Culture (Unit + Quarter) Speculation Thread

[Uberfrog]

I would understand not having consecutive Chinese cultures... except we have Phoenicia–Carthage and Myceneans–Greeks!

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

I understand your disappointment at not seeing the Han (and have been expecting it for a while, given the discussions I have been following), but in the end, there are only so many cultures we can feature. As some of you have already pointed out, 60 cultures feels like a lot, until you start filling them in and realize how quickly you run out of room. This is even more true when you take into account the era division with only 10 slots each, meaning that we do not feature what I have seen people call "blob civs." For many "civilizations" we could probably provide half a dozen stages of their history, and for China in particular we could probably create a score of individual cultures... But between historical impact, a desire to highlight lesser known cultures, geographical spread, and a lot of other factors, the Han did not make it, at least not for vanilla.

 

[Siptah]

The desire to be able to transition into historically related cultures also makes we wonder how people will play this game. Will it really be kind of roleplaying for the majority of casual players? I assume that the more ambitious players will go Nubia-Huns-Aztecs-Portugal-Mughals-Germany-Brazil anyway if it turns out to be an OP strategy. Does it feel weird to the people on this particular forum to go wild with culture transitions?

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

The desire to be able to transition into historically related cultures also makes we wonder how people will play this game. Will it really be kind of roleplaying for the majority of casual players? I assume that the more ambitious players will go Nubia-Huns-Aztecs-Portugal-Mughals-Germany-Brazil anyway if it turns out to be an OP strategy. Does it feel weird to the people on this particular forum to go wild with culture transitions?

It doesn't feel weird to me. Civ depicts America as a unique movie theatre and a unique fighter plane. I can easily envision this set of characteristics arising out of an African cultural heritage or an Asian cultural heritage.

One of the things that most interests me about HK is finding out how they implement cultural uniques and how those uniques combine and stack over time.

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

Obviously, the way to go is to pick Carthage or Maurya, into [UNCONFIRMED] into [REDACTED] and finally [REDACTED], or to go Egypt or Nubia into [UNCONFIRMED] into [REDACTED] so you get a theme going.

 

[j51]

Yeah indeed, Silla is medieval civ.

Silla was founded in the first century. If the Goths and Huns count as classical then Silla definitely does.

 

[mitsho]

For the first few centuries however, it was just one among many Korean Kingdoms, no? It reaches its height by 900 AD or so, way later than the Huns or the Goths.

But I agree, they can be put into classical, since a) it's less about actual years and b) there should be an East Asian Representative and c) if you have to slot a culture a bit weirdly to get even ten per era, you can do that as a developer.

However, we do know that there will both be a turtle ship and a hwacha unit. Neither of those fit with a classical culture. I could see them putting one in medieval and one in early modern though allowing for two Koreas. But three Koreas seems a bit much. Then again, everything is subject to change and maybe they just hadn't decided between those two Early Modern Emblematic Units.

And I can't really think of another contender from that region, not from Indonesia, not from Thailand, the Philippines, China (though if Silla is classical, Tang can be as well), Japan, etc. ..But maybe we are focussing our attention too much. It remains a mystery to me. We will know in five weeks or so

 

[Uberfrog]

Silla was founded in the first century. If the Goths and Huns count as classical then Silla definitely does.

While the kingdom existed beforehand, it only became a regional power in around the 6th century. The height of the kingdom, and it’s near-unification of all of Korea, was firmly in the equivalent of the European Middle Ages.

Like the Franks, one could crowbar them into the Classical period, but the Medieval is a much better fit.

Contrast this with the Hunnic and Gothic confederations, who had fallen apart or settled into distinct kingdoms by the early Middle Ages, which were then destroyed.

 

[Siptah]

Yamato is a possibility for classical East Asia.

I hope for Tiwanaku, however, which would be late classical once again. Nazca would be nice as well.

Got to use the advantage of not having historical leaders ...

 

[VermelhoRed]

Is there something from SE Asia that early?

 

[Krajzen]

Is there something from SE Asia that early?

In Myanmar there were several Pyu city states since 2th century BC; nice civilization, but I don't think I'd add them to the game.
In Cambodia, Thailand and southern Vietnam there was a civilization of Funan since 1st century AD. Again, nice, but either not so awesome or not yet excavated enough (or translated to English) for them to be "cool enough" candidate for such game.
Otherwise there are no notable native civilizations in South East Asia before fall of Rome.
On various websites it is stated that Vietnam has 5000 years long history but that is complete nonsense once you read more about that, typical case of national myths and legends taken seriously. First Vietnamese states did appear soon before Christ, but they were very short lived, as area was really dominated by China. Between 111 BC and 938 AD Vietnam was completely dominated by China, with the exception of 60 years of freedom granted together by two separate rebellions.
"Civilized" history of Indonesia begins in 7th century, in Philippines it is usually dated since early 10th century.

 

[j51]

Yamato is a possibility for classical East Asia.

I hope for Tiwanaku, however, which would be late classical once again. Nazca would be nice as well.

Got to use the advantage of not having historical leaders ...

Yeah, personally I'd prefer something Andean to something East Asian if it's not going to be the Han or Qin.

 

[BuchiTaton]

I was surprised of the lack of something celtic, Gauls could have been a great option for Classical Era (note that I am saying this as somebody that dislike the addition of Scotland over other european nations like Lithuania or Bulgaria on CIV).

Also I think East Asia need some representation each era. With Han and Goguryeo out and Xiongnu being similar to Huns, could it be korean Silla or Yayoi Japan?

Nok for Western Africa or Funan for Southeast Asia could work, but I dont see them as popular options when medieval Mali and Khmer are stronger options for Medieval Era.

Scythians like Xiongnu seem weak with Huns representing the "horse lords" culture from Central Asia.

Then there are Nazca and Moche, they could be a sweet additions representing this group of cultures of the pacific coast of central South America, in contrast to the Altiplano cultures like the Inca. They also are great option to take the agrarian slot.

 

[Patine]

Yeah, personally I'd prefer something Andean to something East Asian if it's not going to be the Han or Qin.

The problem is, if there is NO Classical Age East Asian civ, OR if the only one presented is based on Japan (Yamato, perhaps?), then the game may very likely not sell in the Chinese market, and, nowadays, that can be a big deal (even a make-or-break deal) for many computer games or, even, movies nowadays.

 

[Uberfrog]

The problem is, if there is NO Classical Age East Asian civ, OR if the only one presented is based on Japan (Yamato, perhaps?), then the game may very likely not sell in the Chinese market, and, nowadays, that can be a big deal (even a make-or-break deal) for many computer games or, even, movies nowadays.

I think this is a bit strong, there’s already the Zhou in the Ancient era and there will certainly be Medieval and later iterations of China.

I don’t see sales being hurt over this...

 

[Krajzen]

The problem is, if there is NO Classical Age East Asian civ, OR if the only one presented is based on Japan (Yamato, perhaps?), then the game may very likely not sell in the Chinese market, and, nowadays, that can be a big deal (even a make-or-break deal) for many computer games or, even, movies nowadays.

Yes, it is totally probable that a ton of Chinese players will say "geez this game has only 3 different incarnations of my country instead of 4, I won't buy it, instead I will stick to every other video game ever which always has only 1 incarnation of China"
Gee I am so offended I can buy three oranges in a price of 1, not four, I prefer to go to a different store and buy 1 orange like usual

 

[Jkchart]

The problem is, if there is NO Classical Age East Asian civ, OR if the only one presented is based on Japan (Yamato, perhaps?), then the game may very likely not sell in the Chinese market, and, nowadays, that can be a big deal (even a make-or-break deal) for many computer games or, even, movies nowadays.

The thing is...the game has built in incentives for you to NOT transcend (EDIT: for you to TRANSCEND instead of transition to a new culture, thanks @Catoninetales_Amplitude )...so you can continue playing Zhou until you can play the next iteration of China for continuity. You aren't forced to become a completely different culture, in fact if you are doing well, it seems they want players to take the challenge for that extra sweet sweet fame not transcending offers you. So this is a bit silly, because you can only play China if you really want to. It makes the game harder, but it's entirely possible to still play all, and only all, three base game Chinas.

That being said, I do hope that most cultures eventually get a tree that makes sense from beginning to end for history enthusiasts by virtue of DLC. I'll take the three Chinas we are getting over the one many games seem to offer.

 

[Catoninetales_Amplitude]

The thing is...the game has built in incentives for you to NOT transcend...so you can continue playing Zhou until you can play the next iteration of China for continuity. You aren't forced to become a completely different culture, in fact if you are doing well, it seems they want players to take the challenge for that extra sweet sweet fame not transcending offers you. So this is a bit silly, because you can only play China if you really want to. It makes the game harder, but it's entirely possible to still play all, and only all, three base game Chinas.

That being said, I do hope that most cultures eventually get a tree that makes sense from beginning to end for history enthusiasts by virtue of DLC. I'll take the three Chinas we are getting over the one many games seem to offer.

Small clarification on Gameplay Terminology:
Transcendence is what we call not picking a new Culture and instead sticking with your current one.
Otherwise we usually talk of a Transition or simply a change.


Now, on the note of gameplay, I have actually found myself Transcending my culture quite a few times already, and not just out of a feeling out of doing well and being able to earn more fame that way, but often because I felt having more time to build my Emblematic Quarters fit my strategy better.

 

[Jkchart]

Small clarification on Gameplay Terminology:
Transcendence is what we call not picking a new Culture and instead sticking with your current one.
Otherwise we usually talk of a Transition or simply a change.


Now, on the note of gameplay, I have actually found myself Transcending my culture quite a few times already, and not just out of a feeling out of doing well and being able to earn more fame that way, but often because I felt having more time to build my Emblematic Quarters fit my strategy better.

Thanks for the clarification!

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The thing is...the game has built in incentives for you to NOT transcend (EDIT: for you to TRANSCEND instead of transition to a new culture, thanks @Catoninetales_Amplitude )...so you can continue playing Zhou until you can play the next iteration of China for continuity. You aren't forced to become a completely different culture, in fact if you are doing well, it seems they want players to take the challenge for that extra sweet sweet fame not transcending offers you. So this is a bit silly, because you can only play China if you really want to. It makes the game harder, but it's entirely possible to still play all, and only all, three base game Chinas.

That being said, I do hope that most cultures eventually get a tree that makes sense from beginning to end for history enthusiasts by virtue of DLC. I'll take the three Chinas we are getting over the one many games seem to offer.

Been thinking about the 'sequence' of Factions through the Eras, because, being sort of focused on the History, I was looking at how to play a 'historical' sequence. Then I realized that I might be missing the point of Good Play in the game.

They have said that the various types of Factions (Agrarian, Militaristic, Merchant, etc) have bonuses related to their specialty that continue even when you change Factions (and no, I can't remember where I saw that, it was some time ago in one of the many tweets, releases, shots, videos, etc).
So, it would seem that Good Play would mean picking a 'bonus' that will do you the most good throughout the game, but not necessarily the 'cultural' Faction that matches what you are playing now.

The best way to 'play China' might turn out to be starting as Harappans to get a fat Food/Population Growth bonus from an Agrarian Faction, and leverage your ballooning population to later overwhelm your neighbors as a Militaristic Faction (which might or might not be 'Chinese') and then wind up the game pushing for Fame as an Aesthete or Scientific or whatever you 'need' in your game.

And if they allow us to rename cities in the game, you can just keep a little list of Chinese cities handy and rename appropriately so that on the map, at least, your Faction 'looks' Chinese even when you are actually playing as everything else after the Ancient Era from Austrian to Zulu . . .