[R&F] Mongolia First Look

[Jaybe]

To me, the animations are irrelevant: I keep them turned off.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I did not say that they should move less. No, I just said that they moved less in Civ V, thus you had less chance to see some odd animations.

I want them to move, too. But it's pretty important how they do it. Frideric is odd to me, for instance. And it seems that GK will be waving with his hands like a freak one - making some angry faces. Montezuma type of guy, which is not how I imagine GK.

Just to be clear, while I recognize the passion people bring to the discussion of the Leader mini-videos, they have absolutely no effect on the play of the game, and I suspect most players are like me and cut them off short after the first half-dozen times they hear/view them. In my personal view (and that's ALL it is) they are greatest waste of graphics resources in Civ VI.

If they could get the rights, the animation of Elmer Fudd in a helmet singing "Kill the Wabbit!" would make a perfectly good Declaration of War for the Mongols, be much more entertaining than any animation Firaxis could do - and have just as much to do with how the Mongolian Civ plays in the game.

 

[DeepKing]

To me, the animations are irrelevant: I keep them turned off.

Same. They’re very well made and all, but too taxing for me to use.

 

[darko82]

Okay, so just being fussy and splitting hairs ad nauseum about minor peeves, and folks like me have overindulged this with replies. Too many pages, too much static on the channel.

Keep this up and we might as we retitle the thread "Darko's Mongolian Beef".

For some people it can be minor, for others it may be significant part of the game. If there are animated leaders in the game, they should be relevant etc. And I think leaders representing particular cultures and civilisations are significant. If they are relevant, I might as well be happy with static pictures. Cheers.

And the only real thing I always split hairs about is the poor AI. But that's not something we should be talking about here.

 

[Manifold]

I am a little bit disappointed with the implementation of the Mongols yet. They missed the chance to made a Civ with the Mongols with really unique gameplay.

They gave the Mongols three strong bonuses: 1. extra movement for horses 2. horse theft 3. siege weapons can move fast with the Keshig together. So the Mongols are strong in the blitzkrieg with ranged weapon horses and siege weapons. Also they can build a huge horde by capturing barbarian horses.
I guess this abilities are very similar to those of the Scyths, the UA with duplicate horse production and the Saka Horse Archer - but much better.

So I wonder why they did not made the Mongols different. In Civ4 there was a mechanism for a moving Mongolian camp which spawns units depending on the terrain. This was a nice idea for the representation of the Mongols with very less people but oodles horses. In Civ 5 Venice had only one own City. That one city challenge would have combined with numerous moving Military Encampments...and biological warfare...bonuses for razing cities...

 

[DWilson]

Did we ever get confirmation if the Keshigs can move after shooting or not? I assume not, but would be curious to know for sure.

 

[empresskiova]

Did we ever get confirmation if the Keshigs can move after shooting or not? I assume not, but would be curious to know for sure.

Since they didn’t say they could, I doubt it. That’s good too because that’s waaaaay OP.