Calico Jack
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2021
- Messages
- 17
And as an Englishman, that's a bizarre and rather sad stance to be taking.Well, as an Englishman, I disagree.![]()
And as an Englishman, that's a bizarre and rather sad stance to be taking.Well, as an Englishman, I disagree.![]()
I think as a Brit, I am much more interested in the omission of a British leader over the civ. I'd be much more interested in pre-England tribes and civs appearing in the game than England itselfPlease do not dance around this - England has been excluded. The Normans were one chapter of England's long and storied history, but they certainly don't represent England in Civilisation.
Two countries known for vast imperialism and being hearts of industry during the modern era speaking the same language aren't similar? You're right from a gameplay perspective the America expansion aspects are focused on frontier settling. But it's still the same niche even if the mechanics would be different.Not at all. Two very different countries and even a cursory glance at their history will show that they certainly wouldn't need to fill the same 'niche', from a mechanical perspective - nor should they.
And as an Englishman, that's a bizarre and rather sad stance to be taking.
I didn't say that. I simply said that an important part of English history has been included.but to say that thet are the replacement of the British Empire seems reductionist and, quite frankly, a poor take.
That's a very reductive way of viewing both countries. Even considering the ways they have approached and continue to approach imperialism and industry through vastly different cultural and economic perspectives, our mode of English has enough differences to be distinctive from the Americans. That's not even getting into regional dialects, which can change every 15 or so miles over here.Two countries known for vast imperialism and being hearts of industry during the modern era speaking the same language aren't similar? You're right from a gameplay perspective the America expansion aspects are focused on frontier settling. But it's still the same niche even if the mechanics would be different.
I didn't say that. I simply said that an important part of English history has been included.
Clearly many people care far more than I do - and this is totally fine! I really couldn't care less if England was in at all, I was just pointing out that part of English history is there, it is not a total exclusion.
This doesn't seem worth arguing over. I was simply trying to justify why the devs may not have decided on including both America and UK/Normans and England, but apparently you just don't see the Normans as similar to England (as they clearly intended them to be going off many of the city names), and that America and Britain at least step on each others ties in regards to what they represent when there is only 10 available slots on launch and a lot to cover.That's a very reductive way of viewing both countries. Even considering the ways they have approached and continue to approach imperialism and industry through vastly different cultural and economic perspectives, our mode of English has enough differences to be distinctive from the Americans. That's not even getting into regional dialects, which can change every 15 or so miles over here.
So, it wouldn't be the same niche. I'd prefer the England and Great Britain of the 17th - 18th centuries to be represented, which would be an entirely different experience both in flavour and mechanics than, say, the U.S.A. of the 19th and early 20th centuries.
I think this may well be the crux of it, yes.But, I do think that it highlights another aspect of their radical design in that, if someone isn't a fan of these design choices, it is hard to "bring them back into the camp" so to speak.
Well, the design choices created the problem.I think this may well be the crux of it, yes.
I prefer to call it an opportunity but sure, it's definitely a product of the design.Well, the design choices created the problem.
Clearly many people care far more than I do - and this is totally fine! I really couldn't care less if England was in at all, I was just pointing out that part of English history is there, it is not a total exclusion.
And I guess I could reiterate that having Normans instead of boring old England/Britain is an exciting choice for a start. It's a more refreshing take and, as a plus, it reminds the little Britain or Empire-lover types that England and Britain are inextricably tied to the continent. A win-win choice for me.This doesn't seem worth arguing over. I was simply trying to justify why the devs may not have decided on including both America and UK/Normans and England, but apparently you just don't see the Normans as similar to England (as they clearly intended them to be going off many of the city names), and that America and Britain at least step on each others ties in regards to what they represent when there is only 10 available slots on launch and a lot to cover.
I think the devs fully thought between Normans and America there was enough representation for the anglosphere. If you only have 10 modern era civs and include Britain and the US they pretty much fill the same industrial and expansionist niche do they not? Again I think it boils down to maybe they should have just included 12 civs per age at launch and not gross negligence on the devs part.