Would be a nice change-up of cataphracts, better than giving it to the Byzantines. But if given the option camel guy wins. I'm still waiting for the Saami or Yakut just so I can have a reindeer UU.
I would probably go with cavalry. At the moment the only true early cavalry unit we have is the hetaroi; but we do already have an early elephant unit in the Varu. But I wouldn't mind the elephant.
Vietnam could be the first Civ rule by two leaders.
Leader: Trung Sisters Leader Ability: The Two Ladies each era you can choose one sister to rule:
Plowshares to swords: Trung Nhi +20% unit production if Encampment is adjacent to a farm. +20% production to Encampment District adjacent to a farm. Can spend builders charges to complete 30% unit production in Encampment
Swords to Plowshares Trung Trac +10% to settlers and workers production in a Cities with the adjacent farm. +1 production to Farms adjacent to Industrial Zone +1 faith to Farms adjacent to Holy Site +1 gold to Farms adjacent to Commercial Hub.
UA Ho Shi Minh Trial
+5 Combat Strength for units in friendly territory. Units in the friendly territory may move on jungle and forest titles as on roads, +1 food to farms adjacent to lake, river, or marsh.
UB: Water Puppet Theatre replaces Theatre
+1 Amenities
+2 culture to each adjacent farm
UU Vietkong replaces Infantry
Does not require Oil 400 production movement 3 melee Strenght 65
Starts with a unique promotion Ambush +2 move after attack
Vietnam could be the first Civ rule by two leaders.
Leader: Trung Sisters Leader Ability: The Two Ladies each era you can choose one sister to rule:
Plowshares to swords: Trung Nhi +20% unit production if Encampment is adjacent to a farm. +20% production to Encampment District adjacent to a farm. Can spend builders charges to complete 30% unit production in Encampment
Swords to Plowshares Trung Trac +10% to settlers and workers production in a Cities with the adjacent farm. +1 production to Farms adjacent to Industrial Zone +1 faith to Farms adjacent to Holy Site +1 gold to Farms adjacent to Commercial Hub.
UA Ho Shi Minh Trial
+5 Combat Strength for units in friendly territory. Units in the friendly territory may move on jungle and forest titles as on roads, +1 food to farms adjacent to lake, river, or marsh.
UB: Water Puppet Theatre replaces Theatre
+1 Amenities
+2 culture to each adjacent farm
UU Vietkong replaces Infantry
Does not require Oil 400 production movement 3 melee Strenght 65
Starts with a unique promotion Ambush +2 move after attack
Only Trung Trac was queen; it makes little sense for Trung Nhi to be a leader at all. Also, having two leaders is really dumb if generally the point of leader selection in VI is to give the civs a consistent, distinct personality to play against.
(also, Swords to Ploughshares isn't a Vietnamese concept; Ploughshares to Swords isn't a thing at all)
There aren't many things the devs could do to make me stop buying the game, but implementing a silly fan-requested gimmick like this and giving it to Vietnam of all civs...I think I might ragequit. Vietnam can have one perfectly good leader just like everyone else.
Leader: Trung Sisters Leader Ability: The Two Ladies each era you can choose one sister to rule:
Plowshares to swords: Trung Nhi +20% unit production if Encampment is adjacent to a farm. +20% production to Encampment District adjacent to a farm. Can spend builders charges to complete 30% unit production in Encampment
Swords to Plowshares Trung Trac +10% to settlers and workers production in a Cities with the adjacent farm. +1 production to Farms adjacent to Industrial Zone +1 faith to Farms adjacent to Holy Site +1 gold to Farms adjacent to Commercial Hub.
UA Ho Shi Minh Trial
+5 Combat Strength for units in friendly territory. Units in the friendly territory may move on jungle and forest titles as on roads, +1 food to farms adjacent to lake, river, or marsh.
UB: Water Puppet Theatre replaces Theatre
+1 Amenities
+2 culture to each adjacent farm
UU Vietkong replaces Infantry
Does not require Oil 400 production movement 3 melee Strenght 65
Starts with a unique promotion Ambush +2 move after attack
As much as I want Vietnam I'm not entirely onboard with two attributes being based off of the latter half of the 20th century, when they have a whole lot of other eras of history to choose from.
I agree. Just pointing out that there preferred religion is Buddhism.
As much as I want Vietnam I'm not entirely onboard with two attributes being based off of the latter half of the 20th century, when they have a whole lot of other eras of history to choose from.
i’d like to see the vietcong as a unique unit, at minimum, just bcs another elephant mounted unit or cannon type unit for a Asian civ would be a bit boring. I agree that the UA could be more representative of Veitnam’s past though
i’d like to see the vietcong as a unique unit, at minimum, just bcs another elephant mounted unit or cannon type unit for a Asian civ would be a bit boring. I agree that the UA could be more representative of Veitnam’s past though
i’d like to see the vietcong as a unique unit, at minimum, just bcs another elephant mounted unit or cannon type unit for a Asian civ would be a bit boring. I agree that the UA could be more representative of Veitnam’s past though
This would be my pick: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mông_Đồng
I could see it being similar to the turtle ship that's been in the past games. Caravel replacement (maybe comes earlier) and stronger in coastal water.
This would be my pick: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mông_Đồng
I could see it being similar to the turtle ship that's been in the past games. Caravel replacement (maybe comes earlier) and stronger in coastal water.
I definitely prefer this. The Vietcong represent a much shorter period in Vietnamese history while this was used for nearly a millennium. Plus it feels like it would synergize better with general Vietnamese identity: a culture which slowly and deliberately expanded along the South China coast.
Generally I prefer the idea of the Vietnamese being a "coastal" civ than I do a defensive civ, although I imagine it could still have defensive aspects or vice versa.
Also, I think if we do indeed get Vietnam, a Vijaya city-state is begged.
I don't entirely disagree, but Civ V's "Diplomatic Victory" is functionally an Economic Victory, and it's somehow better than both Civ 6's Religious and Diplomatic victories. This isn't to say it was good -- it was janky at best and garbage at worst -- but it got the most important thing right: it was a victory type that allowed you to immediately end a game you've already won, without it being dragged out for a needlessly long amount of time. Civ 6's endgame could learn from this.
There aren't many things the devs could do to make me stop buying the game, but implementing a silly fan-requested gimmick like this and giving it to Vietnam of all civs...I think I might ragequit. Vietnam can have one perfectly good leader just like everyone else.
chill man. This is not a fun request, but just a concept. It's fun. There is no need to rage
You may not like it, but don't worry my post is not an official Firaxis First Look
If Firaxis were to implement the Trung Sisters with the gimmick as described by Wielki above I would buy the DLC faster than one could blink their eyes. Yes for Girl Power ^__^
(not sure about the abilities though, but the concept of an ability changing depending to whether you're at peace or at war is highly original and Vietnam is one of the best candidates for it)
i’d like to see the vietcong as a unique unit, at minimum, just bcs another elephant mounted unit or cannon type unit for a Asian civ would be a bit boring. I agree that the UA could be more representative of Veitnam’s past though
Maybe a "naming" is a problem.
Part of UA: +1 food to farms adjacent to lake, river, or marsh is quite representative in my opinion, and has a synergy with a general concept: The idea here is to make the Civ a rural one all-around farms. And those farms can be boosted either with adjacency bonuses with districts or can be used to boost army production (peasant recruitment). All these are ok with Vietnam history in my opinion (not only Vietnam war).
Water Puppet Theatres was a part of the Vietnamese peasant culture. That is why I synergize it with a farm title.
Over 2 thousand years of Vietnam history is split on who halves (when the country was under Chinese and later Colonial Powers with uprisings and fight for sovereignty and second part when it was independent and could develop based on agriculture) That is why I came up with the idea of splitting Civ Ability into two halves militaristic/uprise mode and development. I used the Thung Sisters to justify it. That's the context, so maybe some of you will be less serious now
Also, having two leaders is really dumb if generally the point of leader selection in VI is to give the civs a consistent, distinct personality to play against.
You're making up rules again about what Civ 6 is supposed to be.
Two leaders like that would break from the norm, like Eleanor does in its own way.
I'm not sure if Vietnam is the best example for that though.
I'm also not sure this is the best use of Firaxis resources. It could be spent on a full leader instead.
More feasible would be to give a Civ two abilities and allow the player to choose one at the start of each era. A one off ability like that would make a Civ unique without needing the extra leader art.
There aren't many things the devs could do to make me stop buying the game, but implementing a silly fan-requested gimmick like this and giving it to Vietnam of all civs...I think I might ragequit. Vietnam can have one perfectly good leader just like everyone else.
"There aren't many things the devs could do to make me stop buying the game"
Are you sure? You're constantly adding rules and constrains regarding what is acceptable in Civ VI.
This is hardly the first time you dismiss an idea because it does not conform to the type of game you believe Civ VI to be.
You argue that those constraints were intended by the devs, but then get confused and dissapointed if the devs come up with something that goes against those imagined constraints.
(not sure about the abilities though, but the concept of an ability changing depending to whether you're at peace or at war is highly original and Vietnam is one of the best candidates for it)
I don't think that would be enough. Australia already has a very powerful ability that triggers when war is declared on them. Persia when it declares war.
I think to be truly unique it should require a different trigger and preferably more player agency. Which is why I think eras would be a good trigger, since you'd have to plan ahead for the entire era.
You're making up rules again about what Civ 6 is supposed to be.
Two leaders like that would break from the norm, like Eleanor does in its own way.
I'm not sure if Vietnam is the best example for that though.
I'm also not sure this is the best use of Firaxis resources. It could be spent on a full leader instead.
More feasible would be to give a Civ two abilities and allow the player to choose one at the start of each era. A one off ability like that would make a Civ unique without needing the extra leader art.
You're criticizing me of making a clear observation of why Firaxis are choosing leaders with "personality", something which they have expressly admitted on multiple occasions. And then quite literally defending my opinion of why I think it is an incredibly stupid idea, because yes I do consider it a waste of development resources with little to no payoff.
"There aren't many things the devs could do to make me stop buying the game"
Are you sure? You're constantly adding rules and constrains regarding what is acceptable in Civ VI.
This is hardly the first time you dismiss an idea because it does not conform to the type of game you believe Civ VI to be.
You argue that those constraints were intended by the devs, but then get confused and dissapointed if the devs come up with something that goes against those imagined constraints.
I am inferring rules, not "adding" them. I make hypotheses to fit the data, and those hypotheses are subject to change and be refined as new data and ideas surface. As I just pointed out, the notion that leaders provide distinct, consistent playstyles to interact with isn't even really something that required much inference. The design decision to choose personalities quite obviously seemed to be a deliberate attempt to (a) facilitate more defined playstyle niches to make the roster feel less homogenous and (b) lampshade dubious AI advancements with simpler agendas and some superficial attempts at "rapport-building". And so far I haven't been "confused" or "disappointed" because Firaxis has largely held to their design philosophy. A double leader would represent a departure from VI's focus on "personality" and would dilute the main benefits of having a single, distinct leader personifying each civ.
And all it would accomplish would be to implement a dumb fan proposal that has become so parroted in the echo chambers here that it seems some players just feel entitled to it by now. If you are allowed to throw thinly veiled ad hominems at me simply because you are so averse to the idea that VI might have its own goals beyond shallow fanservice, I can certainly complain about some of the trite, uninspired ideas this community keeps trotting out.
I just want to say one more time: first I came out with a game concept and mechanic for civ and THAN if saw the Thrung Sisters would fit this idea.
It wasn't forced to justify those leaders. Maybe it will help you understand that sometimes things are different than you think and argue with
And honestly, I don't have an idea why even I am trying to explain myself here. Again dude, Don't be so serious. It was just a concept
I just want to say one more time: first I came out with a game concept and mechanic for civ and THAN if saw the Thrung Sisters would fit this idea.
It wasn't forced to justify those leaders. Maybe it will help you that sometimes things are different than you think and argue with
And honestly, I don't have an idea why even I am trying to explain myself here. Again dude, Don't be so serious. It was just a concept
We should just have a consolidated thread for all the times someone "comes up" with the idea for a Trung sisters double leader as if the V mod never existed.
Right between the one where people say Babylon should be in VI because it's the last civ which has been in every game; and the other one where people point out that the HRE was neither Holy nor Roman nor an Empire...
Part of UA: +1 food to farms adjacent to lake, river, or marsh is quite representative in my opinion, and has a synergy with a general concept: The idea here is to make the Civ a rural one all-around farms. And those farms can be boosted either with adjacency bonuses with districts or can be used to boost army production (peasant recruitment). All these are ok with Vietnam history in my opinion (not only Vietnam war).
That's basically what I came up with when I was designing my version of Vietnam. I would call the ability Kinh though (meaning rural village)
It also helps that the Trung sisters were able to recruit a lot of their followers from the countryside. I even made it her agenda that she dislikes Civs with many districts in their cities and prefers more improvements.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
