pre-release info New Civ Game Guide: Prussia

[agamemnon_of_the-bronze_]

This is one of my favorite civilization designs in the entire game.
I do wish that they had gotten a Unique Great Person civilian unit instead of the Dive Bomber, but apart from that, no notes.

they really nailed this. the best design of the modern civilizations in my opinion. Blood and Iron helps negate the annoying diplomacy AI. Stuka is iconic and a great choice. the civ is tailored to punch whoever is badmouthing them in the mouth. will be a lot of fun for warmonger runs and for countering civilizations that have high influence like Siam and USA.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

The German Empire was overtly Prussian though.

i wouldn’t call nazi germany overtly prussian, and that’s a plane that first flew in 1935

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

i wouldn’t call nazi germany overtly prussian, and that’s a plane that first flew in 1935

Oh, you specifically meant the Stuka. I agree but it seems they like to give a bunch of civs WWII units anyway like Meiji Japan and Imperial Russia, so that fits.

 

[queenpea]

Oh, you specifically meant the Stuka. I agree but it seems they like to give a bunch of civs WWII units anyway like Meiji Japan and Imperial Russia, so that fits.

For some reason, I'm finding the Modern Age to be the least immersive yet.

 

[Jkchart]

I wouldn't be surprised if the naming was to avoid any potential awkwardness around a militaristic modern age Germany, especially with fascism as a selectable ideology.

I think what people should also remember is that the first German Empire was (legally) a confederation of the remaining German states with Prussia on top. The Kingdom of Prussia existed until 1918.
And guess what? Prussia itself still existed until...1947 as the Free State of Prussia. With Prussian militarism and legal supremacy over the other German states as the driver of a German Empire post-HRE, I see no issue with making Prussia the Civ for this particular era, and if they add a Post-Modern era then "Germany" arises.

 

[Leucarum]

It feels weird to me that they are diplomatic. The civ feels economic with a clear production push to use that for the millitary. Or maybe that's just Ruhr being front and center on their abilities. They feel a bit one-dimensional, if this were an essay it would be a solid B, clearly nothing wrong with it to suggest a non-passing grade, but also just nothing which stands out.

 

[Jkchart]

It feels weird to me that they are diplomatic. The civ feels economic with a clear production push to use that for the millitary. Or maybe that's just Ruhr being front and center on their abilities. They feel a bit one-dimensional, if this were an essay it would be a solid B, clearly nothing wrong with it to suggest a non-passing grade, but also just nothing which stands out.

I think the idea is a nod to Bismarck/the German confederation

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Stuttgart (Wittenberg), Hamburg (Free Town), Dresden, Leipzig (Saxony) were never Prussian towns.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Deutscher_Bund.png

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

The German Empire was overtly Prussian though.

In the same way, the United States are overtly New England...

 

[untitledjuan]

Stuttgart (Wittenberg), Hamburg (Free Town), Dresden, Leipzig (Saxony) were never Prussian towns.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Deutscher_Bund.png

I bet they originally intended to name the civ "Germany" instead of "Prussia"

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

I bet they originally intended to name the civ "Germany" instead of "Prussia"

I don't think so, but even if you are right... So what? They should change the list of cities as well.

 

[Zaarin]

I don't think so, but even if you are right... So what? They should change the list of cities as well.

Civ's city lists have never been great; I always use mods to improve them.

 

[local_hero]

I'm not sure I agree that Prussia is too militaristic. I don't enjoy warmongering but can still see myself having fun with Prussia. There seems to be plenty of production and some science and diplo in my mind, looking at the civics and the UI. They seem quite flexible with all that production. And the bonus to being hated and their military capacity seems nice if **** hits the fan.

I think I'll struggle more to enjoy playing Meiji Japan.

 

[ColtSeavers]

In the same way, the United States are overtly New England...

Prussia held about 2/3 thirds of the German territory/ people, hardly comparable to New England and the US, I think.

 

[Zaarin]

Prussia held about 2/3 thirds of the German territory/ people, hardly comparable to New England and the US, I think.

I don't have figures in front of me, but New England probably held 2/3 or nearly that of the United States' population at the time of independence. It was also culturally and economically dominant for much of the 19th and early 20th century.

 

[Krajzen]

I gotta say, this civ certainly screams "this should have been called Germany"

On the plus side, this introduces a tiny opportunity for post ww2 peaceful German civ... for the fourth age? I mean, I can't imagine devs making fourth age work like the first three ages in terms of demanding civ change and having equal roster to them (neither I can imagine having as long tech tree as other three), it would be also very painful having to decide whether to put say America in the 3rd or 4th age :crazyeyes: but on the other hand there seems to be a clear conscious push to avoid referencing post ww2 world (or post 60s world?).

It is very interesting how 3rd era civs are named as not-modern-country-in-general-but-specific-pre-ww2-regime. It really looks for me as if civs such as Soviets, (postcolonial) India, (post ww2) Germany, (CCP) China, (post ww2) Japan, Thailand (renamed as such in the 30s), (postcolonial) Indonesia, modern Etiopia etc were purposefuly avoided in the 3rd era to use them in the 4th. I mean why else would devs use their pre-ww2/ww1 predecessor state in every instance possible.

Personally I see three options:
1) Fourth age is going to be special in some ways, for example allowing ascending to it with the civ from the 3rd age or reforming it to a "newer version"
2) Devs actually are going to make yet anothet crazy bold move and indeed introduce 4th era with the entire separate civ roster - so no America post ww2
3) Fourth age is indeed going to have an entire separate civ roster, but some countries such as America are going to get anyway as their sci fi futuristic versions

 

[Oberst Kraft]

On the plus side, this introduces a tiny opportunity for post ww2 peaceful German civ... for the fourth age? I mean, I can't imagine devs making fourth age work like the first three ages in terms of demanding civ change and having equal roster to them (neither I can imagine having as long tech tree as other three), it would be also very painful having to decide whether to put say America in the 3rd or 4th age :crazyeyes: but on the other hand there seems to be a clear conscious push to avoid referencing post ww2 world (or post 60s world?).

It is very interesting how 3rd era civs are named as not-modern-country-in-general-but-specific-pre-ww2-regime. It really looks for me as if civs such as Soviets, (postcolonial) India, (post ww2) Germany, (CCP) China, (post ww2) Japan, Thailand (renamed as such in the 30s), (postcolonial) Indonesia, modern Etiopia etc were purposefuly avoided in the 3rd era to use them in the 4th. I mean why else would devs use their pre-ww2/ww1 predecessor state in every instance possible.

Personally I see three options:
1) Fourth age is going to be special in some ways, for example allowing ascending to it with the civ from the 3rd age or reforming it to a "newer version"
2) Devs actually are going to make yet anothet crazy bold move and indeed introduce 4th era with the entire separate civ roster - so no America post ww2
3) Fourth age is indeed going to have an entire separate civ roster, but some countries such as America are going to get anyway as their sci fi futuristic versions

4) Devs try to avoid any controversies (modern antagonisms, religious differences, etc.) as much as possible.

 

[Ornen]

it's so funny to me that Napoleon & Prussia is such a combo, especially given that their synergy is based around riling people up

 

[AW Arcaeca]

I mean, then perhaps giving them arguably the military unit most associated with the terror of the Nazi German war machine (the Panzer is better known and the U-boat more effective, but the horn-howl of the diving Stuka became a symbol of terror in its own right) would seem like not the best idea?

Remember that both Civ4 and Civ5 had a Panzer UU for Germany lead by Bismarck.

I'm not going to argue that Panzers are fitting for a civ that pretends to be specifically Prussian and not just Germany in general, but I don't see how the Stuka is a step too far for Germany because "Nazi German war machine", because that has been the norm for Germany so far anyway.

 

[Daigotsu Max]

4) Devs try to avoid any controversies (modern antagonisms, religious differences, etc.) as much as possible.

That's actually one of the reasons why I think a 4th age may not happen. Having contemporary nations and/or leaders might feel iffy, particularly given the current world climate.