Betting and Speculation - The "Entirely Separate Hypercube" Civ!

ottobot said:
my guess? Nomadic plains indian civ, with some kind of cheap, movable mini-cities instead of the big ones we are used to. its probably the Sioux, as they are well known and nomadic. of course, how that works is another story, as you'd have to figure out what happens if its conquered, how it obtains resources, how borders work, and how you actually move/build the cities... still, if this IS what the civ is, i would DEFINITELY play it. in a way i feel its kinda likely, as all the other native civs have been some degree of city builders, while a good part of native north american civs were nomatic. my one question tho is "why didn't they do this for the huns"
Click to expand...

The problem with the Sioux is that if the Barb axeman is indeed the UU of the NA Civ, then that Axe does not strike like a Sioux weapon at all.

The axe seems to be a Tomahawk. Tomahawk is an english word adapted from the Powhatan name for the weapon: Tamahaac.

The Alphabetical rule doesn't leave much room for other civs like Cherokee and Navajo. Up to this point i think that if this is indeed the last civ, and is Native American it can only be the Sioux or the Powhatan. And that unit artwork screams "Powhatan" to the four corners, not Sioux.
 
Well since the beginning, civ has been all about:
- Exploration
- Expansion
- Advancement (Research)

Most of the speculation above so far has been about the Expansion component. Exploration doesn't seem radical enough (Spain already does some of this with the Natural Wonder finding)... so what if this civ actively tries not to advance in technology (maybe no progress past the ancient, classical or medieval eras), maybe to the benefit of its culture?

Or similarly... maybe the civ's UA perks change drastically depending on the era of tech they're in.
 
I don't know if this fits with any NA history, but could it be a civ that can disguise all its units as any civ's it likes?
 
Were it not for the Alphabetical part, I'd hope for the Mapuche, being able to found cities and move inside other players territory...
 
If it's a "Cities in Motion"-like UA then it's almost certainly the Sioux.

I see it like that : Cities can be founded anywhere in neutral territory. Cities within 3 tiles range of a fixed city are nomadic ie. can be relocated and therefore cannot grow territory or work tiles outside immediate vicinity. Cities beyond the 3 tiles limit can settle down permanently.
 
The more I think about the more likely it seems that some NA civ can (against all common sense and better judgement) produce barbarians.
 
If it is a nomadic civ, it won't start with settlers (unless you subscribe to the movable city theory). It will get two UU's, one for establishing a tribe (perhaps a settler itself) and the Tomahawk unit, or a settler and an additional UU/UB/UI.

If the UA is mobile cities, very well. But there would obviously be a significant penalty for picking up the city initially (like a command center in Starcraft). Plus what would be the gain once you are boxed in a rather non-ideal location? I don't think it would work as you are going to settle in the most ideal location as is.

But the barbarian UU would indicate otherwise. How can you have a UA that moves cities and one that promotes barbarian conversion/alliances? How does that have synergy? How is it not offensive? Clearly, barbarians are involved here.
 
Maybe the Native American civ's units look like barbarians when they're outside of the civ's borders and can attack without DoWs? This tomahawk warrior could be the civ's UU masquerading as a barbarian, for example.

It'd solve the mystery of why, to us, it looked like the barbarians have access to a weird new non-generic unit -- they didn't. It was a Native American civ all along.
 
In the PAX discussion of the Pueblo, it was mentioned that they had the ability to build a UI on mountain tiles. Is that hypercubical enough? I really want the Pueblo to still be in.
 
I'm also going to bet it's a NA civ, not Venice.

Now, as a former player of the Fall from Heaven mod for Civ IV, and thus no stranger to unusual mechanics turned into pure awesome, I'm really looking forward to seeing what Firaxis has up its sleeve.

That said, out-of-the-box ideas that sound awesome on paper but are obnoxious and unfun in practice outnumber truly awesome game changers a thousand to one, at least. So I'm hoping Firaxis' testers don't fall into groupthink and let something really stupid slip out the door.
 
Better yet you should be able to make cities on mountains.
 
Much harder to besiege.
 
HemlockMartinis said:
Maybe the Native American civ's units look like barbarians when they're outside of the civ's borders and can attack without DoWs? This tomahawk warrior could be the civ's UU masquerading as a barbarian, for example.

It'd solve the mystery of why, to us, it looked like the barbarians have access to a weird new non-generic unit -- they didn't. It was a Native American civ all along.
Click to expand...

How are human players supposed to be fooled by that? The barbarians would HAVE to be generic to be "disguised". If you can convert barbs, why the hell would you make a barbarian UU that you know is associated with that civ?
 
I have this horrible feeling that this "outside the box" civ is going to be an "oh hell, no" level of stupid. Like playing as barbarians (no cities, perma-war) or something equally terrible.

Let's not forget that "outside the box" is usually marketing code for "highly controversial".
 
The Sioux with mobile cities would be amazing, and that's what I'm hoping for... but I'm still concerned with the Barbarian tomahawk unit. Maybe it's just a new barb, but I can't help but think that has something to do with it and I'm not enthused about the prospects there.
 
fat_tonle said:
How are human players supposed to be fooled by that? The barbarians would HAVE to be generic to be "disguised". If you can convert barbs, why the hell would you make a barbarian UU that you know is associated with that civ?
Click to expand...

Maybe is not about fooling others but about harassing other players in the early game without DoW's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The_J
Can you make an anti-imperial empire game? The 4Xperts behind Civilization, Syphilisation and Victoria 3 discuss eXperimental 4X design
Replies
5
Views
2K
martindo
M
Evie
Creeds, Prophets and Revolutionaries: Culture and Religion idea
Replies
11
Views
702
Boris Gudenuf
Boris Gudenuf
L
What graphics API does the Civ 3 engine actually use?
Replies
7
Views
900
Lord_Hill
L
Navelgazer
Dream Civs/Leaders for Civ 7
2 3
Replies
48
Views
3K
Patine
Patine
C
[BNW] Unlock existing UU & UB for an existing civ ( especially shoshone pathfinder )
Replies
4
Views
279
Caocao84
C
Top Bottom