Denmark - Completely useless or...?

[hai 1]

Whatever. At least Inca as a whole is better than Norway, and they aren't even particularly great. So is even Korea, and Korea sucks IMO, especially on higher difficulty settings.

I can't make sense of this. Norway? Inca not particularly great? Korea sucks? Madness.

 

[Teproc]

Korea sucks ? What ?

Also Polynesia is pretty decent.

 

[azzaman333]

Denmark is not great but is definitely better than the Iroquois.

The free disembark and extra movement gives warfare a whole new dimension, you can land, set up and fire siege in the same turn. That is a massive force multiplier.

Surely if you're up against Denmark, you invest in naval defenses to destroy any embarked siege weapons.

The berserkers come much earlier and are beasts when they first arrive. They also have extra movement to open up warfare. When you get them they will be way stronger than anything else at the time and will let you take what you want.

The earlier timing of securing Zerks is their best aspect by far. But it's still contingent on having iron (not always guaranteed) and delaying key economic techs such as Education. Unless you're playing a 1v1, you're still losing out to the other civs who focus on building their economy. And as soon as Crossbows come online, the window of opportunity is closed.

What do the Iroquois have? Free roads in forests in friendly territory, that is pretty damn restrictive. On a normal map that gets you a free road tile or two per city that you will need to add railroads to get the production bonus.

Also saves worker turns, gives significantly better defensive mobility.

Mohawk warriors were great in vanilla when iron showed late and melee were tough, now iron showing earlier takes away some of their luster, you need ranged units to take a city, their increased combat in forests is pretty restrictive and they still need iron to promote to muskets and beyond. What exactly is their purpose?

Nothing great about Mohawks, but considerably better than Ski Infanty because they lose the resource requirement and come earlier.

Long houses are better only if you are working three or more forests and are worse late game when you would be better with the percentage bonus.

Longhouses are 20 hammers (80 gold) cheaper to begin with, and for the percentage bonus to be superior than the +1 on forests you need to generate 10 hammers for every forest worked. On top of that, the +1 hammers will be boosted by factories and windmills, while the +10% will not.

Denmark are inferior to every other civ.

 

[Resipsa]

So basically what you're saying is if you play to the sole strength of Denmark, they're better than not playing to the strengths of the Iroquois. Good logic.

Well that's not the sole strength of Denmark; disembarking at 1 movement point is arguably better than Free pillage but that's only if you use it. Aside from that the logic of my post is that actively playing to the strengths of the Iroquois is worse than completely ignoring them and playing the Iroquois as a vanilla Civ that doesn't need to build roads until railroad, in their borders, on forest tiles. Those are all of conditions to get just 1gpt per turn. Its not necessarily the devs fault that Iroquois is the worst they've just gotten worse as patches have changed the game, less reliance on melee units, iron revealed earlier, 5% increase in tech cost per city all those things work against any synergy the Iroquois might have in going wide.

 

[azzaman333]

Well that's not the sole strength of Denmark; disembarking at 1 movement point is arguably better than Free pillage but that's only if you use it. Aside from that the logic of my post is that actively playing to the strengths of the Iroquois is worse than completely ignoring them and playing the Iroquois as a vanilla Civ that doesn't need to build roads until railroad, in their borders, on forest tiles. Those are all of conditions to get just 1gpt per turn. Its not necessarily the devs fault that Iroquois is the worst they've just gotten worse as patches have changed the game, less reliance on melee units, iron revealed earlier, 5% increase in tech cost per city all those things work against any synergy the Iroquois might have in going wide.

Still better than Denmark.

 

[Teproc]

Ok, here's the thing :

- The Iroquois need specific terrain to be ok. Without that therrain they're awful.
- Denmark need a specific playstyle to be ok.

One of these things is not like the other : you have more control over how you play thatn over the terrain you get.

 

[azzaman333]

Ok, here's the thing :

- The Iroquois need specific terrain to be ok. Without that therrain they're awful.
- Denmark need a specific playstyle to be ok.

One of these things is not like the other : you have more control over how you play thatn over the terrain you get.

The Iroquois need a specific terrain that they're biased towards and is found pretty much everywhere but desert.

Denmark require convenient patches of water (entirely dependent on map), a beeline away from the economic boosting techs, a war almost instantly upon learning Metal Casting if you don't want Zerks to be slaughtered by Crossbows or Galleasses.

Denmark are trash.

 

[White Out]

I think a simple mod buffing Denmarks economy or something when they kill units or pillage would help. I agree that playing as a Danish civ you're goal really is to warmonger early but what about later in the game? Reward players for pillaging and such with constant wars. Or add a buff that allows Denmark to deal with the penalties of war better.

 

[Resipsa]

I think a simple mod buffing Denmarks economy or something when they kill units or pillage would help. I agree that playing as a Danish civ you're goal really is to warmonger early but what about later in the game? Reward players for pillaging and such with constant wars. Or add a buff that allows Denmark to deal with the penalties of war better.

My idea has always been to replace the NSI with the viking warship replacement to the galleas the Combat Strength is the same but it heals all adjacent land melee units 15 points per turn

 

[Calouste]

Also saves worker turns, gives significantly better defensive mobility.

Defensive mobility is underrated. On higher levels, if you settle aggressively, the AI will DoW you, and the combination of forests that slow down the invaders but actually speed up your own units plus resourceless units that have an advantage fighting in forests makes defense pretty easy, and you won't need that many units to do it.

 

[GhostSalsa]

a war almost instantly upon learning Metal Casting if you don't want Zerks to be slaughtered by Crossbows or Galleasses.

Obviously you would want a war immediately on Metal Casting. Just as Mongolia wants war at Chivalry.

But galleasses being scary? How unwilling to leverage extra movement are you? Beserkers don't need to end their turn anywhere near the coast. That's the whole advantage of disembarking with 3 movement.

The obvious use of Demark's UA is attacking coastal cities but an ambitious Denmark fan realizes they can attack near-coastal cities instead. Berserkers can swarm an unfortified but valuable near-coastal target, attack it from all sides next turn (with no river penalty), step backward, pillage, step forward, pillage, and attack it again on the third turn. City taken in 3 turns with no support. AI's city-connection income cut in half. AI reinforcements arrive completely out of formation and are easy pickings. Now attack the coastal city from friendly territory. This is how you use movement.

If you're being hit by ranged water units you're not trying.

 

[azzaman333]

Obviously you would want a war immediately on Metal Casting. Just as Mongolia wants war at Chivalry.

But galleasses being scary? How unwilling to leverage extra movement are you? Beserkers don't need to end their turn anywhere near the coast. That's the whole advantage of disembarking with 3 movement.

The obvious use of Demark's UA is attacking coastal cities but an ambitious Denmark fan realizes they can attack near-coastal cities instead. Berserkers can swarm an unfortified but valuable near-coastal target, attack it from all sides next turn (with no river penalty), step backward, pillage, step forward, pillage, and attack it again on the third turn. City taken in 3 turns with no support. AI's city-connection income cut in half. AI reinforcements arrive completely out of formation and are easy pickings. Now attack the coastal city from friendly territory. This is how you use movement.

If you're being hit by ranged water units you're not trying.

Ranged water units kill anything that gets embarked to get the extra movement.

Also, using AI tactical failures as proof of Denmark's superiority is ridiculous. The AI fails miserably against any style of attack.

 

[Light Cleric]

Ranged water units kill anything that gets embarked to get the extra movement.

Also, using AI tactical failures as proof of Denmark's superiority is ridiculous. The AI fails miserably against any style of attack.

If a unit is ending its turn unprotected in the water then you're doing it wrong.

 

[azzaman333]

If a unit is ending its turn unprotected in the water then you're doing it wrong.

Which makes attacking with Denmark even more expensive.

 

[caketastydelish]

I can't make sense of this. Norway? Inca not particularly great? Korea sucks? Madness.

Inca is only good for going tall, and going tall sucks with everyone except maybe Ethiopia.

Korea sucks ? What ?

Also Polynesia is pretty decent.

If you want science, you're far better off with Babylon.

Polynesia sucks because their UI is frankly underwhelming as well as Maoi Warriors. Jaguars get out of date just as easily but are forgiven because their special ability/upgrade is much more important than a puny -10 combat to the enemy.

Being able to go over oceans from the start is hardly a big deal, and obviously by the renaissance it's only downhill from there, as if it weren't anyway from the beginning. There's a reason the AI sucks with Polynesia. It's not equipped with good stuff to work with .

 

[vivalamexico]

Inca is only good for going tall, and going tall sucks with everyone except maybe Ethiopia.

Tall sucks? I guarantee you that if you look at many of the best SV times of many players on this site, many of them will be 4-city Tradition Tall. There have even been threads discussing how to nerf tradition. Please elaborate.
Mongolia is only good for warfare, so maybe they are not good?
Also, your statement about the Inca being exclusively for tall play is highly debatable. I have had success going semi-wide with them. Tall may be optimal, but it is by no means the only way to play them.

If you want science, you're far better off with Babylon.

Try going supertall with Korea and filling out all the specialist slots in your 3-4 cities. That translates into a lot of extra science.

Polynesia sucks because their UI is frankly underwhelming as well as Maoi Warriors. Jaguars get out of date just as easily but are forgiven because their special ability/upgrade is much more important than a puny -10 combat to the enemy.

Being able to go over oceans from the start is hardly a big deal, and obviously by the renaissance it's only downhill from there, as if it weren't anyway from the beginning. There's a reason the AI sucks with Polynesia. It's not equipped with good stuff to work with .

Polynesia is great on Archipelago maps. Wayfinding gives you many many ruins. While the AI is stuck with their 1 or 2 ruins on their puny islands, you are out grabbing the rest of the ruins and meeting all the city-states. Maoris are kinda underwhelming, I agree there, but thats hardly the reason that people play Polynesia (also, Maoris are less bad when combined with Moai defense bonus). However, the Moai (UI) is great for a cutlural victory. When you hit Airports, Moai spam gives loads of tourism and sets you up nicely for a CV if you haven't completely botched the rest of the game.
The AI is not unequipped, it just doesn't know how to use Polynesia.

But this discussion probably belongs in the Tier List thread

 

[GhostSalsa]

Also, using AI tactical failures as proof of Denmark's superiority is ridiculous. The AI fails miserably against any style of attack.

I honestly don't think you're thinking your own statements through. I think you are so far into defending the assumption you brought to this thread you're not thinking critically at all right now.

The AI's tactical ineptitude decreases the value of extra movement. If the AI were good at tactics then Denmark would be considered top tier. Yet you've concluded that the argument you are rhetorically pitted against is that Denmark's only value is in exploiting bad AI tactics?

No one's trying to prove Denmark is good by pointing out AI flaws. The whole reason Denmark's extra movement is worth so little is because you don't need good units to beat the AI. This is the whole reason this thread and the dozen others like it exist.

The discussion here is if there is some use out of Denmark. It's literally in the title. "Denmark - Completely useless or...?" Your posts insist that there is no use to Denmark because... naturally... the player would leave all their units in the water... just basically sitting in water for multiple turns... even though Denmark's UA gives free disembark... ok

 

[azzaman333]

I honestly don't think you're thinking your own statements through. I think you are so far into defending the assumption you brought to this thread you're not thinking critically at all right now.

The AI's tactical ineptitude decreases the value of extra movement. If the AI were good at tactics then Denmark would be considered top tier. Yet you've concluded that the argument you are rhetorically pitted against is that Denmark's only value is in exploiting bad AI tactics?

No one's trying to prove Denmark is good by pointing out AI flaws. The whole reason Denmark's extra movement is worth so little is because you don't need good units to beat the AI. This is the whole reason this thread and the dozen others like it exist.

The discussion here is if there is some use out of Denmark. It's literally in the title. "Denmark - Completely useless or...?" Your posts insist that there is no use to Denmark because... naturally... the player would leave all their units in the water... just basically sitting in water for multiple turns... even though Denmark's UA gives free disembark... ok

Denmark aren't completely useless. Denmark are comfortably the worst civ.

 

[BlackWizard]

I'm not sure how this UA works. It says that all melee units gets free pillage. That's part is correct and their UU norwegian ski infantry doesnt get free pillage. However if you upgrade berzerker to UU it gets free pillage. Also Tanks have free pillage when playing as Denmark. So what melee units have and dont have pillage? How is melee unit defined with Denmark? Is it defined different than with Zulus?

Edit: Unfortunately Berserkers extra movement disappear during upgrade

 

[Moriarte]

Denmark aren't completely useless. Denmark are comfortably the worst civ.

I can think of worse war - oriented civs: Brazil, France, India, Byzantium. Denmark UA is reliable for pillaging, and, 21 strength UU, which comes rather early, certainly provides solid edge for early game domination.

As for science, diplo and culture - you're probably right.