[R&F] Poll: which are the last 4 R&F civs?

[dnoisette]

(ETA: take this with a pinch of salt but if my interpretation of Google's mangling of the post is correct, this person is writing the Chinese version of the leader Civilopedia entries, or claiming so anyway)

Google Translated what I think might be the right bit of the page:



Replies to this post:



Don't get me wrong, I love Celtic history and culture and I'd really love to see a Celtic Civ. They do mention Celts by name (according to Google Translate anyway). I'd be a lot happier if it were just Scotland as a Civ - I would actually love to see that. The mention of Braveheart gives me a small grain of hope. But I think going off this it sounds more like a generic Celtic Civ with Wallace as leader.

Thank you for providing that information. However, I can't seem to find the posts you're referencing on the page that was linked?
Granted, I don't speak Chinese which really doesn't help...

 

[marius_kaparius]

LINK: https://tieba.baidu.com/p/5460361678 #81
"they can take our lives but they can never take our freedom"

Any chance that someone other than Google Translate could take a crack at this? The thread seems to have several pages and appears to have mentions of Turkey and someone trying to hint at what the civilizations are but Google Translate seems utterly useless at translating it all.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Any chance that someone other than Google Translate could take a crack at this? The thread seems to have several pages and appears to have mentions of Turkey and someone trying to hint at what the civilizations are but Google Translate seems utterly useless at translating it all.

Most of the thread appears to be speculation.

 

[marius_kaparius]

Most of the thread appears to be speculation.

Agreed, and putting the post that mentions Brave heart and Shaka through a different online translator makes it seem like he is rather saying that he prefers having Shaka or "Braveheart" over the Cree. Later on there is also a post that could translate to them saying what they posted is NOT a spoiler for those being the new civilizations. Unless, we get a better translation that proves otherwise this is not a leak IMHO.

 

[liv]

Something is not adding up. Wallace as leader for the Celts does not sound right.

 

[Guandao]

I asked my dad (who can read Chinese) to read it, he managed to translate the encyclopedia and Braveheart part, but not the Zulu one. My parents both think this Chinese poster is a "kid" and is lying about working for Firaxis.

I honestly hope they are right. I can wait for the Zulus. I prefer other African Civilizations over them and the expansion already has some warmongers. If Mali and Ethiopia never make it to Civ6, I will be pissed at Firaxis. And William Wallace is a poor choice to lead the Celts, I prefer Robert the Bruce. Firaxis will make him look like Mel Gibson's horribly inaccurate movie portrayal.

 

[dnoisette]

I guess only time will tell now.

 

[ferretbacon]

Admittedly, I don't really understand what's happening on the Chinese forum thread that was linked, but I didn't see anything that convinces me this is a leak.

However, someone earlier said that maybe the Zulu and Celts will be a post-expansion DLC, which makes perfect thematic sense:

 

[Nev_ti]

hmmm...sounds fake

 

[Gabhar]

I'll be really disappointed if the civ is the Celts led by William Wallace. I know V's Celts had some Scottish bias but there's no need to double down, it's better to just make Scotland. Well actually I'd prefer Gaul, the Gaels, or Ireland but I guess I'm biased. I can only imagine the complaints if the Ottomans don't make it in this expansion as well especially if there's no more small DLC.

 

[Guandao]

Why should William Wallace be the Celtic leader? He wasn't a political leader, as far as I could tell. Robert the Bruce is a better option, if they wanted a Scottish leader.

 

[The Kingmaker]

I'm not really okay with a medieval leader for the Celts. Civ5's blob version was bad enough. And it's really unfortunate that Mel Gibson's film has everyone thinking that medieval Scots painted themselves like ancient Picts (which itself is still a matter of historical debate).

The term "Celts" more properly refers to ancient peoples like the Hallstatt and La Tene cultures, the Gauls and the Britons.

Lumping the Welsh, Irish and Scots into a Celtic blob civ would be like lumping the French, Spanish and Portuguese into a Roman blob civ because they speak Romance languages.

Or lumping England, Norway and the Netherlands into a German civ. The Dutch may be Germanic, but don't ever try to tell one of them that they're German.

Give us a Gaulish civ. You can call them the Celts if you want. Just not another mangled Celtic blob civ. My wife ("Cartimandua" of PolyCast fame) almost cried when she saw Civ5's emaciated and underdressed Boudica.

 

[Xandinho]

William Wallace sounds more like a great general than a leader of a civilization.

 

[Arianrhod]

I don't see how there's no way in which we don't get Zulu? Just because they were in every game before this one does not mean they have to appear again. In fact I would argue it's a good reason for them not to - we've already seen them enough, have them make some room for other African civilizations.

I don't care for them, so they're going to appear in every game forevermore. Simple enough. Having bad luck is almost as good as being psychic.

This also works in reverse: I like the Hittites so they've been banished from the series and will never return.

 

[PhilBowles]

If William Wallace is leading the Celts, that would be an even bigger bungling of the Celts conglomerate Civ than usual. Yeesh. I hope it is actually Scotland.

I'd rather dismissed the Celts but they were among my earliest expectations for the expansion due to being associated with the Dark Ages, and the main European civ not yet in the game that flourished in that period. Though Wallace as a leader throws that out as he's well into the Medieval period (never mind the usual round of "not actually a national leader" stuff) - I'd hoped for an Irish or Gallic focus, which would bring some semblance of thematic coherence to the usual hodgepodge (as much as I consider them the worst civ in the game thematically, I assumed they were inevitable at some stage).

On the plus side it's not Boudicca, and since Medieval Scottish should be an available language we won't have anything as anachronistic as modern Welsh (never mind I always found it offputting to have a Welsh warrior civ in the game).

I don't care for them, so they're going to appear in every game forevermore. Simple enough. Having bad luck is almost as good as being psychic.

I don't like the Zulu but I also don't like the idea of having a Civ game without all of the original 12 (which means we need Babylon either as DLC or in the next epansion - having it as a city state doesn't count). I'd certainly rather have them than the Celts (while all but one of the Civ II civs have turned up in every subsequent game - equating the Vikings with Denmark/Norway - that one exception does set a precedent for leaving out the Celts).

 

[ChocolateShake]

If that leak is true I'd actually be quite disappointed. I was really hoping we could avoid a repeat of the "Celtic blob", and if they are going to add an African nation this expansion, the Zulu would have been about last on my list.

Yup, I don't really like having the Zulu as a series regular.

I don't care for them, so they're going to appear in every game forevermore. Simple enough. Having bad luck is almost as good as being psychic.

This also works in reverse: I like the Hittites so they've been banished from the series and will never return.

Hittites would be nice to see! They really should make a comeback.

 

[Guandao]

I'd rather dismissed the Celts but they were among my earliest expectations for the expansion due to being associated with the Dark Ages, and the main European civ not yet in the game that flourished in that period. Though Wallace as a leader throws that out as he's well into the Medieval period (never mind the usual round of "not actually a national leader" stuff) - I'd hoped for an Irish or Gallic focus, which would bring some semblance of thematic coherence to the usual hodgepodge (as much as I consider them the worst civ in the game thematically, I assumed they were inevitable at some stage).

On the plus side it's not Boudicca, and since Medieval Scottish should be an available language we won't have anything as anachronistic as modern Welsh (never mind I always found it offputting to have a Welsh warrior civ in the game).

The downside is the potential for William Wallace being depicted similarly to Mel Gibson's movie portrayal, with anachronistic blue paint on his face and a kilt. And I'm not fond of the real life Wallace either or that Mel Gibson movie.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Armagh is still a City-State so would that change anything? I don't see them making a purely Scottish Civ.

 

[Guandao]

Armagh is still a City-State so would that change anything? I don't see them making a purely Scottish Civ.

Armagh is a Northern Irish city, so they could make the City-List for the Celts mainly Scottish.

 

[PhilBowles]

The downside is the potential for William Wallace being depicted similarly to Mel Gibson's movie portrayal, with anachronistic blue paint on his face and a kilt. And I'm not fond of the real life Wallace either or that Mel Gibson movie.

I very much hope the quote is just for the hint and doesn't reflect the portrayal in-game. Then again, they've used TV shows and movies for half the other leaders - and in Hojo's case particularly bearing no apparent resemblance to the historical figure - so I wouldn't get your hopes up. Still, Braveheart is sufficiently notorious for being wildly anachronistic that they hopefully realise they'd get flak for a Mel Gibson Wallace.

Armagh is a Northern Irish city, so they could make the City-List for the Celts mainly Scottish.

The reason I've always loathed the Celts in Civ games is that their portrayal has been completely incoherent - a mishmash of city names from unrelated cultures and areas, leaders that don't match those, uniques that aren't closely tied to them.

If they settle on a single, consistent period and nation to represent - even if that's Medieval Scotland for which the name 'Celts' isn't particularly appropriate - I'll be a lot more accepting of the civ. I'd rather have that than the usual mix of Scottish, Irish and Welsh with a couple of French cities thrown in for good measure.

Having said that, Armagh wasn't part of the Civ V Celtic city list either despite being a more appropriate choice than half the cities that were.