-
ahdiabolo wrote:
a. water gives +1 (hammer, trade etc)
but that might be too similar to my third Sioux skill.
@giving them more meelee andn o artillery:
I have to agree with Halpo. This is too similar to the Germans
@a: I like this, since it is a small and subtle bonus, which may or may not be very helpful depending on which tiles you end up settling.
But I don't get this nerdy-"nerf" obsession...One of your Sioux abilities is already similar to the American ability (great persons), but you've added your own little twist to differentiate them.
Now that I think of it, I think my "germanesque" Viking idea would work best in tandem with the berzerker suggestion: You start with the same amount of infantry as the germans, no artillery, but with a significant infantry bonus unmatched by any of the other civs.
-
Alan F.
United States
Massachusetts
-
UbikValis wrote:
Pretty much ALL description and/or depiction of Vikings that I have seen and read focus on the helmeted (sometimes with horns) melee warrior. I don't really associate them with artillery. But like I said before, I'm no expert.
That's no reason to remove their artillery. If you can find some sort of documentation suggesting that the Vikings didn't know how to shoot bows and arrows, then I'll agree that your idea applies thematically. Otherwise, it's [...] to do that just because YOU don't "associate them with artillery". I don't think of horsemen when I think of the Chinese, maybe they should start with an extra artillery instead. I don't think of rifles when I think of the Romans, maybe they shouldn't be allowed to research Gunpowder. I don't think of spearmen when I think of India, let's give them an extra horse instead. See my point?
The fact of the matter is the Vikings shot arrows just as much as they swung swords and rode horses. They are noted by the media for their berserkers, but that doesn't make it thematic to throw away their archers.
-
Alan F.
United States
Massachusetts
-
UbikValis wrote: [q="ahdiabolo"]
But I don't get this nerdy-"nerf" obsession...One of your Sioux abilities is already similar to the American ability (great persons), but you've added your own little twist to differentiate them.
The Sioux gain a "chieftain" token every time they make a settlement (I still dont' like that ability, BTW, but whatever). Meanwhile, the Americans begin with a Great Person card. Barely similar.
The Chinese gain culture every time they conquer the village. The Romans, meanwhile, advance up the culture track. Similar, but hardly.
Meanwhile your "germanesque" ability is unthematic and practically the same as the German's except weaker.
And sorry for being "nerdy" and having a "nerf obsession."
-
-
Halpo wrote:
That's no reason to remove their artillery. If you can find some sort of documentation suggesting that the Vikings didn't know how to shoot bows and arrows, then I'll agree that your idea applies thematically.
You're absolutely right about the documentation part, that's why I used the word "associate" - poor language skills on my behalf perhaps - but it is founded on what I can recall from being exposed to a lot of viking culture, real as well as fictional.
And I'm not removing their ability to acquire artillery units, they just happen to start with less in that department.
Halpo wrote:
I don't think of horsemen when I think of the Chinese, maybe they should start with an extra artillery instead. I don't think of rifles when I think of the Romans, maybe they shouldn't be allowed to research Gunpowder.
What? The Roman Empire existed way BEFORE the age of gunpowder. That's like saying that the Romans and people who descend from them have no right to use guns, since they didn't invent it. (Weren't the Chinese first in that department, anyways?) Which doesn't matter, we're both giving examples of unrealistic/illogical elements inherent in the board game I assume you're playing as well. Does Gandhi threatening Lincoln's potential tech victory by flashing a uranium token make sense?! I don't remember India ever using the nuke in real life or on civilians at the very least. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Halpo wrote:
They are noted by the media for their berserkers, but that doesn't make it thematic to throw away their archers (or horsemen?)
Excellent point. Which reminds me that my berserker idea was ignored(?) by both Andreas and you. (I say ignored because everything else was - rightfully - commented and critiqued.)
Sorry if my suggestions are that offensive.
P.S.: "Nerdy" comes from that fact that I've never heard/read the word "nerfed" before, and took it as a derogative internet/fanboy jargon instead of constructive criticism.
-
-
I had a take on the Danish (Vikings etc.) a while ago which you may use if you wish. I was never completely satisfied with them (that's why I never published them myself), but maybe something good can come out of it anyway.
The Danish
The Danish start the game with a caravan marker in their capital.
Danish scouts are also considered armies.
When the Danish attacks and kill one or more enemy scouts they gain 2 loot instead of 1.
Leader: Harald Bluetooth
Starting Tech: Sailing
---
The caravan was supposed to represent their slaves (thralls).
The military scouts were supposed to represent the fact that even merchants and farmers learnt the trade of war from childhood.
And the loot thing is of course the "Vikings" (pillage journeys).
-
Alan F.
United States
Massachusetts
-
^Best Vikings so far. I like it.
-
Joe Rickard
United States
Los Angeles
California
-
Hinnyboy wrote: When the Danish attacks and kill one or more enemy scouts they gain 2 loot instead of 1.
And the loot thing is of course the "Vikings" (pillage journeys).
Do you mean army instead of scout? I didn't think you ever collected loot for killing an enemy scout.
-
-
quartersmostly wrote: Hinnyboy wrote: When the Danish attacks and kill one or more enemy scouts they gain 2 loot instead of 1.
And the loot thing is of course the "Vikings" (pillage journeys).
Do you mean army instead of scout? I didn't think you ever collected loot for killing an enemy scout.
I was thinking the same thing - I know it's been discussed in some posts here - also, I thought Caravans/Fortifications only last one turn?...
-
Andreas H.
Germany
Frankfurt
-
Fortification/Caravan markers DO only last until they are used. So the ability is quite weak.
But Henning already statet, that he wasn´t satisfied with their skills at all.
I also think, that scouts acting as armies is only important, when defending, not to mention, that republic becomes (more or less) useless for the Vikings.
The Berserker thing might get a bit overpowered if their melee is +1.
What about the Maya? 
-
-
quartersmostly wrote: Hinnyboy wrote: When the Danish attacks and kill one or more enemy scouts they gain 2 loot instead of 1.
And the loot thing is of course the "Vikings" (pillage journeys).
Do you mean army instead of scout? I didn't think you ever collected loot for killing an enemy scout.
See the rule book page 20, under "Enemy Figures". It's really easy to miss unless you read carefully.
ahdiabolo wrote:
Fortification/Caravan markers DO only last until they are used. So the ability is quite weak.
Yes I agree, this is mainly the reason I wasn't satisfied with them. I had trouble figuring out a more suitable starting bonus.
ahdiabolo wrote: But Henning already statet, that he wasn´t satisfied with their skills at all.
Well this statement isn't true at all  . I am quite satisfied with the two persisting abilities and I think they offer some unique tactics (scout hunting anyone?).
ahdiabolo wrote: I also think, that scouts acting as armies is only important, when defending, not to mention, that republic becomes (more or less) useless for the Vikings.
Why only when defending?
I can think of several other strategies (and some quite thematic as well):
*The army and the scout can stack to kill some villagers early in the game (just produce one or two more units).
*If combined with a couple of armies you can use your scouts offensively to gather/blockade in enemy city outskirts (making them tougher to defeat compared to if other civilization would try this with the same stacking limit).
*You can create two really solid armies when your stacking limit is 4, as your battle capable figures is 8 instead of 6.
-
-
ahdiabolo wrote: The Berserker thing might get a bit overpowered if their melee is +1.
It is, but I felt that limiting it to one unit (and one unit type) per battle would prevent it from being too powerful. Then again, I won't have time to test any of your civs the next few weeks, so I'll have to stick to assumptions. 
ahdiabolo wrote: What about the Maya?
Can't say I know too much about them, so it's hard to relate it thematically. (I keep confusing the Maya, Inca and Aztecs actually. I KNOW they come from each their part of the central and south Americas, but I always confuse them...)
Overall, I like your idea for the Mayan ability but I have a small problem with it and some suggestions.
Problem: Is it really enough to give the Mayan's just ONE special ability? I know the Romans also have just one special ability, but that seems to be an exception more than a rule.
Judging from a quick Wikipedia-read, they are famous for their temples, pyramids and astronomical knowledge. So maybe an extra Mayan ability like: All Mayan wonders and temples produce one extra culture token when devoting to the arts.
I like that you've made huts represent slave-labour by letting them produce extra production AND trade when assigned to cities. But why not follow a similar logic with the villages? After all, they require military action to conquer, so shouldn't their bonus reflect that a little bit?
I suggest: Each village that the Mayans assign to a city allow it to harvest 1 culture token when devoting to arts PLUS 1 combat bonus to your civilization (á la Barracks). Or, your could make the military reward defensive and say: A village gives a combat bonus ONLY to the city in which it is assigned.
You could also allow the player to move their huts and villages from city to city, but maybe only one token per turn, or one token per city per turn.
-
Andreas H.
Germany
Frankfurt
-
@Maya: I wanted to point out there "empire building" and their "culture" aspect. So I think the +2 culture is okay.
I might think about a small ability, if you think,that one isnt enough.
Maybe: The Maya always play as the defender, when in battles outside a city to point out their military skills.
@Vikings: Still in love with my skills  
-
Joe Rickard
United States
Los Angeles
California
-
Hinnyboy wrote: quartersmostly wrote: Hinnyboy wrote: When the Danish attacks and kill one or more enemy scouts they gain 2 loot instead of 1.
And the loot thing is of course the "Vikings" (pillage journeys).
Do you mean army instead of scout? I didn't think you ever collected loot for killing an enemy scout. See the rule book page 20, under "Enemy Figures". It's really easy to miss unless you read carefully.
Well I guess we've been playing that incorectly. Thanks for pointing that out.
-
Andreas H.
Germany
Frankfurt
-
quartersmostly wrote: Hinnyboy wrote: quartersmostly wrote: Hinnyboy wrote: When the Danish attacks and kill one or more enemy scouts they gain 2 loot instead of 1.
And the loot thing is of course the "Vikings" (pillage journeys).
Do you mean army instead of scout? I didn't think you ever collected loot for killing an enemy scout. See the rule book page 20, under "Enemy Figures". It's really easy to miss unless you read carefully. Well I guess we've been playing that incorectly. Thanks for pointing that out.
Thanks from me, too. Also played that one wrong
-
-
The usual disclaimer : this text reflect my opinions and contains subjective but thought out criticism ... yada yada ... don't be offended ... yada yada ...
One thing to notice about the way the civilization sheets were written in this game is that, in most cases, the abilities of any given civ can help it achieve different kinds of victories. America and Egypt will have some big advantage in one specific domain depending on their initial draw, but that advantage will not be the same from one game to another. China has a double focus on military and culture. Germany has a strong militaritic presence, but it also draws many resources which can fuel any kind of engine. Greece gets a lot of coins easily and can invest in any kind of victory path. India can do anything and everything with its resources.
Russia, Rome and Arabia are exceptions. Russia is very militaristic, and the only civ which can actually pull off tech victories, and the other 2 are mainly cultural powers (but culture, with cards and GP, can fuel any other knd of victory quite effectively...)
When looking at your civilizations, that's the criteria that I keep in my mind to judge them, give value to their strength, and get an idea of how fun they would be to play.
The Zulu :
I really like the hut markers in the beginning, as it will allow them to have different opening strategies, depending on wether they got culture, hammers, or certain resources. Wheat + Animal Husbandry scream early wonder to me
Their other ability seems really geared towards military victory. As regards to my comments on diversity of abilities, your take on their power seems really restrictive.
The ability can be used to harass the other players, get a few loots maybe, but that won't encourage any other path than the beeline for a capital city. Going for a military strategy with heavy focus on lots of units every game does not appear fun to me.
I don't understand your "despotism" restriction either, and I think it makes the ability way too weak.
If we think about what the ability actually gives to them :
- A few army figures, an item that costs almost nothing but a city action. Other civs usually get around to it with their 3rd city, or with Engineering.
- advanced positionning of the figures : close to the ennemy, and in the same spot as the main army. I don't give much value to the "closeness", as technologies such as sailing or steam power are usually enough to quickly reach the opponents, but the fact that the army is one compact stack is powerful.
The price to pay is :
- no government (which kind of cripple any other victory path...)
The risks are :
- be careful of the stacking limit
- an untimely mass defection can completely negate what contitutes 90% of the Zulu's power
In this current form, I consider the Zulu weak and not really fun.
The Sioux :
1 GP tile in each city is both strong and fun.
The bonus culture is quite strong too. With good positioning, it could amount to a free temple or cathedral in all cities. That would allow them to quickly go up the 1st third of the culture track and gain access to the first 2 GP. That's also fun and powerful...
And then there's the moving cities ability. Again : fun and powerful. It negates most of the problems with city positionning and allows the Sioux to plant a city at the first spot, produce a few figures or harvest a few things, then move to those grasslands and natural landmarks. I assume that a GP which is left outside of a city outskirt can be placed back on the board in the next start of turn.
Horseback riding is a very good tech to start with.
I really like your ideas, but you had too many of them, and I think it's a bit too good. Compare it to the Americans, in their base game iteration : 1 GP and a few hammer, compared to 2-3 GP, some culture, and the ability to move cities.
You might be able to drop the GP without making them too weak. A GP without a GP card seems weird anyawy
Babylon :
Weak and kind of boring . Nicely thematic though
+4 defense in every cities doesn't mean much in the end game, and cities are rarely targetted in the early game anyway. That's a nice thematic touch, but does not amount to much as far as gameplay is concerned.
Not paying the level 1 techs is close to the Greek ability. But while the Greeks could actually do something with that excess money (invest !), the Babylonians can only use it as hammers or gain high level tech earlier. Both are nice, but both can be done relatively easily with half the original civilizations.
Basically, they have a very slight boost towards a technological victory, and that's all. They will always be outpaced by other civilizations and will therefore have to be on the offensive, which kind of negates their defensive characteristics ...
The Maya
The idea is interesting. The village ability seems quite strong (free temple, without the star restriction) and seems a good enough incentive to not otherwise spend the token for its printed resource. The hut ability, though, does'nt appear stellar to me. It can be useful a turn or two to start a production engine or because the player is short a few trade points for a tech, but the resources are better used on technologies, or traded away for more useful resources.
So, i'm not sure. Seems good enough, and really geared towards a cultural victory.
I suspect a good strategy would be to find a few huts, use the hamers to build a temple or two (philosophy as the base tech), park a scout on the second temple and devote to the art with one city every turn. Should be easy to quickly gain 10+ culture per turn.
Nice, but not diversified enough to my taste
the Vikings
Both abilities are cool. The second one is the really strong one though. I reckon the coins will mostly be invested in military complex or public education (they come too late to be useful on EftA, and hammers kinda suck if you don't really need them).
Same as Babylon : they must be aggressive to slow their neighbours down, but they actually get nicely compensated for that so ... to playtest I guess.
They probably deserve a starting boost though (free harbors, free units/figures, maybe a free coin ?)
I have to say that your imaginative ideas (even if quite unbalanced in my opinion) and beautiful graphics have motivated me to come up with my own set. Expect to receive a private message with my own ideas, and some variations around your themes
-
-
Wow, these are nice
It's cool that you've bothered to actually make civ sheets, I only have notes for my self-made civs.
The Zulu: I like the hut marker starting bonus, which can help several different strategies. I think the other ability is a little weak though. Maybe it doesn't have to be limited to despotism?
The Sioux: The ability to move cities is quite unique and interesting. I'm not sure exactly how powerful it will be, but it's definitely interesting. And it could be fun to use the power to flee attackers, if your movement speed is high enough.
The culture power is also fine, and could be powerful with the right location (which might be easier to reach with moving cities). I'm not a big fan of the "GP's w/o cards" ability though. GP's can easily run out anyway, and if some of them are "wasted" without getting cards, you get fewer GP cards in the game. And I really like those GP cards (but it's just a personal preference).
All in all my favourite of these civs.
The Babylonians: These seem a little underpowered to me. And I would like the Babylonians to have some sort of wonder-related power (but one must be careful they don't end up being "the egyptians 2.0" if taking this route).
The Mayans: Again, these seem underpowered to me (but I'm no veteran of the game). I think they need an additional power.
Also, do they get to look at the hut/village token before deciding whether to assign it? And can you elect to spend it later?
The Vikings: I'm no fan of this implementation (but that might just be due to the fact that I've made my own as well). I do think the "building on water" power is interesting, because it's different, but it does seem weird. A water bonus power instead (like what was suggested somewhere above) would be better IMO.
The other ability is almost identical to the power of my own vikings implementation, only in my version this also applies to villages.
Thanks for posting these, it has been inspiring to check them out
-off to post my own custom civs now
[EDIT]: Maybe the Babylonians could have a power like "gain one coin every time they build a wonder"
-
Andreas H.
Germany
Frankfurt
-
Actually I have updated some of the powers with your ideas and critisicm here.
I´m finishing graphics right now (might take some weeks because I´m quite busy at the moment)
Will upload the whole stuff under the download area when finished.
-
Andreas H.
Germany
Frankfurt
-
Final versions of Babylonian and Sioux have been added.
The Babylonian should now get a boost towards technological victory.
The others will follow soon.
Files will be uploaded in files section, so that you can download it at the right scale.
-
Andreas H.
Germany
Frankfurt
-
Added the final versions of the Zulu now:
Some thoughts:
Sioux: Changed the GP ability. Now they get GPs only for newly founded cities. They also cant move metropolises. Gave them a natural wonder at their starting tile. Didnt want to make the culture ability too dependend on which tiles you draw. They should get a culture boost, when researching agriculture first turn (devote to the arts with 5 tokens each round) but thats barely all they got.
Zulu: Made the second ability work with all governments and gave them 3 huts from the start. I think this is quite okay because of their somehow weak starting tile.
Babylonian:
Their new tech ability can let them win (without any cards or investments) with a tech victory on turn 11. They wont have enough trade for reasearching level 2 on turn 2 and probably wont have enough to research every turn, too, so letting them invest in public education to level 2 and letting them get an exchange of ideas will make them a real oponent in winning with technology on turn 10-11. I think they are quite cool now and looking forward for playtesting them.
-
-
I like the new Babylonians! I think the first ability is too weak to matter though, but the second ability can be both interesting and very useful (without being too powerful I think)
Good update for both the Sioux and the Zulu as well. These are improvements for sure
-
Andreas H.
Germany
Frankfurt
-
BP90 wrote: I like the new Babylonians! I think the first ability is too weak to matter though, but the second ability can be both interesting and very useful (without being too powerful I think) Good update for both the Sioux and the Zulu as well. These are improvements for sure
Thanks. Let me know your playtesting experiences.
-
|
|
