Hellenism Salesman
King
While we all have our favorite Leaders, there are also... less fun cases.
So rather than getting you excited and creating enjoyable games, I'm looking for your choice of your least favorite leader or civ ability.
If you're struggling to pin it down to one, list as many as you'd like, but here are some criteria that may help you narrow things down.
Is the ability fun to use? We play games to have fun, don't we? So if this ability isn't fun to use, then it reasonably won't land high on our levels of attachment.
Is the ability interesting? Some abilities open up entirely new ways of viewing the game. For instance, take Babylon's eureka-skipping. It entirely changes the way you think about the tech tree and makes researching far less passive, as unbalanced as it may be. If an ability doesn't change the way you look at things or force you to adjust your strategies, it might not be your favorite.
Does the ability present something new? An ability doesn't have to make you think or get you excited to be your favorite. Something that shakes up the standard playstyle and presents a new path to victory can bring some variety and diversity to a sometimes stale experience. Kupe, Eleanor, and Mansa Musa are all good examples. They change the way you play the game and give you an experience that no other leader can. If an ability doesn't offer anything new, then maybe you won't enjoy it as much.
With those questions taken into account, I've figured out my choice. My least favorite ability is Chandragupta's Arthashastra.
Arthashastra: Can declare a War of Territorial Expansion with Military Training, instead of Mobilization. +2
Movement and +5 
Combat Strength for all units for the next 10 turns after declaring a War of Territorial Expansion.
The reason this ability lands as my absolute least favorite is because it fails to answer any of the above questions with a yes.
Is it fun? Not for me, anyway. I never liked abilities that just give you a temporary win button. There's little thinking involved in a Varu rush, and few ways for it to backfire. Just train them, research Military Training, and declare a Territorial War. Then they'll already be so superpowered there's no challenge or engagement anymore.
Is it interesting? Hardly, from my point of view. It just gives you a very dry and simple approach to domination that boils down to abusing a stupidly good Cassus Belli. There isn't much thinking involved and it doesn't encourage me to attempt an unorthodox strategy or think outside the box.
Does it present something new? Nope. It's actually almost an exact copy of Cyrus's leader ability (who was released first, might I add). Both of them just give you absurd movement bonuses that don't really provide a new playstyle to domination. They just make you do it better.
But what about you? What is your least favorite civ or leader ability? I'm interested to hear what everyone else has to say.
So rather than getting you excited and creating enjoyable games, I'm looking for your choice of your least favorite leader or civ ability.
If you're struggling to pin it down to one, list as many as you'd like, but here are some criteria that may help you narrow things down.
Is the ability fun to use? We play games to have fun, don't we? So if this ability isn't fun to use, then it reasonably won't land high on our levels of attachment.
Is the ability interesting? Some abilities open up entirely new ways of viewing the game. For instance, take Babylon's eureka-skipping. It entirely changes the way you think about the tech tree and makes researching far less passive, as unbalanced as it may be. If an ability doesn't change the way you look at things or force you to adjust your strategies, it might not be your favorite.
Does the ability present something new? An ability doesn't have to make you think or get you excited to be your favorite. Something that shakes up the standard playstyle and presents a new path to victory can bring some variety and diversity to a sometimes stale experience. Kupe, Eleanor, and Mansa Musa are all good examples. They change the way you play the game and give you an experience that no other leader can. If an ability doesn't offer anything new, then maybe you won't enjoy it as much.
With those questions taken into account, I've figured out my choice. My least favorite ability is Chandragupta's Arthashastra.
Arthashastra: Can declare a War of Territorial Expansion with Military Training, instead of Mobilization. +2
Movement and +5 Combat Strength for all units for the next 10 turns after declaring a War of Territorial Expansion.The reason this ability lands as my absolute least favorite is because it fails to answer any of the above questions with a yes.
Is it fun? Not for me, anyway. I never liked abilities that just give you a temporary win button. There's little thinking involved in a Varu rush, and few ways for it to backfire. Just train them, research Military Training, and declare a Territorial War. Then they'll already be so superpowered there's no challenge or engagement anymore.
Is it interesting? Hardly, from my point of view. It just gives you a very dry and simple approach to domination that boils down to abusing a stupidly good Cassus Belli. There isn't much thinking involved and it doesn't encourage me to attempt an unorthodox strategy or think outside the box.
Does it present something new? Nope. It's actually almost an exact copy of Cyrus's leader ability (who was released first, might I add). Both of them just give you absurd movement bonuses that don't really provide a new playstyle to domination. They just make you do it better.
But what about you? What is your least favorite civ or leader ability? I'm interested to hear what everyone else has to say.
