Okay, seriously, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
I'm saying that letting you instant-buy buildings is crazy, your response is to not ever mention buildings but instead talk bout some unitmaintenance that I don't care about at all.
It does not matter if you want to compensate for that insane ability with other abilities, the idea is still by default insane. Instant-build was removed from the game for a reason, and the game is adjusted to work around that fact.
Because that was mentioned as part of the proposed UA. You can't look at one part of it, say it's insane when there's parts to reduce it's impact and, in fact, would make it absolutely unusable were it to be implemented as said in the first post (can't rushbuy a building when you'll almost never get out of the red anyway). Instant buildings or reduced investment cost is different enough but to each his own I guess.
Your wording is also not exactly friendly considering I'm the only one making suggestions here whereas you only sit here, are displeased about the UA and make nothing of substance but endless complaining as I try to be nice and make new ideas despite being merely neutral on the subject. The second part probably doesn't count anymore now that you've made your own suggestions to the UA below, though... See my opinion of them below.
I don't agree, a find the idea of free social policies an abomination. It's encroaching way too much on wonder territory, it varies in value way too much to ever be balanced (as the free policy is always worth as much culture as the next policy, or in this case the next X policies) and worst of all, it completely ignores the idea that culture leads to policies.
But it's unique and impactful. Feels like an UA should even if it's a nightmare balance wise and there's more interesting stuff that could possibly replace it.
Fun thing could be something like Yields when you enter a new era, yields when you adopt a policy. WLTKD when you enter a new era, WLTKD when you adopt a policy. Minor golden ages.
First idea encroaches on Arabia, it also gets yields (per turn) when it enters a new era as well as on other ocassions. In a more nitpicky fashion I can say same applies to anyone whose yields scale after entering a turn, they're effectively getting yields for doing so. It's kinda as if you suggested that Poland should get +6 movement for all mounted archers along with four times the maintenance, it doesn't matter if the Mongolian UA lets your mounted archers ignore ZoC, it's still a blatant rip off - and one with way less procs at that.
Yields when adopting a policy is same as Holy Law and not interesting in the least. To your merit, no civ gets that sort of thing directly from what I remember but I doubt many would consider that an entertaining or unique UA if that's all it has. I mean, the biggest flaw people claim here is that Polish UA doesn't change how you play and is not unique, how does it fix this problem?
Other civs effectively get stuff when they enter a new era too (either through scaling or other stuff, though that's nitpicking). While none would get WLTKDs which are a niche of China, your idea is just a more boring version of getting a free policy which at least feels impactful. Also Arabia. Imagine a CTRL C CTRL V'd Mongolian movement quote here.
China also effectively gets discounted policies from it's UA (thanks to Culture it has) and has tons of stronger WLTKD. With your suggestion of discounted policy + something giving WLTKD, Poland would become either an inferior or better China - unless you specify what, how, when and do so in a way that makes the end result unique. Copy paste your Mongolian movement quote, though in this case it's indirect so maybe don't.
Minor golden ages thing also needs you to reveal more, as it is there's tons of civs with GA stuff like Rome which effectively enters perma GA starting renaissance/industrial as long as you fight thanks to scaling yields. Same with Persia. In the current form as you've stated it, I cannot help myself but helpfully add that Montezuma already gets minor golden ages for getting good peace deals. This time I shall mercilessly use CTRL+V with extreme prejucide - it's kinda as if you suggested that Poland should get +6 movement for all mounted archers along with four times the maintenance, it doesn't matter if the Mongolian UA lets your mounted archers ignore ZoC, it's still a blatant rip off.
Could even have something along the lines of 'whenever you adopt a new policy, all cities grow 1 pop and generates 100% of their yield output' That 100% is of course just a placeholder value.
That along with cheaper policies would represent faster and better reforms, something which Casimir was famous for (I think?). Of course instantly gaining one population have some power-gaming value to it, which I'm personally not a fan of. But in general cities don't really tend to grow that much slower as the game goes in in CPP (unlike in vanilla), and you're not really that much in control of your culture output.
And what's fun about that? It doesn't change how you play one bit. Instead of focusing Culture as you do every game with every civ, you'll end up focusing Culture as you do every game with every civ. If it's uniqueness current Poland lacks as many people stated, how does it fix that problem? And why should Poland be that populous? It's going to end up taller than China and India with your idea. I mean, just finishing 3 policy trees grants you +18 pop in the capital and X in other cities. It'd become either a superior China or inferior China because of this, same problem as with your idea above. One way or another, you're effectively making a second China here. +6 movement mounted ranged Mongolia you know the drill. Could Ctrl+V as CTRL+C lasts until restart, but I refrained.
Reason why I don't want to make full suggestions is because I don't want this to be a one-man project. I've already made suggestions on how to fix the Ducal and the WH.
You made suggestions to stuff that were hardly revolutionary and not really specific whereas I've made suggestions for everything. What an one-man project.
