Ancient Greek and Roman architecture are indeed quite similar, as Roman architecture was heavily influenced by Greek designs. The Romans adopted and adapted many elements from Greek architecture, such as columns and decorative styles, while adding their own innovations like arches and domes. So, if the game shows similarities between Greek and Roman buildings, it is completely normal.
So much about the later Ages is Speculation at this point that I agree there is nothing Definite.
Yes of course Greek and Roman architecture are very similar.
Nobody has Infinite Art Assets. To use what you have to distinguish between Corinthian and Doric column decorations at the scale of Civ's buildings would be hard to justify given all the other animated and static graphic elements in the game that require distinguishing graphical elements for game-play, like Civ-specific details on Units, Unique Buildings, etc.
If you look closely, they do have different looking palaces.
My anti-Roman bias has to point out that Romans did not develop arches and domes; they got them from the Etruscans and West Asia.
Typically, while the Romans did not develop arches/domes, they did develop the engineering techniques to use stacked arches to build structures like the Pont du Gard in (modern) France and the exceptional concrete dome of the Pantheon, which is still the world's largest unreinforced concrete dome at 43 meters diameter and height.My anti-Roman bias has to point out that Romans did not develop arches and domes; they got them from the Etruscans and West Asia.
Just before, in the same city, there are also Dyes that I don't think were there before the age transition.
Shh, I'm just trying to accuse the Romans of being creatively sterile technology plunderers who conquer all the interesting civs and rob them of their innovations.
(Unfortunately, even I have to acknowledge that the Pantheon is a work of art.)
My point is that the Romans may not have been particularly original, but they were very good at Application of other peoples' discoveries - going all the way back to their copying the Carthaginians' Quinquereme designs to build their navy.Shh, I'm just trying to accuse the Romans of being creatively sterile technology plunderers who conquer all the interesting civs and rob them of their innovations.
In fairness don't most civilizations get their technology/techniques from other civilizations?My anti-Roman bias has to point out that Romans did not develop arches and domes; they got them from the Etruscans and West Asia.
Most civilizations interact with the civilizations around them so that technologies and techniques spread, yes--even when they actively try to prevent the spread, as with Phoenician glassblowing, for instance. The Romans really are exceptional for the lengths they went to acquire other civilizations' techniques--generally by acquiring the civilization itself.
As I said, the Borg of the ancient world. 
But again, I'm biased. I find the Romans unimaginative and uncultured--I really think we should use their name in place of the insult "philistine," given the Philistines are known for their distinctive style of art. 
The Romans also have a distinctive style of art.Most civilizations interact with the civilizations around them so that technologies and techniques spread, yes--even when they actively try to prevent the spread, as with Phoenician glassblowing, for instance. The Romans really are exceptional for the lengths they went to acquire other civilizations' techniques--generally by acquiring the civilization itself.
They said that part of the reason they didn't change it was because of limitations deep in the code, and that this same code is in Civ7, so I'm guessing the answer to that is no.
and Nirvana wasn't the first grunge band, but it's hard to argue with NevermindMy anti-Roman bias has to point out that Romans did not develop arches and domes; they got them from the Etruscans and West Asia.
It's also hard to argue with we might well be speaking Punic if it weren't for the bloody Romans.
It's rather easy to argue... I'm not currently speaking Latin. (And before you say it, the language I'm speaking is far more German than Latin.)It's also hard to argue with we might well be speaking Punic if it weren't for the bloody Romans.
And if the earliest migrants to America from Siberia had brought along cattle and/or goats/sheep, my ancestors would probably still be in Germany and the population of this part of America would be speaking Salish . . .It's rather easy to argue... I'm not currently speaking Latin. (And before you say it, the language I'm speaking is far more German than Latin.)
