[R&F] Rise and Fall General Discussion Thread

[eso12por8]

I'm Canadian & while evidence seems to be suggesting Canada is in the race for a spot, I'm kind of uneasy with the racial diversity factor.

 

[Rosty K]

I've never heard of a capital flipping. I suppose if you try REALLY hard to historically maintain a perpetually anarchic state of discontent, someone may be able to culturally overcome your capital and flip it? More like a capture and subdue dissenters. Cultural flips don't happen very frequently. I'd love a better, more realistic, diplomatic option to purchase territory from failing civs. Kinda like how Napoleon sold Louisiana, or Russia Alaska.

The only thing which resembles the capital flipping, which I can think of, would be Alexander's 'conquest' of Egypt.

 

[Vahnstad]

The fact that we're missing such important civs (so many!) and that we only get 8 new civilizations (what was admittely a bit disappointing) also would make it more unacceptable if Canada is indeed in the game (what I suspect). It would be much more acceptable if it was in a DLC or if there were more civs. I also don't understand why people think that if they release Canada in a DLC that that would be a good idea, since a lot of Canadians would buy it indeed, but would Europeans buy it for example. I think they're much less likely to buy a Canada DLC, and that's why I think including Canada in an expansion would be a much more smarter choice, since then, we would have no choice to buy it.

It's ridicilous that in this stage of the game, we are being threatened of having a game, with no Inca's, Maya's, no Ottomans (or Portugal -> it will be one of those two) but already Canada and Australia. I think that's really disturbing. If that's the way Firaxis is going, then maybe I should stop gaming tbh. (since Paradox also has overpriced DLC with little to no content, and EA -> mob company)

 

[eso12por8]

If I understand the Civilization Way after all my years playing it, there's always one lackluster civ in an expansion. It's the "I mean, I like it, but..." civ.

 

[Vahnstad]

If I understand the Civilization Way after all my years playing it, there's always one lackluster civ in an expansion. It's the "I mean, I like it, but..." civ.

Indeed, though, it's sometimes also the "leader choice" that disturbs. Like I like that they try to represent more women in the game, but I honestly feel like it went a bit too far, like CdM (who was only included, because she was a woman) and Cleopatra (even if they had a good "female option" like Hatshepsut). On the bright side, CdM was an even worse choice than Canada would be. I never have the feeling that i'm playing against the French, when they're in my game (and they're usually very weak). The French civilization almost always break immersion (but that could also be the case because they're too weak). I'm usually more annoyed by the presence of CdM than Australia tbh. That's why i'm hoping for a French alternative leader (since Egypt and India won't happen (they just focused on Nubia (and that area)). A soviet Russian leader is not going to happen too (and actually shouldn't be priority if they only include 1 alternate leader), so if it's not going to be Isabella, i hope it's going to be Louis XIV.

 

[Guatenadian]

Also, don't tell me that i bash on Canada. When people debate about the inclusion of my civilization, i always have to read discussions that immediately change into a discussion about whether someone should be included in the game because of a genocide or not. I'm even surprised that Leopold II is so well known in other parts of the worlds. Canada doesn't fit civilization, and that's my opinion, and I agree that Belgium also shouldn't been added in Civilization. There is even some likelihood that i won't buy the expansion at all, if they decide to include Canada.

I dont see you as bashing Canada, and I do agree with a few of your points. Canada unfortunately doesn't have the rich history of Europe. My main point is that if the player does get to learn more about the past and history in general then that is an overall good. You said it yourself, more people are aware of present happenings in the world and learning about the history and the mere existence of past civilisations is why I love the Civilisation series. I also agree that I don't want every other civ to be a modern one, at most I'd want Canada and maybe Argentina to help fill in some gaps in South America. The gaming industry, like any other industry is based on profit and Canada is a market that hasn't really been tapped into yet.

I do have one question to ask though, if Canada or another colonial or modern nation is added and it ends up being popular and fun to play, would you at least consider playing it?

At the end of the day the most important thing, to me at least, is that the Civ is fun to play and you end up learning more about in the process

 

[Vahnstad]

I dont see you as bashing Canada, and I do agree with a few of your points. Canada unfortunately doesn't have the rich history of Europe. My main point is that if the player does get to learn more about the past and history in general then that is an overall good. You said it yourself, more people are aware of present happenings in the world and learning about the history and the mere existence of past civilisations is why I love the Civilisation series. I also agree that I don't want every other civ to be a modern one, at most I'd want Canada and maybe Argentina to help fill in some gaps in South America. The gaming industry, like any other industry is based on profit and Canada is a market that hasn't really been tapped into yet.

I do have one question to ask though, if Canada or another colonial or modern nation is added and it ends up being popular and fun to play, would you at least consider playing it?

At the end of the day the most important thing, to me at least, is that the Civ is fun to play and you end up learning more about in the process

I guess I have no other choice. We will see. I don't think I will play with all the civs since I honestly don't have the time for it, and usually get too bored quickly of my games. I still have to play a lot of vanilla civs (but it's also about immersion, and if the strongest AI opponent in your game is Canada, than it would break immersion probably a bit...), but I've started to accept Australia a bit more too.

My first game with a civ from the exp pack, will probably be the Netherlands. Inca, Maya, Otto and Isabella are good possibilities to, if included, and i don't rule out playing with one of the weaker vanilla civs (or an assumed weaker civ from the exp pack), since i want to keep the powerhouses for a Deity run, and my first game with new mechanics is probably going to be on a lower difficulty.

EDIT: One of my favourite civs is actually France (since i live at the French-Belgian border, my mother speaks French as native language and I identify more with the French culturally), and i still haven't play it, since both the mechanics of the civ as the leader seems plain boring. I just hate that civ so much right now. They completely messed it up.

 

[Guandao]

I guess I have no other choice. We will see. I don't think I will play with all the civs since I honestly don't have the time for it, and usually get too bored quickly of my games. I still have to play a lot of vanilla civs (but it's also about immersion, and if the strongest AI opponent in your game is Canada, than it would break immersion probably a bit...), but I've started to accept Australia a bit more too.

My first game with a civ from the exp pack, will probably be the Netherlands. Inca, Maya, Otto and Isabella are good possibilities to, if included, and i don't rule out playing with one of the weaker vanilla civs (or an assumed weaker civ from the exp pack), since i want to keep the powerhouses for a Deity run, and my first game with new mechanics is probably going to be on a lower difficulty.

EDIT: One of my favourite civs is actually France (since i live at the French-Belgian border, my mother speaks French as native language and I identify more with the French culturally), and i still haven't play it, since both the mechanics of the civ as the leader seems plain boring. I just hate that civ so much right now. They completely messed it up.

What don't you like about Civ6's France? The leader ability? Or the Civ Ability?

 

[Vahnstad]

What don't you like about Civ6's France? The leader ability? Or the Civ Ability?

Generally too weak (weak ui, relatively weak uu and weak civ ability on deity)
Leader ability and focus on espionage

 

[ferretbacon]

Generally too weak (weak ui, relatively weak uu and weak civ ability on deity)
Leader ability and focus on espionage

France needs some love from Firaxis, no doubt.

I think it would help, for starters, to increase the production bonus on Medieval, Renaissance, and Industrial wonders from 20% to 25% or 33%. Considering the relatively limited window (3 eras) and that they can't actively boost like China can, it seems the production bonus ought to be a bit higher.

The Chateau improvement is extremely limited on its placement. I'd keep it as is but also grant it the ability to confer a full adjacency bonus to Theater Squares and Commercial Hubs (to further play up the culture and gold they generate). Imagine making culture triangles with a Theater Square, Chateau, and Wonder.

On the other hand, I was pleasantly surprised by Catherine's Flying Squadrons when I finally tried France out. The extra spy and the automatic promotion makes France's espionage game very strong. I was able to wreak all sorts of havoc on rival civs without ever declaring war.

 

[clapyourhands]

France needs some love from Firaxis, no doubt.

I think it would help, for starters, to increase the production bonus on Medieval, Renaissance, and Industrial wonders from 20% to 25% or 33%. Considering the relatively limited window (3 eras) and that they can't actively boost like China can, it seems the production bonus ought to be a bit higher.

The Chateau improvement is extremely limited on its placement. I'd keep it as is but also grant it the ability to confer a full adjacency bonus to Theater Squares and Commercial Hubs (to further play up the culture and gold they generate).

On the other hand, I was pleasantly surprised by Catherine's Flying Squadrons when I finally tried France out. The extra spy and the automatic promotion makes France's espionage game very strong. I was able to wreak all sorts of havoc on rival civs without ever declaring war.

IMO Catherine has a very unique and flavorful leader ability for France, but it's not the archetypical or usual one you'd associate with the civilization of France. The same goes for Teddy, in that their leader skills are very good fits for the leaders but not representative of the civs themselves. Obviously that's the point of leader skills, but it'd be nice to have more characteristic abilities as well (super-cultural for France, or culture with a military leaning, and exploration/expansion into late game powerhouse for America).

 

[DJ_Tanner]

The only thing they care about is the money, and the current audience living in those nations.

So by only caring about money I take it you believe that releasing Canada would only be done because it would sell more than some other civ. But isn't that the whole point anyways? I mean beyond the fact that as a company Firaxis would like to make money, if releasing a Canadian civ would spur more people to BUY it that means more people WANT it. Which is the whole point of making a game, I mean its entertainment so if it happens to be a civ that is going to make the most money its probably the best civ to add as that is what the community most desires.

 

[Leyrann]

We've run out of new information to discuss and are now bantering about my mom's taste in music.
Time to get back on topic.

This is why I was hoping for a first look yesterday.

 

[Vahnstad]

So by only caring about money I take it you believe that releasing Canada would only be done because it would sell more than some other civ. But isn't that the whole point anyways? I mean beyond the fact that as a company Firaxis would like to make money, if releasing a Canadian civ would spur more people to BUY it that means more people WANT it. Which is the whole point of making a game, I mean its entertainment so if it happens to be a civ that is going to make the most money its probably the best civ to add as that is what the community most desires.

They sometimes choose leaders that wouldn't generate the most money.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I had no idea the choice of Civs/leaders meant so much to people.

History is littered with influential, powerful, but ultimately fleeting civilizations. You can't include them all and with the exception of a select few (e.g. Roman), it's impossible to say which have been the most influential. In fact, I would say it is a fool's pursuit!

As far as I'm concerned, as long as the civ is interesting to play, I'm happy for them to be included.

 

[Siptah]

That and the fact that Gilgamesh showed up in my game today reminds me: as long as the developers decided to make Gilgamesh look like a Greek demigod, they seriously missed an opportunity to depict him cuddling a lion.

You prefer him to be Assyrian? Btw there never has been any proof that this statue is depicting Gilgamesh or even is Gilgamesh.

 

[Siptah]

Generally too weak (weak ui, relatively weak uu and weak civ ability on deity)
Leader ability and focus on espionage

While not strong, I think they are among the most fun to play. The early spy is indeed very powerful by the way. Give it a try.

 

[salty mud]

That's ridicilous and you know it. The average person on the street probably know more about Donald J. Trump than George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. The average person on the street probably know more about Canada too than the Incans... , but the Incans at least have considerably more history than Canada. It's just not so well known, and it's because we live in this time. This game isn't called Modern Civilizations.

The Hittites were one of the three / four greatest powers for several centuries back then along with Akkad / Sumeria, Egypt and the Indus Valley civilization, and even threatened at some point Egypt's hegemony.



They weren't even entirely independent. They were a dominion, and so did all nations of the Commonwealth. So did almost half the world.

I'm Belgian. I'm not asking for a Belgian civilization either, but Belgium, at least has a much richer history than Canada. I can tell you that. My civilization doesn't need to be included, but there are at least 50 better choices than Canada right now. The only thing they care about is the money, and the current audience living in those nations.

Also, don't tell me that i bash on Canada. When people debate about the inclusion of my civilization, i always have to read discussions that immediately change into a discussion about whether someone should be included in the game because of a genocide or not. I'm even surprised that Leopold II is so well known in other parts of the worlds. Canada doesn't fit civilization, and that's my opinion, and I agree that Belgium also shouldn't been added in Civilization. There is even some likelihood that i won't buy the expansion at all, if they decide to include Canada.

If they can include Australia in the game, I'm sure even pretty much a non-country like Belgium stands a chance.

 

[Siptah]

If they can include Australia in the game, I'm sure even pretty much a non-country like Belgium stands a chance.

Belgium is a non-country? Just because it isn‘t a nation state?

 

[RohirrimElf]

Belgium is a non-country? Just because it isn‘t a nation state?

Belgium or at least one of their cities (Antwerpen?) was richer once as the Netherlands at some point in their history. But it got sacked by invaders and a lot of influential citizens left. (Also Belgium was hit hard in ww1 while the Netherlands was succesfull to stay out of the war).
Most of its history it looks much like a failed state in Europe. Very divided and not really going anywhere. Antwerpen and Brussels as a city state for Belgium should be the highest status it gets in a civ game. With 50-60 leaders in total that is.