First Look: Macedon with Alex the Great

It's becoming more and more obvious that the first expac is going to have some sort of 'New World' theme to offer representation for neglected civilizations in Africa, SE Asia and the Americas.

I love new Civs and new leaders; the more the merrier. And they have done a good job with Alex/Macedon in terms of selling it as a straight-up warmonger Civ instead of the more cultural Greek leaders. But while all of these DLC ones are nice to have, it's bizarre to me to have a roster full of European/culturally European Civs and then only a handful of token representatives from the rest of the world. No Mongols, no Babylon, no Siam/Vietnam, no Native American Civ, no Incas... but one more ancient Hellenic Civ couldn't wait until the expac? Doesn't seem quite right to me.

I feel like there are two reasons for Macedon being a (deluxe edition) DLC. First, they want Alexander the Great in the game, and second, it themes well with Persia.
 
Might it be that they reverted the swordsman buff? Or is Hypaspist just weaker than normal swordsman? Hypaspist seems to have 3 moves, but only 35 combat strength.

Im also surprised no one has noticed the new wonder on defensive tactics. Also I noticed from Persia video that there is a new wonder on Political philosophy.

Are these new wonders part of the DLC or are they free for all? We will see.
 
Last edited:
Might it be that they reverted the swordsman buff? Or is Hypaspist just weaker than normal swordsman? Hypaspist seems to have 3 moves, but only 35 combat strength.

I noticed this too. I hope that either they're going to give all uniques (including Hypaspists, as otherwise they're weaker normally and equal against cities) +5 strength, or indeed revert the swordsman buff. (about that, I feel like I'm alone here, but I don't think standard melee units are all that weak; imo they're a great backbone of an army, while the ranged units stand behind them unhindered and the cavalry flanks and roams)
 
Might it be that they reverted the swordsman buff? Or is Hypaspist just weaker than normal swordsman? Hypaspist seems to have 3 moves, but only 35 combat strength.

Im also surprised no one has noticed the new wonder on defensive tactics.
Good spot! Mausoleum of Halicarnassus perhaps?
 
It's becoming more and more obvious that the first expac is going to have some sort of 'New World' theme to offer representation for neglected civilizations in Africa, SE Asia and the Americas.

I love new Civs and new leaders; the more the merrier. And they have done a good job with Alex/Macedon in terms of selling it as a straight-up warmonger Civ instead of the more cultural Greek leaders. But while all of these DLC ones are nice to have, it's bizarre to me to have a roster full of European/culturally European Civs and then only a handful of token representatives from the rest of the world. No Mongols, no Babylon, no Siam/Vietnam, no Native American Civ, no Incas... but one more ancient Hellenic Civ couldn't wait until the expac? Doesn't seem quite right to me.

To add to this, if they were planning on adding Alexander/Macedon, which is culturally Hellenic, why on earth did they give Greece the only alternate leader? Pericles, Gorgo, and now Alexander is a bit overkill, even if the last one is technically a separate civilization.

And while they listed one of their reasons for adding Australia was that they wanted to fill out TSL Earth maps better, (A) why are they stuffing Europe so much and (B) if that's such a driving influence on their inclusion decisions, why do we not have a TSL Earth map larger than standard?
 
Didn't like the idea, still don't really like the principle and would rather have Mongols and Ottomans first but looks like they did a great job on the implementation so, whatever.

My issue is extremely nerdy and kind of irrelevant, but, like, the iconic unique unit of Macedon was the hoplite phalanx. Not swordsman, not auxiliary cavalry, the hoplite phalanx itself. And now Macedon doesn't even get hoplites, Greece does and they get swords and cavalry instead.

Like what the hell even is a hypaspist. Its like they were playing as Greece in Age of Mythology and were like 'damn, we already used hoplites, what other unit names are around we can copy'. I'm no historian but I have never heard anything to do with Macedonian swordsmen being fearsome or especially powerful.

From a gameplay perspective it even works great, hoplites were much earlier on and worked more as a support unit/general infantry in the Greek wars than as heavy city conquering infantry like Macedon was known for, I wouldn't even have an issue if, like, it was the same unit just called a Phalanx or something and animated with a spear.

Looks a ton of fun to play though. Ancient era UUs are powerful but not really necessary, it's easy enough to take someone over with archers and warriors, classical era conquest is when you really start to get slowed down by walled cities and AI armies and speeding up that process is super useful. If anything I'm concerned they will be quite overpowered as a warmongering civ between the bonuses for training units and capturing cities. I haven't bought the other DLCs but will definitely be picking this one up, well I would anyway for Persia but even more so.

One thing is clear though, devs are definitely not prioritizing civs based on TSL earth starts :p
 
Firaxis already set the bad precedent with England/USA/Australia, so there's no point in complaining about Macedon. I'm happy for Macedon, and I have no problems with 3 Greek leaders in 2 Civs. Don't forget that Byzantium might come later, so make that 3 Greek civs and 4 Greek leaders. =P
 
So, another greek leader, now with his own separate civ. And all the while many iconic civs like Mongolia or Babylon are still not in. Why, Firaxis?
Welp, at least they didn't name it Macedonia :crazyeye:
Aaand also it's Alexander, who is awesome enough to be in game. Wish he was third greek leader instead though.
 
I am a little bothered they decided to make another civ that is essentially Greek, on top of already giving Greece an extra leader especially when Byzantines are inevitable. Leaving aside civs that aren't represented, if we're going to get that particular it feels like India should get another civ. On the other hand the bonuses look good and I actually think I would enjoy playing Macedon as is, whereas I find Greece pretty boring. It does bring up the point that extra leaders by themselves feel a little underwhelming.
 
Did anyone realize that Xi'an was renamed to Alexandria after being conquered? In 00:50 from the video? :lol: :lol:

Yup. Seems to be an easter egg for the video though, as it didn't happen automatically.

I sure am gonna do that when I get my hands on them, though.

Firaxis already set the bad precedent with England/USA/Australia, so there's no point in complaining about Macedon. I'm happy for Macedon, and I have no problems with 3 Greek leaders in 2 Civs. Don't forget that Byzantium might come later, so make that 3 Greek civs and 4 Greek leaders. =P

Byzantium is Roman, not Greek.
 
Wow, he clearly takes the prize for worst leader design in Civ6. I think he's outdone Gandhi and Gilgamesh. O_O He also looks even more annoying than his Civ5 incarnation.

So now, not only is Greece the only civilization with two leaders...but for some reason the devs thought that now was a good time to add a whole new Greek civilization? Thanks, guys, because there totally aren't other regions of the world that are under or unrepresented while we literally Balkanize the Balkans. :mischief:
 
It's becoming more and more obvious that the first expac is going to have some sort of 'New World' theme to offer representation for neglected civilizations in Africa, SE Asia and the Americas.

I love new Civs and new leaders; the more the merrier. And they have done a good job with Alex/Macedon in terms of selling it as a straight-up warmonger Civ instead of the more cultural Greek leaders. But while all of these DLC ones are nice to have, it's bizarre to me to have a roster full of European/culturally European Civs and then only a handful of token representatives from the rest of the world. No Mongols, no Babylon, no Siam/Vietnam, no Native American Civ, no Incas... but one more ancient Hellenic Civ couldn't wait until the expac? Doesn't seem quite right to me.

I guess they could be of the opinion that if they're going to push a geographic theme for the expacs they're going to to go all in and have nothing but civs from that region, so they want to keep their options open for who they have available to choose from when the time comes. They'll need a mix of the big names and small to get a full roster of 9/10 civs together.
 
So now, not only is Greece the only civilization with two leaders...but for some reason the devs thought that now was a good time to add a whole new Greek civilization? Thanks, guys, because there totally aren't other regions of the world that are under or unrepresented while we literally Balkanize the Balkans. :mischief:
This. Very much this :crazyeye:
 
Greek language, so it is Greek. I'm not going by name of the political entity, but by language/culture.

You are not going by culture. Byzantium was most definitely not Hellinistic. And afaik you could even argue wheter Greece and Macedon as they're implemented have the same culture.

But yeah "Greek language, so it's Greek", that's a REALLY REALLY REALLY bad argument.

(edit: I forgot the quite important "not" in "Byzantium was most definitely not Hellinistic")
 
Last edited:
You are not going by culture. Byzantium was most definitely Hellinistic. And afaik you could even argue wheter Greece and Macedon as they're implemented have the same culture.

But yeah "Greek language, so it's Greek", that's a REALLY REALLY REALLY bad argument.
Scholars still debate whether the Macedonians were Greeks, but the evidence is certainly leaning in that direction. I think you could more fairly call Byzantium Roman than Greek, but its fusion of the two and its success at outlasting the Empire in the West (as well as the distinctive flavor given to its culture by the Eastern Orthodox Church) make Byzantium fully worthy of being considered its own civilization.
 
Top Bottom