pre-release info New First Look: Xerxes

pre-release info
what language is he speaking?
Too brief to say for sure. Cyrus in Civ6 was speaking very bad Middle Persian (poorly spoken and poorly written), and I'm tempted to say Xerxes sounds similar (possibly even the same VA). It doesn't sound like proper Old Persian or Middle Persian to me--notably the presence of the phoneme /v/, which is not in either language.
 
  • Like
Reactions: j51
Green is always a dangerous color for dyes and paints both: most greens are very t ransient, and under any kind of weathering - sunlight, water, etc - will fade or distort in unexpected ways. Green dragoon coats on display at the Musee d' Armee in Paris are either the basic medium green if never exposed, or a dull gray-green or a light acid-apple green, and they all started as the same color. Really bright green as in the graphic shown pretty much had to wait for the aniline chemical dyes of the 19th century, and famously, they used an arsenical base chemical that made them deadly poisonous!
When exactly did Aniline Dyes (which were more durable, and more determinant that made rare 'elite' colors common) were first used and effectively replaced OG dyes like Akane Madder for Red, Indigo for Blue, And Murex Snails for a very expensive Tyrean Purple)?
And is there any elite guard that used Tyrean Purple as their uniform main color or trims?
 
Since it's specific to Xerxes, calling it Persian Royal Roads would still work better. I feel like that name limits other potential leaders and civs that had more to do with the Silk Road historically.
"Silk Roads" would go much better as a mechanic or device with Civs like the Sogdians or Kushans who were the major workers of the route and the major 'Middle Men' civilization between China, Persia and Rome, respectively.
 
(possibly even the same VA)
The VA for Cyrus (and Nader Shah) sounded more nasal than this. Xerxes sounds deep and commanding here.
 
"Silk Roads" would go much better as a mechanic or device with Civs like the Sogdians or Kushans who were the major workers of the route and the major 'Middle Men' civilization between China, Persia and Rome, respectively.
At the late stage of Age II, Portugal finally found a sea route to Asia and effectively ended Silk Road for several centuries, and made Merchant Navy a serious affairs.
 
When exactly did Aniline Dyes (which were more durable, and more determinant that made rare 'elite' colors common) were first used and effectively replaced OG dyes like Akane Madder for Red, Indigo for Blue, And Murex Snails for a very expensive Tyrean Purple)?
And is there any elite guard that used Tyrean Purple as their uniform main color or trims?
'Aniline' was first isolated by a German chemist in 1826. In 1834 another German discovered a coal tar derivative that produced a bright blue color which he called cyanol, but the first commercial aniline dye was produced in 1856 by William Perkin, who discovered mauveine, an aniline compound that produced the color 'mauve'. Perkins is usually given the credit for aniline dyes, although he was simply the first commercially successful product, because at the same time the German chemical industry discovered way to produce aniline compounds by the ton and started a massive artificial dye industry.

The most notorious of the new colored dyes was "Paris Green", a bright, deep green used on a gown worn by the French Empress Eugenie in 1864. It was all the fashion rage after Empress wore it, but the dye was composed by mixing copper and arsenical compounds, so that if someone wore a garment so colored, they got arsenic poisoning to various degrees. 1/8 of a teaspoon constitutes a fatal dose of arsenic, and the average green Victorian era dress might have several pints of dye on it.
 
'Aniline' was first isolated by a German chemist in 1826. In 1834 another German discovered a coal tar derivative that produced a bright blue color which he called cyanol, but the first commercial aniline dye was produced in 1856 by William Perkin, who discovered mauveine, an aniline compound that produced the color 'mauve'. Perkins is usually given the credit for aniline dyes, although he was simply the first commercially successful product, because at the same time the German chemical industry discovered way to produce aniline compounds by the ton and started a massive artificial dye industry.

The most notorious of the new colored dyes was "Paris Green", a bright, deep green used on a gown worn by the French Empress Eugenie in 1864. It was all the fashion rage after Empress wore it, but the dye was composed by mixing copper and arsenical compounds, so that if someone wore a garment so colored, they got arsenic poisoning to various degrees. 1/8 of a teaspoon constitutes a fatal dose of arsenic, and the average green Victorian era dress might have several pints of dye on it.
And this replaced prized Tyrean Purple?
 
And this replaced prized Tyrean Purple?
Perkin's original mauveine was also known as Aniline Purple, and could produce various hues from the gray-purple Mauve to a bright purple. Today there are about 12 different versions of mauveine used as commercial dyes, so it's a pretty versatile chemical for the dye industry.
 
Too brief to say for sure. Cyrus in Civ6 was speaking very bad Middle Persian (poorly spoken and poorly written), and I'm tempted to say Xerxes sounds similar (possibly even the same VA). It doesn't sound like proper Old Persian or Middle Persian to me--notably the presence of the phoneme /v/, which is not in either language.
ppl on reddit seem to be freaking out cuz it isn’t old or middle persian or aramaic.

he’d be too recent to be speaking avestan as well unless he was citing some scripture, but i don’t know what avestan sounds like and whether he was speaking it

so it’s currently a mystery.
 
Perkin's original mauveine was also known as Aniline Purple, and could produce various hues from the gray-purple Mauve to a bright purple. Today there are about 12 different versions of mauveine used as commercial dyes, so it's a pretty versatile chemical for the dye industry.
And Tyrean Purple originally made of tons of Tyrean murex snails. did it really made extinct that species of snails? and is this 'traditional productions of Tyrean Purple Dyes' now banned today?
 
Here's to hoping that Commanders make domination a lot less tedious
I'm hoping that as well. Still, like in all earlier titles, war will most probable be about sieges so unless we see civ abilities tied to that I remain sceptical about all those boni that Xerxes gets about conquering cities. First he has to be able to do it to get any reward. It may be easier in antiquity without many walls. At least Augustus gets boni for towns whether he founded them or conquered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: j51
Here's to hoping that domination victory doesn't require you to conquer your allies.
That's quite complicated topic as it blurs the line between domination and diplomatic victory. Potential solution could be "vassals" instead of "allies", so those allied civ need to accept your lead as dominant military force. Not sure if such system is worth implementing and how well it fits the current diplomacy.

I really hope the World Congress doesn't return. Civ5 and Civ6 have left me firmly preferring it never, ever return; even with what looks like dramatically improved diplomacy in Civ7, I don't see an outcome where the World Congress isn't awful.
Potentially new diplomacy could provide both mechanics to make resolutions working (with the new diplomatic currency) and useful (with things like embargo). But I'd be really cautious, because yes, previous implementations of world congress were awful and I'd not add without being absolutely sure of its value.
 
That's quite complicated topic as it blurs the line between domination and diplomatic victory. Potential solution could be "vassals" instead of "allies", so those allied civ need to accept your lead as dominant military force. Not sure if such system is worth implementing and how well it fits the current diplomacy.


Potentially new diplomacy could provide both mechanics to make resolutions working (with the new diplomatic currency) and useful (with things like embargo). But I'd be really cautious, because yes, previous implementations of world congress were awful and I'd not add without being absolutely sure of its value.
There isn’t a diplomatic legacy path
economic
cultural
military
science

Diplomatic victory merging with military victory in the 3rd age makes sense. (UN= winners club from WW2….and if the allies had stayed allies it would be more significant)

Maybe build/fully active UN requires all the world is your allies or their vassals. Getting the World Government (Domination Victory) requires a fully active UN plus all civs sharing the same Ideology.
 
There isn’t a diplomatic legacy path
economic
cultural
military
science

Diplomatic victory merging with military victory in the 3rd age makes sense. (UN= winners club from WW2….and if the allies had stayed allies it would be more significant)

Maybe build/fully active UN requires all the world is your allies or their vassals. Getting the World Government (Domination Victory) requires a fully active UN plus all civs sharing the same Ideology.
From gameplay perspective the biggest problem is what the game needs to have only 1 winner, not the winners club. So, it needs some additional mechanics to determine who's the USA of this UN.
 
From gameplay perspective the biggest problem is what the game needs to have only 1 winner, not the winners club. So, it needs some additional mechanics to determine who's the USA of this UN.
Probably something like you can use Influence to buy the votes of your allies (and they can use influence to buy your vote)…your vassals always vote for you.

Have it require 2/3 of civs AND 2/3 of settlements?Population to support you.
 
Probably something like you can use Influence to buy the votes of your allies (and they can use influence to buy your vote)…your vassals always vote for you.

Have it require 2/3 of civs AND 2/3 of settlements?Population to support you.
1. Using influence to buy votes is the mechanic, which is really hard to make multiplayer-compatible. And what I've seen so far in diplomacy should work in MP the same way as in SP (although I don't play MP myself, I believe this approach enrichens SP play too, so this has my support).

2. This mechanic needs some working world congress to work, since it's quite strange to have it for win vote only. And I really dislike this approach "We need diplo victory" -> "Let's make world council" -> "Let's add something for it to do". In previous games this approach failed badly.

3. Generally this doesn't fit the original definition of "you don't need to conquer your allies for conquest victory". What it really does is:
- You have conquest victory, where you need to conquer everyone's capitals
- You have diplomatic victory, where you need everyone vote for you. Even if you'll add rules like "civ with conquered capitals don't vote" or "vassals always vote for suzerain", it would still feel like diplomatic victory, not conquest
 
1. Using influence to buy votes is the mechanic, which is really hard to make multiplayer-compatible. And what I've seen so far in diplomacy should work in MP the same way as in SP (although I don't play MP myself, I believe this approach enrichens SP play too, so this has my support).

2. This mechanic needs some working world congress to work, since it's quite strange to have it for win vote only. And I really dislike this approach "We need diplo victory" -> "Let's make world council" -> "Let's add something for it to do". In previous games this approach failed badly.

3. Generally this doesn't fit the original definition of "you don't need to conquer your allies for conquest victory". What it really does is:
- You have conquest victory, where you need to conquer everyone's capitals
- You have diplomatic victory, where you need everyone vote for you. Even if you'll add rules like "civ with conquered capitals don't vote" or "vassals always vote for suzerain", it would still feel like diplomatic victory, not conquest
as to 1 how is that not multiplayer compatible?
You don’t determine how “Your civ” votes, you determine how every other civ votes (using the influence from your empire or vassalhood)

Perhaps instead of each civ choosing a single leader/Hegemon to vote for, a civ has a list of other civs it would support as leader (including None)
on that list is
Yourself (always)
Your Liege (if you are a vassal AND friendly with your liege)
Your allies (if you put enough influence in)
……
You would spend influence to
1. get allies to support you
and
2. get them to not support others (expensive)

So in multiplayer you have to spend enough influence to get everyone on your side While making sure none of the other civ hit the threshold.
 
as to 1 how is that not multiplayer compatible?
You don’t determine how “Your civ” votes, you determine how every other civ votes (using the influence from your empire or vassalhood)

Perhaps instead of each civ choosing a single leader/Hegemon to vote for, a civ has a list of other civs it would support as leader (including None)
on that list is
Yourself (always)
Your Liege (if you are a vassal AND friendly with your liege)
Your allies (if you put enough influence in)
……
You would spend influence to
1. get allies to support you
and
2. get them to not support others (expensive)

So in multiplayer you have to spend enough influence to get everyone on your side While making sure none of the other civ hit the threshold.
You've replied to the list important point of the 3, but ok.

If the system is symmetrical, this means AI opponents could force you to vote for someone. And you could lose a single player game because of it. This looks like a really bad experience. And if the system is asymmetrical, it won't work in MP.
 
You've replied to the list important point of the 3, but ok.

If the system is symmetrical, this means AI opponents could force you to vote for someone. And you could lose a single player game because of it. This looks like a really bad experience. And if the system is asymmetrical, it won't work in MP.
It would only work on your allies so as a counter (to make sure that you only vote for yourself and not yourself + an ally possible leading to their win)

1. ruin your relationship with them (this would be the military victory so declare surprise war and suffer the massive penalties…or just spend influence to degrade the relationship)
2. spend your influence to get other civs to stop supporting them (you should probably be able to spend influence to get them off of your own support list)
 
Back
Top Bottom