[GS] Canada Discussion Thread

[PhilBowles]

I'm curious which Civs people think aren't hilarious stereotypes.

There's quite a difference between an abstraction of what the civ was about and a stereotype.

To use one of your examples, Rome in Civ VI represents a centralised, expansionist civilisation with a powerful Iron Age army - at the game's coarse resolution this is an accurate portrayal of their place in history, at least as far as the significance of their influence on surrounding powers, and one of the best versions of Rome in the series as a result. Monuments are hardly 'stereotypical' for Rome - no one thinks "Trajan's Column - really?"

England represents the British imperial phase in this edition of the game - overseas colonisation, naval dominance and commerce. Again, that accurately reflects the source of British power in that period. It's not a stereotype. When people think of the British Empire they don't think immediately of Royal Navy Dockyards or Sea Dogs, or even necessarily of the British Museum.

etc. etc.

Of course part of the issue when you get to civs like Australia and Brazil is that they simply don't have major accomplishments that can be abstracted in that way, but people still have images of them and those can be portrayed without resorting to crude stereotyping. In Canada's case, yes the civ makes sense as cultural, it makes sense as diplomatic and peaceful, it may even make some sense as a 'tundra' civ. But there are numerous ways to represent those things without mounties and ice hockey. As with civs like England and Rome the civ mechanics should be designed to give the overall desired picture of the civ without the individual pieces being stereotyped.

In some cases, particularly Brazil, the obsession with stereotyping actually ends up producing a result that doesn't behave like the civ it's representing. Brazil is not especially notable for its 'Great People' - an appropriate way to present a Brazilian culture-focused civ would emphasise tourism from landmarks and, yes, entertainment - perhaps by providing them with a way to get tourism rather than culture from rainforest or additional ways to earn tourism that give them an avenue to victory that isn't as dependent on Great People, just as some civs get bonuses to Wonder production to help a culture game. Generic Culture Civ with generic bonuses to Great People production - not to mention the notion of carnivals consuming entire districts on a permanent basis - doesn't give any sense of what Brazil is.

 

[Leathaface]

You are going to have a sound culture base way before you get the rinks and NP if you want to compete against Russia, Greece, and Kongo. As others have said, a blank, vanilla civ in the early game is just going to be boring to play and not competitive. Canada needs more from the tundra to actually make a tundra game viable. I like the idea of basing the civ around the snow but at least give it some bonuses to tundra. Right now, Canada is just a way worse version of Russia.

As I said before, Feudalism is still in the early game so you can get your tundra farm adjacency bonuses then. Plus Canada can purchase tundra tiles for half price (keep enough gold to upgrade slingers) and the AI can't surprise war you. (which is huge on early game Diety)

Those 3 advantages all come in the early game, heck no suprise war from the AI from the very first turn.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

I would encourage you to explain why this is not a valid reason, when we have roughly ten of them that would be better suited for the game in every manner except for a petty marketing boost, and at least one of them is getting cut even if a third expansion happens as a result of Canada.

Don't bury your head in the sand and pretend that opportunity cost doesn't exist. Argue why Canada has more merit than all of them, or it's a bad civ.

It looks like the purpose for including Canada was to create (a) another civ that gets a bonus from tundra, and (b) a civ that can't declare Surprise War.

The dev team then placed Canadian sounding names like hockey rinks and mounties onto game mechanics intended to create a civ to fit those niches. This isn't a situation where they said "let's build an interesting civ inspired by Canadian history". It seems more likely that it's a "we want a civ that does this, who can we make fit?"

I'm not sure why they wanted another tundra civ when they've already designed Russia that way, but if that is the criteria, then what were the other options, besides Canada? The Sami, Aleuts, Inuit, and a few other northern people, most of whom were semi-nomadic, but maybe could have worked. Or Finland, the modern country, which would also be a possibility. You couldn't make Babylonia the tundra civ, could you? I imagine you could come up with a great and interesting civ from those other people, but they could have done that with Canada, too, and chose not to, presumably because the vision was simply "tundra civ" and that's what they focused on.

For the "no war" civ, Switzerland would have been a great alternative. Who else? I'm sure there are some, but I can't think of any right now. Again, I expect they could have chosen another civ to build this ability around, but I don't see why calling it "Canada" makes it a less interesting mechanic than calling it "Switzerland" or another civ.

Also, I don't know why a marketing boost is petty? If it's what civ players want, it will sell more games. If civ players want different civs instead, it'll lose them sales.

 

[MooFreaky]

I would encourage you to explain why this is not a valid reason, when we have roughly ten of them that would be better suited for the game in every manner except for a petty marketing boost, and at least one of them is getting cut even if a third expansion happens as a result of Canada.

Don't bury your head in the sand and pretend that opportunity cost doesn't exist. Argue why Canada has more merit than all of them, or it's a bad civ.

Having an existing Civ for the sake of it isn't a reason either. Having several Civs that act in the same way isn't a good plan, even if they are more historically well known or popular.
There needs to be a consideration for gameplay, and Canada makes sense as a Civ for the new diplomatic victory mechanic. Furthermore, it adds to the game by having more of the map be useful.

While I find civs like the Mongols hugely interesting, they will simply add another warmonger to the mix. That is probably the least interesting option when the game is already so heavily skewed in that direction.

None of this is to say that X is more worthy than Y. Or that Z wasn't hugely interesting (in this example I find the Mongols waaaaaay more interesting than Canada historically), or is undeserving. But enjoy some variety. It's nice to not have all the same faces every game for the last 20+ years.

 

[footslogger]

I like this civ. Peaceful, tundra-friendly, a slow burner. People are always complaining about how games can get boring after 100 moves because a strong start has assured them of ultimate victory. Canada is going to be a challenge for the first two thirds of the game and it will require the player to hold his nerve until the later boosts to culture and diplomacy kick in. I've a feeling the appeal of its unique playstyle will grow over time.

 

[Saltcreek]

As I said before, Feudalism is still in the early game so you can get your tundra farm adjacency bonuses then. Plus Canada can purchase tundra tiles for half price (keep enough gold to upgrade slingers) and the AI can't surprise war you. (which is huge on early game Diety)

Those 3 advantages all come in the early game, heck no suprise war from the AI from the very first turn.

Feudalism is not going to help with the reduced production and the reduced food you get from non tundra tiles. Also, feudalism is not really an early game civic, you are already transitioning into the mid game when you have this. Couple this with the high probability that ice rinks will be after feudalism you do not have much, if any, reason to build in the tundra in the early game. A culture civ with no early game culture generation is not going to do well against the other culture civs. Cheap bad tundra tiles are still bad tiles - it does not matter if you are saving gold on them because they are still bad.

The surprise war trait is actually pretty bad because it is passive. It does not actually do anything and in multiplayer is will be all but useless.

 

[Pietato]

The idea behind Canada is great. It is the exectuion which is flawed.

 

[WillowBrook]

A mere 14 hours after it started, this thread now has as many posts as the Maori discussion thread, and nearly 50% more more the Hungary thread.

If nothing else, a brilliant marketing choice by Firaxis given all the discussion it's generated.

I find it difficult to believe that any of the remaining announcements will get people so riled up.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

A mere 14 hours after it started, this thread now has as many posts as the Maori discussion thread, and nearly 50% more more the Hungary thread.

If nothing else, a brilliant marketing choice by Firaxis given all the discussion it's generated.

I find it difficult to believe that any of the remaining announcements will get people so riled up.

Eleanor seems like a sore spot for a lot of people too. It's just fallen to the wayside for the time being.

 

[WillowBrook]

Eleanor seems like a sore spot for a lot of people too. It's just fallen to the wayside for the time being.

But if she's revealed Christmas week, people may be too distracted by other stuff to post so much. Just my speculation.

 

[Furycrab]

If people want to talk about opportunity cost, I find bringing back a civ they've done with roughly the same leader and gameplay ideas boring. Had a lot more fun with Australia than the R&f generic Mongols.

Wow this thread is gross thought. I grew up with a hockey rink near my backyard, the RCMP actually still has mounties although they are more for ceremony in Ottawa.

I think they got the flavor right. Peaceful civ that wants to expand on the border of colder terrain and seeks to win by culture, tourism, and diplomacy thru the world Congress.

Not sure what I expected, but I guess I'm not surprised. Little disappointed at the negativity. Might be hard to believe but some players have been waiting for this in a mainline game for decades. It was never going to be perfect, but part of me feels included.

This is an easy day one purchase for me.

 

[clapyourhands]

It looks like the purpose for including Canada was to create (a) another civ that gets a bonus from tundra, and (b) a civ that can't declare Surprise War.

The dev team then placed Canadian sounding names like hockey rinks and mounties onto game mechanics intended to create a civ to fit those niches. This isn't a situation where they said "let's build an interesting civ inspired by Canadian history". It seems more likely that it's a "we want a civ that does this, who can we make fit?"

I'm not sure why they wanted another tundra civ when they've already designed Russia that way, but if that is the criteria, then what were the other options, besides Canada? The Sami, Aleuts, Inuit, and a few other northern people, most of whom were semi-nomadic, but maybe could have worked. Or Finland, the modern country, which would also be a possibility. You couldn't make Babylonia the tundra civ, could you? I imagine you could come up with a great and interesting civ from those other people, but they could have done that with Canada, too, and chose not to, presumably because the vision was simply "tundra civ" and that's what they focused on.

For the "no war" civ, Switzerland would have been a great alternative. Who else? I'm sure there are some, but I can't think of any right now. Again, I expect they could have chosen another civ to build this ability around, but I don't see why calling it "Canada" makes it a less interesting mechanic than calling it "Switzerland" or another civ.

Also, I don't know why a marketing boost is petty? If it's what civ players want, it will sell more games. If civ players want different civs instead, it'll lose them sales.

I highly doubt those were the prevailing reasons, especially over more possibilities like "a modern civ that can showcase the new diplomatic victory", or "a long-requested fan favorite that consistently tops civ wishlists, is Civ V's 2nd most downloaded non-fantasy mod civ (behind Stalin's Soviet Union) and one of the most downloaded mod civs in VI". Tundra usage and the unique surprise war mechanic seem more like secondary things to add that are stereotypically "Canadian" than primary factors.

 

[DeepKing]

Canada’s inclusion is fine (especially with Brazil, Austrailia, and Scythia).

I think we really need a deep dive on Diplomatic Favor and the World Congress to really gage them. The tundra bonuses are going to be boosted I’m sure, I agree it’s weak.

Having Mounties and Ice Rinks aren’t cliche, they’re real parts of Canada’s culture. The easy way towards Parks is huge, once Canada gets Mounties they’ll probably dominate tourism.

 

[PhilBowles]

I highly doubt those were the prevailing reasons, especially over more possibilities like "a modern civ that can showcase the new diplomatic victory"

It's actually possible that that is Canada's role in the expansion. It doesn't look from the description as though it has much to do with diplomatic victory, but if emergencies have been reworked to be more relevant than we're used to it's possible their diplomatic favour bonus could be more significant than it appears.

"a long-requested fan favorite that consistently tops civ wishlists, is Civ V's 2nd most downloaded non-fantasy mod civ (behind Stalin's Soviet Union) and one of the most downloaded mod civs in VI"

Which civ is that? No idea how to look up download stats for mods - checking the Steam Workshop page the most popular recent modded civ for Civ V is the Republic of Costa Rica, which I haven't seen as a popular fan request.

Most of the civs people used to agitate for have been added by now - if this is one that hasn't been in a Civ game before (at least in a similar form) my best guess is Italy, but Firaxis have seemed pretty deliberate about avoiding modern Italy. Maybe the Moors (as the incarnation of Morocco used in Civ V was focused on a later period)?

I think we really need a deep dive on Diplomatic Favor and the World Congress to really gage them.

At a guess that will be the focus of the Canada stream if there is one on Thursday, since they have a mechanic that can't be fully explained without it - at the very least I'd expect elaboration on favour and strategic resources even if they save the World Congress for a later reveal.

Having Mounties and Ice Rinks aren’t cliche, they’re real parts of Canada’s culture.

So's maple syrup but you wouldn't expect to see it represented in a game about the history of civilisation.

The easy way towards Parks is huge, once Canada gets Mounties they’ll probably dominate tourism.

Not as long as parks still have such restrictive placement requirements - it's just not common to have the ability to place more than a couple.

 

[clapyourhands]

Which civ is that? No idea how to look up download stats for mods - checking the Steam Workshop page the most popular recent modded civ for Civ V is the Republic of Costa Rica, which I haven't seen as a popular fan request.

Most of the civs people used to agitate for have been added by now - if this is one that hasn't been in a Civ game before (at least in a similar form) my best guess is Italy, but Firaxis have seemed pretty deliberate about avoiding modern Italy. Maybe the Moors (as the incarnation of Morocco used in Civ V was focused on a later period)?

It's the same page you were on, but searched by "Most Subscribed/All Time" and with the "Civilization" and "BNW" tags checked. And I somehow overlooked the second civ, so Canada is actually 3rd discounting fictional civs. Most downloaded is JFD's Soviet Union at 180,000+ subscribers, 2nd is Tomatekh's Goths at 150,000+ subscribers, and third is TPangolin's Canada at 100,000+ subscribers.

If you're curious the rest of the list (skipping alt leaders) goes: 4) Norway, 5) Italy, 6) Prussia, 7) The UK, 8) The USSR, 9) The Papal States, 10) Belgium, 11) Kievan Rus, 12) Australia, 13) Vietnam, 14) Inuit, 15) Sumer, 16) Francia, 16) Sioux, 17) Switzerland, 18) Hungary, 19) Vandals, 20) Mexico

 

[ferretbacon]

Eleanor seems like a sore spot for a lot of people too. It's just fallen to the wayside for the time being.

I'm extremely curious to see how an alt leader for two civs will work. Do you simply pick either England or France on the game setup screen and then play her as normal? Is her LUA exactly the same with both civs? Is there some sort of in-game mechanic that mixes and matches uniques from both civs? Is there a point where you switch to the other one and finish out the game? I'd think it's simply a static LUA and you just pick one or the other at game setup, but it may be much more interesting than that.

I will say, I don't think England really needed an alt. If it ever got one, I'd rather have seen Elizabeth. I wanted one for France, but I was hoping more along the lines of Napoleon or Louis XIV. France is now going to have two queen consorts to choose from, both of which only acted as regents at times, neither having ever ruled in their own right.

Oh well, though. Alt leaders feel like bonus inclusions anyway, so can't complain really.

 

[Morgawr]

I can already foresee the AI having a difficult time grasping the no surprise war mechanic and being stuck in logical loop...

Turn 1: AI moves troops to take Canada city
Turn 2: let's declare surprise war on Canada. Operation blocked. Hold.
Turn 3: let's declare surprise war on Canada. Operation blocked. Hold.
....
Turn 25: still waiting

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'm extremely curious to see how an alt leader for two civs will work. Do you simply pick either England or France on the game setup screen and then play her as normal? Is her LUA exactly the same with both civs? Is there some sort of in-game mechanic that mixes and matches uniques from both civs? Is there a point where you switch to the other one and finish out the game? I'd think it's simply a static LUA and you just pick one or the other at game setup, but it may be much more interesting than that.

I will say, I don't think England really needed an alt. If it ever got one, I'd rather have seen Elizabeth. I wanted one for France, but I was hoping more along the lines of Napoleon or Louis XIV. France is now going to have two queen consorts to choose from, both of which only acted as regents at times, neither having ever ruled in their own right.

Oh well, though. Alt leaders feel like bonus inclusions anyway, so can't complain really.

I wouldn't even call her a regent as leader of France. She was more of a semi-autonomous duchess of Aquitaine and vassal of her husband.

 

[Josephias]

I can already foresee the AI having a difficult time grasping the no surprise war mechanic and being stuck in logical loop...

Turn 1: AI moves troops to take Canada city
Turn 2: let's declare surprise war on Canada. Operation blocked. Hold.
Turn 3: let's declare surprise war on Canada. Operation blocked. Hold.
....
Turn 25: still waiting

Turn 30: Laurier (AI) dennounces them for not participating in emergencies - even if no one has been proposed.
Turn 35: Hey, formal war is available. Proceed...

 

[Cagarustus]

Isn’t Four Faces of Peace a concept developed by Lester Pearson?