I still see the Hammam replacing an entertainment or culture district building (or even as an unique 3rd tier holy site building) more likely than an unique CH.
This is the first game where we've had Districts, so that was never an option before...
There's waaaay more to the Turks than baths, especially seeing as the Romans already have one. I think the Grand Bazaar is as good a fit for a unique CH as any (admittedly it would also work as a building). It being an improvement would be weird.
I still see the Hammam replacing an entertainment or culture district building (or even as an unique 3rd tier holy site building) more likely than an unique CH.
I'm rooting for either Ethiopia or Mali in Rise & Fall, and I just thought if EP's logic held, the churches (or Axumite stelae, although those are getting stale, since they were Ethiopia's UB in both previous instalments) make more sense as Improvements than Malian mud brick mosques do.
Is Quebec like Louisiana where Continental law holds? Under Common law they won't have a leg to stand on. Continental...I guess it'll depend on local statute law.
If Common law is the only jurisdiction they can file in, any lawyer worth his salt will tell them not to bother.
Not only will I enjoy playing the Cree, because they look to be an awesome civ, now I'm going to feel like a badboy rebel as I play them. Bonus! There is a niche for every type of civ player I guess.
Now that we know based on the Xpac features that UU's and UB's are out for the remaining 3 civs, are there any potential civs that we could reasonably rule out just on the basis of them not having a suitable UI/UD candidate?
If the Zulu are indeed in R&F it would be unsurprising for them to have an Ikhanda district replacing the Encampment, but I could also see Firaxis giving them a Kraal UI. Someone who knows more about Zulu culture than I do can probably think of more options as well.
If the Zulu are indeed in R&F it would be unsurprising for them to have an Ikhanda district replacing the Encampment, but I could also see Firaxis giving them a Kraal UI. Someone who knows more about Zulu culture than I do can probably think of more options as well.
I think an ikhanda is an obvious choice - as an enclosed pasture/settlement it is in fact a type of kraal. It could have some sort of adjacency bonus (+housing/food) for cattle/livestock/bonus resources.
You know, the more I think about it, the more I suspect Byz/Ottomans might be a separate DLC or held to the next xpac. After all, the part of the video where forces were attacking Georgia was meant to highly Georgia.
I'll still with my bet, but Ottomans I might hedge with Zulu.
I mean they apparently weren't in 1 or 2; 3 and 4 only added in expansions. 5 was the only one where they were in Vanilla (and they were the least played Civ in vanilla per achievements - which is not surprising since they weren't great outside of the Janissary). So they don't appear overly high on Firaxis's priority list.I was assuming the existence of the Janissary from the Poland scenario made them more likely (they already have unit model), but I maybe that was originally intended as their only appearance!?
I mean they apparently weren't in 1 or 2; 3 and 4 only added in expansions. 5 was the only one where they were in Vanilla (and they were the least played Civ in vanilla per achievements - which is not surprising since they weren't great outside of the Janissary). So they don't appear overly high on Firaxis's priority list.I was assuming the existence of the Janissary from the Poland scenario made them more likely (they already have unit model), but I maybe that was originally intended as their only appearance!?
1) The thursday livestream is kind of proof there was supposed to be a Cree livestream last week that the controversy set fire to.
2) We really, really, really need Firaxis to say something about Post-RF DLC. Could someone who watches the Livestream try to fire off a question and get them to mumble something about it?
If there are post-RF DLC, it really changes the dynamic of what civs we can expect and how excited or disappointed we should be.
Example: Assuming RF is the only xpac and no further DLC, we'd have every right to be annoyed at no Byzantines, Ottomans, Zulu, etc.
Assuming 1 more xpac and no dlc, once the last 3 civs are announced for this one, we can basically carve in stone who will be in the xpac. (Ethiopia, Zulu, Ottomans, Byzantines, Carthage, Babylon, Portugal, 1 slot open to discuss).
Assuming 1 more xpac AND dlc, we get fun discussions
Assuming 1 OR MORE xpacs...
Really the only way they could continue to release DLC would be to design those Civs around the features from the base game right? Civ V didn't get any DLC after its first expansion probably because needing an expansion (essentially DLC in this day and age) to play other DLC could be problematic
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
![[pissed]](/images/smilies/pissed.gif "Pissed [pissed]")
