First Look: Scythia

Light Cavalry is a unit type - not a specific unit. There are Light and Heavy Cavalry. While technically we don't know which type the horsemen is, I think it's a fair guess that it is a Light Cavalry unit considering the fairly specific name of the Heavy Chariot.

The real question is what the Knight and Later Cavalry unit classify as. My guess is that the Knight is Heavy, and the Cavalry unit is Light. So it's possible that Scythia won't be able to spam knights.

I'm a dummy. I meant Heavy Chariot, not Light Cavalry :crazyeye: Just do a mental Find/Replace, I guess.

EDIT: I didn't realize my little slip up would cause such a commotion. I'll have to watch the video again when I get home from work, but I thought the narrator specifically mentioned only the Saka Horse Archer and Heavy Chariot as eligible for the 2-for-1 deal.
 
but I thought the narrator specifically mentioned only the Saka Horse Archer and Heavy Chariot as eligible for the 2-for-1 deal.

She specifically says "Light cavalry or their unique saka horse archer"
 
She specifically says "Light cavalry or their unique saka horse archer"

Yeah, I just got home from work and watched it again. I clearly shouldn't comment based on my memory alone. So I guess the "what constitutes 'Light Cavalry?'" discussion was merited after all.
 
Yeah, I just got home from work and watched it again. I clearly shouldn't comment based on my memory alone. So I guess the "what constitutes 'Light Cavalry?'" discussion was merited after all.

I'm guessing the Saka horse archer and the normal melee horseman so you can field a ranged and meless army of horses.
 
Maybe Persians/Cyrus will get a bonus to declaring surprise wars called "Writing on the Wall", directly aligning them against Tomyris.
 
Ironies aside, I think Scythians are like the Greeks, in that they weren't politically unified, and were prone to internal struggles, but they formed a cohesive group that was in mutual contact and had similar customs and culture, and thus, are fine as a civ. It's different for something like Polynesia, a civ that grouped cultures that, while related, were not in contact to each other, and developed in completely different ways. I'd prefer they split them for this game.
 
The irony transmission lines are a bit unreliable around here.

Of course I wasn't serious. :p I'd been singing the praises of a game mechanic for several paragraphs before then; my opinion is not so unstable that it would do a 180 in the course of a single post.
 
Y'know, something just occurred to me. We might get to see some Scythia gameplay at Gamescom, yeah? What are y'all hoping to see pertaining to Tomy? Me, I'll just be happy to get SOMETHING xD
 
Am I the only one who finds this civ dissapointingly bland? All the other civ so far have bonuses that seem to have complex ramifications and interesting interplay with the mechanics we know about. Something that really changes the way they build their empires. Scythia seems to just boil down to build lots of horses and mess up some fools. I like the personality. A military civ policing the globe, kind of like how I play, and it will be neat to see the AI doing it, but the mechanics just seem uninspired, almost like they were designed only for the AI to play.

I suppose it's just as well that I'll always have AI scythia around, because it's the only one so far I have no interest in playing.
 
Am I the only one who finds this civ dissapointingly bland? All the other civ so far have bonuses that seem to have complex interplay with the mechanics we know about. Something that really changes the way they build their empires. Scythia seems to just boil down to build lots of horses and mess up some fools. I like the personality. A military civ policing the globe, kind of like how I play, and it will be neat to see the AI doing it, but the mechanics just seem to uninspired.

I suppose it's just as well that I'll always have AI scythia around, because it's the only one so far I have no interest in playing.

Well, they do have a unique improvement which produces faith. Perhaps going on an early game conquering spree puts you in a good position to springboard into a religious victory by building those improvements throughout your now-large empire.

We don't really know enough about the religious victory condition to say that for sure, though.
 
Am I the only one who finds this civ dissapointingly bland?

No - I think they're boring too. Will be really cool to play against but other than unlocking an achievement or doing some interesting challenges - so far I can say I probably won't play them regularly. I was very excited about them and think they turned out cool - but I'm not interested in what they have to offer. Their design certainly seems far more narrow than all of the others.

I think they're only winning the other poll because they're new. Also judging by the comments, people seem to have misinterpreted the question as "which one do you most want to play" I think. For example, I personally think Japan is the most interesting civ in civ6 so far, but it's probably 4th or 5th in line for civs I'm going to play first.
 
I think they're going to be more exciting than they sound. They aren't able to field any more units than another civ because upkeep cost will be the same.

Their benefit is the ability to raise armies up to 2x as fast that can move quickly. It's not that Tomyris wages war better, but she wages it more quickly. This can literally be just enough to keep others from provoking you; or perhaps to quickly take a capital that another civ would have to pull off a long sustained war for. And then end the war. I don't recall a civ ever having an ability like this, except maybe Bismarck's ability to get free Barbarian units.
 
I think they're going to be more exciting than they sound. They aren't able to field any more units than another civ because upkeep cost will be the same.

Then again, a couple of well placed Kurgans should help in the upkeep of the larger army, we don't know what tech unlocks them, but they look like an early unlock. Besides hunting barb camps should be apiece of cake with Scythia, they should have enough gold to finance a couple of early wars.
 
I'm mostly excited for this civ because of YSL maps and Tomyris killing Cyrus is a cool story I'm familiar with.
 
No - I think they're boring too. Will be really cool to play against but other than unlocking an achievement or doing some interesting challenges - so far I can say I probably won't play them regularly. I was very excited about them and think they turned out cool - but I'm not interested in what they have to offer. Their design certainly seems far more narrow than all of the others.

I think they're only winning the other poll because they're new. Also judging by the comments, people seem to have misinterpreted the question as "which one do you most want to play" I think. For example, I personally think Japan is the most interesting civ in civ6 so far, but it's probably 4th or 5th in line for civs I'm going to play first.

:agree: I regret voting for them in the poll, but... they were just so new! :lol:

I really wish Firaxis had been more creative with them. They could have gone the nomad route. Amplitude did it with the Roving Clans in Endless Legend.
 
Tomyris looks awesome :), Scythia seem's a cool civ, something a bit different to the regular. looking forward to October 22.:)
 
Not my playstyle, but I'm ecstatic to see the Scythians and Tomyris in the game. The kurgans looks really nice, and starting next to her could be rather convenient--use her and Teddy as a shield against warmongers. ;) I wonder what language she'll speak. Scythian is (very marginally) attested, but rather fragmentary to try to build dialogue from. Perhaps Ossetian or Sogdian?
 
Top Bottom