Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Giskler, Nov 29, 2018.
You mean 52nd. Saudi Israelia is the 51st.
I agree. There is a point I think where there should be an algorithm that controls how many civs show up from each era in a game, so more modern nations can be added to the series without having the game lose its historical flavor. Most people enjoy playing as their own country/nation, so I think it's natural that the series has to start including modern nations. But I hope this doesn't come at the expense of ancient nations. Another good reason for more DLC/an expansion
I think they'll do a good job representing Canada, and I think fresh civs gives them a lot more flexibility like you said. The leaked list is pretty balanced overall.
You can't a;ways get what you want. For me that's no more colonial civs. They will be last on my play list and only because there is acheivements to get. Happy of course for my Canuk mates, I do understand your joy, just like I have my fingers crossed for the leakers to be correct about Maori.
Canada, England, America, Australia, Scotland... five anglophone nations, and if Leonor finally appears leading England...
I would have preferred a hispanic post-collonial nation (the spanish is the second most spoken language in the world and there is only one leader who speaks it!!!) or french like Haiti.
Anyway, if Canada will be fun to play, I'll love it as one more.
And pls coureur des bois replacing engineer!
I couldn't care less which civs they add as long as they are fun to play.
J'espère qu'on ne décide pas d'utiliser trop de gros mots québécois, car pour nous francophones européens c'est rigolo et un peu du blasphème à la fois.
Back to english then, even though I would love to see another French-speaking CIV, Canada wouldn't be my first choice. They kind of ... lack cohesive identity. Apart from maple syrup and Céline Dion (oh and Bieber, but let us not mention that name), there isn't much in common between different provinces.
Any Canadians here wanting to suggest a good national or leader ability for Canada ?
The irony is that with Eleanor (or any other leader for England at that time) you get a leader who would speak better French than English.
Together 3 of those countries account for the majority of two continents and a different three combined control 2 out of 5 UN veto powers. I imagine they are all amongst the top countries for gamers too so it makes sense for Firaxis to target representation of them. That being said, I would have much preferred to see more ancient civs. But as long as they play well and have fun mechanics, I’m fine. Plus modders, or preferably new DLC/3rd expansion, will fill in the gaps.
I'm pretty stoked about Canada to be honest, I think they can have a playstyle that would fit me very well.
I'm just more bummed about no Maya or Byzantium looking very likely
I'll just leave this here...
I personally fail to understand the fundamental dislike for post-colonial nations by some people. I am a history lover myself, and I care much more about pre-medieval history than about post-medieval history. A lot of the reasons to refuse modern nations seem to be grounded in unreflected reflexes to me.
The nations Firaxis chose have all enough merit to be included in my opinion. Civ is not a game about ancient history anyway - quite the contrary. Adding a ninth era makes the Industrial Era the middle of the game turn wise. It makes absolutely no sense if 80% of the civs are modeled after historical civs from before the industrial era (and the fact that Firaxis continues to handle native civs as mostly ancient ones makes it worse, Aztecs should not be an ancient civ, just like the Cree). Sure, some older civs are still "active" today, but I wouldn't add Spain to the post-industrial civs with their current design and uniques.
You can argue that some of the post-colonial nations have looser cultural ties to their former European overlords than others (Brazil seems more distinct to me personally than Australia, for example), but saying that America ~ England, Canada ~ France, Brazil ~ Portugal, and Argentina ~ Spain is incredibly ignorant and for me a kind of ignorance that is hard to tolerate even reading it. And I'm really sorry for the people who can't see and appreciate the differences.
I vividly remember my EUIV campaign where I started as Hamburg, founded and switched tags to Canada and conquered the New World as the greatest merchant republic of all times (TM). So I'm very much looking forward to playing as Canada, if they get fun abilities.
That said, I would have preferred Argentina (for non-game reasons, Canada will probably the more interesting diplomatic/explorative civ compared to the economic powerhouse Argentina would be)
I think Canada could have some unique ability related to power generation. I did some research and we're definitely in the top 10 countries for power generation and renewable energy. We have a lot of rivers ang generate more than half of electricity in Canada is hydro, so a unique dam or hydroelectric station would make sense to me.
That being said, they will probably go with something stereotypical like a Hockey arena replacing the Stadium and the Mounties as UU.
Kind of has to be the Mountie really. Maybe farms equivalent on tundra. (I know it's not really tundra, but they cut down a hell of a lot of trees.)
I just find it a bit lame when I'm in a game, exploring the map while playing as a giant of history like Rome, Egypt or China and then I bump into Australia... Or Brazil... Not exactly in the same league yknow? And I say that as an Aussie.
By area both Brazil and Australia make it into the top 20.
And Canada in the top 10.
At the end of the day, maybe the hockey arena won't be so bad at all. That might help you towards winning a winter games and gain points for the diplomatic victory.
Are the Cree more appropriate? Or the Maori? Zulu? Scotland? Norway? If there would only be the greatest of powers, we would always have the same 20 civs...
To me, it's not as much a dislike of the colonial nations, it's more about diversity and having more historical flavor. I don't know much about Australia and Canada's history honestly, it's a great opportunity to learn. I think in the end that's really the only approach that can be taken now. It's only natural that most people enjoy playing as their country/nation, and since Civ 6 is the most accessible one yet, there's a strong drive to include the countries where the game is most likely to be sold and played. Still though for me, it's not as much an escape from reality when there are too many modern nations in the game. I don't see that as a reason not to include them, I just hope when I launch a game there's a good balance of civs from each era, which is pretty likely anyway.
I don't really understand the distaste for colonial civs myself. It's good that civs that can stand out in the later stages of a game are included, and they help represent the full history of the world.
Anyways, Canada is, in my mind, the last of the major post-colonial civs that was looking for involvement. It seems to me the big four are America, Brazil, Canada, and Australia. I think it's better for the game that they're all in.
But you are not playing today's America or Brazil, just as you aren't playing modern Germany or China. Nonetheless, I can comprehend that aspect to some extent.
I have to point out that reducing modern nations' inclusion to "They are included because they sell well because people want to play as their own country, not because they should be included because of their merits." as somewhat discriminating as well. (Yes, 4 becauses in one sentence. 0/0 style points)
Also, I don't see why adding Canada is less diverse than adding Vietnam.
Separate names with a comma.