What constitutes a stereotype?

[Disgustipated]

Just be glad they didn't make Wayne Gretsky your leader.

 

[Forster]

I too think that RCMP as a military units is stretching it. They are police. If Firaxis is going to use them they should be a culture unit that raises the loyalty of the city where they are stationed and reduce the number of units spawned when a city turn free.
I would rather they use the fur trader as a scout type unit that starts with the ranger ability.

 

[679x]

As a Canadian, I'm not offended at all by the stereotype part of the whole deal, but simply think there could have indeed been better choices for some of their uniques. I, too, am disappointed by the lack of bonuses relating to railroads, the fur trade, or peacekeeping. Not only were those integral in Canada's history and development, but they would've fit perfectly in the expansion's new mechanics (railroads, world congress, grievances) and also with Firaxis's view of how Canada should play as a civ - chill in the tundra out of people's way and work to make the world a better place.

That being said, though, I actually like the Mountie's ability to create national parks. You'd otherwise need Faith, and it doesn't make a lot of sense to me for Canada to try to build up lots of Faith, nor should they have any bonuses toward it. It's also another way to help get them more national parks than their competitors, which I think is a good thing for this civ's design. Of course, that means it only makes sense from a gameplay stance rather than historical basis, but it's not too massive a stretch that I personally would have a problem with it. Same thing with the hockey rinks - it's pretty good for Canada's gameplay design, even though it's not like we have hockey rinks constructed in the middle of nowhere to make our nature reserves more appealing in real life.

Really, if I had to make changes to the civ, I would try to work in something related to railroads, and include a second UU under the leader to function as a peacekeeping unit, which could somehow enhance Canada's ability to participate and win Emergencies, since that would A: be historically accurate, B: synergize with the civ's overall gameplay, and C: synergize with Laurier's in-game agenda. I can't think of anything relating to the fur trade / coureur de bois that would synergize with the rest of the civ, so I'd totally be fine without it if we at least had one or both of the other things added - after all, we can't have EVERYthing.

All in all, if I end up getting the expansion, I probably won't play as Canada much because the civ doesn't look that fun to me personally other than the cheap national parks, but I don't mind the inclusion of the stereotypical aspects because it actually does mesh well. If someone makes a mod that adds a peacekeeping unit, though, that would be awesome.

 

[JJOne]

Then we have railroads. I thought for sure that when these things were revealed for GS that Canada would definitely have something to do with them, given how important they were to Canadian history and unity. Laughably, they did not. Now I'm just waiting for the Ottomans to have something to do with them. Lol.

You're not the only ones with railroads. The british invented them. Germany made them electric, and also has the railroad operator with the largest revenue. Japan made them high speed. Right now, China has the most high speed railroads. US has the largest railroad network.

 

[Kheznik]

You're not the only ones with railroads. The british invented them. Germany made them electric, and also has the railroad operator with the largest revenue. Japan made them high speed. Right now, China has the most high speed railroads. US has the largest railroad network.

Didn't say that, mate. The railroad was an integral part of Canadian history as it united the country. One of the conditions of British Columbia's admittance into the confederation was the completion of the railroad, and its construction brought about the prairie provinces in the process. It was the very first project Canada undertook as a confederated nation.

Canada's a wide, wide country, and without the railroad it never would have been. More to that, if they're adding railroads and Canada in the same expansion pack, the expectation is that Canada would probably play off of it, even if in a small way (extra Loyalty from cities connected to the capital by rail, for example).

 

[Victoria]

OP
A stereotype is something that that a civ is widely recognised for but is oversimplified.
In that regard a Mountie is a perfect example and a hockey rink is not really.
The Mountie in real life appears to be more complex than I recognised, TY Canadian fanatics for educating me.

English naval supremacy is another typical stereotype that in reality is a fallacy. Hipper certainly showed us that fact but no, let’s give England some extra ships and faster sailing ability.... bah

To a degree I guess Firaxis follows some stereotypes to ensure civs feel ‘familiar’ but I was surprised when the home team was also tarred in this way.

 

[Karmah]

My personal disappointment with hockey rinks and mounties were fourfold.

First, there's no natural fit between these and Civ gameplay. So as a result, as I feared, the dev team created some bonuses and then called them "hockey rink" and "Mountie". We want Canada to get more food and production from tundras: call that "hockey rink". We want Canada to be able to get national parks more cheaply: call that "mounties".

Second, the opportunity cost for that is it means other uniques that Canada could have had, that fit more naturally into Civ gameplay, get dropped. Fur Trading Posts as a unique improvement and Coureurs des bois as a unique unit fit very well in a game about exploration and settlement of new lands. Or any of about a dozen other suggestions from the Canada thread.

Third, Civ is an opportunity to explore an interesting aspect of a civ's history. There's a lot of interesting parts to Canada's history that would fit well in Civ: the exploration and settlement of a new continent, the opening up of that continent through the development of the railway and settlement of the west, the development of UN peacekeeping missions, etc. Hockey rinks don't tie into any of those, and mounties only tie into the railroad and settlement of the west (which is why I argued a Mountie Fort could be a good unique improvement, even though a mountie unique unit was likely to be a poor fit). So we don't get any of that. Instead we get Canada as a tundra civ, a role Russia already filled.

Fourth, Civ 6 is on it's second expansion, and at this point in the cycle, a new civ really needs to offer some interesting and unique gameplay opportunities, something different than you can get from playing other civs that are already in the game. Unfortunately, hockey rinks and mounties as portrayed in Civ 6 don't contribute to that. Other than the "no surprise war" thing, this Canada civ seems like a waste of a civ slot compared to what could have been done with Canada. And the main reason for that, it seems to me, is the dev team was set on including hockey rinks and mounties, preventing them from seeking out more interesting things that could have been done with the civ.

Fair enough, it does feel like fur trading post and some kind of scout would have been nice.Yet we do have our fair share of the lattest.
About the non-unique gameplay or having something related to peace , I kind of disagree. Granted we don't know much but I seem to remember that they are immune to surprise attack so that's already something about peace. And the tundra biais is good I think , it's an alternative to playing Russia and make the fringe territories at the border of the map work. Of course I won't be strongly advocating before I tried them out.

Canada's a wide, wide country, and without the railroad it never would have been. More to that, if they're adding railroads and Canada in the same expansion pack, the expectation is that Canada would probably play off of it, even if in a small way (extra Loyalty from cities connected to the capital by rail, for example).

Loyalty bonus on railroad feels right but is it that usefull ? I rarely have loyalty issues @industrial+

 

[CultureManiac]

I suppose we could have given Canada half-price railroads to represent the cheap Chinese labor we imported and exploited, but that wouldn't be very PC now, would it?

Canada has been involved in a lot of peacekeeping, but we don't have specific peacekeeping troops. We use member of the armed forces and, yes, Mounties, who are actually a paramilitary force.

Actually, peacekeeping troops are organized and commanded through the UN, not by individual countries.

But we don't know the mechanics for diplomatic victory, and Canada's extra diplomatic points for emergencies could be quite strong. Also, being able to slap down a national park with each Mountie (8 to 10 does't sound unreasonable), can propel Canada toward a culture victory.

TBH I'm more intrigued with playing the Inca first and see how massive I can grow cities (like terrace farms aren't a stereotype?).

 

[isau]

It's more strange to me that the American/Brazilian/Canadian/Australian armies don't feature a mix of racial avatars, rather than that any particular unit such a Mounty is represented. I suppose you could argue the army compositions are snapshots of those civs at an earlier point in history, but it stands out to me because all of those civs show up in an era way out of sync with their true origins, and a mix of races would better represent the demographics of most of them.

 

[CultureManiac]

You could always play the Cree as an early Canadian civ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cree

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

With all due respect for my Canadian compatriots, fur trappers and maple syrup are a very Eastern Canadian meme. As an Alberta boy, I'd feel more at home with a rodeo and prairie oysters. Sure, Mounties and hockey are cliche, but they are also quintessentially Canadian, and represent the whole country, not just a region. They are part of our history and culture, and probably every Canadian has had some contact with either a hockey rink or an RCMP officer at some point --- maybe one due to the other
Golf courses and highlanders are not stereotypes? Waltzing Matilda and the outback? Aztecs enslaving enemy warriors ... they still haven't lived that one down.
Canada has some of the biggest national parks in the world.

View attachment 513455

The largest, Wood Buffalo, at 44,000 sq km is bigger than Switzerland or the Netherlands.

You'll find RCMP detachments in the parks too ...
https://www.pc.gc.ca/apps/dfhd/page_fhbro_eng.aspx?id=3048

And giving Canada double resource extraction ... that's a nod to the role natural resources play in our economy - all of them - not just oil from the west, for example.

I think they went with what Canada is know for internationally. If they had chosen otherwise, the east/west battles would have begun.

The fur trade was a major economic driver across all of Canada, including in B.C. and Alberta, so I'm not sure why you'd describe it as an eastern meme? Similarly, the railroad literally built Canada and was a much a part of the history of the west as it is of the history of the east.

 

[SagarRathore]

Being Honest,Civ series is basically based on western mainstream view and how ignorant it is about other civ's history.But I believe in civ 6 they have corrected themselves to some extent.If history is seen than both China and India deserve some sort of economic and cultural boost as these regions had been major centre of power before European golden age Also the Music I have seen in West depicting India is something I never heard from any part of India.

 

[Xmonger]

You have to think of it from the development teams perspective. I'm a game developer too, and the balance with games is between complexity in the form of cognitive load on the player, and making it 'interesting' (which is hard to define). Civ has the additional problem unlike many games where it has to be somewhat reality based.

Look at it this way, in any game we're creating a proxy for some version of reality. Game aspects are represented iconically - meaning you have to strip down the meaning of everything to make it a symbol, or proxy for the reality element. For example when designing a game you have fundamental concepts, friend/foe, weapon, item, which is then represented in a iconic manner in the game. Like a weapon may be a sword, but that's just an icon for a sword. Not modeled (that I've ever seen) is personalization (historical swords were often so), aging, rust accumulation, maintenance, heft, weight and inertial weight. No we just get a 'sword' - some kind of pointy thing you can swing with abandon.

With me? So the Civ team has to make icons or proxies for everything. My point being by this you see everything in a game is a stereotype. In Civ it's all a ridiculous stereotype, Teddy Roosevelt for America, seriously? Why not one of the founders? And Broadway as a wonder?? To be honest I never quite got that one, why not the Smithsonian or Library of Congress?

No matter - these are all just proxies for a concept and a very loose representation of something from reality. So Canada is a stereotype? Sure, join the crowd.

 

[Legacy of Smiles]

So, besides Canada, which civs do you think suffer most from stereotyping?

 

[Victoria]

So, besides Canada, which civs do you think suffer most from stereotyping?

dunno, they have done a fair job on egypt this time, a good example I guess.

 

[durfal]

It depends on the civ, but all are stereotyped to a degree. Thats the trade off for being in the game.
Every civ that is still around as a modern country can look at how they are represented in game and say thats only a small part of how they see themselves.
The important thing is does it make the civ recognizable and interesting.
I've traveled to a lot of the places and countries which are represented in game and you go there because you know bit's of its history and probably the stereotypical things about it and when you are there, or read about it, loads of knowledge and interesting facts appear about those places.

For example the Netherlands were I'm from is mostly known around the world by a "wrong" name: Holland (only 2 of the 12 provinces). We are mostly known for windmills, tulips, clogs, cheese, dikes and nowadays softdrugs. Also Amsterdam is known around the world but people often don't even know it's in the Netherlands. And I really been asked if we all live in windmills and wear clogs!! Or some weird story about a kid sticking its finger in a dike to save the land which is absurd.
You can get mad about it or accept it and build a whole tourist business around it. Long live the droves of tourists who bring their money to Amsterdam, we drive them around some tulip fields, windmills and to tourist traps were we even dress some people up in some "authentic" costume (including clogs). And they probably go to a coffeeshop (but not for coffee) by themselves, while I've never set a foot in one of those places.
But while they are here we also show a lot of our culture, architecture, musea and modern infrastructure.
I've been to Canada and I mostly came because of the National Parks (like Jasper and Banff) and yes there were Mounties there and I learned about the Ice Hockey culture. But I also went to ranches, nice cities like Vancouver, Ottawa, Montreal and Toronto and "old" towns like Quebec City.

But coming back to Civ, it still didn't wanted me to have Canada in game as a civ but since it is I'm glad they came with Mounties and Hockey Rinks and being able to farm in tundra (taiga) even if that last one is unrealistic.
Because that makes the civ feel Canadian to me and have an interesting twist to it to make me want to play as it. I never heard about Laurier before but to be honest not counting modern leaders I only knew about Samuel de Champlain before.
So I would say embrace the stereotypical things and when people get interested teach them about the other stuff you want them to know about you.

 

[steveg700]

Golf courses and highlanders are not stereotypes?

This is two-wrongs-makes-a-right reasoning.

The presence of goofy, hackneyed ideas like golf courses in other civ's doesn't legitimize the upping of the ante. It just underscores the disappointing direction of Civ VI when it comes to civ design.

If they can't come up with something thematically and mechanically compelling, then stick a pin in it for later.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

It just underscores the disappointing direction of Civ VI.

Care for some salad? I made it myself.

 

[humble serf]

Personally I think "stereotype" is entirely the wrong way to look at the problem. A bad civ design isn't bad because it's stereotypical, it's bad because it fails to create some level of historically-inspired gameplay.

The two things often (but not always) go together, and the worst civ designs are the ones that feel like somebody skimmed the first few paragraphs of the civ's Wikipedia article and threw together a few lazy, stereotypical uniques. India in Civ4 (The "Fast Worker"? Seriously?) and Civ5 stands out for me as particularly poor. You can practically hear the developers brainstorming the whole design in thirty seconds:

"It says here that India's the world's second-most populous country."
"Alright, so they get higher population. What about the unit?"
"Well, there's a picture of an elephant here..."
"Perfect. And the building?"
"This fort looks pretty cool. It says here it was built by the 'Mughals' in---"
"Whatever. Good enough for me."

But that doesn't mean stereotypes are always a bad thing. Rome in Civ6 is a well-designed and extremely stereotypical civ (I mean, its ability is literally called "All Roads Lead to Rome"), and I can't imagine it would be better if they ditched the Legion for some obscure unit of Thracian auxiliary cavalry just to avoid being stereotypical.

Scotland is a good example of what I'm talking about. Robert's Bannockburn ability is not at all stereotypical, but feels awkward and disjointed in the overall civ design. On the other hand, the golf course is a total stereotype, but at least it contributes to Scotland's overall tall, defensive, scientific theme, which I think is a decent design. I'm not saying I would have picked the golf course if I were the one designing Scotland, but at least it was a more thoughtful choice than Civ4 India's "Fast Worker" in terms of creating a historical playstyle.

The real test of the Canada civ is whether it actually feels like you're playing Canada, or whether it ends up being a random collection of abilities which is only identifiable as Canada because they're playing ice hockey. Personally I'm happy to treat tundra as "the Canadian prairies" for the purposes of the game, and with that in mind, I don't think the design is too bad. Canada's goal is to expand onto "prairies" that most people would avoid, cultivate tourism through national parks and winter sports, and use that tourism to push for a cultural or diplomatic victory. The mountie and the hockey rink are both lame pop culture memes -- and there were definitely better choices available -- but overall I still think Canada's playstyle is reasonably historical.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

The real test of the Canada civ is whether it actually feels like you're playing Canada, or whether it ends up being a random collection of abilities which is only identifiable as Canada because they're playing ice hockey. Personally I'm happy to treat tundra as "the Canadian prairies" for the purposes of the game, and with that in mind, I don't think the design is too bad. Canada's goal is to expand onto "prairies" that most people would avoid, cultivate tourism through national parks and winter sports, and use that tourism to push for a cultural or diplomatic victory. The mountie and the hockey rink are both lame pop culture memes -- and there were definitely better choices available -- but overall I still think Canada's playstyle is reasonably historical.

That's a great way to put it. I don't necessarily mind the mounties or the hockey rink, because I thought that's what they would get anyway, but my problem was the whole tundra ability. Even if Civ's version of tundra equals "Canadian" prairies because if that were the case why didn't the Cree get tundra bonuses either especially since Poundmaker's Cree tribe lived on the praries.

It would of made more sense, in my opinion, for the bonuses to be able to expand quicker on plains and/or woods tiles faster and plains farms add more food as there aren't really any Civ bonuses toward those particular types of terrain, where as Russia already had a tundra ability.