Prussia confirmed instead of Germany

[Gen.Washington]

Spotted in a YouTube video, Rome unlocks Prussia.
Makes sense as we’ve seen Freddie but this confirms there is no Germany and no Britain.

 

[Xyael]

Make sense.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Spotted in a YouTube video, Rome unlocks Prussia.
Makes sense as we’ve seen Freddie but this confirms there is no Germany and no Britain.

Next week. UU, and UC. what should they be?

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

Can't wait for the full reveal. Old Fritz looks awesome but I was really hoping we'd return to my boy Bismarck.

 

[chaosprophet]

Well Prussia is pretty much Germany, but yes we learn about it yesterday as all the videos came out and the civfanatics quickly mined every little bit of info from them.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Can't wait for the full reveal. Old Fritz looks awesome but I was really hoping we'd return to my boy Bismarck.

Frederick II leads now.
Interesting enough that Augustus who could begin with either Greece or Roma could end with Prussia. becoming king or kaiser?

 

[Biologist]

Interesting decision to go with Prussia over unified Germany. It makes some sense though, since Firaxis seems to be going with mainly 19th century incarnations of civs as the starting point for the Modern Age (Tsarist Russia, post-Bourbon French Empire, Siam instead of Thailand). I think it also moves away from the idea that "Germany has to represent fascism" which is frankly a terrible thing to pigeonhole Germany into in a game that's themed around exploring alternative routes through history.

 

[untitledjuan]

I don't get why Spain is included as "Spain" and not as Castile in the Exploration Era, but Germany appears as Prussia and not Germany in the Modern Era. Spain wasn't even a thing until 1716.

Sure, Friedrich was a German, but a politically unified Germany did not exist yet during his lifetime. He ruled Prussia, not Germany.

The same happens with Isabella. She was technically Spanish, but a politically unified Spain did not exist yet during her lifetime. She ruled Castile. Her descendants inherited a personal union of Castile and Aragon, but those two kingdoms remained legally separated until their parliaments were united in 1716 to form Spain per se.

 

[Krikkit1]

I don't get why Spain is included as "Spain" and not as Castile in the Exploration Era, but Germany appears as Prussia and not Germany in the Modern Era. Spain wasn't even a thing until 1716.

Sure, Friedrich was a German, but a politically unified Germany did not exist yet during his lifetime. He ruled Prussia, not Germany.

The same happens with Isabella. She was technically Spanish, but a politically unified Spain did not exist yet during her lifetime. She ruled Castile. Her descendants inherited a personal union of Castile and Aragon, but those two kingdoms remained legally separated until their parliaments were united in 1716 to form Spain per se.

Probably because they are thinking of a 4th Age Germany (and also "Germany" at the last part of the Modern Age has some unfortunate associations that Prussia doesn't have)

 

[Lord Lakely]

I approve of Prussia over Germany. It enables a more specialized, nuanced take on Germany we haven't seen before, and allows for modders to make their own German polity (Saxony, Bavaria, etc).

UU probably a Jäger or an Uhlan. UI I don't know what to expect, but I think something sciency would fit - Reichsplatz district with a Gymnasium and Military Academy UB.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

It does seem that FXS is moving towards individual states in disfavour of ethno-cultural groupings, which is why I expect Florence or Milan in lieu of a Renaissance Italy civ. On the other hand, they're still sticking with Maya and Greece...

 

[Lord Lakely]

It does seem that FXS is moving towards individual states in disfavour of ethno-cultural groupings, which is why I expect Florence or Milan in lieu of a Renaissance Italy civ. On the other hand, they're still sticking with Maya and Greece...

Civs can always be split up later.

Greece coexisted with Macedon in Civ6. It's not impossible it can coexist alongside the Myceneans, Minions and Macedonians once again. (not my preference though.)

 

[Biologist]

Spain wasn't even a thing until 1716.

From Wikipedia: "The dynastic union of the Crown of Castile and the Crown of Aragon in 1479 under the Catholic Monarchs is often considered the de facto unification of Spain as a nation state." Is this completely wrong? Because it seems like Spain existed well before 1716 in a widely-recognized fashion. Similarly, the Habsburg Spanish Empire is dated to 1492. The English didn't face the Castilian Armada, they faced the Spanish Armada. Seems like there's plenty of justification for calling the civ "Spain" and not "Castile" even if Castile is a major influence/component of the Spanish state represented in-game.

 

[ehecatzin]

I don't get why Spain is included as "Spain" and not as Castile in the Exploration Era, but Germany appears as Prussia and not Germany in the Modern Era. Spain wasn't even a thing until 1716.

Sure, Friedrich was a German, but a politically unified Germany did not exist yet during his lifetime. He ruled Prussia, not Germany.

The same happens with Isabella. She was technically Spanish, but a politically unified Spain did not exist yet during her lifetime. She ruled Castile. Her descendants inherited a personal union of Castile and Aragon, but those two kingdoms remained legally separated until their parliaments were united in 1716 to form Spain per se.

And the emblem relates to Castille just to rub it in.

Back when Spain was revealed and we didn't know much about the modern era, it was speculated that Habsburg or Bourbon Spain would feel out of place, but if anything it looks like a "SPAIN" civ should be around Napoleon, Frederick, Catherine and Mexico.

I really hope that Spain is eventually broken into two separate civs, Castille can have the Reconquista and American exploration and conquistadors, and Spain can have the Siglo de Oro and Tercios. heck I would absolutely buy a DLC that does this and adds El Cid as a leader.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

They have Spain instead of Castille, as mentioned above, and Persia instead of Achaemenids. Meanwhile Prussia and Normans are much more specific names.

The nomenclature is absolutely across the board. If anything, I'd expect that civs with less generalized names to reflect the eventual inclusion of predecessor or successor civs, while civs with more generalized names, like Spain or Persia, to remain single-Age entities.

 

[Gen.Washington]

Probably because they are thinking of a 4th Age Germany (and also "Germany" at the last part of the Modern Age has some unfortunate associations that Prussia doesn't have)

I don’t think removing any references to WW2 is what happened or is a good step for civ to take. Japan is in the game and even if they named it Meiji Japan they’re still going to have WW2 technology.
Plus that’s looking aside the fascist vs communist ideology game you can play regardless of what civ you play as.

 

[ehecatzin]

They have Spain instead of Castille, as mentioned above, and Persia instead of Achaemenids. Meanwhile Prussia and Normans are much more specific names.

I think you are correct, but that doesn't mean they can't reconsider already named civs to fleshed out their historical paths later.

Better fleshed out English, French, Middle eastern and Japanese paths I think are a given and probably already part of the coming collections, but I hope Firaxis can reconsider some of the choices and correct them as well later.

 

[King of Prussia]

I have doubts about a 4th age, but if Germany were to appear, then Bismark would be a great pick for a matching leader.

 

[Lord Lakely]

They have Spain instead of Castille, as mentioned above, and Persia instead of Achaemenids. Meanwhile Prussia and Normans are much more specific names.

The nomenclature is absolutely across the board. If anything, I'd expect that civs with less generalized names to reflect the eventual inclusion of predecessor or successor civs, while civs with more generalized names, like Spain or Persia, to remain single-Age entities.

Mods are going to be huge. I don't think we're getting the splits we want, but the mod community will probably carry this on their backs.

 

[Archanist]

Mods are going to be huge. I don't think we're getting the splits we want, but the mod community will probably carry this on their backs.

No kidding, I'm picking up Civ 7 modding just for this