Small Observations General Thread (things not worth separate threads)

[AriochIV]

Do we know if army/naval commanders that are in PACKED condition will UNPACK automatically if attacked by another commander and/or military unit ? Or if the commander itself will receive the sum of the attacks and you will have to unpack them yourself on the next turn ? Seems like an important nuance as we have seen commander promotions defining if your units will be able to attack immediately upon unpacking or not.

Yes, I believe they said in the Antiquity stream that enemy armies will automatically unpack if attacked, but it seems to me that this would be extremely messy in terms of what goes where.

 

[tedhebert]

Yes, I believe they said in the Antiquity stream that enemy armies will automatically unpack if attacked, but it seems to me that this would be extremely messy in terms of what goes where.

and then also who is being attacked could become complicated yes

 

[AriochIV]

and then also who is being attacked could become complicated yes

Yeah, at a guess, one unit would stay in the same hex as the commander and the others would unpack to nearby hexes, but the logic as to what goes where is probably something that you don't want to leave up to chance. I don't think you want to have your units packed when anywhere near the enemy.

 

[Evolena]

View attachment 708653View attachment 708654
Contrary to the build from the antiquity stream, toponyms now remain the same in spite of age transitions. Hooray.

I noticed during the Antiquity stream, some river changed name when they loaded a further save, so this could also have to do with things discovered while playing after saving point A not named the same way as when discovered while playing from saving point A to saving point B. The very first Granary in Roma was also not placed on the same tile between the 2 first saves.

 

[Josephias]

I think I saw such somewhere on these forums; that in Civ 7 no military units require specific resources. Is that true all around or for just, say, infantry? Because if horse based units do not need horses anymore, I find that incredibly lame LOL.

There are no units that I have seen that require particular resources.

It's conceivable that this may be different in the Modern Age, though I doubt it.

AS far as I underestood, we still have "strategic" resources, but they do not limit unit construction. They do, however, provide combat benefits to related units. So infantery strenght is increased with Iron availability and I guess somewhat similar may happen with horses and cavalry. In any case horses/iron were pretty common in previous civs to have continents devoid of a type of unit (if that is what initial quote meant by "simulating american civs"

Contrary to the build from the antiquity stream, toponyms now remain the same in spite of age transitions. Hooray

Seeing the volcano near Chalkidiki / Madrid appears during the livestreams as "Teide" I won't say it will be always the case. ¿Maybe they remain usually but change if you switch the city name to the new civ?


Seems it may be the case:

Near Chalkidiki (once renamed to Madrid):


And near Thebai, some turns earlier

 

[tedhebert]

Dunno if we'd noticed that before, but in the exploration stream I noticed some diplomatic actions under the heading ESPIONAGE. Other headings were TREATIES and ENDEAVORS, but all the way down the scroll list were espionage options. So we have confirmation that it is back in the game.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ Cogs and Catapults are confirmed.

 

[shaglio]

View attachment 708796
^ Cogs and Catapults are confirmed.

not Crossbows and Catapults?

Spoiler Crossbows & Catapults 1983 :

 

[AriochIV]

Dunno if we'd noticed that before, but in the exploration stream I noticed some diplomatic actions under the heading ESPIONAGE. Other headings were TREATIES and ENDEAVORS, but all the way down the scroll list were espionage options. So we have confirmation that it is back in the game.

Ugh, espionage... perhaps the most consistently terrible feature in Civilization.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Ugh, espionage... perhaps the most consistently terrible feature in Civilization.

Competes with World Congress

 

[Giskler]

Not sure if this one has been posted yet:

 

[Siptah]

Not sure if this one has been posted yet:
View attachment 708877

It would be great if counter spies are really defense against a leader now and not defense at a specific tile on the map. Especially with the smaller amount of players around, this probably means that 3-4 counter spies go a long way.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

It would be great if counter spies are really defense against a leader now and not defense at a specific tile on the map. Especially with the smaller amount of players around, this probably means that 3-4 counter spies go a long way.

It's not a unit though, it's a diplomatic action. So if you think they are scheming and you have Influence to spare, do a Counter Spy op.

 

[moysturfurmer]

The ultimate “not worth a separate thread” nugget:

The plural of “codex” is “codices.” I’ve seen a lot of use of “codexes” here.

Anyway in terms of game stuff, you can see from a battle tooltip during the naval battle section that Niter is back as a resource. +1 combat strength to the carrack (and maybe cog?)

 

[Evolena]

Anyway in terms of game stuff, you can see from a battle tooltip during the naval battle section that Niter is back as a resource. +1 combat strength to the carrack (and maybe cog?)

I've seen "Siege and Naval Units gain +1 Combat Strength".

 

[moysturfurmer]

I've seen "Siege and Naval Units gain +1 Combat Strength".

Oh, yeah I don’t mean for that be exhaustive. Just that the unit that had the tooltip was a Carrack ( or possibly cog, I forget). I would expect all gunpowder units would get that bonus, at least in Exploration.

 

[AriochIV]

Oh, yeah I don’t mean for that be exhaustive. Just that the unit that had the tooltip was a Carrack ( or possibly cog, I forget). I would expect all gunpowder units would get that bonus, at least in Exploration.

I'm pretty sure that the tooltip I saw was on the resource itself. It's +1 for Naval and Siege units only.

 

[pokiehl]

The ultimate “not worth a separate thread” nugget:

The plural of “codex” is “codices.” I’ve seen a lot of use of “codexes” here.

Codexes is also correct, as any dictionary will attest.

Many a reader will perceive Latin/Greek plurals in English as pretentious. I honestly kinda cringe when I see “fora” or “personae” or “formulae” or “radii” or even worse, totally incorrect forms like “virii.”

Granted, there are exceptions where the traditional plural is more accepted and common than the English plural: cacti, data, or appendices, for example.

 

[moysturfurmer]

Codexes is also correct, as any dictionary will attest.

Many a reader will perceive Latin/Greek plurals in English as pretentious. I honestly kinda cringe when I see “fora” or “personae” or “formulae” or “radii” or even worse, totally incorrect forms like “virii.”

Granted, there are exceptions where the traditional plural is more accepted and common than the English plural: cacti, data, or appendices, for example.

Well I’m the dirtbag who’d push up his glasses while saying “actually it’s ‘octopodes’ not ‘octopi’” but I’ll freely grant “octopuses” as valid. I, like language, am malleable. So that’s fair enough, hadn’t known it was Merriam Webster approved.

 

[Evolena]

Oh, yeah I don’t mean for that be exhaustive. Just that the unit that had the tooltip was a Carrack ( or possibly cog, I forget). I would expect all gunpowder units would get that bonus, at least in Exploration.

Sorry, I didn't mean to seem rude. I wanted to give the precision but I've been too sparing with the number of words I've used.