What Civs' Unique Abilites would you like to see changed?

[Matthew.]

City number is irrelevant. A 25 pop. city with NC by 1AD would have over 60 science alone. Not that I suggest that, because as I mentioned before I think doubling the population of every city would result in throwing off other numbers and I would like to see India be able to expand a bit easier.

In the past I've suggested giving Mughal Fort +2 happiness, since the gold bonus doesn't come significantly later and +2 culture is weak. Something like +2 food per city and +2 happiness on Mughal Fort would mean that early growth gets a kick-start and the 4 combined happiness from walls/colosseum would result in overcoming that local unhappiness per city significantly quicker.

They would still expand slightly slower than other Civs, but would result in larger than average cities. The added synergy between Mughal and the UA would be good, too.

Unfortunately the addition of composite bows and the awkward upgrade path for chariots (war elephant) makes their UU less than desirable, but that is a needed improvement across the game and not India specific.

Edit:

Spoiler :

A 2-3 food surplus, which is city center tile plus either plains farms or two grassland farms per mine results in ~7-8 pop. city after ~100 turns, more or less the 1AD benchmark (T115 standard pacing). An additional 2 food per city for a 4-5 surplus would bring that number to ~11. Obviously granaries, water mills, and civil service will change that, but just adding numbers to give an idea of how +2 food per city would change city numbers in the early game.

 

[headcase]

Personally I always thought America needed a bonus more like: chance of generating a great person for each city captured (or war won). This would be open to balance of course (not sure on exactly what percent chance would be fair) but it also fits very nicely with history.

I like their current UA anyway, but this style might be accomplished by awarding a free great person for every great general earned. If OP, make it so you can only choose GPs that haven't been chosing yet (like the Maya), and\or make it add to the cost of future GPs (also like the Maya). I don't know how many GGs good warmongers get in a game so I don't know what's OP for this.

 

[bcaiko]

Well, mia culpa - looks like I was wrong. I was certain they wouldn't overhaul any of the existing UAs, but France's has apparently even gotten a new name.

Sounds from the video like the team took a look at all of the existing Civs' abilities. How much do we want to bet India goes get a change?

 

[ferretbacon]

Well, mia culpa - looks like I was wrong. I was certain they wouldn't overhaul any of the existing UAs, but France's has apparently even gotten a new name.

Sounds from the video like the team took a look at all of the existing Civs' abilities. How much do we want to bet India goes get a change?

France has not only opened the door to other UAs being changed, it's battered the door down. The fact that France has an entirely new name and effect for their UA is a sign that we can reasonably expect some big changes for other civilizations.

 

[Calouste]

France has not only opened the door to other UAs being changed, it's battered the door down. The fact that France has an entirely new name and effect for their UA is a sign that we can reasonably expect some big changes for other civilizations.

New name, new effect and even a new play style, very capital centric compared to the per city bonus that encouraged a wide empire.

Considering all the other changes they have also announced to religion, cultural policies, trade routes, espionage etc., BNW is going to be half a new game compared to GnK if they are going to drastically overhaul a number of UAs as well.

 

[SamBC]

France has not only opened the door to other UAs being changed, it's battered the door down. The fact that France has an entirely new name and effect for their UA is a sign that we can reasonably expect some big changes for other civilizations.

Though it's a change that's very specifically to do with the new systems. If all the changes are to do with the new systems, I hope they won't change all existing UAs!

 

[SecretGG]

I really feel that Byzantine, the Celts, and India all need some serious revamping. Mostly for reasons already stated, but seriously it's kind of extraordinarily maddening for me their UA's.

 

[Calouste]

I'm fairly sure the Aztecs' UA is going to be changed, considering the culture buildings are going to generate a lot less culture, 8 culture for killing a Brute is a lot. And the same of course goes for the Honor opener.

 

[Loaf Warden]

France has not only opened the door to other UAs being changed, it's battered the door down. The fact that France has an entirely new name and effect for their UA is a sign that we can reasonably expect some big changes for other civilizations.

I sure hope China is one of them. I find it hard to want to play China as it is, because I'm not much of a warmonger, and I've always felt that making China a warmongering civ was A) not really representative of what Chinese civilization has been about, and B) redundant in the face of all the genuine warmongers in the game.

The other day I thought of one that I thought would fit them better: "The Middle Kingdom". It would give them a bonus to both offensive and defensive culture, meaning their culture would spread easier and other cultures would find it harder to spread to them. This would represent how China spent most centuries of its existence considering itself the sole source of culture in the world, where all of its neighbors were considered as barbarians not really worth borrowing from, while at the same time those same neighbors borrowed eagerly from China and ended up with more Sinicized cultures than they started with. It would fit their history and the new culture system of BNW. Before the announcement about France, I thought this idea was just a pipe dream. Now, well . . . it probably still is, but at least we know overhauling and renaming existing UAs is something they're doing now. So it could happen.

 

[Calouste]

I sure hope China is one of them. I find it hard to want to play China as it is, because I'm not much of a warmonger, and I've always felt that making China a warmongering civ was A) not really representative of what Chinese civilization has been about, and B) redundant in the face of all the genuine warmongers in the game.

The other day I thought of one that I thought would fit them better: "The Middle Kingdom". It would give them a bonus to both offensive and defensive culture, meaning their culture would spread easier and other cultures would find it harder to spread to them. This would represent how China spent most centuries of its existence considering itself the sole source of culture in the world, where all of its neighbors were considered as barbarians not really worth borrowing from, while at the same time those same neighbors borrowed eagerly from China and ended up with more Sinicized cultures than they started with. It would fit their history and the new culture system of BNW. Before the announcement about France, I thought this idea was just a pipe dream. Now, well . . . it probably still is, but at least we know overhauling and renaming existing UAs is something they're doing now. So it could happen.

We could do with a few less warmongers. We already have Germany, Japan, Mongolia, the Ottomans, Denmark, England and the Huns who have 2 UUs and a mostly or exclusively military UA. Then you have America, Sweden, France, Spain, Greece, Carthage, Byzantium and Korea with two UUs, and the Aztecs, Russia, Persia, Songhai and China with a militaristic UA. Add in India, Babylon, Ethiopia and Polynesia who get defensive bonuses and there are really not many civs left.

 

[damnyankees]

I really feel that Byzantine, the Celts, and India all need some serious revamping. Mostly for reasons already stated, but seriously it's kind of extraordinarily maddening for me their UA's.

Given the new information about Reformation Beliefs, it seems almost definite that Byzantium's UA will be changed since its too similar.

 

[Matthew.]

We could do with a few less warmongers. We already have Germany, Japan, Mongolia, the Ottomans, Denmark, England and the Huns who have 2 UUs and a mostly or exclusively military UA. Then you have America, Sweden, France, Spain, Greece, Carthage, Byzantium and Korea with two UUs, and the Aztecs, Russia, Persia, Songhai and China with a militaristic UA. Add in India, Babylon, Ethiopia and Polynesia who get defensive bonuses and there are really not many civs left.

It is almost like a massive part of the game deals with military units and warfare!

I think you guys are exaggerating. Every Civ has access to a wide variety of military units--that there being a unique version of one doesn't automatically make that Civ a dedicated war-monger.

The Chinese AI is flavored to value science and defense over expansion and war-mongering.

As the player, you are letting popular view skew the image. That is like saying Ethiopia shouldn't be a war-monger Civ because many players will use them for domination games (easy religion and UA is always active against Deity AI). Asking for change to a Civ because players are not "playing it right" seems a bit silly. If you want to play as science for China nothing is stopping you, just like nothing is stopping players from domination with Ethiopia.

 

[GenjiKhan]

What could be the new Germany's UA,if it got changed?

 

[Gali]

I feel that the Byzantine UA might need a revamp but new mechanics in BNW might make it far less of a problem. The new piety tree that is all religion could make founding a religion easier and more rewarding. With the new finisher giving an extra belief and all benefits tied to the religion it could really make a Byzantine religion strong enough to be worth no rationalism. They mention a Reformation giving science from faith in the QA and that could help fill the rationalism gap.

That horribly copied interview article from today mention removing "requirements" from policy trees, which could mean piety no longer locks rationalism. Piety tree Byzantine could be good enough to lift the UA to decent status.

Add in the need to protect Sea trade routes, which could increase the dromon's role and Byzantium might be saved. also, if the axeman is a resource less non spear line it might allow cataphrachts to not run into a zillion pikes and increase in usefulness. Same for India with boosted Mughal fort with tourism and chariot archer's fixed buffing the UU indirectly. Enough indirect buffs and balance changes could solve many of these problems.

The massive change to France's UA does open the door for many of these to be fixed though.

 

[ferretbacon]

What could be the new Germany's UA?

My favorite:

Furor Teutonicus: Military buildings (barracks, armory, etc.) confer +1 production. Pay 25% less for land unit maintenance.

 

[GenjiKhan]

One idea to buff the current Germany's UA I saw somewhere is:

Furor Teutonicus:After researching Printing Press,the production of the first military land unit of one type is increased by +50% . Example:

- You research Gunpowder after Printing Press . Your first Musketman will be produced +50% faster;
- You research Chemistry after Printing Press . Your first Cannon will be produced +50% faster;

It would be strong,but it would take time to kick in .

 

[Calouste]

If they change the German UA along those lines, it won't be called Furor Teutonicus any longer. That term is strictly tied to the German tribes of the 2nd-1st century BCE.

 

[g3istbot]

on the topic of changing UA's, I was thinking maybe changing Rome's UA might be appropriate. It's a nice UA, but only if you can have rapid expansion which may not always be possible and which can easily upset other nations.

So I was thinking, and this may be too OP or too weak, I'm not that detailed to know, but -

Roman War Machine - Each time you kill a unit, the exp given is shared by half to all other units.

 

[Bobert13]

on the topic of changing UA's, I was thinking maybe changing Rome's UA might be appropriate. It's a nice UA, but only if you can have rapid expansion which may not always be possible and which can easily upset other nations.

So I was thinking, and this may be too OP or too weak, I'm not that detailed to know, but -

Roman War Machine - Each time you kill a unit, the exp given is shared by half to all other units.

If you have 21 units, then 20 of them get half of the XP that the initial unit gained?! That's 11x XP... way, waaaay OP.

I personally feel Rome's UA is pretty spot on once you think about it and it's one of the more powerful UA's in the game if you really add up the hammers you get out of it. Besides, you want the neighboring civs to get mad at you as Rome so they'll DoW you and then you can take their lunch for doing so without taking as much of a diplo hit as you otherwise would.

 

[GenjiKhan]

Now that Zulu has a very similar and more powerful UA than Germany,then I bet there will be a change on its UA .