Shoshone

[Legen]

As I understand, Shoshone's gameplan is to secure lots of valuable land early on with the border expanse on city founding, and do so without concern of overextending thanks to their bonuses to defensive play. Also about being a thorn to nearby expansionist and militaristic civs, forward settling them and limiting their expansion. I'm not convinced that the defensive bonuses are enough for that at higher difficulties, especially against something like Zulu and Songhai, but that's the direction that their kit points at: an anti-expansionist expansionist civ.

I think any change to this civ should focus on these aspects. As examples:

• Starts with all Ancient Era resources revealed (stone, fish, iron, horses, deer, etc).
• Natural wonders gain extra yields and grant the +20% CS when fighting within 3 tiles of it.
• Encampment gaining a bonus yield per adjacent resource, granting to adjacent resources, or resources having a bonus yield as part of the UA.
• Increasing Encampment's defensive bonuses.
• Reducing Encampment's building time, so that it is a good emergency improvement during a war.
• Allowing military units to build Encampments.

I think that their current kit doesn't necessarily translate to comparable expansion to other non-warmonger expansionist civs, which is ultimately what Shoshone fits as. Other such civs, like Carthage, Iroquois and Indonesia, tend to come with economic rewards for expanding and securing whatever terrain they may favor. Shoshone's kit isn't seen as one that provides something economically comparable, making it harder to either snowball or establish a solid foundation to at least keep up with civs that are meant to scale hard over time, like Brazil and Germany.

About their UU, they were essentially mounted guerilla warriors. A simple "ignore terrain cost penalties" is enough to make them behave as such, and even as raiders in enemy territory due to the "no pillage movement cost". One or two pseudo scouts in the back of the enemy's territory is sometimes enough to divert enemy units away from the main front, and ideally cut their international trade routes.

 

[stii]

Proda's culture on pillaging is really powerful so yeah something like that would make this UU a lot more appealing.

 

[JamesNinelives]

If we were to change the Comanche a bit, I would like them to still stay grounded in the unit's history.

Very much agree!

• Yields on pillage. (Maybe instant in your capital for any pillaged tile?)
• pillaging tiles with resources gives yields in your capital, based on the type of resource (ie. pillaging a bonus gives , luxury gives , strategic gives )

I like these . The horses thing is thematic, but the idea of Shoshone having lots of coal feels strange to me.

You could roll whatever ability is decided on into Comanche Moon promotion, in addition to the +1 movement.

This would be greatly appreciated! The fact that science goes so fast in the end-game is part of what makes later units feel a bit poor sometimes. Having a promotion that carries over would help remedy that.

 

[InkAxis]

The idea of stealing a strategic when pillaging is interesting.

 

[Thibix Magnus]

could also get xp on pillaging or plundering a caravan. Actually there is no special bonus in the game when plundering a trade route.

 

[ridjack]

So I'm currently playing a game on Emperor as the Shoshone, and using a citadel to push my friendly territory bonus a little bit further into enemy territory got me thinking about Mongolia's new Ordo. What if Shoshone Great Generals built a "super Encampment" that gave no/way less defensive bonus, but had the Lebensraum effect? Would put an offensive tool in their belt that continued the "big border blob" theme.

 

[JamesNinelives]

So I'm currently playing a game on Emperor as the Shoshone, and using a citadel to push my friendly territory bonus a little bit further into enemy territory got me thinking about Mongolia's new Ordo. What if Shoshone Great Generals built a "super Encampment" that gave no/way less defensive bonus, but had the Lebensraum effect? Would put an offensive tool in their belt that continued the "big border blob" theme.

Not sure if there's much historical or cultural relevance though.

 

[DeAnno]

That's even grosser than America on your border. I think such obnoxious antics should be reserved for the lategame.

 

[ridjack]

Not sure if there's much historical or cultural relevance though.

Any more or less than the current giant-borders-on-settle?

That's even grosser than America on your border. I think such obnoxious antics should be reserved for the lategame.

America and Morocco are the only two civs I consider disabling just because of how much I don't want them around me. Was genuinely just a thought I had.

Though that did make me think about something like a unique "Chief" great person that's unlocked with completing an Industrial Era policy tree and purchased with faith whose only job is to build that improvement.

 

[JamesNinelives]

Any more or less than the current giant-borders-on-settle?

Um, yes. Almost the literal opposite. To grossly simplify, the Shoshone had land and it was taken away from them. Not the other way around.

 

[ridjack]

Um, yes. Almost the literal opposite. To grossly simplify, the Shoshone had land and it was taken away from them. Not the other way around.

Fair point.

 

[pineappledan]

Coming back to this, I really like the idea of adding some pillaging bonus to the Comanches. The Cossack is the cavalry unit that is all about raw power. The Berber cavalry has decent power, combined with very strong movement options. If you try to make Comanches compete with Cossacks or Berbers on those units' terms, then all you do is water down the other UUs. That leaves Comanche the option to become the "utility" pick, otherwise it's just relegated to being the weakest of the 3.

Yields on pillage will be too hard to balance at that late stage of the game. The game is right at the point where costs for everything really start to accelerate, and it could end up being too swingy if you set them too high and have a good pillaging game, but if you set them too low, the ability ends up not making any meaningful contribution. Thus, I think stealing Strategic resources when pillaging those tiles is the best idea.

If you gain +1 copy of a strategic, you gain a very powerful military/infrastructure boost that helps you complete things like agribusinesses in all cities. 1 pillage is the difference between a factory and no factory in a city, which feels huge. If you steal a lot, there is a sort of cap beyond which more strategic resources ceases to be all that valuable, especially with their relatively small gold value these days, so there is a sort of saturation point, which I think really helps to control balance.

The horses thing is thematic, but the idea of Shoshone having lots of coal feels strange to me.

I think it makes sense. In civ, the Shoshone have been building things like Granaries and building quarries and castles for 5 eras at this point, which don't match their IRL nomadic pastoralist way of life. The Comanches stole horses because that was what drove their economy. If the Comanches were an industrialized society and needed coal, they would have stolen that instead.

 

[Drakle]

I think it makes sense. In civ, the Shoshone have been building things like Granaries and building quarries and castles for 5 eras at this point, which don't match their IRL nomadic pastoralist way of life. The Comanches stole horses because that was what drove their economy. If the Comanches were an industrialized society and needed coal, they would have stolen that instead.

I think he means, it is easy to steal horses, and just graze them on your turf. But you can't really steal all the iron and coal out of the ground continuously unless you own the land.

I wouldn't mind the horse-stealing (and maybe other bonus and luxuries that would make sense) in a UA. But pillaging every strategic wouldn't work, and only stealing horses so late in the game wouldn't be enough.

 

[InkAxis]

I think abstractions can be made for the sake of gameplay.

If you think there's a better idea I'm open to hearing it but this is certainly the most interesting one right now.

 

[JamesNinelives]

I like the benefits on pillaging, I just lean towards yields on pillage rather than strategics. It also makes the ability more versatile - you don't need to find a strategic your enemy controls to benefit from it.

 

[Bruhmoment]

I'd rather have the Encampment buffed more than the comanche rider, rarely do I use cavalry that late into the game

 

[chicorbeef]

I would rather buff the Encampment as well because I think a situational buff to a late game unit is not going to be too consequential. I think Encampment should at least get bonuses from Bison and Horses, two things that you could associate Shoshone with. Maybe bonuses from adjacent pastures/camps too, (like +1 from adjacent Horses, Bison, Camps and Pastures) for some potential production stacking and some more incentives to settle on plains/grassland.

About Comanche Riders though, I think at the least they shouldn't cost Horses, considering how Comanche did raids where they stole Horses.

 

[DeAnno]

People not even wanting a buff to Comanche Riders because they're so useless already paradoxically suggests they really need a buff.

 

[pineappledan]

Encampments are a REALLY strong when they come out in ancient. Then they have the smallest number of tech boosts of any improvement, so they are only slightly better than Agribusiness/Imperialism-boosted Farms when those are unlocked, which is in Industrial.

So the timing when Encampments really fall off in value is exactly when the Shoshone get their other unique component. So why would we buff the improvement which is already designed to fall away precisely at the moment the UU could take the spotlight? lobbying for a buff to the encampment is just a vote for strangling the Comanche in its crib even harder.

 

[Bruhmoment]

Encampments are a REALLY strong when they come out in ancient. Then they have the smallest number of tech boosts of any improvement, so they are only slightly better than Agribusiness/Imperialism-boosted Farms when those are unlocked, which is in Industrial.

So the timing when Encampments really fall off in value is exactly when the Shoshone get their other unique component. So why would we buff the improvement which is already designed to fall away precisely at the moment the UU could take the spotlight? lobbying for a buff to the encampment is just a vote for strangling the Comanche in its crib even harder.

Why would we buff it? Because every spammable UU eventually has more buffs to it later on into the game. The encampment has the least. Compare the Eki, which is also spammable and never really diminishes in usefulness later into the game, because plains eki are really powerful. Why don't we do that with this?
The comanche rider is a cavalry replacement, which that late into the game Mounted ranged units start to be less useful. Plus - just give it a no horses requirement and you're all done with it