Article: How well did they create Australia in Civilization VI?

[shaglio]

I just finished a game with Australia and I have to say that the ramifications of the culture bomb are severe. I had a sheep tile on Rome's border and I didn't want to leave it there unimproved. So I plopped down a pasture, stole a tile from Trajan, and later discovered I had a -10 relationship modifier that lasted for the entire rest of the game. If I had realized that was going to happen, I would have tried to build the pasture before our borders touched, or I would have harvested the sheep and built a farm/mine.

 

[Leyrann]

I just finished a game with Australia and I have to say that the ramifications of the culture bomb are severe. I had a sheep tile on Rome's border and I didn't want to leave it there unimproved. So I plopped down a pasture, stole a tile from Trajan, and later discovered I had a -10 relationship modifier that lasted for the entire rest of the game. If I had realized that was going to happen, I would have tried to build the pasture before our borders touched, or I would have harvested the sheep and built a farm/mine.

I wouldn't like it either if you stole the area I own.

...Even more because it's only some 15 square meters, and hired at that, but that's not the point.

 

[shaglio]

I wouldn't like it either if you stole the area I own.

...Even more because it's only some 15 square meters, and hired at that, but that's not the point.

I knew he wouldn't like it, but I didn't realize just how much he wouldn't like it . . . for just one tile . . . for the entire rest of the game. A -10 modifier, when an Agenda modifier is usually only +/-6, seems a tad bit extreme to me. Lesson learned! Although I wish there was a little more transparency in regards to how egregious an act will be.

 

[nzcamel]

I wouldn't like it either if you stole the area I own.

...Even more because it's only some 15 square meters, and hired at that, but that's not the point.

Which puts Australia in a very unenviable position, if they want to get the pasture, but keep said neighbour onside.... I guess you just know that if you're not wanting to steal land, you've got to prioritise tiles with pastures sooner than you would with other Civs.

 

[bite]

Which puts Australia in a very unenviable position, if they want to get the pasture, but keep said neighbour onside.... I guess you just know that if you're not wanting to steal land, you've got to prioritise tiles with pastures sooner than you would with other Civs.

I've yet to steal another civs tile with the culture bomb, I only seam to use it to get that early expansion bonus

 

[nzcamel]

I've yet to steal another civs tile with the culture bomb, I only seam to use it to get that early expansion bonus

I have stolen land via the culture bomb in the brief game I had as Australia (abandoned after I not only missed out on Iron, but also then Niter, making a come back...tricky lol) and it was fun. The purist in me doesn't like the mechanism in the game, but meh - it is fun. Till it happens to oneself no doubt Then blood will be shed!

 

[bite]

I have stolen land via the culture bomb in the brief game I had as Australia (abandoned after I not only missed out on Iron, but also then Niter, making a come back...tricky lol) and it was fun. The purist in me doesn't like the mechanism in the game, but meh - it is fun. Till it happens to oneself no doubt Then blood will be shed!

Hasn't happened to me yet, but oh boy would it be war

 

[Leyrann]

Hasn't happened to me yet, but oh boy would it be war

I just got forward settled by Poland (halfway through a war by the way). So yeah, there's probably more wars following...

 

[bite]

I just got forward settled by Poland (halfway through a war by the way). So yeah, there's probably more wars following...

The AI do like to forward settle ...

 

[nzcamel]

So do many human players lol

 

[Leyrann]

So do many human players lol

I don't really do that, actually. Just tend to spam settlers to fill everything up, but normally I'm taking the closest available spot.

 

[nzcamel]

I don't really do that, actually. Just tend to spam settlers to fill everything up, but normally I'm taking the closest available spot.

Many...not all

 

[bite]

I don't really do that, actually. Just tend to spam settlers to fill everything up, but normally I'm taking the closest available spot.

yes but that is when Japan sends a settler from across the other side of the continent to settle your 2nd city location

 

[bite]

I've updated the article, now that the last patch nerfed the appeal bonus a bit

 

[unpossible251]

i'll have to try that culture bomb land steal. the trick with australia is to be a bad neighbour and constantly provoke everyone (haha! hello, asia!) without actually being the one who throws the 1st punch.

 

[bite]

I can lead to a couple turns of 'come on just attack me'

 

[Manifold]

I still find it a pity that the Australian Civ has not a aboriginal scout.
I really hope that they fix this by a patch.

 

[Uberfrog]

I still find it a pity that the Australian Civ has not a aboriginal scout.
I really hope that they fix this by a patch.

The developers said in an interview that they couldn't find a way to do the Aboriginal civilisations justice within the context of the Australian civ, and I think that's the right call. It'd be a weird, and probably offensive airbrushing of history to pretend that aboriginals were just a trait of the otherwise entirely colonial civ represented in-game. It'd be like having a native scout for the America civ.

It'd be far better to represent an aboriginal culture with its own civ (not that doesn't present its own problems given they were largely hunter-gatherers and din't have any cities) than to give them a token unit in a civ that otherwise represents the people who took over their country...

 

[bite]

Indeed I touched upon this in the article, that if would have been nice to at least acknowledge Australia's long history, I'm happy that the Dev's thought about this and decided that they needed to give themselves room to add a Indigenous Civ from Australia instead possibly later, and I hope that they do.

 

[Manifold]

The developers said in an interview that they couldn't find a way to do the Aboriginal civilisations justice within the context of the Australian civ, and I think that's the right call. It'd be a weird, and probably offensive airbrushing of history to pretend that aboriginals were just a trait of the otherwise entirely colonial civ represented in-game. It'd be like having a native scout for the America civ.

thanks for the information but this was a wrong decision of the developers.

Also which history represents the Australian civ currently. Just the country that take part on WW1 and WW2 - not very exciting if you start in 4000BC

It'd be far better to represent an aboriginal culture with its own civ (not that doesn't present its own problems given they were largely hunter-gatherers and din't have any cities) than to give them a token unit in a civ that otherwise represents the people who took over their country...

Indeed I touched upon this in the article, that if would have been nice to at least acknowledge Australia's long history, I'm happy that the Dev's thought about this and decided that they needed to give themselves room to add a Indigenous Civ from Australia instead possibly later, and I hope that they do.

This will not happen, so the Aboriginal will simply fall under the table, no more and no less.

Furthermore:
The UA fits probably to the Shire or if you give some one a big excessive advantage
The LUA is something special for Australia? I did not know that Australia was so often a war objective or liberates so many cities.
UU: The fight on the coastal tile of Gallipoli was not so successful if I remember well

The Outback Station is good.

But were is something about the Australian gold rush or free convicts as settlers?

There is more about the history of Australia than just WW1 and WW2. Australia´s influence on both can be described as very limited!