Leaders: Part 2

[mitsho]

Babylon also has the Walls, though that name bothers me since it's so creative

What if we make the strength boost for the Bowmen a promotion and replace the Walls of Babylon with a Ziggurat, a Garden replacement with a scientist slot and either extra or make it available earlier/without river restriction?

@Gothic Empire To which City State would it give the influence? The nearest one? (AI doesn't understand). Might be interesting, but I guess there would be many situations where you'd be like "oh, wrong city state" and "I don't really need more influence with the CS neighbouring me, so it's useless".

The problem with granting promotion through buildings is that you do actually only need one of those buildings, in your military city... This is why the barbary port needs another punch as well (extra gold on sea tiles f.e.).

Oh, and I forgot that the free Great Persons had been moved to the Freedom Tree, I was looking for it in Patronage...

 

[Babri]

Babylon also has the Walls, though that name bothers me since it's so creative

What if we make the strength boost for the Bowmen a promotion and replace the Walls of Babylon with a Ziggurat, a Garden replacement with a scientist slot and either extra or make it available earlier/without river restriction?

That sounds like a sensible change. Would also extend the usefulness of bowmen if they get a promotion.

 

[Thalassicus]

I'd suggest a Tall Diplomatic personality for Sweden, maybe together with the UA of receiving Great Persons from City States already at the Friendly level.

If we move these effects from Ethiopia to Sweden, we'd need to figure out new tall bonuses for Ethiopia. The Ethiopian and Swedish bonuses already work and make sense, so I'd like to keep them where they are. I want to focus on filling in the blank spots in the chart so we can get this finished up.

@Tomice, mystikx21
I have never tested a ranged unit without the "can't melee attack" attribute. I don't know what would happen. It would not be a problem for the AI since units have an AI unit script type deal controlling their behavior, and we can give the units multiple scripts.

@mitsho
The most unique part of Babylon is they're basically immune to early sieges. Korea's unique part is their massive science. If we replace Babylon's siege immunity with science, I think that would make Babylon less unique.

Barbary Port provides the normal harbor bonus too, so it's desirable in most ports.

 

[mitsho]

To be honest, "immune to early seiges" is a very passive ability and only ever useful with the current set up in multiplayer. I haven't been rushed by the AI in Civ5 in more than a year now I feel there is a niche for two science civs, a "early" (Babylon) and a "late" (Korea) one.

Your point about Ethiopia and Sweden is a fair one, but I don't feel rushing it is the best way to go I guess there will be a few more complaints on Ethiopia to come though. And if you want to hurry up, there have been quite a few suggestions in the last pages, waiting for commentary/a update of the table on page 1. I for one am out of ideas for the celts in any case

As for the barbary port, I still feel a unique building, whose unique feature you only need in one place/city really is kinda lame.

 

[Thalassicus]

I updated the table in post #1. This is the tentative version I'm planning on for our first round of testing.

The last blank we need to fill is the third Celtic unique. What sort of UB could we make for the Celts? Someone proposed an Abbey building as a Temple replacement. What could that provide?

@mitsho
It will be 3 months between starting the original discussion and finishing up. This is the longest time I've ever taken to discuss proposals for something in the project. I feel it's important we start wrapping this up so we can move onto other priorities, like policies and new pantheons. We can continue making adjustments to leaders in the future, but I want to get moving.

 

[bagas12]

I updated the table in post #1. This is the tentative version I'm planning on for our first round of testing.

The last blank we need to fill is the third Celtic unique. What sort of UB could we make for the Celts? Someone proposed an Abbey building as a Temple replacement. What could that provide?

@mitsho
It will be 3 months between starting the original discussion and finishing up. This is the longest time I've ever taken to discuss proposals for something in the project. I feel it's important we start wrapping this up so we can move onto other priorities, like policies and new pantheons. We can continue making adjustments to leaders in the future, but I want to get moving.

How about some sort of unique improvement to forests? Like a lumber mill that inst realy a lumber mill. What it would be i dunno, but giving productions plus faith or food maybe?

So we could keep the forests to even the late game and dont replace it all with farms.

And a cool feature to the pics, would be invisible on forests, dont know if its overpower but, instead of hill bonus give them this promotion so we could do some serious barbarians ambushs.

 

[ExpiredReign]

A couple of quick questions.

What are the determining factors for the different victory options and personality traits for each civ?
Are they 'set in stone' or are they up for discussion?

I only ask, apart from not knowing, because India, Ethiopia & Mayans seem to have 3 victory options while some like Babylon and America only have 1. If the 'Attack CS/Attack Civ' are for the 'Conquest' victory option, then it makes it even harder (for me) to understand why certain civs have them. eg the Iroquois seem set up to be militaristic yet they only have the science victory option set.

 

[Thalassicus]

I like half the leaders to pursue conquest, and half pursue peace. If we make the Iroquois military, which military leader shall we make peaceful?

Expansionist leaders focus on peaceful science, while diplomatic leaders focus on peaceful culture. I also allow diplomatic leaders to pursue a spaceship victory since culture is a very narrow and limited victory type, but diplomatic leaders do not focus as much on science. I do not count diplomacy as a victory option, because anyone can get it at the last moment without working towards it like conquest/science/culture.

 

[albie_123]

Sweden seems like a good candidate for peaceful play with their UB and UA, although not very historically accurate with Gustav at the helm!

For the abbey / ceilidh hall / whatever we'll call it: Is it possible to give faith per local happiness in the city?

And finally: Should we change the Mongol's scout to a warrior now that they do not receive the vanguard bonus?

 

[Thalassicus]

Historical accuracy is very important for me with leader personalities. All the leaders are capable of military play to some extent, so I give conqueror personalities to the ones which were historically militaristic.

 

[albie_123]

Historical accuracy is very important for me with leader personalities. All the leaders are capable of military play to some extent, so I give conqueror personalities to the ones which were historically militaristic.

In that case, Dido is really the only one who fits the bill - or at least, she did in all the accounts written about her, when in fact she may have never existed.

The issue here is that Carthage is well known for the Punic Wars against Rome (hence the elephant UU); but in Dido's time, Rome did not even exist.

 

[Thalassicus]

I'd be okay with switching the Iroquois and Carthage. Carthaginian bonuses are more peaceful-expansion now anyway.

 

[jacktannery]

Idea for the Celtic UB:

Concept: since the medieval period, 'celtic' civs are associated with beautiful, harsh, green, undeveloped terrain at the edge of civilisation. It was their location at the edges of the world which allowed them to survive the collapse of the roman empire and become a place of 'saints and scholars' during the dark ages. In modern times, the ruins and books from early christian sites, as well as the untouched landscapes, provide tourists with an almost religious experience.

UB: Abbey
Tech: medieval era, culture line: Theology or Education? Or could we have a special replacement for the Mosque or something which is only available when the piety tree is completed? Or could be a building requiring the proximity of either a mountain or a tundra tile (unique observatory?).
Effect: +1 faith +1 culture +1 food +1 gold on all unworked tiles. Could be restricted to land tiles; could be restricted to tundra and forest tiles, or non-river tiles; however I think unneccesarry as the bonus is not that great.

* * *

I'm still concerned about the Aztecs for the reasons I posted above (GEM changes mean that Aztec UU no longer useful against other civs):

... Monte ... feels a bit weak nowadays. In Vanilla I can use his UU to launch an early rush against a close AI. This is not possible in GEM, so his early UU can only be used against barbarians. It would be nice if the Aztec had two early UUs - a warrior UU that could upgrade to a swordman UU (basically the same advantages as the jaguar but buildable in the classical era too). Not sure if possible

 

[Tomice]

I saw you added a trireme as starting unitfor Carthage - great idea! This fully nullifies my earlier concerns that their naval settling could be marginally useful in practice!
I'm really eager to try them out!

About Austria:
The coffee house now gives 1 GP point of every kind? Very interesting. But I have to admit, I'm not the biggest expert for GP creation, so I'll leave the final judgement to someone else.

A bit offtopic: Which kind of extra belief does Byzantine get? Pantheon, founder, follower or enhancer?

 

[mitsho]

Any kind they want. From Pantheon to Enhancer. This is what makes it powerful, if you can get two enhancers or a super-duper pantheon combination... You can also pile up bonuses on religious buildings if you want

Yes, the Austrian bonus seems a bit counterintuitive, but well, let's try it out

What if we simply swap the effect of the Songhai Pyramid Mosque for the Celts? Meaning a Theater replacement that gives additional faith? I don't like making it a monastery replacement since that locks you into going for Piety. I could also see a Temple replacement that adds faith on forests, jungles and swamps making the celts a second civ that doesn't want to cut vegitation? Also, investing in cities preserves the bonus otherwise lost. Would a NW be possible that transfers surplus happiness into faith? This might focus them too much on faith though... Then just change the forest bonus to culture or science?

On that note, I dislike the Songhai Pyramid Mosque since it locks them into a religious play... What about a Mint replacement (culture on precious metals or per population?).

For Sweden, having a Folkskola and a Public School seems redundant. What if we make it just a earlier Public School (and as Gustav is a warlike leader move it to the military side of the tree).

I feel we should take a look now on leader personalities and victory goals now But I got no time now

(And I still don't understand how the Ottoman Tribute UA works )

EDIT: What if we make the Abbey for the Celts a Unique Improvement? Something like

Abbey
UI, available early-medieval
buildable on all ressources
a) adds 4 OR b) adds 1 and 1
gets bonuses as villages do.

The idea is to offer a choice between the regular improvement and one other direction. Ideally, you would want a mix of the two choices, no? (Especially if it's faith). The reasoning behind is that abbeys/monasteries are often outside cities, and as we have seen it can be argued that they provide any yield. If we want it to be ancient, we can name it a Dun.

 

[bagas12]

Idea for the Celtic UB:

Concept: since the medieval period, 'celtic' civs are associated with beautiful, harsh, green, undeveloped terrain at the edge of civilisation. It was their location at the edges of the world which allowed them to survive the collapse of the roman empire and become a place of 'saints and scholars' during the dark ages. In modern times, the ruins and books from early christian sites, as well as the untouched landscapes, provide tourists with an almost religious experience.

The problem is, is the CiV devs uses several civs as one enclosed as his conquest and history, if we take a close look at vanila sweden who have finish troops, and danish they cleared have norway troops, as Austria have Hussars from poland and Germany with landsknecht.

So my point is, the Celts represent too the cotinental tribes of Celts, gauls, and lusitans who was put to the sword by romans so we need to consider them too if we want historical abilitys.

 

[sukritact]

To be honest, "immune to early seiges" is a very passive ability and only ever useful with the current set up in multiplayer. I haven't been rushed by the AI in Civ5 in more than a year now I feel there is a niche for two science civs, a "early" (Babylon) and a "late" (Korea) one.

Agreed with the sentiment about the "Immune to Early Sieges", I never liked the "Walls of Babylon" much either...

For Sweden, having a Folkskola and a Public School seems redundant. What if we make it just a earlier Public School (and as Gustav is a warlike leader move it to the military side of the tree).

Like a UB version of the Atlatlist, sounds interesting, and the bonus of it coming earlier is certainly unique.

 

[jacktannery]

The problem is, is the CiV devs uses several civs as one enclosed as his conquest and history, if we take a close look at vanila sweden who have finish troops, and danish they cleared have norway troops, as Austria have Hussars from poland and Germany with landsknecht.

So my point is, the Celts represent too the cotinental tribes of Celts, gauls, and lusitans who was put to the sword by romans so we need to consider them too if we want historical abilitys.

I don't disagree. I'm an Irish archaeologist and so I am well aware that modern notions of a 'celtic' civ in northern Europe have no archaeological basis, never existed, and are a mid-20th century romantic invention emphasised in part by people attempting to integrate European countries politically after the second world war.

However, the CIV V Celtic Civ is clearly intended to portray a group of iron-age peoples in northwestern Europe who were pushed to the edges of the roman empire, and then became separate from England. Their leader is Boudicca, after all. So it's not unreasonable to go with an Irish/Welsh/Scottish medieval UB.

 

[Tomice]

Here's a little verdict, imagining how I'd play the Civ and how much fun it'd be.

Austria:
As Austrian, very OK flavourwise. Might be a bit too much lategame-focused. The UU probably won't decide any game. I guess the promotion sticks on upgrade? The path to victory is very unique. Not sure if Austria can achieve a diplomatic victory better than anyone else? I guess the annexed CS's won't vote? I this case, Austria is probably ideal for wide, peaceful play with the difference that you won't found as many cities yourself but "buy them". Considering that many CS's have very good spots, this might be very strong. However, there a re many open questions. Does Austria get the 50turn-bonus from the honor tree if they annex a city state by marriage? Are we allowed to leave an annexed CS as puppet to have a better chance for diplomatic victory? Many open questions here!

Byzantium:
Their power comes from religion, but the UB comes too late to help in actually getting one. Considering how hard it is in the current patch to found a religion or only a pantheon, there might be many games where the Civ fails to ever use it's UA.

Carthage:
Awesome. My favourite Civ, and I've already said enough about it.

Celts:
Incomplete as of now.

Ethiopia:
Very focused tall empire, still strong with religion. I don't know how exactly the GP bonus works, but the Civ seems solid.

Huns:
Early conquest as in vanilla. Probably very strong early on, but there's literally nothing for the lategame. And no way of playing peacefully.

Mayans:
Very versatile builder civ. The pyramid is possibly the single most useful building in GEM, a clear first choice in any city. The free GP's are very useful, but completely passive in terms of getting them. Still interesting since using GP's is so much fun and so manifold in it's effect. Perfect beginner civ due to the good early defense and the mostly unchanged gameplay.

Netherlands:
Both strong when building wide and tall. Very versatile civ that can use it's UA and UI for any purpose and victory type. The UU probably ain't no gamechanger.

Sweden:
Still under construction AFAIK. If I understand it right, their farms have two more yields than usual, making them extremely strong for any purpose throughout the whole game. More science also always helps. Versatile civ, but I'm not entirely sure if they'll be fun to play. or possibly overpowered?



EDIT: part 2


USA:
Extra national happiness favors wide, but gold from specialists and food from walls seems tall to me? Their NASA center probably makes them supre-strong for a lategame tech victory, even if they weren't overly strong before.

Arabia:
Probably best played peaceful/wide. Should be very strong, desert focus makes them unique. Horse archer UU's are just awesome and useful for offense and defense.

Aztec:
The UA combines conquest and culture, which is nicely unique. I agree early conquest might be difficult for them, but the UU at least makes them good at defense. The jungle movement promotion should probably stick to extend the usefulness. The UB is a simple strenght buff, as we'd settle near freshwater usually anyway.

Babylon:
I like turtling and peaceful building, so they're a nice, well rounded civ in my books.

Denmark:
Attacking from water is probably no everyday routine for other civs, so they should offer a pretty unique gaming expirience. They're very weak during peace and on waterless maps, however.

China:
Strong at combat and science. Interestingly, they are equally strong when attacking and defending. Good, versatile civ. The free GG at start might end up as production/science boost most of the time, however.

France:
Their UA seems a bit week compared to the mayans (who can choose the GP they get). The two UU's also seem more situational than the Mayan UB/UU combination.


EDIT: Part 3


Germany:
Hard to judge. Their UA means a lot of strong early units, but if I understand it correctly almost none later on. What's with unusual units like Lancers and Marines? (which don't belong to a "unit line"). I really can't say how good the "Druckpresse" is going to be.
On a side note: "Druckpresse" is the machine, "Druckerei" is the building in German.

England:
3 strong traits, but no real focus. Not that that's a problem, just stating the fact. Better than civs that can only be played one way like the Huns.

Egypt:
UB changed from wide to tall, new river focus: More focused than before, probably replaced by the Mayans as best "noob" civ. Still interesting and worth playing, amybe even more so than before.

Greece:
Can get culture no matter if they're tall or wide. Can conquer, doesn't need to. Interesting!

Inca:
Can settle other spots than the other civs - Me likes ;-)

India:
Well-rounded and somewhat unique tall/religious civ. If needed, the aqueduct UB can help wide empires too.

Iroquis:
As with the Inca, I like civs that use terrain differently than others! Like them!



To be continued...

 

[mystikx21]

@Tomice, with the liberty specialist finisher, I find I use at least a couple specialists in most cities even playing (very) wide, as I often do. This was true for me before for situational purposes or for GP generation, but it's typical that you can get a lot more production from an engineer+liberty than you would get by working most mines, or get a mixed yield with a scientist/merchant.

The gold on specialist working the same way essentially means that every city generates a minor amount of gold early on (when gold is scarcer) and encourages having more cities to do this (and get trade routes for later). The growth part is odd, but I think combines well with the lower happiness costs to allow for expansionist play with bigger cities. I worry more about the NASA center being overpowered than these traits not making sense. With a wide enough empire, it's like getting a great scientist every couple turns (which I also think still need to be toned down) and breezing through the tech tree as a result.

I generally agree with many of the other observations you make here though and I generally like many of these proposed changes.

I think the Ottomans and maybe Germans will need some more polish. And the Celts obviously have a hole to fill still, but this looks definitely interesting.