Harald Hardrada

[Haggbart]

You mean the thread is about Harald Hardråde and Norway/Norse/Viking? He never ruled Denmark (although he spent 20 years trying to conquer Denmark, he never succeeded). the danish king at the time was Svend Estridssøn.

 

[Deggial]

I am also wondering what Norway's special abilities/UU will be - especially, as the fast embarking is already taken away by the English redcoats.

I once proposed this for Civ5 (before the actual "Vikings" were released) and I am still fond of the idea:
What about a melee unit (probably the famous Berzerker) that is able to "transform" into a full battle-worthy and fast melee ship (the longboat) when embarking?

Doubled yields when plundering and/or fast plundering could be kept from Civ5, it was fitting.

 

[Lohrenswald]

Doubled yields when plundering and/or fast plundering could be kept from Civ5, it was fitting.

It's such a useless thing though

when I go to war I almost never plunder, because I don't want to rebuild all the improvements

and it's like, with regular plundering an improvement will give you like 4 gold once, and so that might become 8 instead. Meanwhile you earn 40 gold per turn from banks and tile yields and so on

 

[King Jason]

It's such a useless thing though

when I go to war I almost never plunder, because I don't want to rebuild all the improvements

and it's like, with regular plundering an improvement will give you like 4 gold once, and so that might become 8 instead. Meanwhile you earn 40 gold per turn from banks and tile yields and so on

Except in civ6 it looks like it may very well an entirely viable strategy to go to war with the sole purpose of plundering. Also, it's implied that destroying districts weakens city strength. So even if you are taking the city there are some strategic considerations to plundering.

With plunder yields tied to district type - meaning you can actually get science or faith from plunder - doubling yields seems like a great boost. Also, it appears that plundering may end your turn in civ6 but I'm not 100% sure on that. If so, a Plunder+move ability would also be good. Tying both together seems strong.

 

[Lohrenswald]

Alright you're probably right

I haven't actually really followed the civ 6 news lol

I'd maybe suggest better water yields or something for a norway civ, though

 

[Deggial]

I guess, we all still think way to much in the rule set of Civ5!

Many old strategies may have lost their use or gained new powers. (I never liked the Mongolian city state bonus, for example, as all CSs could be easily purchased with gold later in the game. Hence I was not fond of the German CS bonus - especially, as CSs will provide even better benefits in Civ6. However, the envoy system probably will lead to a situation, where it is simply not possible any more to take a CS away from a suzerain who invested enough in it. War might be the only valid alternative..).

But I distress. What about the Berzerker = Longboat idea?
It probably wasn't so good for Civ5, where special abilities were usually inherited. It might be way more feasible in Civ6, where this is probably not the case.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Thinking of Denmark.... I think this is where multiple leaders could come in well.

Norse civ
Viking leader
Danish leader
Swedish leader
etc.

(in the same way you can have a Greek civ with Athenian and Spartan leaders... same civ=similarities due same 'civilization, culture, etc.', different leaders=differences ie different "empires" that were often at war with each other)

 

[Westfjordian]

I was planning on not buying the game at launch but if Norway's in it I'll buy it 10 times

Shame they can't spell Hardråde correctly though

Oh I can't resit...

You mean they should've spelled it Haraldr Harðráði? 🤔 🤔 😂 😂

Old Norse vs Boknorsk spelling jokes aside, I'm just glad that it's Norway's turn to get some CIV loving

Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[Quoth the Raven]

Enough with this anti European nonsense. As if France and Germany were the same or as if more civs aren't coming with DLC. Every goddamn time someone complains if a European civ is shown, i swear people are going to be happy the day firaxis puts out a game with one civ called Europe and a thousand different tribes from the rest of the world.

Hear hear! There's always DLC (although part of me wishes they would put in all 50 or so civs from the start). Being Norse myself I'm glad the Vikings are included. Although I liked the division of Denmark/Norway and Sweden/Finland from Civ V because historically the Norse were not just one big happy family (even the Viking era Norse fought each other a lot).

Until Valhalla!

 

[Boom Shakazulu]

Is this the first time a Scandinavian leader was included in the base game for Civilization?

Guess the Scandinavian market is more important than others, "sulks away with head down"

I don't expect Norway to be much different from Denmark in Civ5, Berserkers, warmongerer, etc

No, Civ 2 had Vikings in the base game. Canute was the leader.

 

[magha77]

Where's my Southeast Asian civ? Do we really need to overcrowd Europe with Eurocentrism.

While I share you're frustration at the exclusion of Persia from the base game, I always enjoyed playing with the Vikings. They had a huge impact on world history. Whereas Scythia's only impact was killing one of the greatest leaders of ancient history, Cyrus the Great of Persia...which again leaves me flabbergasted at its exclusion. Unless I am wrong and above Cleopatra was Ardishir (a king of later Persian dynasty).

 

[Mustakrakish]

Thinking of Denmark.... I think this is where multiple leaders could come in well.

Norse civ
Viking leader
Danish leader
Swedish leader
etc.

(in the same way you can have a Greek civ with Athenian and Spartan leaders... same civ=similarities due same 'civilization, culture, etc.', different leaders=differences ie different "empires" that were often at war with each other)

I like this. It's quite a fresh and innovative approach to include more of the same civ (different aspects of the samish civ) without simply lumping everything under one leader or on the contrary making whole seperate civs when not really needed (Denmark and Sweden in V). It also helps with TSL. You get someone in Scandinavia and that someone is going to be alone there.

 

[Scaramanga]

Thinking of Denmark.... I think this is where multiple leaders could come in well.

Norse civ
Viking leader
Danish leader
Swedish leader
etc.

(in the same way you can have a Greek civ with Athenian and Spartan leaders... same civ=similarities due same 'civilization, culture, etc.', different leaders=differences ie different "empires" that were often at war with each other)

I Don't think this would work since Norse is distinct from the Scandinavian civilizations we have today. It would be like having French and Spanish leaders for Rome.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I Don't think this would work since Norse is distinct from the Scandinavian civilizations we have today. It would be like having French and Spanish leaders for Rome.

Well call it "Scandanavian" civ then

And Louis, Isabella and Julius can be different leaders of the "Romance" civ

 

[SMcM]

Thinking of Denmark.... I think this is where multiple leaders could come in well.

Norse civ
Viking leader
Danish leader
Swedish leader
etc.

(in the same way you can have a Greek civ with Athenian and Spartan leaders... same civ=similarities due same 'civilization, culture, etc.', different leaders=differences ie different "empires" that were often at war with each other)

I really don't like that idea. What is up with this insistence of blob Civs? I'd rather we either had leaders ruling their actual nations/confederations, or we don't have them at all.They really hurt immersion. Welsh speaking Boudicca from Scotland is not some thing I want to see repeated. I would hate playing as Harald Hardrada and having Copenhagen as my capital. And that would be awful for TSL as well; why should there be like three different 'Norse' leaders next to each other, as opposed to having three different nations?

Why would you go to the efforts to create a new leader, and then drop him into an a Civ where he would be alongside the leaders of historical rivals to his own nation? I heavily doubt it would not please anyone. Swedes would probably not be that grateful to see one of their leaders like Erik the victorious or Gustav Vasa added as an extra leader to a 'Norse' or 'Scandinavian' Civ which had Oslo or Copenhagen as its capital, so making these extra leaders would be a waste of time. Developers would be better off just making extra Civs.

 

[ButtBillionaire]

Thinking of Denmark.... I think this is where multiple leaders could come in well.

Norse civ
Viking leader
Danish leader
Swedish leader
etc.

(in the same way you can have a Greek civ with Athenian and Spartan leaders... same civ=similarities due same 'civilization, culture, etc.', different leaders=differences ie different "empires" that were often at war with each other)

Yeah, I don't like this idea. I don't know about my other fellow Scandinavians in the Civilization community, but I really, really don't like the concept of us being mashed together into an amalgamation of Denmark, Norway and Sweden (and perhaps even Iceland too). To me it feels like as if you would mash together all the German-speaking countries in Europe and call it "Germania", or all Native American tribes into one and call it "Native America" (wait a minute...)

If Firaxis bothered to include Denmark and Sweden as separate civilizations in Civ 5, they can be bothered to include Norway as its own civ this time around.

 

[Siptah]

Yeah, I don't like this idea. I don't know about my other fellow Scandinavians in the Civilization community, but I really, really don't like the concept of us being mashed together into an amalgamation of Denmark, Norway and Sweden (and perhaps even Iceland too). To me it feels like as if you would mash together all the German-speaking countries in Europe and call it "Germania", or all Native American tribes into one and call it "Native America" (wait a minute...)

If Firaxis bothered to include Denmark and Sweden as separate civilizations in Civ 5, they can be bothered to include Norway as its own civ this time around.

I second that. And to me, Norway is more than Vikings, I hope for Firaxis, too.

 

[Mudokon Pop]

I'm surprised at the Norse (or Norway) being in the base game although a lot of Civ choices have been surprising this time 'round. While the Norse are fascinating it seems their modern legacy in the Anglosphere is one of romanticism. I wonder how they'll be interpreted.

Can you explain how Hiawatha had an equivalent impact on history as Bismarck? Uniting the the Iroquois confederacy was cool, and the relationship it played between British, French & American settlers was interesting, no doubt. But the impact that had on world history was exceedingly minor.

If I understand correctly, the Iroquois Laws were the basis or inspiration for framing US Federal Law, and provided some framework for the US constitution. Considering that the US Constitution is often seen as one of the Wests greatest political achievements, at least one of their achievements had a big influence.

Iroquois symbolism (bald eagle) also became one of the US's most famous and Thanksgiving may have been an Iroquois Tradition long before any pilgrims arrived.

Lastly, when playing world/Terra maps, some historical accuracy can add to the immersion. An empty new world can break it. I don't think adding in a Native American Civ is any different than a Celtic Civ (also famous for being defeated!). Both are romanticised in modern popculture and more embarrassingly neo-paganism.

 

[_ViKinG_]

Give me more european civs to fill up my world map cool to get Norway. i hope all the nordic countrys comes in dlc`s later on.

 

[BenZL43]

Norway's UU is Viking Longship!