New DLC: Polynesia

So if the UA is indeed that you can embark and cross ocean immediatly. On a Terra map, would it be benificial to get your first settler and sail off to the new world straight away?

Ok so you will lose quite a few turns at first, but could settle a whole continent to your self without having any opposition....... pretty powerful stuff

Thats an interesting idea. Settle a port city in the old world, but send all your new settlers off to the new world. Keep enough military in the old world so no one kills you, and then build up the new world.

Sounds to easy. :lol:
 
I dont know about the iroquais, but Greece many times was under the same dictator, like Philip or Alexander. but thats doesnt matter.
Speaking of Alexander, he wasn't Greek. He was Macedonian. But he shared and spread Greek culture, and that's why we can say he's Greek. And there's still much room for discussion.

If you look this way, creating a "Polynesia civ" is vry offensive...because you are ignoring all the diversity that exists between the countries there.

I, being a brazilian, would hate being part of "Latin America Civ"
What would you hate more, being part of "Latin American Civ" or not being represented at all? Would you think Latin America is fantasy with all it's magical stuff and bla? I think not. On top of that you already included in such a civ... namely Spanish (or in your case Portuguese). In Age of Empires 3 I've seen many Brasilians intenifying themselves with the Portuguese.
 
Speaking of Alexander, he wasn't Greek. He was Macedonian. But he shared and spread Greek culture, and that's why we can say he's Greek. And there's still much room for discussion.

Yeah I didn't even want to go there. But the question of whether Alexander was "Greek" or not just reinforces the fact that there was no unified polity of Greece at the time when Greek culture was most influential. Certainly Greece is not in the game on the basis of how powerful the modern country is.
 
+1 hammer per water tile would be incredible...

That Would probably be Overpowered...
perhaps like a Seaport... +1 hammer per water Resources (UB replaces monument..still has +2 culture)

They could be a Maintenance Free stronger monument (80 hammers +4 Culture 0 maintenance)
 
Theres Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, the same way theres Thaiti, Hawaii...
Mods' realm.

Polynesia has been the most mysterious naval explorers in Human history. They most probably invented astronomical points of reference (of their own) waaaayyyyy before Europeans were even using sextants.
Gameplay is just the context where Fantasy elements can actually add some real fun.
While Australia may have been conquered by whomever was there first... Magellan would spin in his tomb if it weren't for Atolls and Reefs zig-zagging to the biggest of them islands.
 
I'd assume they start with a 'special' upgrade that gives them the same thing as what you get with Optics/Astronomy.

that's important since they crossed the oceans looking for more islands well before anyone figured out 'astronomy'. (in a purely technical sense)

I think they should get the ability to cross open ocean early on, but with a significant chance to sink/become lost to discourage overuse of the ability.
 
I think they should get the ability to cross open ocean early on, but with a significant chance to sink/become lost to discourage overuse of the ability.

I don't see why, its not That powerful... on most maps all it gives you is
1. some earlier contacts
2. a few safe havens

On an Archipelago map it would be OP, on a Pangea it would be underpowered, on a Continents map... probably just right.
 
Cool, Polynesia sounds like something new and different. Glad to see Firaxis looking outside the normal set of civs, expanding the map a bit while building a civ that should play different that the others.

And I don't think the early ocean exploration will prove OP on archipelago ... those maps are always connected by coastal water in Civ5 anyway (change from 4). A Terra map might be a different story though.
 
Wow, first we had fountain of youth being put in, and now this?

Sure there where 'some' more historically important and significant civs they could have put in.

What they gonna put in next? Klingons? Daleks maybe? :)

Whenever anyone here uses the word "historically important" they actually mean, "I wasn't tought this in my grade 10 history class, that was really only about dead white men to begin with. Also my veiws on non-Western cultures hasn't stretched beyond a Victorian mind set." You, just like everyone else who uses this term is grossly ignorent.
 
I knew that Alexander was a macedonian, btw ask a macedonian if they like that Alexander is always portrait as a greek hero. They hated, they hate greece, long history of conflicts.

If I prefer being a Latin America Civ or not being represented?
Of course I prefer not being in the game.

I know it seens that Im going too far, actually Im ok ith the poly civ, it is just a game.

But, I do hate generalization. Thats a signal of ignorance most of the time. And im happy that you know that I speak portuguese, not spanish. 90% of the americans and europeans doesnt know that. And here lies the problem.

If you will group a whole lot of different plp under the same flag, better be sure of what you are doing...
 
The original settlement of America came from people in boats from the Pacific ... ie. Polynesia. Before that the USA was an icecube with the occasional dinosaur. Assuming by some historical hiccup, George Washington and any of the South American descendants of the Polynesians is waiting for me...I'll be happy to screw them over again.
Other than that, I'm sticking with the far more classy Babylonians as historically accurate and drunk most of the time :)
 
That shows a lot of what firaxis is thinking about civ V...

Not only polynesia doesnt means nothing historically, but the scenary "Paradise Found" probably will be full of fantasies like the Fountain of youth.

I was happy with the patch notes, because it shows that they can learn from the modders. But this DLC is just nonsense. I can think of at least 20 civs that deserved be in the game before polynesia...Portugal, Netherlands, Korea, Carthage, Maya, holy roman, Vikings, Zulus ...if you want to go further theres some new modern powers, like Mexico and Brazil.

I dont know, but I really dont like the way the devs are thinking.

If I want a fantasy game Ill play HMM or warhammer.

Yeah, the mexican UU could be a warrior with cocaine in one hand and an ak47 in the other... brazil I could see as a modern civ included, however. they definitely have more impact on the world these days than portugal at least.
 
Yeah I didn't even want to go there. But the question of whether Alexander was "Greek" or not just reinforces the fact that there was no unified polity of Greece at the time when Greek culture was most influential. Certainly Greece is not in the game on the basis of how powerful the modern country is.
Exactly. There was no "Germany" before 1871. But still the majority of the people in modern Germany spoke German or a German dialect and identified themselves as Germans.

Here's what Wikipedia says about Polynesia:

"The people who inhabit the islands of Polynesia are termed Polynesians and they share many similar traits including language, culture and beliefs."

I think it rectifies Polynesians because they share similar traits.
 
Whenever anyone here uses the word "historically important" they actually mean, "I wasn't tought this in my grade 10 history class, that was really only about dead white men to begin with. Also my veiws on non-Western cultures hasn't stretched beyond a Victorian mind set." You, just like everyone else who uses this term is grossly ignorent.

They honestly Aren't that historically important... like the Aztecs, Inca, Iroquois, Siam, Songhai aren't that historically important. (they had great achievements, but those achievements didn't contribute much to the current day even in their area, because those achievements were overshadowed by other civs that didn't use their achievements)

Eurasian civs (including Egypt) are the only ones that really left/led to significant contributions to the current day or were at Least significant 'speed bumps' to the civs that did contribute (ie Carthage)

This is why geographic balance is Also important. Because if areas outside of Eurasia are just city-states and barbarians it
1. ruins the "what if" possibilities
2. leaves out things people Did hear about in their history books that provide unique civs.


The original settlement of America came from people in boats from the Pacific ... ie. Polynesia. Before that the USA was an icecube with the occasional dinosaur. Assuming by some historical hiccup, George Washington and any of the South American descendants of the Polynesians is waiting for me...I'll be happy to screw them over again.
Other than that, I'm sticking with the far more classy Babylonians as historically accurate and drunk most of the time :)

Actually the earlier settlers came from the north (possibly using some boats, but ones that just had to move along the coast)
 
I like their special ability. Would like to see what the Moai Statues give.

I couldn't quite read it. I'm guessing instant embark?

Yeah WTH Polynesia. I don't think they were that important in history.

Greatest migration and expansion in human history. Unprecedented level of achievement there. Of course, it was pre-bronze working, so I know it's controversial, but it was still impressive.

I'm very intrigued. I've said for awhile that Polynesia would be great for diversity. The idea of instant expansion is a really cool one that would make them play like no other. If I can make out the screens, it's Moa statues and Maori Warrior? I should get royalties for my ideas :p OK, seriously, great choices Firaxis. I suggested using Tonga as the base for cities and leader, but Hawaii makes a ton of sense too. It's also a bit more recent in history, so it's better documented and less prone to exaggeration.

Anyway, solid price, cool flavor. I like it. I do hope for Carthage and the Celts (actually, as big of a Carthage fan as I am, especially the Celts, since I like hearing Gaelic).
 
I was hoping a new DLC would make an appearance. Polynesia is an interesting choice. I was hoping for the Vikings or Carthage, oh well perhaps next time.
 
I couldn't quite read it. I'm guessing instant embark?
Instant embark AND ocean travel. So starting Warrior can go anywhere on the map (besides mountains and Ice and enemy territory)
 
Actually the earlier settlers came from the north (possibly using some boats, but ones that just had to move along the coast)

Even more actually, there's a decent chance that some of the first people in the Americas came from Spain, of all places. :lol: The Solutrean culture, to be accurate.

Looking at their cave paintings you see evidence of deep sea fishing (accurate pictures of Whales and Dolphins... Hunted everything else they drew, no reason to assume otherwise here), and at the time the ice sheet would have made such a journey fairly easy; Island hopping, more or less, from glacier to glacier.

What evidence is there? The Clovis arrowheads. They share nothing in common with Siberian arrowheads of the same era (which is supposed to be where people crossed from, remember?), but share virtually everything with those of Spain; The one refinement being that the Clovis points have a long groove in the center, while the Solutrean points do not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solutrean_hypothesis
 
As for other civs, I'm sure they will come out with Portugal and the Dutch in an Age of Exploration/Imperialism Scenario.

Celts, Carthage in a Roman Empire Scenario

Byzantine, Vikings, (possibly HRE and Poland) in a Mideval Europe Scenario

Texas, Mexico, California, Canada, and the Confederacy in a Civil War Scenario

Love some of these ideas. Throw in the Germans and Persians for Rome...Huns for Byanztium, and for the Civil War you could make Utah a city state.
 
Top Bottom