1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

What UUs and UBs to include in CivV?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Pikkis, Feb 21, 2010.

  1. Woodreaux

    Woodreaux Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2007
    Messages:
    357
    Location:
    So Cal
    I agree with this. Legoinary is better name than Praetorian. I also hope Marines for the U.S. aren't replaced by a UU like the Navy Seals, mainly because the USMC is an awesome force in its own right. Going Civ III style with F-15's is a winner, but so would replacing Modern Armor with M-1 Abrams.
     
  2. Ddude97

    Ddude97 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    761
    I agree with the M1s and legions idea, but not with the redcoats, again GB and the Royal Navy
     
  3. Andrew_Jay

    Andrew_Jay Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2002
    Messages:
    439
    the Redcoats were kind of funny - a unique frigate (or ship-of-the-line) would make so much more sense for the British but it was like they were shying away from putting in naval unique units . . . and then BtS comes out with naval UU's for Portugal and Netherlands.

    If they took out the Redcoat, there could be a Guard or something similar for the French (though that would just mean pushing their UU back from musketeer to rifleman or grenadier).
     
  4. Tusked

    Tusked Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    95
    The original C4 designers were attempting to avoid Naval UUs. BTS was developed by a separate team.
     
  5. cybrxkhan

    cybrxkhan Asian Xwedodah

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Messages:
    9,687
    Location:
    The Universe
    The problem with Naval UUs is that they could have limited use if, say, you're playing on a map-script that doesn't allow for large oceans.

    As for UUs, I just remembered that I'd like the War Elephant, or something of that sort, as the UU for India. The Fast Worker of Civ3, though was a lot more useful than I originally thought, a somewhat racist idea in my opinion.
     
  6. iceman30

    iceman30 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2010
    Messages:
    10
    I think the idea of leader specific UUs is cool, but a couple problems I see are:

    1) Will Julius and Augustus have the same Legions? What separates the Mongol cavalry of Genghis from that of Kublai Khan?

    2) The greatest leaders of the civilizations in question often didn't have the "cool" units to work with (how do we get Chu-ko-nus without including relatively obscure medieval era Chinese leaders?)

    3) How will I overrun my foes with Panzers for fun and profit? (Von Papen is not a good answer)

    I'd prefer multiple unique units, either scattered across eras (England or Russia) or concentrated in one (Panzers plus Stukas plus U-boats= happy fun times).
     
  7. mechaerik

    mechaerik Tuturuu!

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2008
    Messages:
    7,064
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    War Chariots not a good UU? They are an excellent UU! They can carve out a massive empire for you in the ancient/classical era.

    I think the Americans should get the minuteman as a UU, and the French should get a more medieval UU, or a Napoleonic one.
     
  8. e350tb

    e350tb Stupendously Illogical Englishman

    Joined:
    May 24, 2007
    Messages:
    1,839
    Location:
    The Britcave
    Some UUs and explainations; in my opinion, each civ should have more then one UU.

    For the British:
    - Yeomanry (someone suggested this earlier)
    - Redcoats (Napoleon himself said that they were the best infantry of the time)
    - HMS Dreadnaught (Although Dreadnaughts as a whole shouldn't be civ specific)
    - Avro Lancaster (What can I say? Personal preference)

    For the Americans:
    - Rangers (the eighteenth century variety meaning skirimishers)
    - Seventh Cavalry (they were actually quite good from what I heard, even if thier general was not)
    - Marines (modern elite troops - oo-rah!)
    - F-22 Raptor (most advanced fighter in the world)

    For the Germans:
    - Visigoths (could replace swordsmen, perhaps)
    - Knights Templar (one could argue that these could be French as well)
    - Fokker D. VIII (I think that was von Richofen's plane - was it?)
    - Panzer V. Panther (best tank of World War 2, just barely beating the T34 IMO)

    For the French:
    - Gaullic Tribesmen (don't know what they'd replace)
    - Foot Knights (like the ones at Poitiers, except not incompetent)
    - Gloire (first ironclad warship)
    - Renault FT-17 (first turreted tank)

    Forgive my Eurocentric view - I know most about them.
     
  9. Pikkis

    Pikkis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    525
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    M1 Abrams would make a great UU IMO, but its problem is that, with leader-specific UUs and UBs (assuming they are implemented), it would a require a leader from the 80's, 90's, 00's or 10's. Thus I think that Minutemen have much greater chance to be included as they fit the time of Washington's leadership.
     
  10. Art Grin

    Art Grin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,699
    Location:
    Germany
    I don't think that the M1 is a good idea. If the US should get a modern UU than it should be an Aircraft or a Marine. I'm not saying that the M1 is a bad tank but there are superior tanks. Also adding Reagan, Carter, Bush Father or Bush Junior wouldn't be a good idea.
    I would like to see the Japanese have two Leader. Maybe Tokugawa as a medieval leader with a Samurai UU and Hirohito or some post WWII Prime Minister with a Battleship or Aircraft UU.
     
  11. Pikkis

    Pikkis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    525
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    My bad.

    So true (especially the last one).

    I think that Hirohito won't most definitely be a Japanese leader, because Firaxis even banned him from the BTS WWII scenario IIRC. Post WWII Japanese prime ministers are too unknown to be included in Civ IMO. Anyhow, Japan should have two leaders IMO: Tokugawa and Meiji.
     
  12. Öjevind Lång

    Öjevind Lång Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2005
    Messages:
    2,371
    Prince Shotoku, who was the actual ruler of Japan in the 7th century, would be a good alternative Japanese ruler. Unlike Tokugawa, he welcomed foreign contacts; in his day, may Chinese and Koreans with special skills moved to Japan, and Buddhism and Confucianism were introduced. Japanese learning and the Japanese economy flourished. Shotoku could be Creative and Organized, or Creative and Financial.
     
  13. Art Grin

    Art Grin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,699
    Location:
    Germany
    They did ban him from the WWII scenario, I didn't know that.But my guess id it's going to be Tokugawa again.
    I wonder if the Russians under Stalin will still be using the Cossak or will they get an Tank replacement?
     
  14. Pikkis

    Pikkis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Messages:
    525
    Location:
    Helsinki, Finland
    Even though Prince Shotoku was a great leader, I prefer Meiji to him, and for variety's sake, I think we should have both non-militaristic and militaristic leaders for Japan.
     
  15. Ddude97

    Ddude97 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    761
    Personally I find it funny thswt they banned Hirohito, but not Stalin or Mao Zedong who each killed millions.
     
  16. Art Grin

    Art Grin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,699
    Location:
    Germany
    I have nothing against banning Hitler but Hirohito, the guy didn't do a thing. He was also the only Axis Leader to continue leading his nation after the war. But back on topic or else this ends as discussion who is worse Hitler or Stalin(I can't see those discussions anymore).
    I think the Russian UU should be the Cossak or a T-34, but they could also use something really new like Strelzi which would replace the Musketman.:)
     
  17. Dark_Jedi06

    Dark_Jedi06 "Deus ex Machina."

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    1,288
    Gender:
    Male
    Haha the Strelzi (Strelets) made it into Age of Empires 3 and they were incredibly awesome, especially when they pulled out their axes for hand to hand combat. :D
     
  18. Art Grin

    Art Grin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,699
    Location:
    Germany
    Considering those guys get ignored by games pretty much. I could live with them as the Russian UU. It would be something refreshing for once in a while and not the same Cossaks again.
     
  19. Tavenier

    Tavenier Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2003
    Messages:
    819
    Location:
    Netherlands
    I believe Assyrians invented chariots, not Egypt.

    And someone mentioned it being unfair for a UB to become obsolete (totem pole). But a lot of UB's are available late game, like the Russian of American UB in Civ4.
     
  20. cybrxkhan

    cybrxkhan Asian Xwedodah

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Messages:
    9,687
    Location:
    The Universe
    As for the Egyptian chariots, the traditional theory is that it was brought to Egypt by the mysterious Semitic "Hyksos" peoples, although from what I know recent research indicates it may have existed in Egypt in earlier times, too.

    If I remember correctly, it was the Sumerians who invented chariots. They invented the wheel, and it didn't take too long for them to get chariots. There have been scenes at Sumerian archaeological sites that show these primitive, four-wheeled chariots.
     

Share This Page