I think I am going to eat my own words, and agree with Aramel after all. 
Special abilities
- Thread starter Matjillam
- Start date
Aramel
Warlord
Correct me if I'm wrong, but are we trying to deduce the intricacies of the German unique ability based on the grammatical details of an English sentence that is a paraphrase of something from a German article none of us has seen?
I think this method leaves some room for errors.
No, it was an English version of the game. But I'm tired of arguing about it...
Well, let me dip my pen in this ink well and see what I can write up. I'll try and keep things to gameplay, and talk less about historical accuraccy.
The Glory of Rome (Rome): +25% production towards any buildings that already exist in the Capital.
This ability is just flat out good in a very raw kind of way. Anyone can see the usefulness of a 25% increase to producing buildings. This fits in with how the Civilization franchise has always treated the Romans. They usually end up being the most basically good.
The Great Warpath (Iroquois): Units spend only 1 Movement Point entering any tile with a Forest.
I love this ability. In Civilization 4, I would play Aztecs and rush straight to Jaguars. They could be build without Iron, had a power of 5, and started with woodsmen 1. Kill a few barbarians and suddenly you had a unit that could double move through forests, and attack out of them at 50%, or more, I can't quite recall. This lead to some amazing raiding/marauding tactics, and if you had even three Jaguars in an enemies borders, you could effectively shut a civilization down permenantly. Being able to do this with an entire civilization right from the get go sounds super super super hot to me.
Of course, the long term benefits begin to wane. Even as you go through the midevil era, forests become less and less prevailent. But, I argue, that the early game benefits are so vast, that it hardly matters. You can straight up obliterate civilizations with this ability in the early game. I promise.
Manifest Destiny (America): All land military units have +1 sight range, 25% discount when purchasing tiles.
Another, straight up, just good ability. The extra sight is going to allow troops to respond quicker to threats, and the 25% drop in price to purchase tiles means faster cultural expansion, and more gold in the pocket to spend on other things.
I suspect that the bonus to purchasing tiles will become less useful in the late game, but the early game benefits are obvious, and the 1 to sight will always be nice.
Trade Caravans (Arabia): +1 gold from each Trade Route, and Oil resources provide double quantity.
I don't think we know enough about trade routes to know if this ability is awesome, or lame. Double of any resource is always rad though. At any rate, it seems to me like this is an ability that is largely useless until the mid to late game, when it really starts to kick in. If I were playing Arabia, I'd be deathly afraid of hit and run tactics, and having my trade routes pillaged.
Ultimately, we'll simply have to see exactly what's up with trade routes before we know if this ability is any good.
Sacrificial Captives (Aztecs): gains Culture for the empire from each enemy unit killed.
I like the elegance of this ability. It obviously forces the player into a more militaristic mindset, but you DID pick the Aztecs. I like that you can simultaniously be waging war, while also being quite cultural. Winning a cultural victory as the Aztecs while killing all around you would be quite amusing.
Art of War (China): Effectiveness and spawn rate of Great Generals increased
This is entirely dependent on how much effectiveness and spawn rate we're talking about here. There's not alot of info on what Great Generals will do in Civ 5. Conceptually it seems very good though. Who doesn't want more things that kill things.
Monument Builders (Egypt): +20% production towards Wonder construction.
Just a good ability. Of course, maybe wonders are lame now. ;P
Sun Never Sets (England): +2 movement for all naval units.
This is one of the two abilities I'm most skeptical of. It does speak to a level of confidence that the developers have in their new naval combat design, but I am trepidatious. Naval combat has always been poor in Civilization, and while it seems like that might not be the case any longer, a simple +2 to naval movement might not be good enough to rival things like 20% wonder production, or 25% less to land purchasing.
Ultimately, the Zone of Control might moot the benefit of this ability. But, one can never discount the usefulness of simply getting units into combat quicker.
This ability does raise a question for me though; Does moving OUT of a zone of control still constrict you? If it does not, then this ability could be quite powerful in regards to manuevering your ships around on the battlefield, or even having transports escape faster.
This has a huge "Wait and See" on it for me.
Ancien Regime (France): +1 culture per turn from Cities before discovering Steam Power.
This ability tips the hand a bit in regards to the developers being totally find with these civilization abilities becoming less useful during certain ages. Heck, this one simply stops working outright.
Again, we won't know exactly how good this gets until we know how much things cost culturally. What we can say is that this ability will get better the more cities you have, and so an expansionist strategy is more beneficial while you're playing France. Simply put 6 cities is better then 3 as far as the ability is concerned.
Furor Teutonicus (Germany): Upon defeating a Barbarian unit inside an encampment, there is a 50% chance you earn 25 gold and they join your side.
This is the second one I'm skeptical of. This depends ENTIRELY on how prevalent barbarians are in the game. If barbarians exist how they have in the past, this ability is flat out bad. Awful to the point that I would make fun of anyone who chose germany to play.
If Barbarians are quite present though, i can see how this ability would be very interesting. But no matter how you cut it, this ability is very very specific, and loses any punch it might have in the mid to late game.
The hope is that, in the early game, germany will get enough gold and extra units from this ability that it will be able to carry on into the mid to late game with some momentum.
I am extremely skeptical.
Hellenic League (Greece): City-State influence degrades at half rate and recovers and twice normal rate.
Another just really solid ability. Getting the social policy that effects City states along with this will make this an incredibly powerful ability, especially for anyone going for a diplomatic victory.
Population Growth (India): Unhappiness from number of cities doubled, Unhappiness from number of Citizens halved.
I don't want to say that I'm skeptical of this ability, but rather that I don't see how this is an ability that is an actual benefit. I believe that this is mainly because I tend towards military strategy, and expansion, and so I'm having a difficult time conceptualizing this ability.
What the ability will do is encourage players to have less cities, that have more population. Is this a good thing? I assume there are players that will say yes.
I suppose alot of it will come down to exactly how much unhappiness is produced from the number of cities and from the number of citizens. If, in the end, I can actually get more citizens from this ability then I could otherwise, then I see the merit. If it just ends up being a redistribution of numbers that end up being the same as before, then I truly do not see the benefit of this ability.
I am, however, extremly open to someone creating a case for it. Perhaps there's something there that this old warmonger hasn't quite captured. To be totally clear on why I'm not skeptical of this ability; I feel that the ability may very well be a good one, and that I am simply unable to see it's usefulness. This is a limitation of my own, and not a limitation of the game, I am sure. The ability is just not for me.
General Notes
It's incredibly plain that there are abilities that start out strong, and then lose their effectiveness as the game goes on, or that start out weak, and gain in power as the game goes forward. I don't think this is a bad thing at all. What it will do is force players to utilize the abilities they have to their full extent, while they can.
I don't see many people playing the Iroquois and playing a passive early game, for instance. But you could also say that you'd never see an Egyptian not try to build Wonders. Or you'd never see an Indian player expand quickly and broadly.
Just because an ability doesn't stay useful for the whole game, doesn't mean it won't be overwhelmingly good for the period that you can use it. That Iroquois ability is going to straight up ruin civilizations all day long.
I'm so playing Iroquois.
The Glory of Rome (Rome): +25% production towards any buildings that already exist in the Capital.
This ability is just flat out good in a very raw kind of way. Anyone can see the usefulness of a 25% increase to producing buildings. This fits in with how the Civilization franchise has always treated the Romans. They usually end up being the most basically good.
The Great Warpath (Iroquois): Units spend only 1 Movement Point entering any tile with a Forest.
I love this ability. In Civilization 4, I would play Aztecs and rush straight to Jaguars. They could be build without Iron, had a power of 5, and started with woodsmen 1. Kill a few barbarians and suddenly you had a unit that could double move through forests, and attack out of them at 50%, or more, I can't quite recall. This lead to some amazing raiding/marauding tactics, and if you had even three Jaguars in an enemies borders, you could effectively shut a civilization down permenantly. Being able to do this with an entire civilization right from the get go sounds super super super hot to me.
Of course, the long term benefits begin to wane. Even as you go through the midevil era, forests become less and less prevailent. But, I argue, that the early game benefits are so vast, that it hardly matters. You can straight up obliterate civilizations with this ability in the early game. I promise.
Manifest Destiny (America): All land military units have +1 sight range, 25% discount when purchasing tiles.
Another, straight up, just good ability. The extra sight is going to allow troops to respond quicker to threats, and the 25% drop in price to purchase tiles means faster cultural expansion, and more gold in the pocket to spend on other things.
I suspect that the bonus to purchasing tiles will become less useful in the late game, but the early game benefits are obvious, and the 1 to sight will always be nice.
Trade Caravans (Arabia): +1 gold from each Trade Route, and Oil resources provide double quantity.
I don't think we know enough about trade routes to know if this ability is awesome, or lame. Double of any resource is always rad though. At any rate, it seems to me like this is an ability that is largely useless until the mid to late game, when it really starts to kick in. If I were playing Arabia, I'd be deathly afraid of hit and run tactics, and having my trade routes pillaged.
Ultimately, we'll simply have to see exactly what's up with trade routes before we know if this ability is any good.
Sacrificial Captives (Aztecs): gains Culture for the empire from each enemy unit killed.
I like the elegance of this ability. It obviously forces the player into a more militaristic mindset, but you DID pick the Aztecs. I like that you can simultaniously be waging war, while also being quite cultural. Winning a cultural victory as the Aztecs while killing all around you would be quite amusing.
Art of War (China): Effectiveness and spawn rate of Great Generals increased
This is entirely dependent on how much effectiveness and spawn rate we're talking about here. There's not alot of info on what Great Generals will do in Civ 5. Conceptually it seems very good though. Who doesn't want more things that kill things.
Monument Builders (Egypt): +20% production towards Wonder construction.
Just a good ability. Of course, maybe wonders are lame now. ;P
Sun Never Sets (England): +2 movement for all naval units.
This is one of the two abilities I'm most skeptical of. It does speak to a level of confidence that the developers have in their new naval combat design, but I am trepidatious. Naval combat has always been poor in Civilization, and while it seems like that might not be the case any longer, a simple +2 to naval movement might not be good enough to rival things like 20% wonder production, or 25% less to land purchasing.
Ultimately, the Zone of Control might moot the benefit of this ability. But, one can never discount the usefulness of simply getting units into combat quicker.
This ability does raise a question for me though; Does moving OUT of a zone of control still constrict you? If it does not, then this ability could be quite powerful in regards to manuevering your ships around on the battlefield, or even having transports escape faster.
This has a huge "Wait and See" on it for me.
Ancien Regime (France): +1 culture per turn from Cities before discovering Steam Power.
This ability tips the hand a bit in regards to the developers being totally find with these civilization abilities becoming less useful during certain ages. Heck, this one simply stops working outright.
Again, we won't know exactly how good this gets until we know how much things cost culturally. What we can say is that this ability will get better the more cities you have, and so an expansionist strategy is more beneficial while you're playing France. Simply put 6 cities is better then 3 as far as the ability is concerned.
Furor Teutonicus (Germany): Upon defeating a Barbarian unit inside an encampment, there is a 50% chance you earn 25 gold and they join your side.
This is the second one I'm skeptical of. This depends ENTIRELY on how prevalent barbarians are in the game. If barbarians exist how they have in the past, this ability is flat out bad. Awful to the point that I would make fun of anyone who chose germany to play.
If Barbarians are quite present though, i can see how this ability would be very interesting. But no matter how you cut it, this ability is very very specific, and loses any punch it might have in the mid to late game.
The hope is that, in the early game, germany will get enough gold and extra units from this ability that it will be able to carry on into the mid to late game with some momentum.
I am extremely skeptical.
Hellenic League (Greece): City-State influence degrades at half rate and recovers and twice normal rate.
Another just really solid ability. Getting the social policy that effects City states along with this will make this an incredibly powerful ability, especially for anyone going for a diplomatic victory.
Population Growth (India): Unhappiness from number of cities doubled, Unhappiness from number of Citizens halved.
I don't want to say that I'm skeptical of this ability, but rather that I don't see how this is an ability that is an actual benefit. I believe that this is mainly because I tend towards military strategy, and expansion, and so I'm having a difficult time conceptualizing this ability.
What the ability will do is encourage players to have less cities, that have more population. Is this a good thing? I assume there are players that will say yes.
I suppose alot of it will come down to exactly how much unhappiness is produced from the number of cities and from the number of citizens. If, in the end, I can actually get more citizens from this ability then I could otherwise, then I see the merit. If it just ends up being a redistribution of numbers that end up being the same as before, then I truly do not see the benefit of this ability.
I am, however, extremly open to someone creating a case for it. Perhaps there's something there that this old warmonger hasn't quite captured. To be totally clear on why I'm not skeptical of this ability; I feel that the ability may very well be a good one, and that I am simply unable to see it's usefulness. This is a limitation of my own, and not a limitation of the game, I am sure. The ability is just not for me.
General Notes
It's incredibly plain that there are abilities that start out strong, and then lose their effectiveness as the game goes on, or that start out weak, and gain in power as the game goes forward. I don't think this is a bad thing at all. What it will do is force players to utilize the abilities they have to their full extent, while they can.
I don't see many people playing the Iroquois and playing a passive early game, for instance. But you could also say that you'd never see an Egyptian not try to build Wonders. Or you'd never see an Indian player expand quickly and broadly.
Just because an ability doesn't stay useful for the whole game, doesn't mean it won't be overwhelmingly good for the period that you can use it. That Iroquois ability is going to straight up ruin civilizations all day long.
I'm so playing Iroquois.
duckstab
Child of Noble Family
bjbrains
Man of U-235
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2007
- Messages
- 837
Hope you don't mind if I post my own thoughts/addendums Jono:
Rome: As said, this is just solid all around, and will make for some interesting strategies in that your capital (should) end up with a bunch of buildings.
Iroquois: I agree that it's incredibly potent, especially with units moving more tiles, and battle formations being important.
America: The 'rush-expand' bonus also encourages expansion since new cities can get access to their tiles more easily.
Arabia: The gold production seems fine, but the double oil could be incredibly potent in late-game warfare. The ability to just field more tanks than your opponent is amazing.
Aztecs: It is an awesome ability that encourages warmongering by helping them develop while you war.
China: We know that basic great generals are 'civilian' (aka can stack with military) units that give +25% strength to adjacent units. That by itself is powerful, and the ability to have more of them, and have them be better seems really potent. Also is interesting in that it encourages 'strategic' combat with formations centered around generals (seems flavorful).
Egypt: A solid bonus, and if you grab aristocracy under tradition, you'll be building wonders incredibly quickly.
England: I think you underrate the renewed importance of the navy in Civ 5. Now that amphibious assaults require escorting groups of transports over a large area and naval units can bombard land units, it'll give England a clear advantage in the water.
France: It's a 'free' bonus (aka automatic with no restrictions/conditions) that offers free culture for a good portion of the game. With the increased importance of culture on a local (since cities can grow larger, but tiles are individual), and a global (social policies) level, it should be good all around.
Germany: It looks like barbarian camps spawn more throughout the game now, and now that gold is more important/units are more expensive, it could be really good. The randomness puts me off though.
Greece: Powerful and simple. Skews the Greeks towards city-state protectionism interestingly.
India: this is a puzzle of one, but it looks like that much more of your unhappiness comes from population than from # of cities unless you expand a ton. It'll definitely encourage a different playstyle (encourages large, food-rich cities), but since population is your primary source of science, it could make the Indians really powerful at teching. It's definitely an obstacle to warmongering though.
It'll be interesting to see how the UU/UBs turn out, as that definitely impacts how 'good' the civs are. The French Musketeer does seem really powerful though (20 strength versus 16 for the basic), giving the French a period where they may just have the most efficient/powerful military.
Rome: As said, this is just solid all around, and will make for some interesting strategies in that your capital (should) end up with a bunch of buildings.
Iroquois: I agree that it's incredibly potent, especially with units moving more tiles, and battle formations being important.
America: The 'rush-expand' bonus also encourages expansion since new cities can get access to their tiles more easily.
Arabia: The gold production seems fine, but the double oil could be incredibly potent in late-game warfare. The ability to just field more tanks than your opponent is amazing.
Aztecs: It is an awesome ability that encourages warmongering by helping them develop while you war.
China: We know that basic great generals are 'civilian' (aka can stack with military) units that give +25% strength to adjacent units. That by itself is powerful, and the ability to have more of them, and have them be better seems really potent. Also is interesting in that it encourages 'strategic' combat with formations centered around generals (seems flavorful).
Egypt: A solid bonus, and if you grab aristocracy under tradition, you'll be building wonders incredibly quickly.
England: I think you underrate the renewed importance of the navy in Civ 5. Now that amphibious assaults require escorting groups of transports over a large area and naval units can bombard land units, it'll give England a clear advantage in the water.
France: It's a 'free' bonus (aka automatic with no restrictions/conditions) that offers free culture for a good portion of the game. With the increased importance of culture on a local (since cities can grow larger, but tiles are individual), and a global (social policies) level, it should be good all around.
Germany: It looks like barbarian camps spawn more throughout the game now, and now that gold is more important/units are more expensive, it could be really good. The randomness puts me off though.
Greece: Powerful and simple. Skews the Greeks towards city-state protectionism interestingly.
India: this is a puzzle of one, but it looks like that much more of your unhappiness comes from population than from # of cities unless you expand a ton. It'll definitely encourage a different playstyle (encourages large, food-rich cities), but since population is your primary source of science, it could make the Indians really powerful at teching. It's definitely an obstacle to warmongering though.
It'll be interesting to see how the UU/UBs turn out, as that definitely impacts how 'good' the civs are. The French Musketeer does seem really powerful though (20 strength versus 16 for the basic), giving the French a period where they may just have the most efficient/powerful military.
I'm going to play Egypt and chop all the forests near the Iroquois to build wonders
Oh Nooooooooooooooes!
Well... I'll... make my workers plant forests ON YOUR WONDERS!!!
I think my skeptisism comes, quite largely, from the lack of a good naval combat system in any Civ game previously. While being able to move naval units faster is obviously good, in a well structured system, I'm yet to actually see much of anything that convinces me that the naval combat system is a well structured system.
In the past, naval combat really did boil down to a series of stalemates where ships simply didn't want to attack each other for a lack of any attack advantage. The naval game only shifted when someone brought an obviously superior vessel into the battlefield. But when it's frigates versus frigates, the combat was blatently stale and stupid, where the only way to win was to simply build more ships then the opponent, and they took so long to build that it just became tedious work. Not to mention that you don't truly GAIN anything by controlling the seas, in games past, as stacks would guarentee that you'd land somewhere.
This said, I respect that the combat system is widely different in Civ 5 then any previous installment, but it will have to be so tight, in regards to it's naval combat, to warrent a civilization's special ability being a movement bonus it's navy. The franchise has never managed to do it yet, and so I say I will wait and see on this one.
Right now, in my mind, the 2 movement bonus just lets the british get into stalemates with other ships faster. I'm definately open to having my mind changed on this, but I think I'll need to see some pretty stiff gameplay before I'm willing to say that this ability is as good as a 25% production bonuses to buildings that exist in your capital.
That's where most of my skeptisism comes from as well. Every other civ's ability does exactly what it does. It's a guarentee that France will get 1 culture per city. It's a guarentee that the Egyptians get a 20% production bonus to wonders. The german's ability relies on there being barbarians around to begin with, which is completely random, and then you have a 50% chance for the ability to not yield military units, which adds another layer of randomness. So, in the end, you could very well end up with an ability that you get to use once, or twice, in an entire game, to give you a total of 25-50 gold completely.
Woo.
It might be entirely the case, however, that these encampments are much deeper, and more prevalent then in past games, but much like the english fleet movement, I'll have to see some pretty stiff gameplay to conclude that this ability is equal to ANY other.
Aramel
Warlord
Keep in mind that naval units can now attack land units with their ranged attack, so controlling the seas gives you a tangible advantage. I agree, though, that Germany's ability seems weird; I hope it's a little different in the final game. Maybe they could toss in some additional bonus like cheaper unit upgrades (although I'm not sure if upgrades still cost money).
The more and more I think on this, the more I can conceptualize the advantage. Being able to bombard an entrenched choke point from the seas is definately going to have it's advantages, and I suspect that England's special unit will most likely be a naval vessle, thus solidifying their naval advantage. Being able to do that, while at the same time remaining the most mobile, is certainly going to be powerful.
The last concern I have, I think, is whether or not movement is affected by zone of control when you move from a tile that is in enemy control, to one that is not. It would be extremely useful to be able to mount a full scale retreat, where it is certain no other vessle will catch you.
The thing is that I can see how the ability might be good, maybe. Alot just depends on how present those bloody barbarian encampments actually are. Although it could encourage a kind of barbarian encampment farming, where you never actually destroy the encampment, but just harvest it every time a military unit is spawned from there.
But is that fun?
Who knows.
moysturfurmer
Emperor
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,558
"I suspect that England's special unit will most likely be a naval vessle, thus solidifying their naval advantage."
It is. One of them is, at least. The Ship of the Line.
It is. One of them is, at least. The Ship of the Line.
Huzzah!
Naval combat is going to be mostly ranged attacks, so more movement would help you to move into range, launch a ranged attack and then move away again so your opponent can't counterattack.
And it will it also make easier for England to move land units along the coast and land them behind the enemy lines to attack the enemy's ranged units.
Schuesseled
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,081
ranged combat removes all remaining movements, (including naval ranged combat.)
Check. More movement would still be helpful to get the first shot in. Although we don't know yet if ranged attack strength is affected by the damage a unit has suffered. But even then, in say 4 vs 4 Frigates naval combat, getting the first shot in would probably allow you to sink one of the 4 oppossing ships by concentrating fire on them and might leave the enemy with insufficient firepower to sink one of your ships on their turn.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Keep in mind that the obsoleting at a tech suggests this was a balancing move (they probably figured giving this ability until the end of the game was too powerful). This suggests that it will indeed be very useful (especially considering that social policies are bought with culture).
EDIT: As far as England goes, having land units move 4 tiles per turn instead of 2 by becoming naval units is very useful as well. When you face England, you need to have at least one ship protect your coast from someone trying to sneak around. Then, the English will eventually get Ships of the Line and you'll need a strong navy to protect your coast.
Crazy George
Destined to Rule
Oooh double negative. We love those because there is no chance for misunderstandings there.
Care to rephrase that?
Hate to sound like I was parsing my words.
If I was going to split the powers in half (better vs worse), India's happiness boost would have to go in the better column... and fairly high up the list.
Double unhappiness for too many cities, simply means one doesn't plan on city sprawling when playing India. It's a given.
But half of the standard unhappiness for city size means that for every two increase in population past the difficulty level set point, India will get 1 happy citizen and 1 unhappy citizen. Which in turn means:
1) Provided that the 1 happy citizen can work an irrigated flood plain or food resource, every Indian city will be able to grow indefinitely (until they run out of premium food hexes), and
2) Once India builds a happiness building or aquires a happiness resource, that unhappy citizen will be unlocked and be imediately available to add to the growth engine or serve as a specialist.
I haven't done the math. But with a city radius of three and a dozen good farm tiles, that means a late game Pop 50 city (or 10 odd higher than anyone else) would be available to India.
Sounds pretty powerful to me.
Much better than some piddling little movement bonus.
Crazy George
Destined to Rule
I will enjoy playing the Aztecs.
Iroquois will be an interesting challenge.
England will rule the seas.
But if I am playing for the win and I am able to choose my Civilization, India will be on my short list of civs to choose from.
A single Pop 20 city as India will be more than capable of achieving mid game is far superior than two Pop 10 cities or four Pop 5 cities.
1) The Pop 20 city only has to build a single instance of library, barracks, and so forth. Multiple cities must build multiple instances of these buildings, essentially duplicating their efforts and wasting hammers.
2) Hammers not wasted in multiple builds are available for more diverse builds, therefore it is to be expected that India's cities will be more fully developed. In other words, instead of building library and barracks yet again, India's cities will be moving on to build walls, courthouses, granaries, and so on.
3) Because India's cities will be more fully developed and because the bonuses received for buildings are additive (+ for library, + for observatory, + for research lab), India's Cities will have greater bonuses.
4) Thus, even though two Pop 10 cities, four Pop 5 cities, or a single Pop 20 city all work the same number of hexes and harvest the same raw amount of commerce and hammers, because more bonuses will be applied to those harvested by the Pop 20 city (due to the presence of more buildings), the effective yield for a Pop 20 city will be far greater.
Or to illustrate the advantage given to India from a slightly different angle:
The Glory of Rome gives a 25% bonus for building any building already present in the capitol. Let Rome have an empire of ten Pop 10 cities, while India has an empire of five Pop 20 cities. And then have both of them build a Forge in all of their cities at a proposed cost of 100 hammers each to keep things easy.
Rome's cost is 100 (for the capitol) + 75x9 (for each of 9 cities) = 775
India's cost is 100x5 (for each city) = 500
This hypothetical example yields India a production advantage of 275 hammers, which equates to that many more buildings, wonders, or military units.
I admit that this is a simplistic comparison and one could argue that Rome should have ten Pop 15 cities versus five Pop 25 cities for India (and thus, a full comparisons would have to include the greater number of hexes worked by the Roman Empire), but as a starting point, I hope this lays the groundwork for why I believe India's power is not to be underestimated.
Iroquois will be an interesting challenge.
England will rule the seas.
But if I am playing for the win and I am able to choose my Civilization, India will be on my short list of civs to choose from.
A single Pop 20 city as India will be more than capable of achieving mid game is far superior than two Pop 10 cities or four Pop 5 cities.
1) The Pop 20 city only has to build a single instance of library, barracks, and so forth. Multiple cities must build multiple instances of these buildings, essentially duplicating their efforts and wasting hammers.
2) Hammers not wasted in multiple builds are available for more diverse builds, therefore it is to be expected that India's cities will be more fully developed. In other words, instead of building library and barracks yet again, India's cities will be moving on to build walls, courthouses, granaries, and so on.
3) Because India's cities will be more fully developed and because the bonuses received for buildings are additive (+ for library, + for observatory, + for research lab), India's Cities will have greater bonuses.
4) Thus, even though two Pop 10 cities, four Pop 5 cities, or a single Pop 20 city all work the same number of hexes and harvest the same raw amount of commerce and hammers, because more bonuses will be applied to those harvested by the Pop 20 city (due to the presence of more buildings), the effective yield for a Pop 20 city will be far greater.
Or to illustrate the advantage given to India from a slightly different angle:
The Glory of Rome gives a 25% bonus for building any building already present in the capitol. Let Rome have an empire of ten Pop 10 cities, while India has an empire of five Pop 20 cities. And then have both of them build a Forge in all of their cities at a proposed cost of 100 hammers each to keep things easy.
Rome's cost is 100 (for the capitol) + 75x9 (for each of 9 cities) = 775
India's cost is 100x5 (for each city) = 500
This hypothetical example yields India a production advantage of 275 hammers, which equates to that many more buildings, wonders, or military units.
I admit that this is a simplistic comparison and one could argue that Rome should have ten Pop 15 cities versus five Pop 25 cities for India (and thus, a full comparisons would have to include the greater number of hexes worked by the Roman Empire), but as a starting point, I hope this lays the groundwork for why I believe India's power is not to be underestimated.
Crazy George
Destined to Rule
I confess to not knowing how unhappiness will work in C5.
For my analysis, I have assumed that the mechanic would operate as it had for Civ 4.
