We considered historical renaming but went for RyZanTIum instead

[Isca Dumnoniorum]

I’d like to understand the thought process that was behind purposefully creating a randomiser button for made up city names (because they’re so hilarious) over historical ones, really I would. Especially in the context of a backlash from some fans about the way the civ switching was implemented.
The fact they had the option to implement random historical renaming and chose to implement the puerile Ryzantium nonsense instead (and go out of their way to revel in it) can only indicate that they really don’t care about winning over the civ-switching sceptics, even when small gestures like this would’ve been nice nods.
But hey, as long as we end up getting a cat scout unit that we can pet at some point, everything will be alright.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Can you please explain what you mean, was this mentioned on the livestream?

 

[Siptah]

Yeah, random historical renaming to your current civ seemed to be a low hanging fruit. And it's what I'll be doing by hand now, at least for the civs for which I can easily make city list myself.

 

[Menocchio]

There is no randomiser (unless you watched a different video). Renaming looks manual, like it has been in past games.

 

[pokiehl]

There is no city name randomizer. There is only a city rename function, like everyone’s been clamoring for.

“Ryzantium” was just a lighthearted nod to how some people like to rename their cities.

No need to be upset about them giving folks a feature they’ve been asking for.

 

[Isca Dumnoniorum]

Sorry, I should’ve specified - it was in the 5min clip of Ed talking to camera that they posted to YouTube. I’ll try to link it here.

 

[Nikolai II]

There is no randomizer for naming. It's the default or you manually change them.

 

[Isca Dumnoniorum]

There is no randomizer for naming. It's the default or you manually change them.

If that’s the case (and the video just skipped the person typing the name out) then fair enough.

The second part of my complaint still stands, though - why tell us you considered historical renaming and chose not to implement it? It’s like saying “you know that thing you said you wanted? We’re not giving it to you”. If they’d done that with other requested features or UI improvements it would’ve caused a stink.

I had a similar reaction when Ed all but rolled his eyes on a previous stream when someone had sent in a question asking if quick combat would be introduced at some point. He genuinely seemed to think the combat was quick enough already, in which case I’d invite him to send an aerodrome full of bombers at a city and see how long it takes for them each to drop their payload

 

[Menocchio]

If that’s the case (and the video just skipped the person typing the name out) then fair enough.

The second part of my complaint still stands, though - why tell us you considered historical renaming and chose not to implement it? It’s like saying “you know that thing you said you wanted? We’re not giving it to you”. If they’d done that with other requested features or UI improvements it would’ve caused a stink.

I had a similar reaction when Ed all but rolled his eyes on a previous stream when someone had sent in a question asking if quick combat would be introduced at some point. He genuinely seemed to think the combat was quick enough already, in which case I’d invite him to send an aerodrome
full of bombers at a city and see how long it takes for them each to drop their payload

I think you misunderstood his point: he was saying that there are already historical names for settlements (the current pre-1.1.1 condition of things) and in the patch the renaming function will allow you to change settlement names to whatever you'd like, which is inclusive of any historical names you might prefer. The idea of historical renaming as a distinct function isn't touched upon.

 

[Uberfrog]

I think you’ve just got the wrong end of multiple sticks here. When he talks about historical city names… he’s talking about the fixed names the cities already have. Which manually renaming them yourself is the alternative to.

 

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

Did someone specifically ask for historical renaming and not just reanaming on CivFanatics? Maybe I’m wrong but unless it was asked for it’s unreasonable to expect to get it.

 

[Sagax]

Did someone specifically ask for historical renaming and not just reanaming on CivFanatics? Maybe I’m wrong but unless it was asked for it’s unreasonable to expect to get it.

Not really, from my anecdotal experience - but maybe there were a couple of more specific ideas about it. I thought it was generally understood that manual free-for-all renaming will satisfy almost everyone. “Rename the cities however you like” means exactly that, be it immersion-friendly or not.

Personally, though, I was also hoping for civ renaming or a civ name generator - but I’ll settle for just settlement renaming for now.

 

[Isca Dumnoniorum]

Ok mea culpa - I’ll just head to bed and call it a day!

I read the transcript for the clip and I still don’t think you need much of a leap to get to what I thought I was hearing/seeing from the combination of the visual of the name instantly changing and the line “our narrative team did put a lot of serious consideration into historically accurate city names but…[etc]”. Maybe I was susceptible since I was hoping for the change!

Sure, manual renaming is an approach but from a quality of life perspective, it would be so much easier if there was a button for it. Particularly since I play on a TV without a keyboard but I realise that’s a niche setup!

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Ok mea culpa - I’ll just head to bed and call it a day!

I wish more people reacted like you when they are called out, good stuff

 

[King Flevance]

“our narrative team did put a lot of serious consideration into historically accurate city names but…[etc]”.

I think this was more a nod to the work that was put in more than anything. Hours went into these names probably and I am just going rename it "Port Jade" just so I can remember where it is on the map.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I'm on a different spot from most on this: all I ever wanted was the ability to rename cities as I desired.

I've got 20 different city lists that I have composed since Civ VI days, including some for Civs in the games: Persian, Mayan, Scythian, Mongolian, Mughul, Gallic, etc. - and some for Civs maybe yet to come, like Anglo-Saxons, Xiong-Nu, Al-Andalus and Haudenosenee, and some that will likely never appear in any official Civ game: Sikhs, Picts, Taklamakan Cities, Sogdian, Khazar and Kushan.

The point is if I want to 'write my own narrative' I am going to be role-playing, and frequently role-playing a very different Civ than the game thinks it is throwing at me. They might not let me re-name the Leader, but in Civ VII Baroque Frederick or Kong Fu Tse can lead Rome or Han China - or The Imperial Gallic Confederation or the Khazars, even though there might be a whiff of Roman or Han about them.

Having cities like Samarobriva or Durocortorun, or Timutarkha and Samandar on the game map helps with that a lot compared to an Exploration mixed batch of Roman and Shawnee sites staring back at me.

 

[pjotroos]

Did someone specifically ask for historical renaming and not just reanaming on CivFanatics? Maybe I’m wrong but unless it was asked for it’s unreasonable to expect to get it.

Not connected to this thread, apparently, but I did: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/converting-to-city-should-update-the-settlement-name.696448/
What's more, instead of just asking for it, Lorizael rolled his sleeves up and made a mod that does just that: https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources/people-just-liked-it-better-that-way.32054/
(which I've been enjoying ever since and plan on using past tomorrow if it still works)

 

[Thormodr]

Since history has been totally thrown in the blender with Confucius leading the French or Benjamin Franklin leading Japan, I totally support this random renaming of cities or even Civs for 7. Just like the Rock Bands or military units in Civ VI.

 

[ThERat]

Maybe they got the historical renaming idea from the fact that they just used the standard German city name list for Prussia which includes cities such as Stuttgart.
The entire renaming issue tells me, what a mess this edition is. A standard feature omitted on purpose or by mistake. Well, well

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Since history has been totally thrown in the blender with Confucius leading the French or Benjamin Franklin leading Japan, I totally support this random renaming of cities or even Civs for 7. Just like the Rock Bands or military units in Civ VI.

All is well as long as they allow the gamer to also throw history into a blender as he/she desires.

In Civ VI, for instance, I always had a Rock Band named Spinal Tap . . .