I had a quick whack at making the two rounds more directly comparable. The thumbnails are the difference between GS and R&F (after dividing by the total number of abilities/units being compared in each round).
So anything above the line did relatively better post-GS, anything below the line did relatively worse.
We were more all over the place with the Civ UAs, but we were fairly consistent. Looking at it this way, Egypt may have been the biggest improver...
With the UUs the battering ram nerf definitely did its thing, cavalry almost uniformly down, biggest gainers were mostly melee.
Not sure if I should have replied to this thread or started a new one? As these get locked down and it also has some stuff about the UU thread....
View attachment 533653
View attachment 533654
Both are not particularly strong but are thematic and relate to the new features in GS, which I think adds a lot to people's perceptions. I.e. Englands UA is where it is not because it turns England into a powerhouse but because a lot of players enjoy setting up these high adjacency IZs surrounded by green disctrictsBesides England UA which obviously got completely changed (although I would never place it that high, hell its high place is one of my biggest shocks). Egypt only got flood immunity and that somehow skyrocketed Iteru like 20 positions forward?
I also fail to understand drastic fall of Nubia and Macedon which still seem very good to me.
Another observation: Khmer and India are still trash at the bottom, even after three additional bonuses given to Dharma. I think Indian UA should be simply completely scrapped and redesigned into some new truly unique ability, same with Khmer.
I think India is considered poorly for the same reason as Georgia cited above, namely religious victory just isn't popular.
I loved playing with this ability when I made 10 cities of size 30, completely changed my view on it.Even the lowest ranked ability, Grand Barays, has some benefits, and I kind of like putting farms around Aqueducts.