And for some reason "Lady Six Sky" is being translated into "Lady Six Day" in the official Chinese localization of VI - VI's Chinese localization is notoriously bad, to the point which there is a "Better Chinese Translation" mod on Steam Workshop - I can't imagine what these translators will do for "Eight Deer Jaguar Claw".
In mandarin Chinese, 天 („tian“) means both day and sky….as well as other things. If Civ‘s translation is indeed 天, then that would IMO be correct. Or am I wrong? I‘m not a native speaker.
I think this can be the reason why. My Vietnamese name is Han-Viet (Viet words borrowed from Chinese) and I know how to write it in Chinese although I don't speak the language because it is incredibly simple. One time a friend of mine who is from HK said "Just describe your name as the reverse of "tomorrow" and everyone will know", but afterward, most Chinese people I'd talked to thought my name was 天明, when it is actually 日明. So I guess the reason why "Lady Six Sky" gets mistranslated because 天 means both "sky" and "day". From a Vietnamese/Han-Viet perspective, thiên (tian) only means sky or heaven, when nhật (日) means day, the sun, or Japan.
If Germany were to get a second leader, I would prefer a cultural leader like Frederick the Great. I absolutely have no desire to see modern Germany (Bismarck or anyone more recent) nor the panzer represented.
If Germany were to get a second leader, I would prefer a cultural leader like Frederick the Great. I absolutely have no desire to see modern Germany (Bismarck or anyone more recent) nor the panzer represented.
Just make sure you pick the right Frederick of Germany in the leader screen. I wouldn't mind seeing a few more Holy Roman Emperors before we get back to Bismarck. Rudolf II may not have been the best, but he'd be a fun one.
Just make sure you pick the right Frederick of Germany in the leader screen. I wouldn't mind seeing a few more Holy Roman Emperors before we get back to Bismarck. Rudolf II may not have been the best, but he'd be a fun one.
Shouldn't be hard to tell Fireman Freddy from Frederick, that's for sure. Rudolf II would be a very interesting choice for a Leader. A Great People and Science Leader.
Firaxis needs to separate out Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. Frederick can lead the HRE, with Hansa while a modern German leader would get Panzers and other modern buffs.
If Germany were to get a second leader, I would prefer a cultural leader like Frederick the Great. I absolutely have no desire to see modern Germany (Bismarck or anyone more recent) nor the panzer represented.
In mandarin Chinese, 天 („tian“) means both day and sky….as well as other things. If Civ‘s translation is indeed 天, then that would IMO be correct. Or am I wrong? I‘m not a native speaker.
You'd typically expect 天空. Though I myself wouldn't be against the naming chosen here.
After all, she's not Lady Six Sky. She is Lady Six Sk... The two terms are translated because the third part of the name is illegible.
In fact, it might as well be a Chinese name without the third syllable. The best guess is that she's "Six-Heaven-Weave/六天織" or put into more natural terms "The Sixth Heaven Weaver/第六天織"... it's really something you can't f up in Chinese unless you try really, really hard. So calling her something like 六天夫人 isn't that wrong. At least IMO.
Firaxis needs to separate out Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. Frederick can lead the HRE, with Hansa while a modern German leader would get Panzers and other modern buffs.
Eh I'd rather they take an in-between approach. Have a Germanic "base" civ structure, and then add elements to create variants of it (like slightly more differentiated alternate leaders) for, say, Prussia/Teutons, the HRE, modern Germany, etc. Think the idea of clone fighters in fighting games.
You could have many more specific civs that everyone wants for less work, and also be able to show off how they are historically connected like having some shared elements between Rome and Byzantium, or a Greece-Macedon-Persia-Timurids-Mughals continuum.
Alternatively, they could "combine" elements to create civs with substantial historical overlap, say combining aspects of France and Germany for the Franks, or Byzantium and Russia for Kievan Rus', or Mughals, Maurya, and Chola for India.
It just seems to make so much sense that the roster could be expanded several times its size if the devs would lean into historical connectedness and reused assets rather than trying to pull together a whole set of uniques for each civ. Although I do give the devs credit for trying to give each civ in VI a distinct playstyle and geographic niche, ultimately it seems like many players still criticize the game for not having enough strategic variety--I just don't think a handful of uniques and some slight terrain biases was necessarily enough to justify wholly unique civs (as much as I personally love the resulting mosaic in a way that V never really achieved--and really I just love the potential because so much of the bigger global picture is still missing).
Eh I'd rather they take an in-between approach. Have a Germanic "base" civ structure, and then add elements to create variants of it (like slightly more differentiated alternate leaders) for, say, Prussia/Teutons, the HRE, modern Germany, etc. Think the idea of clone fighters in fighting games.
You could have many more specific civs that everyone wants for less work, and also be able to show off how they are historically connected like having some shared elements between Rome and Byzantium, or a Greece-Macedon-Persia-Timurids-Mughals continuum.
Alternatively, they could "combine" elements to create civs with substantial historical overlap, say combining aspects of France and Germany for the Franks, or Byzantium and Russia for Kievan Rus', or Mughals, Maurya, and Chola for India.
I still think alternate leaders is the best choice for most of these and I'd much rather them focus on giving us more alternate leaders for alternate ways to play a single civilization in Civ VII, though not at the cost of number of Civs.
My idea is for each alternate leaders to at least each come with a separate unique unit or unique infrastructure with the standard unique unit and unique infrastructure for the civ.
For example: England can come with Longbowmen and a Royal Navy Dockyard. When you choose Elizabeth to lead you can get a "Globe Theater/Elizabethan Theater" unique building. If Victoria is leader she gets Redcoats instead.
Harun Al Rashid for Arabia can get a House of Wisdom UB while Saladin could get Mamluk UU on top of other unique components.
I still think alternate leaders is the best choice for most of these and I'd much rather them focus on giving us more alternate leaders for alternate ways to play a single civilization in Civ VII, though not at the cost of number of Civs.
My idea is for each alternate leaders to at least each come with a separate unique unit or unique infrastructure with the standard unique unit and unique infrastructure for the civ.
For example: England can come with Longbowmen and a Royal Navy Dockyard. When you choose Elizabeth to lead you can get a "Globe Theater/Elizabethan Theater" unique building. If Victoria is leader she gets Redcoats instead.
Harun Al Rashid for Arabia can get a House of Wisdom UB while Saladin could get Mamluk UU on top of other unique components.
You're leaning more toward the "alt leader" side of that spectrum but I think you see what I'm getting at.
And honestly I'm not sure how much my idea would work because you can't really give an old English heptarchy civ the Royal Navy Dockyard. I'm just trying to reconcile why we devote so many resources to "offshoot" civs like Scotland, Nubia, Byzantium, Macedon, Canada...while simultaneously ignoring very large regions like the Maghreb, the Guinea coast, the Swahili coast, Pashtunstan, etc. I know that Civ is concerned with "empires," but there are still some very empire-rich regions (not to mention culture/flavor rich) that somehow never make it in Civ.
I think most of the musical themes are solid enough that they could be recycled for several civs (perhaps with a few exceptions). As can unique architecture/palaces. So that's something that cuts off development resources. But I guess under my model we are looking at, maybe, a common unique ability, or in some limited circumstances a common unique infrastructure or more rarely a unique unit...everything else would still need to be a wholly new asset. Except, as I observed, in the case of "hybrid" civs like the Franks or Timurids/Macedon which could maybe get away with pulling a few more assets together from different civs.
Yeah, I'm convinced it will be a new leader for a new civ.
The suggestion of OnePurpose made me laugh (in the good way) as it would be interesting to see the reaction of the people having Phillip II as King/leader of the most anticipated Portuguese Civ hahaha!
I personally prefer Portuguese leader + Portugal Civ (Yes, Phillip II was Portuguese too, but it is not the same).
And who knows! I always advocated for an alter persona for Philip. I think it could bring much to the game.
As I said in the post to turn Spain into an explorer Civ if Portugal never make it, a Phillip persona based on exploration and other on religious conquest could be dope!
But thinking it now, it could be leader to Portugal and Spain too, so it would be like 4 new leaders + Portuguese leader:
1) Conqueror Phillip + Spain civ bonuses
2) Explorer Phillip + Spain Civ bonuses
3) Conqueror Phillip + Portugal civ bonuses
2) Explorer Phillip + Portugal Civ bonuses
5) Portuguese Leader + Portugal bonuses
And following your suggestion about leaders, Conquistadors could go with Philip as a leader. Leaving space for Portugal having an unique Nao UU and Spain a Galleon UU.
It will hardly be a thing, I was just dreaming.
In any case, alternatives leaders could still be a thing.
I mean I remember that alt Roosevelt and alt Catherine were part of NFP but were not in the "roadmap" (if I’m not mistaken).
So technically they could still add more personas and be part of the "more content" (not taking the slot for new leaders, so to say).
Like in the example, it could be Portugal Civ + Portuguese civs + Personas
Yeah, I'm convinced it will be a new leader for a new civ.
The suggestion of OnePurpose made me laugh (in the good way) as it would be interesting to see the reaction of the people having Phillip II as King/leader of the most anticipated Portuguese Civ hahaha!
I personally prefer Portuguese leader + Portugal Civ (Yes, Phillip II was Portuguese too, but it is not the same).
And who knows! I always advocated for an alter persona for Philip. I think it could bring much to the game.
As I said in the post to turn Spain into an explorer Civ if Portugal never make it, a Phillip persona based on exploration and other on religious conquest could be dope!
But thinking it now, it could be leader to Portugal and Spain too, so it would be like 4 new leaders + Portuguese leader:
1) Conqueror Phillip + Spain civ bonuses
2) Explorer Phillip + Spain Civ bonuses
3) Conqueror Phillip + Portugal civ bonuses
2) Explorer Phillip + Portugal Civ bonuses
5) Portuguese Leader + Portugal bonuses
And following your suggestion about leaders, Conquistadors could go with Philip as a leader. Leaving space for Portugal having an unique Nao UU and Spain a Galleon UU.
Honestly if they went that route Maria I leading both Portugal and Brazil would make more sense, even though I still doubt that will happen, instead of adding Phillip already in the game to Portugal.
Honestly if they went that route Maria I leading both Portugal and Brazil would make more sense, even though I still doubt that will happen, instead of adding Phillip already in the game to Portugal.
Maria for Portugal/Brazil
Philip for Portugal/Spain
The thing of Philip having a "persona" is the possibility to make him an explorer leader. I don't know enough about Maria I to say if she would fit the role, but the good thing is that Phillip could in worst case scenario (and very well).
A persona with a UU "conquistador unit" and bonuses tied with discoveries of Natural wonders and continents (like Simbad, but far more limited) could fit both Spain and Portugal. If Portugal has bonuses tied to exploration or making intercontinental cities, of course (Even better if it has a nao or caravel Unique for them).
I know I'm dreaming, but I really think it could be very synergetic (even more than Genghis khan.)
I'm certain it will be one civ with a leader for that civ. The "new civ and new leader" nomenclature has been used in the marketing materials before for that very typical arrangement.
And personally, I'm rather excited about the possibility of Luisa de Guzman for Portugal that someone mentioned a while back. I'm not entirely certain what her LUA would be, but she was integral in reestablishing Portuguese independence from Spain.
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.
I wouldn't mind seeing a few more Holy Roman Emperors before we get back to Bismarck. Rudolf II may not have been the best, but he'd be a fun one.
Rudolf II would be a very interesting choice for a Leader. A Great People and Science Leader.
