Alright, finally got around to voting. I can only mention 10 users in a post, but here are my critiques of some of the civs I didn’t end up voting for. A later post will be reviews of those I voted for:
@Zero17893’s Helvetians design:
Helvetians
If I had a 6th vote, it would have probably gone to this civ. A lot of things I liked about it, although one of my biggest hangups was their pikeline having 0.5 range (fine) but also a mechanic that slows enemy units, which is too strong of an ability for a trash unit IMO, and should be reserved for a gold unit (and probably a UU). Speaking of UUs, the Handschütze is a cool idea, but my other hangup is how powerful it is. Unless I’m misunderstanding something, it fires way too fast (every 1 sec) for a unit with 16 attack, a spreadshot mechanic, and an anti-UU bonus (given the Samurai is terrible vs. ranged units, I think it’s okay to give a ranged unit the Samurai gimmick). I like the Tavern idea as well, but giving all allies access to this OP unit is overkill. Even if it’s nerfed to just become a somewhat better handcannoneer, that’s a major buff to the whole team (much more useful than Condos or Imp Skirmishers in TGs), and has a lot of potential to stack with civs that already have strong gunpowder bonuses or techs (Portos, Hindus, Spanish, Burgundians) to become extremely powerful.
@UnpricedCar9’s Serbs design:
Serbs
The civ seems okay balance wise, but doesn’t feel that unique in a lategame situation since it will only have extra spearline armor and faster training monks at that point. That’s not necessarily bad (sort of like Cumans’ lategame), but I don’t find it very exciting. The UTs are okay, but the Imp one seems a bit weak since it’s only +2 armor on 1 unit (also not sure if its melee, pierce, or both. If both then it’s fairly strong). Also, the I think a cavalry UU that ignores all bonus damage is just too much, I would make it a percentage. Free Cav Armor is a strong bonus, but I think it’s okay given the civ doesn’t have a very strong eco.
@CruelDegree2949’s Serbs design:
Serbs2
Hmm. To start off, this thread was kind of hard to read due to syntax and formatting issues, and not having all the bonuses in one post really detracted from the overall presentation. I think there’s some room for aura bonuses, but I’m pretty conservative about how they should be implemented. Don’t really care for the idea of monasteries increasing villager work rates but I do like the idea of fortified monasteries that shoot arrows. I also think a cavalry unit that is fully immune to bonus damage is just too strong, (although now that the Sicilian bonus will be nerfed it could have 50% or something).
@SHABOOM8608’s Tai design:
Tai
A lot of ideas that I liked in this civ, but I’m conflicted on the implementation of most of them. I find the lumberjack bonus a little wonky and kind of functioning similarly to a more niche Khmer housing bonus, and it has some odd implications (like wounded villagers losing the excess HP and possibly dying as they are pursued and leave the lumbercamp’s aura). There also remains some (niche) potential for abuse in vill fights or tower rushes, by having your vills carry a token amount of wood and building a forward lumbercamp. Overall it’s a semi-complex mechanic for what seems to be a pretty small and niche upside, but I like the creativity. I also like the idea behind the conversion bonus, but I think it’s too easily overcome, especially for civs that get Sanctity, and usually will just result in a short window in early Castle where your units can’t be converted. Cheaper elite battle ele is good, and I like that there’s a bonus granted by conversions, but even with less final HP the effect is far too similar to the Aztecs IMO. The monk bonus is also the only one that has the potential to matter much in a long game, so overall the civ seems to have a lot of niche bonuses that don’t make it feel like it has lasting strengths outside of the brief moments where those bonuses may matter. The UTs are a high point as far as usefulness, both of them look strong and useful. I think the TB is a little overdone, as giving Genoese, Mamelukes, Cataphracts, etc +25% bonus seems like a huge advantage for the team. I would tone it down to 10-15% max. Overall I think this was one of the most creative designs, I’m just not wild about a lot of how the bonuses are implemented.
@IBMichele117’s Venetians design:
Venetians
Eco bonus is a little generic, but solid, and I’m half surprised there isn’t a civ with it already. Faster wood/gold gen + faster archers (not to mention the damage UT) seems very strong and probably overdone given how fine-tuned the archer line has to be, but the concept of strong midgame and weak Imp is decent. Although seeing that they miss Cavalier is pretty rough, and IMO they’re a bit too heavy on the all-in Castle identity and will be quite weak in TGs, and the Imp UT seems too weak.
@KarstHillFort77’s Chams design:
Chams
This civ has some interesting aspects and I like that it’s a naval-focused civ that also gets a boost on land maps via free fish. The water bonuses are okay, but free Shipwright comes in too late to be very strong. I would prefer that it be available in Castle Age, probably not free, but heavily discounted, and fast researching. I do think the Battle Elephant ability to cut trees steps on the Khmer’s toes too much, and despite lacking range, requires much less investment to pull off. The Castle Age UT is cool and novel, but I think the Imp one is underwhelming. It seems to me that multiple villagers per farm is much more useful early game, when it can be used to gain food quickly with little wood investment, but I don’t see it being super impactful by Imp. I would consider making this a civ bonus. The Pirate UU seems situational, but I like the idea of the Dragon Ship and its unit transport feature. Anyway, cool design overall, and one of the civs that I was closer to voting for.
@Burgundian2000’s Wallachians thread:
Wallachians
Um, so the only actual design in this thread was from someone other than the OP. The OP’s post was a “civ concept” in the most general possible sense, i.e. a desire for Wallachians to be added at some point, but I didn’t actually see any aspects of civ design from him, so…was I supposed to for the other person’s design, or the general idea of adding the civ? Either way, I couldn’t vote for this one, and unless the featured concept is the one by the other person, I don’t see why this should be in the poll.
@JCC3001’s Chimu design:
Chimu
My biggest hangup here was not committing to some hard numbers for the bonuses.
What X turns out to be matters a great deal as to how strong the bonus is. The principle is fine, but lacking a solid metric makes it difficult to be enthusiastic about.
I also think Skirmishers ignoring armor is too strong (gold unit ability, IMO), and I already voiced my distaste for tech names along the lines of “Bronze Armor,” although this is kind of nitpicky.
The strongest point of the thread was the impressive research done, the well-presented information and visuals and citations. While I’m normally very little influenced by images and presentation over the technical aspects of design, @JCC3001 's thread makes a very strong case for why a Chimu civ would be an excellent addition to the game.
@Player870583437’s Romanians design:
Romanians
Overall the civ’s bonus erred on the side of being too weak, but some were OP in certain contexts (e.g. + 2/2 villager armor as a civ bonus, or cheaper farms as a team bonus). The thread was also confusing because it had other peoples’ designs written in by the OP, and the thread went annoyingly off topic very early on and devolved into the usual arguments about civ viability, umbrella civs, whether or not other civs should be added/split, etc. That’s not the OP’s fault, but it makes the thread much less accessible when you’re looking for changes made by the OP.
@Seicing’s Sogdians design:
Sogdians
Obviously this civ impressed a lot of people. It features a unit that already exists in the Editor/campaigns, and is a civ with a strong cavalry and trade identity. The custom unit graphics also do a lot to bring the civ to life. That said, I tend to suspect the cavalry bonuses + knight replacement, may be too strong, and that the two UUs may cover each others weaknesses a little too well. I think the ideas have a lot of potential, and I like the concept of a unique trade unit generally, but the explanation of how the unit works was confusing, and the Town Center gold generation was not well defined enough for me to be able to enthusiastically support the concept as a whole. I don’t really have any good metric for how the civ plays out economically, or how the Sogdian Merchant compares with standard trade units.
General Takeaways:
I think organization should be a criteria for inclusion in the next poll. Some threads are just not well formatted or are very long and have various design changes scattered throughout them and just don’t have all the info in one place. For quite I few of these I had to skim through long threads to find all the changes. I am guessing the majority of people who voted did not bother to do this, and if not I can’t blame them.
Also, I don’t want to fault people who don’t speak English as a first language, but a couple of these posts are loaded with so many spelling/grammar/punctuation/syntax issues that it becomes very distracting and even a little hard to understand.