Unpopular Opinion Thread

I would say castles have to become obsolete with Artillery (a modification I added)--during the Renaissance and early industrial revolution days castles were different--the "star forts". These babies had a different design: no blindspots, low and thick walls, lots of earthworks and systems of ditches that would trap incoming enemies. They had other variants when geography made it convenient/necessary, such as the fortifications used in San Juan, Puerto Rico.

Castles and forts like these saw the end of their useful life when artillery shells first entered the scene (late industrial revolution in the Western World--around the time just before the world wars).


I also modified the Great Wall to have a more realistic useful life:

* Built with construction (not masonry)--the first major Great Wall attempt was that of the Qin unification (mid-classical era in 200something BC). Other smaller and less complex fort systems dated from before.
* Latest build being by the Renaissance (the most famous parts of the Great Wall date to the Ming Dynasty, which happens to be the Chinese period that was contemporary with the Western Renaissance).
* Obsolete with rifling (only do this on Legends of Revolution, when a similar wonder, the Brandemburg Gate, affects great general spawning rates).
 
Sliders should have been dropped in favour of building/pop/specialist yields long before Civ 5. They're a relic of an early experiment in making a historical strategy game for DOS that should have been binned faster than the mechanic whereby Mario died if he fell more than his own jumping height in Donkey Kong.
 
Applying a one-size-fits-all tech tree to all cultures is Eurocentric racist erasure, and being unlocked by Iron Working makes the Jaguar Warrior an exotic Minstrel.
 
I don't see how technology can be euro centric. History can, and culture can, but not science.
 
Also it isn't racist. The makers are European descendants and their buyers will almost all be of European descent one way or another. Most are not pure Aztec or so. Technology is generally the same except the small exceptions of the New World cultures.


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
 
Sliders should have been dropped in favour of building/pop/specialist yields long before Civ 5. They're a relic of an early experiment in making a historical strategy game for DOS that should have been binned faster than the mechanic whereby Mario died if he fell more than his own jumping height in Donkey Kong.

Well, I'd say they represent the preparation of budget which each and every real world government has to deal with, allowing fast and radical shifts of financial funding - and thus are apropriate and fully justified. But after all this is the "unpopular opinion thread"... ;)
 
I'm not using the term 'racist' in a KKK way. I'm using it to mean 'internalised colonial attitudes that every White adult in the world can't not have but can acknowledge and challenge, myself included'.

Technology is not the same. For instance, paper. Indigenous American cultures developed papermaking as a result of the way they cooked corn with wood ash, in a process known as Nixtamalisation. And up to 60 million people are not a 'small exception'; in world terms, replacing Wheat with higher-yielding Corn caused malnutrition epidemics across the Mediterranean and Africa as the grain was mechanically processed and lacked the bioavailability of Nixtamal.

Silkmaking was a big part of the Chinese and Indian economies two millennia before the sort of time period occupied by Calendar.

Islam is founded by Divine Right, an ideology of absolutist monarchy, but a Caliph is not generally a hereditary position - you can't have an Islamic Republic without the Pyramids or Constitution (via Liberalism).

The Compass didn't reach the Mediterranean for the best part of two millennia after Carthage built her Cothon.

State Atheism has been a major part of history. Billions of people have lived under Stalinist regimes using the 'opium of the people' quote to justify inquisitions against everyone of faith. It's not even mentioned.

Don't get me wrong, the tech tree does a rubbish job of representing European culture as well; it's widely criticised that for Greece and Rome (and Carthage*, India and Mesoamerican cultures) to adopt Representation, they have to take turns looking after an Egyptian royal burial site.

It's a fun game and I love it to bits, but its representation of non-White cultures is problematic.



*Initially, I wrote 'Greece, Rome and Carthage'. See? That's what I mean by internalised racism, right there - I unconsciously appropriated a Semitic culture into a list of poorly-represented European cultures.
 
Well, I'd say they represent the preparation of budget which each and every real world government has to deal with, allowing fast and radical shifts of financial funding - and thus are apropriate and fully justified. But after all this is the "unpopular opinion thread"... ;)

I prefer a Gold Mine to function as a source of funding for buying and funding the operation of a Research Lab, as opposed to directly producing raw beakers :)
 
I'm not using the term 'racist' in a KKK way. I'm using it to mean 'internalised colonial attitudes that every White adult in the world can't not have but can acknowledge and challenge, myself included'.

It's a fun game and I love it to bits, but its representation of non-White cultures is problematic.

I was going to nitpick the role of heredity in Islam, but then I was reminded that I thought it should be much easier for the Chinese to get medicine and gunpowder in Civ I.

I take your point. Sometimes the tech tree is more about timing than cause and effect, but it's basically European timing.



What's the solution?
A separate tech tree for each continent ? Each civ?
Or would New World, Europe, Chinese, Indian, Middle Eastern, and African do it?
Bonus beakers to various civs for certain techs?
 
To some extent, I'm six of min-maxers who constantly rattle about cottage economies and beelining.

And yeah, I'm sick of the Eurocentrism in Civ games as well.
 
I also modified the Great Wall to have a more realistic useful life:

* Built with construction (not masonry)--the first major Great Wall attempt was that of the Qin unification (mid-classical era in 200something BC). Other smaller and less complex fort systems dated from before.
* Latest build being by the Renaissance (the most famous parts of the Great Wall date to the Ming Dynasty, which happens to be the Chinese period that was contemporary with the Western Renaissance).
* Obsolete with rifling (only do this on Legends of Revolution, when a similar wonder, the Brandemburg Gate, affects great general spawning rates).
While this may be a more realistic life, I don't think it's more useful. You build the GW to keep out barbs. The increase in GG production is a very minor consideration (you shouldn't be fighting much within your borders). The GS GPP might be useful or might be counterproductive, depending on your goals.

If barbs aren't under control by the time you discover Construction, something's wrong. I play huge/marathon and barbs a definitely a pain in the a** on those setting (even without raging barbs), but I'm not worried about them by construction.
 
I don't believe that optimal play is the most desirable way to play.

This. I don't like having to put a lot of effort in micromanagement (and other activities that take away the fun of the game for me), finishing the game as early as possible, going for score, striving to overcome the AIs' handicaps with increased efficiency so I can be able to play at a higher difficulty, etc.

I like building infrastructure, upgrading units, building wonders, having freedom to try strategies like SE, going for religion and other things that are considered bad or sub-optimal play but I find to be really fun.

I've been playing Civ4 for several years and still play at Prince. Sure, I have learned a lot from these forums (for example now I know how to take full advantage from the whip, something I never bothered to do before) and I respect players who put a lot of effort in being able to play at higher difficulty levels (and I'm grateful for what I can learn from them), but that's just not something I want to do.
 
You build the GW to keep out barbs... The GS GPP might be useful or might be counterproductive, depending on your goals.

Or it might even be the thing you're aiming for, to kickstart an EE.

I got GW then Oracled CoL in the Sons of Monarchy Suleiman game. Good times.Hardly bothered teching anything for myself after getting Communism.

Incidentally: I think it's tolerable that GW comes in so early, if we think of its initial state as being a particularly large city wall that also encircles nearby crops, and consider how successive governments increased its length. Maybe. Hey, it makes more sense than CR making your economy stable when you privatise everything one year then proclaim FULLCOMMUNISM the next, ad infinitum :D
 
(you shouldn't be fighting much within your borders).

I disagree completely. If I'm getting ready to attack a neighbor with a big stack on the border, I declare first so I can deal with his SOD on my territory. Then I can go in and mop up. This usually means I kill more of his unit on my territory than on his. It also helps with WW considerably.

Granted you can't always rig it this way, but the AI is so stupid it's usually works.
 
If I know I intend to do a cuir/cav breakout, I throw a GG on a trebuchet and give it morale and accuracy. It sucks when it runs into castles, but otherwise it helps save some cavalry (and more, I think, then putting a GG on my best cavalry).
 
If I know I intend to do a cuir/cav breakout, I throw a GG on a trebuchet and give it morale and accuracy. It sucks when it runs into castles, but otherwise it helps save some cavalry (and more, I think, then putting a GG on my best cavalry).

that's honestly quite an interesting idea that I never considered. Not sure I realized you could put morale on a siege unit (maybe only with GG?). Ofc, I'd always make a super medic first, but otherwise I rarely like to make hero units out of Curs anyway. Either I go for more medics, use it to buff a small stack for quick health, or settle.
 
If I know I intend to do a cuir/cav breakout, I throw a GG on a trebuchet and give it morale and accuracy. It sucks when it runs into castles, but otherwise it helps save some cavalry (and more, I think, then putting a GG on my best cavalry).

Oh wow, now I'm picturing some kind of mobile siege engine XD
 
that's honestly quite an interesting idea that I never considered. Not sure I realized you could put morale on a siege unit (maybe only with GG?).
I thought morale is a GG-only promotion.
 
Top Bottom