Poll: Should culture-specific names for shared units & buildings be replaced with generic names?

[balparmak]

This has been discussed on discord a couple times and pretty much everyone agreed, but discord can be a bubble. By culture specific names for shared stuff I mean things like Tercio, Oxford University, Hermitage. East India Company is not exactly culture-specific, but it's still specific to our timeline/history, while Civ is all about alternative scenarios, so that could also be changed. I believe @pineappledan @Hinin and @Rekk discussed this earlier and probably have a more detailed list&suggestions.

Tercio will get a much better icon in the next patch. While we're at it, we can also change its name to Pike&Shot (or any variations), so I added additional responses for that (I'll sum all 3 yes options, sorry if the poll is a bit confusing)

 

[pineappledan]

Things we proposed that have very specific names for them that some people, myself included, would like to change:

• Tercio (Spanish) - Pike & Shot
• Oxford University (English) - Research Institute, or Imperial College
• Hermitage (Russian) - National Gallery
• Circus Maximus (Roman) - Racetrack, or replacing art with a public square
• Opera House (European) - Concert Hall

Many of these are things that are either hyper-specific to European culture, or are things that only exist in 1 place in the world, and thus would be more fitting as world wonders or unique replacement wonders for a certain civ.

Some people also voiced support for re-naming the East India Company to something else, but that is more contentious. Many different nations had EICs, though it is rather specific to Europe. One suggestion was "Chartered Company"

Let me know if I forgot any of the components we had talked about.

 

[arievillo]

I love all these generic suggestions and always found it very strange Harun al-Rashid to build a Circus Maximus and fight w a Tercio lol

But hey..the purists....

 

[looorg]

I really don't see why you would change them. How would that make it better by using bland generic descriptions? Is someone getting offended or triggered by the eurocentric perspective?

Nor do I really see how the suggestions Pineapple mention above would make anything better. They are all very eurocentric views, words and concepts that are being used to describe something. So instead of being somewhat specific, something that more or less everyone should know or can identify they instead become bland and generic. Helping nobody. It's not like it's breaking immersion in this game, certainly not when wonders of the world go all over the place -- I just don't recall the Great Pyramid of Washington DC ever being a thing etc.

I don't really know why Tercio was picked as an example, perhaps they where the best of its kind or was it the first or the one that everybody across Europe (once again) copied? What are Chinese Tercios? Are there Chinese Pike-N-Shots? No? Then changing the name has not resolved anything here really. It's one Eurocentric concept exchanged for another one.

A lot of nations used something similar to the Tercio but by another name and it wasn't pike-n-shot either. But it really doesn't matter. It's fancy pikemen if you will. With that in mind Tercio will do just fine as it is. Or are the Tercio units getting a ranged attack to when you change the name to pike-n-shot? So they are now becoming more like the Impi (they have a promotion that offers something like a shot effect before attack don't they?). Otherwise the shot part is a bit misleading.

I can understand that some of them would be or are unique or might be better as a world wonder (THE Circus Maximus for sure). But to go from Circus Maximus to Racetrack is a serious downgrade, also factually wrong since it was mainly chariot racing and not the sort of racetracks we have or think of today. But it goes from a national wonder to something found in every other town or so. Massive downgrade in that regard.

Research institute is also very bland, just call it National University or something then, most countries do have one like premiere university. It's either considered the best or it was the first or whatever. But it was, if they are old, rarely a place of research. Most of the old once are usually places for education (theological education being very common) to educate the elite, the administration and or the clergy. Not a lot of research going on there.

East India Company, please tell me it's not someone being upset about slavery. It was a thing. No point in trying to gloss that over. Just see if for what it is. It was a highly successful venture at it's time, perhaps despicable by modern eyes but still it doesn't really change anything.

If you find it weird that say Harun builds the Circus Maximus doesn't it also then feel weird that he builds the Stonehenge or the Great Pyramid of Giza? That they cropped the names of a lot of wonders shouldn't fool you. Most of them are very eurocentric or centered around the Mediterranean sea, almost all of them should really have an "... of SomeCity" attached to them. More or less all the ancient wonders in the game have a city or something such attached to them, or should have as it is clear what they are referring to and shouldn't be second guessed in that regard. Or is it that civilizations that died out a long time ago, or basically are insignificant in our modern world, are somehow given a second chance of make-believe? Consider if for it it is, fantasy and place holders. They might not have built the Circus Maximus but they probably built some great place of spectacle and show if they could.

Perhaps people should just interpret it as I'm building A Circus Maximus, a place of great spectacle (or I guess if you want to be all modern about it -- an entertainment complex). Not necessarily THE Circus Maximus. After all there was a lot of arenas and Colosseum type places all over the empire at the time. Not just as grand, large or important.

 

[arievillo]

I think there is only one person triggered/offended here by different opinions.
Anyway... that the choice made by ALL prevails.

Moderator Action: This is inappropriate. Please do not make posts that do not contribute to the discussion and serve only to anger other users. - Recursive
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[InkAxis]

What's the difference between the second and third choice on the poll?

 

[arievillo]

What's the difference between the second and third choice on the poll?

Tercio with Pike&Shot
Tercio with Pike and Shot

 

[balparmak]

Noone said anything about these being offensive and I don't want to get sucked into that. The main point is that these are national wonders, they aren't unique and they shouldn't be named as such. I don't have any problems with Great Pyramids of Washington, I wouldn't have a problem with Oxford University of Arabia either if it was unique, but I do have a problem Oxford University of Arabia co-existing with Oxford Universities of Spain and Mongolia.
Hope it doesn't sound rude but your argument on Tercio doesn't make any sense to me. Chinese Pike and Shot does sound a lot better than Chinese Tercios. It solves the issue of assigning one unit of a particular culture to all others, since pike and shot formation isn't unique to anyone. Calling them Tercio feels like calling all Horse Archers "Atlı Okçu" because Turks were good horse archers.

I really don't see why you would change them. How would that make it better by using bland generic descriptions? Is someone getting offended or triggered by the eurocentric perspective?

Nor do I really see how the suggestions Pineapple mention above would make anything better. They are all very eurocentric views, words and concepts that are being used to describe something. So instead of being somewhat specific, something that more or less everyone should know or can identify they instead become bland and generic. Helping nobody. It's not like it's breaking immersion in this game, certainly not when wonders of the world go all over the place -- I just don't recall the Great Pyramid of Washington DC ever being a thing etc.

I don't really know why Tercio was picked as an example, perhaps they where the best of its kind or was it the first or the one that everybody across Europe (once again) copied? What are Chinese Tercios? Are there Chinese Pike-N-Shots? No? Then changing the name has not resolved anything here really. It's one Eurocentric concept exchanged for another one.

A lot of nations used something similar to the Tercio but by another name and it wasn't pike-n-shot either. But it really doesn't matter. It's fancy pikemen if you will. With that in mind Tercio will do just fine as it is. Or are the Tercio units getting a ranged attack to when you change the name to pike-n-shot? So they are now becoming more like the Impi (they have a promotion that offers something like a shot effect before attack don't they?). Otherwise the shot part is a bit misleading.

I can understand that some of them would be or are unique or might be better as a world wonder (THE Circus Maximus for sure). But to go from Circus Maximus to Racetrack is a serious downgrade, also factually wrong since it was mainly chariot racing and not the sort of racetracks we have or think of today. But it goes from a national wonder to something found in every other town or so. Massive downgrade in that regard.

Research institute is also very bland, just call it National University or something then, most countries do have one like premiere university. It's either considered the best or it was the first or whatever. But it was, if they are old, rarely a place of research. Most of the old once are usually places for education (theological education being very common) to educate the elite, the administration and or the clergy. Not a lot of research going on there.

East India Company, please tell me it's not someone being upset about slavery. It was a thing. No point in trying to gloss that over. Just see if for what it is. It was a highly successful venture at it's time, perhaps despicable by modern eyes but still it doesn't really change anything.

If you find it weird that say Harun builds the Circus Maximus doesn't it also then feel weird that he builds the Stonehenge or the Great Pyramid of Giza? That they cropped the names of a lot of wonders shouldn't fool you. Most of them are very eurocentric or centered around the Mediterranean sea, almost all of them should really have an "... of SomeCity" attached to them. More or less all the ancient wonders in the game have a city or something such attached to them, or should have as it is clear what they are referring to and shouldn't be second guessed in that regard. Or is it that civilizations that died out a long time ago, or basically are insignificant in our modern world, are somehow given a second chance of make-believe? Consider if for it it is, fantasy and place holders. They might not have built the Circus Maximus but they probably built some great place of spectacle and show if they could.

 

[Rosete]

I'm in favor of changing the name. I think it is a net good to be more inclusive, even if by only a little with a simple name change. It also gives space for mods to have more targeted, specific buildings/units, as there would be no overlap. In addition to other, I would name the following name suggestions:

• Tercio (Spanish) - Marauder (I like the name and I think it is general enough to describe a military unit, it also has connotations with rough/tough/bulky/strong)
• Oxford University (English) - Imperial Academy (since most civ leaders are monarchs, and you command an empire in-game, I think this is a better fit)
• Circus Maximus (Roman) - Great Square/Grand Market (the entertainment district in most culture are located at common squares or markets, referencing ancient sporting grounds)

East India Company, please tell me it's not someone being upset about slavery. It was a thing. No point in trying to gloss that over. Just see if for what it is. It was a highly successful venture at it's time, perhaps despicable by modern eyes but still it doesn't really change anything.

I want to point out that at no point in time were the actions by the EIC acceptable. It was legal, yes, but being legal alone is not a good reason. The people who were in power during the EIC's reign knew that what they did was wrong; the EIC itself knew its actions were wrong at the time. That was why the EIC spent so much time and effort devising theories and euphemisms to justify their wrongful actions. There would be no need for justification if the EIC truly believe what it did was normal. I think we can do without the EIC, I like the suggested Charter Company replacement.

While civ is produced by a Western company, it is enjoyed by a global audience. In whatever small capacity we have, we should try to be more inclusive. The National Wonders are a good candidate for name changes because it applies to all civ. You can only have 1 Stonehenge in a game, but possibly 8+ EIC.

 

[looorg]

Noone said anything about these being offensive and I don't want to get sucked into that. The main point is that these are national wonders, they aren't unique and they shouldn't be named as such. I don't have any problems with Great Pyramids of Washington, I wouldn't have a problem with Oxford University of Arabia either if it was unique, but I do have a problem Oxford University of Arabia co-existing with Oxford Universities of Spain and Mongolia.
Hope it doesn't sound rude but your argument on Tercio doesn't make any sense to me. Chinese Pike and Shot does sound a lot better than Chinese Tercios. It solves the issue of assigning one unit of a particular culture to all others, since pike and shot formation isn't unique to anyone. Calling them Tercio feels like calling all Horse Archers "Atlı Okçu" because Turks were good horse archers.

This is what is not really explained very well, or at all really. Why? What makes it better by changing a few names. As far as I can tell nothing. If you are fine with the Great Pyramids of Washington then I don't really see why you should have issue with Oxford University of X, Y and Z. You are in some regard destroying the association by renaming it. Everybody, or most, knows Oxford University. The association of what it is and you have built something similar in whatever city of whatever civilization you are playing doesn't matter. In some regard you should interpret Oxford University here as a placeholder and not the actual structure. A lot of perceived unique things are really less unique. If you want to be bland about then just replace the names with National X (university, arena, concert hall or whatnot) as we all have one of those. It says nothing. It's bland and generic. But to replace Oxford University with "Research Institute" is just sad. How will it compare then to the overly common Research Lab three eras later?

With that in mind changing it from Terico to Pike and Shot doesn't really change anything either. A lot of armies used a Tercio like formation or structure of very long pikes and some form of muskets (or bows) in it to give it range. If you call it Tercio or Pike and Shot in that regard doesn't change anything. The Tercio in that regard was not just some dude with a very long pike with a fancy spanish name. But to change it doesn't really improve anything either. You are in some regard just changing something to change something. You are changing the name from one very european formation to another very european formation name. I'm fairly sure the Germans, Dutch and Swedish didn't call them Tercio but that they used a similar formation or long pikes and some ranged weapon in it. If you want to call it pike and shot instead fine whatever. It wasn't a word they used either. But they did copy the Tercio formation and organization hence the name stuck. So I don't see why the name should change in that regard.

So if, or apparently when, you change it are you going to change other similar names to? Cuirassier and Fusilier comes to mind. They are very language specific and not generic in that regard, one being somewhat more common then the other tho. In some sense it might then be better then to just be super generic across the board and call everything either Cavalry or Infantry cause that is what they are. That said I don't think you should. But if you do it for one I assume you want to be consistent and do it for all.

I want to point out that at no point in time were the actions by the EIC acceptable. It was legal, yes, but being legal alone is not a good reason. The people who were in power during the EIC's reign knew that what they did was wrong; the EIC itself knew its actions were wrong at the time. That was why the EIC spent so much time and effort devising theories and euphemisms to justify their wrongful actions. There would be no need for justification if the EIC truly believe what it did was normal. I think we can do without the EIC, I like the suggested Charter Company replacement.

While civ is produced by a Western company, it is enjoyed by a global audience. In whatever small capacity we have, we should try to be more inclusive. The National Wonders are a good candidate for name changes because it applies to all civ. You can only have 1 Stonehenge in a game, but possibly 8+ EIC.

That is not exactly how I recall it. Clearly people were not to upset about it since it lasted for some 250ish years or so. I guess all the money helped. Anyway it was a highly successful venture and it spawned a lot of copies all over Europe and the copies usually had a very similar but local name; the Dutch had the Vereenigde Oostindische Compagnie (the last two words there are literally East India Company), Sweden had Ostindiska Companiet (once again more or less a direct translation to East India Company) and the list goes on like that. So in that regard I don't find it weird to have 8+ East India Company cause that was quite literally what they called them in country after country that copied it. It might be weird for the non-Euro civs to have one but then it's the concept we are talking about here and not the literal company, and also this isn't reality in that regard but a game so the name is sort of placeholder. But if you say East India Company more or less everyone will instantly make the association for what it is that you are building but "Chartered Company" doesn't really say anything in that regard. It's super bland and generic. East India Company gives reference and context, Chartered Company does not. If you want a concept it should be Colonial Trading Company as that is usually what it was or what they wanted to do, more or less successfully (or not so much since most of them failed quite fast even with the backing of the various monarchies and states).

This is basically why I voted No. You are replacing things that actually give context and reference to what you are building with bland and generic words and concepts that say nothing. Which I find bad.

 

[Zanteogo]

I didn't vote because I don't care enough on this to vote.

My only issue is if this has a chance to break mod mods or has a chance to effect something else unintended, if this is a possibility I would just leave things as they are.

 

[Rekk]

I didn't vote because I don't care enough on this to vote.

My only issue is if this has a chance to break mod mods or has a chance to effect something else unintended, if this is a possibility I would just leave things as they are.

Zero chance to break mods. Some text might be weird if there are Unique National Wonders that reference the original National Wonder name.

 

[Delvemor]

This is basically why I voted No. You are replacing things that actually give context and reference to what you are building with bland and generic words and concepts that say nothing. Which I find bad.

Exactly.

Hope it doesn't sound rude but your argument on Tercio doesn't make any sense to me. Chinese Pike and Shot does sound a lot better than Chinese Tercios. It solves the issue of assigning one unit of a particular culture to all others, since pike and shot formation isn't unique to anyone.

iirc it's called Tercio because it played a crucial role in a battle involving Spanish soldiers against French knights. Only after then did it get imitated at large by other nations. What you call "the issue of assigning one unit of a particular culture to all others" is actually an historical reference.

While civ is produced by a Western company, it is enjoyed by a global audience. In whatever small capacity we have, we should try to be more inclusive.

Weither you like it or not, the vast majority of historical advancements (for the best or for the worst) have been made by western nations, with some notable exceptions such as gunpowder from China. The game is naturally eurocentric for that reason and I don't see how you could easily solve this "issue".

Moderator Action: Post edited. You are welcome to express your opinion respectfully, but please refrain from personal attacks. Also, generalizing the other side's argument as "inclusivity BS" is inappropriate. - Recursive
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[pineappledan]

• Oxford University (English) - Imperial Academy (since most civ leaders are monarchs, and you command an empire in-game, I think this is a better fit)

• Circus Maximus (Roman) - Great Square/Grand Market (the entertainment district in most culture are located at common squares or markets, referencing ancient sporting grounds)

I like these two suggestions.
Calling it a Great Square or something similar would require an art change in addition to the name change, which is a lot more work than a name swap. The icon is definitely not of a city square.
Imperial Academy certainly sounds a lot more grandiose than what I suggested. It maybe conflicts a bit with the GScientist improvement, which is called an academy though?

This is what is not really explained very well, or at all really. Why? What makes it better by changing a few names.

There's a few reasons:

• Consistency: The names listed here are places where culturally-specific names for things are used. Most national wonders are called things like "Heroic Epic", or "Foreign Bureau". Things that are categories, not singular, specific buildings, or incarnations of that idea.
• Uniqueness: Generic names for base buildings make civ's unique replacements for them stand out more. For example, Independence Hall is America's unique replacement for the Hermitage. There's only 1 Independence Hall in the world, so it makes sense that America is the only civ that gets to build it. But there's also only 1 'The Hermitage' in the world. So you have a unique, one-of-a-kind thing that replaces a different one-of-a-kind thing. If the Hermitage had a name like "National Gallery", then it would be more like a category of building, that America could have a special version of
• Immersion: It feels silly to be building units/buildings that are named after specific, European things when not playing a European civilization, especially when more generic names for what that building is exist. Likewise, it's silly to be playing a European civ and have to build a national wonder named after an institution in another country, that your current civ has a 95% similar counterpart to IRL. For instance, I understand what they are going for with the Oxford University, it's a really old and prestigious university. But France has one of those, and so does Germany, and a whole lot of other countries. But the game explicitly tells me I'm Not building My nation's old, fancy university, I'm specifically building ENGLAND's old, fancy university. If it was a world wonder then great, in fact we already have that with Songhai's old fancy university being a distinct world wonder. However, it's dumb that all 8 players in my game are all building exclusively England's finest university, especially when 3/4 of the other national wonders let players fill in the blanks themselves. "National Monument" Doesn't explicitly tell you you're building the Arc de Triomphe. The School of Philosophy doesn't explicitly tell you you're building the Platonic Academy. Sure, that's what's depicted in the icon, but they had to put something there. Why does the game go out of its way in these handful of instances?
• Specific Bug-Bears and silliness with the choices:
  • Oxford University: So you build a university in your city, and then that unlocks the national wonder which is... Another, older university??? That's dumb. Why isn't Oxford something other than a name-brand version of a generic base building you've already built in the same place?
  • Hermitage: This really bugs me, because "The Hermitage" is not A hermitage. A hermitage is a type of monastery, where hermits live. "The Hermitage" is the Russian national gallery. It's called "The Hermitage", because it was converted from a Russian imperial palace, and the Romanovs were so notoriously awkward and reclusive that people joked that they lived like monks, and the name stuck. So the national wonder for this thing which is all about housing great works of art is so specifically, historically, and culturally Russian that the name for the building doesn't even make sense if you take the name of the building at face value. Why not just call the thing the National Gallery, rather than this obscurantist historical in-joke?
  • East India Company: This one is minor, but the Dutch UA is also called "Dutch East India Company", so it's a bit silly that their UA is also a UNW. In essence, East India Companies are something called a "chartered company", which is a more flexible term that basically means the same thing: That the company had a legal monopoly or exclusivity granted by the government. For example, the Hudson's Bay Company in what is now Canada was an "East India" company with a legal monopoly to trade with indigenous peoples in North America on behalf of the British Crown, even though the company wasn't set up somewhere anyone would call the "Indies". Many non-western nations in history had similar arrangements. The most famous one I can think of is the Canton system in China that restricted trade with Europeans to specific ports, and only with a specific group of merchants called the Cohong. The dynamics of this trade monopoly is what led to the first Opium War.

Moderator Action: Post edited. Please report trolling posts rather than engaging with them. - Recursive

 

[Hinin]

So, I don't want to enter a fray when words like "woke" are used so quickly to describe what is in the end a very mild change that, I think, should have been left at the discretion of the developpers. I'll be brief : this change would be about consistency (putting the same naming standards for all national wonders), removing proper nouns from buildings that aren't meant to be world wonders or unique components and liberating five elements that could become potential new unique components for their respective civilization in the future.

This is not about countering a euro-centric view (it's just that all named national wonders are about Europe, as is the majority of the game in general), it's not about wokism (whatever that means nowadays). People, please, keep cool.

Also, about the Tercio part : Pike & Shot is a general kind of infantry formation, while Tercio is a specifically Imperial Spanish kind of unit (with its unique quirks, like battalion priests and such) that is, moreover, posterior to the birth of Pike & Shot (a sort of final hallmark of the category), meaning "Pike & Shot" is both more historically accurate as a general term and better as a Renaissance Era unit unlocked from the first Gunpowder tech. Tercio fits far better as a superior replacement for the Pike & Shot, I think.

 

[Rosete]

Calling it a Great Square or something similar would require an art change in addition to the name change, which is a lot more work than a name swap. The icon is definitely not of a city square.

I found an image that could work for Great Square icon art. The large tower can be cropped out to hide that it is a drawing of Piazza San Marco, Venice, and make the icon more ambiguous timeline-wise. What do you think?

Imperial Academy certainly sounds a lot more grandiose than what I suggested. It maybe conflicts a bit with the GScientist improvement, which is called an academy though?

Imperial College or Imperial University would work too and not overlap. Personally, I think college sounds better.

Moderator Action: Post edited. Please report trolling posts rather than engaging with them. - Recursive

 

[CppMaster]

There is "Pike & Shot" instead of Tercio in Civ6. I'm not a fan of the other changes, though. I got used to them and I like them.

 

[pineappledan]

I don't really know why Tercio was picked as an example, perhaps they where the best of its kind or was it the first or the one that everybody across Europe (once again) copied? What are Chinese Tercios? Are there Chinese Pike-N-Shots? No? Then changing the name has not resolved anything here really. It's one Eurocentric concept exchanged for another one.

There is "Pike & Shot" instead of Tercio in Civ6.

I'm pretty floored by the Tercio talk, because it's as @CppMaster says. Pike & Shot isn't an ambiguous or unheard of term, it's just what this infantry tactic is called. If you're actually curious about the history of Pike & Shot tactics, it's a quick google search to find the wikipedia article, which discusses the innovations of German and Spanish infantry tactics that started integrating firearms into their pike blocks, why this was done, when and where these tactics were independently developed in East Asia, and how the ratio of guns to pikes changed over the next 300 years all around the world.

It's also not a mystery why they are called Tercios in VP, they just took the old Spanish unique unit, and made it available to all players without changing any of the text. "Tercios" were not the first to use Pike & Shot tactics; they weren't even the first Spaniards to use the tactic.

Imperial College or Imperial University would work too and not overlap. Personally, I think college sounds better.

I agree, but it is funny to me because VP changes the name of the National College to School of Philosophy, which means we would more or less be moving the BNW name for a different national wonder. It makes sense though; Oxford, is a collegiate university. The specific building depicted in the current icon is the All Souls College

I found an image that could work for Great Square icon art. The large tower can be cropped out to hide that it is a drawing of Piazza San Marco, Venice, and make the icon more ambiguous timeline-wise. What do you think?

I would definitely stay clear of Venice. It feels like every square inch of that city is already either a unique national wonder or world wonder.

It's just a pain integrating new art into VP's atlases, so if there was a name we could agree on without having to change the icon of the Circus Maximus, I would do that. If not, there are already a lot of high quality squares that have icons made. My personal vote would go to Martyr Square as the icon, which I think gets the point across of a large public square quite nicely.

 

[zeofig]

I agree many of them are silly in their current forms, and that the principle of national wonders being "generic" make sense. However they're only worth replacing if a good and exciting replacement can be found - just slapping "National" or "Grand" on various buildings is dull. It's a minor issue and changing such things can really annoy people, without achieving anything much. My thoughts on some of the ideas:

• Oxford: Imperial Academy (or College) is solid. It has actively struck me as silly that twelve mighty nations all build an Oxford University, usually in their capital which is not Oxford, while meanwhile England may indeed found the city of Oxford if she makes it to 9 cities.
• East India Company: Grand Market and Great Square aren't exciting enough. What about Grand Arcade? I also don't mind Chartered Company, or perhaps Chartered Company Headquarters
• Tercios... I actually like this one. It may be fairly specific, but it also has the generic meaning of "a third" (perhaps referring to 1/3 swords/pikes/guns), which nicely captures its role as a transition between melee and gun-based infantry. Pike & shot is more generic, but it looks rather awkward to me - are there any other "and" units in the game? Also upgrading your pikemen to a *pike*&shot, and your longswordsmen also to a pike&shot feels funny to me. One alternative: "Halberdier" is a cool word for infantry, although historically I believe pikes became more dominant than halberds later in history.
• Hermitage - it's not an amazing name, but it's better than Oxford University (in that it doesn't directly refer to a specific place). I wouldn't mind seeing it changed, but National Gallery is pretty boring.

 

[looorg]

I'm pretty floored by the Tercio talk...

I find it equally baffling that you are now basically engaged in relabeling for no good or apparent reasons other then to change things just to change them or for them to fit into some concept someone came up with.

Moderator Action: Please refrain from unnecessary personal attacks or accusations. This is not necessary to express your opinion. - Recursive
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

I'm fairly sure that nobody has said that Pike and Shot was unheard of or ambiguous. But it's a lot more generic then Tercio. If bland and generic is what you want to go for for whatever reason then fine. But you are just relabeling thing for no good reasons really as nothing of value was or is gained or has changed. It's not that Tercio is an unheard of concept either. After all it's the one that they copied to some extent. So why not keep it? As noted then there are at least two other units that comes to mind that would need to be renamed for the same reason as for the Tercio then. But I don't see them being brought up, yet. I guess that will be the next polls.

Looking at the poll standing currently I guess no matter which you chose about half the crowd will not like the change. So the Discord bubble is real then if everyone there apparently thought that this was great and couldn't find any fault with it what so ever.

From what I understand your issue with Oxford university is that the name Oxford is in it. My issue with it is that it requires a university to build a university. Which is kind of weird. I guess one could see it as an upgrade or uplifting of the university. Which I guess is another reason why Oxford might fit. That said I'm fine with Imperial College (which I find more fitting or better then National X or Imperial University; if one wants to go with the more generic tho it should probably be national as that is the one used later or otherwise in the game for the late national wonders).