[NFP] Odd/Poorly 'themed' Civ implementations

[Alexadamz]

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.

Well, Brazil deforestation is getting faster in the last decades, but from most our history, the country was a big chunk of unexplored rainforests. That also fits Pedro II's time and deeds, as he is also famous for making a huge reforestation and conservation effort in the city of Rio de Janeiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tijuca_Forest). Street Carnival is fine, although it lacks some unique design - it is just not much different from the regular entertainment complex. The water park counterpart, Copacabana, is weird in fact, it is just there because it is the most famous beach of the country. All that synergizes well with Brazil gameplay and, as a brazilian, I liked the way they made the Civ in the game. The only thing off is the UU - as most the others UUs: that ship was not something unique in the sense of UU, as it was only one ship, not multiple as we can make in the game. I rather they kept the pracinhas...

 

[Bibor]

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.

i know, but it ties into your thoughts as well - as long as its “german” or “brasilian” and it fits the mechanics, it’s going to be named and graphics designed as such.

Hansa wasn’t even an industrial zone, it should be, if anything, a commercial district.

As for the submarine warfare, it was a failure in both world wars. If they really wanted to reflect german military might. it would have to do something with either maneuver warfare, combined arms or chain of command doctrines.

having combat bonuses for having an adjacent unit of a different class would be way more interesting gameplay than an almost useless unit.

 

[Morningcalm]

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.

The Lavra is a religious building steeped in religious culture. It generates culture points based on Russia's ability, but that doesn't render is not religious. Also, It's not just that Peter wasn't a fan of the religious hierarchy, he thought men were wasted in religion and wanted them for his army, so Russia's Unique Infrastructure being a religious district is nonsensical when led by Peter.

As described in Massie's biography of Peter, pp. 965-966, Peter's state control over the church led to a decline in religious fervor, among peasants (who gravitated towards Old Believers and other sects), and among "students, educated people and the middle classes" who despised the church for "its conservative anti-intellectualism and slavish support of the regime". State control over the church led to "the entire religious bureaurcracy" following the government "over the cliff" in the years after and the Holy Synod was abolished in 1918 along with other imperial institutes, such that when Lenin reestablished the patriarchate it was even more state-controlled than in Peter's time.

Whether Peter's intent or no, his control over the church destroyed the moral fabric of it that gave it much authority. And being a tool of an imperial government didn't inspire artists, so that makes the cultural part of the Lavra nonsensical under Peter as well.

 

[CrabHelmet]

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.

I don't think this approach to France or England works because those Civs have been different things at different times and when you try representing everything, you just end up with a garbled mess. I feel like this is where alt-leaders could have come in - have Elizabeth I for when you want your Tudor longbow military power England, then Victoria for when you want your naval gunbaot diplomacy and industrial science England. As it is, England just doesn't work. I think this is exacerbated by the fact England keeps getting made a Domination Civ, which I think is untrue - this is the nation of shopkeepers and really ought to be a primarily economic/production Civ that works best towards Culture or Science victories, with Domination a useful aid at best. Civ V's VP mod had a really fun England, where you were a cultural Civ with really early spies and bonuses for stealing works of Art, which was powerful and interesting and coherent - Perfidious Albion! It gave England a lot of personality. Civ VI England is a mess.

The same problem applies to France. At least now with Magnificent Catherine, they've picked a single theme for France - Culture Civ built on decadence - and expanded around it, even if I don't like Catherine as a choice. England still hasn't received that focal treatment. They've been underwhelming for several Civ games in a row now.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

The Lavra is a religious building steeped in religious culture. It generates culture points based on Russia's ability, but that doesn't render is not religious. Also, It's not just that Peter wasn't a fan of the religious hierarchy, he thought men were wasted in religion and wanted them for his army, so Russia's Unique Infrastructure being a religious district is nonsensical when led by Peter.

Still Peter founded the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in St. Petersburg so I really don't think it's that strange. I can't wait for the possibility of Kublai Khan maybe building the Great Wall of China.

The same problem applies to France. At least now with Magnificent Catherine, they've picked a single theme for France - Culture Civ built on decadence - and expanded around it, even if I don't like Catherine as a choice. England still hasn't received that focal treatment. They've been underwhelming for several Civ games in a row now.

I still think England is primarily a domination civ even with Eleanor. She just does it in a different way by collecting great works to capture cities.

 

[Aurelesk]

I don't think this approach to France or England works because those Civs have been different things at different times and when you try representing everything, you just end up with a garbled mess.

I agree: I rather want they focus on 1 historic thing the civilisations depicted is famous from, but not be a mix of several one that do not necessarly work. I guess this is what they tried to do:

• A civilization ability to represent one thing the country is famous for.
• A leader that represent a famous time period.

Industrialization (Workshop of the Wolrd) and the Victorian era (colonialism) were picked. In a sense, Workshop of the World" makes more sense than "British Museum".

As it is, England just doesn't work. I think this is exacerbated by the fact England keeps getting made a Domination Civ, which I think is untrue - this is the nation of shopkeepers and really ought to be a primarily economic/production Civ that works best towards Culture or Science victories, with Domination a useful aid at best.

I don't know: the naval domination and the successful colonialism were probably the biggest "successes" of England. England were the first global power, maybe more powerful during its time than USA were during the second half of the XXIst century. Sure England is not "only" this side and I understand you can grow tired of this depiction. England, like a lot of European nation, were dominant on several ways: culturally (Belle Époque VS Victorian Era), militarily & scientific searching, trade, and so on. You can't make a civilization that is good at everything.
The second thing that comes to mind is Industrialization, and how England gained wealth during that time period. They tried to do that with "Workshop of the World", but maybe the ability isn't well made. England became so dominant with Industrialization through trade that Napoleon himselft tried to enforce a continental blockade to counter this, but failed.

In a way, I am okay with England even if "Workshop of the World" feels like:

• Industrialization was about Steel! Let's add some Coal and Iron bonuses!
• Remember those great Canals and improved waterways and railroads? Let's give a Military Engineer bonus as well!
• Our Industrialization is all about Power. So let's give them bonus toward Power as well!
• And England was the first nation to achieve this: let's give a +% production towards Industrial Zone!
• Remember that Industrial thing was about manufacturing things so we could sell it? Why not give additionnal strategic stockpile to represent this?

And that's probably how we end up with such of a weird ability.

 

[Morningcalm]

Still Peter founded the Alexander Nevsky Lavra in St. Petersburg so I really don't think it's that strange.

Founding a single lavra does not a religious leader make, especially if that leader took state control over the Church, weakened it, derided men who joined the Church or wanted to join it, made policy changes that ultimately led to the Church's decline, and in no way encouraged the arts through lavra specifically.

Frankly, I think lavra are only in the game for Peter-led Russia because they wanted onion domes for Russia.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Frankly, I think lavra are only in the game for Peter-led Russia because they wanted onion domes for Russia.

Well I won't disagree with that. It wouldn't have been my first pick for a unique infrastructure anyway but I can live with it.
I think it could have been more beneficial if Georgia had gotten the unique Holy Site later while Russia got unique walls in the form of a kremlin.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

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.

?
Peter's ability is basically boosting culture and science from a civ that is way ahead in the race. That references how he went on a diplomatic mission to modernise Russia. I will say that is historically sensible. He may not be religious personally but he is ruling the religious nation.

Similar aspect can be seen in Ethiopia. Menilik II isn't a very religious man- not really known for religious acts but he is ruling from the religious nation.

 

[Sostratus]

Peter's ability is basically boosting culture and science from a civ that is way ahead in the race. That references how he went on a diplomatic mission to modernise Russia. I will say that is historically sensible. He may not be religious personally but he is ruling the religious nation.

Peter’s ability is a great example of the flip side of the thread. Historically on the nose, but mechanically, it’s a terrible ability that no one really enjoys (going by what people say in elimination threads.)
Most major civilizations (forgive me, but I am going to distinguish between “major” civs and niche cultures like Mapuche ) have arguments for almost all core areas of the game, so the designer to some extent needs to come up with fun ability packages and then assign civs to them that have a decent fit.

An example of this mentality is that all the Civ abilities for every expansion Civ are named internally the same as what they are in game. So “three kingdoms” will have that in the name. But the code names for vanilla civs are described based on what they do - japan’s Meiji ability name refers to district adjacency instead of Meiji.

So it’s quite likely a lot of abilities in the first release came from a drawing board and they built up civs around some of them. Meiji could fit Germany to an extent, for example. You could stick pretty much anything into America and make it work- you have military, economic, cultural, scientific, religious and diplomatic elements to draw from. This approach likely produces a more “fun” game at the end of the day.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Founding a single lavra does not a religious leader make, especially if that leader took state control over the Church, weakened it, derided men who joined the Church or wanted to join it, made policy changes that ultimately led to the Church's decline, and in no way encouraged the arts through lavra specifically.

Frankly, I think lavra are only in the game for Peter-led Russia because they wanted onion domes for Russia.

I am kinda funny how you forgot to mention Japan- its Civ ability is called Meji restoration ( a time when all the power returned to the emperor of Japan) and yet we have a leader who isn't the emperor of Japan but is a puppetmaster behind not only the emperor but also Shogunate.

 

[8housesofelixir]

I am kinda funny how you forgot to mention Japan- its Civ ability is called Meji restoration ( a time when all the power returned to the emperor of Japan) and yet we have a leader who isn't the emperor of Japan but is a puppetmaster behind not only the emperor but also Shogunate.

The same goes for Germany. Barbarossa is a city-state killer IRL (to Lombard city-states), so as his leader ability. However the civ ability of Germany is named "Free Imperial Cities", basically another type of city-state. Not to say that the unique district of Germany, Hansa, is based on a league of merchants of the city-states - the same Free Imperial Cities - as well. So in the end we have a city-states killer and a city-states buffer merged into the same civ.

 

[Morningcalm]

?
Peter's ability is basically boosting culture and science from a civ that is way ahead in the race. That references how he went on a diplomatic mission to modernise Russia. I will say that is historically sensible. He may not be religious personally but he is ruling the religious nation.

Similar aspect can be seen in Ethiopia. Menilik II isn't a very religious man- not really known for religious acts but he is ruling from the religious nation.

Peter's individual ability, yes, refers to his modernization, but that doesn't pair well with Russia as a religious nation in his time and under his rule, IMO, for the reasons I cited: his policies led to a decline in the Church and he was vehemently against men joining it, and his policies restricted the church under state control, reducing its authority and popularity among Russians in his time and thereafter.

Ethiopia and its rulers, including Menelik II, have almost always been deeply religious, and in Menelik II's case, he didn't preside over the decline of the Church that Ethiopia's faith bonus is based on.

In Menelik II's case, he liked to cite God and religion quite a bit, per his Wikipedia entry, quoted below with my emphasis in bold added (Peter liked to cite God too, privately, but again--his policies led to a decline in the Church, so the Russian faith based bonus makes little sense for him):

On 17 September 1895, Menelik ordered all of the Ethiopian nobility to call out their banners and raise their feudal hosts, stating: "An enemy has come across the sea. He has broken through our frontiers in order to destroy our fatherland and our faith. I allowed him to seize my possessions and I entered upon lengthy negotiations with him in hopes of obtaining justice without bloodshed. But the enemy refuses to listen. He undermines our territories and our people like a mole. Enough! With the help of God I will defend the inheritance of my forefathers and drive back the invader by force of arms. Let every man who has sufficient strength accompany me. And he who has not, let him pray for us."

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Peter's individual ability, yes, refers to his modernization, but that doesn't pair well with Russia as a religious nation in his time and under his rule, IMO, for the reasons I cited: his policies led to a decline in the Church and he was vehemently against men joining it, and his policies restricted the church under state control, reducing its authority and popularity among Russians in his time and thereafter.

Ethiopia and its rulers, including Menelik II, have almost always been deeply religious, and in Menelik II's case, he didn't preside over the decline of the Church that Ethiopia's faith bonus is based on.

In Menelik II's case, he liked to cite God and religion quite a bit, per his Wikipedia entry, quoted below with my emphasis in bold added (Peter liked to cite God too, privately, but again--his policies led to a decline in the Church, so the Russian faith based bonus makes little sense for him):

ah but Menelik II was also pragmatic- he wasn't frantically religious- he made friends with Muslims and even kept some Muslims as his staff.
Peter was trying to weaken church's power but you gotta remember, almost no Russian monarch was big fan of church interfering with politics. I believe Peter is religious just as much as most monarchs were religious at the time- like Louis 14 of France.

 

[Datian]

I hear those criticisms but I still like how the design of many civs matches them historically or geographically, or points to a sort of golden age.
Come to mind :
- Japan and how a tiny and cramped archipelago hosts urban powerhouses
- Spain who reaches its apex during the Renaissance, with the conquistador and the colonization bonuses
- Mongolia who will be at its most fearsome during the early Middle Ages, when the horde is built before the neighbours are ready
And many others...

I'm not entirely convinced by some civs like Germany, France and Britain, who had different ways of shining, and the leaders don't show that.
Eleanor is a nice choice, but is redundant with France abilities somehow, and fails to reflect the 19th century (conquests by Napoleon, wide colonization, french as the diplomatic language until WW2...)
Another leader for Germany, to reflect the scientific and philosophical achievements of the 19th-20th century would be more than welcome.

 

[Sostratus]

nother leader for Germany, to reflect the scientific and philosophical achievements of the 19th-20th century would be more than welcome

"Another militaristic german leader, you say? If you insist!"
-Firaxis, 2001, 2005, 2010, 2016

 

[BackseatTyrant]

I think one of the most oddly themed civs in this installation, must be the Cree. In particular, their leader Poundmaker, whose RL equivalent was a prominent anti-colonization and anti-imperialism figure. Never mind the bonuses that come with the Cree, think of all the things you can do as the Cree that the historical Poundmaker wouldn't consider doing in a million years, like conquering foreign cities, or even something like considering barbarian units to be, well, barbarian.

 

[Morningcalm]

ah but Menelik II was also pragmatic- he wasn't frantically religious- he made friends with Muslims and even kept some Muslims as his staff.
Peter was trying to weaken church's power but you gotta remember, almost no Russian monarch was big fan of church interfering with politics. I believe Peter is religious just as much as most monarchs were religious at the time- like Louis 14 of France.

Being pragmatic and religiously tolerant doesn't mean you can't be frantically religious (Menelik II was all of those as far as I can see). Peter does not deserves a religious ability any more than Louis XIV (who is known far more for his revocation of the Edict of Nantes, his incessant warfare, bankrupting the country, and cultural patronage).

Also, whether a monarch likes a church interfering with politics is a separate matter from taking active steps to muzzle the Church. I can't think of any monarchs that were "big fan of church interfering with politics", but that doesn't mean there are no monarchs who deserve religious abilities (e.g., Ashoka, Tamar, Hezekiah).

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Being pragmatic and religiously tolerant doesn't mean you can't be frantically religious (Menelik II was all of those as far as I can see). Peter does not deserves a religious ability any more than Louis XIV (who is known far more for his revocation of the Edict of Nantes, his incessant warfare, bankrupting the country, and cultural patronage).

I don’t know. I mean you had to appear to be religious ( or at least be a good Ethiopian orthodox Christian.) And not be a Muslim ( like his sucessor Lij Iyasu failed at). However he did not do anything for the church. He is no more religious than his descendant haile selassie. I will say that for Menelik II religion was a tool.

Russia was and is a religious nation. Thus I think it deserves it's religious focus. Just like Ethiopia.

 

[Leucarum]

Robert the Bruce feels a little out of place leading a civ themed around the industrial revolution... But having contrasting abilities isn't a terrible thing overall, it does open up more strategies if your initial plans hit a hurdle.