The UU-A-Day Countdown

[Louis XXIV]

Fighting a defensive war doesn't mean you are losing. It can be very profitable, even in Civ4, to entice an easily provoked AI to send a stack into your territory and then annihilate it using your local movement advantages.

The problem with this is that you are dependent on the AI invading you. If you want to annihilate them, they might choose for you to attack them. In other words, the AI has a chance to not be stupid and could instead nerf your ability.

 

[Ahriman]

If say the territory of a conquered city had the effect of neutral territory (instead of friendly to the conqueror and enemy to the original owner) Then that would
1. make sense from a realism standpoint
2. work to resist the 'snowball' from a gameplay standpoint.

This would be a giant mess from a UI standpoint.
Your territory is your territory. Why would they make different bits of your territory have different status? That would be a terrible design.

Besides, you could manually reassign many of the tiles to any other cities that were within range.
Why would you want to encourage this kind of micromanagement?

Also, it wouldn't decrease snowballing to any particular extent (the gameplay effects are very minor).
And from a realism perspective; you think its realistic that the territory around a conquered city is *never* friendly territory, even centuries later?

 

[Polobo]

The Minuteman will make conquering and hold territory much easier as you will require fewer units to defend the homeland as well as to guard the newly captured territory.

Depending on whether bonuses/promotions apply to cities this will be even moreso.

 

[Calouste]

The problem with this is that you are dependent on the AI invading you. If you want to annihilate them, they might choose for you to attack them. In other words, the AI has a chance to not be stupid and could instead nerf your ability.

If they don't invade, that's fine with me, I'll just continue with my science or culture win.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

So... uh... what's the next UU?

So far, I like what they did with the French Musketeers. The ones in Civ4 were kind of useless, TBH... the Musketman wasn't that great a unit in the first place, and although the Janissary and sometimes the Oromo Warrior could gain a great advantage, I never found a really good way to use the Musketeer.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

This would be a giant mess from a UI standpoint.
Your territory is your territory. Why would they make different bits of your territory have different status? That would be a terrible design.

Well you would need a clear distinction, and you did have that issue in civ 4 with cultural owners of a tile not necessarily being the actual owner

ANd they do have a UI, cities will have an indication that they are conquered...

Also, it wouldn't decrease snowballing to any particular extent (the gameplay effects are very minor).
And from a realism perspective; you think its realistic that the territory around a conquered city is *never* friendly territory, even centuries later?

Well the city is never 'unconquered' even centuries later.



THIS is important aside from our debate

Besides, you could manually reassign many of the tiles to any other cities that were within range.
Why would you want to encourage this kind of micromanagement?

If reassigning which city Works a tile actually reassignes the tile to that city, then there are problems already...regardless of friendly tiles.
Because then you have the micromanagement of assigning all tiles from a threatened city to other cities in your empire.

 

[Babri]

We city is never 'unconquered' even centuries later.
THIS is important aside from our debate

But centuries later it is assimilated.
And I think that in ciV there is no longer going to be a %age ratio of a tile like 70% Aztec 30% America etc & most probably tiles won't be flipping due to culture (except using Great Artist) so your point will become invalid.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

But centuries later it is assimilated.
And I think that in ciV there is no longer going to be a %age ratio of a tile like 70% Aztec 30% America etc & most probably tiles won't be flipping due to culture (except using Great Artist) so your point will become invalid.

Cities are NEVER assimilated

And tiles don't flip due to culture. The tile stays with the city, so if you can flip tiles between cities you control, that mechanic leads to annoying micromanagement of reasigning tiles from threatened cities.. so the enemy doesn't get those tiles.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Do you have any sources for any of that?

At a very minimum, I'm pretty sure it was mentioned that you can use a Great Artist's Culture Bomb to steal tiles from enemy cities (so tiles do flip due to culture). I'd like to see some confirmation for some of your other assertions, since they have a big impact on the game.

 

[Lyoncet]

Yeah I tried to explain that to Krikk but he seems oblivious.

Being oblivious and disagreeing are two entirely different things, no matter how many times you imply otherwise.

That aside, the question of what counts as friendly territory are valid in that there are a few times when a tile may be your color but not friendly. Like when you're systematically annihilating a populace, is that territory friendly? Completely legitimate question, and no saying "Yes I know it is" without having anything to back it up isn't a good answer. Especially if you follow it with "I did the math in my head so I won't show it to you but it's right."

I do agree though that the likely scenario is that if it's your color, it counts as friendly territory.

 

[ShaqFu]

What is the next UU to be discussed ?

Right now Thanks for the patience - these past few days have been utterly chaotic (I've driven ~600 miles, moved into a new place, had a weekend-long convention...) so I had to take a day off, which I thankfully built into the countdown.

Awesome idea on keeping track in the first post! I'll do that while I'm on my laptop right now (albeit tethered to an Android phone...).

Anyway, on to UU #22, for those sick of arguing about the definition of "friendly"! This time, we go from a UU that needs no great generalship to one that demands it....

Today's UU is the Japanese Samurai, another familiar face from Civ3 and Civ4. Previous incarnations have seen raw combat boosts and built-in first strikes; the Civ5 version is possibly stronger, but requires a bit more forethought to fully exploit. The newest Samurai comes with a combat bonus on open terrain on top of its already respectable 18 Longswordsman strength. To sweeten the deal further, Samurai combat victories have an increased chance to generate a Great General.

The Samurai is a UU that requires the Japanese player to plan and maneuver his units carefully. In hills/forests/cities, the unit becomes a generic Longswordsman and removes Japan's combat advantage. If a Japanese warmonger can choose where his battles take place, however, he has a tremendous combat edge - namely, what may be the strongest unit of its era. Granted, we don't know the precise bonus, but I'm certain it'll be at least +20% (for 21.6 strength). That's enough to take on a Lancer (22) with fair odds, steamroll Musketmen, and do horrible things to unprotected Crossbowmen. The only real downside to all this is that it requires open terrain; if your enemy outmaneuvers you and brings the fight to the hills/forests, your fancy UUs turn generic. To get the most out of your Samurai, you'll have to get your opponent to face you on your terms, with a tremendous reward in store.

The second ability? If you can get the enemy to face you in the open, well, one great general deserves another

 

[CleverFool]

I think considering that terrain plays such a large role, and most players/AI would probably seek it out as much as possible, the Samurai might be somewhat limited in direct frontal attacks. I suppose you could always ignore these defended areas and force them to attack you on open plains. I could see the Samurai ranging ahead towards the cities while other units mop up the defended areas.

Combined with the UA of Japan I could see this being a very strong unit.

 

[IdiotsOpposite]

It sounds like a good unit, provided you aren't playing a map with hills set on HIGH. This would be particularly good in defending floodplains... or attacking grassland... or just about anywhere that isn't a hill or a forest.

In addition, using them gets you great generals faster, and who doesn't like faster great generals?

I can definitely see a use for this unit in my future of CiV. A good unit in my humble and likely about to be destroyed opinion.

 

[bjbrains]

The samurai definitely seems like a UU with a lot of potential. The longswordsman is already a very powerful unit for its time period, so giving it a free promotion and an increased Great General spawn rate should make for a good UU.

BTW Shaq, it's not a generic "combat bonus on open terrain", but rather a free Shock 1 promotion, which gives a +20% bonus. What shock 2 does could be a big influence on Samurai power level.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

A really significant factor in this is the Penalty for defending in open terrain.

which means
Samurai -> Longsword in open Terrain: Sam+ Longsword- (Samurai wins massively)
Longsword->Sam in open Terrain: Sam+- Longsword (an ~even battle)

So Samurai want to be IN the hills/Forests, and Attacking the open terrain (like everyone)

But Samurai are
1. much better when they catch the enemy in open terrain
2. can survive if they got caught in the open terrain (probably because they just attacked and killed a unit there.

This means that when invading Renaisance/mideval Japan you Must stick to hills/forest as much as possible.

 

[ilikepies]

The Samurai looks excellent. Longswordsman are the basic infantry of the medieval era, so I think Japan will really dominate here.

First of all, Japan has Bushido, making its units not suffer as much from ranged bombardments or damage in battle, so you can continue to sweep across the terrain. Second, you get a bonus on open terrain, and your enemy gets a penalty on open terrain, so as long as you maneuver so you don't have to attack hills and such, and try to pull your enemies army around, you can run in and chop them into knight-sushi as soon as they get off their hills or forests.

However, against the Iroquois they will not be effective.

The great general bonus is nice but doesn't have much of a combat effect. Still, the rest of the unit is great.

 

[Polobo]

Hard to really how you'd leverage the unit. Its more a matter of just doing the same things you'd do with a normal longsword but better. You'd be able to make some marches more direct than otherwise, since being on flatland would be less of a risk. But, the enemy is likely to be forcing you onto flatland anyway (if you are attacking them) so the difference will be minimal.

On defense, if you can suck the enemy into your own flatland you'd be able to more easily wipe them out.

If it is indeed a Shock I promotion that they get then the other promotions that are opened up are important. The downside to it being the promotion to a middle-ages unit is that you are likely to have a number of warriors/spears already with Shock I and so the promotion would be wasted (whereas a unit bonus would not be).

Since you can move 2 tiles over flatland as well, and can absorb damage better (maybe...), there is a slightly greater opportunity to get behind enemy lines with a raiding force and try to take out key resources.

 

[Lyoncet]

Perhaps the default option to generate starts favorable to each particular civ will start Japan's closest neighbors in large, open tracts.

 

[Polobo]

The great general bonus is nice but doesn't have much of a combat effect. Still, the rest of the unit is great.

Really depends on how they implement the "greater chance". Is it going to be independent of the normal (assuming experience based like in Civ4) based method of getting a general or will it simply cause each XP to count double (or some other multiple) towards the generation of a great general?

The combat bonus a general provides is quite good (though whether they stack we have no idea) and the citadel is not bad, especially during the early stages of conquest where you can use the help in defending the newly conquered territory; or just to cover your other flank while you focus on the main front.

 

[Boshi]

Another thing that minutemen could be very useful for is defending friendly city states, as long as allied city states count as friendly territory. If you're doing a strategy that depends on the city states then I think that having a good UU for giving them a boost could be useful.