God & Kings Screenshot Analysis
- Thread starter Camikaze
- Start date
AbsintheRed
Deity
I agree, there will be a hard cap
Probably something like: in range from (n/2 - 1) to (n/2 + 1), with the exact value randomly decided in the beginning of each game
Same way civ attributes work
anandus
Errorist
I believe that's the lancer.
Inhalaattori
Emperor
I think we can pretty much confirm 2 "new civilizations":
Britain
Leader: Queen Victoria
UU1: Mark V
UA: Get extra spy
Huns
Capital: Attila`s Court
You can ask why so weird civilizations are in the game? Answer: Scenarios.
Britain
Leader: Queen Victoria
UU1: Mark V
UA: Get extra spy
Huns
Capital: Attila`s Court
You can ask why so weird civilizations are in the game? Answer: Scenarios.
Where do you get Queen Victoria from? Boudicca is confirmed as a new leader in that screenshot, so I agree that they'll be a new civ, but Boudicca will be the leader.
Inhalaattori
Emperor
I would bet they have Queen Victoria as the leader of Great Britain in "Empires of the Smoky Skies" -scenario. After all it is labeled as "Victorian science-fiction scenario". They want to use all leaders and civs from Scenarios so that is the reason Britain is in.
Nobody believed that "Holy Roman Empire" could be in Civ IV along with Germany. But it was.
Nobody believed that "Holy Roman Empire" could be in Civ IV along with Germany. But it was.
janboruta
Artistriarch
I seriously doubt that Britain is going to be a separate civ, seeing that both Vicky and Liz were English leaders in Civ 4. Victoria is likely to be the leader in the scenario but I bet it will reuse the English civilization. Wouldn't be it stupid to have two Londons on the same map? I don't presume the devs would be so ignorant. Besides, you can see the Mark V in Dutch hands as an ordinary unit.
While i'm 99% certain there wont be a British civ outside of the scenario, we will already have 2 Istanbuls (although the Byzantine one will be called Constantinople).
Very unlikely (unfortunately).
...of the Celts.
Can't exclude the possibility, but I think most people associate her with Britain, not the Celtic as a whole. For example, the Wikipedia article about here refers to her and the rebellion as brittish troughout the entire thing, but only mention anything containing "celt" twice:
That combined with the article referring to the British makes it pretty clear to me, and the double London issue can easily be solved by having the British version called Londinium.
janboruta
Artistriarch
You wanted to say we have two Constantinoples, although the Ottoman one is called Istanbul
But seriously, Ottomans are vastly different than Byzantines as a civ than Britain would be from England, unless it was a pagan pre-Anglo-Saxon/Norman Britain. Therefore having both Constantinople and Istanbul is slightly less awkward than having two Londons in different colours. @steave435: Good try on contradicting what the devs confirmed: that Boudicca is leader of the Celts.
filli_noctus
Hmmn
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2010
- Messages
- 2,221
Britain as a civ outside of a scenario is highly unlikely. Boudicca was not British as the term is used nowadays, the term Brythonic is often used to differentiate between ancient and modern Britons. Even taking that into account Boudicca was a member of the Iceni tribe, who were celts. The celts actually pushed the original Britons into Scotland and were eventually forced to follow by the Anglo-Saxons during the dark ages. Londinium was founded by the Romans so there is no basis in history for it to be an ancient British or celtic capital.
Seriously, can we have a :headdesk: smiley?
Most people associate Boudica with the Celts (or ancient Britons), not with Great Britain. Why would Boudica of the ancient Britons get a spy as her UA? What, did she spy on the Romans or something? London (Londinium) was founded by the Romans, so why would there be a double London issue?
It might be "clear to you" but you're completely wrong. She's been confirmed as the leader of the Celts, as I've tried to point out twice now. No offence but your posts make me
.Maybe the "soldier unit" with Penicellin Tech is the WWII infantry (the unit with modern helmet icon of the Civ5 infantry).
Penicellin was invented between the two WW and can be used to simulate the better "war-lifestyle" of WWII soldiers compared with WWI soldiers.
WWI and WWII infantry are the closest technologicaly unit in Civ (A reinassance Musketman and a Civil War Rifleman have at least 400 years of techs between!) and isn't a bad idea to use a not industrial/military tech for allowing them.
p.s.
Remember Civ I? With Riflemen on Conscription (and not Rifling) .
Penicellin was invented between the two WW and can be used to simulate the better "war-lifestyle" of WWII soldiers compared with WWI soldiers.
WWI and WWII infantry are the closest technologicaly unit in Civ (A reinassance Musketman and a Civil War Rifleman have at least 400 years of techs between!) and isn't a bad idea to use a not industrial/military tech for allowing them.
p.s.
Remember Civ I? With Riflemen on Conscription (and not Rifling) .
janboruta
Artistriarch
The Penicillin unit is using a Thompson gun, so maybe the WW1 infantry will be simply "Infantry", while the WW2 unit will be "SMG Infantry" or "Assault Infantry"? Though naming is a secondary matter, the transition between rifle-based and smg/automatic weapon-based infantry is more important, although the in-game difference will most likely be only in base strength.
Maybe Trench Infantry -> Infantry or Infantry -> Modern Infantry.
But yes, name doesn't matter.
The problem is the granurality of civ techs, Civ never used tecnical names for tech, we don't have "Pike" allowing pikemen, or "Longswords" allowing Longswordmen.
But yes, name doesn't matter.
The problem is the granurality of civ techs, Civ never used tecnical names for tech, we don't have "Pike" allowing pikemen, or "Longswords" allowing Longswordmen.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,937
I agree. Penicillan would be a good entry point for WW2 era infantry.
Monthar
Deity
That unit in Penicillin looks like a Marine to me.
