Phillosophical/Industrious

[DigitalBoy]

The samurai are one of the best UUs in the whole damn game. (Although Agg/Org was way better than Agg/Pro, in my opinion.)

 

[BYC]

I've changed Ghandi to Phi/Ind as I like my peaceful AI's to be builder nuts and it hasn't changed him very much to play against honestly.

I do plan on trying it eventually but haven't got around to it yet. I'm sure it's more of a player advantage then a AI one.

I'm not surprised the AI isn't good at it. The AI is still limited in what they can do.

India would definitely NOT be a good choice from a player standpoint. Fast workers are good, Mysticism is good, and Mining is good.

 

[Blaarg]

2 first strikes makes the samurai one of the best in game? I dunno, maybe I don't value first strikes enough.

I tend to like UU that either have a strength upgrade, or get free upgrades or defense against thier normal unit's counter.

Things like

Cataphracts +strength
Numidian Cavlary +vs melee
Praetorians +2 strength
Conquistidors +vs melee and gets defensive bonus (admitedly this was better before when it replaced the knight)
Redcoats +vs gunpower units
Phalanx +defense vs Chariot

 

[Kao'chai]

guys ............were talking about traits not UU's .

 

[Blaarg]

Well UU and UB are related because the best trait combos are ussually set to civs that have crappy UUs and/or UB.

Like the celts, they have some of the worst UU and UB and have some of the best trait combos.

So if Ind/Phil is going to be added, and it's generally considered a powerful combo, should probably be set to a civ that has a weak UU and UB.

 

[Kao'chai]

what about a insignificant civ , with a great ruler .

 

[The Redcoat]

Well, it would be interesting, I would use it without doubts... But a good combo isn't enough to win a match (it helps, however). It would be interesting, but maybe a little frustrating, to challenge a leader with those features! He should be annihilated before it's too late
Maybe Greece (Pericles?) or USA should deserve a leader with those traits.

 

[caimeizhu]

Well majority wins . Now it either we make a new leader with these traits or modify one .

 

[Desert-Fox]

In civ4 system where UB and UU is civ based not leader, then Phi/Ind should be totally a new Civilization.

Having bad UB is not very bad if it is not replacement of a key building... For example if a UB replaces Bomb Shelters then it has no matter what bonuses it has unless you do not give it something very special. Same goes for UU, for example UU explorer with +1 movement or +2 strenght... nobody cares. Or if you make -1 strenght and +2 movement, also nobody cares.

I'm not going to make up any certain leader or civ... but
PHI/IND, starts with wheel/mining, UU is Maceman replacement, 7 strenght and 2 movement. UB is library what costs more but has +50% culture, then they are crappy enough.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Emperor Taizong should be added and given those traits for sure. Those traits equal Great People and Wonders. No civilization was ever as great as Tang China. China should really have such a leader in the game.

Lincoln? Lincoln's America was a cultural, intellectual and to an extent economic backwater in the Western World with no great people and no wonders. If any US leader should get those traits it would be FDR ... lots of great people and lots of wonders in his age (include the decades after his death too).

These traits are however perhaps too strong to be in the game. I hold that Financial/Industrious is too strong too, I dread games where the Incas are on another continent.

 

[Antilogic]

Emperor Taizong should be added and given those traits for sure. Those traits equal Great People and Wonders. No civilization was ever as great as Tang China. China should really have such a leader in the game.

Your awfully subjective analysis aside, I don't think Ind/Phi would be that bad. The best route I have found for a culture victory has been to use specialists with Philosophical...I've found it much harder with Qin Shi Huang and his Ind trait with the UB that gives an extra +25% culture. The easiest time I've had is Pericles.

I think Industrious is quite overrated...if you have marble or stone, you can build wonders fast anyway. Other traits have a definite advantage in versatility.

 

[GoodGame]

It would be unbalanced, only because the list of wonders is highly comprehensive to cover most aspects of the game, and the synergy between cheap GP points from wonders, and Philosophical. The only thing that would make it worse is if Great Generals were made through the normal Great People system.

The only way to balance such a system would be to weaken the powers of GP, which would affect the whole game. I'm happy with no Ind/Phi. A Phi/Exp leader on India is a fair substitute for Ind/Phi in my book.

 

[Swein Forkbeard]

I voted yes.

Here are some leaders who can have this combo.

Paul von Hindenburg
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Solomon
Meiji
Hammurabi
Nebuchadrezzar II
Montezuma I (not the II!)

 

[TM Moot]

A big YES from me, only because it would suit my game play, and it does seem a shame that this is the only trait combo not in the game (I believe).

It would need balancing out though, an USA leader with their late UU/UB makes sense, not going to try to pick which one though!

 

[LAnkou]

the only downside of this combo is that you can't really control the type of the GP you get. There will be a lot of GP you may not want.

Obviously this combo is about getting more GP and lightbulbing, but when you look at it a little closer:

You will lightbulb your techs and be trade whore, then getting commerce and beakers will be less of a priority. you will be a production monster
And
You will need fewer hammers to build the wonders, then getting production will be less of a priority. You will be a commerce monster

As you will be more advance, you will get more modern unit, then having less to focuse on military
By building wonders, you won't have to care a lot about culture generation

Well, you have to admit there's a great snowballing effect in cause with this combo.

You will build the stonehenge before anyone else, so you will get an even sooner prophet, then just being phil, you will build oracle and will have an even sooner prophet and you will make an oracle slingshot easily.

It is surely a combo that need to be worked, but it's surely an overpowered combo

 

[Swein Forkbeard]

The combo would be no good for a human on Deity though, as it is very difficult to get wonders on that level. It would definetely KILL the AIs on the lower difficulty levels, but not so much on the higher ones.

 

[Kao'chai]

Yes why not make Meiji . Japan does need a better leader than isolated Tokugawa .
Well If Russia , America ,England anf France have 3 leader , maybe adding Taizong isn't that bad

 

[azzaman333]

It's nothing special really. I personally rate Industrious as the 8th best trait, because it gives a rather minor bonus unless you don't have Marble and/or Stone which can be beaten by someone else having said resources.

 

[Swein Forkbeard]

Emperor Taizong should be added and given those traits for sure. Those traits equal Great People and Wonders. No civilization was ever as great as Tang China. China should really have such a leader in the game.

Lincoln? Lincoln's America was a cultural, intellectual and to an extent economic backwater in the Western World with no great people and no wonders. If any US leader should get those traits it would be FDR ... lots of great people and lots of wonders in his age (include the decades after his death too).

These traits are however perhaps too strong to be in the game. I hold that Financial/Industrious is too strong too, I dread games where the Incas are on another continent.

IMO China has an excellent UU and UB, so giving a Chinese leader Philosophical/Industrious would be overkill.

 

[Kao'chai]

But Japan's UU and UB isn't that good , why not Meiji .