Unlabelled Civilization - Civilization VI: Rise and Fall – First Look: Georgia

1/10/2018 11:38:00 am
A+ A- Print Email

Civilization - Civilization VI: Rise and Fall – First Look: Georgia

Civilization VI: Rise and Fall – First Look: Georgia

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 07:00 AM PST

When you like starting Civ games, but never like finishing them...

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 09:03 AM PST

A different form of yield porn.

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 09:08 AM PST

Civ VI leaders by era (as of Tamar's reveal)

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 03:28 PM PST

With only three leaders left to reveal for Rise and Fall I felt it was time to look into the game's leaders by the era they represent.

Here's how I split the eras:

Ancient: Prehistory to 700 BC

Classical: 700 BC to 500 AD

Medieval: 500 AD to 1400 AD

Renaissance: 1400 to 1700 AD

Industrial: 1700 to 1900 AD

Modern: 1900 to 1950 AD

Atomic: 1950 to 1980 AD

Information: 1980 AD to present

With that out of the way, let me start off with the fact that by this reckoning there are no leaders from the Atomic era onward; the only leader who lived past 1950 is Wilhelmina, and she abdicated the throne in 1948 anyway. Perhaps there are no recent leaders for the same reason there's a twenty year rule in the history subs.

Anyway, here are the leaders by era (R&F leaders in italics):

Ancient: Gilgamesh

Ol' Gilgabro here is sitting pretty lonely at the moment. Perhaps if Hammurabi or a pre Ptolemaic Pharaoh comes around then we'll have another leader here.

Classical: Cyrus, Tomyris, Pericles, Gorgo, Cleopatra, Amanitore, Alexander, Chandragupta, Trajan, Qin Shi Huang

Well, that's a lot. Most of the leaders from the Mediterranean hail from here, which underscores just how crucial that area was in this time period. Also fun fact: Alexander was only one generation older than Chandragupta, and the latter married a daughter of one of Alexander's former generals, even!

Medieval: Frederick Barbarossa, Harald Hardrada, Jadwiga, Hojo Tokimune, Gitarja, Jayavarman VII, Saladin, Seondeok, Genghis Khan, Tamar

We actually have a lot of medieval leaders too, but surprisingly only a few Europeans here. A lot of Asians though.

Renaissance: Montezuma, Philip II, Catherine de Medici, Mvemba a Nzinga

Here we have a pretty few leaders, and interestingly, Montezuma here is the odd man out, with the other three all in the 16th century and with Philip and Catherine being contemporaries, even.

Industrial: Peter, Pedro II, Victoria, Poundmaker

Interestingly we have two guys with the same name here, but Russian Peter is like Monty in that he's actually ahead of his peers chronologically. Pedro, Vicky, and Poundmaker were all alive at the same time!

Modern: Teddy Roosevelt, Gandhi, John Curtin, Wilhelmina

The latter three are WWII leaders while Teddy is the only one who led his country pre WWI (though to be pedantic, Gandhi never really led his country either as a head of state or government).

So there's my post about the leaders of Civ VI by era revealed thus far. Which eras do you think the last three leaders will be from?

submitted by /u/rattatatouille
[link] [comments]

(Post) Modern Wonders: Abraj Al-Bait

Posted: 08 Jan 2018 10:57 PM PST

Only 3 Civs Left - Let's Discuss Who They Could Be!

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 08:46 AM PST

Afaik, Rise & Fall was confirmed to have 8 new civs and 1 new leader in it. With 5 civs (Korea, Netherlands, Mongolia, Cree, Georgia) and one leader (India) revealed so far, we should expect 3 more civs before launch.

What do you think they are going to be?

The existing civs cover a wide range from Europe to east Asia, the caucuses, and Canadian North America.

I see a few regions untouched and ripe for civs. South America, Mesoamerica, and lots of Africa. Because of this, I think we are likely to see:

  • Maya or Olmec - Both are great Meso American options that would be very popular with fans. The Long Count is a ... long standing staple of Civ, but the Olmec would be a fresh alternative, being the likely progenitor to all other cultures in the region. I'd love Mexico, but the Aztec exist and they share a capital which I can see as a problem.

  • Argentina or Chile - Both fill a good contender to Brazil geographically, but leave the popular Inca available for future expansions or DLC on Firaxis' end. Also they offer a colonial contrast to the Maya/Olmec and Cree.

  • South Africa, Zulu, or Ethiopia - all of these are great contenders for unrepresented African cultures in the current game. Ethiopia and Zulu are recent civ staples, but I think South Africa would be a great, modern contender.

What do you think?

submitted by /u/SabyZ
[link] [comments]

Very old poster I carried around for years

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 10:19 AM PST

Civilization VI : Rise and Fall - First Look : Georgia

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 07:01 AM PST

So come on /r/Civ, who exactly is this blurry face from the Korea gameplay!?

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 09:11 AM PST

The Best Worst Start Ever

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 02:59 PM PST

Monuments in Rise and Fall. A pattern analysis.

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 08:26 AM PST

TIL that the price of a District is 25% lower when the number of a given district you own is less than the all-player average

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 02:40 PM PST

Possible Confirmation of Portugal as a Civ?

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 10:52 AM PST

The Mac OS version still doesn't have the latest DLCs! It's 2018!

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 02:04 PM PST

Why I think additions of lesser known civs and leaders is good

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 04:51 PM PST

We've all read the YouTube comments -

Seondeok? What about Sejong? You know, Sejong the GREAT? Firaxis are SJW scum.

William of Orange would've been a MUCH better choice. Why choose some Queen no one knows?

I can't believe they're putting feminism over historical accuracy.

What I think these commenters are forgetting is that Firaxis, when making Civ 6, told the community that they weren't necessarily looking for the best leaders, they were more looking for leaders with interesting personalities that might be able to focus on different aspects of the game. That's why Catherine de Medici was chosen for France, not necessarily because she was the greatest leader, but because she was a great pick for a civ based on the espionage system. I think the same thing is happening here. Yes maybe Tamar didn't win the most battles or conquer the most territory, but she brought Georgia into a golden age, which is a feature Firaxis is really trying to emphasise this time round.

Perhaps some of the leaders and civs coming out in this expansion weren't the most historically or geographically significant, but they're all intriguing cultures that we should be interested to learn more about. Let's be honest, if the game was just all the big famous civs in history, there'd be no flair or learning curve to any of it. I find the same with leaders - if we had William of Orange in every game leading the Netherlands, or Sejong leading Korea in every game, we'd get a bored.

Just my 2¢! Feel free to discuss why you feel differently in the comments.

TL;DR: Tamar is a lesser known leader from a lesser known kingdom and I think it'll be intriguing to find out more about her.

submitted by /u/AristocratesSR
[link] [comments]

The r/Civ Battle Royale Mk2.1, Part 100: Sentimental Centennial

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 04:00 PM PST

Announcing the Trebuchet (as seen in trailer) the day of R&F release would be a smart way to get to the front page via r/trebuchetmemes

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 11:35 AM PST

Would be very smart marketing if they did that.

A massive game like civ, a unit that fits into the game and has been in it before, the day of release on the front page would be smart.

submitted by /u/MoistKangaroo
[link] [comments]

With the back to back announcements of Cree and Georgia, it's okay to say that Civs are chosen for uniqueness instead of worldwide impact

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 09:09 AM PST

There was a debate in the earlier Finland thread that Finland wasn't a good civ to pick because it "hasn't really had an impact" on the world as a whole.

I don't necessarily disagree with that statement or feel like Finland should be in over other civs, but with the announcement of Georgia, a country with less than 4 million people, has been recently tossed around between Russia and the Soviet Union, and who's Golden Age in the 12th century still really only affected their immediate area, I think it's okay to say that civs will be picked to give uniqueness to the game as a whole.

I'm just sick of hearing the same argument for civ suggestions get shot down by saying "Well they hadn't really done anything on the world stage," then immediately those same people fawn over how great it is that Firaxis would pick a civ like Cree or Georgia.

I like Cree in the game. I like Georgia. But c'mon, enough with this tired, useless argument. At the end of the day, it's gameplay.

submitted by /u/moidawg
[link] [comments]

Jackpot?

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 07:36 AM PST

This has never happened before

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 06:57 PM PST

[VI] Scientist needs holy site, but I'm Kongo

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 04:57 PM PST

So since it was the first Great Scientist I could get and wanted the tech boost I grabbed a Great Scientist that needs a holy site to activate the boost. (+100 Faith, Faith Adjacency Bonus Gives Science Too).

Is there anything I can do with the unit other than have it be a Scout?

submitted by /u/chucktestlacoil
[link] [comments]

Is Civ 6 worth 12 bucks? I liked 5 and friends bought 6 but i feel like they will quit after a week...

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 05:59 PM PST

thoughts?

submitted by /u/ElvisDimera
[link] [comments]

What is the easiest and hardest victory for you to win in Civ 6?

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 08:04 PM PST

For me, the easiest is culture and the hardest is religion.

submitted by /u/QueenShewolf
[link] [comments]

How to prevent the end game from feeling like a chore?

Posted: 08 Jan 2018 10:05 PM PST

I've had some games on emperor and higher difficulties that make it hard to get a winning condition, but when I do, it's a complete snowball.

It'll take 40 turns to get to an almost guaranteed victory, but when rounds take a few minutes or more each time, that gets cumbersome and boring.

What are some good ways to mitigate that, or make the end game more fun?

submitted by /u/King_Joffreys_Tits
[link] [comments]

Is there a chance for huge discount of all released DLCs so far?

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 05:06 PM PST

I dont have any DLCs and I checked them out. Turned out they are already priced for much more than the base game itself. Even worse is that in my local currency all Civ items are much more expensive for some reason. The base game costs 73$ for example.
So definitely there is no way I'm buying that shit piece by piece, but I'm asking Civ veterans, is there a chance for something like 50-70% price drop, or a pack of DLCs to make purchase better?

submitted by /u/Stalowy_Cezary
[link] [comments]

Chances of a diplomatic victory being an option for Rise and Fall?

Posted: 09 Jan 2018 07:39 AM PST

So, I've been hoping to see a Diplomatic victory condition with this expansion. (Having enough suzerian power at city-states to vote yourself as world leader). They did not initially tell us that they are adding one, but they also told us they're keeping some things as surprises until launch. With the addition of governor's and Georgia getting the bonus to Envoys, it could make sense that they're ramping up to release a couple more civs with envoy bonuses to easily achieve that diplomatic victory. What are your guy's thoughts? I could be just dreaming, but would love to see this victory condition (with the World Congress making a return as well) back in the game.

submitted by /u/samtank2048
[link] [comments]

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Games26 © 2015. All Rights Reserved.
Powered By Blogger
Powered by Blogger.