1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Props to the devs for designing the Civs to be played as they existed!

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Peng Qi, Nov 7, 2012.

  1. Peng Qi

    Peng Qi Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,431
    Location:
    Irrelevant.
    The Furor Teutonicus thread got me thinking about something I had already pondered: many of the mechanics of Civs in this game encourage them to be played in a manner consistent with their history. For example:

    Rome
    -Early expansion facilitated by powerful UUs.
    -UA encourages development and expansion after early aggression.
    -UUs are very strong compared to contemporaries, but gain nothing from upgrading, encouraging player to sit on the UUs as long as they can get away with; Rome's lack of military modernization was one of the historical reasons for its downfall.

    Germany
    -Early game focused on barbarian-hunting; i.e. pulling together disparate tribes into a force to be used against other major civs.
    -Mid-game with cheap defensive units encourages a defensive posture around what would be the time of the Holy Roman Empire.
    -Late-game strong UU encourages a late-game aggressive push.

    England
    -UUs and UA encourage player to use a highly mobile fleet coupled with a few extremely strong ranged units to defend territory or make aggressive pushes.


    I think this design aspect is really cool. Some of the civs are designed just with flavor or gameplay in mind (I'm looking at you, Huns) but some of the more oddball abilities like Furor Teutonicus or the decision not to let Legions keep their terrain improvement powers when they upgrade actually do have some thought behind them in creating immersive gameplay. Anyone else notice anything like this?
     
  2. crawf0rd

    crawf0rd The One and Only

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Messages:
    483
    I hate to say it, but I don't think it was a decision to keep the Legions from upgrading with their powers. They give each unit special improvement abilities, which are normally limited to the worker and the workboat, but they gave these abilities to the Legion also. It would be complicated coding to make it upgrade so that only Roman Longswordsmen are able to make roads and such. The rest is spot on though.
     
  3. TM Moot

    TM Moot King

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2005
    Messages:
    693
    Location:
    Somersetshire
    Not flaming here, genuinely interested :), but is this correct?

    I always assumed the fall of the Roman Empire was down to corruption, internal power struggles, external tribal pressures & possibly religious turmoil rather then military ineffectiveness.

    I'm not aware that the Vandals, Goths etc.. had anything militaristic a well resourced Roman Legion couldn't handle.

    Perhaps I need to read Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" which has been gathering dust on my bookshelve for years...;)
     
  4. Plumfairy

    Plumfairy Prince

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    355
    Yeah... not to be a jerk, but the OP isn't correct about Rome. Their military was perfectly up to date when they collapsed.
     
  5. Peng Qi

    Peng Qi Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,431
    Location:
    Irrelevant.
    This is not at all true. Eastern Rome lacked the funding and wherewithal to upgrade their Legions' armor to superior mail armor once it had been developed, and often relied on mercenary armies with inferior equipment.
     
  6. Donaskme

    Donaskme Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2012
    Messages:
    164
    Location:
    Florida
    There are many notions, yours is based on Vegetius, however he didn't ascribe it to failed technology, but rather the cultural dilution of employing so many Germanic barbarian mercenaries.

    Virtually all the theories consider cultural, economic, or moral decline to have played the central role, though few assign only one single cause. To my knowledge, technological inferiority is not considered a significant factor in any of the leading theories.
     
  7. Peng Qi

    Peng Qi Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,431
    Location:
    Irrelevant.
    Oh I don't mean to imply that they didn't HAVE the technology, merely that they didn't have the necessary funding to provide enough men with the most up-to-date equipment. (Then of course there's the severe manpower shortage in the late Empire, but that's not the era of which I'm speaking.)

    P.S.: Hey Vegetius, what's up?
     
  8. Morningcalm

    Morningcalm Keeper of Records

    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,075
    Location:
    Abroad
    Some nations are too limited though. Does anyone pursue any victory other than domination with Germany? Arguably you could go Science, but that's a direct result from conquering a bazillion cities...they didn't really represent the cultural side of Germany very well, or the artistry of the Japanese.
     
  9. Arachnofiend

    Arachnofiend Perturbed Pugilist

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,950
    A lot of the civs that were serious world powers kind of got the shaft on the cultural side. America would have made a lot of sense as a culture civ (Coca-colonization is the closest thing the real world will ever get to the in-game VC) but nope straight up warmongerer. Same with the Greeks and focusing in on Alexander's annexation of basically everything rather than the cultural contributions of Athens that would eventually be much more significant to the development of the world.
     
  10. Louis XXIV

    Louis XXIV Le Roi Soleil

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    13,579
    Location:
    Norfolk, VA
    I disagree that mail armor was superior. It's different and better against certain weapons, but it's actually quite inferior against others.
     
  11. Naokaukodem

    Naokaukodem Millenary King

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,191
    Actually there are hundreds of theories concerning the Fall of Rome, and there is not any concensus about any of them. In other words, we don't know why Rome felt.

    Some people pretend that every thing have an end, and that our own civilizations will be extinct more or less soon.

    For my Civ ideas, I usually consider that Rome felt because they got caught back "technologically" by barabrians. See the post http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=479211 , where i consider that Rome would fell in Civ5 around the fifth century because a special military tech tree that normal civs don't have. (in the same way Mongolia rises in the twelveth century becacuse of a superior army, here again a special military tech tree other civs don't have)

    I think it makes pretty much sense, as barbarians are known to be superior individually on regular civilized troops. (they were good in forest ambush, where trees prevented Roman soldier to organize themselves) However, Roman people were far better in discipline, and for open field battles it seems discipline is prevalent.

    However, in my imagined scenario, barbarians just inspire themselves of the Roman discipline with time (in Civ: technology ?), while remaining still superior individually. The same triggers with Mongolia, their way of life makes every single member of the society a warrior since its tendering age, with competition around war abilities and horseback riding. Hence their supriority on the field.
     
  12. triheptyl

    triheptyl Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2012
    Messages:
    106
    Never understood this as well. If anyone has culturally "conquered" the world it would be the Americans.
     
  13. Donaskme

    Donaskme Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2012
    Messages:
    164
    Location:
    Florida
    And technologically, economically. I think the developer was constrained to what passes for our history in schools these days. America the imperialist, killer of injuns, etc.
     
  14. Arachnofiend

    Arachnofiend Perturbed Pugilist

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,950
    A truly American America would focus in on city-states. Playing the part of Big Brother and forcing the little states to assimilate without actually annexing them is what America has been about since the Monroe Doctrine. I think for a theoretical cultural America there should be a Great Capitalist replacement that, when used on a city-state, gives a big one turn culture boost. It would have to be huge to compensate for the fact that that could have been an Artist, though.

    Give them Containment for the UA and make the influence of other civs decrease faster when you have a spy in the city-state and you are good to go.
     
  15. Arksa

    Arksa Warlord

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Messages:
    298
    Rome fell I think mainly because they couldn't aquire more slaves (qonquest eventually halted) and they kinda ignored technological advance in some areas because of the slaves they used to have.
    IMO barbs were the final blow.

    They also had tons of mercenaries in the army later on and that can bite you in the ass when the coffers begin to empty.
     
  16. HeraldtheGreat

    HeraldtheGreat King

    Joined:
    May 20, 2012
    Messages:
    906
    Location:
    Toronto, Canada
    Let's not forget about the spread of disease!
     

Share This Page