|
shadow puppet of a posted:I like the sound of multiple rulers per civ with different personalities. I think this was done in Civ IV, where Washington and Lincoln were both options for America. They even had different special abilities (though not unique units of course). I had been hoping that Gold and Production would be somehow merged, but nothing like that was mentioned. They are two resources produced in (largely) the same way and used to reach exactly the same goals, except that one of them scales weirdly. (And of course they're practically interchangeable in real-life: Nations aren't able to "just produce" a bridge that they can't afford. And they don't "just buy" infrastructure that they lack the productive capacity to make. Except Dubai.) But I'm glad that unhappiness is going local again. Perhaps uprisings and nation-switching will be more common for more distant colonies. It's better to put consequences on a map rather than on a read-out.
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
Gold vs. production makes a certain amount of sense: if you don't have any major projects you're working on right now, then your civ can dedicate its productive capacity towards banking resources. Then you can pay nebulous other entities with those banked resources at a later date, rather than use your own productive capacity. It's kind of like the difference between a state-owned corporation and a contractor. It is weird from a simulationist standpoint that you get results instantly when you spend gold, though.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
I like it when a Civ's leaders, abilities and uniques represent different periods in that Civilization's history. For example Germany's stuff all reflects different periods. UA Furor Teutonicus representing the Germanic tribes that opposed Rome's expansion. Landsknecht and Hansa from the medieval time when Germany was a bunch of different countries unified as Holy Roman Empire. Bismarck represents late 1800's when Germany was unified into a single state and became a major player in European politics. And finally Panzers from WW2. I also find Civs that have all their unique things from the same approximate era to be dull, but I understand that it is necessary for some.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Lord Hypnostache posted:I also find Civs that have all their unique things from the same approximate era to be dull, but I understand that it is necessary for some. Maybe I'm misremembering things, but I feel like they kinda solved this in IV or III by giving a few Civs that didn't really have any real-world modern equivalents or whatever imaginary unique units to compensate. It was a cool idea so you didn't end up with Civs that just had unique units focused entirely on one era and nothing else.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
I don't know about anyone else, but I really hope Teddy Roosevelt is the American leader. The trailer seems to suggest so.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
I don't care if they go with multiple leaders or not, as long as the Civs can have V-style unique bonuses that differentiate them. The mix-and-match approach of IV felt like the world's most boring buffet.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Especially since a few of the leader bonuses were clearly massively better/worse than the others (looking at you, Financial and Protective).
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:23
|
|
|
I know the graphical style may be leaning a little heavy on saturation, but I kind of get the feeling that a decade+ of grimdark brown realism games have made normal colour schemes positively blinding by comparison. Good news is there's plenty of examples showing this slightly stylized, cartoony look ages far better than contemporaries. Windwaker and TF2 still look fantastic for instance, and I quite imagine Overwatch will experience a similar longevity. Perhaps Civ VI will be the same. As it is, between my partner and we've sunk 3000 hours into CiV, and I love the new art direction, and I find claims that it looks like 'Clash of Clans' or freemium games to be just a little shy of complete bullshit. My partner is somewhat worried the system requirements will be significantly higher than CiV and Beyond Earth however. This will be a total bummer, as Civ night is kind of our board game night and hangover activity. Sure we can play hotseat, but it's just not as good as crashing on a couch with two laptops, throwing a movie on the TV, and sparking a few joints while wonder sniping and backstabbing each other. PoizenJam fucked around with this message at 17:31 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
I really love their direction of the geography of the land dictating production and research bonuses. Also seems like the direction they are going with AI civs seems reasonable enough to pull off. Hopefully it amounts to interesting alliances.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:29
|
|
|
Handsome Ralph posted:Maybe I'm misremembering things, but I feel like they kinda solved this in IV or III by giving a few Civs that didn't really have any real-world modern equivalents or whatever imaginary unique units to compensate. Are you thinking of Rise of Nations? Because all civs were dull as hell in 3 and 4.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
 I always find it entertaining to follow the civilization lists as they're revealed, for the main entries and their DLCs, as well as the leaders. It's still early yet, but going wholly by the history of the series, the "core" list of civs would be America The Aztec Empire China Egypt England France Germany Greece India Japan* Persia** Rome Russia That's 13 civs that can probably be reliably expected to return, out of possibly 18 (that's been the base for the past two games, up from 16 in Civ 3). Arabia's made a strong showing since first appearing in Play the World, too. I'd guess Firaxis would want at least one more Native American and African representative, too, though they haven't been as consistent about those. Perhaps the Iroquois will make their third showing. *Only in the console versions of Civ 1, replacing Zulu, but the SNES title came out the same year as the MS-DOS game, so I count it. **Wasn't in Civ 1, but has always been a base since Civ 2. They didn't make it to the Revolution games, though.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
The Human Crouton posted:Are you thinking of Rise of Nations? Because all civs were dull as hell in 3 and 4. Ahh, poo poo. You're right.  Still, it'd be a cool thing to see in the game if done right.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Ratios and Tendency posted:Anything specific? Don't want to do a huge write up but three examples : Zakharov's philosophy in the modern era doesn't really work "for science" as an idea has really been on the backfoot and you'd have to mash Santiago's militant FARC type thing doesn't exist either and Godwin would have to way more the right kind of Christian than she already was. Morgan would totally still work though. Hogama posted:
Japan is in there are Samurai mentioned in interviews
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
I think it's a bit lame when the leader wasn't that great in real life (looking at you Portugal!) Some of the leaders get old but some of them are classics I couldn't go without. Genghis Khan and Montezuma are the two that spring to mind as irreplaceable. It'd be nice to switch Gandhi though, India has a really rich history and every game they represent it with a dude who didn't even govern the country. I'd even go a step beyond and replace India with like 2-3 of the historical empires that operated there, but I know that's unlikely. Finally, I hope we don't have any weird "Polynesia" bullshit in the game.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:I think it's a bit lame when the leader wasn't that great in real life (looking at you Portugal!) Like it or not there's no way we're not getting nuke-happy Gandhi in Civ VI. It's tradition at this point.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:14
|
|
|
Oh I know. I know. 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
Monty needs his bff Shaka though. They're the dynamic duo of Civilization. And by dynamic I of course mean aggressive. It will likely be an interesting if you start sandwiched between them.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Civ V pulled a pretty good one, making it seem like they weren't going to put Shaka in at first.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Have the Swiss been a civ? They should be. And Australia. Just have wireframe meshes to denote the absence of internationally-renown leadership. Lots of good unit types and building perks to make out of those two. And grow a pair of balls Firaxis and add Tibet as well. You can't possibly be selling that many retail boxes into China to not make taking the hit worthwhile.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
Poil posted:Monty needs his bff Shaka though. They're the dynamic duo of Civilization. And by dynamic I of course mean aggressive. It will likely be an interesting if you start sandwiched between them. At the same time though it's kind of annoying that aggressive rear end in a top hat civ will forever be Genghis, Monty ,Shaka though.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
I'm being extremely triggered by those fonts 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
SirKibbles posted:At the same time though it's kind of annoying that aggressive rear end in a top hat civ will forever be Genghis, Monty ,Shaka though. Every Civ 4 Player who cares about their religion posted:Is-A-BELL-AAAAAAAA!!!!!
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
berryjon posted:I see you haven't played Civ 4 yet. She doesn't count because if you have the same religion she's fine.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:33
|
|
|
SirKibbles posted:She doesn't count because if you have the same religion she's fine. Buddhist warmonger Isabella is a Civilization classic that surpasses nuke-happy Gandhi IMO.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
shadow puppet of a posted:Have the Swiss been a civ? They should be. And Australia. Just have wireframe meshes to denote the absence of internationally-renown leadership. Lots of good unit types and building perks to make out of those two. Reminder, Firaxis has no balls Civ V Code posted:A creative and innovative people, the Chinese have given the world some of the most important inventions in history, including paper, gunpowder, the compass, and movable type. (This section is mandatory whenever Chinese history is discussed, in case you were wondering. It's a law.)
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
Civs I'd like that haven't been an official civ before: - Haiti - Gran Colombia (not counting Civ4 Colonization) - an australian aboriginal civ - Kongo (mainly to troll Belgium) - Harappa (maybe as a city state. historical records are scarce, but I want the Indus River Valley) - Inuit (has always been a fan favorite suggestion) - Argentina (lol modern states)
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:43
|
|
|
With all these little pet civs people are suggesting, they're basically asking for Europa Universalis with a timeline extension mod. They're not going to add all these obscure states that only history nerds know about. Civ is very much pop history.
Fister Roboto fucked around with this message at 18:47 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
shadow puppet of a posted:Have the Swiss been a civ? They should be. And Australia. Just have wireframe meshes to denote the absence of internationally-renown leadership. Lots of good unit types and building perks to make out of those two. IMO we don't need more European civs, Australia would be cool though
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:If they were to add everybody's little pet civ then you might as well be playing Europa Universalis with a timeline extension mod.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:IMO we don't need more European civs, Australia would be cool though Willing to swap Switzerland for the uncontacted tribe on Sentinel island. +2 defense vs coastal assaults in the archery era (its always the archery era).
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
More Indian civs would be nice. When we have Babylon and Assyria as unlinked to Iraq I don't see why we can't have the Mauryans or whatever as another distinct civ from India. It'd also be nice if they gave them a different tileset than the East Asian one this time around.Nine of Eight posted:Reminder, Firaxis has no balls it's not like any of the other leader blurbs aren't just fellatio of the highest order either. it's always supposed to be about how the civ you're about to play was the coolest poo poo ever
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:With all these little pet civs people are suggesting, they're basically asking for Europa Universalis with a timeline extension mod. They're not going to add all these obscure states that only history nerds know about. Civ is very much pop history. It can be hard to compete with the heavy hitting pop history civs like The Songhai and The Shosone but I think adding a bit of variety would still be appreciated
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:It can be hard to compete with the heavy hitting pop history civs like The Songhai and The Shosone but I think adding a bit of variety would still be appreciated Wasn't the original plan to use another, more popular native American civilization, but they couldn't get permission from the tribe to to use a native speaker for the voiceover, so they went for Shoshone as the B option? I recall reading something like that. Clarste fucked around with this message at 18:59 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Wasn't the original plan to use another, more popular native American civilization, but they couldn't get permission from the tribe to to use a native speaker for the voiceover, so the went for a B option? I recall reading something like that. You're correct in that they originally went for The Pueblo, but I wouldn't describe them as well known. At least not compared to classics like The Sioux Jump King fucked around with this message at 19:03 on May 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Wasn't the original plan to use another, more popular native American civilization, but they couldn't get permission from the tribe to to use a native speaker for the voiceover, so the went for a B option? I recall reading something like that. Yeah, they were originally planning to do the Pueblo as a Civ V expansion civ to the point where they designed the leader and unique units/traits, but the Pueblo Council took offense at their historical leader being depicted in a video game so Firaxis scrapped it.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
ixnay posted:Yeah, they were originally planning to do the Pueblo as a Civ V expansion civ to the point where they designed the leader and unique units/traits, but the Pueblo Council took offense at their historical leader being depicted in a video game so Firaxis scrapped it. The Council was actually very willing to play along, up until their language got involved. quote:Firaxis was willing to consult with the Pueblo Council to determine the most realistic way of portraying the Pueblo civ, but the Pueblos drew a hard line at the language. To the Pueblo people, their language is sacred. They viewed inclusion of the language in a video game as a form of desecration, similar to how many native people do not wish to be photographed. Also the article in the link above is a really fun exploration of how Firaxis chooses and develops its civs for inclusion in the game, it's really cool!
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:You're correct in that they originally went for The Pueblo, but I wouldn't describe them as well known. At least not compared to classics like The Sioux 
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
My Civ6 dream feature list:
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Don't forget to make trade deals suggest money instead of junk like horses and open borders by default. Everyone wants money. If I wanted someone else I would ask for that specifically. Having it default to crap just wastes everybody's time.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
Poil posted:I've always thought the Apache and Comanche were among the most well known because they were frequent in Lucky Luke if my memory is correct. Apache, Comanche, Sioux, Navajo, Cherokee, Iroquois and the Cree are probably the most well known tribes or confederacies in North America. I'm probably forgetting some. Either way, The Shoshone and The Pueblo are both somewhat outside picks.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2016 19:24
|
|