Once they revealed they were going for non-political leaders, my mind quickly went to wanting Rasputin. But I'll take her over anyone else for Russia, if we can't have him.
I think Tolstoy would have been a great pick. Rasputin would have been fun. Ivan IV would have been fun. Anastasia Romanovna would have been interesting. Even Nikolai II is sort of charming in his charismatic stupidity. I'm just bored of every iteration of Civ having either Peter or Catherine; there's more to Russian history than those two.
I'm disappointed they went with Napoleon over literally anyone else. Give me Louis V the Do-nothing. Francis II who died before even reaching majority. Jean d'Arc (Jeanne's brother--yes, I'm serious she had a brother Jean ). A random peasant from Rocamadour named Jacme. Anyone but Napoleon. (But Henri II would have been my first choice.)
I'm disappointed they went with Napoleon over literally anyone else. Give me Louis V the Do-nothing. Francis II who died before even reaching majority. Jean d'Arc (Jeanne's brother--yes, I'm serious she had a brother Jean ). A random peasant from Rocamadour named Jacme. Anyone but Napoleon. (But Henri II would have been my first choice.)
Like how Julius Caesar was for Civ6. But they had to not coach his voice actor to do a Classical Latin accent and he went all ecclesiastical in his pronunciation. Che-zar!
As a side note I wanted to look up the quote about snake bile and potency and came across this:https://travelfoodatlas.com/thai-snake-whiskey
Maybe something to do with Siam such as a unique merchant or Floating Market unique quarter?
Considering that Napoleon is a 2k exclusive bonus only, it's possible that we have another French leader.
So... that would imply that base game has not a single French leader...
Because of the Civ/Leader disconnect, it's hard to predict how they are approaching leader selection to begin with. Are we still going to see staple civs but without the civ part, just the leader?
Echoing the question from the previous page - does this 100% pertain to the base game, or are they preemptively submitting such details to account for the upcoming DLCs?
Also, personally I’ve never shared the discontent over reusing leaders starting from Civ 6. Civ 6 made leaders a standalone gameplay element with the introduction of LUAs, which wasn’t a thing before. Sure, you had Catherine lead Russia in Civ 5 and prior, but the civ’s abilities were more about Russia and less so Catherine herself. With leader uniques, they can now showcase in actual gameplay what Catherine brought to the table as a leader, rather than just be an AI face to interact with. Now, if they keep LUAs in future games and keep bringing her back, then I will share the sentiment.
That said, if the sexual themes are due to her introduction, then I’ll be a tiny bit bummed - hope her portrayal will be more nuanced than just “that one horse story” (Mongolia > Russia confirmed in the most cursed way?)
This one is a silly concern, but now I really hope that if it eventually comes, Poland is a Modern Age civ. Getting two partitioners in the game kinda stings, and it could get worse. (Though I wouldn't mind Austria-Hungary and say Franz Joseph at all!) ((And I can live with Frederick, especially if we get Prussia, as that sounds like a very cool civ, but...))
I really hoped and thought that they'd portray the "more to Russian history" this time. Getting an imperialist tzar again is boring for one, we have enough warmongers already, but as much as I detach modern politics from the game, could we now at least get a Tzar who didn't oversee genocides? Eh, I dunno. I don't like her addition. And I cling on to hope that the ESRB excerpt pertains to someone else.
I asked my dad if I'm overreacting and he told me that he would prefer the game without Russia at this time. So, at least I represent a moderate viewpoint in my household.
The Polish Republic (Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth) is contemporary with a lot of other Modern Age civs that we know of, so I do see that happening in the future.
I really hoped and thought that they'd portray the "more to Russian history" this time. Getting an imperialist tzar again is boring for one, we have enough warmongers already, but as much as I detach modern politics from the game, could we now at least get a Tzar who didn't oversee genocides? Eh, I dunno. I don't like her addition. And I cling on to hope that the ESRB excerpt pertains to someone else.
I doubt she would be portrayed as a warmonger though. I'd think they'd go for a scientific cultural approach with her regarding the Russian Enlightenment.
I really hoped and thought that they'd portray the "more to Russian history" this time. Getting an imperialist tzar again is boring for one, we have enough warmongers already, but as much as I detach modern politics from the game, could we now at least get a Tzar who didn't oversee genocides? Eh, I dunno. I don't like her addition. And I cling on to hope that the ESRB excerpt pertains to someone else.
I asked my dad if I'm overreacting and he told me that he would prefer the game without Russia at this time. So, at least I represent a moderate viewpoint in my household.
I wouldn't want Russia excluded just because of recent events; I'd find such an approach reactionary. I would like to see it represented as more than a couple Enlightenment monarchs, though--both of whom were notoriously contemptuous of Russian culture, incidentally.
I think Tolstoy would have been a great pick. Rasputin would have been fun. Ivan IV would have been fun. Anastasia Romanovna would have been interesting. Even Nikolai II is sort of charming in his charismatic stupidity. I'm just bored of every iteration of Civ having either Peter or Catherine; there's more to Russian history than those two.
Echoing the question from the previous page - does this 100% pertain to the base game, or are they preemptively submitting such details to account for the upcoming DLCs?
I don't think so. Civilization VI does not have separate ratings for its DLCs or even expansions. And from the ESRB FAQ:
How does the ESRB rate downloadable content (DLC) or other content updates that supplement a game or app?
Downloadable content (DLC) often refers to additional content that supplements or extends a previously-rated product. In most cases, the rating assigned to a game also applies to its DLC. However, if the DLC content exceeds the rating assigned to the “core” product, it must be submitted, and a different rating may be assigned to the DLC.
Should the ESRB find DLC or other update that is incompatible with the original rating, the developer and appropriate digital storefronts will be notified of a change to the rating for the DLC or, in the case where the update is required, a rating change for the core product.
For me that sounds like Firaxis would want to include material that they know is going to be in the DLCs. Otherwise they might have to resubmit and they probably would not want that.
Well, I guess it's time to update my spreadsheet again with this plus the news that Crossroads of the World civs will be using wonders already on the game
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
)
