General Leader Discussion

Question: Is that possible to give each leader 3 uniques (buildings,units,upgrades)?

I think that it'd be great if every leader has 3 uniques. There are many interesting things that make leaders more interesting that were deleted for other things. For example Japanese Zero's or Norwegian Sky Infantry. Both are very interesting and there are more, more or less interesting special units and buildings.

I know that for example Zero's don't fit to Japanese medieval Oda theme but if we go this way, then we should remove Gandhi's war elephants and so on.

Norwegian Sky Infantry is very interesting formation :D
Other than the Norwegian ski infantry making no sense in a danish army. :D

I've entertained this thought multiple times, my general thought is that more uniques means more fun. But you really have to stop somewhere. And adding one more unique for every civ would mean creating maybe 35 new unique units/buildings (assuming 7ish existing ones can be salvaged)
It would also mean that customcivs wouldn't be compatible unless they have a trigger that adds another unique specifically for CPP.

All in all it would be great fun, but I don't know if it is worth the work.
 
Okay, I do not get how anyone is okay with Mongolia. Everyone agrees that the CSD mod is really necessary. The reason is because without it you just buy the city states and win the game. Mongolia gets to buy city states only it is even cheaper and easier than it used to be without the mod. You build up an army and then send any unit you have even if it isn't a military one and make people half way around the world surrender to you. Even if the city state is close to you and you have troops near it the Mongols can send anything at all and make it surrender out of fear even though their troops are half the world away on a HUGE map.

The ridiculous part is that it is the exact same troops that you use to make them all surrender. How freaking cheap is that? You just keep paying upkeep and take every city state in the game. This is massively broken or I don't know how it works and I don't see how anyone can think it is okay to let a leader take any city anywhere on the map without even so much as bring a military unit into sight range of that city. If you seriously think this is okay, I just won't let Mongolia ever be a choice for the computer in my games and I certainly will never be playing it.

Please explain to me how this okay to you Gazebo or tell me it isn't working correctly. Thanks for reading.
 
Okay, I do not get how anyone is okay with Mongolia. Everyone agrees that the CSD mod is really necessary. The reason is because without it you just buy the city states and win the game. Mongolia gets to buy city states only it is even cheaper and easier than it used to be without the mod. You build up an army and then send any unit you have even if it isn't a military one and make people half way around the world surrender to you. Even if the city state is close to you and you have troops near it the Mongols can send anything at all and make it surrender out of fear even though their troops are half the world away on a HUGE map.

The ridiculous part is that it is the exact same troops that you use to make them all surrender. How freaking cheap is that? You just keep paying upkeep and take every city state in the game. This is massively broken or I don't know how it works and I don't see how anyone can think it is okay to let a leader take any city anywhere on the map without even so much as bring a military unit into sight range of that city. If you seriously think this is okay, I just won't let Mongolia ever be a choice for the computer in my games and I certainly will never be playing it.

Please explain to me how this okay to you Gazebo or tell me it isn't working correctly. Thanks for reading.

Mongolias ability is basically them conquering citystates without having to do the fighting. They get huge diplomatic penalties from using it and other civs can declare war on them and liberate the citystates for huge diplomatic boosts.
 
Mongolias ability is basically them conquering citystates without having to do the fighting. They get huge diplomatic penalties from using it and other civs can declare war on them and liberate the citystates for huge diplomatic boosts.

I guess the problem here is that when Mongolia has the biggest army in the game then the fact that it has diplomatic issues doesn't really mean anything. Why do they care if no one likes them when they can keep taking city states for free without repercussion as long as they have military superiority?

I am about to have a vote to sanction them so we will see if it goes through. Honestly though is even sanctioning them a problem when they keep getting free cities that always have resources? I will liberate the ones closest to me and see what the rest of the world thinks of that. It still seems like getting the biggest army and then taking over city states for free is overpowered since no one will go to war with you when you have the biggest army. Can it get any easier? I will let you know how the vote goes.
 
I guess the problem here is that when Mongolia has the biggest army in the game then the fact that it has diplomatic issues doesn't really mean anything. Why do they care if no one likes them when they can keep taking city states for free without repercussion as long as they have military superiority?

I am about to have a vote to sanction them so we will see if it goes through. Honestly though is even sanctioning them a problem when they keep getting free cities that always have resources? I will liberate the ones closest to me and see what the rest of the world thinks of that. It still seems like getting the biggest army and then taking over city states for free is overpowered since no one will go to war with you when you have the biggest army. Can it get any easier? I will let you know how the vote goes.

I don't see thing whole "for free" issue, if they have the biggest army they could easily just conquer them anyways, and it's not like conquering a citystate is hard for anyone.
 
Having the biggest army means you can send your units and take them. This requires time, losses, and if you get near someone then it means that they can defend the city state. You can also gift units to city states as well. Free means there is no travel time and there is no loss of units. There is no loss of time or effort. It is massively different if you have to actually travel across the map.

This means that the same troops are no longer available to defend your own cities. It means that if you are near the bottom of the map then it will take time to get to the top. It means that you have to send your troops over the ocean and cross a shoreline. Defended shorelines can be massively devastating. It means you don't have to worry about the guy with the second biggest army stopping you because he has to fight and loose troops and you don't. It means that the second biggest army even if it is close to theirs in size has to face all of the dangers and logistics problems while doing nothing to the army of the Mongolians in the process.

I don't see how it can be more obviously free of effort, difficulty, and resource consumption. They would also have to declare war or move entire armies around entire other civilizations claimed spaces since their diplomatic issues means no open borders. One unit which can be a prophet or missionary which can move freely across borders can be substituted for entire armies. That is definitely free. Diplomats too. This is definitely free. I stop city states from being taken all the time just by supplying them with gift troops. What difference does it make if it is easy for players to take them. Unless you are doing multi-player it is what the computer does and can do that makes a difference.

I have a thought though. If liberating city states removed some of the warmongering penalty you get for taking cites after someone attacks you it would be better. Just have to balance it against people manipulating things so others go to war with them. Though if that is really how they play then there isn't much point in them playing at all imo.
 
Having the biggest army means you can send your units and take them. This requires time, losses, and if you get near someone then it means that they can defend the city state. You can also gift units to city states as well. Free means there is no travel time and there is no loss of units. There is no loss of time or effort. It is massively different if you have to actually travel across the map.

This means that the same troops are no longer available to defend your own cities. It means that if you are near the bottom of the map then it will take time to get to the top. It means that you have to send your troops over the ocean and cross a shoreline. Defended shorelines can be massively devastating. It means you don't have to worry about the guy with the second biggest army stopping you because he has to fight and loose troops and you don't. It means that the second biggest army even if it is close to theirs in size has to face all of the dangers and logistics problems while doing nothing to the army of the Mongolians in the process.

I don't see how it can be more obviously free of effort, difficulty, and resource consumption. They would also have to declare war or move entire armies around entire other civilizations claimed spaces since their diplomatic issues means no open borders. One unit which can be a prophet or missionary which can move freely across borders can be substituted for entire armies. That is definitely free. Diplomats too. This is definitely free. I stop city states from being taken all the time just by supplying them with gift troops. What difference does it make if it is easy for players to take them. Unless you are doing multi-player it is what the computer does and can do that makes a difference.

I'm not going to argue with you, but I think you're highly overrating the power of this ability.
 
City-state alliances are key to the 'bully metric' used by Mongolia to annex C-Ss. If a CS is unallied and unprotected, it'll fall much more easily (as you seem to be seeing). If you have an alliance with a CS, you can pretty much negate Mongolia's ability. This is the same strategy one can use to prevent Austria's UA, as Austria must be allied to a CS for 5 turns to 'marry in,' thus keeping the CS allied to you prevents this.

Also, this is Mongolia's only major boon – is it strong? Sure, but there is a solid counter.

G
 
Thanks for the information Gazebo! That makes a good deal of sense. As long as you get out there and start protecting them they can't all be dominoes. I didn't think the diplomatic penalties had anything to do with it and I was right. I tried a sanction against the Mongolians at the World Congress after they had already taken 4 or 5 city states since the last congress and every single civilization voted against the sanction.

I spent a lot of time making diplomats and sending them out so I had more votes than everyone else put together so the sanction went through. They get the city states closer to them this way but as long as I protect the ones near me they can't override my activities. I had them get one close to me before I knew they were in the game but I fixed it.

I can see why you think it is okay as is with the ally/protection cancelling out the ability. If I didn't have the maximum 41 city states on a huge map they probably wouldn't get any with their ability unless it was early on. I would have to agree that this is a good call. They still build a monster military but unless you ignore the city states they can't just grab everything in sight without even one military unit involved. Keeps you on your toes with your own city states because they can use non-military units to do their trick. Good thinking.
 
Here's a necromancy.

Since I play exclusively on single player, I have no idea about the multiplayer dynamics and rankings of civilizations will be different for that purpose (but someone else should start the list for that).

So what I rank civilizations are based on their consistency, flexibility, and their power spikes (the earlier, the better, or usually around gunpowder when cannons come in). The rankings are based on the following settings:
-8 players (16 City States)
-standard map size Pangaea
-strategic balance
-no tech brokering
-no tech trading
-research agreements off

Disclaimer: I feel that EVERY civilization is VIABLE, however, there are a few that certainly stand out to be easier to obtain victory (or even stabilize) than the others. This is based on Emperor difficulty.

So here's my current civ ranking (version March 9, 2016):

S+: Korea
S: Babylon/Poland/Shoshone
S-: Maya/Morocco/Netherlands/Byzantium/America/Ethiopia/Persia/Iroquois
A+: India/Huns/China/Russia/Inca/Sweden/Rome/Ottomans
A: Portugal/Assyria/Zulu/France/Venice/Arabia/Austria/Inca/Celts
A-: Carthage/England/Indonesia/Mongolia/Siam/Denmark/Japan
B+: Aztec/Polynesia/Brazil
B: Greece/Songhai/Spain
B-: Germany/Egypt
And here are the brief explanations below. 
America
The ability to buy land from other civs is really strong. Especially those city states with Natural Wonders. The UU is pretty strong too, and the UB is good. And the early game sight is still a game changer.

Arabia
Strong UU (still one of the strongest in game, even after the horse archer ranger nerf), decent UB (it's nothing spectacular), and a good UA allowing him to get a "chain" of events. Solid civ.

Assyria
Strong aggro civ. Early game UU allows easy city captures and thus activating UA, and snowballs easily from there. The only problem is when there isn't a nearby neighbour trying to expand. The UB is just icing on the cake when you get writers.

Austria
Great UA, but a little dependent on other civs. But...with how often other civs conquer/spam Great Diplomats, you'd have to be willing to war them when you see one. Great UB, and a decent UU.

Aztec
Highly river dependent, but a good early game bully (though not as good as others). You'd have to be willing to wage war as soon as you see someone to abuse your UA and defend barb camps (so you can kill them yourself). The problem is just that the current authority tree isn't that good compared to the others, and Monte is highly encouraged to take it right away or he falls behind quickly.

Babylon
After the science changes, they're back to being top notch since the early academy helps a (insert expletive here) ton. It gets everything rolling, and if they have extra gold, their infrastructure skyrockets.

Brazil
With the Golden Age requirements to have their UA kick in, it's a massive liability early on, especially when their UU is so far late into the game to come into play. Surviving early game isn't easy with Brazil. Though the woodcamps help a little bit, it's not that helpful if you lack production. With that said though, they are pretty hard to control once they get to the later stages.

Byzantium
Warning: Incoming personal bias - I love this Byzantium. Early game cataphracts (20 combat stat this early?) at military theory, guaranteed religion (of YOUR CHOOSING!), combining the two makes it so dominant.

Carthage
Being able to invest into buildings immediately as you expand is a great boon. Early infrastructure really sets the pace for whatever you need the city to do later on. If you don't need to spend the gold on the city, then you're probably going to spend it on units anyway (or if you're feeling like gambling, invest into a wonder).

Celt
Lugh, Mannanan, and Bran are all pretty good pantheons. However, celts aren't always guaranteed a religion, and that's a pretty big bummer considering how good the pantheons are (probably meant to balance it out a little). Their UU allows them to get their pantheon early if you are able to hunt down a few barbs, and just hope from there that you are able to make it to a religion before they're all taken.

China
Strong UA. Strong UU. Strong UB. However, the UA's may be a little difficult to get going sometimes when the AI doesn't want to give you the luxuries early on. So it may take a bit to get the ball rolling, and that's probably the only strike I have against China.

Denmark
Good aggressive civ. Having earlier long swordsmen really go a long way, especially when they take no action points in pillaging. It makes the unit sturdier in an invasion, and most likely can take down any city other than capitals early on. Although, there may be an exception from cities with babylon's walls. But the UB encourages you to fight units anyway.

Netherlands
Extremely good UA since the wonders require culture to build now. Especially since each of them give 4 culture per turn. Polders are also extremely good. Although the UU isn't as great when I play pangaea, I would just consider it icing on the cake.


Egyptian
Great on lower difficulties. Otherwise is terrible since the UA regarding wonders is nothing compared to the AI, and is now culture locked anyway. So good luck even starting one when you have absolutely no bonuses for culture until artifacts (which you may get only a couple anyway since Egypt generally falls behind). The chariots are good, but that's their only saving grace.

England
Pangaea devalues the Ship of the Line by a lot and her naval bonuses are cut short as well. Although the extra spy is always nice. Her UB comes a little late, and usually is a little too late to recover (but if you got it while ahead, then you skyrocket, especially with coals).

Ethiopia
The Steele is still one of the absolute best early game buildings out there (if not the absolute best). The UA is also pretty good in jumping ahead on techs.

France
Nice cohesive UA. However, getting the slots for theming bonuses is pretty difficult. Their musketeers come at a very critical point and can be a game changer with the extra movement, and this allows the plundering to start. The only problem is getting a wonder to shove all that loot in. But overall, a great civ.

Germany
Getting alliances with city states isn’t easy as Germany on Emperor. Especially when the AIs get massive bonuses to compete against you. And with a UA that requires alliances with city states, it’s pretty much hoping the stars align for Germany to thrive. They have to wait until really late game for their UU to come through, and their UB is heavily reliant on other civs not sanctioning nor conquering other city states. Well…at least it’s better than Egypt.

Greece
Well, Greece is pretty solid at the moment due to the bonus combat stats of the hoplite, and possibly only because of that. Being able to get early generals and have early combat boosts matter (unless you face a Byzantium). However, unlike the Aztecs or Persia, they don’t have a way of automatically healing, and thus hurts them a lot.

Hun
Hun see. Hun take. Soon, Hun is going to be a big problem. Probably starting around spearmen or when they take a couple of barb camps.

Inca
The Inca is extremely good early game with their UI. Ignoring hill movement costs is a pretty big deal. It’s basically faster army, faster workers, and generally means a faster start.

India
Starting with a Pantheon will almost always guarantee a religion, especially if you pick the current “God of All Creation” where it’s basically guaranteeing you a religion. The UU is a little strange since it lowers the mobility of the skirmisher, but it gains plenty of durability (through feared enemy) and high stats. Although their siege is still suboptimal even though they don’t have that normal siege penalty. Better off using cannons. But their UB is also a bright spot for them.

Indonesia
UU is too random. UA is extremely good with an automatic monopoly (or a few). UB is decent.

Iroquois
Being able to move through half the map without hindering yourself (and on top of that, you getting bonuses from it) is extremely appealing. Being able to grab the early ruins even though you’re in the middle of a jungle is a good thing.

Japan
The UU is good. The UB is good. The UA requires a good dice roll to become relevant. Combat bonus is decent. Not bad by any means, but not really great either unless you have a great coastal start.

Korea
The nuts. Cannons upgraded from the Hwacha actually retains the two attacks promotion. The UA is insanely good (especially with reworked science), and the UB is good as well. Sure, you won’t be conquering anyone before cannons. But after the cannon… it’s doomsday.

Maya
The UI allows you to get an early tech lead and possibly secures a religion for you. It alone is outstanding enough to make Maya competitive, but with the ability to get a free Great Person every so often, it makes Pacal to be quite a force to be reckoned with. The UU isn’t that good though (but that’s beside the point).

Mongolia
Meet the neighbourhood bully that doesn’t need to hit you to hurt you. Just building up an army and going around annexing CSes is pretty satisfying. It’s not like you’ll lose any men either. The world will hate you, but you got an army to beat them down with anyhow. Good UB as well. The UU could be better, but having a free medic that buffs people around them isn’t something I would complain about.

Morocco
Just sending out caravans already makes Morocco strong with the bonus culture. The Kasbahs are also extremely good improvements. The UU is decent in regular terrain, but gets better in desert.

Ottoman
Getting the free volley upgrade is the highlight for this civ. The trade routes is also pretty good considering that the AI usually cleans the barbarians anyway. The Janissary is also a good UU currently, with the bonus of being available earlier.

Persia
The UA allowing movement bonus in a GA really pushes their siege units to being extremely powerful. Let’s not forget that immortals are pretty strong early on and can heal extremely quickly. This allows Persia to be extremely aggressive early, and can easily conquer other cities without much hassle. The UB is just icing on the cake for conquered cities.

Poland
I think this is the only civ that isn’t modified at all. And the funny thing is, it’s still one of the strongest civs. Especially since they recently got a buff (well, it’s more like a nerf for the majority of the civs) regarding the wonders requiring policies (guess who gets them for free?)

Polynesia
Great UU. Has half of the old Spanish UA. Pretty poor UI. It all depends on the dice roll for Kamehameha to be an actual force and not just a random early war guy.

Portugal
With the new science system, the UA is actually more relevant now and you can get a head start if you can get a trade route going early on with another CS. Later on, it gets better when you get naus. However, just like every other CS reliant civ, it’s a hassle to protect them, especially the farther ones.

Rome
Though Rome focuses on an early aggressive expansion stance, they can also switch over to conquer mode if necessary. The ability to retain buildings of conquered cities means that you should let them develop a little first before taking them over. So the Legion aren’t exactly the units with the best timing for that. But it’s probably best to establish a presence first anyway.

Russia
Catherine has a pretty useful UA in doubling all her strategic resources. This allows her to trade the excess away (usually for quite a bit of gold) and those same strategic resources give her bonus science as well. All in all, that’s the key selling point of Russia. The UB and UU are subpar compared to what others have, though the UU can actually fight infantry.

Shoshone
I think this is absolutely the most consistent civilization in the game. They will always be relevant. They have huge settling perks, extremely potent early game starts, and a great UI to boot. Unless you’re up against Washington, you’re going to annoy everyone else…but you can also wreck them too since you usually get ahead easily.

Siam
I personally dislike playing as Ramkhamhaeng, but his UU is extremely strong for the time frame it’s in. But again, the city states are annoying to defend, especially when everyone sends great diplomats from across the world to your allied city state.

Songhai
Askia depends on the length of the rivers you have in the city. The more river tiles you have, the better. The UU can be used mid-game to conquer cities more efficiently. But again, it all depends on the rivers.

Spain
Well, now that the Spanish gamble is gone, I do enjoy the more religious flavoured Isabella. Although she’s basically going to take someone’s religion and shove it into the world’s face, it usually comes at the cost of said person…and then the entire world hating on you. Overall, the UA and UB works well together. But the UU isn’t something that has an impact in Pangaea games.

Sweden
The new UA is very potent. Especially the extra movement on siege weapons. It’s kind of like Persia on steroids conqueror mode. Except that these guys start at gunpowder in general and they have a good UB to fall back on since it provides both science and culture now.

Venice
Venice, from being the joke of the base game, became actually viable. Hugely thanks to the Doge’s palace. That bonus start is crazy good, and allows Venice to actually be a big menace from the get go with the big head start. However, as with all diplomacy based civs, protecting the CS is a big problem. So he’ll usually just take them himself and start beating people up.

Zulu
Warmonger Shaka takes a little bit to ramp up, but when his units start getting multiple promotions, it’s basically trouble for everyone else. Impis are still an extreme terror, and with their double attacks (quadruple if you ever get to blitz with them, heaven forbid), things disappear really quickly.
 
We making tier lists? I'll try too.

SS: Korea - obvious placement. Wisely used, this UA will get you more Science than some AI civs total science output. Great at all difficulties, all map settings, great UU, great UB, no abusable flaws. Loves Tradition.
S: Babylon - also obvious. Less insane Science wise, more flexible than Korea thanks to the OK early UB and Gold bonus. Not forced to go Tradition but it helps.
A+: Maya - Solid.
A : Poland, Byzantium, Ethiopia, Morocco, Zulu, Rome, China, India, Assyria, Celts, Brazil - they're all pretty easy to understand and solid. Zulu are overpowered in combat sense and I can't agree with the previous poster to ever putting Sweden (which is absolutely terrible compared to Zulu - their entire UA is inferior to just one of Zulu special promotions, which they get much more of thanks to 25% faster promotions, let alone with -50% unit maintenance) that high.
Poland is still great, but UU is now only decent, UB is good - it's carried by the UA pretty much, not broken, there's some much better civs, but nevertheless it's great.
Celts have one of the best UAs with insane possibilities and flexibility combined with almost guaranteed religion, one of the best UUs in the game and a UB nobody cares about
The rest is either flexible or very strong at what they do. Brazil is absolutely broken tourism wise, or was so a patch ago. Rome has one of the best UBs, good UA and one of the worst UUs in the game, if not the worst.
A-: Indonesia, Inca, Aztec, Morocco, Carthage, Portugal, Shoshone, Songhai - more situational than A on average but in the right spot broken. Aztecs have insane growth and production bonus that is sometimes (lakes) almost broken as well as lots of stuff for killing units and a great UU that becomes a nightmare when upgraded. Solid. Songhai has the best UBs in the game with the right start, the UA is solid, the UU is not good but with this sort of UB/UA it's very good.
B+: Netherlands, Persia, Iroquois, Huns, Ottomans, England, Denmark straightforward, some with great possibilities but not quite as good as those above.
B: France, Japan, Polynesia, Greece, America - Great UI and UU saves France from worse spot, Japan is too start based to get something valuable from it's UA, Greece has a great UB (but not as good as Colosseum), decent UU and uninteresting UA
B-: Venice, Egypt, Germany Venice is too start dependent to get anything more, it is inflexible but cool and a civ that can't settle can't be higher up. Egypt has a good UA, great UB that comes at a decent time and a great, early UU. Germany has a great UB that comes mid-late, a great UU that comes very late and an UA that is irrelevant until later on.
C-: Sweden I think it's the worst Civ in the game. UA bonus is outshined by Zulu promotions, UU is only decent and comes mid-late, UB that is only decent and comes too late to be only decent, UA's heal is cool and all but thanks to 25% faster Promo acquisition, Shaka gets more healing too (every promo = free, small heal, more promos = more heals) and a stronger army as promotions do matter a lot.
Free March on an UU is cool and all, but the Zulu can just get March on everything very fast as well, after a good ol' war half their army should be Marching with 1-2 unique promos by the time you get to Carolean.
Poor, ****ed man's Zulu.



Spain - unsure where to place. It's very fun to play as but the UA in itself is pretty bad due to it giving you way less Faith alone than Celtic one unless you go absolutely ballistic with aggression but it's still fun and fitting. UB is great, awesome, wonderful - if you can get your cities to grow fast and have a good faith gain to begin with. If you don't, it's just awesome but still one of the best. UU is situational, bad at actually fighting but overpowered at settling overseas which is ironic considering the name of this one means Conqueror. Conquistadors are only good at being peaceful (...or settling after you burn down inferior cities with little to no infrastructure, which they quite literally devour with ease... But the same can be said about almost all units of the time)

IT's not always possible to get a religion at higher difficulties due to its bad UA faith.

Let's say it's A-/B+ on lower, B on higher difficulties if you can settle overseas, but it's worse if you can't/don't want to settle on other islands/continents due to UU being less useful and if you can't/don't want to be at war because UA becomes just a convenience with no influence spread and if you get no religion or don't manage to steal one, you'll have no fun.
This civ is carried by Mission which is its centrepiece and it's only consistently good part, apart from no foreign religion spread and no foreign missionary spread which only actually matter and truly work if you get a religion.
 
C-: Sweden I think it's the worst Civ in the game. UA bonus is outshined by Zulu promotions, UU is only decent and comes mid-late, UB that is only decent and comes too late to be only decent, UA's heal is cool and all but thanks to 25% faster Promo acquisition, Shaka gets more healing too (every promo = free, small heal, more promos = more heals) and a stronger army as promotions do matter a lot.
Free March on an UU is cool and all, but the Zulu can just get March on everything very fast as well, after a good ol' war half their army should be Marching with 1-2 unique promos by the time you get to Carolean.
Poor, ****ed man's Zulu.

Not gonna do any kind of full ranking breakdown, but man, we must war quite differently if 3 move siege isn't even worth mentioning in your mind. I'd take a Swedish Cannon over a ton of UUs. Yes, they aren't as good at war as the most war focused civ in the game, but they're also considerably better at science and culture.
 
Not gonna do any kind of full ranking breakdown, but man, we must war quite differently if 3 move siege isn't even worth mentioning in your mind. I'd take a Swedish Cannon over a ton of UUs. Yes, they aren't as good at war as the most war focused civ in the game, but they're also considerably better at science and culture.

After playing a bit more, I think I misplaced them - they should be at B- or maybe even B, with Spain taking over the worst civ in the game spot for requiring too many things to go right to get anything of true value. While sometimes it's a great civ that is absolutely beastly, too often the Conquistador is just a fancy clad Knight, UA does very little if you go Piety which you should and Mission is the only one doing anything (while a top tier building it is still not imho as good as, let's say, Colosseum which is my fav UB - +gold from connections that gets better with more cities, +2 culture, +3 production, more GG points than you can hold, what's not to like. More than compensates for the Legion's absolute suckage)

Anyway, compared to Sweden Zulu have far superior economy allowing them to keep their army stronger with less of an early game punishment for creating many units (lower maintenance), and by the time Skola comes into the play its culture and science bonus is not the most significant thing in the world.
 
After playing a bit more, I think I misplaced them - they should be at B- or maybe even B, with Spain taking over the worst civ in the game spot for requiring too many things to go right to get anything of true value. While sometimes it's a great civ that is absolutely beastly, too often the Conquistador is just a fancy clad Knight, UA does very little if you go Piety which you should and Mission is the only one doing anything (while a top tier building it is still not imho as good as, let's say, Colosseum which is my fav UB - +gold from connections that gets better with more cities, +2 culture, +3 production, more GG points than you can hold, what's not to like. More than compensates for the Legion's absolute suckage)

Can't really speak to Spain, only played them once and it was a long long time, and a million things have changed. I do wish they were more fun to face, but, not everybody can be Japan or Ethi. I don't fear AI Conquis for sure (well more than a regular Knight at least), at the same time I like the idea of there being UU that don't quite specialize in war, I support the Explorer idea Wodhann has for Brazil for instance. So it would be hypocritical for me to criticize Conquis I suppose. I just...choose to never play with them.

Anyway, compared to Sweden Zulu have far superior economy allowing them to keep their army stronger with less of an early game punishment for creating many units (lower maintenance), and by the time Skola comes into the play its culture and science bonus is not the most significant thing in the world.

So back when gold was hyperplentiful, I really didn't think this mattered tbh, at least outside the Ancient. Every civ could afford an army and still get things done at home. It almost meant nothing but more gold for my enemies to steal really even. Especially especially back when gold cost for buildings didn't increase by cities owned. But now, with there being less gold overall, you're right, I may have to rethink my view.

Skola isn't maybe the greatest building individually, but remember that with one click of a level one tenet, they're in every city. That's quite a boost of culture if you've been successful with Trebs, Caros, and Cannons.
 
Skola isn't maybe the greatest building individually, but remember that with one click of a level one tenet, they're in every city. That's quite a boost of culture if you've been successful with Trebs, Caros, and Cannons.

That's actually one of the worst parts about Sweden, Skola is cheaper and unlocks earlier, so getting it from order feels like a total waste.

On the topic of Sweden however I feel like both their UA and their UU are pretty toptier actually. Haven't used the Skola enough to make an assessment of it, but last time I called out on it for being theoretically bad, people said that it was awesome. That reminds me that just a few months ago people were heavily complaining about Sweden being out of whack overpowered, and nothing was changed since then.
 
That's actually one of the worst parts about Sweden, Skola is cheaper and unlocks earlier, so getting it from order feels like a total waste.

On the topic of Sweden however I feel like both their UA and their UU are pretty toptier actually. Haven't used the Skola enough to make an assessment of it, but last time I called out on it for being theoretically bad, people said that it was awesome. That reminds me that just a few months ago people were heavily complaining about Sweden being out of whack overpowered, and nothing was changed since then.

Sweden was nerfed a bit. 15%->10% on attack from UA.

G
 
Can't really speak to Spain, only played them once and it was a long long time, and a million things have changed. I do wish they were more fun to face, but, not everybody can be Japan or Ethi. I don't fear AI Conquis for sure (well more than a regular Knight at least), at the same time I like the idea of there being UU that don't quite specialize in war, I support the Explorer idea Wodhann has for Brazil for instance. So it would be hypocritical for me to criticize Conquis I suppose. I just...choose to never play with them.

Spain is pretty fun to play though. They're probably not fun to face because Isabella is absolutely insane and incompetent. Can't remember a single time she has done anything well, she doesn't know how to play the game - I remember even the worst of leader AIs being at least a mediocre threat from time to time but she is always rendered to an useless mess sitting on 2-3 cities (until she loses them), denouncing everyone and sending hate messages every 5 turns. Even in vanilla when she started next to wonders she still managed to become a non-issue.

Conquistador's settling ability is cool but it has a pretty limited usage, would be better if instead of settling it just built all the Pioneer-tier + Harbour buildings instantly in conquered cities (that on top of a CS increase/a promotion). It'd encourage conquest much more which is what Spain should be about, but UA is pretty bad too. The faith output for settling is not high enough to absolutely guarantee you a religion (which means you still must build Shrines everywhere, unless your pantheon fits you a lot), the instant conversion is cool on conquest but on settling it's just nice (and once you get Piety almost everything you own converts at the speed of light), conquest faith is not impressive neither.

So back when gold was hyperplentiful, I really didn't think this mattered tbh, at least outside the Ancient. Every civ could afford an army and still get things done at home. It almost meant nothing but more gold for my enemies to steal really even. Especially especially back when gold cost for buildings didn't increase by cities owned. But now, with there being less gold overall, you're right, I may have to rethink my view.

Skola isn't maybe the greatest building individually, but remember that with one click of a level one tenet, they're in every city. That's quite a boost of culture if you've been successful with Trebs, Caros, and Cannons.

Good point about tenet but the difference between a Skola and Public School won't matter that much at the point you get that tenet as I doubt the bonus culture will amount to even one policy until the game finishes and the science is not that much higher. Could help you save yourself from some tourism maniacs like Brazil, though. The +1MA siege units are admittedly awesome though.
 
That's actually one of the worst parts about Sweden, Skola is cheaper and unlocks earlier, so getting it from order feels like a total waste.

It might feel like a waste, but I don't think it actually is, at least if I'm early adopting in the Industrial. I guess it probably is if I'm midpack in culture and waiting til the Modern Era. Authority gives so much culture for Marathon hyperwarmongering nowadays tho that's not really a concern of mine tho lol.

On the topic of Sweden however I feel like both their UA and their UU are pretty toptier actually. Haven't used the Skola enough to make an assessment of it, but last time I called out on it for being theoretically bad, people said that it was awesome. That reminds me that just a few months ago people were heavily complaining about Sweden being out of whack overpowered, and nothing was changed since then.

I love the UA, I'm with you on that. The UU is weird on Marathon, because all the opportunities for combat mean the best infantry really have March already, or don't only because I intentionally pick worse promos. Still like it tho, and for sure its one of the best in AI hands.
 
Sweden was nerfed a bit. 15%->10% on attack from UA.
What's with your obsession of proving me wrong? Couldn't you just let me have this?!

Just messing with you by the way, tells you how much I actually play Sweden :D.

It might feel like a waste, but I don't think it actually is, at least if I'm early adopting in the Industrial. I guess it probably is if I'm midpack in culture and waiting til the Modern Era. Authority gives so much culture for Marathon hyperwarmongering nowadays tho that's not really a concern of mine tho lol.
How much more culture per kill do you get on marathon compared to Standard? I didn't even think it actually scaled.


I love the UA, I'm with you on that. The UU is weird on Marathon, because all the opportunities for combat mean the best infantry really have March already, or don't only because I intentionally pick worse promos. Still like it tho, and for sure its one of the best in AI hands.
I feel like this was true back when it was a rifleman/fusilier replacement, but as a Tercio-replacement you're probably not going to get 4 promotions before you reach it. And besides even if you do being able to recruit fresh units with march throughout two eras is really powerful. It also allows you to go Cover and Medic on your units instead, as they are going to get march when upgraded anyways.
 
How much more culture per kill do you get on marathon compared to Standard? I didn't even think it actually scaled.

The full triple, and Imperium culture tripled too.



I feel like this was true back when it was a rifleman/fusilier replacement, but as a Tercio-replacement you're probably not going to get 4 promotions before you reach it. And besides even if you do being able to recruit fresh units with march throughout two eras is really powerful. It also allows you to go Cover and Medic on your units instead, as they are going to get march when upgraded anyways.

I do, at least when I play Emperor. Starting to move to Immortal, we'll see how that goes. And yeah, as you say, i just take cover 1 and 2. But I warmonger a lot AND I actually use Classical/Med infantry as more than meat shields. That longswordsmen are useless thread is confusing to me tbh. Guess I've been doing it wrong?
 
Back
Top Bottom