thanks! Seems all pretty clear to me except the medieval king, who could be any European medieval civ and the guy with the sword, who might also stand for quite a few ancient or early medieval civs.
Culture (Unit + Quarter) Speculation Thread
- Thread starter Matthias Corvinus
- Start date
thanks! Seems all pretty clear to me except the medieval king, who could be any European medieval civ and the guy with the sword, who might also stand for quite a few ancient or early medieval civs.
Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Harappans, Hittites, Mycenaeans, Nubians, Olmecs, Phoenicians, Zhou, Athens (?), Vandals (?), Persia, Romans, Frankish (?), Khmer (?), Vikings, Ming (?), Germans.
WillowBrook
Lurker
Aesthete isn't too bad of a choice IMO. Humankind uses culture in Civ's sense of civilization, so they need another word for what Civ calls culture. Aesthetic is too narrow IMO, but I imagine English speakers will differ in perspective.
Ming and Khmer can be identified by the buildings in the back pretty well.
and the card that is in a post below the others is showing Teutonic Knights in front of what looks like the Kaiserburg of Nuremberg, where the insignia of the HRE were kept in the Middle Ages. So I guess HRE.
FinalDoomsday
Prince
Matthias Corvinus
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2019
- Messages
- 73
Some of the architecture of the supposed teutonic knights card reminded me of Prussian architecture like in Konigsberg. Perhaps I am going out on a limb, but I would love to see a prussian culture.
mitsho
Deity
I‘m fine with aesthete, it‘s quite clear what these cultures are about gameplay wise.
I‘m curios what they‘ll do with France. Gauls to Franks or Merovingians is clear. But afterwards? French Kingdom kinda predetermines the government. And they probably want to have Versailles AND Napoleon in their game.
I do wish they wouldn‘t go from old to new in their reveals. I also hope they don‘t develop their game this way. I always had the impression that the Civ games where done like that and then they ran out of time to make the industrial and modern era interesting.
I‘m curios what they‘ll do with France. Gauls to Franks or Merovingians is clear. But afterwards? French Kingdom kinda predetermines the government. And they probably want to have Versailles AND Napoleon in their game.
I do wish they wouldn‘t go from old to new in their reveals. I also hope they don‘t develop their game this way. I always had the impression that the Civ games where done like that and then they ran out of time to make the industrial and modern era interesting.
Egypt is that case where it could have both Builder and Aestethe
Same with Assyria and Militarist - Expansionist
And extreme case with Zhou which could have any personality and it would fit
I really hope Greece is going to be Scientific, seriously the fact that civ series never gave this titan of human progress any research bonus is ridiculous.
Rome is going to be great pain as well, between Militarist, Expansionist and Builder.
Persia will probably get Expansionist, if Axum appears as token African in classical era it will probably get Builder. No idea about Celts.
If Arabia doesn't get Scientist I riot.
Same with Assyria and Militarist - Expansionist
And extreme case with Zhou which could have any personality and it would fit
I really hope Greece is going to be Scientific, seriously the fact that civ series never gave this titan of human progress any research bonus is ridiculous.
Rome is going to be great pain as well, between Militarist, Expansionist and Builder.
Persia will probably get Expansionist, if Axum appears as token African in classical era it will probably get Builder. No idea about Celts.
If Arabia doesn't get Scientist I riot.
Last edited:
If the cards are an indicator, the classical incarnation of Persia is a Merchant culture and Rome an Aesthete. The classical greek card looks more scientific than anything else.Egypt is that case where it could have both Builder and Aestethe
Same with Assyria and Militarist - Expansionist
And extreme case with Zhou which could have any personality and it would fit
I really hope Greece is going to be Scientific, seriously the fact that civ series never gave this titan of human progress any research bonus is ridiculous.
Rome is going to be great pain as well, between Militarist, Expansionist and Builder.
Persia will probably get Expansionist, if Axum appears as token African in classical era it will probably get Builder. No idea about Celts.
If Arabia doesn't get Scientist I riot.
Okay Persia is weird but
ROME AESTETHE
ROME NOT MILITARIST OR EXPANSIONIST
I'M LITERALLY CRYING RN
well no and I'm curious of such original choices, maybe it's that famous fresh air
FinalDoomsday
Prince
Okay Persia is weird but
ROME AESTETHE
ROME NOT MILITARIST OR EXPANSIONIST
I'M LITERALLY CRYING RN
well no and I'm curious of such original choices, maybe it's that famous fresh air
The unit card shows a gladiatorial bout in a colosseum being viewed by presumably the Emperor when I first saw Siptah suggest Aesthete I was doubtful. To me the glorification of combat in an arena could suggest warmonger and the colosseum itself could suggest builder although since the building itself is not a focus of the card like it is with Egypt I thought this is unlikely.
All the warmongers revealed so far have warriors prominently featured but the Roman card is intentionally showing us the spectators viewing the gladiators not just the fighters themselves. So perhaps it will be Aesthete and the more I think about it the better it fits the Romans.
I love how all the civ cards match the type of civ they are, we can be pretty sure Germany will be a warmonger civ just from the card.
Matthias Corvinus
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 19, 2019
- Messages
- 73
To everyone who is viewing this thread - what are some of the bonuses you want the bronze age quarters to have? What culture do you plan on picking first?
We not only don't know anything particular about any civ.
We also don't know nearly nothing about the gameplay and mechanics.
We can only discuss personal historical taste. My favourite ancient cultures of those shown are Babylon, Harappa and Phoenicia.
First ten are already known images
As for further I'd say Greece, Goths, Persia, Rome, Franks, Khmer, Vikings, Ming and... yeah Germany, but I really damn hope it represents German Empire and ww1, not Third Reich and ww2... Out of all periods of German glorious history choosing literally Hitler...
There was some article in the web which literally said "China is represented by Zhou, Ming and PRC". Unless I remember it wrongly and those were examples and China gets those among others. I'd actually quite support the idea of two giants, India and China, both getting different iteration in every age.
I'm pretty sure if we get some Migration Period civ it'd be very famous Goths who did main job of taking down Rome and established kingdoms in Spain and Italy.
Unless those people are Anglo-Saxons - the first iteration of English civ cycle! Yeah, that's the only alternative I see.
FinalDoomsday
Prince
I'm hoping it's Goths I was a bit disappointed with how they were implemented in Total War: Attila I really felt that game should have been their story but they were side lined in favour of Romans and super Huns. So here is hoping Humankind does them better!
@Matthias Corvinus I'm excited to play any of the cultures that I have not seen playable in civ before like Harrapans, Olmecs and Hittites (They were in one of the older civs I think but there a bit beyond my time)
@Matthias Corvinus I'm excited to play any of the cultures that I have not seen playable in civ before like Harrapans, Olmecs and Hittites (They were in one of the older civs I think but there a bit beyond my time)
VermelhoRed
Prince
Rome could be scientific too, they have achieved tons of progress regarding construction at least, stuff that was lost after it fell, and there wouldn't be comparable stuff for a long time
I also really hope they don't use the lame "Holy Roman Empire" name for a civilization that should be called "Frankia" or "Germany".
I also really hope they don't use the lame "Holy Roman Empire" name for a civilization that should be called "Frankia" or "Germany".
It is usually said that the Roman individual with the biggest impact on science is the soldier who killed Archimedes.
There‘s certainly a lot of technological advancement in the Roman Empire, but the same could be said for many other empires like Persia, the Hittites or Egypt. Yet, I would associate neither of these four as Major scientific Player, especially not compared to the Greek natural philosophers.
mitsho
Deity
It depends on how you view "science". There's certainly an argument to be made for Roman Engineering: Aqueducts, Bridges, Roads that still stand today. There are a few philosophers but they are naturally deep in the tradition of Greek Philosophy. There's Pliny's Historia Naturalis which yes, collects and copies texts from older sources but that was usual until deep into the Enlightenment. Without Copying mechanisms, it makes sense to create something new and update it on the way. The description of the eruption of Vesuvius helps us a lot today as well. Political Science, i.e. the whole Republic thing, is science as well and then there's the question where do you put Scientists in the late Roman Empire, people such as Galen who was of Greek origin but lived in Rome?
So yes, the Romans could be scientific. But then any civ can probably be anything if you take the time and source it right. Just some make more sense, the Vikings will be naval raiders, because who could be a better candidate. And it is like that with Rome, there are more obvious example for scientific civs in the ancient era (yes, the Greeks primarily) that you don't really need to put the Romans there. I would see Rome as expansionist (founding cities) mostly. Alternatives being infrastructure (roman roads) or organised (military, bureaucracy) or something related to happiness (decadency).
So yes, the Romans could be scientific. But then any civ can probably be anything if you take the time and source it right. Just some make more sense, the Vikings will be naval raiders, because who could be a better candidate. And it is like that with Rome, there are more obvious example for scientific civs in the ancient era (yes, the Greeks primarily) that you don't really need to put the Romans there. I would see Rome as expansionist (founding cities) mostly. Alternatives being infrastructure (roman roads) or organised (military, bureaucracy) or something related to happiness (decadency).
Similar threads
