DWilson
Where am I? What turn is it?
If cities can grant eurekas on capture, there is huge potential for a late game science surge (with hard to get eurekas).
It's becoming more and more obvious that the first expac is going to have some sort of 'New World' theme to offer representation for neglected civilizations in Africa, SE Asia and the Americas.
I love new Civs and new leaders; the more the merrier. And they have done a good job with Alex/Macedon in terms of selling it as a straight-up warmonger Civ instead of the more cultural Greek leaders. But while all of these DLC ones are nice to have, it's bizarre to me to have a roster full of European/culturally European Civs and then only a handful of token representatives from the rest of the world. No Mongols, no Babylon, no Siam/Vietnam, no Native American Civ, no Incas... but one more ancient Hellenic Civ couldn't wait until the expac? Doesn't seem quite right to me.
Might it be that they reverted the swordsman buff? Or is Hypaspist just weaker than normal swordsman? Hypaspist seems to have 3 moves, but only 35 combat strength.
Good spot! Mausoleum of Halicarnassus perhaps?Might it be that they reverted the swordsman buff? Or is Hypaspist just weaker than normal swordsman? Hypaspist seems to have 3 moves, but only 35 combat strength.
Im also surprised no one has noticed the new wonder on defensive tactics.
It's becoming more and more obvious that the first expac is going to have some sort of 'New World' theme to offer representation for neglected civilizations in Africa, SE Asia and the Americas.
I love new Civs and new leaders; the more the merrier. And they have done a good job with Alex/Macedon in terms of selling it as a straight-up warmonger Civ instead of the more cultural Greek leaders. But while all of these DLC ones are nice to have, it's bizarre to me to have a roster full of European/culturally European Civs and then only a handful of token representatives from the rest of the world. No Mongols, no Babylon, no Siam/Vietnam, no Native American Civ, no Incas... but one more ancient Hellenic Civ couldn't wait until the expac? Doesn't seem quite right to me.
Could it be the Macedonian unique building?Good spot! Mausoleum of Halicarnassus perhaps?
Could it be the Macedonian unique building?
Did anyone realize that Xi'an was renamed to Alexandria after being conquered? In 00:50 from the video?
Firaxis already set the bad precedent with England/USA/Australia, so there's no point in complaining about Macedon. I'm happy for Macedon, and I have no problems with 3 Greek leaders in 2 Civs. Don't forget that Byzantium might come later, so make that 3 Greek civs and 4 Greek leaders. =P
It's becoming more and more obvious that the first expac is going to have some sort of 'New World' theme to offer representation for neglected civilizations in Africa, SE Asia and the Americas.
I love new Civs and new leaders; the more the merrier. And they have done a good job with Alex/Macedon in terms of selling it as a straight-up warmonger Civ instead of the more cultural Greek leaders. But while all of these DLC ones are nice to have, it's bizarre to me to have a roster full of European/culturally European Civs and then only a handful of token representatives from the rest of the world. No Mongols, no Babylon, no Siam/Vietnam, no Native American Civ, no Incas... but one more ancient Hellenic Civ couldn't wait until the expac? Doesn't seem quite right to me.
Byzantium is Roman, not Greek.
This. Very much thisSo now, not only is Greece the only civilization with two leaders...but for some reason the devs thought that now was a good time to add a whole new Greek civilization? Thanks, guys, because there totally aren't other regions of the world that are under or unrepresented while we literally Balkanize the Balkans.
Greek language, so it is Greek. I'm not going by name of the political entity, but by language/culture.
Scholars still debate whether the Macedonians were Greeks, but the evidence is certainly leaning in that direction. I think you could more fairly call Byzantium Roman than Greek, but its fusion of the two and its success at outlasting the Empire in the West (as well as the distinctive flavor given to its culture by the Eastern Orthodox Church) make Byzantium fully worthy of being considered its own civilization.You are not going by culture. Byzantium was most definitely Hellinistic. And afaik you could even argue wheter Greece and Macedon as they're implemented have the same culture.
But yeah "Greek language, so it's Greek", that's a REALLY REALLY REALLY bad argument.