Japan's Kit

[HeroOfTheSword]

So more swords?


But seriously, I think your Kami sounds undercooked. It's a Holy Site, right? What art will you use, still the Torii gate?
Assuming the yields were competitive, you're taking the General/Admiral -> GWAM and extending to GWAM -> Engineer. It's quite one-track, no?
Isn't the idea better accomplished by Legen's UNW

Spoiler :

Tatara (replaces Ironworks, takes the Kabuki slot as Japan's 2nd UB)
Unlocked at Iron Working (from Machinery)
Production cost scales with number of Cities
5 Iron (from 2)
10 Production, +5 Culture and 5 Faith
1 Engineer slot
+2 Culture and +2 Faith to Manufactories in the Empire.
When a Great Engineer is born in the Empire, gain Science equal to 100% of your Culture and Faith per turn as an instant yield. (global version of the Kabuki's Musician ability, the yields and GP choices can be easily changed with database values, but the global nature requires DLL changes)
25 Science whenever a building is constructed in this city, scaling with Era. (baseline Ironworks ability, no changes)

With whatever changes based on UA and Dojo like
Melee/Gun, Mounted Melee and Armor units in the Empire gain Eight Virtues of Bushido.

Yeah probably the Kami is undercooked although it's just an idea at this point so I'm open to suggestions to buff it, alter it.

It's not quite like a Torii gate, although it's very similar in design so I guess the Torii could be tweaked a bit as a base model.

I suppose it is a bit one-track, I worried about that, but I don't think the Tatara as a UNW works at iron working because the Tatara process wasn't really honed and perfected until the late medieval era so for me it's out of place in time. The engineer part is just a small addition, like the % I was thinking of would be very low, 5% or lower.

I had toyed with the idea of a Grand Temple UNW too as there is a head Kami shrine, the Kanayago Kami, so perhaps that's a better fit? Legen's UNW Tatara could be incorporated into that. But alas, yes, it is more swords

 

[Legen]

The more I think about the introduction of the Tatara building, the less I like it since the whole point of it was a way to sort out the GWAM issue and early iron scarcity. Without those elements it seems as if we're just adding the building for the sake of it.

The Tatara (as an unique forge) was trying to address the following dynamic:

I've been playing a lot of Japan lately and having a rough go. But it's partly because I have some specific things I want to do and if they don't work out it makes me want to abandon the attempt. On Immortal/standard/standard my plan is:

-Authority/Artistry/Imperialism
-protection -> hero worship
-sufficient iron to spam Samurai early (5+ is ideal)

Authority starts can be the most hit or miss for me- you're a bit at the mercy of good barbarian camp luck and maybe having some nearby CSs to bully. So some % of games get rough right off the bat if Barb camps are sparse.

Protection is an easy grab- I've hardly ever missed it. But man is hero worship a beloved AI pick. I got beat to it by Ghandi of all people last game. It seems to go within the first 3 picks pretty often, so getting it as Japan isn't a given at all... my success rate is probably 50% or so. I typically won't quit here as long as the AI that got Hero Worship is at least close enough for me to attack first.

And then there's iron, which having in abundance doesn't seem all that common. A lot of games I'll have maybe 1 deposit in reach so just a few yields. There's CSs or trading as other sources but those aren't very reliable. Not being able to capitalize on Samurai feels bad.

There's also the early tech path reaching for walls and then iron early on. Having plantation or sea luxes is really inconvenient tech wise.

All of these taken together mean it's pretty easy for the plan to go wrong. To which you might say: boohoo- adapt, be flexible! And I can see your point. In terms of just trying to win the game, yes- flexible adaptation would be the answer.

But it just feels wrong to me to play Japan any other way, and less fun. The kit screams "go authority/imperialism, get hero worship, war your way to promotions and generals/admirals!". I mean- the kit is "buy 2 get 3 free" GG/GA into Artists/Writers/Musicians, how can you not pick the policy trees that let you buy GG/GA with faith or the founder that gives you tons of points towards them when you conquer a city? Why bother playing as Japan if you aren't going to lean into the kit? At that point, wouldn't most other civs be better choices to open with progress or to pick a different founder with?

The issue on how Japan currently plays out is that the civ has multiple tech requirements at disparate parts of the tech tree to make the most use of in Ancient Era (Bronze Working for securing Iron, Construction for Walls with the +1, whatever tech unlocks your surrounding's luxury improvement), and in near Medieval Era as well (beeline the bottom techs for Steel, but also the top techs for GW slots). And all of that on a civ with no early science bonuses. This makes for a civ with a rigid plan that can't adapt easily if something goes wrong.

This dynamic is also why you had a better experience opening with Progress, despite it having less synergies with Japan's kit than Authority.

Hi all, so I've just played a few games with Japan and obviously went Authority first, and then Imperialism later on, culminating in three different starts all ending in disaster, always falling way behind in tech and not being able to make any impact with an army, even with god of war, zealotry, hero worship and warrior monk picked as beliefs as well as wonders that should bolster things like terracotta etc. So this latest game I've tried a different tact; going Progress to get expansion up and running early and then Artistry to bolster great works and by god it's miles better! I am actually enjoying the kit now although I still think the faith and culture on defensive buildings is rather pointless and wondered if that is something that could be changed?

Substituting the yields on Walls and giving an early UB alleviates your tech requirements in Ancient Era. The free Iron mitigates the desire to abandon the game if there's little Iron around, since you have a workaround. Early GW slots (or the Torii) also alleviate the tech needs in late Classical and early Medieval eras, since you don't have to rush the techs on the top of the tree just to not end with GWAM people sitting idle in your Capital.

All of this gives more room to adapt if Japan's plan goes wrong. If your monopoly luxury requires Calendar or Fishing to improve, you're not delaying it as much with an UB in Bronze Working (which also secures Iron), as you do now that you need both Bronze Working and Construction to secure Iron and benefit from the UA's yields on Walls (Japan's only source of early yields).

The Tatara (with three additional buildings) was also trying to synergize with the UA by boosting Great Works through its strong theming bonus, which is on par with World Wonders; 3 GWs on a themed World Wonder or Tatara side building are stronger than 3 Torii. I could emphasize this aspect if I gave bonuses to GWs themselves, instead of just giving a strong theming bonus. Here's an idea for a different building doing that:

----
UA: yields on Defense buildings removed.

Jinja (unique Shrine, replaces Kabuki)
Cost: 65
1 2(from 2)
Enables the construction of Atsuta Shrine, Three Palace Sanctuaries and Ise Grand Shrine.


Grand Shrines
Unique National Wonders, only 1 of each in the Empire, must be in different cities, fixed cost: 44.

Atsuta Shrine
3 Writing slots (+15 theming bonus, +10 if themed, requires 3 Japanese works, any era).
+2 to Great Works in all Cities.

Three Palace Sanctuaries
3 Art/Artifact slots (+15 theming bonus, +10 if themed, requires 3 Japanese works, any era).
+2 to Great Works in all Cities.

Ise Grand Shrine
3 Music slots (+25 theming bonus, +20 if themed, requires 3 Japanese works, any era).
+2 to Great Works in all Cities.
----

A more explicit UA synergy, and gives Japan an unique way to quickly address City needs as you expand; if a city suddenly has high Distress, Illiteracy or Boredom, you can move some Great Works there to alleviate it until it can catch up on relevant infrastructure. Happiness tends to be a major issue for warmongers, so this design also indirectly supports Japan's militaristic side.

It also addresses part of the dynamic I discussed. Early yields on an unique shrine are much more convenient than on Walls, so you don't have to choose your fist techs between improving a luxury monopoly or benefitting from the current UA's yields. Early access to GW slots also means you don't end with GWAM sitting idle for beelining to Steel.

Also, we have no unique Shrines, even with the 4UC integration, so this is a point for uniqueness.

All defensive and military buildings gain +1 and +1

It should be clear from the dynamic I explained, but I don't think this type of bonus helps with making Japan's plan more flexible, even if the bonus includes Science. If Japan is to be less rigid, you'd want any early yield to come either on Bronze Working (since securing Iron is a major priority anyways), or not require a tech to unlock (like in the Jinja example).

This is also a big part of the Ironworks Tatara design, since it comes with the UA providing yields on Engineers (typically unlocked at Bronze Working, and an extra on Tradition's Justice). The rest of that Tatara design was meant to synergize with it.

Engineer-based design:

- UA change: Now also triggers on Great Engineer birth, but GWAM progress is lowered to 34%. +1 Culture and Faith to Engineer specialists, instead of Defense buildings.

Tatara (replaces Ironworks, takes the Kabuki slot as Japan's 2nd UB)
Unlocked at Iron Working (from Machinery)
Production cost scales with number of Cities
5 Iron (from 2)
10 Production, +5 Culture and 5 Faith
1 Engineer slot
+2 Culture and +2 Faith to Manufactories in the Empire.
When a Great Engineer is born in the Empire, gain Science equal to 100% of your Culture and Faith per turn as an instant yield. (global version of the Kabuki's Musician ability, the yields and GP choices can be easily changed with database values, but the global nature requires DLL changes)
25 Science whenever a building is constructed in this city, scaling with Era. (baseline Ironworks ability, no changes)

However, I guess this UA change is easy for people to ignore.

I'm also leaning away from slapping on early iron to the civ now altogether since it technically hasn't anything to do with the Japanese ingenuity of gaining iron without actual iron.

Sounds like a contradiction to me, can you elaborate?

 

[pineappledan]

The more I think about the introduction of the Tatara building, the less I like it since the whole point of it was a way to sort out the GWAM issue and early iron scarcity. Without those elements it seems as if we're just adding the building for the sake of it.

A very different perspective from mine, so I will explain my rationale.

I want to remove the dojo even if its bonuses are reconstituted elsewhere. stacking components on steel is bad and the Dojo contributes far more to the stereotype of “glorious nippon steel folded 1,000 times” than the tatara does. My cursory look at the history of dojos seems to indicate they were not a noteworthy aspect of Japanese culture until westerners adopted the term for martial arts gyms for kids in strip malls. So in summation, the Dojo is a funhouse mirror Japanese component without genuine substance.

Moving the unique building to forge also does something I also have prioritized: removing the building bonus from the UA. I think a flat yields bonus on some buildings as a unique building is the most boring, lame bonus in the whole mod. A Tatara forge allows Japan to still have an early infrastructure bonus without tying it into the UA.

The Tatara accomplishes both things for me -- unstacking the tech tree and removing the building bonus -- while keeping the things in the Japan kit that people like. As an additional perk the tatara is a cultural artifact that I feel reduces the impression that VP Japan is a shallow caricature.

What I DON'T want from a UB is for it to be used to eliminate a civ's choices choices, and smooth the game out to a degree that it covers for any meaningful deficiencies. Just designing away any possible pain points. But adding a source of Iron to Japan's kit isn't just a way to smooth out the Samurai; it affects every stage of the game and the monopoly system to boot. I will bet you that removing a core challenge that other civs face -- getting enough strategics to fight an effective war -- won't succeed in making Japan fun or interesting to play. I have had plenty of fun with them in the past and they have never needed more iron than every other civ before now.

Edit: I also forgot that in addition to being just a bad bonus, the building yields in question gives 1 faith per city in ancient. This is a substantial, albeit not decisive edge in the race for founding and I think that small bits of faith on kits that otherwise are focused in completely different areas from religion should be cut out wherever possible. We have a few civs that utterly depend on founding for their kit to work and we have many more civs that have no bonuses to faith at all, but still benefit massively from founding. A handful of civs with bonuses specifically to founding, but otherwise a complete and stable kit disassociated from faith, is a cancer. Bonuses like Japan’s +1 to walls make the early religion game fundamentally unfair and for no particularly good reason.

can't say this ship inspires much, the Mikasa and the Yamato are far more iconic. Isn't it possible to justify moving the yamato one tech earlier?

If we stick with the Yamato as a battleship it will always be the latest unique unit by a large margin. Bringing it earlier won't change that. A Mikasa dreadnought will still be the latest UU

The Matsushima is certainly at a disadvantage, but I think that's mainly the model. The historical relevance is a wash in my opinion.
The choice between the two is more about whether the community values a better model or an earlier UU. I also think you could do more fun things with the Matsushima's bizarre design. Like it could have a much higher RCS, but a unique "Canet Gun" promotion that prevents it from attacking 2 turns in a row.

 

[Legen]

What I DON'T want from a UB is for it to be used to eliminate a civ's choices choices, and smooth the game out to a degree that it covers for any meaningful deficiencies. Just designing away any possible pain points. But adding a source of Iron to Japan's kit isn't just a way to smooth out the Samurai; it affects every stage of the game and the monopoly system to boot. I will bet you that removing a core challenge that other civs face -- getting enough strategics to fight an effective war -- won't succeed in making Japan fun or interesting to play. I have had plenty of fun with them in the past and they have never needed more iron than every other civ before now.

Japan has another limitation besides iron dependency, though: it is a militaristic civ with no early combat bonus, nor an early UU. Most militaristic civs have at least one of them, which lets them make good use of Authority bonuses and potentially snowball. Which is part of why Japan's gameplan tends to be so rigid; the more limitations you add to a civ's kit, the less flexible it is when trying to make full use of that kit, and Japan has plenty of them in the early game.

Your suggested rework moves part of the Dojo's combat bonuses to the UA (if weakened), which in theory removes one of Japan's limitations, just like the Tatara having iron does. And removing the early limitation also reduces the iron dependency limitation as well, since it means Japan can secure iron through forward settling and early conquest as well as the majority of militaristic civs, who are typically good at this thanks to their early combat advantages. So, I think your argument against Tatara providing iron is even more applicable to moving some of Japan's combat bonuses to the UA.

To be clear, I'm not against your argument per se, nor against moving a combat bonus to the UA; I even tried that during the last congress and I see it as a way to address the discussion in this thread that opening with Authority isn't working so well with Japan. I simply think that it is not a good argument against the Tatara providing iron.

A Mikasa dreadnought will still be the latest UU

The Mikasa is a pre-dreadnought battleship, and having it as a dreadnought doesn't make much sense; this ship was already obsolete when everyone started building dreadnoughts, and an UU dreadnought Mikasa would be a state-of-art naval unit in early Atomic Era, when Japan was already building the Yamato. The Mikasa should be an Industrial Era UU.

 

[pineappledan]

The Mikasa is a pre-dreadnought battleship, and having it as a dreadnought doesn't make much sense; this ship was already obsolete when everyone started building dreadnoughts, and an UU dreadnought Mikasa would be a state-of-art naval unit in early Atomic Era, when Japan was already building the Yamato. The Mikasa should be an Industrial Era UU.

The Mikasa is a pre-dreadnought insofar as it was commissioned 4 years before the Dreadnought was and by design was not an all-big-gun capital ship. The Mikasa was actually decommissioned 3 years later than the HMS Dreadnought (1922 vs 1919), so it was there for more or less the entire Dreadnought era. The two ships were contemporaries, and so I should think that a dreadnought is the most appropriate slot for the Mikasa. Its design is also far more similar to the dreadnought in role, size, and armament than it is to the cruiser.

As another way of comparison:
The base cruiser model is a Pallada Class protected cruiser built in 1895 and has a displacement of 7,000 tons. Its largest guns were six 8-inch cannons
The Mikasa is a pre-dreadnought battleship built in 1900 and has a displacement of 15,300 tons. Its largest guns were two 12-inch cannons
The HMS Dreadnought was built in 1905 and had a displacement of 18,100 tons. Its largest guns were five 12-inch cannons

TIL the Mikasa was built in 21 months while the Dreadnought was built in 4 months. Holy crap.

 

[Legen]

The Mikasa is a pre-dreadnought insofar as it was commissioned 4 years before the Dreadnought was and by design was not an all-big-gun capital ship. The Mikasa was actually decommissioned 3 years later than the HMS Dreadnought (1922 vs 1919), so it was there for more or less the entire Dreadnought era. The two ships were contemporaries, and so I should think that a dreadnought is the most appropriate slot for the Mikasa. Its design is also far more similar to the dreadnought in role, size, and armament than it is to the cruiser.

Mikasa was active while the Dreadnought also was, but was mainly a coast-defense ship by that point. The high point of Mikasa's career was during the Russo-Japanese War, before the Dreadnought revolutionized battleship design.

If Industrial Era is still too early for you, then you may consider Mikasa as an UU dreadnought with an earlier unlock (early Modern Era, instead of late). One of the highlights in the ship's career was that it could exchange hits vs targets around 13km, twice the effective range of its rangefinder (around 6km to 7km), during the Russo-Japanese War. This caught attention of ship designers and was an important validation for the long-range gunnery naval tactic that would later characterize the Dreadnought design. This may be enough conciliation of Mikasa being a pre-dreadnought battleship, while having specs more similar to the HMS Dreadnought than to the base cruiser design.

 

[pineappledan]

I think a 1-tech line earlier dreadnought at Electricity seems more than fair, yeah.

 

[Gen.Washington]

I still think the Yamato is the obvious choice for a UU. Yes it comes late game, but it’s so emblematic of the pinnacle of the battleship era and Japanese aspirations for an empire. I definitely think Japan could be balanced to have an wwII era UU.
If anything I think we need a few more world wars era UUs.

 

[pineappledan]

If anything I think we need a few more world wars era UUs.

We have generally tried to stay away from atomic/WWII era because that is when ideology units come out

 

[Gen.Washington]

We have generally tried to stay away from atomic/WWII era because that is when ideology units come out

I understand that, I just think it’s a shame to boil ww2 units down to T34/B17/A6M when there are so many potential unique national units.

 

[pineappledan]

The solution is more ideologies

 

[Gen.Washington]

The solution is more ideologies

Maybe sub ideologies someday lol. Fascist republic or socialist monarchy?

 

[Relatyve Mind]

So is there a consensus on a rework for Japan that might happen someday? It seems like there could be 2 different Japans, which would also be neat (albeit a pain to do all the leader stuff etc)

 

[pineappledan]

Nothing would be done until a Congress vote.
We can rehash this there.