How well has your country been represented in game?

direblade99 said:

Hugh Jackman, Steve Irwin

Click to expand...

OK, that's the UU's sorted - who's the leader, Kylie?
Seriously, I would be pretty miffed at the exclusion if I was an Aussie - they should be in the game IMO, (as long as they don't get some unrealistic UA around cricket).

And you know what, I'll do Germany. I grew up there and I speak German, and no one has done it yet.

Leader : Yep. Friedrich II would also be acceptable, but Bismarck is a no-brainer. One of the great statesmen of the XIXth century, and the major influence on the unification of Germany (props to Napoleon III for his stupidity though, that also helped )

UA: I don't really get this. I mean yes, the Germanic barbarians are very famous, but why the conversion thing ? The reduced maintenance doesn't make that much sense either, it should be something to do with Discipline or earning XP faster, because that's what the German armies were know for in the modern/contemporary era.

UU: Panzer is good, the other option would be the U-Boat I think, or something Prussian. But I don't know what the Prussians have that was very specific, they were mostly known for their discipline and competence.

UB: Hanse. That's excellent. It gives a very unique flavor to Germany, and the Hanse is a huge part of the history of the region. It's also a nod to the fact that, during many centuries, Germany was composed of many city-states. It's also good to have an economic aspect to Germany, given that it is their biggest strength since WWII. A unique Factory would also have been appropriate in that regard, but I'm not sure how I'd name it.

You could say that it's very North-centric (Bismarck was Prussian, the Hanse was about coastal cities in the North Sea and the Baltic, a lot of which were/are not German). The thing I would change for that is to have a UA related to city states and maybe religion called "Holy Roman Empire".

Coming from England, I'm somewhat disappointed by the English civ being almost entirely militarily focused. IIRC it was Napoleon who described England as "a nation of shopkeepers". The British Empire was not built from having better ships than our rivals (although having better ships did perhaps come as a consequence), but on a) constitutional monarchy and the resulting political and economic stability, and b) being the home of the industrial revolution.

I wouldn't say any individual part of the English civ is bad (although Elizabeth I has appeared so many times now, how about Albert the Great or Edward III or Gladstone or Disraeli or Walpole?) but I wish they'd made room for something representative of our industrial and commercial past.

Ultimately, I suppose the problem is that England is a nation with a long and varied history, and there may well be a trade-off between representing different sections of it and creating a civ with synergies between its components. England has an obvious synergy between Sun Never Sets and the SotL, and it's harder to see exactly see how you would create a synergy between some bonus kicking in around industrialisation and between either of those. Maybe there would be a synergy with the Longbowmen upgraded to Gatling Guns, but that's hardly the thematic point of the civ. In the context of that choice, I might not necessarily agree with the designers' decision to go for a unified civ with synergies (as opposed to a widely representative civ with little to no relation between the parts) but it's understandable and perfectly reasonable.

Overall? Solidly a B+, perhaps an A- if I'm feeling generous.

goremand said:

Pretty happy with Sweden, we dodged the viking stereotype (suck it, Denmark) and instead the focus was on the Swedish Empire.

Click to expand...

When it comes to playing style it is actually quite accurate. You can fight like hell, but should do it with a bunch of friends or at least with AIs that agrees with you.

Then, the issue is of course that that have portrayed the wrong king and used some really bad wording in his welcoming address. Also the Hakkapeliittas should be enhanced. As the sole enhancement to have a bonus a general is on the same tile is not to much of an enhancement and also, it doesn't help the AI much. I have never seen AI Sweden Hakkas with a general on it.

So... I'm going to have a shot at Venice.

The UA... well... it's not all bad. There was always a Venice-first attitude to the Republic, and the lack of settlers is at least an interesting way of doing this. But I feel the people of the mainland cities (Padova, Vicenza, etc.) have been hard-done by. I think I would have preferred more of a focus on the Venetian-speaking people as a whole.

Since the idea is to represent the Republic of Venice over the people, the emphasis on Trade is spot-on. The Great Galleas is ok, but the importance of Venice's Arsenal has been forgotten... the ships should be faster to build.

The leaderscreen is good, it's unfortunate that they mispronounced the word "Doge" though.
The colours chosen for Venice are poor, though it's a little understandable since there are other civs using the Red & Gold colours.
The icon of the rampant lion is terrible though. The standard Lion of St. Mark is such an iconic image of Venice - can't imagine why they didn't use it.

Teproc said:

For France :

(…)

UA : I like the current one more than the previous one, though that was fine as well. Makes sense to have France going for cultural victory, since that's pretty much what we achieved in the 17th century at the height of our power. That's something that's missing from America btw, since the late 20th century is also pretty much a CV for America.

(…)

Click to expand...

Allons ! Everybody wear French blue jeans and listen our music pop… Or not, actually.

In the game, it's really hard to win CV with France for me since I moved to Immortal. If you have tips, I'll be glad.

Hi, since I come from Germany, I'll do that one.

Leader: Very good choice. An important figure of German history and well known.

UA: Yeah.. I think it should represent, that Germany wasn't always a unified country but many states and tribes. And "collecting" barbarians means unifying them in one civilisation. And less maintance? For such a small country, Germany had a large war machine, sure. Both nothing super defining abilities but not unfitting.

UU: For a military unit a good choice. Other fitting units would have been something medival (knight or yes, the Landsknecht) or like already said something prussian.

UB: I LOVE it. Of all the replacements they could make, this is a masterpiece I think. The effect is fitting, trade from a city helps the production of all cities with a Hansekontor. Exactly what such a large trading guild should do. And the Hanse was a really powerful and well known entity. Just go to Hamburg and see an entire quarter full of Kontors.

The colors are a bit dull but together with the iron cross fitting.

As for World Wonders:

- Brandenburg Gate: Nice. Although today it is seen not as something military but as a symbol of the German reunification by Germans. So including the Gate is great but the +XP effect is a bit odd.

- Neuschwanstein: Great! It's nice to see this in, as it is one of Germanys greatest tourist magnets. Yes it was built as kinda fairytale castle and maybe isn't that great itself BUT the effect that this wonder has in game nails it. Germany has lots of castles and many are kept in good shape. All of them giving culture and happiness shows that and Neuschwanstein is the one worldwide known German castle.
(plus its fun that noone can pronounce it)

Finland is well enough represented as a part of the Swedish Empire. There's two oddities though.

The city list. It makes no sense that Helsinki is so high up in the city list since it was just a small fishing hamlet during the Swedish rule. Turku was the center of power in Finland during that time. I think there's a couple of other Finnish cities in the city list which either didn't really exist during the timeframe or were just tiny villages. They should have probably used the Swedish names for the cities too.

Hakkapeliittas have a bit weird ability. As far as I know they were famous for their cavalry charges. Their name came from the war-cry "Hakkaa päälle!" which I guess is best translated as "Beat them up!". I think they also got quite a reputation for their melee attacks. I think they should have had a more aggressive bonus instead of being able to just ferry around Generals.

IDk the representation is adequate but a bit flawed.

Vitruvius said:

The UA is ok but definitely not what China is known for. Despite the heavy internal conflicts, Chinese generals were hardly talked about outside of China (although I am not saying that they are of poor quality). Granted, the Sun Tze art of war is a famous Chinese book but it has been used in politics more often than the battlefield. In Chinese philosophy, war is an extension of politics, and war is not a glorious thing, more like last resort. I do not see China as a military civ, even Wu says something about persuing peace and prosperity in the leaderscreen. Chinese military has always been used for domestic consolidation and establishing unity, not for the subjugation of other people, unlike the Romans or the British.

Click to expand...

So you mean that military conflicts, no matter how heavy they were, are not important as long as they are internal? Sure war can be seen as part of politics, but that's actually true for any nation. I am yet to see in other cultures an entire war period romanticized to the point it becomes overused in modern culture and almost every citizen gets interested in it (Sengoku is the only thing that comes to my mind). And as I said, I am fine with them making China a military civ with good synergy rather than a jack of all trades but master of nothing.

In fact, if you measure how militaristic a civ is by the degree of subjugation of other people, then Russia and Arabia have completely wrong UAs.

Vitruvius said:

The reason behind Roman conquest and Chinese conquest is different. Roman conquers territory and people that they think are Barbarians or belongs to a different world/culture and they attempt to Romanize them all. Chinese conquers people and territory to fullfil the mandate of heaven, that all people in that territory belongs to the son of heaven (the emperor) and its his duty to rule over them. Thats why the Chinese never bothered much about colonizing Barbarian tribes. The mandate of heaven was established in early Zhou dynasty and there was already a singular overarching ruler the son of heaven. The son of heaven rules over the land divided among the different states and they fight wars mostly for bragging rights and influence. It was until the warring states that state leaders began to have ambitions of becoming that son of heaven themselves. However the idea and philosophy of the mandate of heaven remains all the way until 1911. Most of the wars prior are really just ambitious people trying to become the son of heaven themselves with exception of several invasions from northern tribes. I agree with you that there were plenty of violence but I don't think violence is what Chinese rulers desire, it was only means to consolidate their power amongst people they consider their own. Unlike many Western imperialists who wants to rule over people they consider as foreign.

Click to expand...

"All the people here belong to me" logic is not much better than "all these people must be Romanized" logic.

Quebec City, Vancouver .. meh. But no Toronto

Click to expand...

But they do have York. So yes, you're covered.

Siam: really bad
A wat is a Buddhist temple... how come no faith?
Naresuan's elephant? (didn't know king naresuan's elephant was special... and then there would be only one... just go with "war elephant" or something)
Father governs children? So how does that have any relationship with city states?

Worst of all, unlike, for example, Oda, Rammy's Thai is completely modern and the language the man himself used is completely different from ingame. I'm just grateful they did some research at least and didn't name his capitol Bangkok.

The way he greets you (check out his "wai")... I'm not sure who designed the leader greeting screen but they completely botched it.

Swedish here.

First the good things

Leader-The obvious choice, but good that they made it.

UU well chosen, would have liked to see the caroleans get offensive bonuses(carolean strategy and training was nearly exclusively based on attacking) but march also fits thematically(and assume balance means they can't get both).

Hakkapelites well chosen-but a bit weak.

UA seems fine as well(even though it doesn't fit to well with the Swedish empire theme of the UUs and leader).

However as has been said-wrong person on the leader screen.

Secondly tundra start bias despite there being no tundra in Sweden(except a tiny portion up far north) or indeed in the Swedish empire when it existed. This mistake just feels like it was due to someones stereotype of Sweden and it should be extremely easily avoidable(just wikipedia tundra...).

Well, my country isn't represented as a civ. There's a couple of city states, but then that's a fairly inaccurate representation, although pretending it's a civilization would be worse.

I would've chosen Miley Cyrus as leader of the USA. New UA would be TWERKIN', and would grant -%3000 tourism.

Well, as a portuguese, I'd say they've done a pretty good job :

Leader : Well, not that I don't like her, King John II, King Manuel I, or the Marquis of Pombal would have been much better choices (and certainly not Prince Henry the navigator : he has never been a leader, and the only battle he commanded, it was disastruous. Certainly a genious naval engineer, but he wasn't nor a king, nor a leader, or whatsoever).

UA : Well, it's pretty good, although in practice it's much less impressive than on paper. It represents well the portuguese golden age of merchandise, where the language itself became the vehicular language on the african and asian continents.

UU : It HAD to be the Nau. It IS the portuguese UU, although technically it should have been the caravel, but since it was made universal ... It's effect represents pretty well the main purpose of the portuguese while exploring the seas : not the discovery itself, but seeking commercial partners to tradde with.

UI : the feitoria is also an obvious choice : since portuguese were low in inhabitants, compared to France or Spain, and couldn't afford mass colonization on every territory they stepped in, they'd built these commercial/war/harbor fortresses to maintain property over the the goods.

Ireland, so Celts

Leaderscreen: B
Leader: D. A leader of a failed rebellion in a small province of Britain? Over Vercingetorix or Brian Boru? Firaxis clearly just went with name recognition and a boost to the female roster
UA: Druidic Lore: A. Fits quite well
UB: Pictish Warrior: B
UU: Ceilidh Hall: C-

Camikaze said:

Well, my country isn't represented as a civ. There's a couple of city states, but then that's a fairly inaccurate representation, although pretending it's a civilization would be worse.

Click to expand...

Sorry, what country are you from? I can only hope that people don't hit me for asking this.

EDIT: Found out. Probably should have guessed.

Anyway, despite not being Swedish, I would like to see Carolus Rex instead of Gustavus Adolphus as leader of Sweden, even though he isn't as famous. I think that Carolus/Karl/Charles was a lot more interesting than Gustavus/Gustav, and he lead the empire at its hight (and destroyed it, but we can forget about that), but I'm not sure any Swedes will agree with me. I'm not trying to hijack the thread, but this seems to be a good enough place to ask people.

DemonMaster said:

When it comes to playing style it is actually quite accurate. You can fight like hell, but should do it with a bunch of friends or at least with AIs that agrees with you.

Then, the issue is of course that that have portrayed the wrong king and used some really bad wording in his welcoming address. Also the Hakkapeliittas should be enhanced. As the sole enhancement to have a bonus a general is on the same tile is not to much of an enhancement and also, it doesn't help the AI much. I have never seen AI Sweden Hakkas with a general on it.

Click to expand...

"Främling, välkommen till snökonungens rike!"

It's true, we should give them credit for the portrayal of Sweden in gameplay terms. Gustav Adolf is a famous general yet Sweden is one of the most peaceful countries in the modern world, so they made an interesting peace/war schizoid Civ.

Viregel said:

Sorry, what country are you from? I can only hope that people don't hit me for asking this.

EDIT: Found out. Probably should have guessed.

Anyway, despite not being Swedish, I would like to see Carolus Rex instead of Gustavus Adolphus as leader of Sweden, even though he isn't as famous. I think that Carolus/Karl/Charles was a lot more interesting than Gustavus/Gustav, and he lead the empire at its hight (and destroyed it, but we can forget about that), but I'm not sure any Swedes will agree with me. I'm not trying to hijack the thread, but this seems to be a good enough place to ask people.

Click to expand...

If you ask a swede, our second choice would probably be Gustav Vasa (Gustav the 1st), who btw looks a hell of lot more like how Gustavus Adolphus was portrayed in the game. Carl XII i think is famous mostly for dying mysteriously.

I think Adolphus would be top choice for most Swedes, more importantly he left quite an impression outside of Sweden.

Voted "They did pretty good"