[R&F] Rise and Fall General Discussion Thread

[Josephias]

Corruption was in 1 and 2. In fact, it was a key reason to evolve governments. I looked for two screenshots below in which you can see the effect, making some of your trade yield unusable (black arrows). I recall seing also red shields for waste, but i couldn't find any in the screenshots (maybe this was only 3?)

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Yes that's right, I remember now! It affected gold income so if you had high corruption you had to raise taxes and reduce science.

 

[eso12por8]

My childhood revisited!!

 

[Disgustipated]

Yeah I often went to Democracy as soon as possible in Civ2 to get away form corruption. And once I finished the tech tree, I went to fundamentalism to get away from unhappiness too. Fundamentalism could be so strong in that game. Never played Civ1, but it certainly was in Civ2. But it seems more memorable in Civ3 because how strong it could get. They made it even worse to try to combat ICS problems Civ2 had.

I believe both games had inefficiency or I think it was called waste.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Yeah I often went to Democracy as soon as possible in Civ2 to get away form corruption. And once I finished the tech tree, I went to fundamentalism to get away from unhappiness too. Fundamentalism could be so strong in that game. Never played Civ1, but it certainly was in Civ2. But it seems more memorable in Civ3 because how strong it could get. They made it even worse to try to combat ICS problems Civ2 had.

I believe both games had inefficiency or I think it was called waste.

From what I read, they had planned to remove Corruption in Civ3 & replace it with a better mechanic-just like they had planned to implement the Social Policy System from Alpha Centauri. Sadly they ran out of time & so only about half of the improvements they'd planned actually made it in. Leaving Civ 4 to be the true "game-changer" in the series.

 

[mehmetakifsahin]

This might be better with adding the United Nations

 

[Morningcalm]

Civ 4 was indeed the game changer. The achievements-like system of Rise and Fall is based on how in the Civ 4 base game you got bonuses from being the first to circumnavigate the world, research Liberalism, etc.

Many newer systems they may add to Civ VI (like the UN/World Congress) will likely be pale shadows of their glory in Civ IV, which had an interesting diplomatic victory that required much AI interaction, bribery, etc.

 

[Leyrann]

By the way can anyone explain about the Netherlands flag

The French flag falling from the Statue of Liberty in the video was incorrectly identified as a Dutch flag by some, I assume because the French flag and the Dutch flag are both red-white-blue, but the Dutch flag has this from top to bottom while the French flag has it from right to left.

Also, corruption and waste are both most definitely in Civ 2. I've never played 1 and 3 and I clearly remember both mechanics.

 

[Karmah]

February 8th release date means I have to choose between treating myself by buying the expansion or treating my girlfriend for Valentine's Day 6 days later...

Or you are just like me and she 's a geek with thousands of hous on civ and the valentine's day includes mandatory civ expansion gaming

 

[Kimiimaro]

Very well, sixty-eight days now

Edit: Changed dates in all my counting posts by adding one day.

 

[PhilBowles]

India: Does anyone like how Civ treats India?
Persia: I'm not even sure what you mean by this. Civ's Persia has always been Achaemenid Persia, which was a unified and powerful empire. At no time has any later incarnation of Persia--Sassanid, Parthian, Islamic--been incorporated into the civ.

Are you really expecting to see Parthia or Iran in the game as separate civs? Sure, the portrayal of Persia has generally been consistent for the Achaemenid time period, but as you say in past Civ games England has been more-or-less true to England rather than Britain. It was still broadly understood that England included the British Empire (see the name for Civ V's leader UA and the naval movement bonus).

My point is that people would probably not be bothered if Shapur or Yazdegerd was chosen as the Persian leader in a future incarnation, if Islam was the default AI-favoured religion, or if Hecatompylos or Nishapur were part of the Persian city list, because in-game Persia can legitimately represent any part of Iranian history. It represents the Achaemenid more thanks to popular recognition of this part of Persian history than a conscious effort to be self-consistent, I suspect: leaders like Darius and Cyrus are well-known where Parthian and Sassanian leaders aren't, and the Immortal is the first military unit people would think of in association with Persia.

China: One can make a case for different dynasties representing different civs, but since this isn't how the Chinese view their own history I don't see the need to press the idea.

It's how they see it now in retrospect because it suits a 'One China' narrative. It doesn't have much actual historicity. But if that's your criterion, why would you oppose Britain vs. England? The English at least don't typically view the British Empire as a different civilisation from preceding periods of English history. As I noted earlier contemporary Imperial writers broadly treated 'British' and 'English' as near-synonyms and it was accepted that British-descended colonials from Rudyard Kipling to George Orwell were of English rather than British nationality. Mainland European writers of the time - despite coming from states with long exposure to, and often politically distinct relations with, Scotland and Ireland - also appear to have made little distinction between the two.

Ethiopia: Aside from the stele from Aksum, Civ5's Ethiopia was pretty Selassie-thematic. (Quite aside from the fact that I don't want Selassie back, I really hope Civ6's Ethiopia capitalizes on the fact that Ethiopia is an ancient nation and pays less attention to its modern history.)

Civ IV's Ethiopia, in contrast, had nothing to do with the modern period and was late medieval to early colonial. While the stele was indeed in Civ V - you can't really make a case for thematic coherence by throwing out one third of the civ's uniques.

Prior versions of England have been much more English; it's Civ6 that doubled down on Great Britain in all but name.

Agreed aside from Civ IV, I just don't see this as an issue and indeed welcome the fact that they're taking a different angle than the 'boats and longbows' of most past Civ games.

It's not as though Civ IV was innocent of using 'British' leaders like Churchill and indeed Victoria, and having the Redcoat as a unique unit is a very overt nod to the British Empire, while the Stock Exchange is associated with the British period. Take away Elizabeth and Civ IV's England is purely British.

 

[Leyrann]

Very well, sixty-seven days now

Pretty sure it's sixty-eight. Today it's December 2nd, so in 31 days it's January 2nd, in another 31 days it's February 2nd, in another 6 days it's February 8th.

31 + 31 + 6 = 68.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Pretty sure it's sixty-eight. Today it's December 2nd, so in 31 days it's January 2nd, in another 31 days it's February 2nd, in another 6 days it's February 8th.

31 + 31 + 6 = 68.

Depends on how you count it. I use this: https://days.to/8-february/2018

 

[Morningcalm]

It's certainly a shorter wait than expected, and I do agree with some sentiments expressed elsewhere online that the Valentine's Day release date is odd (why choose that date? Is the expansion meant to be a "love letter" to Civ fans?).

I will definitely not have to choose between a romantic Valentine's Day and Civ VI gaming. I have no girlfriend or boyfriend, and I don't plan to have one by that time either. Too much time spent on human interaction when I could be exploring history, weird bugs, and new gameplay features in Civ VI.

 

[PhilBowles]

Some things may stand out as more obviously anachronistic, that's still not a scale.

Barely any of the civilizations in the game existed in 4000BC. When London, Rome, Rio, Aachen, etc., are founded on turn 1, they are all anachronisms. Victoria is wearing a rather fancy frock for the period too.

Having recognisable historical figures included is fun but worrying too hard about the historical accuracy of their portrayal seems daft to me, given the above. It's a game that bears very little relation to real history.

All in my opinion of course, I just find it fascinating that anyone would care.

I can sympathise with wanting consistency to the portrayals, but what name you give the civ seems pretty trivial when Civ calls the Majapahit "Indonesia" or the Sukothai period of Thai history "Siam". Personally in both cases I'd have preferred more historically appropriate names but I'm not (very...) bothered by the direction they chose instead. "England" was more-or-less the British Empire with England-only city names in Civ IV so this isn't even new to the series (indeed it ought to make Zaarin happy that Civ VI is less anachronistic - no Elizabeth leading a British imperial civ).

I've had and still have numerous issues with Civ VI, but aside from a couple of stumbles (in particular, France in its entirety and a couple of the other female leader choices) I think it's generally got both the best civ selection in the series (for this point in its release cycle. If we haven't seen civs like the Ottomans, Maya, Inca, Mongols or Ethiopia by the end I'll be disappointed, but I really don't expect that) and the best portrayals of most of those civs.

 

[gfeier]

Depends on how you count it. I use this: https://days.to/8-february/2018

I don't think they are going to release it at midnight, so I agree with 68.

 

[Kimiimaro]

When have the other DLC's usually been released? At what time?

 

[mehmetakifsahin]

I hope this expansion will affect for catching Civ5's atmosphere

 

[Guandao]

When have the other DLC's usually been released? At what time?

Why did you asked that?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

When have the other DLC's usually been released? At what time?

Anywhere from morning to evening eastern US, although the last few were consistently around 1pm eastern US.