Few cool details from the streams

[Siptah]

Yes, but they don't have voice overs for delegation exchanges, trade requests, trade acceptances/denials, or even denunciations. I hope the final build has them but something tells me Firaxis skipped all that voiceover this time around.

Already missing the more immersive Civ V leader screens which didn't have annoyingly fuzzy backgrounds framed with scoured black. They also had more voice overs and naturalistic transition animations (whereas in Civ VI all leaders snap into their resting state after a denunciation etc).

I found that to be very strange, too. They go out of their way to use ancient languages and then they only give them 3 or 4 lines each. I don't get it. And the passive breathing stance isn't the nicest thing to look at and doesn't make much sense. Shame, I really loved the leaders up until I've seen more of them.

 

[darko82]

I found that to be very strange, too. They go out of their way to use ancient languages and then they only give them 3 or 4 lines each. I don't get it. And the passive breathing stance isn't the nicest thing to look at and doesn't make much sense. Shame, I really loved the leaders up until I've seen more of them.

This will not change. It's how they are designed.

 

[Morningcalm]

It's such a drastic reduction from how it was in Civ V that I can't help but feel disappointed. The whole point of using the ancient languages was to add to the immersion. When leaders are silent during trade deals and *denunciations*, that doesn't add to flavor. Civ V also had silent denunciations but at least they had trade lines as well.

 

[nzcamel]

It's such a drastic reduction from how it was in Civ V that I can't help but feel disappointed. The whole point of using the ancient languages was to add to the immersion. When leaders are silent during trade deals and *denunciations*, that doesn't add to flavor. Civ V also had silent denunciations but at least they had trade lines as well.

I found that odd in V, and it's annoying it is carrying over into VI

 

[FedorWin]

Writing Bull opened the civilopedia page for the roman legion. No chopping wood and no roads. Just 1 military fort.

In Arumba's stream I've seen that legions have only two builder actions: build roman fort and remove feature. They have 1 charge each. Sadly, he did not use that feature in the first stream, and I have not seen the second one.

Also he had an epic bug: he was a suzerain of La Venta. At some point he saw a big kongolese army approaching La Venta from inside the fog of war (he hadn't meet Kongo yet). He sent a spearman to meet Kongo, but the Nzinga greeting screen did not pop up even as he was standing on a tile adjacent to Kongo territory. No leader icon in the top right either.
When he declared war by attacking a kongolese unit, he got leader screen with his own leader (Trajan) saying something like "bring it on".
Save and load helped, but the bug was really fun and frustrating at the same time.

 

[Siptah]

In Arumba's stream I've seen that legions have only two builder actions: build roman fort and remove feature. They have 1 charge each. Sadly, he did not use that feature in the first stream, and I have not seen the second one.

That's strange, the civilopedia doesn't mention that in any way. It only shows the build fort ability and the text also says nothing about remove feature. I remember seeing the bulldozer in some versions, though. I thought all Youtubers use the same version... confusing. Writing Bull hasn't got a legion as far as I've watched, but I'm curious what it can do. Should get to it today at some point.

Another thing: I would have wished for pericles to put on his helmet when he gets a DoW. But he just waves the scroll.

 

[elitetroops]

Do we know what kind of yields you get from chopping woods, harvesting resources or removing other features?

 

[George Abitbol]

When leaders are silent during trade deals and *denunciations*, that doesn't add to flavor. Civ V also had silent denunciations but at least they had trade lines as well.

The reason why leaders where silents during denunciations, asking for war against X, etc in Civ5 was, I guess, the difficulty to add the target civilization name in the spoken sentence.
How would you say "Let's denounce England" or "Our words are back with nuclear weapons" in Sumerian or Aztec language?
I reckonize it breaks the immersion a little bit.

 

[SupremacyKing2]

How would you say "Let's denounce England" or "Our words are back with nuclear weapons" in Sumerian or Aztec language?
I reckonize it breaks the immersion a little bit.

It is possible if you have an algorithm that can construct new sentences by stringing different sound files today. Master of Orion does this for the GNN robots that give news announcements. But it does break immersion a bit because of unnatural pauses between words. You get "We will denounce ... England" and it is obvious that the word "england" is a separate sound file that was inserted into the speech.

 

[stealth_nsk]

It is possible if you have an algorithm that can construct new sentences by stringing different sound files today. Master of Orion does this for the GNN robots that give news announcements. But it does break immersion a bit because of unnatural pauses between words. You get "We will denounce ... England" and it is obvious that the word "england" is a separate sound file that was inserted into the speech.

Also, it may be just nor working with localizations. Or the system needs to be VERY flexible. For example, in Russian, Egypt and Rome are "male", while England or Greece are "female" which could affect random parts of the sentence.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Toys are a unique luxury from Great Merchant John Spilsbury.

Also, I still haven't actually seen Gold as a luxury. How peculiar.

 

[phryxolydian]

Not really a "cool" detail but, did anyone notice just how awful the map generator is? Seriously WTH. You need only have a look at Japan's land on Filthy's Norway LP. Like, really?

 

[Morningcalm]

The reason why leaders where silents during denunciations, asking for war against X, etc in Civ5 was, I guess, the difficulty to add the target civilization name in the spoken sentence.
How would you say "Let's denounce England" or "Our words are back with nuclear weapons" in Sumerian or Aztec language?
I reckonize it breaks the immersion a little bit.

I disagree. Denunciations don't need to be gender-specific. The in-game text is already not gender-specific. They could just use the formal tones (for example, when France is attacked, Catherine says "Vous vous attackeh mon royeaum?" (You (formal) attack my realm?). There's no need for gender specificity in general, AND even if there was, it wouldn't take much effort to record two versions of each denunciation. And no need to say a nuclear line in the language either. They already have many lines where the leaders are simply silent as they discuss delegations, etc.

But for something as big as a denunciation you'd expect more than just a shout.

 

[ProMeTheus112]

Not really a "cool" detail but, did anyone notice just how awful the map generator is? Seriously WTH. You need only have a look at Japan's land on Filthy's Norway LP. Like, really?

In games I had seen so far of this latest build I liked map generation. I took a look at this game you suggested, and the first thing I noticed that I really like is very high variety on the map in terms of the size of islands/land masses as well as all features distribution / density, there is variety and I think that's awesome, because it makes strategy richer too (always different and everybody work with smtg different within same game too!), and exploration more exciting and interesting since you can't expect, you can't really guess what's in the dark when you see a part of something, you know? Like, if when you see a coast, you can already guess the size of the island/landmass from the map type you picked, that's not exciting. Now there is just one problem is balance between players, in terms of how somebody might get a horsehockey start, but I think that's ok in civ. Japan has a **** start on that map, that is why you say map generator is awful, no? Well, I think that's fine. In this game, Japan has a weak territory and it will likely be a weak contender.

This problem of balance, it is not simple, because it can be bad sure. If as a human player you get a horsehockey start in a single player game, if you can recognize it rather quickly, that's not a big problem, you'll just restart. However if it happens super frequently, or if you find that map features around play a huge role in determining the winner in general (not the case in Civ6 from what I see, I mean its not so deterministic), then that would be annoying/bad. And then there is multiplayer..

But, in my opinion, in a civ game the start position are not meant to be equal/balanced at all. I think it's best, if there is a great variety, anything can happen maybe including edge cases like this where a civ has a rly bad start pos (?), and it's probably best if the game does give you tools to do interesting things even from a "bad" start.

 

[qadams]

What I noticed on Filthy Robot's Norway LP — with Island Plates — is that the map seemed a lot emptier than on the Pangaea LP's I've watched. There was more space between Civs and City-States, far more room to grow. I'm not sure if that's good or bad, but it's different.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Military units can not attack religious units. That is pretty huge, you need strong religion to kill strong religion and you can use your religious units to block an enemy military and if they can not build enough religious unit to breach through they can not conquer you

 

[Siptah]

Military units can not attack religious units. That is pretty huge, you need strong religion to kill strong religion and you can use your religious units to block an enemy military and if they can not build enough religious unit to breach through they can not conquer you

That's very interesting, changing a lot of strategy. So you probably can't steal Great Prophets with military units as well.

 

[Kouvb593kdnuewnd]

Great people can not be attacked.

 

[Xur]

I found that to be very strange, too. They go out of their way to use ancient languages and then they only give them 3 or 4 lines each. I don't get it. And the passive breathing stance isn't the nicest thing to look at and doesn't make much sense. Shame, I really loved the leaders up until I've seen more of them.

In civ5 the trade deal voiceovers were burned into your memory - Im happy that they are gone.
Do you miss this:

 

[Krajzen]

Great people can not be attacked.

I like that. The idea of armies instantly finding and killing one (harmless and valuable to capture) individual felt stupid and destroyable GPs were very annoying feature with sudden barbarian attacks and whatnot.

I am only wondering what about great generals. On one hand protecting them in civ5 was very annoying and historically relatively few of them died on the battlefield (especially in more modern eras). On the other hand such tactical asset should be possible to neutralized in some way.