[R&F] First Look: Robert the Bruce | Scotland

[Eagle Pursuit]

Do we know if it unlocks at Rifling? Could it unlock earlier at Gunpowder? It looks like they could be holding muskets instead of rifles.

I didn't notice it in the FL. Maybe someone could review it quickly to see if the tech is shown. But if not, we will probably see it in the Livestream today.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The problem with this approach is how much it would squish entirely different nations/ethnicities into one blob.

If it were done poorly and without knowledge of real unique qualities, yes, but I'm not suggesting that it be done poorly.

How would you do a Sumerian civ, for instance? Or the Aztecs? What would you call them? I guess Mexico and Iraq?

No, I would call them Sumer and Aztecs (well, correctly, the 'Triple Alliance') just as the game does now. And, just as the game does now, any uniques for them from after the period in which they existed would have to be 'generic' based on their terrain/climate preferences - just as the game does now.

This whole issue just stems from lack of a clear definition of a civilization by firaxis. A lot are specific empires, some are regions, or countries.

We generally expect the regional civs to include the whole swathe of history in that region, while the empires stick exclusively to their time period. The countries are the toughest as we expect them to cover a lot of time, but only the periods of history that most remind us of their culture.

The problem actually, is lack of a clear definition of a 'civilization' by everybody: Firaxis and the Player Community both. Precisely, a Civilization is a group that builds and lives in Cities. That means, even by the widest possible definition of 'city', many 'civilizations' in the Civ franchise were never civilizations: Huns, Iroquois, Commanches, 'Polynesia', etc.
Most people, and Firaxis from their actions, widen the definition to include any recognizable cultural/political group. That leaves everybody with the problem that this definition includes numerous 'groups' that were either extremely short-lived in game terms (Sumer, USA, Carthage, Huns again) or over time included numerous other cultural/political/linquistic/ethnic influences, to the point of changing their nature completely. In strictly historical terms, in 4000 BCE there were no recognizable Greeks, Romans, Germans, Celts, Huns, Scythians, Chinese, or any other of the 'Civs' included in the game. They all developed their recognizable characteristics within the time frame of the game.
So, from the beginning, Civilization the game was a fantasy game, and so it remains.

And, I think, so it will have to remain.

Think about it. To do otherwise, you'd have to start with a wandering tribe with pretty generic Neolithic Attributes in 4000 BCE. Yes, some 'tribes' have pottery, primitive boating, Animal Domestication, or Agriculture, but none of them are building anything 'unique' yet, or showing more than the Photo- versions of their languages or religions.
Then, to progress to 'recognizable' Civilizations, you'd have to model the influences, and (I've thought about this a lot) that is monstrously difficult.
Just, for example, the Greeks: start as nomads, wander into an area with fertile land next to the sea divided into 'compartments' by mountains, already inhabited by an agricultural people. The 'Proto-Greeks' conquer them, absorbing some cultural/religious/technological/linquistic elements from them. Then they interact with other civilizations like the Hittites, Minoan Cretans, and (early) Phoenicians. Then the Mycenean Bronze Age civilization collapses, and out of the Greek Dark Age comes a set of city states with Aristocratic/Oligarchic governments relying on citizen spearmen who insist on a say in government and so develop various forms of inclusive to semi-inclusive Democracy with Hoplites - and semi-secular Philosophy, which comes from of a way of looking at the world and examining it almost unique in the entire world.

Bluntly, not once in a 100 games will you get a recognizable Greek Civilization by the Classical Era, because the various cultural, technological, climactic and geographical influences make a total that is very nearly statistically impossible to reproduce.

And that is very nearly true of ALL recognizable civilizations in history.

So, we go with fantasy, and start the civs with recognizable but anachronistic Unique Attributes and assume they will still be recognizably unique even thousands of years after that particular civilization historically disappeared.

What I would like to see is not 'historically accurate' civs - an impossibility even if we knew exactly what that meant in every case, which we don't - but more dynamic Civilizations that may or may not develop the same way every time based on the in-game conditions.
What If? is always an intriguing question, but right now, I don't think the Civ games provide a good answer.

What If - Greeks developed a wide empire, and maintained it? How would that change their political/government/cultural uniques.
What If - outside monotheistic religions did not influence Greek religion? What kind of religion would they end up with by fuzing the old Polytheocratic Agglutinative 'Hellenic' religion with Greek Philosophy?
What If - The Greeks did not settle in a climate/terrain like Greece, but on the Eurasian plains/steppes where they came from, or in a volcanic semi-tropical area like the Aztecs? How would that change the Unique Attributes they develop? Right now, the game assumes that it would have no effect on them at all, which is ridiculous and forces the gamer to deal with the map without the adaptability of the historical peoples.

 

[Art Grin]

Kinda cool, I was expecting the Scots to end up as the generic Celt faction with forest bonuses and woad raiders. Positively surprised about the way Firaxis implemented them.

 

[Grotius]

I think golf courses are great! Scotland is the birthplace of golf. The Open Championship is usually played there. Golf is a significant part of the country's heritage. And, as in Civ, golf courses are often right next to cities and other populated areas -- e.g., St. Andrews. Good call to include them.

 

[Guandao]

Something about Robert the Bruce's face reminds me of Pedro II's Civ6 model....
They both would fit right in an Aardman Animations film.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Something about Robert the Bruce's face reminds me of Pedro II's Civ6 model....
They both would fit right in a Aardman Animations film.

I think it's the big nose.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Something about Robert the Bruce's face reminds me of Pedro II's Civ6 model....
They both would fit right in a Aardman Animations film.

(William) Wallace and Gromit?

 

[Kimiimaro]

Guys, I don't know if anyone has noticed before, but... Look closely at Robert's sword

 

[Guandao]

Guys, I don't know if anyone has noticed before, but... Look closely at Robert's sword

View attachment 486367

Firaxis logo....
Are they hidden on the other Rise and Fall leaders too? I was trying to check for it on Poundmaker earlier....

 

[Stomper66]

This is a bit Off Topic, but in another Thread somewhere I posted the suggestion that each Civ have a separate set of Uniques for each Era, and the specific Unique Attribute, Unit, Improvement, District, etc. that you got and kept would depend on events and decisions in each game. I made the mistake of also suggesting different Leaders available by Era and got shot down because it would cost too much to make all those animations - as if the Leader Animations were the most important playing and selling point of the game.
Point is, such a system would
1. Allow each Civilization to be played differently depending on the way each individual game went, and the parameters set for the game (map, opponents, victory conditions)
2. Allow each Civilization to approach the entire array of unique aspects that the civilization historically developed, just not all of them in the same game, necessarily.

I think that it would be a stretch animating a new leader for every era for every civilisation. I think that the Rise and Fall is going to give more flexibility on changing a civs play style in each era. One of the ideas I had would be to have the same leaders but re skin them by changing their clothes and dialogue through each era. Changing the civs music and cities through each era made a lot of fans happy (I still love that they did that) so I think the leader changing clothes and attitude would also be a great way to show that time has moved on. Imagine Frederick in a slick suit or Cleopatra in a sultry dress in the later eras. I don't know if you use it but MOAR units is a great mod for better civ representation as it normally provides 2 or 3 new units for every civ for different eras. Ethnic units for civ5 was also great as every unit got re-skinned and made the game so much more engrossing. Hopefully they will do it for every unit skin in Civ 6 one day.

I can see what you mean in your last post but I have to say I play Civ6 for the complete opposite reason. The civ I'm playing has to start off in the terrain and have other neighbouring civs that reflect real history. I even build the wonders relevant to the actual civ. Right now I'm playing England on continents. I'm on a large Island with the white cliffs of dover. France is across a small sea for wars and India and the US are dominating on other continents nearby. It's one of the most entertaining games I've ever played because it is very familiar to actual history. If I spawned in a huge desert or jungle as England I would just reset the game until I got something that was more similar to its real life terrain and historical situation. Maybe it's just me but I don't want to be challenged with a fantasy location I want similar to real history. Also, a lot of the Uniques, starting biases and achievements are related to the civs real life terrain and achievements so it must be encouraged a bit.

 

[Thormodr]

Firaxis logo....
Are they hidden on the other Rise and Fall leaders too? I was trying to check for it on Poundmaker earlier....

Jayavarman VII’s wristband has the Firaxis logo on it.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Firaxis logo....
Are they hidden on the other Rise and Fall leaders too? I was trying to check for it on Poundmaker earlier....

They are hidden on all leaders in the game.

 

[Thormodr]

They are hidden on all leaders in the game.

I am surprised there is not a thread for it yet, then.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I am surprised there is not a thread for it yet, then.

@bite was thinking of making one, I believe. I'm not sure why he didn't.

 

[bite]

@bite was thinking of making one, I believe. I'm not sure why he didn't.

Life

 

[HEF]

Robert the Bruce reminds me of King Fergus from the Disney animated movie, 'Brave'.

 

[shaglio]

Robert the Bruce reminds me of King Fergus from the Disney animated movie, 'Brave'.

If you say so . . .

 

[HEF]

If you say so . . .

The fact that both characters are big, burly 3-D animated models and Scottish is lost upon you, yes?

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I think that it would be a stretch animating a new leader for every era for every civilisation. I think that the Rise and Fall is going to give more flexibility on changing a civs play style in each era. One of the ideas I had would be to have the same leaders but re skin them by changing their clothes and dialogue through each era. Changing the civs music and cities through each era made a lot of fans happy (I still love that they did that) so I think the leader changing clothes and attitude would also be a great way to show that time has moved on. Imagine Frederick in a slick suit or Cleopatra in a sultry dress in the later eras. I don't know if you use it but MOAR units is a great mod for better civ representation as it normally provides 2 or 3 new units for every civ for different eras. Ethnic units for civ5 was also great as every unit got re-skinned and made the game so much more engrossing. Hopefully they will do it for every unit skin in Civ 6 one day.

I would love to try the MOAR Mods, but I play on a Mac and so have to carefully pick what Mods I try - MOAR and several others just do not work on my Mac.

I can see what you mean in your last post but I have to say I play Civ6 for the complete opposite reason. The civ I'm playing has to start off in the terrain and have other neighbouring civs that reflect real history. I even build the wonders relevant to the actual civ. Right now I'm playing England on continents. I'm on a large Island with the white cliffs of dover. France is across a small sea for wars and India and the US are dominating on other continents nearby. It's one of the most entertaining games I've ever played because it is very familiar to actual history. If I spawned in a huge desert or jungle as England I would just reset the game until I got something that was more similar to its real life terrain and historical situation. Maybe it's just me but I don't want to be challenged with a fantasy location I want similar to real history. Also, a lot of the Uniques, starting biases and achievements are related to the civs real life terrain and achievements so it must be encouraged a bit.

Having read Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel years ago, and taken a few Population and Political Geography classes at University, I thoroughly agree. To paraphrase the realtors, in history as well it's 'Location, Location, Location'. If I start a game as England and my start position is the equivalent of the edge of the Gobi Desert 1000 miles (or 20 tiles or so) from the nearest ocean, I restart immediately, because with that Start position I will not be playing England, I will be playing Mongolia with a strange ship fetish!

I have found, in fact, that Civ's 'Start Location Bias' is a Bad Joke: any civ with a terrain basis requires at least 2 - 6 Restarts to get anything like a start position that justifies the bonus or Unique. I have virtually stoped trying to play Nubia, because I have, in about 10 attempts, gotten a start position with ANY desert tiles exactly once, so the 'Nubian Pyramid' might as well be a mirage in my games...

To return to the purpose of this Thread, that actually is a Plus for Scotland: Golf Courses, it appears, can be built on a variety of terrain types, and they come along relatively late in the game so it should not be too difficult to get a viable Start Position. - As long as it's not the Gobi Desert, because it appears that in the Civ VI version, Sand Traps are incompatible with Golf Courses.

I wonder if that says something about how well Ed Beach plays golf?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I just realized, Buenos Aires and Zanzibar are going to be must-have suzerainties for Scotland. Unless they have been changed.