First Look: India (Gandhi)

Overall I really like this Civ in terms of immersion but I do agree with those who worry that the civ abilities are a bit too passive. Unlike some of the other civs it's hard to affirmatively take advantage of their unique abilities. Finagling things so that you can build missionaries of other religions feels game-y and not fun -- otherwise you're just hoping they spread religion to your cities. And the war weariness thing is not going to be enough to make you more aggressive just to cause war weariness.

Unless they make trade routes really strong religion-spreaders or something.

 

I like India, especially the fact that they have incentives to not go to war. I also like that they are related to Gandhi. A potential future other leader coulld totally change the way to play India. That's so cool.

They just seem like the perfect counterpick against warmongers and religion civs. If your friend picks Spain, or Scythia (Tomyris can possibly form an early religion with the Kurgan faith generation), pick India to beat them.

 

If it is true that Gandhi's ability only works when known religion founders are not at war (not just not at war with you), then Gandhi needs to keep the peace all around. That takes some serious diplomacy. I dig it.

 

IMO, India looks to be even more of an annoyance in my games than they did in CiV. As neighbors they just seem like they will be a headache. No one likes the kid who always runs to mommy everytime someone starts with them (Suddenly your people are unhappy?) Do you suppose that a warrior culture like real life Aztecs would have cared or been unhappy they were killing any one group? If I choose to play a society ingrained with a bloodthirsty, unforgiving, domination culture doesn't caring for one group more than another seem like nonsense? Does this make sense from an immersion type player?

 

Our words are backed by nuclear weapons....my precioussss ICBMssss...

 

I really like this incarnation of India (the mechanics, at least, I won't comment on the choice of Gandhi). The follow belief ability is almost exactly what I would have chosen, and the stepwell seems to do a good job of using new mechanics (housing, as well as interesting adjacency bonuses) to encourage vertical growth.

I do think the civ would be a slightly more interesting if there were a greater selection of follower beliefs (something that could probably be added late in development), but my only real concern is with the war weariness bonus. War weariness is a mechanic that makes a lot of sense in principle but is more problematic in practice. In a game where a player can nominally maintain a war with no actual effort, it's far too easy for war and peace related mechanics to be manipulated as weapons, either intentionally by cynical human players or unintentionally, by AIs that don't know how to recognize defeat. That said, we have no idea yet how the system will work, beyond that it affects amenities, so complaints that it will turn Gandhi into a warmonger are premature, to say the least.

 

I like Gandhi's leader ability flavourfully, but they're pushing it a bit far by making all of India's abillities - even the elephant - punish aggression. While overall it seems a fairly interesting design, it seems a Civ V Ethiopia-like effort to railroad the player into a specific turtling playstyle rather than a civ like BNW Arabia that can play the religious game well but has a more varied toolkit.

On another note, as much as I loathe the art style they've gone for with this game's units and leaders, I think it actually works very well with Gandhi's appearance.

 

I would say that India could actually be incredibly menacing, militaristically. First, whoever they're fighting gets penalized extra for being at war. Next, stacking a couple Varus will drastically weaken your opponent's units. I can imagine a strong cavalry strategy in which you move up two (or more) Varu's to weaken, them slam with a modern unit to do major damage. Third their extra faith generation can be used to generate units and great people, to boost your war efforts. Conquering other lands should diversify your religious makeup, allowing you to more easily gain various follower beliefs.

I actually think that India is going to be a lot better at warring than they were intended to be.

 

I'm noticing a strange trend: those of us who like the art style seem to think Gandhi looks horrible, while those who say they dislike the art style seem to like Gandhi's appearance. Personally, I think he looks like an inbred cross between a troll and an alien with severe head deformities. O_O

 

The wording was confusing, but Firaxis response on some comments in The Facebook page clearly say that is when they are not at war with you.

 

Makes way more sense.

 

It is funny Ethiopia was mentioned, since Ethiopia actually made for a great warmonger Civ in Civ 5. Easy religion on a building you always build, and religion is extremely useful for supporting conquered cities. A combat bonus against empires with more cities (read: most potential runaways on immortal/deity). Sure, you lose that bonus once you finally overtake your competition, but by then you've already won and just playing clean-up on the last few capitals.

Of course there is also the point that whether or not India ends up being great for warmongering, the intention was for them to be otherwise.

Overall, India seems like a Civ I won't mind having in the game for variety (a painful empire to attack into, much like Ethiopia was), but won't be very fun to play as.

 

Overall, I am neutral/negative about the abilities. Gandhi will most likely be a Modern era leader. Getting faith while at peace in Modern era.... I would say meh. Without having any aggressive/defensive traits, the Civ would be wiped out before it could even make use of the war weariness penalty.

 

Most people here seem to think Gandhi's UA will exist from 4000 BC. He is a modern era leader. His bonuses are NOT going to kick-in until Modern era. If you have not met everyone by Modern era, then possibly something else is wrong.

 

Your civ's leader is your civ's leader, from 4000 BC till the end of the game. Just because Gandhi the person lived in the modern era doesn't mean that's when the abilities of Gandhi the Civ Leader will be active, that's not how the game works.

 

Interesting - you're totally right. I love the art style and am not loving this Gandhi.

 

Given that Civ VI is working with absolute numbers and not percentages, it won't matter much. Suppose horseman had 40 strength and Varu reduced it by 10. That's about 25% less. Suppose tank has 200 strength and Varu still reduces it 10. That's only 5% less. So, as we increase the era, the bonus automatically reduces.

 

I'm confused about leader abilities. Do they apply for the whole game or only a specific period when that leader actually ruled? If the latter, the FLs or some other source should indicate which periods they apply to.

 

Of course yes. Qin's ability of extra charge for a worker is only in the classical era. Not for the entire duration of the game. Teddy's bonuses for national parks (and rough riders) are only in the industrial era.

 

Teddy also gives a +5 combat bonus against enemies on his continent, and videos have shown that in effect from turn 1.