|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Genghis Khan and Montezuma are the two that spring to mind as irreplaceable. 
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 02:38 |
|
|
Yeah truth be told I could get over it if they replaced every leader.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
They replaced Moctezuma. In Civ4 it was Moctezuma II, in Civ5 it was Moctezuma I.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
yeah I just always thought it was weird that Canada/Australia got jack poo poo so consistently throughout the series. I'm not going to say it deserves to be in more than any other civ, I'm just saying it's like the easiest civ to make. Mounties are RIGHT THERE, and have an very deep history of intense combat, like that time they chased a crazy man through the woods. Or that other crazy man. Okay it's mostly just insane fur trappers and gold rushmen but isn't that what all civs are when you really think about it.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Mounties would be the worst way to include a Canadian civ. Probably best to just not give them a unique military unit, since that would encourage military play. I've seen people come up with examples of a Peacekeeper unit which, while a little masturbatory, would at least enable a unique type of late game play style.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Canada and Australia got a bunch of city states over other more historical possibilities. City states are also the best way to represent cultures and nations that can't make it into the main game as a full playable "civilization" and hopefully they add some more features for them, like maybe giving militaristic city states their own unique units or certain city states their own unique wonders.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Probably best to just not give them a unique military unit, since that would encourage military play. I've seen people come up with examples of a Peacekeeper unit which, while a little masturbatory, would at least enable a unique type of late game play style. I'm sure they're out there in a mod somewhere, but melee units that are clearly overpowered but can't take cities (or maybe even attack units) would be really interesting.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:27
|
|
|
Proposition Joe posted:Canada and Australia got a bunch of city states over other more historical possibilities. City states are also the best way to represent cultures and nations that can't make it into the main game as a full playable "civilization" and hopefully they add some more features for them, like maybe giving militaristic city states their own unique units or certain city states their own unique wonders. Given that Civilization is in large part about making weird wacky alt-histories, having full-blown civs for nations that in reality are relatively small is not remotely impossible or a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
Combed Thunderclap posted:I'm sure they're out there in a mod somewhere, but melee units that are clearly overpowered but can't take cities (or maybe even attack units) would be really interesting. I believe there is a Vietnam mod that has exactly that in the way of the Viet Cong, Proposition Joe posted:Canada and Australia got a bunch of city states over other more historical possibilities. City states are also the best way to represent cultures and nations that can't make it into the main game as a full playable "civilization" and hopefully they add some more features for them, like maybe giving militaristic city states their own unique units or certain city states their own unique wonders. I think City States were originally referred to as Minor Civs, and I think it'd be cool if they could have more than one city, but weren't as serious of contenders as the rest of the civs. It'd also be interesting if your cities could rebel and become city states or something, should you mismanage them enough. Of course, I'm no game designer, and these probably aren't actually good choices, but since this is the opinion zone, there's nothing stopping me from spewing opinions. VVV Agreed for the most part. I'd rather have a variety of cultures and everything, but I'm not opposed to sneaking one of those in there, so long as there's an interesting gameplay element to their inclusion. Those are all good choices though, I really like the pre-columbian new world civs in these games. Jump King fucked around with this message at 02:46 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Given that Civilization is in large part about making weird wacky alt-histories, having full-blown civs for nations that in reality are relatively small is not remotely impossible or a bad idea. I would rather have the Hittites, Cherokee, or Khmer over Canada, Australia, or Switzerland because the game presents a clash of civilizations not a clash of minor contemporary western countries.  Also, I don't get an alt-history vibe from Civilization at all, that's more for games like Europa Universalis or Crusader Kings. Proposition Joe fucked around with this message at 02:44 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:I believe there is a Vietnam mod that has exactly that in the way of the Viet Cong, Found it! Definitely playing as them next time I feel like turtling my way to victory.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
Yinlock posted:yeah I just always thought it was weird that Canada/Australia got jack poo poo so consistently throughout the series. I think that, it actually makes a lot of sense that Canada/Australia have gotten jack poo poo so consistently throughout the series.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
I really don't like that art style. It reminds me of the playstation version a while ago that had practically no features in it. Just extra cartoony. Since this is Civ 6 proper it'll probably be awesome and deep and I'll play the poo poo out of it tho. But I might wait for some DLC to come out before I buy. Let the game age a bit.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
Maybe it's just lip service but it's encouraging that they went out of the way to say that modding the game will much easier than Civ5.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Given that Civilization is in large part about making weird wacky alt-histories, having full-blown civs for nations that in reality are relatively small is not remotely impossible or a bad idea. Most of the civs are pretty small, historically, because most countries were pretty small. Only a few European nations and Japan ever got really big into the whole imperialism thing, and even before that large empires have always been the exception, not the rule. Geographically speaking, Canada is probably bigger than most other playable civs.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
They should make everyone happy and have a custom civ designer like literally every other 4x game has.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
Clarste posted:Most of the civs are pretty small, historically, because most countries were pretty small. Only a few European nations and Japan ever got really big into the whole imperialism thing, and even before that large empires have always been the exception, not the rule. Geographically speaking, Canada is probably bigger than most other playable civs. If Firaxis has to make a choice of including either Sumeria (inventors of writing, literal first civilization) or Canada (large) then I hope they go with Sumeria.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:They should make everyone happy and have a custom civ designer like literally every other 4x game has. Well that'd be one way of finally profiting from including Hitler in the game.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
Proposition Joe posted:If Firaxis has to make a choice of including either Sumeria (inventors of writing, literal first civilization) or Canada (large) then I hope they go with Sumeria. Well yeah, should they get into that very silly hypothetical situation where they're forced to choose between those two, that's a good pick. Additionally if they're forced to choose between Rome (longest lasting empire and founder of western civilization) or Atlantis (fictional) I hope they go with Rome.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
Proposition Joe posted:If Firaxis has to make a choice of including either Sumeria (inventors of writing, literal first civilization) or Canada (large) then I hope they go with Sumeria. The Cucuteni-Trypillian Culture says what up.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
atlantis and some fantasy civs for a dlc would be pretty rad though
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
Is there anything explaining the new building mechanic? I read that you put down blocks and those blocks will build specific buildings but have they said if there's a limit to how many buildings per block? I don't think they would make it so that you can only build limited buildings but I'm still confused about how it's going to work. I love the new art style though, it's very cheerful and cartoonish 
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:37
|
|
|
It looks less like "only this many buildings per district" and more "this district can be upgraded with these buildings" They've specifically mentioned the campus district gets the library, university, and research lab. It looks like this has subsumed the old building system, although it still looks like the monument and granary exist as city-tile buildings.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
Yeah, it sounds to me like you have to have a specific district built as a prerequisite for building certain buildings (and possibly units). Want to have a library? You need the campus. Want to have a barracks? You need the military district. Etc. There's 12 district types and they compete with tile improvements for space around your city, which should hopefully fix the "just build everything" problem that Civ 5 had (leading to a bunch of cities that all looked identical) while also being a more obvious tradeoff than Civ 4's upkeep and commerce system. And of course wonders also take up map space. I wonder if you can end up crippling a city's long-term growth prospects by building too many wonders around it early on.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:49
|
|
|
MMM Whatchya Say posted:Well yeah, should they get into that very silly hypothetical situation where they're forced to choose between those two, that's a good pick. Additionally if they're forced to choose between Rome (longest lasting empire and founder of western civilization) or Atlantis (fictional) I hope they go with Rome. That's not a silly hypothetical situation, in order to decide what civilizations are in the game then Firaxis needs to compare the historical importance and geographic representation of all the potential civilizations. If the match-up is silly then I guess Canada will never be in the game!
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
sarmhan posted:It looks less like "only this many buildings per district" and more "this district can be upgraded with these buildings" I read somewhere that they also had tile specific buildings and upgrades, as in observatory is only on a mountain and pyramids on desert. I like this idea a lot but I'm really concerned about : TooMuchAbstraction posted:And of course wonders also take up map space. I wonder if you can end up crippling a city's long-term growth prospects by building too many wonders around it early on. because my playstyle is super casual and I always go for all the wonders. I'm assuming that'll be hard/impossible and I'm going to have to go for specific ones. I've no doubt that they're factoring in casual players moreso than hardcore grognards but I don't want it to be stripped down because of this new stuff. I liked all the buildings and wonders in Civ V even though there were a lot of them. I also really loved BE and thought it was a fantastic game so
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
Koramei posted:atlantis and some fantasy civs for a dlc would be pretty rad though I would play the hell out of a deep sea tile-bound Atlantis and soak up the furor it creates among stack of doom reminiscent type civfanatics forum posters. And if there is a Brazil then their should be a Canada civ with no issues of lineage or civishness shadow puppet of a fucked around with this message at 04:01 on May 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
shadow puppet of a posted:I would play the hell out of a deep sea tile-bound Atlantis and soak up the furor it creates among stack of doom reminiscent type civfanatics forum posters. I want an Antarctica DLC where all your units are military penguins and orcas for sea.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 04:11
|
|
|
Cowman posted:I want an Antarctica DLC where all your units are military penguins and orcas for sea. Lead by a very confused polar bear.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
Cowman posted:I read somewhere that they also had tile specific buildings and upgrades, as in observatory is only on a mountain and pyramids on desert. I like this idea a lot but I'm really concerned about : The other thing they were talking about is how districts have synergy with terrain types- so campus districts and relgious districts both gain bonuses from adjacent mountains, and campus districts give bonuses to surrounding jungle once you build a university. This goes into their plan to move the city onto the map. It also looks like you might not need to be next to the coast to build maritime districts/naval units, but that's a lot more speculative.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Get rid of America and Brazil and let's have Sioux back and Tupi in their places.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 04:54
|
|
|
Stop trying to make Hitler happen, he's not gonna happen
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 05:27
|
|
|
normies have farsightedness so the game has to look like a keebler elf came in a bag of limes, good job firaxis
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 08:40
|
|
|
Cowman posted:I read somewhere that they also had tile specific buildings and upgrades, as in observatory is only on a mountain and pyramids on desert. I like this idea a lot but I'm really concerned about : I'm assuming that wonders take up a space, but are not counted as districts, so building wonders doesn't limit the number of districts you can build but does limit the number of hexes you can place them. Fortunately each city has 36 hexes to choose from, so it shouldn't be a problem unless you really want to build all the wonders in the same city.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 09:12
|
|
|
They should release the game with only the canadian civ available for the player to choose, then the rest in expansions and DLCs.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:13
|
|
|
As an Australian I think that Canada and Australia have had little impact on the world since they are young countries with small populations. There are many more interesting and important options. Although it would be funny to have both as Civs and both use Elizabeth II who is currently head of state of both countries as a leader. Also using a native Australian tribe is problematic since the English just rolled them so easily, Civ designers have always maintained that they want to have 'successful' rulers for civs (re: no Hitler)
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 12:22
|
|
|
They could throw a bone to Jandamarra.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 13:09
|
|
|
If we're still comparing civilizations we'd want in VI, I've had a few of them kicking around in my head since Brave New World: Romania under Vlad III and their unique building is the Forest Utah under Brigham Young, because it's the one American unit I can think of that isn't America or a Native people The Yoruba Israel, which I know is a futile hope, under King Solomon. Unique unit Maccabees can't exit Israeli borders but spreads religion during each skirmish. The Inuit, with some kind of ability that makes tundras and snow not a useless feature on the map Also, I want more diversity in the religions. It's not a Viking army until they worship Odin, never mind what Harald Bluetooth actually did in his life.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
Israel in Civ is probably the only thing even less likely to happen than Hitler in Civ.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 02:38 |
|
|
Proposition Joe posted:That's not a silly hypothetical situation, in order to decide what civilizations are in the game then Firaxis needs to compare the historical importance and geographic representation of all the potential civilizations. If the match-up is silly then I guess Canada will never be in the game! It's just silly to frame it as some kind of head to head tournament. I do agree that Canada isn't that important or likely to be in the game, but I think that a better method of comparison would be to look at all the civs they have in the game. Like, maybe Sweden, Denmark, Norway, The Netherlands, England, Germany, Austria, Poland, Russia and Hungary are all individually more important than Canada, but at a certain I'd rather a mix up for variety. Obviously Canada is a modern western country and not as much of a mix up as The Kongo or The Khmer, but it'd have it's place if they brought a unique playstyle.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2016 14:37
|
|