Really you don't like washington? I think he's one of the best americans. Roosevelt is probably a tad better but for early expansion washington is a beast with extra happy cap and fast workers and granaries. America's ub and uu suck though so there's that. Would've been way cooler if america's uu was something sooner like minute-man, a 2 move rifle or a lower cost to produce or something.
Well, America is just not a good civ since it's like having no UU/UB. Roosevelt has a trick with the GLH which makes him a bit special and that's about it.
To be fair, I forgot about Germany too, which also doesn't have any UU/UB practically. The leaders' traits are pretty good though.
And pray tell what role is that? What would you possibly use a jaguar for over a regular axe? They're like weaker axes with woodsman promo and resourceless.
Woodsman II has some applications with the mobility, much like Keshiks. It's not huge, but since I'm not a fan of vanilla swordsmen anyways, it's like something extra.Woodsman III gives you an early medic, and that is something harder to get.
I don't get why philosophy is so good. Doesn't it over the course of a game net like 1-2 more great people only? I thought someone said once that's about average benefit. I guess speed in getting your first 1-2 out can make a big difference, but I consider it like middle of the pack trait. If I were to rate traits I'd make four tiers:
"Over the course of the game" is not very important. Not chopping a forest would also yield more production over time, but why do we chop it? It's because we need production now. The first few great people are the most important so you can get a tech edge, such as an academy or even a philio bulb. If you can get Taoism that would discourage the AI from trying to go up that tree.
Best- financial, organized
Second tier, above average- expansive, creative, charismatic, industrious
Third tier, average or a tad less- philosophical, spiritual
Fourth tier, below average- imperialistic
Last place just not very good- aggressive, protective
I'm thinking
Best--Fin
Well, should be obvious. Not only does it make cottages better, but also any high commerce tiles also benefit. As a side note, it also makes coast less crappy so it's pretty flexible overall. It often starts out good and ends up even better.
Great-- PHI, IND
Some special circumstances make them better than Fin, especially if your land is horrible. IND can get wonders or more fail gold when not possible normally, especially if you come across a resource. PHI means faster academies, faster bulbs, extra bulbs, and only requires a bit of food. The absence of a PHI/IND leader is also somewhat telling....
They do take more work to get mileage as opposed to FIN or even Cre/EXP though; with IND being harder to use both for the noob trap of mass wonders and also fail gold shenanigans. And they don't have the staying power of FIn too, as well.
Good- CRE, EXP
These traits help your early game almost immediately and are very forgiving, making them a good choice for new players. Creative allows you to avoid monuments, mystiicsm, or even prudent city placement. Many new players like to place the "best" city long term as opposed to what would help them out in the present. CRE lets you literally have your cake and eat it too. Also the additional defense and fatter borders means for easier defense which also helps out. Also libraries which again a shoutout to Pericles, who would have been up there had Greece not been so so-so.
Expansive is faster grainaries and workers. The health is actually nice late game too.
Despite all the good things I said, these traits also lose steam past the early game, so they are not top tier as a result.
Decent-- SPI
This is a hard to rate trait. In terms of practical application, it doesn't offer that much. If you think about it, you don't go into anarchy that much anyways. But then again, that's because you don't want anarchy. Because diplomacy is so powerful in this game and SPI can have you flip flopping like the sleaziest of politicians, it's rather strong for this reason especially if the AP/UN comes into play, or begging for peace treaties. Of course, there's also many cases where it's not that great-- aka you're isolated/semi-isolated with someone hostile anyways. But it can be broken if the opportunity allows.
Ok - CHA ORG
These can be nice to have. and usually help out a bit consistently across the course of the game but I don't consider them essential. They can be strong if you play to it. Charismatic gives you extra happiness which means more room to do something of your choice. Organized makes your maintenance problems a bit better but I don't value it that highly since usually I don't really settle cities that far out for it to be a problem early on, but it does have some value if you conquer a lot. I usually like these as a secondary trait. Aka, one paired with one of the above, it's usually nice. Much less if it's paired with one of the below. Literally the difference between the 2 Celt leaders.
I probably would like organized better if I ran corporations or something, but that just never comes up.
Shrug-- IMP
GGs are fun. Occasionally you may spawn on a crappy peninsula and you MUST get that settler out. This is where IMP helps.
Bad-- AGG Helps against early barbs and wars, otherwise whatever. As a side note, this is where I must boo Firaxis for giving Quechas combat I as well, which affords them a similar advantage.
Might as well not be there-- PRO Unless you're Sitting Bull. Or maybe Qin, but generally you don't want them to march up to your city. However, there's certain terrain especially against super aggressive neighbors where a hilled city will save your life.And maybe you don't have strategic resources.
Of course that isn't the whole story. You have stuff where the trait syergizes with the UU/UB, say Shaka's Aggressive and Ikhandas. Then you have Wang Kon who's financial, but seems pretty mediocre anyways. And there's sometimes odd/bad spawns where the worse traits suddenly become useful.
)
