God of Kings
Ruler of all heads of state
I don't find that to be the case:
We need to ask Menzies if they are close or not, using the Wikivenetian method.
Morocco discussion
- Thread starter nunor
- Start date
We need to ask Menzies if they are close or not, using the Wikivenetian method.
TheMarshmallowBear
Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
They are nothing close.
Morocco's read is strong red it isn't err.. tomato red. (well, they both are tomato red in a way)
And the secondary colour are completely diffrent, Monty's is blue, Ahmed's is green.
Morocco's read is strong red it isn't err.. tomato red. (well, they both are tomato red in a way)
And the secondary colour are completely diffrent, Monty's is blue, Ahmed's is green.
Tomato
Yeah, but the border color is so similar, for the first glance on Morroco play through, I thought why Aztec in the game?
TheMarshmallowBear
Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
Tomato
Yeah, but the border color is so similar, for the first glance on Morroco play through, I thought why Aztec in the game?
I must be a genius/talented because I have NEVER had an issue identifiying colour schemes, they never mix up for me.
Captain Fargle
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2009
- Messages
- 544
I just feel sorry for colour blind people. Morocco is going to be hell for them.
Crafty Bison
King
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2012
- Messages
- 756
Hi all, How do people project that the UA will alter the way you play? I'm not sure if your bonus is for both your trade routes and theirs, but the opponent benefit sounds (to me anyway) like it's only for their trade routes at least. Depending on what kind of trades you benefit from, will it alter the way you approach friendships, diplomacy and war? Will you protect other people's trade routes? Or will everyone just play like they normally do and be happy to see the benefits?
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,937
It's hard to say how Morocco's UA will affect my gameplay because it modifies International Trade Routes, and I've never played with that mechanic before.
If I were to wager a guess on how it plays differently than civs that don't have a ITR bonus, I'd say that it will probably make me less likely to use ITRs to generate food and production internally. I would probably be more interested in having diverse trade route destinations rather than sending a bunch of routes to just a handful of civs and city-states (i anticipate preferring city-state trade partners over civs).
It may also make me less likely to pursue offensive warfare since fewer trade partners means less benefits. I might actually go to war to defend a trade partner on the verge of defeat in order to preserve the unique benefits.
Since open borders nor friendship are not required for ITRs, I don't see them affecting my diplomatic endeavors.
If I were to wager a guess on how it plays differently than civs that don't have a ITR bonus, I'd say that it will probably make me less likely to use ITRs to generate food and production internally. I would probably be more interested in having diverse trade route destinations rather than sending a bunch of routes to just a handful of civs and city-states (i anticipate preferring city-state trade partners over civs).
It may also make me less likely to pursue offensive warfare since fewer trade partners means less benefits. I might actually go to war to defend a trade partner on the verge of defeat in order to preserve the unique benefits.
Since open borders nor friendship are not required for ITRs, I don't see them affecting my diplomatic endeavors.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,937
That falls under the second sentence in that section; going to war to defend trade partners.
Byzantine Bomb
Warlord
Oh man, when I play as Morocco online with friends, I'm going to ask what each of them is willing to give me or do for me in exchange for more trade routes headed towards those cities. That gold will add up and become hard to resist.
Trade wars I tells yah!
Trade wars I tells yah!
TheMarshmallowBear
Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
I'm curious, do you guys think that trade routes leading to Morocco automatically give +2 gold? or is it that only routes YOU give give that?
loserforsale
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2012
- Messages
- 59
I assumed the point of the +2 gold was to incentivise other civs to send their trade routes to Morocco and thus give Morocco its culture and extra gold. Given that, I don't see why you would receive extra gold for receiving Morocco's trading routes, unless it's to convince to to play nice and not go to war with them.
Byzantine Bomb
Warlord
I'd have to agree with you, loserforsale. Now that I think of it, this can be good for Morocco if it is trying to spread faith. Trade routes help spread faith now yes? If everyone is clamoring to get a little extra gold by trading with Morocco, then any religion founded in Morocco has an even better chance of being disseminated globably, especially if Itinerant Preachers or Religious Texts is part of that religion.
VainoValkea
Emperor
Morocco looks like a nice, balanced trade-heavy civ. It's good that Africa gets more love and I definitely can't wait to play it.
Inhalaattori
Emperor
Well North-Africa was not ever the problem really, it is the Sub-Saharan Africa that is underrepresented. North-Africa is in many ways rather part of Mediterranean culture.
Morocco seems to be quite good Civ for all victory types except Domination. That constant flow of money can be used to anything.
Morocco seems to be quite good Civ for all victory types except Domination. That constant flow of money can be used to anything.
VainoValkea
Emperor
I agree that Sub-Saharan Africa is underrepresented, although to be honest there isn't much to pick from anyway. With the majority of the people leading a nomadic or semi-nomadic lifestyle, they seem like a bad choice for an "Empire". Sure, they could go for a fictional amalgamation like the "Native American Empire" in Civ IV. Fancy playing a Swahili Empire with Julius Nyerere as its leader and Ujamaa as its UA?
Then again, inclusions based more on flavor than actual "merit" are fairly common anyway. The most important thing to me is that a civ has some flavor, is fun to play and isn't totally misrepresented or historically unsound.
Then again, inclusions based more on flavor than actual "merit" are fairly common anyway. The most important thing to me is that a civ has some flavor, is fun to play and isn't totally misrepresented or historically unsound.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
I think the Kingdom of the Kongo is clearly deserving. Great Zimbabwe would as well except that I'm not sure we know any leaders.
Ryoga
King
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2010
- Messages
- 993
Though it doesn't really matter what is the actual color but how it is perceived by the eye.
You could, for example, color the central symbol as grey and your eye (actually the brain) would still perceive it as green. It is a well known optical effect.
I'll need to see how it fares in the actual game but as of now they look pretty similar.
Though there are already civs that are hard to tell apart in the minimap like Genghis and Isabella.
VainoValkea
Emperor
So true, especially Kongo. Zimbabwe on the other hand is, as far as I know, a civilization of which very little information has survived so it would be hard to model accurately in the game.
seancolorado
Deity
I played Morocco before but had bad luck with Zulu as neighbor and mostly tundra tiles instead of desert so I was underwhelmed
This time around, everything lined up and I had my best BNW game yet
Desert Folklore + Monasteries from a bunch of incense around me + Petra. That extra trade route from Petra is HUGE with Morocco early in the game which is why I shot to Currency ASAP after I had my science down
So much fun
This time around, everything lined up and I had my best BNW game yet
Desert Folklore + Monasteries from a bunch of incense around me + Petra. That extra trade route from Petra is HUGE with Morocco early in the game which is why I shot to Currency ASAP after I had my science down
So much fun
