How well has your country been represented in game?

klandri said:

UA: Game play vise the ability is uninspiring. It fits the viking theme decently and it's nice to see a exploration heavy embarking ability to fit with the exploration of Iceland, Greenland (Nuuk is a city under its Danish name) and North America. The pillaging bonus is also a must.

UU: The Berserkers are the stereotypical Norse warriors (when they're not high on shrooms, or maybe especially when they're tripping) and are widely reported on in the Icelandic sagas and other sources. While in game it bores you to tears it fits thematically as a brutal viking.

Click to expand...

I would love some more Iceland representation. But I really disagree that the UA is uninspiring - I always play totally differently with Denmark. Despite its weakness for overall gameplay it's perfect for what it's supposed to do - like taking unguarded cities with a team of five Berserkers before the AI's army can even get there.

Even into the Atomic Era you can take any city within 5 tiles of the sea in a couple turns, usually pillaging every tile as you go. You can take cities without fighting armies. The coastal raider theme seems perfectly executed to me.

ToothedBomb said:

I was gonna write my opinion on the Netherlands, but I'm not really sure how much my opinion would even be worth. The Dutch have lost their pride, and their sense of self, I think.
I never even had any class or lessons on William of Orange in school. If it wasn't for my own curiosity, I would have never known how this country was founded. My parents don't even know what exactly William did. Most people only know he's important, but are not sure why. A few years back, our current queen even said that there's no such thing as a Dutch identity.

Maybe foreigners are better judges on whether or not the Netherlands is represented well in the game (although a large group of people would probably choose coffee shops as a UB, and prostitutes as a UU).

Click to expand...

I fully agree. Dutch history classes are first about ancient Egypt, then maybe two days of Dutch revolt history and then the rest (90% of all classes) the second world war, which is in my opinion the most boring part of history and shows how the monarchy weakened the country. But I shouldn't go into details, because it will become a policital discussion.

seanflokstra7 said:

I forgot to talk about the Dutch city list which isn't too bad.

1. Amsterdam is a fair pick. Its our current capital, so I'm alright with this

2. Rotterdam is really the only choice for the second city. It's important

3. Utrecht. I would be alright if it was number 4, but it's not more important, than The Hague. Nowadays its a big city, but it should be number 4

4. Groningen. Same story as Utrecht, it should at 5

5. Breda. NOT SIGNIFICANT AT ALL. It should be much lower

6. Nijmegen: Better than Breda, probably in the right spot

7. Den Haag(shut up its not The Hague). *sigh*, where to start? At first, it was our de facto capital during the time we were a republic. Secondly, it is now our third biggest city(behind Amsterdam and Rotterdam). Finally, the government and the Royal Family are seated here. Den Haag deserves the spot as third city

8. Haarlem. No comment on this one, its alright, maybe it should be a bit lower

9. Arnhem. Big city, same as Haarlem

10. Zutphen. Excuse me Zutphen, what are you doing here?

Other cities that should be higher

Brielle. Nowadays its small, but during our war against Spain it was so important, it should be higher

Delft. Where William lived. Still a big city today, should definitely be a lot higher

Leiden. Also too low, but not as important as the first two

Almere. Its one of the bigger cities IRL. But its a really new city(Flevoland, its province, was created by the Aflsluijtdijk), so I get why its not that high.

Why don't we get some of the cities we had colonized in the past? Atleast Batavia(currently Jakarta) should be there

Click to expand...

It is clear that in the Civilization series the Netherlands is represented mostly as the Dutch Republic and not as the modern day nation. Your adjustments make only sense from a modern day standpoint. The way you disregard Breda and Zutphen show that you do not understand the historical significance of these cities. I think Firaxis did a good enough job here.
And about colonial cities: they don't do it with any civ and it makes sense. However, it would be logical to add Flemish cities to the list, because of the treaty of Utrecht and that they are part of the Dutch etnicity. But then again, it is about representing the Republic and not the Dutch as a whole.

From that point of view they did a good job representing the Netherlands. The only other leaders I can image are Johan de Witt, Maurits van Oranje and Willem III (aka king Billy of England), but they are not as "epic" as Willem van Oranje.
The unique unit represents the struggle for independence and the naval attention of the country. The polder is a clever representation of "the eternal fight against water". The UA makes sense in name and the ability itself makes sense as the Netherlands as an international trading hub (importing goods to export).
I give an A.

The only thing I really don't like is the "Holland" thing in the documentation. The country is called the Netherlands and Holland is a part of it. It does not need to be mentioned separately in the game.

As a American:

UA - Manifest destiny (A): I see this as a very accurate way of imitating the Louisiana and Alaska purchase, annexation of Texas, and to some degree the Indian removal act, it allows the American civ to have a larger tile footprint which also fits. To me the added sight for military units covers the idea of minutemen sufficiently, also covers the exploration of the west, and probably also covers some of the strength of modern U.S. artillery (added sight to artillery is great in game).

UU - Minutmen (D): Not a huge fan of the concept, maybe if i looked at them as the Kentucky riflemen of the revolution it would be more acceptable but overall I didn't care too much for this representation.

UU - B17 (A): Big fan of this representation, it captures the strength of the U.S. military golden age WWII - the present with a superior bomber unit, the impact of U.S. strategic bombing in modern campaigns has been profound, they did a great job.

Personally I would agree with some here the minutemen should be preplaced with the UB "Mall" and have it provide either a gold, culture, or tourism boost, would it make the U.S. a even more late era focused Civ?, yep it sure would but it would be accurate.

I am of Scotch-Irish, German, and Polish ancestry so I should probably rate them later as well.

GhostSalsa said:

I would love some more Iceland representation. But I really disagree that the UA is uninspiring - I always play totally differently with Denmark. Despite its weakness for overall gameplay it's perfect for what it's supposed to do - like taking unguarded cities with a team of five Berserkers before the AI's army can even get there.

Even into the Atomic Era you can take any city within 5 tiles of the sea in a couple turns, usually pillaging every tile as you go. You can take cities without fighting armies. The coastal raider theme seems perfectly executed to me.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think this is what a lot of people miss and why Denmark is exactly the sort of civ that should have been (as it was) DLC - it's a "theme civ", and to my mind the best theme civ in the game. You really feel like you're playing a Viking (another reason the Ski Infantry is out of place). It really doesn't need "fixing" at all, and it's perfectly fine for a game like civ to have some civs that are there for people who want to play to a particular theme regardless of whether or not that's optimal for "competitive" play
. Any civ, after all, has the tools to win the game - uniques are just icing.

Plus I've had fun with Denmark and Citadels - disembark a Great General and steal land straight away; I once ringed Thebes with Citadels that way...

Denmark can actually be very good at taking choice coastal cities, because it can land, set up and use several siege units in the same turn, as well as the Berserkers to go in and grab the loot. Quite often in a Civ game you only want to capture certain places - there's a huge grey area between "warmonger civs" and "peaceful civs" that rewards limited aggression, and Denmark is one of the few civs that fits quite nicely into that gap.

leadtothehead said:

As a American:

UA - Manifest destiny (A): I see this as a very accurate way of imitating the Louisiana and Alaska purchase, annexation of Texas, and to some degree the Indian removal act, it allows the American civ to have a larger tile footprint which also fits. To me the added sight for military units covers the idea of minutemen sufficiently, also covers the exploration of the west, and probably also covers some of the strength of modern U.S. artillery (added sight to artillery is great in game).

UU - Minutmen (D): Not a huge fan of the concept, maybe if i looked at them as the Kentucky riflemen of the revolution it would be more acceptable but overall I didn't care too much for this representation.

UU - B17 (A): Big fan of this representation, it captures the strength of the U.S. military golden age WWII - the present with a superior bomber unit, the impact of U.S. strategic bombing in modern campaigns has been profound, they did a great job.

Personally I would agree with some here the minutemen should be preplaced with the UB "Mall" and have it provide either a gold, culture, or tourism boost, would it make the U.S. a even more late era focused Civ?, yep it sure would but it would be accurate.

I am of Scotch-Irish, German, and Polish ancestry so I should probably rate them later as well.

Click to expand...

Hmm, on that basis does having Rhodesian ancestry qualify me to rate the Zulu?

PhilBowles said:

Hmm, on that basis does having Rhodesian ancestry qualify me to rate the Zulu?

Click to expand...

Probably none, but generally having some link to country makes you more interested in studying the history, culture, and other aspects of that civilization, but your point is well taken I should have said I have a interest in other civilizations because that's what I was really saying. I would also point out that on the other side of the coin being a citizen of a country doesn't always qualify someone to rate that nation either considering the state of public education in most countries.

Comrade Aart said:

It is clear that in the Civilization series the Netherlands is represented mostly as the Dutch Republic and not as the modern day nation. Your adjustments make only sense from a modern day standpoint. The way you disregard Breda and Zutphen show that you do not understand the historical significance of these cities. I think Firaxis did a good enough job here.
And about colonial cities: they don't do it with any civ and it makes sense. However, it would be logical to add Flemish cities to the list, because of the treaty of Utrecht and that they are part of the Dutch etnicity. But then again, it is about representing the Republic and not the Dutch as a whole.

From that point of view they did a good job representing the Netherlands. The only other leaders I can image are Johan de Witt, Maurits van Oranje and Willem III (aka king Billy of England), but they are not as "epic" as Willem van Oranje.
The unique unit represents the struggle for independence and the naval attention of the country. The polder is a clever representation of "the eternal fight against water". The UA makes sense in name and the ability itself makes sense as the Netherlands as an international trading hub (importing goods to export).
I give an A.

The only thing I really don't like is the "Holland" thing in the documentation. The country is called the Netherlands and Holland is a part of it. It does not need to be mentioned separately in the game.

Click to expand...

As a first question, are you Dutch(just interested)

Secondly, in a way, you are right. But if it covers more of the republic, then why is Amsterdam the capital? In that time Den Haag was the de facto capital, so then it should be

1. Den Haag
2. Amsterdam
3. Rotterdam

Finally, Breda and Zutphen. They were important, and you are right, but then I still think they're a bit too high. But I respect your opinion, and in many ways you're right

seanflokstra7 said:

As a first question, are you Dutch(just interested)

Secondly, in a way, you are right. But if it covers more of the republic, then why is Amsterdam the capital? In that time Den Haag was the de facto capital, so then it should be

1. Den Haag
2. Amsterdam
3. Rotterdam

Finally, Breda and Zutphen. They were important, and you are right, but then I still think they're a bit too high. But I respect your opinion, and in many ways you're right

Click to expand...

Despite Den Haag having been the de facto capital, there's one interesting detail: It's not actually a city. Never got city rights.
Also, Amsterdam has arguably played a much larger role in Dutch history overall, so from a full-history-scale point of view, Amsterdam as capitol makes sense. I'd probably rate Den Haag right under Utrecht - Utrecht has at various points in history been a rather important city, especially when it comes to religion. Which is why Utrecht above Den Haag isn't that weird. Den Haag under Groningen, however, is arguably a bit weirder.

PhilBowles said:

Denmark can actually be very good at taking choice coastal cities, because it can land, set up and use several siege units in the same turn, as well as the Berserkers to go in and grab the loot. Quite often in a Civ game you only want to capture certain places - there's a huge grey area between "warmonger civs" and "peaceful civs" that rewards limited aggression, and Denmark is one of the few civs that fits quite nicely into that gap.

Click to expand...

Yes exactly, selected aggression, and their extra movement in the Medieval era (embarked / berserker) assists with that as well. You have to be really picky about who you go to war with before ideologies come online - Denmark and Zulu's extra movement units are both really handy for longer-distance attacks. Denmark's instant siege ability isn't even so prime anymore now that Berserker's can be built early enough to take cities on their own. But enough Denmark gushing. I should talk of my own civ now.

So. I am in the USA. The USA is represented terribly in this game.

Manifest Destiny: This is not fun to use and barely helpful. I wouldn't care if it was the best thing to possibly represent USA, if it isn't fun to use then I don't want to play this civ, so it's worthless. The extra sight is so pointless in the early game barring a (very thematically inappropriate) desert start. I can't see past forest and forest is everywhere. In later game it has a military value but 1) I fail to see what that has to do with the Manifest Destiny theme anymore 2) strictly talking military value in-game I'd infinitely prefer a 5-movement horse unit (which can handle extra scouting) to passive extra sight any day of the week.

I dislike theming the USA around the pre-Civil War era. It's boring and caucasian-centric, and as others have said it really only represents the country as an offshoot of English and Protestant European cultures - only one part of a million that should be represented. In CiV you get to play as "America before the pesky brown people took our fun." No thanks. This is a country of diversity.

The USA should be represented for its cultural melting pot and industrial qualities post-Civil War, blended obviously with its restless military. Something like Film Noir: boosted GWAM generation when at war, scaling with amount of civs - which I've been suggesting since G&K and is even more appropriate with the late-war focus in BNW - or Immigration: leaching citizens from other countries based on tourism strength (good way to put emphasis on diplomats and trade routes - actual globalization - independent of cultural victory). These would be so much more interesting to use than cheaper tiles.

Minutemen: Despite my complaints above, I don't really have a huge problem with this unit. Why not, the Revolution is obviously the centerpiece of the USA's nationalistic self-image. That self-image is bad for a UA but fine for a unit. The Golden Age thing should be stripped and replaced by the GWAM boost type UA.

B17: I'm surprised this is getting any positive marks. Yes it's a good thing to represent - but the default bomber already represents the exact same thing. Bombers are already such an era-defining unit that it's impossible to put more emphasis on them. Wasted UU.

Better: a UI railroad. Available earlier (steam power). Does what regular railroad does but built twice as fast and adds food bonus in addition to production bonus for connected cities. That bonus shouldn't extend to harbor -connected cities obviously. The railroad is such an important story for this country including our funny relationship with food, and generally ignored / undervalued in the game. The novelty of being more encouraged to get railroad down would add to play-appeal for this civ.

Washington: I don't have a strong opinion about this. The USA is a republic and our presidents have a figurehead status that extends beyond their actual impact on anything besides wars, so it's whatever.

PhilBowles said:

I've said before that I think longships are represented perfectly by the Danish UA and the icon for embarked troops - better than they would be as a UU.

That doesn't mean I'm a fan of Norwegian Ski Infantry; I wonder if there's a UB or even UI that could have worked?

Click to expand...

I think a major problem with the longship - which I would have picked - is that there is no melee naval unit between Trireme and Caravel. Had there been one, Longship should have replaced that one with higher speed and ability to cross oceans (but perhaps not end in ocean tiles).

Being a Dane, the Norwegian SI is one of the major WTF moments of the game for me, simply because I NEVER heard about these outside of Civ. I could understand it if the civ was called "Vikings" or something because then it would also cover Norway (but then they would obviously be out of time), but being called Denmark, it makes very little sense to me. It's hard to find a perfect alternative, perhaps something like the fortified "round churches" that we have on Bornholm could work?

Some mods replace the Norwegian Ski Infantry for a Smoke Hut or something like that.
Don't know the History behind it, though. What do you Dane guys think?

kaspergm said:

I think a major problem with the longship - which I would have picked - is that there is no melee naval unit between Trireme and Caravel. Had there been one, Longship should have replaced that one with higher speed and ability to cross oceans (but perhaps not end in ocean tiles).

Click to expand...

To me the problem is that the longship is not a military vessel. Longships were transports, not ships engaged in naval combat, unlike triremes. Unlike prior versions of Civ, there are no transport ships, so the best way to represent longships is as embarked units ... say, with a movement bonus to reflect the fact that they were the threat they were because of the Vikings' superior speed and navigation at sea. And look, this is exactly what the Danish UA does.

Being a Dane, the Norwegian SI is one of the major WTF moments of the game for me, simply because I NEVER heard about these outside of Civ. I could understand it if the civ was called "Vikings" or something because then it would also cover Norway (but then they would obviously be out of time), but being called Denmark, it makes very little sense to me.

Click to expand...

It's a fair enough point that Norway was long part of Denmark, but this is reflected well enough in the city list, without any need for a Norwegian UU.

It's hard to find a perfect alternative, perhaps something like the fortified "round churches" that we have on Bornholm could work?

Click to expand...

I wondered if something like a 'Mead Hall', or a thane's hold, would be too Hollywood. Huscarls were introduced by Canute, but are more associated with Anglo-Saxons and would replace the same unit as the Berserker.

Or some sort of government structure like the Althing (why not an Icelandic replacement for a Norwegian unit...?); it wouldn't be the first unique to represent a solitary structure in reality (Songhai's Mud Pyramid Mosque does the same, for instance); however I'm not sure what it would either replace or represent.

PhilBowles said:

Shame he's not more authentic (which I didn't know) - I love Harald's voice acting. He sounds so cheerful, in a boisterous stereotype Viking kind of way.



Strange, I've always liked the way Denmark plays in game. The Berserker's not very interesting to look at mechanically, but in combination with the UA - both the disembark bonus and the pillaging - it's highly characterful in the way it lets you play a hit-and-run raider.



I've said before that I think longships are represented perfectly by the Danish UA and the icon for embarked troops - better than they would be as a UU.

That doesn't mean I'm a fan of Norwegian Ski Infantry; I wonder if there's a UB or even UI that could have worked?

Click to expand...

My personal biases are showing as I'm not a fan of Denmark's playstyle. I prefer harder hitting, more direct aggression or naval combat for plain steam rolling. I agree that thematically it fits great and I have no complaints there, it's just that I don't like playing them.

I do love Harald in most aspects except for the fact that his language is all sorts of messed up. He is, as you say, upbeat and fun.

As for a more fitting UU/B/I, assuming the long ship is already represented which I sort of agree with, it's a tough one. Maybe Huskarl as a pikeman replacement or something? Vikings weren't exactly known for their infrastructure but maybe a UI trading post like in cIV (where it was a UB) could work? 1 extra gold if by the coast or something.

Edit, didn't see this until after I posted:

Or some sort of government structure like the Althing (why not an Icelandic replacement for a Norwegian unit...?); it wouldn't be the first unique to represent a solitary structure in reality (Songhai's Mud Pyramid Mosque does the same, for instance); however I'm not sure what it would either replace or represent.

Click to expand...

I agree that Huskarls aren't a particularly good idea but they could work. Considering Alþingi, it's not as unique as you think. Both it and the Faroese Lögting are based on Scandinavian assemblies (the reason you hear about Alþingi is that Iceland is much more recognizable than the Faroe Islands and Scandinavia was quickly united under various kings who took all power away from the local assemblies, also Icelandic historical records are abundant and the oldest source we have for Lögting is indeed Icelandic) which was actually the reason for my idea of a UI trading post. These þings (Al just means all so "Alþingi" means the All assembly, ie. for all of Iceland and Lög means Law so the Faroese equivelant is the Law assembly) were much more than just parliaments but also where traders and craftsmen met, gossip was exchanged etc. Which is why I think it would make sense to replace the trading post, seeing as they were usually local. What its effects would be I don't really know.

With the addition of the Shoshone, USA is still represented well, despite the protests. During the civil war, Lincoln wanted a piece of Shoshone and the Pocatello, particularly Pocatello because of the raids that the Shoshone did on American wagons. Lincoln hired Patrick Connor to search for Pocatello. Like all the other tribes that were reserved, Shoshone were sent to reservations equally.
As for Washington, and the rest of the USA, Morocco and the other middle eastern leaders see the usa as the devil but independent. The attack on the twin Towers in the United States was done by bin Laden who was killed already and belonged to the Al qaeda terrorist group. The terrorist group however still exists in Assyria.

I am from Australia. It's nice to see Melbourne and Sydney in as City States. Uluru and Great Barrier Reef in as Natural Wonders fit perfectly as well.

While it'd be nice to have an Australian civ, I can see it just being done for geographical reasons. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing. But if they were to do an Australian Civ I would hope they make us more interesting.

I would have Menzies as our Leader.

Our UA should reflect our resource production so agriculture and mining. We have been built off the sheeps back after all and more recently the mining has kept our economy one of the strongest in the world. whether we should get direct food and production boosts or improvement speed boost or both, I am not sure.

I think we should have an aboriginal UU that replaces the scout. It should provide faith for each natural wonder it finds due to closeness of the aboriginal people to nature.

I think most people would say another UU and have the digger instead of the great war infantry, or the light horseman instead of the cavalry. But to be honest, I don't think we are combat focused nation.

For something different and that is very unique are our "Clubs". For those who are not aware of them they are usually either a RSL (Returned Serviceman League) or a Sports Club (Rugby, League, AFL, Soccer). They are an entertainment venue with restaurants, poker machines (slot machines), betting agencies, they host music events etc.

These are very uniquely Australian which most Australians would not be aware. I suggest that they replace the Stadium and increase the happiness and gold production due to they revenue that they generate (Afterall in proportion Australians gamble the most of anyone in the world).

That's my ideas, but this may not be the right thread to discuss it.

Osama Bin Davis said:

I would have Menzies as our Leader.

Click to expand...

He probably is the most well-known Australian leader...if any Australian political figure can be called "well-known".... I suppose mainly because of his clear and unequivocal stance during WW II. Although there is Harold Holt...has his disappearing act been forgotten now by modern Australians?

Osama Bin Davis said:

Our UA should reflect our resource production so agriculture and mining. We have been built off the sheeps back after all and more recently the mining has kept our economy one of the strongest in the world. whether we should get direct food and production boosts or improvement speed boost or both, I am not sure.

Click to expand...

I think an Australian civ could be made quite interesting..... Something like maybe extra food for any of those sheep found grazing on a hill-top..... And maybe something like a special national wonder .....say the "Super Pit".... producing maybe something like quadruple the output of Cerro de Potosi but not buildable until the start of the Industrial Age....well something like that with appropriate balance built in.

And maybe extra happiness from any Pub unique building built on a desert tile.....