Small Observations General Thread (things not worth separate threads)

[sTAPler27]

I wasn't thinking of global warming in particular. I don't think global warming was implemented well in Civ6. The downsides to polluting could be mitigated very easily...

The game doesn't last far enough into the future to make things get really ugly. Ultimately it only hurts civs that are far behind tech/economy wise or in bad geographic positions, which is pretty true to real life.

 

[Krikkit1]

Antiquity Stream, 1h02'40 and at the end of the explanation "yeah they boost your adjacencies"

Thanks... there just hasn't been anything on any of the buildings seen so far.
But hopefully that will get clarified... or maybe it is only building adjacencies in post antiquity era

In any case, that means the effective output of a specialist depends on where you put them (whether it is the specialist or adjacent buildings that get boosted)

 

[moysturfurmer]

As of today, we are past the halfway point between the June 07 teaser trailer and the Early Access release of Civ VII. Congratulations all.

(And for those keeping score at home, on November 15, we will be at the halfway point between the gameplay reveal and full release)

 

[AriochIV]

Firaxis first announced that they were working on Civ7 in February of 2023... if that means anything.

 

[Elhoim]

They should add a range overlay when placing cities, both here and with settlers. After so much time and mods that add it, why should I STILL be counting tiles to see the area the city will be able to work?

 

[AriochIV]

This was a bit confusing, as this was presented as a lineup of "Phalanx" variants. But they aren't armed with spears, and the left two units are the Legion and Roman Warrior, and the Egyptian unit is the Medjay. So I guess they were speaking not in precise game terms.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

This was a bit confusing, as this was presented as a lineup of "Phalanx" variants. But they aren't armed with spears, and the left two units are the Legion and Roman Warrior, and the Egyptian unit is the Medjay. So I guess they were speaking not in precise game terms.

View attachment 705903

The African and North American soldiers could afford to equip themselves with armour from head to ankle, with solid weapons and large shields ... and chose not to acquire anything to wear on their feet? I have a hard time picturing that life choice. Is there any historical rationale for this?

 

[Zaarin]

The African and North American soldiers could afford to equip themselves with armour from head to ankle, with solid weapons and large shields ... and chose not to acquire anything to wear on their feet? I have a hard time picturing that life choice. Is there any historical rationale for this?

I'm less knowledgeable about Africa. In the Southeast, going barefoot was fairly normal (as it was in the Northwest). In the Southwest, Plains, or Northeast, they'd be wearing moccasins.

 

[notNamed]

The African and North American soldiers could afford to equip themselves with armour from head to ankle, with solid weapons and large shields ... and chose not to acquire anything to wear on their feet? I have a hard time picturing that life choice. Is there any historical rationale for this?

For one, going to war barefoot was not at all something unheard of. Within the area of modern Southern China/Nothern Vietnam, the soldiers always went barefoot. Take the "Asian" guy and remove the boots.
That's a reasonably accurate depiction of a soldier there. Same thing also happened in Europe. Irish always fought barefoot. Even in armor.

Specifically these warriors are not particularly accurate. They play up stereotypes as needed. Like how the Egyptian soldier carries a khopesh not because research supports it as a weapon used in mass warfare, but because it screams "Egyptian". The African armor also looks like a hodgepodge of various styles and artifacts from across all of history, rather than an attempt to reconstruct an Aksumite soldier of the period, whom were in active contact with the rest of the Mesopotamian (Western) civilisation and most likely used very similar gear to everyone else like the Yemeni soldier here.
But that's not "African" enough so you instead pick out a weird sword, add random golden bracelets, fantasify the armor a bit. To make him stand out as "The African" of the bunch. Readability over history.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

This was a bit confusing, as this was presented as a lineup of "Phalanx" variants. But they aren't armed with spears, and the left two units are the Legion and Roman Warrior, and the Egyptian unit is the Medjay. So I guess they were speaking not in precise game terms.

View attachment 705903

Here I suspect they are using 'Phalanx' in its original Greek meaning: the main body of the army, regardless of weapons carried.

Which means these represent the 'standard warrior' of their respective regions in Antiquity. Which means they are somewhat stylized: note that only the Roman on the end is identified to a specific Civ, while the rest only to 'regions' or continents.

Going barefoot sometimes had a symbolic meaning. Among some of the Native American plains tribes, a warrior who jumped off his horse, kicked off his moccasins and stood there barefoot signaled that he was not going anywhere, but had decided to die where he stood, "rooted to the earth". This also signaled that he planned to take as many enemies with him as he could, so it was very dangerous to approach him. In one incident in the early 1850s a single barefoot warrior wounded 7 US soldiers before they managed to kill him, and they had pistols while he had just a spear and bow.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

For one, going to war barefoot was not at all something unheard of. Within the area of modern Southern China/Nothern Vietnam, the soldiers always went barefoot. Take the "Asian" guy and remove the boots.
That's a reasonably accurate depiction of a soldier there. Same thing also happened in Europe. Irish always fought barefoot. Even in armor.

Specifically these warriors are not particularly accurate. They play up stereotypes as needed. Like how the Egyptian soldier carries a khopesh not because research supports it as a weapon used in mass warfare, but because it screams "Egyptian". The African armor also looks like a hodgepodge of various styles and artifacts from across all of history, rather than an attempt to reconstruct an Aksumite soldier of the period, whom were in active contact with the rest of the Mesopotamian (Western) civilisation and most likely used very similar gear to everyone else like the Yemeni soldier here.
But that's not "African" enough so you instead pick out a weird sword, add random golden bracelets, fantasify the armor a bit. To make him stand out as "The African" of the bunch. Readability over history.

Yemeni using Roman shield? the same Yemeni footsloggers who would meet Muhammad's Army shortly later in 6th Century?

 

[Zaarin]

note that only the Roman on the end is identified to a specific Civ

Rome and Egypt both have their unique units depicted.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

This was a bit confusing, as this was presented as a lineup of "Phalanx" variants. But they aren't armed with spears, and the left two units are the Legion and Roman Warrior, and the Egyptian unit is the Medjay. So I guess they were speaking not in precise game terms.

View attachment 705903

Which game? civ 7? official?
And I don't see Southeast Asian, Indian or Maori variants here yet.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Rome and Egypt both have their unique units depicted.

I stand corrected.
I would also point out that both of these 'specific' types are not quite correct:

The Roman seems to have a wolf's head over his helmet, which was typical of standard-bearers, not regular soldiers: he should be carrying a metal Eagle on a staff instead of a shield.

The Egyptian has a characteristic shield, but from at least 2600 BCE Egyptian infantry are shown with long spears or bows. The khopesh 'sickle-sword' was usually indicated as the weapon of their enemies, especially the Canaanite and North African tribes. That doesn't make it utterly wrong, because Egypt hired bunches of mercenaries from all their neighbors, but it is not typical of native massed troops.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

I stand corrected.
I would also point out that both of these 'specific' types are not quite correct:

The Roman seems to have a wolf's head over his helmet, which was typical of standard-bearers, not regular soldiers: he should be carrying a metal Eagle on a staff instead of a shield.

The Egyptian has a characteristic shield, but from at least 2600 BCE Egyptian infantry are shown with long spears or bows. The khopesh 'sickle-sword' was usually indicated as the weapon of their enemies, especially the Canaanite and North African tribes. That doesn't make it utterly wrong, because Egypt hired bunches of mercenaries from all their neighbors, but it is not typical of native massed troops.

in Civ6 Egyptian Khopesh is made of iron. (and reasonably long). Egypt however had always been bronze civ all the time.

 

[8housesofelixir]

Here I suspect they are using 'Phalanx' in its original Greek meaning: the main body of the army, regardless of weapons carried.

It's possible, but the majority of the main body of the army at the time carried spears, the sword-and-pilum-carrying Romans was perhaps the only outlier (not to say that the third line of the legionnaires had a spear as well).

I would lean more towards they might have just jumbled the word and meant to say "Swordsmen" or something.

 

[notNamed]

Rambling observation: Firaxis really needs an East Asian specialist.

It takes a very strong sense of "okay, we're lost" to give a rebel, 'barbarian' leader of an illiterate culture the agenda of 文明 "civilisation" (Van Minh). And then make it about disliking promoted generals.
How could that ever possibly make any sense to the team?

Like so far we've seen 4 East Asian cultures (Han, Ming, Meiji, ethereal Vietnam) and everything except Weiyang Palace design, Confucius' and Himiko's clothes has been ridiculously wrong or silly. And the only really understandable bit was using Ming Great Wall due to the iconicity and gameplay effect of the thing. But that doesn't suddenly make it fine to go and use Ming architecture for a supposedly ancient Han dynasty Villa and all the other stuff.

 

[Siptah]

This was a bit confusing, as this was presented as a lineup of "Phalanx" variants. But they aren't armed with spears, and the left two units are the Legion and Roman Warrior, and the Egyptian unit is the Medjay. So I guess they were speaking not in precise game terms.

View attachment 705903

So, who uses the generic European model in the base game? Or were they already made for DLCs?

 

[AriochIV]

So, who uses the generic European model in the base game? Or were they already made for DLCs?

The city-states may use them as well.

 

[stealth_nsk]

This was a bit confusing, as this was presented as a lineup of "Phalanx" variants. But they aren't armed with spears, and the left two units are the Legion and Roman Warrior, and the Egyptian unit is the Medjay. So I guess they were speaking not in precise game terms.

View attachment 705903

One thing it does is the confirmation of Mississipians as there are no North American civ revealed yet and some kind of Gauls/Celts as we have not seen any European civ as well. Gauls are more likely due to pigs on the shield.