Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by nunor, May 25, 2016.
Chariots in general ruled in Civ1 and weren't great afterwards, I think.
Man, that trade route bonus makes me wish they added Hatshepsut, it was her forte. Egypt looks to be a bit of an all-rounder.
Eagle-Pursuit said thinks that Egypt are designed to be "Beginners" type of civ, fit for the new players.
After the Maryannu unit, I can't wait for the eventual Gilliganu and Professoru.
It seems like an infrastructure and trade civ. A very basic set of benefits that will be good for learning the ropes.
And with her Agenda, she's going to love the Warmongers till they come crashing through her borders to reap all her hard work.
I can't load pictures right now but on the 39 sec mark and the 49 second mark you see trade routes stretching past the respective cities.
Its very likely just multiple trade routes running
But you see a trade rout go from, I believe thebes, to Boston. But from there it branches further Northeast, while another goes to Washington.
Do we think trade routes span multiple cities or is that just other trade routes following the roads that were already laid down before?
And if that's case, wouldnt we prefer a new road be laid instead since Boston is not in a straight line with Washington.
I agree, Egypt's bonuses are perfect for Hatshepsut. I've been saying for some time that Egypt should have a trade incentive to represent the fact that they were major consumers but not distributors of luxury goods; while I'm sure the trade bonus they had in mind was the fact that Egypt was the breadbasket of Rome, I still feel that my idea is represented. I may be unhappy about Cleopatra (even if I find her very entertaining), but I'm otherwise quite pleased with Egypt's representation. I'd been leaning towards Qin Shi Huang for my first game, but both Hojo and Cleo are giving him some competition.
I imagine Trade Routes will make use of previously laid roads to as much extent as they can.
Iron Chariots were the core of my dwarf army... in Fall from Heaven II
They were good in specific instances in Civ IV (especially as scouts/sentries), but not a mainstay since Horse Archers were far superior for combat.
Actually, we saw that already back in one of the earlier videos, I think the America one. My guess is that will be a production-focused city state.
I remember there was some talk about one type of city state for each district, and so far, we've seen science (blue), religion (white), trade (yellow) and (inconclusively) military (green), and on top of those four, on the minimaps we have seen purple (probably culture), teal (probably food/maritime or growth) and then brown (probably production).
It's worth noting that the green one with the shield icon - presumably militaristic - does not follow the colour of the corresponding district roof, so it might be that militaristic will be red, and that the green one is instead something else (food?).
I think this is correct also. It looks to me like the red lines are indicating possible routes, not necessarily ones that Egypt already has, while the roads could indicate roads built by Egypt or America (or someone else for that matter) with prior trade routes. Also, did everyone notice the different numbers by the swords, perhaps indicating different defense amounts for the trade routes depending on where they are located (e.g. highest number is for internal route to Thebes)?
I like this Egypt very much. Before they released this video, the Egyptian civ was probably the one civ I least looked forward to.
Also, I like the "all-round" feel of it, as long as there are fun/good bonuses (unlike +1 sight/50% discount on tiles). Perhaps I'm the minority here, but I don't appreciate designs that pushes one civ to pursue 1 victory condition and/or very specific playstyle to get use of the civ uniques.
Given that the video still used a lot of placeholder art (namely blanks)
While I would like not to have to have my Units patrol the roads, I wonder if the number indicates the number of turns, they stated that Trade Routes' length/turn time depends on the distance.
True, could just be placeholder. But it would be nice if there were some basic defense to trade units; and higher defense inside your own borders would make sense. But might just be distance and/or number of turns since it's 4 to Boston and 8 to Washington.
Its hard to tell but i feel they probably were were placeholders done with concept art
Idk if I'll like that because I may want a direct road from my city to Washington, you know for security reasons......
But it could create the effect of a Silk road that spans an entire continent. Which would then lead to the question could you disrupt trade routes that may not be directed at you but travel through your civ?
Control of the trade routes could be a good mechanic
I think its important to have both "all-around" civs and focused ones, though in the case of the focused ones I prefer for the focus to be on something other than a specific victory condition (I think the religious civs in Civ V are a good example of this).
Looking at the trade routes in the video (0:45), I noticed there was a white yield in the trade route to Washington. Is this faith? As far as I can remember there hasn't been any mention yet of faith from trade routes.
I'm also intrigued by the statement that flood plains don't block the placement of districts and wonders. Does this mean they do block them for other civs? I don't see any reason for the narrator to go out of her way to say it otherwise. Then again, I would think that, barring specific terrain bonuses (like Egypt's) you wouldn't want to put districts and wonders on flood plains. There's no reason to sacrifice fresh water bonuses to farms (I assume these will exist in some form) for something that can be built just as well on a dry tile. Along the same lines, it seems like Egypt will be very strong in the early game, especially at wonder construction but, having used up its river tiles, will tend to fall behind growth-wise later on (all the while feeding other civs with its trade routes. I have no idea whether this is intentional, but it does seem to make for an interesting dynamic and fit with Egypt's historical place as a strong early power with less power later on.
I feel like the river-based UA is going to be rather hit or miss based on terrain. Sometimes you start on a beautiful river system that's long with lots of tributaries. Sometimes you start on a 5 tile long river in the tundra. At least the Trade bonuses work everywhere.
On the other hand, you'll always seek to settle on rivers when you expand so you'll probably get use of the bonus in every game.
Maybe this'll push them to script more natural looking river systems....
Couple this with the fresh water bonus civs depend on, I think it's more imperative that we don't get these single creeks snd get more river systems complete with river valleys and cataracts in it.
Separate names with a comma.