Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Eagle Pursuit, May 11, 2020.
Not everyone. It's missing the Native American tribes from North America
The Cree and Aztec are there. The Maya and Gran Colombia are not yet.
Yes, you are right. I thought there were more NA civs. My brain must be frazzled
Isn't it obvious? They made it to space.
To be fair I'm sure the map was made before last week.
Agreed, that's why I said only Poland in the first comment
Can people stop being anal-retentive about Costantinople/Istambul? Like, jesus, it's a game
Personally, i'm ready for Theodora using Cleopatra recyled anims
lol i’m allowed to have whatever emotions i want about constantinople/istanbul
they got partitioned again
For all the "we can't have Constantinople and Istanbul despite the fact that we have for like four Civ iterations now" people, I'd like to point out that Aleppo is on Arabia's city list twice. Meanwhile, there are a lot of other city list doublets across civs, and Alexander and Cyrus are going to be fraught with loyalty problems if you put all their cities in the "correct" locations the way their city lists overlap geographically. IMO there shouldn't be an issue with city lists that contain the same cities (ideally with names in different languages); a lot of civilizations ruled the same territories, after all. So, for instance, if we got a Palmyra civ, I would hope they had Aleppo and Damascus on their city list, despite Arabia already having them (and one of them twice); just call them Halpa and Darmsuq.
I'm not a linguist but what about Palmyra being on Rome's city list though I guess it's way down there it's not seen in many games?
The Aramaic name is Tadmor, but it could also be removed from Rome's list, too, probably without too many people even noticing since, as you say, it's pretty far down there.
Yeah I can't really seeing a Palmyra civ without, well, Palmyra as the name of the capital.
Cleopatra anachronistically rules from "Ra-Kadet," a little town on the location where Alexandria would later be built, so... (Also, as I've said before, I'm a fan of calling the civ either Aram or Syria.)
It somewhat irritated me that Civ IV did this with at least one, and I think several, Khmer cities: most notably, Yasodharapura and Angkor Thom were the same place (archaeologists define them as being slightly different sites in time, but it appears the Khmer didn't make this distinction).
Most non-European city lists are an absolute mess. Some European city lists are a mess, too.
I personally have no problem with "duplicate cities" because they often underwent cultural changes so significant that they essentially were different cities despite occupying the same geographic location. Byzantine Constantinople was not the same city as Ottoman Istanbul. Tenochtitlan was not Mexico City. Khanbaliq was not Beijing. The only problem with this would be TSL but as has been suggested, there could be a "no duplicate capitals" setting.
There's no evidence that was the case for Yasodharapura specifically, and a lot of time they're using both archaeological and original names for the same place, or the city list refers to different places but is inconsistent in whether it uses the original or the archaeological name (the Maya being a current example, with a capital using the Mayan name but most cities having the currently-used name, only some of which are authentic - although in some cases, like El Mirador, it's not clear the original name is known)..
But admittedly this issue pales in comparison with what they've done with some Native American city lists (Iroquois in Civ V spring to mind, never mind the Native American civ in Civ IV), or the Civ V Celtic city list with its decided shortage of Celtic cities and Anglo-Norman-founded capital.
City lists should always be spelled in the language of the civilization that list belongs to imo. The city of "Rome" should be called "Roma", but that's a basic example. but it would allow for say, Rome, to have "Neapolis" in its list, while an Italian civ would have "Napoli".
It doesn't account for cities that have the same name but different locations (the only instance where this is relevant in Civ 6 are Scythia and Rome, with the former having a "Neapolis" in the list, while the Roman "Neapolis" is refered to by the name of its largest suburb, "Puteoli"
The main issue to me (and I put much more importance in it than i should but um hello i have a SPREADSHEET of city lists for every plausible civ this nerd gotta nerd) is the lack of consistency and the seeming refusal by Firaxis to pick a lane. Either make *all the city names* in the same language as the one the game's being played in (which it did in Civ4 and worked well imo) or in the language of the civilization (some minor modifications can be made for semitic languages and Egyptian to add in the missing vowels - there's no need for "Lebqis" to be refered to as "LPQY" - The Phoenician language is attested for, just hire a scholar to get the ortography right)
i’m so glad there are mods to fix bad city lists
This. 100% this.
IIRC the Celtic city list was based on the "Six Celtic Nations" and pulled equally from each, which is a nice touch even if it was weird to have to cycle through the Isle of Man to get back to Scottish or Irish names.
Separate names with a comma.