1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[GS] Eleanor of Aquitaine Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by bite, Feb 5, 2019.

  1. DJ_Tanner

    DJ_Tanner Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Messages:
    953
    Well the most ridiculous thing some people bring up here is this notion that there is a "correct" leader or civ that needs inclusion. This is simply not the case. Every leader or any civ that has had a historical impact is worthy of inclusion. From there it is simply a matter of gameplay and preference.

    Further, it apparently can't be stated enough, but LEADER DOES NOT MEAN RULER.
     
  2. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    2,081
    Location:
    South Wales
    I don't agree with every leader chosen in Civ but I am glad that they are looking at different leaders and how they can use those leaders to provide different abilities. I don't want the same leaders coming back again and again.
     
    Meluhhan and Eagle Pursuit like this.
  3. Sagax

    Sagax Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,070
    Well, there is at least one leader that is permabanned from the franchise in the foreseeable future...
     
  4. IvoryPavane

    IvoryPavane Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2019
    Messages:
    139
    “Tamar, leads Georgia in Civilization VI: Rise & Fall”
     
  5. OmegaDestroyer

    OmegaDestroyer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2018
    Messages:
    288
    Gender:
    Male
    A major bonus to playing the Civilization franchise. I've learned a lot about the leaders and their accomplishments. I find it absolutely fascinating.
     
    CPWimmer and ChocolateShake like this.
  6. Martinus

    Martinus Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,842
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warsaw, Poland
    I think it is also a testament to people being less touchy about politics back in the day.
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  7. Martinus

    Martinus Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,842
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Warsaw, Poland
    3 knights and a Ram gives you grievance and warmonger penalties.
     
  8. Sagax

    Sagax Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,070
    Pfff, who cares *proceeds to win any victory condition from the snowball effect*
     
  9. King William I

    King William I Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Messages:
    521
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Speaking of civ memes, am I the only one who hopes they go all out with Gandhi and make him THE BIGGEST warmonger in the game?
     
  10. Zaarin

    Zaarin My Dearest Doctor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    5,329
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    He already was a few patches ago. :p
     
  11. PhoenicianGold

    PhoenicianGold Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    461
    This is an oversimplification of the issue and to my mind is often accompanied by grossly vague ambivalence to facts.

    There is indeed a standard of factual correctness surrounding what civs are likely to be included. And that standard is what the Firaxis team is likely to include. And that itself is defined by a host of additional factors that quite clearly rule out certain civs. The clearest factor I would argue is that Firaxis cannot impement a civ that does not have any historical or even legendary leader options. They simply cannot do civs past a certain prehistoric date because the attestation is so poor we don't even know the names of anyone from that culture.

    Then we get into the additional fact that Firaxis clearly appears to have set their own basic mechanical standards for how they want to design civs. It is absolutely correct to presume that civ proposals that struggle to or cannot support these standards will be discarded as being too difficult or impossible to implement without being glaringly subpart compared to the rest of the game.

    And then we get into completely fair speculation of fact that Firaxis is not considering civs individually but within the context of a whole interactive experience. This alone suggests that a civ that does not add as much to the experience as other civs, it is discarded. But it also implies that Firaxis already has their thesis and civ list planned out. They have already vetted hundreds of civs against each other and decided on the X finite number of distinct civs which contribute to their vision. So it is also reasonably correct to presume precisely the opposite from what you propose, and that absolutely none of these civs were considered in isolation and that everything must and always will conform to the "idea of VI." In fact I think it quite ignorant to keep the pretense up that "any civ stands a chance" because it is impliedly reliant on looking at civs solely on a vacuum.

    So obviously we don't KNOW for certain what the grand thesis and standards of VI is. But we can be pretty sure they exist. And so all of this speculation, if people can step back from their personal civ propositions, is arguing and debating over our guesses as to what that thesis and those standards are. What are they prioritizing? What are they not settling for? To what extent did they carry over design philsophy from IV and V? How far do they want to push out of conventional ideas?

    And I would further argue that some of these arguments have far better factual support than others. We already know civ selection is not imperialistic like IV or V. We have Scotland and Georgia. We know it is willing to blob polities into cultures (India, Phoenicia, Sumeria), but not cultures into polities which never existed (Polynesia, Celts). We can reasonably assume that the devs are filling out gaps in the geographic map since aside from the Macedon/Persia DLC every civ has not substantially coocupied territory with another.

    So I don't buy this kind of sweeping dismissal. Judea is probably not happening. The Tupi are probably not happening. Rapa Nui are not happening. The Chinook are not happening. I'm sorry, but these are nice quaint ideas but the amount of delusion needed to support the idea that Firaxis will develop them is ludicrous.
     
    Kataklysm likes this.

Share This Page