How well has your country been represented in game?

[GhostSalsa]

As far as Babylon goes, I'm not particularly knowledgeable about them, but I didn't think of Babylon as a scientific civ before. I find it strange that there is nothing reflecting what is arguably the greatest achievment of the Babylonians : the Hammurabi Code.

The Tradition tree sort of already represents that whole theme, maybe? To me the Babylon civ's inclusion in the game feels a bit fantastical, though with Assyria I guess they're not the only pre-classical one anymore. It doesn't really bother me it's just funny when people gripe about Brazil's inclusion but you get to pretend to run around in tanks with a culture that's probably not translatable to modern life at all.

 

[Teproc]

Well, Ramessess predates Nebuchadnezzar by 5 centuries or so, and Darius is pre-classical as well (6th century BC if memory serves), as well as Dido (regardless of her existence, Carthage was presumably founded around the 8th / 9th century BC).

People gripe about Brazil because it's a modern civ ? That's pretty dumb.

 

[PhilBowles]

I missed this earlier due to a shortage of time to respond to more complex posts.

N

• And when referring to the continental populace as a whole, "American" is as correct for the collective as "European" is for my continent. But claiming "America is a continent, therefore it isn't a country" is as absurd as asserting "Europe is a continent, therefore Belgium isn't a country"; the fact that the two share a similar name in the former case is immaterial.

I have no idea why are you saying this. This is obviously an absurd, I agree. What is your point? I never said you can't call your country America because people call the continent that as well. Also, the comparison with Europe-Belgium just throws all logic in the trash can.

You might not have, but the comment that started this sub-discussion was explicitly "America is not a country, it's a continent" - which we're both in agreement is absurd.

• I don't think anyone's claimed anything of the kind

I understood that from your previous post:

• Only one country in the world has "America" in its name, and only that country has the adjective "American". Anyone claiming "America isn't a country" is being either deliberately obtuse or provocative for the sake of pointing out that Latin America exists (Canadians never seem to feel the need to point out that "America" is also part of the name of their continent), and everyone knows (even in Latin America, where the name America is used for the US as it is everywhere else) that when the word is being used to refer to a country, it means the United States. Claiming otherwise is akin to somebody from Columbia (a US state) saying "Colombia isn't a country, it's a state, and by the way it doesn't have two "o"'s in it", or like an Ulsterman complaining that the Republic calls itself Ireland when it doesn't cover all of Ireland.

I find it problematic that you only refer to countries again.

Again, this is specifically because the claim being made that I was responding to is "America isn't a country".

The Mayas were meso-american.

Another one of those fudge terms designed to reflect a geographically nonexistent entity (in this case, Mexico & Central America, to the exclusion of South America) and the Maya were confined to the Yucatan and adjacent parts of Mexico, in northern "Mesoamerica".

• It's a term of convenience used for all of the Americas south of the US mainland (though usually excluding at least Anglicised and Dutch portions of the Caribbean), since "South and Central America, plus Mexico" is unwieldy, and Central America does not belong to any continental landmass. It's approximately the same as the area of "Latin" influence, minus the southern US states (Spanish and Portuguese aren't "native" languages in any of those territories, though they are national languages), but several of them speak French or non-Romance languages (Dutch and English in Suriname and Belize, respectively).

I don't believe those are part of the Latin America.

I actually wasn't sure, so asked a colleague as my host organisation does a lot of work in Suriname, and as an American he'd better understand conventional use of the term than I would (it's not one we really use in the UK). He confirmed that Suriname, Belize and French Guiana are indeed considered part of "Latin America".

Being Brazilian, I don't call everything south of the US 'Latin America'. It seems to be a (bad) generalization.

Welcome to the English language - there are a lot of these imprecise, hazy or downright inaccurate generalisations, and variety across the English-speaking world in how they're applied. I never talked of Latin America before moving to the US - it seems to be an American concept (at least in English, I don't know whether Brazilian Portuguese or other languages have something at least roughly equivalent).

[*] Here in the US the term "Hispanic" is used more specifically to refer to people from Spanish-speaking Latin American territories (though more to distinguish these from Brazil than from, say, Belize); it's also used - very imprecisely - to denote an ethnic group of predominantly mestizo (Spanish plus native) ancestry although Spanish-speaking Latin Americans typically described as Hispanic range from Andean Colombians of almost pure European ancestry to pure Quechuas from Peru, and everything in between.[/LIST]

Didn't know that. You learn something every day! [/QUOTE]

I'd stress again though that this is my understanding of the situation as an outsider. American concepts of "race" seem rather complex and arbitrary (while the strictly colour-based divisions we tend to apply in Europe, or at least the UK, are equally arbitrary, but much simpler to understand and recognise). National Geographic even ran a piece a couple of months ago showcasing 'atypical' members of different self-professed ethnicities in the US.

The US view of ethnicity is also fundamentally tied up with the country's politics and obsession with ethnically-defined voting demographics (something we really don't have in the UK - no one campaigns for the "Asian vote" or the "black vote", or appears to track voting behaviour in these groups; we've also never traditionally adopted the "hypenated" fashion of American subdivisions; black Britons are not British-Africans, say, while their American counterparts are African-Americans. In some areas this is changing - British Asian and British Indian are increasingly recognised categories) - I think when talking about "Hispanics" Americans intend mainly to refer to American citizens of Latin American descent (with the largest groups of those probably being people with Mexican or Cuban ancestry, and Puerto Ricans).

As I said in the other post, if someone near me says 'I'm from America.' I'm not going to ask 'Which one?' - that's stupid. Still, the same applies to the other side of the coin. I don't understand the need to instill your ideas upon the other person, he is not wrong, neither are you.

If his view is "America is not a country", then yes he is wrong, just as wrong as he'd be if he said "Japan is not a country".

as the French poster said, they actually call US citizens 'états-unien'.

I speak (or at least read) French and I've never encountered that - I understood from his post that it's something some French people are starting to do (and that he prefers the traditionally correct French term, americain), but I don't know how widespread it is or if it's the currently accepted French name for American nationals. Different languages do have different derivations for the national adjectives they use - Scottish and Irish Gaelic use words derived from "Saxon" for the English, while we ourselves (and most languages) use a word derived from "Angle".

EDIT: Seems to be something off with the quote function, as I'm having trouble editing the above to display quotes correctly.

EDIT 2: Fixed following bane_'s (correct) suggestion that the NOPARSE command was the issue; I suspected a coding conflict, but hadn't spotted one.

 

[Teproc]

As far as French goes, "états-unien" is mostly something you'll find in newspapers, in an effort to avoid the continent/country problem. "Américain" is still much more widely used.

I think "états-unien" is an objectively better term, even if I don't like it. It's not that you often have actual confusion between the country and the continent, it's just that it tends to minimize the existence of other American countries, especially Canada.

"Latin America" is also a thing in French btw. It makes sense as a cultural/geopolitical entity as well, although Mexico is always a bit problematic, as it goes in both "Latin America" and "North America" (since one of them is based on language, the other one on georgraphy). But that's actually pretty reflective of Mexico's situation (part of the ALENA, but still closer culturally to, say, Colombia, than to the US I think).

I'll add that the problem with saying "X is a continent, Y is not" is that there are many definitions of continents : geological, biological, cultural, etc.

 

[PhilBowles]

As I am living in whence now is part of China (it is complicated), I guess that will be the closest thing I have as "my country". That said, the place I live in DOES get represented as a city-state, but there are not really anything to comment on it.

Leader: Wu Zetian

As others have pointed out, out of 100+ emperors China had, Firaxis decided to pick the only empress in the list to represent China, most likely to boost the "female leader count" for whatever reasons they have. While not a bad monarch herself, Wu Zetian's contribution was not exactly significant compared with other emperors—in fact, her reign was called "revival of the reign of Zhenguan" under Tang Taizong, as under her rule China recovered a bit from its weakened state, drawing it closer to back when it was the powerhouse during Zhenguan period. If the choice of leader is based on how significant (or famous) said leader was, then it would probably be more logical to pick Tang Taizong himself. Other than that, there are several other emperors that are more influential to China than Wu Zetian, most of them founders of a new dynasty (which means their rule tend to affect the entire dynasty).

That said, I think it is an improvement from the previous instalments of the series, which used Mao as the leader (along with Qin Shi Huang from IV and Tang Taizong from III and IV after expansion and in the Chinese version). As his replacement in the Chinese version suggested, Mao, while undoubtedly influential to China and the world in his own ways, is still a rather controversial figure among Chinese and a few others, while the past emperors are... not, mostly. Thus, although I have no problem playing as Mao or seeing him being in the game, picking someone who is not as controversial might be better over all. The same also applies to other potential post-imperial leaders of China, but probably to a greater degree.

Regarding the dialogue, it is actually quite well-written (Chinese) and well-voiced (Mandarin). Although some lines sound a bit awkward (such as NeutralHearIt03 and, to an extent, Request), it is still of quite high-quality overall, especially given how Chinese lines usually end up in western games. A minor nit-picking would be that Wu Zetian did not refer to herself as, well, Wu Zetian—Zetian is a title she (or rather, her successor) picked up after her ascension as the empress emeritus. During her reign, she will probably refer to herself as Tian Hou, or other titles she gave herself. One might say that since we all know her as Wu Zetian, it is passable. I agree with that, but since I doubt the Chinese lines are chiefly directed to people who know Mandarin, I would say the voiced lines can afford to be a bit more obscure and period-correct.

Rating: B

Unique Ability: Art of War (The Great General combat bonus is increased by 15%, and their spawn rate is increased by 50%.)

While China has its fair share of great generals, and the Art of War is indeed among the most famous books of war the world has ever had, personally I do not think it fits well in, especially considering the introduction of and BNW (when will we get a smilie for it? ). As others have mentioned, China is basically the east Asian version of Roman Empire except it did not fall apart until the modern era, and even then it remains independent to this day, but perhaps unlike the Romans, China did not (and still does not, but anyway) excel in warfare. Although China had a decent military depending on the dynasties and periods, and it did held off the Mongols for generations, an amazing feat in and of itself, China is more skilled in maintaining a large empire and making it stable, as well as spreading its culture to bordering nations. As such, I believe a more fitting UA for China would be something that is based on culture gain or (with the new BNW culture and tourism system) a bonus on tourism pressure.

Rating: C

Unique Unit: Chu-Ko-Nu

Despite being considered impractical as a weapon and most likely fictional (at least about its inventor, the eponymous Chu-Ko/Zhuge), I think it is not too bad a UU for China. In real life, it is a well-designed weapon usable by untrained peasants and women to defend their home from bandits, its weak firepower being compensated by firing speed and a liberal use of poisoned tips. It proved to be quite useful a weapon even for the military (though then, Chinese military was not the best in the world) against lightly-armoured cavalry from the north, and had since saw widespread deployment up until 19th century—at least, as far as legends are concerned. In any case, it is one of the most famous and well-known Chinese weapons out there (the others being either rather ubiquitous, or more often associated with other cultures), and its in-game performance is consistent with its historical role and characteristics.

Rating: A

Unique Building: Paper Maker

The building is a decent choice due to how famous China being the inventor and mass-producer of paper, and its significant influence on China as a culture at large. While originally I feel its function not matching its description very well, I have since realised what it was supposed to represent: the spread of knowledge using paper-based books and records, which reflects rather well with its per function. However, as the use of paper-based books also help a lot with the spread of education and culture (got to have all the poems, writings and paintings being on something), I feel it might be better if the bonus is replaced by or, as BNW, bonus. I am not sure how it will act on the balance of the game, but that is just my two cents.

Rating: B

Overall, I think China is quite well-represented, especially given the context of western games not being the best source to learn about China. Although there are some mistakes and head-scratching choices in design, I think They did pretty good.

Another minor things, while the spoken dialogue of Oda Nobunaga (from Japan) is pretty well-written, its delivery is quite hilarious. When I declare war on him, his reaction is more like he is on the verge of tears than someone being eager to destroy me (or being destroyed by me).

Well done for what looks to be the most authoritative and comprehensive take on a country in this thread yet. I know little about China's history but was interested enough in the "Why is Wu Zetian the Chinese leader?" threads to look into her a little, and your post goes into a lot more detail that supports what I'd read and the opinion I'd formed that she's a perfectly valid choice as a capable Chinese leader (in contrast to some of the more outraged posts regarding her inclusion), but that there were certainly better options.

 

[Koiranputki]

Thanks for your considered response above. As usual with these kinds of debates terminology has to be mutually understood.

But what I got out of your response is that Washington was much more an "Englishman" than an "American" in the context of the times he lived in. And I would certainly have to agree.....The term, "American", was in the process of being defined while he lived..... Almost certainly the term didn't jump out fully formed on the eve of the revolution, but more likely was slowly taking shape over the centuries prior, from the founding of Jamestown.

I don't know if historians can actually infer how Washington himself self-identified in terms of "nationality", but I think it is certainly reasonable for all those "Americans" who came after him to think of him as "quintessentially American"..... embodying quintessentially American values ...."freedom", "no-taxation-without respresentation", "individualism", "republicanism" ...small "r", that is, and so forth, even if he may not have actually entertained all those attributes himself.

Different languages do have different derivations for the national adjectives they use - Scottish and Irish Gaelic use words derived from "Saxon" for the English, while we ourselves (and most languages) use a word derived from "Angle".

"Damn Sassenachs"... Interesting this...there must be an "axiom" at work...that the closer two ethnic groups have been historically, the more likely it is they will refer to each other in their respective languages, using terminology that now seems ancient and antiquated....

In Finnish...which I speak poorly as a second language... Germany is referred to as Saksa... In French, and other Romance languages, it's Allemagne, and variations on that.... Obviously these terms refer to particular Germanic tribes, presumably those representing the "face" of Germany at some particular point in history...

But Finnish seems to be an outlier in this regard...all the other Nordic languages use some variation of Tyskland....which presumably comes directly from the German name for itself, Deutschland....

And while I'm at it, Finnish also has an interesting name for Russia....Venäjä....which comes from "Wends" which were a particular Slavic tribe who, historically, were about as far west as the Slavs got... Now how could that have come about...I ask, rhetorically....

And even the Russian word for Russia seems to have come from a different language than Russian, [or even some ancient Slavic language]. In Finnish the word for Sweden is Ruotsi..."Rowers", and refers to the Vikings who made their way east and, in time, south to Constantinople....the Varangians... The word, "Russia", is cognate with Ruotsi... and relates to the Viking founders of the Russian state.

I guess the moral of this is that the origin of the words that different peoples use to refer to each other can be embedded deep in the mists of history and may not be very logical in terms of the modern situation.

All interesting stuff....in a pedantic sort of way

 

[PhilBowles]

Thanks for your considered response above. As usual with these kinds of debates terminology has to be mutually understood.

But what I got out of your response is that Washington was much more an "Englishman" than an "American" in the context of the times he lived in. And I would certainly have to agree.....The term, "American", was in the process of being defined while he lived..... Almost certainly the term didn't jump out fully formed on the eve of the revolution, but more likely was slowly taking shape over the centuries prior, from the founding of Jamestown.

I don't know if historians can actually infer how Washington himself self-identified in terms of "nationality", but I think it is certainly reasonable for all those "Americans" who came after him to think of him as "quintessentially American"..... embodying quintessentially American values ...."freedom", "no-taxation-without respresentation", "individualism", "republicanism" ...small "r", that is, and so forth, even if he may not have actually entertained all those attributes himself.

I wouldn't disagree with any of that (and the city that bears Washington's name still has taxation without representation, so he clearly didn't entertain them all). British historians like to point to the irony that the American revolutionaries were aiming to restore what they'd been brought up to consider British values (a major inspiration for the revolution was Thomas Paine, a writer on individual liberty who was from the island and emigrated to America), and considered that Britain itself had lost sight of these.

In Finnish...which I speak poorly as a second language... Germany is referred to as Saksa... In French, and other Romance languages, it's Allemagne, and variations on that.... Obviously these terms refer to particular Germanic tribes, presumably those representing the "face" of Germany at some particular point in history...

Strangely, Germanic English uses a name derived from the Latin for the region, while neither German nor the Romance languages do...

And while I'm at it, Finnish also has an interesting name for Russia....Venäjä....which comes from "Wends" which were a particular Slavic tribe who, historically, were about as far west as the Slavs got... Now how could that have come about...I ask, rhetorically....

There's some odd historical migration at work - it might be a similar case to Asia. "Asia" is the Roman name for Anatolia (a region still sometimes known as Asia Minor), but in modern times has become the name for the world's largest continent, the vast majority of course being well to the east of Turkey - and only part of the "original" Asia falls within it.

And even the Russian word for Russia seems to have come from a different language than Russian, [or even some ancient Slavic language]. In Finnish the word for Sweden is Ruotsi..."Rowers", and refers to the Vikings who made their way east and, in time, south to Constantinople....the Varangians... The word, "Russia", is cognate with Ruotsi... and relates to the Viking founders of the Russian state.

We have something similar with China - the name's derived from the pronunciation of the first dynasty, the Qin dynasty. However, I understand from people who speak Mandarin that the Chinese name for the country is something else entirely.

 

[Teproc]

Oh yeah, Germany is awesome for this :
In english : German, after the latin name for the different "barbarians" living there at the time
In german : Deutsch, after the language
In french : Allemand, after the Alamani, a German tribe. I believe it is similar in spanish as well
In italian : Tedesco, after an other German tribe I think.

Didn't know about other ones (finnish and so on), but it's rare to have that many different names among somewhat close languages like that. Probably because Germany is such a recent entity.

 

[bane_]

@PhilBowles
Your posts are very informative and I apologize for jumping on a moving train. I wasn't following the thread from the first page, so that's my fault. A minor faux pas on my part, nothing major.

I have to bow to the information about Suriname from your friend, because as you said he has more authority on the matter than me, but I'll not duplicate this sentiment since I'm not entirely sure he is right about that and some other Countries in the Central America.

The problem with the quote seems to be the inclusion of 'Noparse' by me when making the original post you quoted, since it wasn't closed when you broke the post down the quote probably got messed up in that.

 

[ToothedBomb]

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).

 

[goremand]

In terms of their inclusion in Civilization, certainly. You make a fair point, but including immediately post-colonial America as a "civ" would be on a par with including Idi Amin's Uganda as a civ. And in America's case it's a frankly ridiculous choice considering what the country went on to achieve a couple of centuries later. In which case my essential point, that something should be included to represent the US strength of mass production, and the Minuteman is the most expendable element, remains.

You should take a look at China, they are in a similar situation: half the things I own says "made in China" at the back, yet China doesn't have any unique ability, unit or building related to production. Why? Because the Civ is focused on medieval imperial China not modern (sort of) communist China. I'm sure there's some Chinese people who don't think China is best represented by this period.

As for the Minuteman, since the B17 is the only modern American unit it could be replaced with your production UB without breaking the central "colonial theme" the Minuteman represents. Ofc losing the b17 would be lame for gameplay reasons.

 

[AW Arcaeca]

So what I'm seeing here is that Firaxis generally did a fairly good job portraying the civs' leaders, UAs, UUs and UBs (which is actually kind of the opposite of what I expected... )

So now I'm curious how well Firaxis portrayed the civs' symbols, like the icons, colors or even unit flags.
Personally I'm not really sure where Firaxis got the idea of making America's symbol a shield, but at least the colors are good - I'm not sure any other 2-color combination would really suit America nearly as well.

 

[Koiranputki]

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).

Well...that seems to be increasingly common in the modern era....probably because it is no longer PC to stress too much the unique contributions of one's own country....

I wouldn't say I've ever focussed strongly on Dutch history, but I have picked up a few things in passing. I think it is fair to assert that the Netherlands was the first....[I suppose Venice is an earlier contender as well....] ....of the world's modern economies....focussing on trade and mercantilism. Until the rising economic clout of Britain overwhelmed it sometime in the late 1700s.

But I think the romantic idea of the restlessly enterprising Dutchman is still quite alive....you know, the Wagnerian...Der fliegende Holländer...and all that.

But the "touch of the Dutch" can show up in surprising ways. A couple years ago during a trip to Provence, as a result of misinterpeting a bus schedule...it was a French holiday, we were stranded for a few hours in the town of Orange, located near Avignon.....

The name, Orange, struck me as a bit odd for a French town....it might of been a coincidence, of course, but I was quite aware that the word, "Orange", often implied Calvinistic things and Dutch things. Anyway...I was curious enough to do a google search and found out that, yes, indeed, it had at one time been Calvinistic and, in fact, had been part of the holdings of the Dutch royal house of Orange-Nassau....going back to the time of the particular William featured in the Civ game....

The town suffered greatly during the St Bartholomew's Day massacre and I think it wasn't until the time of the French revolution before it was clearly a part of France..... Today it looks and feels like any other small French town in that part of France....but it's name belies an unusual history.....

 

[PhilBowles]

So what I'm seeing here is that Firaxis generally did a fairly good job portraying the civs' leaders, UAs, UUs and UBs (which is actually kind of the opposite of what I expected... )

I'd say they did a fair job based on passing familiarity with many of the civs, but we've probably had reports from a minority of countries represented in the game (no one commenting on any of the African or Middle Eastern entries or, more unexpectedly, many of the European civs - any Poles here? Italians to take up Rome? Greeks? - or India).

Perhaps the country that got most heavily slammed on the thread for its representation was Siam - which, on the points raised and the focus of the thread, is entirely fair, but I find it one of the best civs for gameplay, so I let that one slide...

So now I'm curious how well Firaxis portrayed the civs' symbols, like the icons, colors or even unit flags.
Personally I'm not really sure where Firaxis got the idea of making America's symbol a shield, but at least the colors are good - I'm not sure any other 2-color combination would really suit America nearly as well.

England:

The crown is, indeed, a stylised version of the English crown, as recognisable from our coat of arms or the modern government website. Given the era represented is quite broad, it's more fitting than a Tudor rose or other coat of arms, and it is in the correct style for the Tudor-era version of the crown (which had the cross on top - the modern version is topped with a square panel with an inset saltire - diagonal cross).

I'm not sure where the colours derive from - red and white are England's national colours (the British blue is derived from the Scottish flag), but while I like the tone of the English red in Civ V, England's most recognisable colour is the shade of the English, and later British, Army Redcoats, which is brighter. White on red reverses the colour of the English flag, but is a better choice than the reverse both because of the Redcoat association and because red on white is more characteristic of Japan. England should really have the colours that were given to Austria in G&K, but the version we have is close and to my mind aesthetically better if not as appropriate for the civ.

The unit flags aren't terribly imaginative, but there's not a lot that can be said that's wrong with them. Ships of the Line were hardly unique in using wheels to steer, however it is appropriate for the approximate period the UU represents since ships' wheels were introduced around the start of the 18th Century. Plus it's a nice icon. Longbowman ... does what it says on the tin.

Well...that seems to be increasingly common in the modern era....probably because it is no longer PC to stress too much the unique contributions of one's own country....

In my experience of living in several countries, and having also previously assumed that it was a more modern way of seeing the world and that nationalist ideas are archaic, that's a European perspective, probably due in part to increased European integration (although the rise of nationalist movements in a number of European states, including my own, suggests a reaction against it). The 'newer' countries I've lived in - Australia and the US - seem to go out of their way to deliberately cultivate a national identity.

 

[Vitruvius]

As I am living in whence now is part of China (it is complicated), I guess that will be the closest thing I have as "my country". That said, the place I live in DOES get represented as a city-state, but there are not really anything to comment on it.

Leader: Wu Zetian

As others have pointed out, out of 100+ emperors China had, Firaxis decided to pick the only empress in the list to represent China, most likely to boost the "female leader count" for whatever reasons they have. While not a bad monarch herself, Wu Zetian's contribution was not exactly significant compared with other emperors—in fact, her reign was called "revival of the reign of Zhenguan" under Tang Taizong, as under her rule China recovered a bit from its weakened state, drawing it closer to back when it was the powerhouse during Zhenguan period. If the choice of leader is based on how significant (or famous) said leader was, then it would probably be more logical to pick Tang Taizong himself. Other than that, there are several other emperors that are more influential to China than Wu Zetian, most of them founders of a new dynasty (which means their rule tend to affect the entire dynasty).

That said, I think it is an improvement from the previous instalments of the series, which used Mao as the leader (along with Qin Shi Huang from IV and Tang Taizong from III and IV after expansion and in the Chinese version). As his replacement in the Chinese version suggested, Mao, while undoubtedly influential to China and the world in his own ways, is still a rather controversial figure among Chinese and a few others, while the past emperors are... not, mostly. Thus, although I have no problem playing as Mao or seeing him being in the game, picking someone who is not as controversial might be better over all. The same also applies to other potential post-imperial leaders of China, but probably to a greater degree.

Regarding the dialogue, it is actually quite well-written (Chinese) and well-voiced (Mandarin). Although some lines sound a bit awkward (such as NeutralHearIt03 and, to an extent, Request), it is still of quite high-quality overall, especially given how Chinese lines usually end up in western games. A minor nit-picking would be that Wu Zetian did not refer to herself as, well, Wu Zetian—Zetian is a title she (or rather, her successor) picked up after her ascension as the empress emeritus. During her reign, she will probably refer to herself as Tian Hou, or other titles she gave herself. One might say that since we all know her as Wu Zetian, it is passable. I agree with that, but since I doubt the Chinese lines are chiefly directed to people who know Mandarin, I would say the voiced lines can afford to be a bit more obscure and period-correct.

Rating: B

Unique Ability: Art of War (The Great General combat bonus is increased by 15%, and their spawn rate is increased by 50%.)

While China has its fair share of great generals, and the Art of War is indeed among the most famous books of war the world has ever had, personally I do not think it fits well in, especially considering the introduction of and BNW (when will we get a smilie for it? ). As others have mentioned, China is basically the east Asian version of Roman Empire except it did not fall apart until the modern era, and even then it remains independent to this day, but perhaps unlike the Romans, China did not (and still does not, but anyway) excel in warfare. Although China had a decent military depending on the dynasties and periods, and it did held off the Mongols for generations, an amazing feat in and of itself, China is more skilled in maintaining a large empire and making it stable, as well as spreading its culture to bordering nations. As such, I believe a more fitting UA for China would be something that is based on culture gain or (with the new BNW culture and tourism system) a bonus on tourism pressure.

Rating: C

Unique Unit: Chu-Ko-Nu

Despite being considered impractical as a weapon and most likely fictional (at least about its inventor, the eponymous Chu-Ko/Zhuge), I think it is not too bad a UU for China. In real life, it is a well-designed weapon usable by untrained peasants and women to defend their home from bandits, its weak firepower being compensated by firing speed and a liberal use of poisoned tips. It proved to be quite useful a weapon even for the military (though then, Chinese military was not the best in the world) against lightly-armoured cavalry from the north, and had since saw widespread deployment up until 19th century—at least, as far as legends are concerned. In any case, it is one of the most famous and well-known Chinese weapons out there (the others being either rather ubiquitous, or more often associated with other cultures), and its in-game performance is consistent with its historical role and characteristics.

Rating: A

Unique Building: Paper Maker

The building is a decent choice due to how famous China being the inventor and mass-producer of paper, and its significant influence on China as a culture at large. While originally I feel its function not matching its description very well, I have since realised what it was supposed to represent: the spread of knowledge using paper-based books and records, which reflects rather well with its per function. However, as the use of paper-based books also help a lot with the spread of education and culture (got to have all the poems, writings and paintings being on something), I feel it might be better if the bonus is replaced by or, as BNW, bonus. I am not sure how it will act on the balance of the game, but that is just my two cents.

Rating: B

Overall, I think China is quite well-represented, especially given the context of western games not being the best source to learn about China. Although there are some mistakes and head-scratching choices in design, I think They did pretty good.

Another minor things, while the spoken dialogue of Oda Nobunaga (from Japan) is pretty well-written, its delivery is quite hilarious. When I declare war on him, his reaction is more like he is on the verge of tears than someone being eager to destroy me (or being destroyed by me).

Are you from Hong Kong or Singapore?
What is your take on the use of modern Mandarin and modern city list for a civ with mostly ancient and medieval uniques and a Tang dynasty leader. What do you think of cities like Shanghai and Guangzhou as the first 3 cities instead of more historical ones like Kaifeng, Luoyang or Changan (which should replace Xian). It does not fit the leader or the loading screen as it clearly shows Changan as the capital. Other modern civs such as England get to use a more historical city list, with York and Coventry ahead of modern big cities like Manchester and Liverpool.

 

[Teproc]

The French symbol (fleur de lys) is good, as it was the symbol of the French monarchy from the Carolingians and on. I guess you might squabble with it because Napoléon is obviously not a king and didn't use that symbol of course, but it's good, and I can't think of any better symbol except maybe Marianne, but that's a little harder to do for a small icon.

The color... I mean, blue has to be in there for sure, but gold ? Blue and red would have been my choice. The problem is that blue/white/red is incredibly common in flags, but I think blue/red ended up only being used with Korea ? Blue and white would also have been a better combo.

The city list is good I think. My only complaint is that Reims should be much higher, it's not a big city now but it was where kings got crowned and a very important religious center in the medieval era. Since they chose Orléans as a second city, they should continue the trend of early centers of power (Tours and Troyes being that high also go with that) and have Reims instead of Lyon as a third city. The order gets a bit weird after a while (Grenoble and Bayonne are way too high, Nantes and Lille way too low) but it's ok for the first few cities, which is basically all that matters.

As far as Germany goes (again, not German but I did grow up there), the symbol (iron cross) is good and goes well with Bismarck, although I would've preferred the eagle. Grey color though ? Why ? I guess the Prussian flag is black and white, but the German colors are pretty clearly black red and gold. Black and gold would have been my choice probably ? But maybe black is not practical, since they haven't used it for anyone. And red and gold is Persia. The city list seems good to me, very modern oriented but that makes sense for Germany.

 

[Teproc]

Singapore is not even close to being a part of China. You might be thinking of Taiwan or Macau, but that last one is pretty clearly a part of China. Hong Kong is as well, but only since 1997 or so.

 

[neoaspilet11]

Are you from Hong Kong or Singapore?
What is your take on the use of modern Mandarin and modern city list for a civ with mostly ancient and medieval uniques and a Tang dynasty leader. What do you think of cities like Shanghai and Guangzhou as the first 3 cities instead of more historical ones like Kaifeng, Luoyang or Changan (which should replace Xian). It does not fit the leader or the loading screen as it clearly shows Changan as the capital. Other modern civs such as England get to use a more historical city list, with York and Coventry ahead of modern big cities like Manchester and Liverpool.

I think the Chinese city list was based on western popularity in modern times.

Western people would probably dig some history books if the Chinese city list were based on ancient cities like


Chang an
Louyang
Kaifeng
Nanjing

and put Beijing lower. Beijing was the last imperial capital.

Most ancient Chinese capitals did not grow into very big western recognizable cities with the exception of Beijing.

 

[PhilBowles]

Are you from Hong Kong or Singapore?

Singapore's independent; when it was part of anything, it was first Britain and then Malaysia, never China. The obvious possibility is Hong Kong, but there's an outside possibility he's a Tibetan living in Lhasa - also Chinese for complex reasons, and a city-state in the game.

Singapore is not even close to being a part of China. You might be thinking of Taiwan or Macau, but that last one is pretty clearly a part of China.

Neither Macau nor any Taiwanese cities are city-states in Civ V, though. And while the Taiwanese situation is complicated, a Taiwan native would not consider that their identity as Chinese is complicated - Taiwan's issue with China is essentially the legacy of a historical dynastic struggle: Taiwan doesn't claim independence from China, it claims to rightfully own China, because it was founded by exiles from a former ruling dynasty.

blue/red ended up only being used with Korea ? Blue and white would also have been a better combo.

I thought the French colours in Civ V were blue and white, although the icon itself has a light gold fleur de lys?

Korea's shades aren't the same as France's for either colour, and are a somewhat odd choice as it is. Korea's main flag colour is white, and there's more red than blue on the modern flags of both South and North Korea (the pre-Korean War flag had equal parts blue and red, but it was otherwise the same as South Korea's flag) - navy on red, or on white, would have seemed better choices. I was a bit sad to see Korea's colours; while I love the scheme, it's hard to find a more appropriate combination for the Khmer and I'd hoped to see them reintroduced.

But maybe black is not practical, since they haven't used it for anyone

Interesting observation, and it's quite a common secondary colour. While people made a lot of fuss about dark green and bright red making Ethiopia easy to confuse with barbarians (despite the fact that the red is very different), I don't see any way of confusing a black-primary, gold-secondary civ with barbarians, and it would make a very good combination.

 

[TPangolin]

Macau is on the Chinese city list.