Betting and Speculation - The "Entirely Separate Hypercube" Civ!

Serenity Now.
 
Look, guys, a new 50 pages thread we've never seen before!
 
Waddya know, the thread's back.

Soooo, uh, Venice is bad, and Shoshone sounds like shoe-shine.
 
*plays the Doctor Who theme*
It's wibbly-wobbly timey wimey stuff. Obviously, the person posted the info when the next two Civs were annouced, and it got sucked into a wormhole and got washed up here. Then, it noticed a high level of paradoxes in this thread which weakened the temporal link and allowed it to vanish temporarily. Now to post this blurb which I've had open since the thread vanished.

I'm not quite sure why people think Venice (with the tentative UA) would be weak. Sure, they have a major drawback in not being able to found cities. But the double trade routes is very, very, very powerful. Let's say the average Civilization will end up with 10 trade routes by the end of the game (10 is a rough approximation based on the videos we've seen). Venice would have 20 trade routes. Let's say late-game trade routes are worth 20 gold apiece (there were at least 10 trade routes worth 20 gold in the featurette). Venice gets an extra 200 gpt, at least, in the lategame if they send all those trade routes out.

What Venice does is throw gold at problems until they goes away. A massive puppet empire (puppets focus on gold) will be easier to maintain, because you can rushbuy happiness buildings. People seem to be focusing on the 'city-state puppeting with Great Merchant' thing, but that seems to be a feature which, while being sort of neat, won't be your main strategy for most games. As I see it, the player will want to stay small and puppet one or two city-states until around Navigation, at which point they start going on a conquering rampage. Puppet their coastal cities with your Galleasses, and when the cities come out of resistance, rushbuy units and crush their empire!
 
Has anything actually been removed? What was the point in shutting it?
Probably a case of better safe than sorry. If it's kind of unresolved whether this info is something that should not be out, it might be better to pack it away until green light have been given to do otherwise. But like it was said in the other thread, the info is now so out and about that there's probably no sense in trying to hide it at this point, even if it was not supposed to be leaked, which may be why the thread came back. Or they may even be trying to do a double entendre on us, by keeping this thread out, we don't know whether the info is true or false, whereas hiding the thread almost certainly would indicate that the info was true ...
 
14822.jpg


My thoughts on the past few days on CivFanatics xD
 
So here is the question: now that the mods decided to put it back up -- does that mean the leak is fake?
 
Did you save the text for Venice too?


so nunor posted this in a Reddit thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1g07oo/bnw_civs_8_and_9_venice_and_the_shoshone/

"Venice Leader: Enrico Dandolo: Cannot gain settlers or annex cities. Double the number of trade routs available. A Merchant of Venice appears after researcing Optics. May purchase in puppetteered cities
UU: Merchant of Venice: Replaces Great merchant: Has an additional ability to buy city states as puppet cities.
UU: Great Galleass: Replaces Galleass It has +2 combat, +3 ranged combat but costs 73p (vs 67)"

Might as well post what the Shoshone text supposedly is. Again, credit goes to nunor:

"Leader: Pocatello
Unique Ability: Founded cities start with additional territory. Units receive a combat bonus when fighting in friendly territory.
Unique Unit 1: Pathfinder; Replaces Scout. It has 8 combat, costs 30 p, allows you to choose ancient ruin bonus
Unique Unit 2: Comanche Riders; Replaces Cavalry. 134 p, it seems to have 4 movement like Cavalry but has an ability that gives +1 movement, the explanation says they have quick attacks."
 
Put that away before the mods do.
 
But the Unique Great Merchant, being a Great Person and not a regular unit, might have been filed somewhere else, for all we know. At least it's not unthinkable. So I wouldn't say that's definitive either.


Yes, if there is no suitable start location that fits your start bias, you'll get a random starting location. But coastal bias should be considerably easier to fulfill than forest, and otherwise, I guess you just roll a new start (or curse your luck and take it as an extra challenge).

I always curse my luck and take it as a challenge, I never roll a new start :king:
 
so nunor posted this in a Reddit thread: http://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1g07oo/bnw_civs_8_and_9_venice_and_the_shoshone/

"Venice Leader: Enrico Dandolo: Cannot gain settlers or annex cities. Double the number of trade routs available. A Merchant of Venice appears after researcing Optics. May purchase in puppetteered cities
UU: Merchant of Venice: Replaces Great merchant: Has an additional ability to buy city states as puppet cities.
UU: Great Galleass: Replaces Galleass It has +2 combat, +3 ranged combat but costs 73p (vs 67)"

Might as well post what the Shoshone text supposedly is. Again, credit goes to nunor:

"Leader: Pocatello
Unique Ability: Founded cities start with additional territory. Units receive a combat bonus when fighting in friendly territory.
Unique Unit 1: Pathfinder; Replaces Scout. It has 8 combat, costs 30 p, allows you to choose ancient ruin bonus
Unique Unit 2: Comanche Riders; Replaces Cavalry. 134 p, it seems to have 4 movement like Cavalry but has an ability that gives +1 movement, the explanation says they have quick attacks."

The Shoshone sound interesting, but I really can't picture Venice being all that strong of a civ with those limitations. Sounds like they'll be a really easy early conquer for me.
 
If that's the Shoshone, that's ridiculously boring, even given that scout replacement's ability. Venice sounds much more interesting to play as, if challenging.
 
Um, you guys, something I just noticed.

At around 8PM on Friday, someone made a post saying "Shoshone and Venice" on an apparently name filtered website's /vg/ board, in the Civ thread. Archive source. Or, see the actual post.

Did someone leak it there two days ago, or was it just a lucky guess?

The two were known two days ago. That's when the Polish forum leaked it. The details are new.
 
Back
Top Bottom