[NFP] Odd/Poorly 'themed' Civ implementations

[GunsGermsandSteel]

There are a number of civs in this game I find that have somewhat odd choices for abilities/units. I'm not talking about whether these civs are GOOD or not per se. Just that sometimes the way the civ is put together is a bit off-putting.

A primary example of this is Germany. Represented by a crusades era leader, Barbarosa, with an affinity for military in general and attacking city states specifically, while they have a renaissance era district, a gamey civ ability to create more districts than normally allowed, and a WW1-2 era unique naval raider unit.

This is just my opinion but all those things don't really go together, some of them kind of do (extra emphasis on production and militarism) but I feel like the devs were trying to represent too wide a range of concepts and history to interestingly/accurately portray Germany. While I like most of their abilities the fact they are a militaristic-ish civ but their unique unit is a late era naval raider just completely turns me off from playing them.

Again, Germany is 'fine as is' but I wish they had "themed" them a bit better. They aren't the only civ that suffers from this.

Another smaller example is Japan. I feel that all their abilities flow until electronics factory. Just seems entirely tacked on. And it just doesn't fit with the Civ. Not that there's anything wrong with it necessarily - other than you don't build a ton of factories anyways.

I see Brazil as another. Minas Geraes and Street Carnival/Copacabana and an emphasis on earning great people don't really all work together. Brazil works as a civ because their abilities are good enough to be competitive, but it's just weird that a non-militaristic civ would get such an emphasis on a happiness district. A late game unique battle ship is an odd choice too because Brazil is well suited to go for non-combat victories. Again, each of these things work just fine. They just don't really work well together. It creates a disjointed play style.

 

[bengalryan9]

I will respectfully disagree, and here's why.

Look at a guy like Lautaro. His kit doesn't particularly synergize well together. He's got a huge combat bonus against enemies in a golden age, encouraging you to go to war but only at specific times. Swift Hawk attacks a city's loyalty, making it best used against an enemy having loyalty problems (the opposite of a golden age). And then he has the chemamull, a tile improvement that gives culture and eventually tourism when built on high appeal tiles, encouraging a player to pay close attention to city planning and appeal. He's all over the place, especially compared to someone like Shaka who has a much more synergistic design built around his militaristic nature.

The thing is, given a choice... I'd rather play as Lautaro over Shaka any day (and I think Lautaro is one of the weaker leaders in the game). It's all about options for me. As Lautaro, there are multiple paths I can pursue. I could go all-in on domination, I could go all-in on culture, or I can pick and choose and do a combination of the two - setting up a strong cultural game while waiting for the perfect moment to strike against an opponent. With Shaka, your basically have one path ahead of you - war - and that takes a lot of the fun and strategy out of the game for me personally.

That's just my opinion, though. I certainly see what you are saying as well.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

This is just my opinion but all those things don't really go together, some of them kind of do (extra emphasis on production and militarism) but I feel like the devs were trying to represent too wide a range of concepts and history to interestingly/accurately portray Germany. While I like most of their abilities the fact they are a militaristic-ish civ but their unique unit is a late era naval raider just completely turns me off from playing them.

Usually when I pick a civ to play it's not because of the UU. I don't mind the U-Boat considering it's well known that those are how Germany dominated the seas in WW1, but I would have also been easily happy with a Panzer again. I personally don't mind the "grand tour" civ approach where they take something from every era of their history and it makes sense to me to give them a World War 1 or World War 2 unit at least when everything else is based off of earlier German history.

Another smaller example is Japan. I feel that all their abilities flow until electronics factory. Just seems entirely tacked on. And it just doesn't fit with the Civ. Not that there's anything wrong with it necessarily - other than you don't build a ton of factories anyways.

I think it's fine for them. They play both a cultural and military game and the electronics factory provides both culture and production to surrounding cities which can help with military or wonder production.

I see Brazil as another. Minas Geraes and Street Carnival/Copacabana and an emphasis on earning great people don't really all work together. Brazil works as a civ because their abilities are good enough to be competitive, but it's just weird that a non-militaristic civ would get such an emphasis on a happiness district. A late game unique battle ship is an odd choice too because Brazil is well suited to go for non-combat victories. Again, each of these things work just fine. They just don't really work well together. It creates a disjointed play style.

The whole point of the Street Carnival/Copacabana is the Carnival project toward which grants Great People points which does synergizes with Pedro. Not to mention that later down the line in patches the Entertainment complex and Water Park buildings got a lot of tourism bonuses to help.
If anything it's the Amazon ability to me that synergizes less with the rest of Brazil but I guess we need a rainforest civ so.
As for the Minas Gerais, every civ gets a combat related UU so I don't see the problem especially with a late game UU, because that's when they would get one.

 

[enKage]

I don't understand Mali set of uniques as I consider it as antisynergistic.

Mine = +4 gold
Mansa's ability = +1 gold for international trade per flat desert.

Obviously you want to settle some desert, but hills, because flat is unworkable (except floodplains).
Anyway, how many flat desert tiles you would have in your main trading city, 8-10? (of course after you buy these tiles - another factor to count after how many turns this cost would be repayed)? This is just working 2-3 mines. I would always prefer to send domestic trade route instead, using food to work 2 more plainhill mines instead and maybe a specialist for the same or even better effect.

For me, mansa musa's unique ability simply does not exist. I want an alternate Malinese leader.

 

[Sostratus]

I don’t mind the approach of getting bits from all of a Civ’s history, it doesn’t really matter. The flow of the Civ’s kit when you play a game matters.
For Germany, the extra district slot and the Hansa+Ch interaction pair very well together. This is something you really feel if you swap between Germany and Japan, for example. The extra military card is generally useful but also allows you lean into stuff like classical & merchant republic for a builder style (pairs well with hansas.)
The city state thing is kind of there, but it’s still very handy for expanding.

That’s not me trying to justify Germany, I’m saying I have tried to mod in custom Civs to fit my preferences more and I still can’t beat German gameplay. A lot of firaxis designs work very well even if they are a historical soup.

 

[CrabHelmet]

I feel like England and France are done particularly badly in Civ VI. In particular, Firaxis can't seem to decide how they want to portray England, and the foreign continent stuff is just a bit half-hearted, because continent borders are so random and the rewards for settling overseas are so low. Then the Royal Dockyards are just a crazy mishmash of stuff all slapped on.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

For me, mansa musa's unique ability simply does not exist. I want an alternate Malinese leader.

I doubt we will get another leader. Still the extra trade route capacity from a Golden age is handy even if you only do domestic. Plus you can always try to rush Petra.

I feel like England and France are done particularly badly in Civ VI. In particular, Firaxis can't seem to decide how they want to portray England, and the foreign continent stuff is just a bit half-hearted, because continent borders are so random and the rewards for settling overseas are so low. Then the Royal Dockyards are just a crazy mishmash of stuff all slapped on.

I think the new Catherine the Magnificence helps France find a theme at least.
England has always been mainly about domination just in different ways I think. Victoria is more straight forward using navy and redcoats while Eleanor is using great works to flip cities.

 

[cain3456]

Seems like you should be happy with what Firaxis did with Teddy, then. National Parks really had nothing to do with keeping peace on the home continent. Now those two agendas are split between getting huge bonuses for conservation & the military approach.

 

[Morningcalm]

Russia being religious under Peter the Great in Civ VI is silly. He was pretty anti-church and the biography by Robert K. Massie makes that especially clear.

It also makes no sense to me that Kongo can’t win a religion victory just because they didn’t found Catholicism. It’s not like Spain or France founded it either, and they can win religious victories. Kongo under Afonso I (Mvemba a Nzinga) was quite possibly one of the most religiously fervent incarnations of the kingdom, and the minor bonus they get from other religions doesn’t really encourage actually spreading foreign religions at all.

 

[Aurelesk]

I feel like England and France are done particularly badly in Civ VI.

Some countries have a rich history with different key moments. They tried to represent different era of the same civilization. England and France have been a huge local power and even a global power for more than 1000 years with a lot of key moments. Representing England just for his colonial Empire is kind of misleading.

Eleanor represents the Plantagenet era and what will lead to the 100 years war, the Sea Dog represent Elizabeth Ist reign, the "Workshop of the World" appeared to show the Industrial Revolution that started in England and was kind of lead to be an economical hegemony, Victoria represents the colonial era, and the RNDY for the naval domination.

Same thing for France, the Château kind of represent of highly decentralised France were during the Carolingian reign and its focus on culture, Eleanor represent what will lead to the 100 years war, Catherine Black Queen represents the Wars of Religion, Catherine Magnificent represents the transition from "puppet king" to "absolute power" (or: from gothic to rococo) and the Garde Impériale represent the Napoleonic era.

Most unique unit are "just" cosmetic, unfortunately. The Crounching Tigers were not really relevant, but is here to show "the Chinese invented the gunpowder. Even more unfortunate, most of civilization that has "rich" history were in the base game, so they feel like they have old game mechanics. Sometime, even some key era are not even represented (no 'USSR' era thing for Russia?!).

In the end, it feels like a mix of independant mechanic and ability that have no link together. England has bonus toward almost all district and going colonial? So playing wide and tall? with trade and domination? To this day, I don't know how I am supposed to play England.

 

[Lord Lakely]

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Nuclear Gandhi yet, but I suppose that one is so painfully obvious it's hardly worth mentionning.

I don't really mind the amalgamations they gave to England and France. It's annoying but you can't condense centuries of cultural capital into 5 unique components.

The issue for me lies in the cliché's associated with them. France is Cultural! How? Because They Build Wonders! And Have Castles On Their Rivers :gasp:. In their attempts to make the French civilization diverse, they made it surprisingly shallow. The same issues apply to most European civs: Greece, Spain, Scotland, Rome and England in particular. Russia too, but I can forgive them since they're fun to play.

More on topic, the one that sticks out of me is Brazil. Mechanically I really like the abilities. I don't like them for Brazil however. Brazil's all about rainforests, so it gets a... battleship UU? Named after ONE particular battleship no less (which IS a pet peeve of mine - :side-eyes the Dutch: ) Wait no, they also have a unique district which is named AFTER ONE PARTICULAR BEACH ugh. Loving rainforests is also a weird fit for Brazil because the ability makes you want to keep them, yet Brazil is responsible for the massive deforestation of the Amazon rainforest. Just a leetle bit stereotypical and incorrect.

As far as portrayals go Cyrus's characterization as basically a grade a douchebag is another that sticks out. Tamar's gruff paranoia is.. disappointing given the accounts on her irl personality. Cleopatra being reduced to a cocky flirt... gross for a game this outspokenly feminist.The rest... don't really bother me actually. Ottomans, Norway, Maori, Chandraguptan India, Khmer, Japan, Aztecs, America (both Roosevelts) and Inca all stand out as being very well-designed and true to character.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Russia being religious under Peter the Great in Civ VI is silly. He was pretty anti-church and the biography by Robert K. Massie makes that especially clear.

HOWEVER. you need to make distinction between Civ ability and Leader ability. Civ ability is an ability that represents civ as a whole regardless of leader. And Russia is a VERY religious nation- heck even now Russian Orthodox is VERY inflectional in Russian life and politics- it is what ties Russians together ever since fall of USSR.

 

[The Civs 6]

For me the tension between Civ trying to "model" history (and I use that word in a very broad sense) and game mechanics/synergy is the most palpable in 6. But that isn't really a criticism of Civ more than a reality that they are making Civs with more unique features than ever. There have been some hits (I think we can all agree that America is well-themed with what they were trying to go for, with strong synergies, England is another that comes to mind), some misses (sure the Dutch are strong, but I just don't get how their strengths matches with anything in real life), and then some Civs that make sense but are so simplistically designed that I question it a bit (Mali and Maori - did the Malinese really eat sand? Did the Maori really respect the environment as much as is cracked up?)

Yeah there are some, pointed out already, that I just don't get. Japan? What because they are super densely populated? Germany? Shouldn't Hansa related stuff be in a commercial district? Greece - yeah super strong but why does an Acropolis give an envoy? Maya - did the Maya magically make more food the closer they were to their capitol?

But as I said there are a surprisingly large number of hits. Another one I think of is Rome. Cheap infrastructure, legions, roads. Yep, that's Rome. You can go a-conquering early game.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

The issue for me lies in the cliché's associated with them. France is Cultural! How? Because They Build Wonders! And Have Castles On Their Rivers :gasp:. In their attempts to make the French civilization diverse, they made it surprisingly shallow.

To be fair the French would technically be leading a real world cultural victory as they have been the most visited country in the world for many years.

Wait no, they also have a unique district which is named AFTER ONE PARTICULAR BEACH ugh.

But the Ottomans are fine having the Grand Bazaar able to be built multiple times?
At least it was added later in R&F, which makes sense, because they didn't want you to choose between a regular water park or your unique district on a coastal city. I'm not sure what else they would call it considering the Copacabana is the most famous beach/coastal destination in Brazil. The name does sound better at least than Street Carnival.

 

[Bibor]

Those wanting emphasis on historical accuracy, I can only point to paradoxplaza (with a big YMMV disclaimer)

Sid games are, and always have been, about slapping (sometimes less) familiar names onto game mechanics.
Its one of the oldest marketing tricks in the book and it still works.

sidenote: also the reason why I stopped appreciating most movies, compared to ways I used to do before.

 

[GunsGermsandSteel]

Those wanting emphasis on historical accuracy, I can only point to paradoxplaza (with a big YMMV disclaimer)

Sid games are, and always have been, about slapping (sometimes less) familiar names onto game mechanics.
Its one of the oldest marketing tricks in the book and it still works.

sidenote: also the reason why I stopped appreciating most movies, compared to ways I used to do before.

True enough. My initial thoughts in this discussion wasn't mainly just about historical accuracy. Primarily I'm pointing out the 'theme' 'synergy' of the civ. Like why does Brazil need a later age naval ship? It doesn't really fit with their land based affinity for rain forests and ability to recruit great people faster. If you want to throw historical/IRL Brazil has never been recognized as having a particularly powerful navy and the ship itself sounded like a dud from what little I read about it.

@Lord Lakely
And you're missing one of Brazil's biggest bonuses - faster earning of great people. Hardly fits with Brazil IRL. That should be more of an American/English/French/Chinese sort of ability IMO.


As others have pointed out. They actually had tons of hits. There's just some oddball choices out there for others.

 

[8housesofelixir]

From a strict historical point of view lots of "themed" civs are "poorly implemented" as others have pointed out. It always has been a historically themed game rather than a historical game, so as long as the different game mechanics have synergies (for instance, Rome, Phoenicia, China, etc) I'm okay with the design.

Also I'm surprised nobody elaborate Spain yet. It's another interesting example - Spain is themed very well with their IRL religion, colonization, and wealth/trade focuses. However Spain doesn't have any bonuses towards founding a religion or increasing trade routes, not to say the lacking of culture output to go through the civic tree.
You can tell it is Medieval/Renaissance Spain, but playstyle-wise it just feels off: Technically it can do everything, realistically it can also fail at everything, it has many birds in the bush but none in the hand.

 

[Morningcalm]

HOWEVER. you need to make distinction between Civ ability and Leader ability. Civ ability is an ability that represents civ as a whole regardless of leader. And Russia is a VERY religious nation- heck even now Russian Orthodox is VERY inflectional in Russian life and politics- it is what ties Russians together ever since fall of USSR.

They might be distinct, but the civ and leader ability are so opposed in the Russian design that it makes no sense. Whereas civs like science-heavy Korea, led by the astronomy-obsessed Seondeok, or the science-heavy Maya, led by the similarly astronomy-obsessed Lady Six Sky, or the faithful and scientific Arabia, led by the mathematically-inclined faith-war Saladin, or the Acropolis-featuring Greece led by the cultural patron Pericles, or religious India led by the peace-loving religious leader Gandhi, make far more cohesive sense. For better or worse, some civ designs in Civ VI are more historically sensible than others.

 

[Lord Lakely]

@Lord Lakely
And you're missing one of Brazil's biggest bonuses - faster earning of great people. Hardly fits with Brazil IRL. That should be more of an American/English/French/Chinese sort of ability IMO.
.

Leader abilities do not count. I don't associate France with Espionage but have zero qualms with CdM being science-based. (Magnificence Catherine is thematically a very French leader, but honestly give those abilities to Louis XIV and they work just as well)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

They might be distinct, but the civ and leader ability are so opposed in the Russian design that it makes no sense.

The Lavra equally works for culture victories at least with the Great People points. Besides it's not as if Peter wasn't religious, he just wasn't a fan of the church hierarchy which he wanted to keep under his control. Seems similar to civ 6 where he has total control.

And you're missing one of Brazil's biggest bonuses - faster earning of great people. Hardly fits with Brazil IRL. That should be more of an American/English/French/Chinese sort of ability IMO.

Pedro was a friend to many great people in his life so that's why they he got ability. You are also missing Greece on your list of earning great people.

Leader abilities do not count. I don't associate France with Espionage but have zero qualms with CdM being science-based. (Magnificence Catherine is thematically a very French leader, but honestly give those abilities to Louis XIV and they work just as well)

Do you know a French spy? Maybe they are doing something right then?