[R&F] How Would you Change Uniques?

[Legacy of Smiles]

It's no secret that some Civs get rather lacklustre uniques. From the underpowered to the unimportant there's many uniques that just don't quite fit. I hate this - uniques are often one of the most interesting parts of a civ and I think it's vital that every civ has at least decent uniques. What do you think? Which units need replacing (and with what?) and which do you think need buffs/nerfs?

 

[Disgustipated]

Most civs I am fine with. Georgia is the only civ that really needs a buff, though Spain and Norway could use some small buffs. Georgia needs half price walls, I would even argue 1/4 price walls for them, if that's possible with the game engine. Their UU needs +5 strength as well.

 

[The googles do nothing]

Make them all upgradeable too. That is such a powerful ability i don't any equivalent bonus to give units. I would also like to see promotions increase the gold maintenance costs.

For Norway the Berserker should get a embarked movement bonus of +2. Chateau should give housing.

 

[Naokaukodem]

In order to "improve" uniques, I would scrap them completely. Imagine having YOUR country in the game, AND the ANCESTOR of your country, and any country you may want to play... This would be all be possible if we scrap uniques, except for names and city names of course. This way, the work of the developpers would be focused on integrating EVERY CIV IN THE WORLD PAST AND PRESENT instead of mere uniques you barely pay attention at past the effect of discovery, if there's any.

This, associated with the option to be able to start NEAR culturally linked civs would make for an AMAZING roleplaying, like recreating History, really. For example I'm French, I would totally love to play the Franks, surrounded by the Goths, the Vandals, Rome, why not even Carthage, etc... or playing regular France with England (I hate England with a passion), Italy, Germany, Spain, Dutchland, Belgium, Switzerland, Luxembourg (city-state ?), etc. etc. all around.

Not to be mentionned we could play on Earth map, with every civilization covering the land... but of course not in actual-like Civilization, because the turns would take forever. Maybe in an upcoming game that finds a way to fullfill empty areas with non-computer-consuming-power stuff. (like "City-States" -barbs, minor civs, whatever you want to call them-, but working *VERY* differently than actual civs, like having abstract units and all, and dealing with them would be like sending spies to them) EXAMPLE : what about having a whole areas depicted in RED, without cities but marked as populated with barbarians, in which no single civilian unit could survive more than 1 turn, and military units being constantly harrassed by barbs units spawns...

Wow, that got far.

 

[Legacy of Smiles]

In order to "improve" uniques, I would scrap them completely. Imagine having YOUR country in the game, AND the ANCESTOR of your country, and any country you may want to play... This would be all be possible if we scrap uniques, except for names and city names of course. This way, the work of the developpers would be focused on integrating EVERY CIV IN THE WORLD PAST AND PRESENT instead of mere uniques you barely pay attention at past the effect of discovery, if there's any.

This, associated with the option to be able to start NEAR culturally linked civs would make for an AMAZING roleplaying, like recreating History, really. For example I'm French, I would totally love to play the Franks, surrounded by the Goths, the Vandals, Rome, why not even Carthage, etc... or playing regular France with England (I hate England with a passion), Italy, Germany, Spain, Dutchland, Belgium, Switzerland, Luxembourg (city-state ?), etc. etc. all around.

Not to be mentionned we could play on Earth map, with every civilization covering the land... but of course not in actual-like Civilization, because the turns would take forever. Maybe in an upcoming game that finds a way to fullfill empty areas with non-computer-consuming-power stuff. (like "City-States" -barbs, minor civs, whatever you want to call them-, but working *VERY* differently than actual civs, like having abstract units and all, and dealing with them would be like sending spies to them) EXAMPLE : what about having a whole areas depicted in RED, without cities but marked as populated with barbarians, in which no single civilian unit could survive more than 1 turn, and military units being constantly harrassed by barbs units spawns...

Wow, that got far.

I'd argue that animated leaders are the bigger killer for Civ quantity. Imagine how many hours go into designing one of them.

 

[Sostratus]

Chateau should give housing.

Are you suggesting that giant luxurious houses should give le gasp... Housing?

I literally wrote the same suggestion like two weeks ago in some other thread.

Life is hard here because we don't have a balance cycle like a competitive multiplayer game; so we just aren't attuned to what the devs think the power budgets of each civ are. Do they rate the value/power of certain abilities much differently than we do? Certainly. But they may have a game view where something just needs to be fun in isolation- it doesn't bother them that scythia or Australia just has way more power than a civ like georgia or egypt. Or maybe they think faith generating improvements are superior to ones that output food and production.

In the inca stream, they remarked that carl playing on emperor was noteworthy and that, in almost a sense of 'awe', he might still even be able to play on a harder difficulty!!
So our huge group of deity players are having a vastly different experience from a lot of the employees - naturally this has huge consequences for balance.

 

[Lord Lakely]

I'm not to fond of Châteaux giving housing. The workers that toil in them mines and tend to the crops living in huge sprawling riverside mansions? Doesn't seem too right for me. At least not before 1789

Châteaux are easy to fix however: Just let that +2 Culture stack with itself, dammit. Same with all improvements that suffer from the same ailments. Ziggurats and Kurgans should improve as you make your way through the tech tree.

 

[Sostratus]

Same with all improvements that suffer from the same ailments.

I would argue that ziggurats, because they come turn one and are so powerful on rivers, probably dont need more than the +1 culture they get at natural history.

Kurgans, Sphinxes, and Chateaux all get minimal tech tree support; the chateau has none, sphinxes get the same +1 culture at natural history, and kurgans get +2 gold throughout the game, which is like +1 of another yield.
Compare to Outback Stations, Polders, Mekewaps, Stepwells, etc. which all have multiple tech upgrades and become quite potent.

Châteaux are easy to fix however: Just let that +2 Culture stack with itself, dammit.

This would please me greatly. They need to give more culture or more gold. The pairidaeza outclasses them with more gold, often more culture, less placement restrictions, and +2 appeal instead of +1.

Some civs should have better UIs than others, just for balance; but some improvements are really really bad.

I would also suggest nubian pyramids need to get more food yield somehow just because they have to be built in the desert and you mostly want them for the district bonus instead of their own yield, which is mediocre on base 0 yield tiles.

 

[Lord Lakely]

I once played France and Persia in succession. The Château can't hold a candle to the Pairidaeza, which is available in the Classical Era, spammable, gets adjacency from FOUR DIFFERENT DISTRICTS and has no outrageous tile restrictions (can't be next to each other is hardly a restriction). The Pairidaeza also generates tourism as quickly as a Château does as well actually it does it faster because the PD also adds APPEAL, helping you put down more seaside resorts and national parks.

What does the château get by comparison? A measly +1 culture if you build it next to a wonder. PATHETIC.

Edit: fun fact. In the French game I was going for Culture (built every renaissance wonder and all wonders that came thereafter), but had to go for Science because Persia was generating loads of tourism on the other continent and there was nothing I could do about it. In the Persian game, I almost failed a Domination victory because I was making so much tourism that I almost won a Culture Victory by accident.

 

[The googles do nothing]

I played two half-games as Spain and I don't think there problem is they are underpowered it's they they really have only one good strategy that is counter intuitive. Make sure you get a religion but don't spread it (with religious units). Don't explore at the start and aim for a dark classical age so you run Monasticism.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'm not to fond of Châteaux giving housing. The workers that toil in them mines and tend to the crops living in huge sprawling riverside mansions? Doesn't seem too right for me. At least not before 1789

Wouldn't the person working the chateau for culture and gold live there though while the farmer lives in the farm?
Honestly on top of housing, it would make sense to give the Chateau some amenities from entertainment. Think of all the parties and balls they would throw in those houses full of culture and gold.