Well that was diplomatic; now I feel bad. I hope you know I was joking about the ulcers.
It was never said that no panelist had ever played Egypt in Civilization VI, only one panelist. There was no consensus that trade routes should always be internal but rather one panelist reiterating that that is their position; admittedly no other panelist expressly contested that in this instance, though it has been in the past. Many of the panelists' playstyles are rooted in Domination which, when not specifically stated no doubt comes across otherwise: we speak first and foremost to the perspective that we have more/most experience with. We are always trying to acknowledge and incorporate playstyles other than our primary into our conversations; even where we may not cover those aspects completely, we never do so out of disrespect or dismissal. That it came across that way with respect at any point was and is not intentional: that there was, and is, much about England for example that is Domination-based (or otherwise beneficial) most likely led to less attention being given to its Museum Unique Building.
We always welcome our audience to raise strategic elements that we overlook and/or different perspectives on those that we do not; to have individuals do so not only better enables us to engage with our listener base, and by extension the Civ community, but also challenge us as players to think critically about our own positions. We may not always agree on points raised -- just as we don't always agree with one another on the show -- but when they are raised constructively as here, they are appreciated and considered.
You can't expect people to just be able to speak outside their experience, and I don't think any of us wants that. But there does seem to be an odd kind of double standard going on. If I were to post somewhere that, as a culture or score focused player, I thought Scythia wasn't a strong choice and her only ability worth focusing on was the Kurgan, I'd never hear the end of it.
It's okay to treat civs as though they are only as good as their Maryannu rush or the timing attack of whatever UU they have. Maybe it's the fault of Firaxis for not properly balancing the incentives for war an peace? Or just a prevailing attitude a few of us don't align with, I don't know.
As far as Egypt specifically though, her bonuses -beyond the if necessary aggressive expansion phase in the ancient and a little into classical- everything
heavily incentivizes cooperation with the AI in order to maintain your strong trade routes and take advantage of her very strong tourism from shaping the appeal of your land to fit national parks and seaside resorts wherever you want with sphinxes, to buying up all the great works at a discount from your allies and sticking them into your cheap wonders and districts, everything is focused to that end. Can she deviate, sure, and she's much more flexible than many others, but still, even her loading description describes her this way, and it would be easy to argue that domination should be the last victory she aught to focus on and be evaluated by. Heck she may even the the worst domination civ considering Maryannu uniquely upgrade to crossbowmen to defend your cities instead of knights to go on the offensive.
It seems odd to just take it for granted that domination be the point of reference from which you'd want to evaluate her abilities even if that is your preferred play-style. Just as it would be odd to judge Scythia or Aztec by their ability to pursue culture victories. When we discuss them, we do so from the point of view of taking advantage of their obvious military strengths. Even if it did mean stepping outside our area of experience, no one would ever pass over those things.
Whether it's the game's design we have to blame or how we're perceiving and using it. Whether it's intentional or not. Whether it's something that may change, or something they will embrace. I think these are the questions that drive my interest in this topic.
It seems clear that there is a disconnect between the intended use and the actual use, and I have to wonder how and if that may affect the direction of development.
Where your screams may or may not be heard. The two-hundred-and-eighty-second episode of PolyCast, "Shouting Into the Void", features regular co-hosts Daniel "DanQ" Quick, Stephanie "Makahlua", Philip "TheMeInTeam" Bellew and "MadDjinn" with returning guest co-host David "Hans Lemurson" Skold. It carries a runtime of 59m59s.
-- hope you enjoyed the post-produced version. Thanks for being back on the show!
