Suleiman trait overpowered 108 versions

[albie_123]

but have a moral aversion

Stopped reading there.

This might sound harsh, but, morality really doesn't have any place in a Civilization game, especially when you're discussing, of all things, the trait of a Civ.

I understand if you have historical annoyances, but, as soon as you bring morality into the mix, well, you have to understand that it's really utterly irrelevant.

I won't do the thing most people do and bring up the two leaders which are often in Civilization games that have been just as bad as any in terms of atrocities committed* (Looking at you, M and S) simply because I don't think it's necessary, but, needless to say, every major power has committed atrocities in their time, and every major power has had beneficial attributes.

*For the record, I think leaders should be included for historical relevance, not how 'nice' they were. I'll still never understand why Wu Zetian got in and Qin didn't.

 

[Txurce]

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.

I have zero attachment to the Ottomans, and can't even remember when I played them last.

At this point your cumulative statements about the Germans and the Ottomans are clear enough for me to end my part in this dialogue.

 

[Sneaks]

Civs that have done morally averse things - All of them. I don't think we should use that as the balancing point in terms of abilities. The game offers the player a chance to create their own version of history: to be a warmongering murderer as Gandhi or a pacifist Alexander the Great. Did the Germans have a deep and rich culture with many great people? Absolutely. Do all of their current UA abilities represent pieces of its history as well? Yup. We are limited to 3 unique elements per civilization, and it is by far most important to unify them into something with a sense of cohesion. I don't disagree that swapping the Ottoman and German traits would work either way with the civs, but it comes down to whether we should be drastically altering two civilizations or one. The route Thal went, properly in my opinion, was to add as much positive impact as possible while adding as little fundamental change from vanilla.

 

[gunnergoz]

Personally, I'd rather see two unique buildings and one unique unit per empire than the 1:2 ratio we tend to see. But I'm a builder and less of a warlord, obviously...