Norman - Exploration Age Civilization Discussion

I suppose the castle is the Motte and the Bailey is the wall-enclosed set of buildings. Hopefully it looks more integrated when in the same Quarter, which I'm supposing is not the case in the above image.

Will be a little weird to have a Dungeon and a Donjon in the same city. :crazyeye:
And the White Tower, an infamous dungeon!
 
It looks from the image on the civ guide as if the "celebration" animation for completion of the White Tower is a flight of crows circling around. How darkly appropriate. :D
I believe those should be Ravens - the "Tower Ravens" are quite famous and well cared for by the guards.
 
The inconsistency in the names of the civs revealed so far is becoming a slight pet peeve of mine. If most of the civs' names are proper nouns like Rome, Persia or Aksum, why isn't this one called Normandy? Or, vice versa, why aren't they called Roman, Persian or Aksumite?

Reminds me of the wiki on Fandom's way of referring to the civs, which I already thought was quite strange.

A foolish consistency isn't always the best marketing strategy. :)

I mean, its a good strategy to appeal to people on this forum, where we have more than a few obsessive compulsives, but out there in the wild, where normal humans shop, consistency here isn't probably as important as appealing to "I want to play as the Mongols! I want to play as America!" sentiment.
 
consistency here isn't probably as important as appealing to "I want to play as the Mongols! I want to play as America!" sentiment.
Funnily enough, I think we've seen "Mongolia" so far, and I think "Normandy" is more recognizable to the average person.
 
Well, some of those civilizations were states and some weren't. States are called by their state name, others by their people. I don't think calling all civs by their people would be much better.
Fair. I do wish they (and "Mississippian" and "Abbasid") were written in plural, though, as has been the case with similar names in previous games, like the Ottomans in VI or the Huns in V.
 
Presumably these buildings, mixed with the Greek UBs here.
View attachment 707734

Re: Swiss Flag

So, I modded a Hospital building into Civ VI a while ago and the issue is very familiar to me. As already mentioned, using a Red Cross icon is at the very least unethical. A Rod of Asclepius icon doesn't really stand out from far, it's more or less just a vertical line unless you a) use a high-res texture for the flag and b) are zoomed in to the max. The Caduceus is more recognizable from afar due to the wings, but is technically the wrong symbol and the game already does use it correctly for commerce.

In the end, I also settled on the solution Firaxis found (or stole from me, if I'm feeling full of myself😜): an inverted red cross, i.e. the Swiss flag.

HOWEVER: There was one additional issue I had. Color. My Hospital building provides a mix of science and unit healing. I themed the building blue-ish through its glass facade. A frequent alternative to using the red cross is a green cross. Unfortunately, red fit the HP-related bonus better. Green is the color of food and growth. But what's that? There is no more health or housing in VII. As seen with the Bath, health-themed buildings now seem to grant their bonuses to growth directly in the form of a Food yield. So green would be perfect!

tl;dr: use a green cross instead
A kinda magistrate?
 
"well I guess I'd pick the Mayans for a Normans game, because their weakness is science and you need science to get to your unique unit".....
Logic will probably apply to most exploration factions.

Notably poison is available as a tradition (stronger vs weaker units). Unclear if their two "happiness buildings gain science/culture" traditions count for Motte and the White Tower wonder.
 
It seems that they specifically made the roofs of Roman and Greek UBs grey so that they were a good fit with Norman architecture. Clever, I suppose.

In general I like the Normans design. Very coherent. A strong millitary civ both on offence and defence. Appropriate vibes of castles and knights.

Simultaneously good for turtling after conquests in antiquity, and good for continuing the conquests on your continent and adjacent isles. Without any obvious downsides.

Spain will likely be a bit better option for spreading your influence around the ocean and naval combat.
 
The inconsistency in the names of the civs revealed so far is becoming a slight pet peeve of mine. If most of the civs' names are proper nouns like Rome, Persia or Aksum, why isn't this one called Normandy? Or, vice versa, why aren't they called Roman, Persian or Aksumite?

Reminds me of the wiki on Fandom's way of referring to the civs, which I already thought was quite strange.
Inconsistency is something that bothers me in this kind of naming situation, Civ 7 is using at least 3 types of patterns, country name (classical use of Greece, Rome, Egypt, Aksum, etc), people or period names (Shawnee, Khmer, Mississipian, Abbasid, etc) and compound names (a mixture of the 2 above giving Maurya India, Han China, etc). Obviously not all civs have the option of using the name of a country, but it is preferable to the others. "Norman" strangely deviates from the pattern by not going with Normandy, but on the other hand it is more obvious that it also encompasses Norman England and perhaps Norman Sicily as well.

I would much prefer if all the names were the name of the people or period only because it is more universal, or else use the adjective trick and leave everything in the format "Roman Civilization", "Abbasid Civilization", "Chola Civilization", etc. As for compound names, I particularly hate it aesthetically and by the inconsistency too because if it were consistent we should have "Roman Europe" beyond the "somenthing" China or India. I know it gets the job done, but I still don't like it.
 
It's interesting to listen your impressions about the naming rule. I'm not good at catching the differences because those features are not clearly existing in my language. (except India and China thing. I hope they will be shown without that extra clue)
 
Inconsistency is something that bothers me in this kind of naming situation, Civ 7 is using at least 3 types of patterns, country name (classical use of Greece, Rome, Egypt, Aksum, etc), people or period names (Shawnee, Khmer, Mississipian, Abbasid, etc) and compound names (a mixture of the 2 above giving Maurya India, Han China, etc). Obviously not all civs have the option of using the name of a country, but it is preferable to the others. "Norman" strangely deviates from the pattern by not going with Normandy, but on the other hand it is more obvious that it also encompasses Norman England and perhaps Norman Sicily as well.

I would much prefer if all the names were the name of the people or period only because it is more universal, or else use the adjective trick and leave everything in the format "Roman Civilization", "Abbasid Civilization", "Chola Civilization", etc. As for compound names, I particularly hate it aesthetically and by the inconsistency too because if it were consistent we should have "Roman Europe" beyond the "somenthing" China or India. I know it gets the job done, but I still don't like it.
I suspect the compound names aren't actually in the game. Chola is still just Chola on the site, and Maurya, Han, and Ming have all been referred as just that in the past. IIRC when Maurya showed up in the livestream they didn't have India attached too. Modern Age Japan was also just called "Meiji" in the Switch trailer, so I suspect the compounds have just been added for marketing purposes to increase familiarity a little.
 
One of their starting bias is Iron. I wonder if that means they could be unlocked by having 3 Iron resources (Mongolia mode)?
Horse = Mongols
Camels = Abbasid
Iron = Nornans
Navigable rivers = Songhai

Please, not! That would be, oh, so boring. But sadly, I would say chances are high that this is exactly what happens in the game.
 
Inconsistency is something that bothers me in this kind of naming situation, Civ 7 is using at least 3 types of patterns, country name (classical use of Greece, Rome, Egypt, Aksum, etc), people or period names (Shawnee, Khmer, Mississipian, Abbasid, etc) and compound names (a mixture of the 2 above giving Maurya India, Han China, etc). Obviously not all civs have the option of using the name of a country, but it is preferable to the others. "Norman" strangely deviates from the pattern by not going with Normandy, but on the other hand it is more obvious that it also encompasses Norman England and perhaps Norman Sicily as well.
I'd much rather them ditch the first one and just name them for the people like past civ games: Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Aksumites etc.
Interesting enough all the YouTube videos like to mention them as the "Normans," which I like the best. Obviously calling them Normandy doesn't work especially when their associated wonder is located in current London.
As for the compound ones, I don't mind it as much, especially as they might be doing that to show the different stages of said modern nations to make them familiar. I don't know if using the term "Han Chinese" or Mauryan Indian" would be preferable though?
Navigable rivers = Songhai
Isn't it already known that you just have to play the game as Amina to unlock them?
 
Horse = Mongols
Camels = Abbasid
Iron = Nornans
Navigable rivers = Songhai

Please, not! That would be, oh, so boring. But sadly, I would say chances are high that this is exactly what happens in the game.
Boring but also possibly a little out of the player's control depending on spawn...
 
Top Bottom