1. Isn't 'Ship of the Line' a 'Generic Unit' ? if SoTL will be chosen as English UU name (Actually the Seventy Four should be proper name), what will be 'Generic' variants? Wasn't 'Sovereign of the Seas began as Raze-built Galleon?
Remember that everyone else had SoTL too! Including the US Navy (and American 'Four Decker' USS Pennsylvania that took 20 years to complete only to be proven an unwieldy ship. Actually US Navy had a couple of SoTL of either 5-3 Rate I think).
2. "Great Ship" being English UU instead?? (Supercarracks and maybe Galleons, the likes of Mary Rose and Big Harry)
And what are the most appropriate English symbol?
A. Rose
B. Upright standing Lion
C. Triple Lions
Ship-of-the-Line is NOT 'generic'. It is very specifically a ship with at least 2 continuous gun decks from stem to stern mounting its guns to fire broadside. A Frigate, by contrast, has only 1 continuous gun deck. The number of such decks is a defining characteristic of both ship types.
The
Sovereign of the Seas was built from the start with 3 continuous gun decks: the 'conversion' of it in 1660 was simply to remove a bunch of smaller stern and bow-mounted anti-personnel guns so that it was a 'pure broadside' ship. It is generally considered to have been the first 'ship-of-the-line' because of the gun deck configuration.
"Man-of-War" is generic, which is why it grates as a specific Unit in
Humankind: it's a little like having a 'Soldier' as a Land Unit.
Great Ship is almost generic: it refers to any large and excessively expensive ship, ranging from clinker-built Carracks (
Grace Dieu in 1418) to caravel-built Carracks (
Great Michael in 1511) to Galleons (
San Martin de Portugal, 1577) to race-built Galleons (
Ark Raleigh, later
Ark Royal, 1610). I would prefer to make the Early Modern Great Ship a special Unit with Prestige (Loyalty, Diplomatic) bonuses but really excessive construction and maintenance costs - a sort of sea-going minor Wonder. They could even be preserved as later Tourist attractions (as in an 'add-on' to a Seaside Resort or Museum), although the only ones to survive long enough to become such were submerged like the
Vasa or
Mary Rose - both Great Ships when built.
I had it the other way around initially :3 but the Ship seemed a bit anachronistic. Regardless, Civs with a naval UU should always have access to a land unit as well, otherwise they're hamstrung on land maps. That was the logic for tossing in the Yeoman, for what it's worth. :shrug:
A good point: unless Civ VII makes naval trade and naval warfare far more important than it has been in the Civ games in the past, Naval UUs are going to remain marginal and situational.
Assuming that does not happen, then the potential Land UUs for England are, in approximate chronological order:
Yeoman Archer ("Longbowman") (1300 CE)
Billman (Pikeman with Melee bonus) (1500 CE)
Redcoat (Fusilier) (1700 CE)
Heavy Dragoon (low cost, low maintenance Cuirassier) (1760 CE)
SAS (fast-moving Special Forces) (1941 CE)
Much as the Longbow is Iconic to Medieval England, the Billman is probably more useful as a Land Unit (Pike bonus versus Mounted AND a Melee Bonus, what's not to like?) and was still in wide use as the 'basic' infantry unit in Elizabeth's armies.
tossing in an alt leader from the United Kingdom (maybe a prime minister like a Gladstone or Wallpole), assigning them the naval bonus and giving Bess a culture bonus is something I could have done, but that is too much thinking time. I have a life, or like to pretend I have one, at least.
