Civ VI Funny/Strange Screenshots

[kaspergm]

It was some kind of pagan idol and Muhammad cleansed it of the pagan imagery or something.

I think the relics of tribal villages are like voodoo talismans or Amazonian shrunken heads or the carved humans skulls that have been found at Gobekli Tepe. They are or were material parts of spiritual traditions that don't really have the trappings of a formal religion, but they could be a starting point.

But pagan beliefs and voodooism would translate into pantheons in terms of this game - right?

 

[Leyrann]

But pagan beliefs and voodooism would translate into pantheons in terms of this game - right?

But why can those not spawn from a relic - after all, it is only a few turns until that happens.

 

[Cerilis]

Cultural border growth could either bring them back to La Venta or be on the other side of your empire from La Venta.

And then they would likely be stuck again.

 

[WillowBrook]

But pagan beliefs and voodooism would translate into pantheons in terms of this game - right?

I would think of it like the tribal village has a pantheon (broadly defined) that the relic is related to, and when you bring the relic back, your people, over the course of time, develop their own version of the pantheon in connection with the relic. By contrast, when you find faith in the tribal village, it's like they teach you directly about their beliefs.

 

[kaspergm]

I would think of it like the tribal village has a pantheon (broadly defined) that the relic is related to, and when you bring the relic back, your people, over the course of time, develop their own version of the pantheon in connection with the relic. By contrast, when you find faith in the tribal village, it's like they teach you directly about their beliefs.

That is an explanation I can put some meaning into.

When that's said, I still think it would be better for balance if you could only find a relic in a hut after you've founded either a pantheon or a religion.

 

[bbufa]

Gandhi must thank those barbs for saving his city, they ignore everything to attack my units

 

[Kimiimaro]

Australia is insanely good.

 

[God of Kings]

Australia is insanely good.


View attachment 474246

Add in Eiffel Tower, Alvar Aalto, and Charles Correa.

 

[Leyrann]

Add in Eiffel Tower, Alvar Aalto, and Charles Correa.

Can't get more after +3 though.

 

[God of Kings]

Can't get more after +3 though.

That's good, because with +5 appeal, Australia would be extremely OP.

 

[Kimiimaro]

That's good, because with +5 appeal, Australia would be extremely OP.

And what is Australia now if not extremely OP?

 

[God of Kings]

And what is Australia now if not extremely OP?

I believe that Australia is intentionally made to be OP in order to sell the Australia DLC.

 

[Leyrann]

I believe that Australia is intentionally made to be OP in order to sell the Australia DLC.

I believe theories like this one to be pure conspiracy theories.

 

[Rosty K]

I believe theories like this one to be pure conspiracy theories.

There's also no point in that since they didn't advertise Australia being OP before the DLC release, so how was it supposed to affect sales?

 

[kaspergm]

I believe theories like this one to be pure conspiracy theories.

Certainly not. DLC civs have, both in Civ5 and Civ6, pretty consistently been top tier, often bordering on OP. Civ5 Mongols, Inca, Korea, Babylon and Spain (albeit the latter was a gamble) are all prime examples of this, as are all Civ6 DLC civs so far. It's a logical choice, because if people pay money to get one specific civ, it has to stand out from the crowd, otherwise people will be dissatisfied.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Certainly not. DLC civs have, both in Civ5 and Civ6, pretty consistently been top tier, often bordering on OP. Civ5 Mongols, Inca, Korea, Babylon and Spain (albeit the latter was a gamble) are all prime examples of this, as are all Civ6 DLC civs so far. It's a logical choice, because if people pay money to get one specific civ, it has to stand out from the crowd, otherwise people will be dissatisfied.

Hem hem... Denmark.

 

[kaspergm]

Hem hem... Denmark.

Yes, obviously the exception to the rule.

 

[Leyrann]

As far as I'm aware Poland isn't that strong either.

(and don't ask me about Civ V as I don't know that game nearly as well as I do Civ VI)

 

[Kimiimaro]

As far as I'm aware Poland isn't that strong either.

(and don't ask me about Civ V as I don't know that game nearly as well as I do Civ VI)

And I'm avare that I have to disagree with you. Poland is one of the better Civs in game. Winged Hussars are one of the best units in game, Sukiennice is one of the best UBs in game, the worst policy slot transformed into the best policy slot is also great, stealing land from your neighbours can be also awesome if you have annoying forward settling neighbours. I agree, Jadwiga's UA isn't very good, but at least makes Poland the second best Civ when you're going for the religious victory.

 

[Leyrann]

And I'm avare that I have to disagree with you. Poland is one of the better Civs in game. Winged Hussars are one of the best units in game, Sukiennice is one of the best UBs in game, the worst policy slot transformed into the best policy slot is also great, stealing land from your neighbours can be also awesome if you have annoying forward settling neighbours. I agree, Jadwiga's UA isn't very good, but at least makes Poland the second best Civ when you're going for the religious victory.

Guess I'm off there, then. I'll admit I haven't played them in quite a while. They don't seem to come up a lot on the forum though, contrary to civs like Australia and Kongo. (Guess Jadwiga just looks too cute.)