Discussion about Shoshone in BNW

[iconocast]

what happens to ur uu when u get iron, do they even have a upgrade path?

 

[Ulthwithian]

iconocast: If they can upgrade to Swordsmen, that's some really scary stuff.

If they don't, after they're less useful, stick them in your cities for free maintenance/better RA (assuming Tradition).

There's speculation that they upgrade to Archaeologists along with other Scouts.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Pathfinders (as Scout replacements) don't upgrade. If you want them to be continuing their usefulness, pick weapons from the ancient ruins to turn them into archers.

Scouts do NOT upgrade into Archaeologists. Archaeologists are civilian units while scouts are military units. It's not possible to upgrade from one to the other.

 

[shaglio]

Same with the extra territory thing, an entire extra ring would be very powerful, but something like 'here's a sufficient lump sum of border-culture to purchase 4 tiles right away. Make them count!' would be a bonus worth having but not OP.

My initial thought on this would be that you would get 1 extra tile per era the city is founded in. (i.e. 1 in Ancient, 2 in Classical, 3 in Medieval, etc.). That's not as strong as the entire second ring, but not completely useless either.

If so, then I wonder how the tiles are determined:
A) completely random
B) based on what the "purple" hexes would have been
C) player determined (you get to pick x hexes in the second ring when you found the city).

 

[Gamgee]

They are my favourite civ hands down so far. They look really fun to play.

 

[BAshley]

My initial thought on this would be that you would get 1 extra tile per era the city is founded in. (i.e. 1 in Ancient, 2 in Classical, 3 in Medieval, etc.).

I dunno about those numbers, man. I rarely build any cities after the Classical era has been and gone. And a single tile in your capital seems rather underpowered. To put that in context, I think you get a new tile after like 12 turns. Even 2 in classical is only 105-200 gold. Underpowered.

But yeah the principle of X extra tiles per era makes sense.

 

[ajok]

if you get 5 ancient ruins, it can be upgraded to gatling gun

 

[Arachnofiend]

As has been stated, a unit can only be upgraded by ruin once. This was changed pretty quickly after somebody save scummed their way to an ancient-era tank in vanilla.

I'm more worried about the prospect of grabbing techs. That alone means there HAS to be some limit to this ability.

 

[dowd001]

Having extra early tiles is not useful unless (i) the tile is usable early without development (e.g. deer on a forest) since it takes time to get a worked going, (ii) you want to settle two tiles away from a resource and plan on developing it early, (iii) you are trying to drop a city down and steal a resource from a neighbor without buying a tile or (iv) the first tiles you pop after settling the city are not delayed by the fact that your initial borders were bigger. That last one is really a strong benefit over time as it means your city's borders are always x tiles ahead of your rivals with the same culture and its true value is the amount of culture required for the next expansion, which grows over time.

A full ring would be OP because of item (iv) and so they would have to make the next border pop cost be higher - but that would penalize Shoshone since a good resource may be 3 tiles away, in which case each other civ would get those first. So do not think a full ring is realistic.

My guess is somewhere around 3 extra tiles to start, chosen in the same way the border expansions are chosen, with the next border expansion coming at the same cost as all other civs.

 

[Devell]

Doesn't the Pathfinder make Shoshone warriors absolutely pointless until they get iron?

 

[Louis XXIV]

Probably. Unless you want to upgrade them to Swordsmen, in which case you'll have to build warriors (scouts won't upgrade by themselves).

 

[Jman5]

Shoshone is going to be a fun civ to play. I'm thinking my Ruin order is going to be:
Culture -> Faith -> Gold spam

 

[Gucumatz]

I sincerely think the pathfinder is going to be much weaker than we speculate it will be. Particularly on higher levels when the AI get so many more units to explore with.

 

[Rob (R8XFT)]

My favourite game setting is pangea plus, duel, 5 civs; it gets crowded quickly. The Shoshone UA is extremely useful in that setting !!

 

[shaglio]

I dunno about those numbers, man. I rarely build any cities after the Classical era has been and gone. And a single tile in your capital seems rather underpowered. To put that in context, I think you get a new tile after like 12 turns. Even 2 in classical is only 105-200 gold. Underpowered.

But yeah the principle of X extra tiles per era makes sense.

Maybe 2 per era then? So in the Renaissance Era you'd be getting the entire second ring.

I sometimes build late cities when I discover there's no Coal/Aluminum/Oil/Uranium in my territory and there's a nice little unclaimed island that has some. Of course, I should mention that I generally play on Prince, so there's still unclaimed tiles around that late in the game. Higher level players I'd imagine don't get the chance to do so.

 

[El Caballerion]

I am excited to play as the shoshone and I plan to play them or Morocco first. I think I will go with shoshone because their UA doesn't change the new features in BNW so I can experience these new features as they intended to be implemented, unlike Morocco's bonus to trade routes.

My thoughts exactly. No reason to play as a CIV with BNW-specific UAs, or you'll get spoiled right away thinking the mechanics work that way universally.

 

[adwcta]

This is going to be such a head-scratcher. Warriors for the Shoshone are strictly worse, even excluding the ruins. They have travel limitations and cost 33% more hammers, while having the same strength.

All the Warrior has on the Pathfinder is that they can be upgraded. So, although indirectly, the Pathfinder actually replaces two units, instead of one.

 

[Pikachao]

This is going to be such a head-scratcher. Warriors for the Shoshone are strictly worse, even excluding the ruins. They have travel limitations and cost 33% more hammers, while having the same strength.

All the Warrior has on the Pathfinder is that they can be upgraded. So, although indirectly, the Pathfinder actually replaces two units, instead of one.

I never use swordsmen, and from what I've seen, most others don't. S really, pathfinders get another bonus for, in a sense, replacing two units (scouts and warriors). It's just another perk for the Shoshone.

 

[Arachnofiend]

All the Warrior has on the Pathfinder is that they can be upgraded. So, although indirectly, the Pathfinder actually replaces two units, instead of one.

Not true. The Pathfinder can choose to upgrade to an Archer.

The one thing the Warrior can do the Pathfinder cannot is take cities after being upgraded, basically.

 

[SnowKomodo]

I never use swordsmen, and from what I've seen, most others don't. S really, pathfinders get another bonus for, in a sense, replacing two units (scouts and warriors). It's just another perk for the Shoshone.

I agree swordsman can be frustrating at times, but one thing I do to change up the game from time to time is focus on amassing an army revolving around a certain unit. It's a neat little way to learn about the unit's strengths and weaknesses from a different POV.

E.g. Build up a Maori Warrior dominant army with Polynesia. Or a Hoplite-Companion Cavalry dominant army with Greece. I'll even Sometimes see how much I can attack/defend using just Unique Units

May not always be the best strategy wise, but it's fun and adds a different sort of "challenge" if the regular game gets too repetitive