Suleiman trait overpowered 108 versions

[gdwitt]

I've noticed in the the last few versions of 108 that Suleiman creates a juggernaut that ultimately wins the game.
The below is based only on 3 games on emperor.
Scouting his territory, I saw no features or natural wonders that would have encouraged this dominance. In fact, half his territory was tundra.
In trade, he had on 1 apparently tradeable luxuries and only 5 iron 5 horses.
Nevertheless, he beat me to most of the wonders (despite my tradition-wonder policy).
In the midst of these wonders, he had taken out Darius and Askia and had armies on the other side of the continent fighting other wars.
When we finally came head to head, his stream of sipahis, cannons, and mostly Janissaries were endless
His gold was in the 15000 range and he bought out most of the city-states with it.
He was several techs ahead of me and had the coasts lined with men-of-war.
He was ahead culturally as well, which is usually my focus. We had the same no. of policies, but infoaddict showed him to be way ahead.

I think it's time to tone down some of the governance features.

 

[Thalassicus]

Some characteristics are much easier for the AI to use effectively than others. For example, Firaxis hardcoded leaders to never attack citystates in the early game, which significantly weakens Mongolia. I don't feel AI-Genghis doing poorly means the civ needs a buff. The success of an AI also depends largely on the glitchy city placement, which works best in triangles of cities precisely 3 tiles apart. If the terrain is not available in this pattern for the first few cities, the AI gets stuck and loses.

Due to AI limitations like these I use human performance in estimating leader power.

 

[Sneaks]

Ottomans are an odd bunch. In the last game I played, they were wiped out by turn 100.

 

[Ahriman]

Ottomans have nothing special in the early game, but they are mid-late game monsters because of the huge specialist economy they can mount, combined with the powerful-en-masse Janissiaries and (I suspect) an AI that is deliberately designed to make them aggressive during Renaissance, or at least to not wage war unless they have a significant military advantage.

 

[EsoEs]

I find that the AI is much better at using brute strength UUs than finesse UUs (not so good at Keshiks/Longbows, very good at Samurai and stuff like the Ottoman's UUs). If the AI for those civs manages to secure itself a decent enough start, theyll usually do much better than civs with less obvious strengths.

 

[gdwitt]

Yes, mid-game, mass Janissaries are hard to defend against.
I still believe that the specialist (4 prod/gold/cult?) are too much and responsible for this.
I believe they are also historically unwarranted. The only specialists in the Ottoman slave empire were in and around the palace itself.
I would favor a historical revert to a version of Ottomans that focuses on converting barbarians, piracy bonuses, and the use of low-cost slave-armies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_Ottoman_Empire

Bribery and blackmail were the methods of governance, not specialists
http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-East-Encyclopedia/ottoman.htm

 

[EsoEs]

I wouldn't be exactly opposed to changing the Ottoman's trait, but the trait itself is very interesting to play with, and I would hate to lose it. Yes it is powerful, but I'd say Korea has an even more powerful trait, as they are gaining +2 on every specialist rather than 1 (+2 science, but still, +2 science is > +1 yield)

 

[gdwitt]

It would make historical sense for the Ottomans to cluster the high-powered specialists in one building at the capital, like the palace. The rest of the empire was almost cut off from the head, leaving local despots to do mostly what they wanted. For example, the Barbary pirates, with their cities of 40,000 slaves, were supposedly under the Ottoman empire's rule.

I wonder if we can program different "empires" to have specialists with different strengths. For example, German science specialists far outclassed those of Korea for hundreds of years.
Other ideas: French artist specialists, English commerce specialists, etc.
Maybe America, the origin of the assembly line, could have 4 point production specialists in certain buildings.

A bit of history in VEM would make it more appealing to many.

 

[tlaurila]

Oddly enough, if AI food bonuses have been removed in later versions of VEM, the Ottoman specialists should have actually lost relative power, shouldn't they? Furthermore, specialist slots have been toned down in latter versions, as I understood it.

That said, if the Ottomans can get the multiple-whammy of specialist-boosting wonders and policies on top of their trait, the numbers do seem to indicate that they become a juggernaut. Which doesn't necessarily have anything wrong with it, as they also seem to have a hard time at the start, being rather unlikely to get off the ground. It might be worthwhile to consider giving Suleiman extra GPP as opposed to yields, though.

My feeling of the game is that maybe there's a few engineer slots too much, at least when there was 2 on smithy and furnace both. My feel was that National Wonders with 2 slots each was nice (to really make that wonder count), but 2 slots on improvements buildable in every city feels excessive.

 

[gdwitt]

I think that the civs should have some basis in history.
I can't find one great person or technology that came out of the Ottoman Empire.
If anything, one of the European empires should have the specialist/GP bonuses.
For example, Germany is given a bonus for a cheap army when history shows that the Prussian army was a professional class that had very high maintenance costs.
They never could field a large army until the end of the 19th century.
The Ottoman armies were vast and composed largely of slave and young boy recruits.
A simple starting solution would be maybe switching the Ottoman with the German civ traits.

 

[Seek]

A simple starting solution would be maybe switching the Ottoman with the German civ traits.

I would have no problem with this; if it gives both civs more historical flavor, so be it.

 

[Sneaks]

I don't think it gives both civs more historical flavor. Quite the opposite. In fact, I am not sure the German "empire", which was less technologically advanced than the Ottomans for hundreds and hundreds of years makes any sense having a Specialist bonus. Specialists in my mind represent a strong and organized empire, such as the incredibly well built bureaucracy of the Ottomans. The Landsknecht are cheap to build because they are the video game equivalent of mercenary armies. Landsknecht could be fielded very quickly, and often in very large numbers (wiki says 4,000 - 10,000 in their regiments). As for the lack of knowing great people or inventions, while Taqi al-Din might be less known than Copernicus or Tycho Brahe, his advancements in astronomy were certainly on par with those contemporaries. There are several examples of this nature.

 

[Ahriman]

I don't like just switching UAs, and I don't think that it would be a flavorful switch at all.
I think the German faction is very poorly designed in a flavor sense. Their leader is Bismark and they have a Panzer, but the Landsknecht is HRE-era and the UA is ancient-era. They're really all over the place, without a consistent theme at all. And the Landsknecht (cheap unit, easy to acquire) has very poor synergy with the UA (which gives you free units).

My preference would be to have the barbarian-capture UA go to a Celtic civ, and then remodel Germany around a medieval-modern theme.

 

[EsoEs]

The German trait is so sweet I would hate to lose it, I don't mind the idea of transferring it but then I would have to go buy another DLC :/ An idea for a new German trait (although Im fine with Germany as it is)
-Less diplomatic penalty for deccing (Bismark was quite the diplomat)
-additionally, reduced unit maintenance costs

 

[Thalassicus]

Germany's theme is the romanticized "barbarian horde," large and cheap armies throughout the first half of the game. Most barbarians from the trait come in the ancient era and upgrade to Landsknecht. Since upgrade cost is based on unit cost, each barbarian can upgrade to Landsknecht mercenaries for only 10 apiece! This is very inexpensive. Most other Medieval upgrades are in the 100-200 range. The Ottoman trait and Landsknecht wouldn't have this synergy.

 

[Txurce]

I don't think it gives both civs more historical flavor. Quite the opposite. In fact, I am not sure the German "empire", which was less technologically advanced than the Ottomans for hundreds and hundreds of years makes any sense having a Specialist bonus. Specialists in my mind represent a strong and organized empire, such as the incredibly well built bureaucracy of the Ottomans. The Landsknecht are cheap to build because they are the video game equivalent of mercenary armies. Landsknecht could be fielded very quickly, and often in very large numbers (wiki says 4,000 - 10,000 in their regiments). As for the lack of knowing great people or inventions, while Taqi al-Din might be less known than Copernicus or Tycho Brahe, his advancements in astronomy were certainly on par with those contemporaries. There are several examples of this nature.

Totally agree. In terms of great people, the Ottomans also had great military leaders coming out of their ears. Their military was not just effective, but innovative as well. And the fact that their bureaucracy was decentralized doesn't mean that there wasn't a bureaucracy - in fact, a renowned one. They may not be the only candidate for the Specialist UA, but they more than qualify for it. To trade it out would be absurd.

Germany's theme is the romanticized "barbarian horde," large and cheap armies throughout the first half of the game. Most barbarians from the trait come in the ancient era and upgrade to Landsknecht. Since upgrade cost is based on unit cost, each barbarian can upgrade to Landsknecht mercenaries for only 10 apiece! This is very inexpensive. Most other Medieval upgrades are in the 100-200 range. The Ottoman trait and Landsknecht wouldn't have this synergy.

This is how I see Germany as well: most of its free barbarians seamlessly upgrading into an otherwise little-used unit, the very cheap Landsknechts. This is excellent synergy.* A Wehrmacht UU would be more synergistic than the Panzer, and worthy of inclusion, given its tremendous performance throughout WW2... but they don't say "blitzkrieg" as clearly as the Panzer does.

* So was the Berserker upgrading to Ski Infantry, but never mind that...

 

[gdwitt]

If we focused on the a medieval-Renaissance UA for each civ it would still call for major shakeup:

Landsknecht refers to the heavily armoured Teutonic knights that fought on foot. They were the opposite of cheap. Going up to the 19th Cent, you never see massive German armies in their assembly of city-states. When the Ottoman horde was at the gates of Vienna, where was the massive German army? Poland had to come to the rescue. The German states only had professional, small armies that were quite expensive to maintain and rarely marched outside the borders. There is no history I can find of the large-scale use of Pikemen except in Switzerland. They spent lavishly on technology and had great military engineers build advanced forts. By the 1800s, the Ottomans and the Americans were depending on German military advisors on how to train troops and build seige and defense works.

Totally agree. In terms of great people, the Ottomans also had great military leaders coming out of their ears. Their military was not just effective, but innovative as well. And the fact that their bureaucracy was decentralized doesn't mean that there wasn't a bureaucracy - in fact, a renowned one. They may not be the only candidate for the Specialist UA, but they more than qualify for it. To trade it out would be absurd.

The Ottoman military only retained a local edge with its famous archers for only 300 years and then fell into a rapid decline. True, they took a Constantinople with the cannons, but it had already been sacked by the Germans and encircled for over 100 years. Gunpowder was introduced by the mongols and the cannons were actually a German/Hungarian import. Read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpowder_artillery_in_the_Middle_Ages
Only 90 years later, a massive Ottoman fleet was handily defeated by a smaller Catholic fleet at Lepanto. http://archive.redstate.com/stories/history/lepanto_october_7th_1571
Note the quote:

Virtually every soldier, sailor and oarsmen in the Turkish fleet was conscripted or enslaved; among the Christians, freemen were the rule, not the exception.

To read more about the short-lived dominance of the Ottomans read:

http://www.flowofhistory.com/units/asia/6/FC49

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_Ottoman_Empire


For its last 400 years of existence, the Ottoman empire depended autocratic local dictators who governed with compulsion and bribery, a huge forced-conscript army, and slavery. Their holdings in North Africa were one of the main sources of their slaves and the barbary pirates raided European and African lands for 100s of years under the protection of the Ottomans. These would be the themes I would use for an Ottoman UA.

Regarding their many Great People, where is an ottoman Bach? Or Reformer? Or Newton? Or Adam Smith? or Philosopher?

I believe that the specialist UA for the Ottomans is completely unfounded in history and makes them overwhelming opponents in most games when they stay out of trouble until the Janissaries and build specialist enhancing wonders. It is fun to play, but why not let other civs have a piece of the fun in a coming revision.

 

[Sneaks]

Honestly, there seems to be hints of ethnocentrism bubbling up here. The idea of slavery is brought up again, and there seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of slavery within the Ottoman system. Many of the slaves could earn jobs, become military officers, and in fact run the government:

"The majority of officials in the Ottoman government were bought slaves, raised free, and integral to the success of the Ottomans from the fourteenth century to the nineteenth. By raising and specially training slaves as officials, they created administrators with intricate knowledge of government and fanatic loyalty, and cut corruption. As an administrator with no ties in the region, he would not favor one person over another when granting contracts."

That is from the linked wikipedia article above.


As for the landsknecht argument, from every article linked, it only reinforces that the unit is working pretty well. They universally describe the Landsknecht as largely mercenary forces that were quick to raise in large numbers. Low production costs in game are an excellent means of incorporating this.

 

[Txurce]

Landsknecht refers to the heavily armoured Teutonic knights that fought on foot. They were the opposite of cheap.

Dead wrong. They were mercenary pikemen (or, arguably, levies).

By the 1800s, the Ottomans and the Americans were depending on German military advisors on how to train troops and build seige and defense works.

This period, which spilled into the early twentieth century and lasted less than a hundred years (plus 1940-1944), is where the conventional wisdom of German military prowess comes from.

The Ottoman military only retained its edge for only 300 years when it fell into a rapid decline.

It's closer to 400 years, but either way, it blows German prominence out of the water - especially since the Germans mostly built theirs beating tiny Denmark, a decaying Austria-Hungary and then (impressively) France in a space of seven years. The result? Germany unified itself, just like Italy did... and no more. This doesn't come close to creating a true empire against serious coalitions that spanned centuries.

For its last 400 years of existence, the Ottoman empire depended autocratic local dictators who governed with compulsion and bribery, a huge forced-conscript army, and slavery.

Wow. Who were these compelled and conscripted soldiers and slaves fighting at the gates of Vienna - the Children's Crusade? Because my understanding is that the Ottomans were plenty formidable as of 1683... well into those last 400 years.

Regarding their many Great People, where is an ottoman Bach? Or Reformer? Or Newton? Or Adam Smith? or Philosopher?

I believe that the specialist UA for the Ottomans is completely unfounded in history and makes them overwhelming opponents in most games when they stay out of trouble until the Janissaries and build specialist enhancing wonders.

As far as Civ 5 is concerned, specialists contribute much more than GP - they purposely constitute an economy. So how many great people the Ottomans produced is actually fairly irrelevant. But they obviously had enough greats and semi-greats to have the science, culture and architecture - not to mention dominant military and consequent economic system - to (like China) dwarf Europe. Reform? There's not one empire that lasted that long without reform - including the Ottomans. Now who were these specific individuals? Search me. Like you, much of what I know about the world comes through a Euro-American filter. That's your failing, and mine... not the Ottomans'.

 

[gdwitt]

This is my last post on this topic.
I realize your attachments to the Ottomans Txurce. I love playing that civ because of their overpowered trait but have a moral aversion because of the atrocities and repression of so many other cultures, much like I won't play the Romans and a few of the others.
I'm rather well-read on history; it was my college major. Their imperial palace in Istanbul was an impressive place full of imported scientists and military specialists. The rest of the empire was rather depraved and presented the worst examples of inhumanity and despotism in the near-modern Western world.
Proposals:
1) Give the ottoman trait to other civs and give the Ottoman imperial palace a special boost of culture, science and productivity. Give them cheap slave armies and pirate ship conversions representing the Barbary states.
2) A temporary quick fix would be to let the Ottomans keep their special 4 point specialist bonus but reduce the Great person bonus to 1. Imported scientists and engineers would rarely stay beyond their contract. A better temporary fix would be to give them the chinese trait of Great General generation and a special building representing their dominance of the spice trade.
3) Consider boosts to other civs involving creative management. You mention the Germans. There were German military advisors in the Sultan's court all the way back to sacking of Constantinople. The Germans armies was various and may have included excellent, but costly mercenary halberdman, just as the Swiss. The German states were at the forefront of fortifications and their courts generated a stream of Great People: from Leibniz through Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Marx, Nietzsche, Heidegger and Wittgenstein to contemporary philosophers. We cannot forget to remember Bach, Schubert, Handel, Mozart, etc. The Germans states could never unite until they were overrun by Napoleon, but they had a common language and heritage. Nazism was an exception in their history.
4) I'm not a bit German and believe other civs should be able to showcase their unique heritage. The Americans and English seemed to share a special Merchant trait that is not showcased. Spain's civ is bizarre and unplayable. Spanish and Portuguese speaking players form large portion of the Civ 5 population and they would love any enhancements.