[R&F] On the Topic of Civ Representation

[VermelhoRed]

I'll add that Germany is in the same situation. The U-boat is modern Germany, but the rest is the HRE.

But the HRE was basically Germany. I mean, northern Italy, Czechia and the Netherlands were parts of it as well in different periods, but the core of the HRE was Germany. And all the elements brought to the civ were from the German parts of the HRE. It think it's a great depiction that honours the whole of German history.

Right, but it fails to adequately represent the breadth of English history despite the civ being called England. It's so weighted toward being post-union Britain that it may as well be called Britain. Queen Victoria, redcoats, Pax Britannica, British Museum... to me, it's British Museum that takes it a little too far (and Workshop of the World as it applies to the industrialization of 19th century Britain has the same issue). I like the cultural aspect of British Museum, but think it could be represented more specifically to England if it were to draw inspiration instead from English literature, perhaps, rather than plundering artifacts from Egypt during the throes of its imperialist phase.

Well, I agree and disagree with you. I agree that it may as well be called Britain, and I think it SHOULD have been called Britain and we shouldn't have a different Scottish civ.

 

[Dragonflow]

But the HRE was basically Germany. I mean, northern Italy, Czechia and the Netherlands were parts of it as well in different periods, but the core of the HRE was Germany. And all the elements brought to the civ were from the German parts of the HRE. It think it's a great depiction that honours the whole of German history.

I believe his point wasn't about the HRE not being Germany but that the U-Boat just doesn't fit too well thematically. It's really great that medieval Germany is the focus of the civ this time. Yet for some reason Germany gets a completely out of place modern era naval UU.

 

[Pietato]

They removed the museum, right? It was inaccurate, anyway, as it should have let the English steal everyone else's artifacts.

 

[Legacy of Smiles]

They removed the museum, right? It was inaccurate, anyway, as it should have let the English steal everyone elses artifacts.

We have no idea what you're talking about. None.

 

[Guandao]

As an Australian, I am perfectly happy with how they designed Australia

For the longest time, I thought you were a New Zealander.....

 

[clapyourhands]

I'm still not over sphinxes being a UU for Egypt when there is really only one famous Sphinx in the whole region. Compared to pyramids. Or burial tombs. Or literally any other improvement that could have given the exact same bonuses as sphinxes while also existing in a quantity larger than 1.

While I'm sure there probably were small sphinxes as decorative motifs or the like in similar structures, it still doesn't change the fact that Egypt looks super weird with mini-Great Sphinxes lying willy-nilly all over the place.

 

[Lord Lakely]

My idea for America would be an expansion focused police force, but that's just one non-'Merican's perception. If France can be 100% Culture, then why not?

I'm surprised nobody mentioned what I think the best designed Civ is: The Aztecs. Historical bonuses that have immense synergy with each other and give an accurate representation of how the Aztec empire actually operated. I wish all Civs were designed like they were.

I think Germany is a really well-designed civ as well, from a historical perspective. The U-Boot is whack, but give them a Landsknecht and you have the most immersive HRE civ imaginable. Same with Mapuche, Indonesia, Mongolia, Cree and Nubia, you can clearly tell these were inspired designs.

As for the worst, I have to think. Sumeria, Georgia, France, Norway, China, England and Egypt are all come to mind as examples of civs where the devs definitely lacked creativity or botched the few good Ideas they had (like Cleo's trade bonus giving food to her trade partner; it's historically accurate, but silly as a game mechanic), but my vote goes to the Netherlands. They're fun to play and I LOVE Wilhelmina, but... Adjacency from rivers, WTH? How is this historically accurate, like at all? "Radio Oranje" has as much impact on the game as a Tsikhe, their UU is named after a ship rather than a type of ship, Polders on coast is just silly, they have colonial names in their city list, a questionable icon. Perhaps it's clearer for me to see their flaws because I live right next door, but the overall design just screams "made by people who have never set a foot in the Netherlands." :-/

 

[Guandao]

Polders on coast is just silly

How would you portray the Polders then?

 

[clapyourhands]

IMO:

America: The quintessential late game civ; expansive with a split focus on late-game military and culture
Arabia: The religious/scientific mixed civ
Aztec: The classic early-game hyperaggressive civ, with a happiness/luxury/amenity-related interaction
Babylon: The classic early-game scientific civ
Brazil: The late-game hypercultural civ
China: The all-rounded "beginner" civ with scientific, cultural, and construction bonuses
Egypt: The early-game wonder-rushing civ with a focus on development
England: The colonial, naval-focused civ
France: The quintessential cultural civ with a militaristic edge
Germany: The quintessential production-focused civ with a militaristic edge
Greece: The "beginner" civ that is all-rounded with a larger focus on government
Inca: The hill-building civ
India: The religious and population-growth civ
Japan: The late-game all-rounded coastal civ with militaristic, production, cultural, or economic bonuses
Korea: The defensive scientific civ
Maya: The early/mid-game science civ
Mongolia: Horses
Netherlands: The coastal economic powerhouse with polders
Norway: The coastal raiding civ
Portugal: The exploratory/colonial maritime civ with a focus on commerce
Rome: The quintessential expansionist, infrastructure-focused civ
Russia: The mid/late-game civ with strong production, science, and culture
Spain: The colonial religious civ

 

[Tech Osen]

Adjacency from rivers, WTH? How is this historically accurate, like at all?

Well, the wealth and power of The Netherlands is largely due to the great rivers flowing into the sea right here, the Rhine and the Maas. Making us an economic/trade superpower which paid for all the rest. Rotterdam still is one of the largest ports in the world because a huge part of the trade to the industrial heartland of Germany, The Ruhr Valley, has to go through it.
And our biggest polder project, Flevoland, literally was build in a sea. The Zuiderzee was directly connected to the North Sea before they build the Afsluitdijk.

 

[altayrneto]

About the U-Boat, I think they choose it as UU to have something in the Civ that (if possible, visually) can be related with the Germany of the World Wars, possibly the most popular of the Germany's iteration, and we should consider that a leader from this period is highly improbable. But, as the Panzer was already used too many times and the other options or could be considered polemical, or wasn't so distinct or well known, and so they choose the U-Boat. Other possible option for UU was the Zeppelin, which could be unique enough to be well accept.

 

[Legacy of Smiles]

A few people seem to like the Aztecs but there are two major aspects that put me off. The LA is cool from a flavour PoV but in-game the attack boost can snowball to a point where fighting or defending from the Aztecs is impossible. Once the LA activates (which you may have very limited potential to stop) it's usually permanent and can end up being really unfair. It also bugs me that they have a useless and historically minor UB.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Not that different from portraying the US as a military-heavy civ with bonuses to gold and espionage - and you don’t see Firaxis doing that (yet?)

I agree with your points on Russia, but I would actually like to see this. The bulk of the time in history USA has been influential is marked by these things, but perhaps Firaxis deems the memories a little too...recent.

 

[VermelhoRed]

I believe his point wasn't about the HRE not being Germany but that the U-Boat just doesn't fit too well thematically. It's really great that medieval Germany is the focus of the civ this time. Yet for some reason Germany gets a completely out of place modern era naval UU.

It's not out of place, it was done precisely to also have at least one element depicting modern Germany.

 

[Lord Lakely]

How would you portray the Polders then?

Make them a unique Dam district

 

[pgm123]

Those are exactly not the right arguments to redeem Cyrus. You might have argued that he was no worse than his contemporaries. But that's exactly not what you do:

(1) His 'humanitarian conqueror' is the same as caesar being 'generous' and alexander being 'great'. In truth, all of them were ruthless - once they had won, they were generous.

(2) The Cyrus Cylinder as a 'charter of human rights' is a white lie. It might be well meant, but it is still wrong:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrus_Cylinder#Human_rights

I generally agree with you, but I think you're overstating it a bit with Cyrus, especially in comparison to Alexander. While you can say restoring Marduk to the temples was a bit of propaganda, you can't deny that he's the only Gentile in the Bible to carry the title anointed (Messiah/Christos). His reputation as enlightened is certainly better than his contemporaries (not "no worse," but better).

 

[SumerianMonkey]

I picked up on it when he said he’s getting up at 5. 3 hours behind us . Not sure about representation though, as gs civs come out we can make our judgements there.

 

[Dragonflow]

About the U-Boat, I think they choose it as UU to have something in the Civ that (if possible, visually) can be related with the Germany of the World Wars, possibly the most popular of the Germany's iteration, and we should consider that a leader from this period is highly improbable. But, as the Panzer was already used too many times and the other options or could be considered polemical, or wasn't so distinct or well known, and so they choose the U-Boat. Other possible option for UU was the Zeppelin, which could be unique enough to be well accept.

While the U-Boat is iconic there are definitely better options for WW2 units they could've chosen. I guess the Bf 109 is out since it be awkward if both US and Germany had a unique fighter but other options could be:

• Me 262 - replaces jet fighter and is available at an earlier tech/civic
• Panzergrenadier - infantry replacement with more movement
• Pocket Battleship - less HP than regular battleship, same attack but also cheaper and more movement
• Bismarck - more expensive but also stronger than regular battleships

But considering the other German uniques are based on the HRE a knight, pikeman or musketman replacement would've been nicer.

 

[Weraptor]

Spain, albeit weak, is nicely designed. Persia could use other more historically accurate bonuses (trade routes are fine, but I would give them Governors-oriented bonuses and remade the backstabber Cyrus into an actual nice guy, whom he was)

 

[Jewelrunna]

My idea for America would be an expansion focused police force, but that's just one non-'Merican's perception. If France can be 100% Culture, then why not?

I'm surprised nobody mentioned what I think the best designed Civ is: The Aztecs. Historical bonuses that have immense synergy with each other and give an accurate representation of how the Aztec empire actually operated. I wish all Civs were designed like they were.

I think Germany is a really well-designed civ as well, from a historical perspective. The U-Boot is whack, but give them a Landsknecht and you have the most immersive HRE civ imaginable. Same with Mapuche, Indonesia, Mongolia, Cree and Nubia, you can clearly tell these were inspired designs.

As for the worst, I have to think. Sumeria, Georgia, France, Norway, China, England and Egypt are all come to mind as examples of civs where the devs definitely lacked creativity or botched the few good Ideas they had (like Cleo's trade bonus giving food to her trade partner; it's historically accurate, but silly as a game mechanic), but my vote goes to the Netherlands. They're fun to play and I LOVE Wilhelmina, but... Adjacency from rivers, WTH? How is this historically accurate, like at all? "Radio Oranje" has as much impact on the game as a Tsikhe, their UU is named after a ship rather than a type of ship, Polders on coast is just silly, they have colonial names in their city list, a questionable icon. Perhaps it's clearer for me to see their flaws because I live right next door, but the overall design just screams "made by people who have never set a foot in the Netherlands." :-/

Agree with regards to Germany and the Aztecs, they did a great job with both of them. Until Civ V added the Hansa, Germany never felt like the productivity powerhouse they were at the turn of the 20th century; it was a really weird representation. The current form they take in Civ V is quite good, especially with Barbarossa's HRE theme going on. I'd love to see Bismarck added to see what kind of flavor they give a late-19th century unified Germany. The Aztecs are great all around too—their main bonuses are both practical in-game and accurate, and though the tlachtli is pretty irrelevant as far as unique building, it's a wonderful flavor addition for what the Aztecs were all about culturally.

I also want to give a nod to the Zulu's representation as well. Shaka is noteworthy as a figure for just how well-trained and organized his army was, and the focus on corps/armies is just so fitting. I really like the Ikanda as a unique district; it helps the Zulu be slightly less of a one-dimensional warmonger, and it reflects the organization of the Zulu communities. For being one of my least favorite every-game alumni in Civ, they really went the extra mile for Civ VI's Zulu.