There are a number of civs in this game I find that have somewhat odd choices for abilities/units. I'm not talking about whether these civs are GOOD or not per se. Just that sometimes the way the civ is put together is a bit off-putting. A primary example of this is Germany. Represented by a crusades era leader, Barbarosa, with an affinity for military in general and attacking city states specifically, while they have a renaissance era district, a gamey civ ability to create more districts than normally allowed, and a WW1-2 era unique naval raider unit. This is just my opinion but all those things don't really go together, some of them kind of do (extra emphasis on production and militarism) but I feel like the devs were trying to represent too wide a range of concepts and history to interestingly/accurately portray Germany. While I like most of their abilities the fact they are a militaristic-ish civ but their unique unit is a late era naval raider just completely turns me off from playing them. Again, Germany is 'fine as is' but I wish they had "themed" them a bit better. They aren't the only civ that suffers from this. Another smaller example is Japan. I feel that all their abilities flow until electronics factory. Just seems entirely tacked on. And it just doesn't fit with the Civ. Not that there's anything wrong with it necessarily - other than you don't build a ton of factories anyways. I see Brazil as another. Minas Geraes and Street Carnival/Copacabana and an emphasis on earning great people don't really all work together. Brazil works as a civ because their abilities are good enough to be competitive, but it's just weird that a non-militaristic civ would get such an emphasis on a happiness district. A late game unique battle ship is an odd choice too because Brazil is well suited to go for non-combat victories. Again, each of these things work just fine. They just don't really work well together. It creates a disjointed play style.