Civilisation Attributes open discussion

[LikeNothing]

Some fun and flavorful UUs

Spain: Inquisidor (What did you expect?!)
- Replaces Religious Prosecutor
- Extra Movement
- Extra and when removing Religions
- Can be used in your Vassals of the same State Religion

Conquistador is no longer very helpful given Tercio and Spanish UP. If anything, mass Conquistadors trampling Europe is just weird.

America: Intelligence Agent
- Replaces Spy
- Does not die, but loses some and XP upon mission failure
- Does not move upon mission success
- Extra gain and less cost on spread missions

This makes America using Spies not a micromanagement nightmare. Perhaps the logistics/micromanagement of Spies can be re-designed overall, but currently it is heavily cumbersome for America in particular.

Minuteman is no longer very helpful given the glorious Pioneer (Yee-haw!). If Pioneer also gets March and/or Medic I, it would replace Minuteman completely.

Japan: Mangaka
- Replaces Missionary (Japan should be either Shinto or Secular, holy spirits dammit)
- Requires Nationalism
- Can work on both yours and foreign Cities (need Open Border though) regardless of Religion
- Spreads your , temporary bonus and penalty, and gives Great Artist points

Zero is largely ceremonial, anyway. We don't need it.

 

[BluesyCobalt]

- Spreads your , temporary bonus and penalty, and gives Great Artist points

And then make the penalty permanent after experiencing your first recession in the digital era.

 

[brett0007]

Well, yeah. Star Trek doesn't really highlight this and sometimes writers seem to be confused about what such a society should look like, but sure. I think we would be a lot better off as a society if people mentally pictured Star Trek instead of Stalinist death camps when they heard the word socialism.

The problem with picturing communism/socialism as Star Trek is that they can violate themodynamics, which as far as we know is Impossible. In my opinion as long as resouces are finite such a system is impossible.

 

[Leoreth]

As long as resources are finite capitalism is impossible.

 

[1SDANi]

The human race produces enough food to keep 10 billion people fed, yet 9 million people still starve every year. In my opinion, thermodynamics are not the issue, greed is.

 

[brett0007]

As long as resources are finite capitalism is impossible.

Capitalism is a manifestition of the fact resorces are finite, Humans as a species are naturally quite competitive, We have spent most of history in what amouts to varying dickwaving contests between groups, Capitalism is just the latest in these contests, who can make use of resource X to make product Y for the cheapest price and make the most profit. If we had infiniite resources it wouldnt work because nothing would have value. If everyone has a million tonnes of gold then why would you pay for it?

The human race produces enough food to keep 10 billion people fed, yet 9 million people still starve every year. In my opinion, thermodynamics are not the issue, greed is.

I'd argue thats less of a greed problem than a logistics and development problem, no amout of aid will work if you cant get it to the people who need it.

 

[1SDANi]

Capitalism is a manifestition of the fact resorces are finite, Humans as a species are naturally quite competitive, We have spent most of history in what amouts to varying dickwaving contests between groups, Capitalism is just the latest in these contests, who can make use of resource X to make product Y for the cheapest price and make the most profit. If we had infiniite resources it wouldnt work because nothing would have value. If everyone has a million tonnes of gold then why would you pay for it?

I'd argue thats less of a greed problem than a logistics and development problem, no amout of aid will work if you cant get it to the people who need it.

Except capitalism only works so long as we have an exponential increase in revenue. It's untenable

We can set up the logistics and development to do so if we want, it's just not profitable, so we choose to let people die. We can avert deaths but doing so is inconvenient for those in power, and so we don't. We can pull the lever and divert the trolley from the people tied to the track, but by doing so the trolley would be late for its next stop, so we let it ride.

 

[Regulas021]

Allllllrighty then, capitalism and communism both have issues, moving on,

So what do you guys think of Byzantines UP? Been messing around with the civ and I’m not sure it feels quite right, maybe i just haven’t figured out how to use it right

 

[RichyC78]

UHV2: "Have the largest navy in the world for x consecutive turns" or if that's too easy "Have the largest navy in the world that is at least twice larger than the second largest navy in the world, for x consecutive turns"

If destroying ships is a problem, I use privateers to do that. Plus its really good for getting Great Generals.

 

[brett0007]

UHV2: "Have the largest navy in the world for x consecutive turns" or if that's too easy "Have the largest navy in the world that is at least twice larger than the second largest navy in the world, for x consecutive turns"

If destroying ships is a problem, I use privateers to do that. Plus its really good for getting Great Generals.

That should be a British UHV, we had a doctrine called the 2 power standard, basically it was law that the British had to have a fleet that was at least the size of the two next largest navies, If France and Germany had a combined 30 battleships the British needed at least 30 battleships.

 

[Leoreth]

I am aware, that was my initial plan for that goal. The issue is that the AI competition is usually not sufficient, and definitely not consistent.

 

[MechatronicJazz]

I am aware, that was my initial plan for that goal. The issue is that the AI competition is usually not sufficient, and definitely not consistent.

What if you put a minimum ship limit on the British navy AND a max for the next largest navy? So Britain would have to fight it's strongest rivals or find some other way of limiting their navies.

 

[Cole98]

Given the similarities between Canadian and American expansion is it worth discussing whether Canada should also have the Pioneer UU. I guess that it would no longer be a unique unit, but it could be more of a cultural unit for the Anglo-American colonies. Of course Canadian colonial expansion involved less warfare on account of us learning from the experience of the US so I can see either verdict.

 

[DC123456789]

Given the similarities between Canadian and American expansion is it worth discussing whether Canada should also have the Pioneer UU. I guess that it would no longer be a unique unit, but it could be more of a cultural unit for the Anglo-American colonies. Of course Canadian colonial expansion involved less warfare on account of us learning from the experience of the US so I can see either verdict.

Not sure it makes that much sense; the European settlement of the Canadian Prairies was generally more organized and controlled by the NWMP, while the Pioneer UU reflects the more independent and self-reliant nature of American settlement and the many conflicts with the Natives, which of course was not as intense in Canada. It would be almost contradictory with the whole concept and mythos around the Canada's UB (the RCMP).

 

[Cole98]

Not sure it makes that much sense; the European settlement of the Canadian Prairies was generally more organized and controlled by the NWMP, while the Pioneer UU reflects the more independent and self-reliant nature of American settlement and the many conflicts with the Natives, which of course was not as intense in Canada. It would be almost contradictory with the whole concept and mythos around the Canada's UB (the RCMP).

I don't think it's that contradictory so much as Canada learning lessons from the United States. Western settlement wasn't orchestrated by the RCMP so much as act in paramilitary capacity in lieu of a federal military - not unlike the US army. Violence was rarely needed since Canada had other methods of coercion - especially after the collapse of the bison population. I guess Canada could have a similar unit that just grants a worker (and perhaps a calvary unit?) . I can't quite remember everything but I know that a couple of my history courses touched on this.

 

[MechatronicJazz]

One of the first major operations of the NWMP was the campaign against the Metis and some First Nations in what is now Saskatchewan during the Northwest Rebellion. So there was definitely violence involved in Canada settling the west, though it may have been less than the United States.

Violence was rarely needed since Canada had other methods of coercion - especially after the collapse of the bison population.

I think this is mostly true, but also keep in mind that the bison population didn't just collapse on its own - bison were intentionally killed by Americans and Canadians in part to starve out the Indigenous peoples of the region. Canada did not peacefully take control of the prairies.

An interesting feature of Canadian settlement in the prairies is that the government had difficultly recruiting enough anglo-European settlers, so the first really big wave of white settlement was from eastern Europe after the government changed immigration policy. I think American settlers were largely drawn from the Eastern states (though I'm much fuzzier on American history than Canadian), so that could be one big difference in how 'pioneers' worked in the US vs Canada.

I suppose if you want a Canadian UU or UA tied to Canada's westward expansion, you could look at a worker unit connected to the immigration mechanic. Maybe free workers spawn in cities when they are first connected to the capital (or a port city) by rail. So your first workers prioritize the railway for the UHV, and each city along the railway would get its own workers to develop nearby tiles. Not sure if this would be balanced, but it would mimic Canada's settlement pattern pretty well.

 

[Cole98]

Yeah it's interesting because depending on the speed of the game Canada's rapid expansion from 1867 to 1880 can be relegated to the initial turns. But that's gives me an idea. Maybe a worker with flat movement costs that gets a bonus when building farms adjacent to railroads? "Surveyor" perhaps.

 

[Enyavar]

Hi, I know I'm late in this whole thread, but have we considered different UPs for different leaderheads? As far as I'm concerned, the leaderheads stand for different eras in each country, not for the actual persons. So besides their preferences towards civics/religions, I think it makes sense to tie them to the unique powers of their nations.
Just some examples:

• Ramesses gets the power of the Pharao at start; Cleopatra gets the power of the Ptolemy later (something with city defense probably). The later Egyptian leaders get less impressive stuff. Baibars... dunno, maybe power of the Nile, rewarding each controlled farm/plantation with 1 commerce, given that the Mamluks were big into supporting the large landowners. Nasser gets a power of military that rewards building tanks and airports?
  
• Perikles gets the power of Philosophy at start (probably a different bonus than currently), Alexander gets the power of the Macedonians, something conquest related. Basil could get a power of Loyalty (troops bought with gold don't get the Mercenary promotion); Justinian is fine like he is with the power of Bribery; George I gets no(or less) penalty from keeping outdated civics?
  
• Alfred (power of wool merchants: +1 gold to merchant specialists or something else insignificant); Elizabeth I (power of buccaneers, slightly more effective privateers or ships in general). Then Victoria gets the indirect rule; and Churchill would get yet another power that strengthens Britains industrial base at home.
  
• Barbarossa gets the Power of Crusades (combat bonus against non-catholics); Charles V gets the power of Investiture (as is); Francis gets the power of Felix Austria (hmmm... disregard core culture of neighbours: you get control over tiles where you have the majority culture: 50% suffices instead of needing the 80% threshold)
  
• Qinshihuang gets the power of the myriads as is, Taizong gets a small gold reward for every tech he researches first, Hongwu gets a tech(culture?) bonus in every turn he doesn't have troups outside of the Chinese historical area, Mao can sacrifice 1000 culture in a city to gain 50 hammers there (once per turn, also disrupts culture production for two turns). (these leaderheads represent: agricultural despotism, "liberal" golden age of the Tang, Ming/Qing isolationism and modern communism)
  
• Songtsen Gampo gets the power of missionaries as is; Lobsang Gyatso gains a diplo bonus for all nations with buddhist minority communities.
• Charlemagne (power of the Frankish: double the currency benefits of the Elective+Manorialism civics, Louis XIV (power of power: diplomatic bonus towards weaker nations), Napoleon (power of diplomacy: has more sway in congresses), DeGaulle (power of European integration: all friendly multilateral European nations get +100% income, like DP partners)
• Washington (power of Independence: +1 diplo bonus from every leader sharing the American Dream civics), Lincoln (power of the North: +25% production towards buildings), Roosevelt (happiness power of the American Dream)
  
• Ragnar (regular Viking power of raids); Gustaf Adolph (power of the Reformation - all land units get drill 2 when built in barracks?) and Gerhardsen (power of Social Security - +1 currency for every maritime resource in BFCs while running public welfare)
• Huyna Capac (power of terraces), Castilla (power of modernization: cities with state religion gain 50% science output on all techs that have already been discovered by at least ten other civs)
• Pedro (power of sugar: plantations +1 currency), Vargaz (power of Ethanol as is)
• Kammu (power of ancestors: may build/keep pagan temples in buddhist cities), Oda Nobunaga (as is), Meiji (power of military reform: each military unit stationed in a city contributes 5 hammers per turn to the creation of new military units). Am I overlooking more recent leaderheads - Akihito or Hirohito?

 

[Hickman888]

Hi, I know I'm late in this whole thread, but have we considered different UPs for different leaderheads? As far as I'm concerned, the leaderheads stand for different eras in each country, not for the actual persons. So besides their preferences towards civics/religions, I think it makes sense to tie them to the unique powers of their nations.

Wow, what an idea, never considered this! I think the idea has some great potential, with these dynamic leader powers being able to gently push the player to behave in certain ways in each era, for historical accuracy or for achieving their UHV.

 

[Temujin8k]

Hi, I know I'm late in this whole thread, but have we considered different UPs for different leaderheads? As far as I'm concerned, the leaderheads stand for different eras in each country, not for the actual persons. So besides their preferences towards civics/religions, I think it makes sense to tie them to the unique powers of their nations.
Just some examples:

• Ramesses gets the power of the Pharao at start; Cleopatra gets the power of the Ptolemy later (something with city defense probably). The later Egyptian leaders get less impressive stuff. Baibars... dunno, maybe power of the Nile, rewarding each controlled farm/plantation with 1 commerce, given that the Mamluks were big into supporting the large landowners. Nasser gets a power of military that rewards building tanks and airports?
  
• Perikles gets the power of Philosophy at start (probably a different bonus than currently), Alexander gets the power of the Macedonians, something conquest related. Basil could get a power of Loyalty (troops bought with gold don't get the Mercenary promotion); Justinian is fine like he is with the power of Bribery; George I gets no(or less) penalty from keeping outdated civics?
  
• Alfred (power of wool merchants: +1 gold to merchant specialists or something else insignificant); Elizabeth I (power of buccaneers, slightly more effective privateers or ships in general). Then Victoria gets the indirect rule; and Churchill would get yet another power that strengthens Britains industrial base at home.
  
• Barbarossa gets the Power of Crusades (combat bonus against non-catholics); Charles V gets the power of Investiture (as is); Francis gets the power of Felix Austria (hmmm... disregard core culture of neighbours: you get control over tiles where you have the majority culture: 50% suffices instead of needing the 80% threshold)
  
• Qinshihuang gets the power of the myriads as is, Taizong gets a small gold reward for every tech he researches first, Hongwu gets a tech(culture?) bonus in every turn he doesn't have troups outside of the Chinese historical area, Mao can sacrifice 1000 culture in a city to gain 50 hammers there (once per turn, also disrupts culture production for two turns). (these leaderheads represent: agricultural despotism, "liberal" golden age of the Tang, Ming/Qing isolationism and modern communism)
  
• Songtsen Gampo gets the power of missionaries as is; Lobsang Gyatso gains a diplo bonus for all nations with buddhist minority communities.
• Charlemagne (power of the Frankish: double the currency benefits of the Elective+Manorialism civics, Louis XIV (power of power: diplomatic bonus towards weaker nations), Napoleon (power of diplomacy: has more sway in congresses), DeGaulle (power of European integration: all friendly multilateral European nations get +100% income, like DP partners)
• Washington (power of Independence: +1 diplo bonus from every leader sharing the American Dream civics), Lincoln (power of the North: +25% production towards buildings), Roosevelt (happiness power of the American Dream)
  
• Ragnar (regular Viking power of raids); Gustaf Adolph (power of the Reformation - all land units get drill 2 when built in barracks?) and Gerhardsen (power of Social Security - +1 currency for every maritime resource in BFCs while running public welfare)
• Huyna Capac (power of terraces), Castilla (power of modernization: cities with state religion gain 50% science output on all techs that have already been discovered by at least ten other civs)
• Pedro (power of sugar: plantations +1 currency), Vargaz (power of Ethanol as is)
• Kammu (power of ancestors: may build/keep pagan temples in buddhist cities), Oda Nobunaga (as is), Meiji (power of military reform: each military unit stationed in a city contributes 5 hammers per turn to the creation of new military units). Am I overlooking more recent leaderheads - Akihito or Hirohito?

I've also been thinking about something like this a few days ago. Perhaps a UP for each leaderhead, in addition to the current per-civ UP. Sounds very Civ 6-esque, yes. We have more than a hundred leaders in the mod right now, though, so it's gonna be a lot of work.