Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by FlorbFnarb, Mar 11, 2015.
Are they not able to actually found new cities and can only conquer and puppet-ize them?
Yes exactly, thats what venice can do to find new cities but they rely on purchases and no courthouses. You get double the trade route slots and you get to purchase whatever it is you need un your cities. Building in non capital cities is automated.
Wow, that's...a really different game mechanic. Are there any other civs that have such a radically different set of mechanics? I've only played with a few of the original civs so far.
I dont remember,really. There are many civilizations that are unique in their own way. Indonesia, for example, can get free luxuries from cities built in other islands that arent built in the same island that the capital is built in. Austria has a diplomatic marriage ua that can also buy city states like venice does.
Actually, I like playing Venice, though it's hard to win above Emperor level.
Hopefully your city has a mountain next to it and a couple of nearby CS, from there it's just to befriend a couple of Mil CS and get the free units, while you work on finishing NC as quick as possible. Traderoutes are great with this civ as you see when you have 10 of them.
My first game with Venice was quite lucky by having 4 CS quite close and a cultural win around turn 280 was achieved with 6 cities. No wars, just a nice relaxed game.
Just make sure you work on getting those Merchants of Venice out.
For other civs, reddish already mentioned Indonesia and Vienna, I like to add Shoshone where their pathfinders can choose from goodiehuts, in one game I got early culture to set off Liberty, then 3 pathfinders was upgraded to compbows. That and their huge borders in new cities makes it fun civ to play.
Poland of course for extra policies, as the civ wasn't strong enough already.
Morocco and Portugal for nicer traderoutes, especially Morocco as they have a good chance of spawning in desert, which of course leads to Desert Folklore.
Zulu I don't need to explain, Impis are deadly.
And of course the Danish, Ski Infantry is a blessing! j/k
Babylon is great for science, a scientist planted around turn 15-20 will do great and half the time of new scientists born is awesome. Still a finicky civ to play, if you get a good start then it's a walk in the park, if not it can be a struggle to get your focus right.
Haven't really tried Brazil and Assyria and only did one game with Polynesia so far, where my settler went to the other continent straight away on a game on a Terra map. Was only King so I won and claimed my starting point from the Germans later. All in all, the new civs have different flavours, but they are absolutely playable.
A thing to note about Venice is how some Social Policies work. On first glance one might think that neither Tradition nor Liberty is viable because some SP bonuses require more cities and the ability to build settlers.
Legalism and Finisher for Tradition gives you free culture buildings and aqueducts in Venice and 3 other puppeted cities (I think they need to be CSs purchased with a Great Merchant of Venice). This also works if you add the city after the policies are in place (just as it would work for a normal civ if building a city after). First time I played Venice I did not go tradition because I thought Legalism and Finisher would just be a waste, giving the free buildings just in Venice.
Collective Rule from liberty will give a GMoV instead of a Settler , which is quite strong (but you do lose the 50% build speed for settlers). So going Liberty will give you 2 great people.
What's the official approach on Venice - Tradition or Liberty? Which one is the stronger?
Personally I always go tradition with Venice. The free aquaducts, landed elite, and monarchy bonuses are perfect for them. Since you basically rely on your capital for everything they synergize extremely well, plus the free buildings for any cities you snag with a GMoV are pretty helpful. The wonder building bonus is also great since I find I spend most of my time building National wonders and world wonders.
The free GMoV from collective rule is nice but most of the liberty bonuses are wasted. You don't need to worry about worker speed since 2 workers will easily have every workable tile in the capital improved long before you can assign a citizen to them. Meritocracy bonus is useless since you can only make puppets, ditto for representation. The bonus to building production from republic is decent but not really enough to make liberty worthwhile.
Citizenship really isnt that useful for venice, i agree, but thats why you shouldnt build a single worker when using venice with liberty. City states usually come with their own workers and often have their improvements built by the time you buy them. The only advantage i see is that building roads for connections could be done quicker, particularly if the city states that were purchased are far away.
Yes, all your expansion will be either through conquest or by puppeting city states with Merchants.
Tradition is definitely the way to go.
I've written an extensive guide for playing as Venice: http://www.megabearsfan.net/post/2014/05/15/Civ-V-Venice-strategy.aspx.
It should hopefully answer most of your questions.
Those guides are very helpful, thanks for sharing.
Well, can't exactly pass up on an opportunity for shameless self-promotion, now can I?
To me the way they setup Venice is just plain wrong.There were many Venetian cities, let me just mention: Spalato, Cattaro, Candia, Zara, Veneto, Lepanto, Modon, Nauplia, Cefalonia, Corfu, Treviso, Pola, Padua, Verona, Otranto, Famagusta, Nicosia, Canea, Malvasia, Vicenza, Zante, Romagna, Friuli and Eraclea, among others.
Why cripple this tribe with the inability to settle and found new cities?
Of course some of these cities were not founded by Venetians(actually many of them weren't), some might even just be island names, however, they were at some point part of the seafaring Venetian empire. Similar to Carthage, Phoenicia or Netherlands, although the Dutch and perhaps Carthaginians were slightly more expansionistic.
Venetians were a seafaring naval power and excellent merchants. Reflect these qualities in their bonuses, let Marco Polo be one of the Great Explorers in the game!
Here is a thought, why not make Great Explorer one of the great people in Civilization 6? There are so many great people of history this field would fit so well!
No, not at all.
Make the Venetians only capable of founding coastal cities, but don't turn them into a city state.
Why? What's wrong with the way it is?
Im guessing he said that because then Venice would be too UP. Cargo ships would make Venice a lot more.
I'm not understanding the problem with Venice as it is though. Is he saying Venice is currently UP?
Im saying Venice would be UP if Venice wasn't on a coast because cargo ships provide a lot more gpt, food and production particularly if the city states were also coastal. Im sure players could still pull it off with Venice founded in a non coastal position but it would be a lot easier for trade if Venice was in a coast with any city nearby in another coast.
Oh, sure. I haven't investigated Venice in any detail, but I would imagine the whole thing is pretty heavily weighted toward needing to get to a coast quickly.
Extra pro challenge: play Venice on Pangaea with no city-states.
Separate names with a comma.