[R&F] Rise and Fall Live Stream General Thread

[FractalAdvocate]

I think that what you're suggesting would be ahistorical. While there are leaders on this list that had same-sex relationships, these were mostly not considered socially acceptable at the time and were almost always kept well behind closed doors, and they usually also had conventional heterosexual marriages (even if only for public cover). The notion that an ancient leader would make a homosexual advance towards another leader of the same sex in the course of diplomatic contact seems absurd.

For early medieval through modern western cultures, that seems accurate for more sexual-tinged flirting? Writing letters of praise and admiration to fellow same-sex rulers: certainly a thing, throughout history. From what I know of them, I doubt Gilgamesh or Alexander the Great would care about throwing around some sexual-tinged same-sex flirting, though. I admittedly have less of a concrete idea about what was considered appropriate in the less western-influenced cultures.

Cleopatra's famous flirtations were because diplomatic marriage-type frameworks were a thing through which she could achieve power and autonomy, which isn't really in Civ VI, but if it's a trait for her and her alone, it doesn't really bother me because it's the best way Civ VI has to approximate that. If it's a potential trait for a lotta people, that's a little weird to me, if it's for literally everyone, that's very weird to me.

Please leave your political agendas and modern revisionism out of my historical games.

Like all commercial art, Civ VI is a mixture of what the various creators want in their heart of hearts to portray, what they can sell, and what won't get them in too much trouble. Like all art, it is inherently political.

Choosing not to include slavery: political. Choosing not to include still-living leaders: political. Choosing not to include leaders who committed genocide in the past century: political. Choosing to include barbarians as utterly separate from civilization, who can only be turned from their current path by religion: political. Minor villages just being there to passively give up an independent study to whichever empire finds them first: political. Some 'civilizations' being ciity states that can never grow beyond a certain prominence or make complex diplomacy: political. Choosing to include Great People, and exactly who counts, and what impact they have, and why they rise up: political. Choosing which civilizations and leaders to include: political. Heck, choosing to make the game as a single player eternal god-emperor no matter which government they're under at the moment has some political implications, although it's also very gameplay-conceit, even more than the others.

Civ VI couldn't be removed from modern perspectives on historical politics if it tried -- but it doesn't try particularly hard, and is more focused on gameplay than history when push comes to shove.

 

[leandrombraz]

They obviously weren't very good at keeping these things "behind closed doors", considering we know today that they had these kind of relationships. Also, I thought it was pretty common in ancient rome and greece, particularly for men, to have sexual relationships with other men and boys. Some would say it was even encouraged.

We know but we have access to more things than the general public would have then, like personal letters. Based on my limited historical knowledge, it wasn't uncommon por people to know but not acknowledge, so even when people was aware it would still be hidden, even if poorly. It wouldn't be demonstrated publicly. IIRC Hadrian lived with his lover, everyone technically knew what was going on but for all effects and purposes nothing was happening. He even got his lover to be declared god after his death or something like that, with people worshiping him to get favors with the Emperor.


I think it's pointless to discuss this. The fact is that it's a bad agenda, regardless of heteronormativity. It's the only agenda you have no way to affect with gameplay, it's set once the game start who will get a penalty and who will get a bonus. I can't imagine a single person liking this agenda and I already can see all the threads complaining about it. Depending on how much someone hate it, they might just set male only games to guarantee it will be a bonus (you know it will be male). A mod that exclude the agenda will surely exist and be used extensively. Even though I'm not a fan of changing the game, I might consider using it. I don't like agendas that feel impossible to fulfill, one that is definitely impossible to fulfill once it's negative is the worse type of agenda that they could come up with. If Firaxis still have time to remove it they should, if they didn't do it already.

 

[clapyourhands]

Wasn’t Flirtatious initially thought to be the agenda that likes people that interact with him/her often, the opposite of Curmudgeon, the one that likes to not be bothered?

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: We are, once again, way off topic. Please come back to topic.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[CivLuvah]

Wasn’t Flirtatious initially thought to be the agenda that likes people that interact with him/her often, the opposite of Curmudgeon, the one that likes to not be bothered?

Have we seen this agenda before? If it's going to be in the new expansion, then it's a pointless agenda indeed.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

You are aware that per his own words, he was having so much 'fun' with his wife that he didn't have time to teach her how to read

That's why I said supposedly.

Have we seen this agenda before? If it's going to be in the new expansion, then it's a pointless agenda indeed.

No it's new. I think it will be interesting. Honestly I think this secondary agenda was made mostly for Cleopatra anyway as her default hidden agenda most of the time, so it doesn't bother me much at all.

 

[sonicmyst]

I suppose we can ask @FXS_Sarah about these new agendas on their next livestream. It would be hard to please the AI civs if I am of the same sex.

 

[CivLuvah]

I suppose we can ask @FXS_Sarah about these new agebdas on their next livestream. It would be hard to please the AI civs if I am of the same sex.

It's very and oddly specific for a diplomatic agenda.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

It's very and oddly specific for a diplomatic agenda.

People keep mentioning it as an obligate hidden agenda for Cleopatra. Is that the context in which it was observed? If so, that would explain why it is so specific and rather out of line compared to the others.

 

[DeepKing]

It's odd and unnecessary. It'll only be fine if the end product has so many agendas that they're almost purely color.

This isn't Sims.

 

[Giskler]

People keep mentioning it as an obligate hidden agenda for Cleopatra. Is that the context in which it was observed? If so, that would explain why it is so specific and rather out of line compared to the others.

We've seen Cleopatra and Poundmaker with this hidden agenda in the preview build. I'm not sure why people think it's limited to Cleopatra only.

 

[stealth_nsk]

It's odd and unnecessary. It'll only be fine if the end product has so many agendas that they're almost purely color.

This isn't Sims.

After thinking a lot, I believe I'm ok with such agenda.
The role of agendas is to spice up diplomatic relations and allow players to maneuver through them. Hidden agendas bring a bit of randomness here.
So, what will "Flirtatious" agenda do? It will make the leader like or dislike you and other leaders statically, from the beginning of the game, regardless of their actions. It doesn't allow to change the relations with such civ, but allows to build diplomacy around it. Say, you're playing as a male leader and have Flirtatious Cleo in the game. This means, if you have strong military (to fulfill Cleo's first agenda), you'll have a very positive relations with Cleo and high chances to ally against female leaders. This surely a refreshing part of diplomacy.

 

[Meluhhan]

After thinking a lot, I believe I'm ok with such agenda.
The role of agendas is to spice up diplomatic relations and allow players to maneuver through them. Hidden agendas bring a bit of randomness here.
So, what will "Flirtatious" agenda do? It will make the leader like or dislike you and other leaders statically, from the beginning of the game, regardless of their actions. It doesn't allow to change the relations with such civ, but allows to build diplomacy around it. Say, you're playing as a male leader and have Flirtatious Cleo in the game. This means, if you have strong military (to fulfill Cleo's first agenda), you'll have a very positive relations with Cleo and high chances to ally against female leaders. This surely a refreshing part of diplomacy.

I believe this agenda will also sometimes help balance some irritating primary agendas like those of Pedro or potentially Chandragupta.

 

[Siptah]

Wasn’t Flirtatious initially thought to be the agenda that likes people that interact with him/her often, the opposite of Curmudgeon, the one that likes to not be bothered?

That was a misunderstanding by me. I saw an agenda in action that liked interaction. I didn‘t see the name in the game. Then I saw the Flirtatious agenda here on the forum and jumped to the wrong conclusion.

 

[KyivanRusCivPlease]

So after receiving no answer from Sarah regarding the age brightness effects, I have discovered in one of the let's play streams that the golden age saturation and dark age darkening effect are applied also when the animated day/night cycle is turned on.

 

[Giskler]

That was a misunderstanding by me. I saw an agenda in action that liked interaction. I didn‘t see the name in the game. Then I saw the Flirtatious agenda here on the forum and jumped to the wrong conclusion.

I think the one you saw was Sycophant and its counterpart is Curmudgeon (dislikes frequent interactions). There should also be a Golden Age lover agenda, but I haven't seen this one... though it could be Sycophant I guess.

 

[Uberfrog]

I think the one you saw was Sycophant and its counterpart is Curmudgeon (dislikes frequent interactions). There should also be a Golden Age lover agenda, but I haven't seen this one... though it could be Sycophant I guess.

A sycophant should suck up to a successful civ, rather than being friendly to everyone, so it might be the Golden Age lover.

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

Leaving aside the political discussion and thinking about Flirtatious from a gameplay perspective, I'm OK with agendas that the player cannot control, given that IRL diplomacy is often dictated by ingrained prejudices, but only as long as it's possible to overcome the negative modifier with careful actions and choices. If it is balanced correctly then this sort of agenda could add some interesting flavour to the game!

 

[Cerilis]

Maybe liking someone of a different sex doesnt mean disliking someone of the same? ^^"

 

[God of Kings]

A flirtatious Cleopatra would be more interested in the likes of Trajan, Gandhi, Mvemba, or Jayavarman VII than the likes of Victoria, Jadwiga, Gitarja, or Tamar.

A flirtatious Poundmaker would be more interested in the likes of Amanitore or Wilhelmina than the likes of Gilgabro, Chandragupta, or Cyrus.