[R&F] Rise and Fall General Discussion Thread

[SupremacyKing2]

So, that would mean, if I would play as, I dunno, Germany, and I tried to conquer the world, and I conquered someone's capital, would that trigger an emergency against me for all other Civs? If yes, that would be cool.

Yes, I think that is how the system will work. That's kinda the point of the new mechanic actually. It provides a system for other civs to work against the leader and maybe prevent them from running away with the lead. The whole premise of this expansion is to prevent runaway civs.

 

[nzcamel]

i've posted this elsewhere, and while you may be right, be VERY careful about presuming these civs will be in the expansion. Winged Hussars were in vanilla trailer but Poland was DLC.

Yeah, and you could well be right. But Mongolia is a far far bigger deal than Poland.

i have bad news for you about who actually built the pyramids....

 

[Ferocitus]

Indeed. Being the only Civ able to build on water made them automatically one of the best Civs in the game.

Seriously? It makes them easy to pillage and throw the civ into chaos and
rebellion IMO.

 

[Zaarin]

he biggest, over-arching goal: dynamic empires. Civilizations will rise and fall through the course of the game (as you probably figured out from the title). Borders will ebb and flow. Cities will change their loyalties.

This news is fantastic. When you study history, civilizations come and go--except China, but in many ways the different dynasties can be interpreted as different civilizations--while in Civ it's just a steady climb the entire game.

View attachment 481763
The trailer alludes to Korea. That scene with the girl wearing that crown looks like Seondeok of Shilla.

Glad I'm not the only one who caught the crown of Silla.

I really hope we will never see Inuit in the game. That would be just TOO ridiculous IMO. I also dont see big need to include Native Americans from North-America. I love the culture and know their history of Native Americans very well, but I dont see big need for them in THIS game. I understand the "what if" aspect of the game, but there are limits to that too. What we need to see from Americas is true great Civilizations like Maya and Inca. Also Mapuche might be nice addition. North-American Native tribes were much smaller and less advanced than Central- and South-American tribes.

The PNW was the most densely populated region in the Pre-Columbian world with an advanced culture and the most complicated weaving techniques in the world. The Mississippians practiced advanced agriculture and complex ceremonial culture. The Iroquois played three European powers off each other in order to carve out a state for themselves over the course of three centuries. North America wasn't just a bunch of backwards savages. I do agree about the Inuit, however: the Inuit, Aboriginal Australians, etc. simply never developed the kind of society that merits the term "civilization."

The Middle East is already far too crowded on TSL maps.

It's not possible to overcrowd the Near East.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

i have bad news for you about who actually built the pyramids....

‘Slaves didn’t build Egypt’s pyramids’

 

[SupremacyKing2]

The main thing I'm on the fence about is the Dark Ages. Especially how, in the video posted a few pages back, the guy says that there are people on Civ VI using Dark Ages as a strategy as you can bounce into a Heroic Age (if I understood that part correctly). Now, Civ is obviously a game but for me this sounds a bit weird, to use something as negative sounding as a "Dark Age" as a strategy. But eh, perhaps it will feel fine once in the game.

Well, if dark ages become an exploit, hopefully, it will be tweaked. But as I see it, using dark ages to trigger heroic ages, might be a viable strategy, but it is still a catch up strategy that might be difficult to pull off. So, it won't be the "best" strategy. IMO, the best strategy should still be to avoid dark ages in the first place and be the strongest civ.

 

[ferretbacon]

I'm disappointed that the 4 commonly accessible units don't include something between Musketmen and WWII-era Infantry. That gap bugs me.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

• NEW GLOBAL CONTENT: Eight new world wonders, seven natural wonders, four new units, two new tile improvements, two new districts, fourteen new buildings, and three new resources have been added.

from one of the articles.

Two new districts and fourteen new buildings ? That probably means we'll get more mutually exclusive district buildings. If there are three/four buildings for each of the new districts, we're left with eight/six new buildings for the nine old districts. If one of the new districts can't hold buildings like the Aqueduct then every old district could get a new building.

View attachment 481763
The trailer alludes to Korea. That scene with the girl wearing that crown looks like Seondeok of Shilla.

Nonsense ! The woman at 1.00 in the trailer is clearly Queen Tamar of Georgia !

 

[JacquesBquick]

That actually sounds great to me. I'm all up for paying a cost now to get a bigger boost later. That's what strategy is all about to me! The question, however, is if it can be balanced properly. Not sure I really trust the devs there...

As for historical immersion, it also kind of works for me. A dark age is a period of massive upheaval which, although painful for now, opens the door for great things later. Thing French Revolution followed by Napoleon's conquests. Or the successive crises of the Roman Empire in the 1st century BC followed by the gold age of the early Empire.

I'd be up for Golden ages to make future dark ages much more likely to trigger too, that's probably the most typical historical case. But I guess makes for less interesting gameplay (the game might be over, and the player too far ahead, for it to matter)

Agree, I'd even argue they HAVE to go that route. If dark age is just flat out bad with no potential ways to jump to huge benefits in the future, then it is a de facto game over at moderate to high difficulty levels. that is not fun. If you suffer a dark age in one era, there has to be ways to turn that into a golden age the next era more easily or something. The Renaissance growing out of the Dark/Medieval era says hello If they can build into the game the idea that you are just gonna suck for a while but there's still hope for you to win the game in the future if you use the avenues given to you appropriately, then THAT is fun and that would do a lot to shake up the age-old problem of exciting early game dull late game Civ has always had

 

[Kimiimaro]

So, after reading the whole post from Anton Strenger about Rise and Fall again, I've noticed something:

"This is just the start of what’s coming in Civilization VI: Rise and Fall. We have lots more to share before this expansion releases on February 8, 2018 that we can’t wait to tell you about – starting with all the new leaders and civilizations you’ll get to rule."

So, this implies that the first thing that will be released are the first looks. I'm so hyped!

 

[DJ_Tanner]

While it sounds great, I was still hoping for a economic victory and a little more polish on the commerce game, but doesn't sound like that is coming this time around.

 

[JacquesBquick]

‘Slaves didn’t build Egypt’s pyramids’

well! today i learned something new! thank you

 

[Kruos]

Expansion looks promising. We now just have to pray for a good AI. I am also secretly hoping for some form of stacking return, to ease the 1UPT logistic nightmare.

 

[DJ_Tanner]

Surprised no one has discussed some very interesting speculation:

"We are not afraid to go back to leaders we have already finalized and rework their bonus entirely"

 

[SammyKhalifa]

well! today i learned something new! thank you

to be fair I think there's still a little argument over it

 

[Ferocitus]

The PNW was the most densely populated region in the Pre-Columbian world with an advanced culture and the most complicated weaving techniques in the world. The Mississippians practiced advanced agriculture and complex ceremonial culture. The Iroquois played three European powers off each other in order to carve out a state for themselves over the course of three centuries. North America wasn't just a bunch of backwards savages. I do agree about the Inuit, however: the Inuit, Aboriginal Australians, etc. simply never developed the kind of society that merits the term "civilization."

I have to take the term "advanced" with a grain of salt. You can't weave a
musket, or an ocean-going ship, or a vaccine.

An advanced culture can be particularly adept in arts and crafts, languages and
communication, kinship structures, and many other pursuits, but it will fall to
an aggressive, scientific, militaristic one. Translating those early cultural
"advances" into useful ones for a new age is the key to survival, and the PNW
civs didn't do it very well. That doesn't mean there was something inherently
wrong with them, but they were no match for the hell that came to them from
Europe.

I do agree about the Inuit, however: the Inuit, Aboriginal Australians, etc. simply never developed the kind of society that merits the term "civilization."

Yes, many Australian Aboriginal societies had very advanced languages
and trading networks spanning almost the entire continent, but they were
no match for what was unleashed on them.

 

[bite]

Moderator Action: This is not the time to rehash the who is and who is not a 'Civilization' debate

 

[Ferocitus]

It's not possible to overcrowd the Near East.

It is on Civ TSL maps.

Sumeria, Persia, Egypt, Arabia are enough.

I'd love to see Assyria, Babylonia, Hittites, and many others from
that region, but I'd also prefer to leave them to modders and not
official releases from Firaxis. Just my personal biases, of course.

 

[Cerilis]

I'm disappointed that the 4 commonly accessible units don't include something between Musketmen and WWII-era Infantry. That gap bugs me.

Well, theoretically they could have the pike and shot take the place of the musketman (in the tech tree) with parts of his graphics and "upgrade" the musketmen to be somewhat later and more like line infantry.

 

[Guandao]

It is on Civ TSL maps.

Sumeria, Persia, Egypt, Arabia are enough.

I'd love to see Assyria, Babylonia, Hittites, and many others from
that region, but I'd also prefer to leave them to modders and not
official releases from Firaxis. Just my personal biases, of course.

Don't forget the Ottomans...
And Civ6's Sumeria is a poor representation of a ancient Mesopotamian Civ, just my humble opinion.