Whe will we get a pure science Civ and science focused civs?

[Siptah]

It's also the question which not yet present civ would be fitting as a pure science civ. Some good candidates are already used up (Sumer, Greece, China, America, Germany). I see not that many posibilities: Sweden, Maya, Italy, Switzerland, Netherlands (hopefully not). Maybe Hitties and Korea again.

 

[Arent11]

It's also the question which not yet present civ would be fitting as a pure science civ. Some good candidates are already used up (Sumer, Greece, China, America, Germany). I see not that many posibilities: Sweden, Maya, Italy, Switzerland, Netherlands

Well, are Babylon and Korea present already? Is there perhaps a reason for that absence?

 

[Siptah]

That would put Babylon close to Sumer though. I'd prefer it different. Not that that is a reason.

For me, Babylon is not much of a science civ anyway: it's a civ about building and growth. In an expansion with new mechanics I can also see it with a bonus to diplomacy of some kind. The science thingy belongs much more to Sumer. It's okay to mix it up if only one is in the game, but when we get Babylon and Sumer, they should be different in my opinion. Just like Greece/Macedon are in the game now.

 

[Arent11]

That would put Babylon close to Sumer though. I'd prefer it different. Not that that is a reason.

For me, Babylon is not much of a science civ anyway: it's a civ about building and growth. In an expansion with new mechanics I can also see it with a bonus to diplomacy of some kind. The science thingy belongs much more to Sumer. It's okay to mix it up if only one is in the game, but when we get Babylon and Sumer, they should be different in my opinion. Just like Greece/Macedon are in the game now.

Well, historically because of enlightenment & industrialization it would have to be a western civ/england, france or germany. But they are already seafaring, culture & production. Sumeria right now is domination (Ziggurats are imho more for avoiding campuses than to speed up research). So, basically only korea is left, maybe also the inca, but they are not strictly scientific either in history.

What you could do is take a civ that is already there (china) & give them a scientific leader in addition of their 10% eurekas. Same could be done with England or Germany.

 

[View619]

Well, historically because of enlightenment & industrialization it would have to be a western civ/england, france or germany. But they are already seafaring, culture & production. Sumeria right now is domination (Ziggurats are imho more for avoiding campuses than to speed up research). So, basically only korea is left, maybe also the inca, but they are not strictly scientific either in history.

What you could do is take a civ that is already there (china) & give them a scientific leader in addition of their 10% eurekas. Same could be done with England or Germany.

This seems like the solution. Pairing Germany and China with science focused leaders would give a science focused civ, especially Germany.

 

[Leyrann]

It's also the question which not yet present civ would be fitting as a pure science civ. Some good candidates are already used up (Sumer, Greece, China, America, Germany). I see not that many posibilities: Sweden, Maya, Italy, Switzerland, Netherlands (hopefully not). Maybe Hitties and Korea again.

The Netherlands really shouldn't be a science focused civ. I mean, if you want to give them anything that represents the great minds in the Netherlands, you should make it a bonus towards Great People, as there were lots of scientists, writers etc in the 17th and 18th century that fled to the Netherlands because their ideas weren't welcome in their home country. A much better representation of the Netherlands, however, would be related to either trade or infrastructure. Or maybe both.

 

[Siptah]

The Netherlands really shouldn't be a science focused civ. I mean, if you want to give them anything that represents the great minds in the Netherlands, you should make it a bonus towards Great People, as there were lots of scientists, writers etc in the 17th and 18th century that fled to the Netherlands because their ideas weren't welcome in their home country. A much better representation of the Netherlands, however, would be related to either trade or infrastructure. Or maybe both.

Yes, that's why I wrote 'hopefully not' behind them. But they have the potential to be a scientific civ imho. Not that it is the best solution or that I'd like it.

 

[MantaRevan]

There is a clear asymmetry between science and culture trees that does need to get smoothed out. Lots of civs race down one but lag behind on the other. The interesting thing though, is that after the industrial era or so the tech tree pretty much stops doing anything that isn't military. A science focused civ would be a military civ more than an actual science one because for most of the game the most important things the tech tree provides are just unit upgrades.

 

[Wingednosering]

When I play Arabia, I play them for their insane science boosts. The Madrasa is constructed way earlier than standard Universities. It might actually be the best UB in the game because of its repositioning in the tech/civic tree. As people have mentioned, China and Sumer have great science boosts as well.

Too much science in this game is crippling. This could be why they haven't made a 100% science civ. I'm not sure there are 100% culture or war civs either. Every civ so far has a mix of abilities. A few do seem to focus almost entirely on religion, but each civ has 1-2 UUs (which are only for DVs) and some sort of unique infrastructure (which tends to be for one of the other VCs).

 

[Tiger Genocide]

Am I the only person here that would disable Korea for Immortal and Deity games on Civ 5?

 

[Formica]

Am I the only person here that would disable Korea for Immortal and Deity games on Civ 5?

Nope, I did it too. I got tired of getting Caravels only to discover that Korea had an insurmountable science lead. Call me a scrub if you must, but it just wasn't fun. I did have a few games where Korea started on the same continent and I was able to conquer them, but if they were across the sea it was pretty much hopeless.

 

[Tiger Genocide]

Nope, I did it too. I got tired of getting Caravels only to discover that Korea had an insurmountable science lead. Call me a scrub if you must, but it just wasn't fun. I did have a few games where Korea started on the same continent and I was able to conquer them, but if they were across the sea it was pretty much hopeless.

You aren't a scrub. The mighty Marbozir used to disable them too, for his deity games too if I recall correctly. His reasoning was the same as yours. If they are far away, they snowball out of control and win science victory before your military can reach them.

 

[Manifold]

Whe will we get a pure science Civ and science focused civs?

The Phoenicians have made some of the most important inventions of world history: e.g.
Alphabet, Naval ram, Long vessels, Metal processing, Agricultural improvements...

For a space/science victory they also need production.

UA - Purpura +science to trad Routs you start, +science to trade route other have with you and the originator gets a gold bonus
UU - mercenary other UU can build every UU from an other Civs with whom the Phoenicians have a friendship declaration
UI - Cedar Woodcutter camp +production +gold, bonus if built next to a mountain. Must: wood and hill

 

[The Kingmaker]

I'd say Babylon should be equal parts science and culture, but they should have a clear science path. They were astronomers and mathematicians from an exceedingly early date.

 

[DWilson]

If they go the route of using a leader to make an existing civ a science focused civ, I hope they choose a weaker civ (minus the leader's ability). Germany is too strong already, while Barbarossa's ability is quite mild. To keep a semblance of balance it would have to be a weak science ability, which doesn't sound fun.

 

[CaptainUnknown]

If they go the route of using a leader to make an existing civ a science focused civ, I hope they choose a weaker civ (minus the leader's ability). Germany is too strong already, while Barbarossa's ability is quite mild. To keep a semblance of balance it would have to be a weak science ability, which doesn't sound fun.

Good point. I wonder if we will ever see a leader with an additional UI, bringing a Civ's total Unique infrastructures up to 2. The reason I propose this is because a lot of people like the the builder civs and what better way to give civs a bonus than to give them another UI. I also thought it would be cool to have additional district types as uniques (doesn't replace any), but that's probably not going to happen anytime soon. Maybe when new mechanics are introduced in expansions. I think this could happen solely because some Civs have UU that replace nothing so why not districts as well? These districts would be like neighborhoods or aqueducts so no additional buildings. You may be thinking, if not buildings, why not just make it a tile improvement. Well the districts I have in mind would provide bonuses that are not yield based. Perhaps great person based like a meeting/guild hall? Perhaps they have unique bonuses for specialists? Not sure, but there is potential here.

 

[NegativeZero]

I'm sure we'll see more science based civilizations coming down the line.
Compared to specialists in Civ 5, Civ 6 specialists are really lackluster and currently released civs don't have any focus on them.
I could see Babylon coming to civ 6 but with a focus on locking down specialists within districts.

 

[KmDubya]

I hope that they do not make any civs that are massively better at science than others. This really hurt ciV in that Korea and Babylon were in a class by themselves. Since science>everything else, having a civ that is best at science would be very unbalancing.

China's science advantage takes a lot of effort to achieve a 10% boost. That seems well balanced. Australia's huge boost to science and production seems to be ill thought out unless they intended to make them markedly superior to everyone else.

 

[nzcamel]

I hope that they do not make any civs that are massively better at science than others. This really hurt ciV in that Korea and Babylon were in a class by themselves. Since science>everything else, having a civ that is best at science would be very unbalancing.

China's science advantage takes a lot of effort to achieve a 10% boost. That seems well balanced. Australia's huge boost to science and production seems to be ill thought out unless they intended to make them markedly superior to everyone else.

That potential has been lessened with the civics tree.

 

[Calyxx]

If they go the route of using a leader to make an existing civ a science focused civ, I hope they choose a weaker civ (minus the leader's ability). Germany is too strong already, while Barbarossa's ability is quite mild. To keep a semblance of balance it would have to be a weak science ability, which doesn't sound fun.

Maybe add Kennedy as a science focused leader for the US?