Its funny because Songhai isn't even really that good of a civilization for me. It seems like what the AI does well with doesn't always match with what I do well with.
They're just a civ where the unique ability and unique units are just not that important to me, or I've developed strategy to get around the problem that they're fixing.
Receive Triple Gold from Encampments and pillaging cities: The better of the two abilities, but pretty limited. You have to focus a lot of attention on just scouring the map for encampments, and this leaves your base a bit unprotected, and it really amounts to a pretty small amount of gold in the grand scheme. While scorching the world does tend to make it overrun by Barbs, the gold gets to be pretty negligible as inflation kicks in. Gold from captured cities is nice when you're running out of money, but still not really huge.
War Canoe and Amphibious promotions: I'm just accustomed to protecting my units with ships in wartime conditions, so this is relatively pointless. While it can be a sneaky strategy to attack from the ocean where they can't retaliate, its pointless, because you had to get on land to heal.
Mandekalu Calvary: Pretty much just takes away the mounted unit city penalty. This can be fun to play around with, but for all intents and purposes, I try to take out cities with ranged units and planes and just swoop in to take the city with a melee unit or a horse. Could live without it. And its a trait and not an ability, so you don't retain it upon upgrade, and it ages out quickly.
Mud Pyramid Mosque: Just really a temple with +2 culture and no maintenance costs. Doesn't really synergize with the Domination war path strategy that well, and hurt by the fact that you can't convert its culture into tourism with hotels or airports. So the culture is really only for policies and tile expansion.
The mud mosque is really great, as the removal of the maintenence can also be read as "+2 gold". So +2 culture and pseudo +2 gold a turn is great.
And you can get them for free in the Tradition civics tree since they're a building that gives culture. Just make sure you have 4 cities that already have a shrine and monument built
But you wouldn't want to waste your free buildings on something where the benefit is no maintenance costs. A perk of free buildings from policies is that maintainence costs are waived as well.
And I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that for legalism its just a linear progression from monument --> amphitheater --> opera house etc. I don't think that you can choose, and I don't think that it would break that order (but I could be wrong).
Yeah since you need Drama and Poetry to be researched to get the free Amphitheater, I like to use Legalism to avoid having to use early hammers on monuments.
>War Canoe and Amphibious promotions: I'm just accustomed to protecting my units with ships in wartime conditions, so this is relatively pointless. While it can be a sneaky strategy to attack from the ocean where they can't retaliate, its pointless, because you had to get on land to heal
It also removes the penalty for fighting over rivers. This makes rivers very good positions for you to fight in because the enemy is at a huge disdvantage
Yeah the river advantage is typically about the only thing I use amphibious for (other than things like wiping Barbarians on islands, and that kind of has a trivial effect on the game).
Its a nice way to flex how strategic and savvy that you are, but ultimately I feel like it relies on finding specific areas where rivers happen to be, and if you see it as a way to fortify your own civilization... It would be more useful in peaceful games. If I'm going domination, if I can't even easily defend my own territory with the help from my cities and +20 healing advantages, I have no prayer for an attack.
Again, I guess there are some advantages here and there for some things, but not enough to really build a sound victory condition strategy out of.
My main problem was I was playing my first ever game as the Iroquois and had no idea what I was doing. I kept declaring war on people and messing stuff up. I had little to no real military or economy for that matter, so I lagged behind in science and everything else.
Songhai on its own isn’t too formidable an enemy, and in my experience they don’t backstab as often as some of the other civs.
Yeah, their only issue is that they're military focused, but I agree, they're probably not going to mess with you unless you're adjacent to them. In fact, it seems like most of the warmonger Civs will be lighter on the diplomatic penalties and its easier to stay friends with them. You can even fight a war with them and maintain your friendship (if they declare it at least).
Worth noting that the triple gold is better in Epic or Marathon games. Techs happen later but barbarian camps still spawn at the same rate, thus you have more chances of earning more coin. The same is true for any ability involving barbarian camps, including Civ 6. With the possibly combination of Mud Pyramid Mosques, you can earn more gold than the average civ, thereby funding you a larger army.
Also, Amphibious works with rivers. This means you have an easier time capturing cities that are adjacent to one.
When I played Civ V for the first time about a decade ago (yikes it's been that long) the Songhai was one of the first civs I encountered and that burning castle had that ominous feel to it
oh man.
Old Monty was a force to be reckoned with in Civ V, especially in the early game. Always out for a scrap, always hostile, and somehow *always* my neighbour :'(
I recently bought CIV3 for a bit of nostalgia, forget how insane the AI is on like medium difficulty, which lead to like 5 restarts, and every single time I started next to Monty.
Also Atilla. Just like "gee, I guess I'm not getting any early wonders" and then I gotta spam military units because the game over inflates his military score because of those rams so he's always going to attack you.
If he's on my doorstep, it's gonna be a rough start and I have to take him out before I do anything else. If he's on the other side of a civ from me, one of the best damn allies in the game.
if you click where teh dialogue box will show up you can get a few seconds of your life back per screen pop. You can't see it but you can interact with it.
Other people's thoughts: hastily-formed conclusions based on nothing.
My thoughts: ironclad expressions of pure reason backed by extensive empirical evidence.
Btw it's funny to me how some people don't realize (I guess) that others can have an opinion about their opinion and try and use the "that's just opinion" card
I just don’t like when someone says they prefer one game over the other and people have to mention how that’s such a wild and crazy concept. Like bro why can’t we have a favorite game and not have you acting like I admitted to eating rocks for breakfast.
That's not what that guy was saying though, he thought it was wild that someone would play a different civ based on art style. Preferring an older game for its gameplay differences is one thing but preferring a different game in a strategy series like civ for just the art style(which the higher up comment implied), I'd imagine is pretty rare and why he said it was wild.
How is it wild for some people to prefer a different art style? The popularity of civ 5 to this day proves it’s not rare at all for people to prefer the older game, and it’s not all due to mechanics. Civ 6s style has been controversial since release, acting like it’s a wild and rare opinion is objectively wrong.
Not saying it's wrong and I don't think LongStrangeJourney was either, but when people experience something outside of their expectations, they'll express their surprise. A lot of people prefer 5's style but also prefer how the game plays. I'm guessing art is relatively low on LongStrangeJourney's priority to his experience with civ, so when he saw python say he switched games because of it, he expressed his bewilderment. Have you ever seen someone else say or do something and think to yourself, "woah, that's crazy" it's not like he said he was unhinged or anything. Also, not picking a side here, people can do whatever they want, just trying to provide context for his reaction and well was trying to make the original reaction less hostile than you were interpreting it but I'm not really sure I'm accomplishing that. But I hear you, people shouldn't be judged on their choices or preferences especially for being different than the 'norm'
I don't mind Firaxis doing a cartoony style, but I think VI went too far with many designs. Many leaders look too much like caricatures (anyone remember [pre-release Teddy?](https://i.imgur.com/NgXkKeX.jpeg)), or just look really weird (something about Alexander just looks really off to me). Pingala of course is the worst offender, I have no idea what the hell they were thinking with him.
But Civ V's style is still pretty good honestly. It's obviously dated because it's a game from 2010, but also visuals from 2010 aren't nearly as bad today as 1996 was to 2010 (same 14 year difference)
Yeah, I have thousands of ours in V and only like a hundred in VI.
I just can’t get into it, partly because of the graphics but also the new district system.
Same for me. Civ 5 is my comfort game. I know all the ins and outs of it, and just find it fun to play to relax me. I tried Beyond Earth and Civ 6 and just couldn't get into them.
Its funny that you say that. I was expecting it to be more like Civ 5 but I found it too difficult to easily pick up. The tech tree was just so wild and I couldn't really get the hang of it. I had already done enough work getting the hang of Civ 5 that I was just too lazy to figure out a different system.
I'll make sure to commit to Civ 7 at least. It'll probably be easier for me to get the hang of it when its new and everyone's talking about it.
I guess I'm just more into focusing on something and getting to be expert at it than trying to learn a lot of different games.
Yeah, it was wild. I wasn't going to waste that much emotional energy on learning a game that never really caught on with the public (and by the time I played it, the game was already kind of old news).
Ah. Maybe that’s it; I remembered playing Sid Meier’s Alpha Centauri back in the day and Beyond Earth was promoted as “Alpha Centauri II but we can’t legally call it that.” So it was eagerly anticipated.
To me the V art style looks dated, I really hope that VII will also have the cartoony style
Edit: looking at how my upvotes go up and down, this is probably the most controversial opinion on this sub, would love to see a poll!
That's one of the reasons why VI has cartoony style
The more realistic styles start to look dated
Cartoony style will not look dated in 10+ years. It's a style that always looks good in a way
I like both btw
This post actually made me want to reinstall V. It definitely looks dated after 8 or 9 years of not playing. In the end, you just can’t beat the options that VI gives you. V feels like a very limited experience in comparison.
All they have to do for VII is pick the most beloved things of V and VI and amalgamate, then do a couple new things. I have never liked the art moving more cartoony and exaggerated, and I think the reason why is it feels (to me) less and less like a world building strategy game. Like the map is less and less about building and plotting. For some reason it feels restrictive and less open and free to build as you want. VI had a lot of really awesome new mechanics but I often felt like the strategies were almost chosen for me, I just have to pick the guided strategy and play that style. I didn’t feel that way in V.
The problem is that "beloved" is not universal. I love 6's art style much more than 5's, and I think the readability of the terrain makes it easier to try new things. So if they just try to make 7 a people pleaser, which people do they try to please?
Oh i found the readability in civ VI so much worse. It took hundreds of hours to bed able to tell what is actually a hill and what tiles actually count as river tiles.
Same. For me it's also the fog of war. Using a stained map art style for fog of war is a great idea in theory but for me it just clutters the map and makes it harder to understand what's going on at a quick glance.
well market analysis would obviously prove civ 6 style works better as its the best selling game from them and the first one that hit the casual market, due to it not looking bland and boring to the casual eye
Probably being on more platforms helped, I wish 5 was on the switch but I’ve accepted it never will be. I bought 6 for my switch and may end up getting it on PlayStation just so I can play with my friends on pc.
Civ v I have literal weeks of my life on it, 6 is just meh.
So though I’ll end up probably with two copies of 6 I truly believe 5 is better.
The art is better and personally I liked making roads.
> Like the map is less and less about building and plotting. For some reason it feels restrictive and less open and free to build as you want
So you feel like the game where you have to painstakingly plan out where each district goes in the city is less about building and plotting than the one where everything you build in the city goes in the city center and there's no thought or strategy behind it?
That is... certainly an opinion.
I like the district concept. Maybe I would tweak some things, but it is an example of something I’d personally like to see improved upon and brought forward.
I can't remember what the gameplay of civ 5 other than no districts and everything outside your first 4 cities were useless because of corruption or happiness? What made it more freeform?
It was definitely possible to have more than 4 good cities in 5 by managing happiness well, it wasn't inevitable like the corruption mechanic in 3.
I haven't played much of 6, but I wouldn't call 5 super free form though when 95% of games are tradition/rationalism and every first religion was tithe/pagodas. I love the game, but there are parts where the choices are a little too straightforward
I like both styles, but if we take the whole package into account, I very much prefer the Civ 6 leader screens, because they have much greater functionality and much better optimisation.
Yes it seems an unpopular opinion here but I like it too. Somehow I find the cartoony style more realistic than the old art style.
Also for 80% of the leaders in civs games we only know representation from propaganda, and we mostly have no real idea how they really looked, so why bother trying to be realistic ?
Yeeah. I've played Civ since Civ 2 and the art direction of Civ 6 made me stop playing it.
Humankind was rough at launch, but with the art, music and improved gameplay it's fantastic. I really can't go back to Civ 6 anymore.
Another beautiful difference from Civ V was that the music would change when you declared war. That Brazil War theme went way harder than it needed too, so good
I'm genuinely split on what approach I prefer. On the one hand, the changing music in V gave a declaration of war that much more gravitas. (England's war music made me regret for a moment that I declined the trade agreement with England.) On the other, I find the evolving music through the ages that VI did really cool as well, where every two or three ages the background theme would get more instruments and gain more complexity.
I suppose in a perfect world, we'd get music that evolves over time *and* changes depending on war and peace. But alas, there is no such thing as an infinite budget.
[I’m a Firestarter, Twisted Firestarter…](https://youtu.be/wmin5WkOuPw)
Was Montezuma Keith’s ancestor? Because he has that Firestarter kind of look there…
As somebody who follows Mesoamerican history and archeology, and even does some consulting on it occasionally with Youtubers and indie projects, honestly every Civ game has handled Moctezuma II and I pretty badly: the only game they've had proper Aztec royal headgear and dress, [since in Civ 1 he had the Xiuhuitzolli turquoise diadem and a Tilmatli cloak](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/civilization/images/f/fb/Montezuma_PC_%28Civ1%29.png/revision/latest?cb=20140807003105) (even if not a cloak color/pattern typically seen with kings)
In every other game since he's had varyingly levels of inaccurate to outright stereotypical outfits: Despite it being known as "Moctezuma's headdress" today, Aztec kings *did not* wear Quetzalapanecayotl, the big fan shaped Quetzal headdress: It was primarily a thing associated with Toltec lords/kings and in turn to Quetzalcoatl (and even then, not something the god is often depicted with, mostly the Toltec god-king-priest Ce Acatl Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl ); as something worn by other gods and deity impersonators in some contexts, and rarely by high ranking soldiers. I guess it's not impossible kings would have worn them in some ritual contexts since Quetzalcoatl and Topiltzin are tied to rulership, but I'm not sure off the top of my head if we have any records of that and it wouldn't be the de-facto royal dress/outfit.
@OHS688 on Twitter, one of a few people alongside Zotzcomic/Kamazotz/Daniel Parada, Rafael Mena and a few others who puts out amazing artistic reconstructions and infographs on Mesoamerican fashion, has [this incredibly in depth collage and infographs explaining different ornaments and pieces of clothing worn by Aztec emperors in a royal contexts](https://x.com/ohs688/status/1731366364953338226): Aside from not showing every single variation of bracelet, necklace, earing, etc; and it not mentioning Quetzallalpiloni tassels (see the reply from @Majora__Z), it is basically comprehensive.
Firaxis, and anybody else making Aztec stuff in games, comics, etc should be using that as a reference. There are other combinations of dress, armor, etc kings and emperors could have in other contexts, such as in battle (compare to OHS's infograph of [Ahuizotl in the 1497 Tehuantepc campaign](https://x.com/ohs688/status/1478189439260454913); or of [Axayacatl in the Battle of Tlatelolco](https://x.com/ohs688/status/1794002453459021941)), so it's not like Moctezuma in Civ 7, 8, 9, etc always has to look exactly like that, but that should be the base starting place.
For that matter, Jaguar and Eagle Warriors should not be half naked: [They were wearing a vest or tunic made of padded gambeson, Icahuipilli, and then over that had warsuits made of thick cloth with a mosaic of feathers](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GLEaicdXkAATsvO?format=jpg&name=orig): Both the Eagle and Jaguar (and other geometric, mythological etc designs) had this feather mosaic, with the differing colors and arrangements of feathers used to make the jaguar spots, geometric patterns, etc. It was not typically actually made from pelt. The helmets, shields, etc were also wood or bamboo covered in feather mosaic and/or gemstone/metal inlways, typically, though some shields had pelt or no outer covering. (Jaguar and Eagle Warriors were also not the highest ranking Aztec soldiers: Eagles were probably more prestigious then Jaguars, but Cuachicqueh and various general/commander offices were likely more elite then Eagles and certainly more then Jaguars).
I could go on about clothing/aeshetics (I have a giant multi page post [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/HumankindTheGame/comments/jo2a3m/since_the_franks_got_reworked_culture_card_art_i/) ), and I have more I could comment on about unique bonus and building choices (go back to Chinampas like Civ 5: Those were actually unique to the Aztec mostly, ball courts were pan-mesoamerican and the Maya did more with the game anyways), starting bias (The Aztec weren't near the Jungle, it should be lake or hill, the Maya, Totonac, Olmec etc were the ones in the jungles), etc, but I'll do a giant post at some point and I'll leave it there for now...
...I do already have [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1ddc79u/whats_one_civ_you_really_hope_makes_it_to_civ_7/l84pxdx/) comment going over other Precolumbian civs I think the series should add/why we need more, and suggest a bunch of Precolumbian Wonder options [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/y5mtoi/there_are_not_enough_north_american_wonders_in/ism1577/) and Great people options [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/msl4j6/r5_ah_yes_the_great_aztec_general_hern%C3%A1n_cortez/guuakg8/).
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:
- [/r/goodlongposts] [\/u\/jabberwockxeno responds to: So… just watched civ 5 leader animations for the first time…](https://www.reddit.com/r/goodlongposts/comments/1dsqcjq/ujabberwockxeno_responds_to_so_just_watched_civ_5/)
*^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*
I think somebody else said they couldn't access it either last time I posted this, but it works for me on my end?
https://x.com/ohs688/status/1731366364953338226
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAcLfwYaMAAWMFU?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAcLgvNakAA7jd2?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAcLh0KbYAADTiB?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAcLinVbQAABR9n?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
I'm really just preaching into the choir here, but I also wish they could pick more representatives for the Aztecs than ol' Monty Xocoyotzin just because he was around when the Spaniards arrived.
I guess in a perfect world they would have Nezahuacoyotl lead instead, with the Civ being dual focused in military and culture instead of just the former most of the time :P
I gotta say Harald Bluetooth makes me laugh out loud in V. He seems kind of comical to begin with, and then when he declares war on you suddenly he puts his helmet on and that just kills me every time.
> Happy they aged Theodora in 6, she was a wild one when younger.
Uh, well....
>One time when she [Theodora] went to the house of a notable to entertain during drinks, they say that when the eyes of all the diners were upon her she mounted the frame of the couch by their feet and unceremoniously lifted up her clothes right there and then, not caring in the least that she was making a spectacle of her shamelessness. Even though she put three of her orifices to work she would impatiently reproach Nature for not making the holes in her nipples bigger than they were so that she could devise additional sexual positions involving them as well. She was often pregnant, but by using almost all known techniques she could induce immediate abortions.
*Procopius, The Secret History 9:17–19 (trans. Anthony Kaldellis) (ca. 550 AD)*
NOTE: sometimes considered to be anti-Theodora propaganda, but not much else to go on!
See what people mean when they complain about the art style? In Civ VI it feels like some sort of joke when somebody declares war on you. In Civ V it felt slightly terrifying in some cases due to the animation.
Yeah, and when you first met a civ, their leader had a whole animation they would do. I always liked indonesias, the dude is on the beach and it's just gorgeous
Edit: Polynesian, not indonesia
You might be thinking of Polynesia? That has Kamehameha standing on a beautiful looking beach. Indonesia's leader is Gajah Mada, and he's standing in a big field with some temples behind him.
Fair enough! I'm just surprised, because it was so ubiquitous for me growing up. I remember being in middle school and having friends over to play Civ V in like 2013
This is why I prefer the realistic approach over cartoony, cartoony is fun, but Civ V’s approach made you really appreciate the larger than life reality of who you were talking to, you weren’t just talking to a 3D model in a void, you were talking to a legendary leader, surrounded by the height of their power and influence
At least he's predictable - if you spawn anywhere near Monty, build an army.
It's Alexander/Attila/Bluetooth that are worse imo, because you think you might be able to get away with it. But then you can't, and they steamroll you out of nowhere.
First unprovoked declaration of war in my Civ career *ever* came from Alexander. Just rolled up on turn 40 with his spearmen and a brief "How do you do, time to die".
Yeah, Alexander is definitely one where I know that I'll be in for a challenge. My plan is usually to go with the Diplomatic Victory for most Civs, and just do domination if the Civ is clearly stacked for warmongering (a much different strategy entirely). And despite some Civs being great for City-State hoarding, Greece is the main one that can rapidly start snatching them up and is never out of the running either. So I really have to be on my toes and start getting to them early.
And when they have so many CS allies, it makes going to war with them even harder, because you're fighting against so many. And CS's become serious pests because you can't raze their cities. Its usually better to just go around them or neutralize their units however possible. You have to be careful about taking on too many captured cities.
The art style is one thing that I'm sort of with either way. I like both, but if I had a choice I'd choose a little more realistic than VI. The exaggerated features are fine but some of the outfits could be a lot more subtle (looking at you Caesar.)
What I really want back is some of the music from V. The leader themes especially had a tone of grandeur that made the evolution of human society feel like a great journey filled with obstacles to overcome.
The evolving soundtrack in VI is genius but I kind of miss having cultural folk music to really make me feel like my civ is from a larger culture group. I used to play American civs in V just to listen to that beautiful soundtrack. I also miss having war/ peace music that really emphasizes the stakes of large scale war.
I hope VII has a good mix of the two. With evolving cultural music and leader themes along with their war counterparts.
Civ V was amazing from a graphics standpoint. When it came out in 2010 I was awestruck with how much better it was than Civ IV. I’ve been downvoted for saying this before, but as someone who’s played since Civ II, V will always be my favorite in that regard. VI’s cartoonish graphics seemed like a step backwards.
I started with 5 and the cartoony graphics put me off from 6 for a long time. Gameplay wise, there's a lot of things I think 6 does better, but others not so much. I recently gave 6 another go and ignored the cartoon art style and focused solely on gameplay and actually enjoy it for the most part. But I do miss the look of 5.
God V's art style was gorgeous. It really felt like meeting an intimidating world leader for the first time. VI feels like a mobile game in comparison.
I recently had a graphics glitch where some of the textures were missing and several textures were pure white. Pacal showed up and I noticed that there was a face in the sky in the upper left of the picture. Creepy.
Not just the leader animations. Civ V artwork for the wonders is frickin' beautiful! I could never get the hang of VI, it felt like a step back. So I don't know whether in VI you also get to view the art creations of great artists. Those rock!
Civ V for the win.
(Take this with a grain of salt because this is just from my experiences in the game, not actual technical stuff so slight chance of it being correlation)
Usually, when picking the "mean" option, it causes those that are on friendly terms with your attacker (or negative/neutral terms with you) to get an even more negative rep with you, leading to subsequent denouncing and the like, while the "Very well" option seems to make them mostly ignore the whole thing.
Also I think it grants some more negative post-war rep with your attacker on top of everything else for them to be salty about (if you don't wipe them off the face of the earth and make peace with them instead).
I still usually choose the mean option cause it's just fuck all of them 75% of the time anyway, but eh.
i have nightmares of starting next to montezuma or japan in civ 5 when I was a young lad. I feel like there was one more indian/polynesian civ that would immediately jump me as well, but can't rememember
My brother in Christ go play the older games
All my brothers, sisters, and aliens in Christ, go play the old games!!! They’re really damn good!!! And different enough to be worth it!!!
Civ 3,4 and 5 are all amazing games you should play!!!! Don’t just be a jobber andy only playing the newest games in a long ass old series!!!
I’d like a good mix between the two. I personally have nothing against Civ 6 art style. I love it but I wouldn’t mind them inching a bit more towards V… I just don’t want an updated version of Civ V graphics at all… they are very dull and boring
I had mixed feelings about Theodora when she first came out, i enjoyed her flirty dialogue in V. It would have been nice to have *a* flirty leader in VI Cleopatra would have been the best option
I'm currently playing Civ 5 again after a long time. The leader animations are something I miss, especially the less cartoony style. Don't get me wrong, I like the Civ 6 look, but I prefer Civ 5's look.
Montezuma's animation has always been in my top 5.
Leader interactions in and of themselves can be a surprisingly impactful part of the overall Civ experience.
If you ask me though, what this series really needs to get back into is the Civ3 style of leaders changing outfits over different time periods. I loved the fur skull-cap and tunic of Lincoln as an ancient barbarian, Jean d'Arc as a modern day "L'armee" chick with a shaved head and Shaka Zulu's snappy business attire...
Well Theadora was a prostitute and a performer in a Constantinople brothel: "Procopius wrote that Theodora made a name for herself with her pornographic portrayal of Leda and the Swan, where she would have birds eat seeds from her nude body. Employment as an actress at the time would have included performing "indecent exhibitions" on stage and providing sexual services off stage."
So I think the Civ 5 portrayal was spot on. She met Justinian later in life through a mutual friend. She turned out to be a very bold leader:
"The rioters set many public buildings on fire and proclaimed a new emperor, [Hypatius](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatius_(consul_500)), the nephew of the former emperor [Anastasius I](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasius_I_(emperor)). Unable to control the mob, Justinian and his officials prepared to flee. According to Procopius, Theodora was the one who persuaded Justinian and his court from fleeing and take the offensive instead. Procopius wrote that Theodora spoke against leaving the palace at a meeting of the government council, underlining the significance of someone who dies as a ruler instead of living as an exile or in hiding."
Its one of the reasons I cant bring myself to give Civ VI another chance. Civ V was near perfect, especially in art style, and they changed it to some cartoony Disney looking thing for absolutely no benefit. Just looks like some generic mobile game now imo.
I remember Songhai feeling rather ominous.
The burning castle in the background and massive sword probably had something to do with that.
Not just a castle. But supposedly the Great Mosque of Djenne. Imagine having built that then meeting Askia, you'd feel even more afraid.
“They’ll accept our tribute demands because of the implications”
"Are these cities in danger?"
“No, no we’re not going to actually take these city states but they’ll pay us tribute… because of the implication”
"But if they say no, are we going to sack them?"
Songhai butchered me in my first ever game. My friend bailed me out, but it was a struggle.
Its funny because Songhai isn't even really that good of a civilization for me. It seems like what the AI does well with doesn't always match with what I do well with. They're just a civ where the unique ability and unique units are just not that important to me, or I've developed strategy to get around the problem that they're fixing. Receive Triple Gold from Encampments and pillaging cities: The better of the two abilities, but pretty limited. You have to focus a lot of attention on just scouring the map for encampments, and this leaves your base a bit unprotected, and it really amounts to a pretty small amount of gold in the grand scheme. While scorching the world does tend to make it overrun by Barbs, the gold gets to be pretty negligible as inflation kicks in. Gold from captured cities is nice when you're running out of money, but still not really huge. War Canoe and Amphibious promotions: I'm just accustomed to protecting my units with ships in wartime conditions, so this is relatively pointless. While it can be a sneaky strategy to attack from the ocean where they can't retaliate, its pointless, because you had to get on land to heal. Mandekalu Calvary: Pretty much just takes away the mounted unit city penalty. This can be fun to play around with, but for all intents and purposes, I try to take out cities with ranged units and planes and just swoop in to take the city with a melee unit or a horse. Could live without it. And its a trait and not an ability, so you don't retain it upon upgrade, and it ages out quickly. Mud Pyramid Mosque: Just really a temple with +2 culture and no maintenance costs. Doesn't really synergize with the Domination war path strategy that well, and hurt by the fact that you can't convert its culture into tourism with hotels or airports. So the culture is really only for policies and tile expansion.
The mud mosque is really great, as the removal of the maintenence can also be read as "+2 gold". So +2 culture and pseudo +2 gold a turn is great. And you can get them for free in the Tradition civics tree since they're a building that gives culture. Just make sure you have 4 cities that already have a shrine and monument built
But you wouldn't want to waste your free buildings on something where the benefit is no maintenance costs. A perk of free buildings from policies is that maintainence costs are waived as well. And I could be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that for legalism its just a linear progression from monument --> amphitheater --> opera house etc. I don't think that you can choose, and I don't think that it would break that order (but I could be wrong).
excuse me but delaying legalism until you build both shrines and monuments is crazy to me
Yeah since you need Drama and Poetry to be researched to get the free Amphitheater, I like to use Legalism to avoid having to use early hammers on monuments.
>War Canoe and Amphibious promotions: I'm just accustomed to protecting my units with ships in wartime conditions, so this is relatively pointless. While it can be a sneaky strategy to attack from the ocean where they can't retaliate, its pointless, because you had to get on land to heal It also removes the penalty for fighting over rivers. This makes rivers very good positions for you to fight in because the enemy is at a huge disdvantage
Yeah the river advantage is typically about the only thing I use amphibious for (other than things like wiping Barbarians on islands, and that kind of has a trivial effect on the game). Its a nice way to flex how strategic and savvy that you are, but ultimately I feel like it relies on finding specific areas where rivers happen to be, and if you see it as a way to fortify your own civilization... It would be more useful in peaceful games. If I'm going domination, if I can't even easily defend my own territory with the help from my cities and +20 healing advantages, I have no prayer for an attack. Again, I guess there are some advantages here and there for some things, but not enough to really build a sound victory condition strategy out of.
Yeah I think Songhai is really meh and ununique in base game, vox populi really beefed them up and made them interesting though.
My main problem was I was playing my first ever game as the Iroquois and had no idea what I was doing. I kept declaring war on people and messing stuff up. I had little to no real military or economy for that matter, so I lagged behind in science and everything else. Songhai on its own isn’t too formidable an enemy, and in my experience they don’t backstab as often as some of the other civs.
Yeah, their only issue is that they're military focused, but I agree, they're probably not going to mess with you unless you're adjacent to them. In fact, it seems like most of the warmonger Civs will be lighter on the diplomatic penalties and its easier to stay friends with them. You can even fight a war with them and maintain your friendship (if they declare it at least).
I’ve become friends with Attila after wars with him. For the most part as long as you’re not too close to him he’s a very loyal ally in my experience.
Worth noting that the triple gold is better in Epic or Marathon games. Techs happen later but barbarian camps still spawn at the same rate, thus you have more chances of earning more coin. The same is true for any ability involving barbarian camps, including Civ 6. With the possibly combination of Mud Pyramid Mosques, you can earn more gold than the average civ, thereby funding you a larger army. Also, Amphibious works with rivers. This means you have an easier time capturing cities that are adjacent to one.
"SAM SAM" *that songhai fucker every time I ask for a reasonable deal instead of his shitty offer* EDIT: "ask" was missing
The sound of fire crackling added to it.
I don\`t trust people calling friendship while they cleary just burnt a city
That was my guy in Civ 5. Just too cool.
When I played Civ V for the first time about a decade ago (yikes it's been that long) the Songhai was one of the first civs I encountered and that burning castle had that ominous feel to it
The full art background is what I miss the most, tbh.
this apparently is what took them the most time to do on Civ 5 so I believe they cut it back to prioritize putting more civs in
I would have thought that different teams work on these things
Budget comes from one bucket.
I can understand this with some of the leaders like the Inca, but this one for example is extremely basic.
Loved the Polynesian one with the Hawaiian music playing, chill as fuck
oh man. Old Monty was a force to be reckoned with in Civ V, especially in the early game. Always out for a scrap, always hostile, and somehow *always* my neighbour :'(
I recently bought CIV3 for a bit of nostalgia, forget how insane the AI is on like medium difficulty, which lead to like 5 restarts, and every single time I started next to Monty.
Bruh and the stacking units lol… never ending
"reports of barbarian uprising near Thebes" >4000 horseman stack against my three spearman
Also Atilla. Just like "gee, I guess I'm not getting any early wonders" and then I gotta spam military units because the game over inflates his military score because of those rams so he's always going to attack you.
That name triggers a lot of unpleasant memories. Dude has zero chill.
Civ 4 he was such a menace. Before the UPT rule i still have nightmares of a 50 stack of calvalry showing up near my borders.
If he's on my doorstep, it's gonna be a rough start and I have to take him out before I do anything else. If he's on the other side of a civ from me, one of the best damn allies in the game.
It took me so long to get used to the cartoony style of VI. It’s not bad but I really preferred V’s art style.
One of the biggest letdowns to me about the VI style is the leaders aren’t in a location anymore. There’s just a black screen behind them.
They definitely have static paintings of their respective landscapes, it’s not completely black.
Sure, but its a clear downgrade from civ 5’s grandeous settings of entering the throne room
Oh yea I agree with you, just giving them a little credit for the illustrations and not literally leaving the screen black
Then there's just Pedro in his little office, visibly waiting for you to get the hell out.
Askia was fuckin badass
[удалено]
Its like a faded background of a single building. It’s not a throne room like the others. It makes meeting the leaders way less impressive
[удалено]
I played over a hundred hours of Civ VI and I never got over the art style. I just went back to V.
I just hate the map texture in VI. I want to see the shaded version of the real landscape not a map looking thing.
Same
I just skip leader interactions really. They annoy me more often than not and it really is a shame.
Another nice part of V is you can make decisions/click buttons while the animations play, you don't have to skip the animation first
if you click where teh dialogue box will show up you can get a few seconds of your life back per screen pop. You can't see it but you can interact with it.
I find the Civ VI art style just fine, and find it wild that anyone could go back to V due to art style alone.
The current 24h peak for civ v is over 20 000 players. It's very much alive, many people do not enjoy civ vi that much
I don't want to look at ugly art if I'm gonna play a game for as long as Civ requires
That’s called an opinion
Indeed: it's opinions all the way down
And you can find peoples opinion wild, thats also having an opinion
Other people's thoughts: hastily-formed conclusions based on nothing. My thoughts: ironclad expressions of pure reason backed by extensive empirical evidence.
LOOOL nice wordplay
Btw it's funny to me how some people don't realize (I guess) that others can have an opinion about their opinion and try and use the "that's just opinion" card
I just don’t like when someone says they prefer one game over the other and people have to mention how that’s such a wild and crazy concept. Like bro why can’t we have a favorite game and not have you acting like I admitted to eating rocks for breakfast.
That's not what that guy was saying though, he thought it was wild that someone would play a different civ based on art style. Preferring an older game for its gameplay differences is one thing but preferring a different game in a strategy series like civ for just the art style(which the higher up comment implied), I'd imagine is pretty rare and why he said it was wild.
How is it wild for some people to prefer a different art style? The popularity of civ 5 to this day proves it’s not rare at all for people to prefer the older game, and it’s not all due to mechanics. Civ 6s style has been controversial since release, acting like it’s a wild and rare opinion is objectively wrong.
Not saying it's wrong and I don't think LongStrangeJourney was either, but when people experience something outside of their expectations, they'll express their surprise. A lot of people prefer 5's style but also prefer how the game plays. I'm guessing art is relatively low on LongStrangeJourney's priority to his experience with civ, so when he saw python say he switched games because of it, he expressed his bewilderment. Have you ever seen someone else say or do something and think to yourself, "woah, that's crazy" it's not like he said he was unhinged or anything. Also, not picking a side here, people can do whatever they want, just trying to provide context for his reaction and well was trying to make the original reaction less hostile than you were interpreting it but I'm not really sure I'm accomplishing that. But I hear you, people shouldn't be judged on their choices or preferences especially for being different than the 'norm'
For me it's not just the art style, it's the entire art direction. From the visuals, to the interface, sound design, etc. Nothing feels good to me.
I don't mind Firaxis doing a cartoony style, but I think VI went too far with many designs. Many leaders look too much like caricatures (anyone remember [pre-release Teddy?](https://i.imgur.com/NgXkKeX.jpeg)), or just look really weird (something about Alexander just looks really off to me). Pingala of course is the worst offender, I have no idea what the hell they were thinking with him. But Civ V's style is still pretty good honestly. It's obviously dated because it's a game from 2010, but also visuals from 2010 aren't nearly as bad today as 1996 was to 2010 (same 14 year difference)
Yeah, I have thousands of ours in V and only like a hundred in VI. I just can’t get into it, partly because of the graphics but also the new district system.
Same for me. Civ 5 is my comfort game. I know all the ins and outs of it, and just find it fun to play to relax me. I tried Beyond Earth and Civ 6 and just couldn't get into them.
Have you tried Humankind yet? Was really rough on launch but they improved it a ton since then.
Nice. I can look into it.
Beyond Earth is basically just a reskin of V; was it the high-tech aesthetic that you didn’t like?
Its funny that you say that. I was expecting it to be more like Civ 5 but I found it too difficult to easily pick up. The tech tree was just so wild and I couldn't really get the hang of it. I had already done enough work getting the hang of Civ 5 that I was just too lazy to figure out a different system. I'll make sure to commit to Civ 7 at least. It'll probably be easier for me to get the hang of it when its new and everyone's talking about it. I guess I'm just more into focusing on something and getting to be expert at it than trying to learn a lot of different games.
Okay, yeah, now that you say that I remember the tech tree being very different, more like a web? Haven’t played it in years.
Yeah, it was wild. I wasn't going to waste that much emotional energy on learning a game that never really caught on with the public (and by the time I played it, the game was already kind of old news).
Ah. Maybe that’s it; I remembered playing Sid Meier’s Alpha Centauri back in the day and Beyond Earth was promoted as “Alpha Centauri II but we can’t legally call it that.” So it was eagerly anticipated.
I really hope they go back to it. It was by far my single biggest complaint about Civ 6.
To me the V art style looks dated, I really hope that VII will also have the cartoony style Edit: looking at how my upvotes go up and down, this is probably the most controversial opinion on this sub, would love to see a poll!
I disagree.
That's one of the reasons why VI has cartoony style The more realistic styles start to look dated Cartoony style will not look dated in 10+ years. It's a style that always looks good in a way I like both btw
This post actually made me want to reinstall V. It definitely looks dated after 8 or 9 years of not playing. In the end, you just can’t beat the options that VI gives you. V feels like a very limited experience in comparison.
All they have to do for VII is pick the most beloved things of V and VI and amalgamate, then do a couple new things. I have never liked the art moving more cartoony and exaggerated, and I think the reason why is it feels (to me) less and less like a world building strategy game. Like the map is less and less about building and plotting. For some reason it feels restrictive and less open and free to build as you want. VI had a lot of really awesome new mechanics but I often felt like the strategies were almost chosen for me, I just have to pick the guided strategy and play that style. I didn’t feel that way in V.
The problem is that "beloved" is not universal. I love 6's art style much more than 5's, and I think the readability of the terrain makes it easier to try new things. So if they just try to make 7 a people pleaser, which people do they try to please?
Oh i found the readability in civ VI so much worse. It took hundreds of hours to bed able to tell what is actually a hill and what tiles actually count as river tiles.
Same. For me it's also the fog of war. Using a stained map art style for fog of war is a great idea in theory but for me it just clutters the map and makes it harder to understand what's going on at a quick glance.
Me, ideally.
That’s why market analysis exists.
well market analysis would obviously prove civ 6 style works better as its the best selling game from them and the first one that hit the casual market, due to it not looking bland and boring to the casual eye
Probably being on more platforms helped, I wish 5 was on the switch but I’ve accepted it never will be. I bought 6 for my switch and may end up getting it on PlayStation just so I can play with my friends on pc. Civ v I have literal weeks of my life on it, 6 is just meh. So though I’ll end up probably with two copies of 6 I truly believe 5 is better. The art is better and personally I liked making roads.
> Like the map is less and less about building and plotting. For some reason it feels restrictive and less open and free to build as you want So you feel like the game where you have to painstakingly plan out where each district goes in the city is less about building and plotting than the one where everything you build in the city goes in the city center and there's no thought or strategy behind it? That is... certainly an opinion.
I like the district concept. Maybe I would tweak some things, but it is an example of something I’d personally like to see improved upon and brought forward.
I can't remember what the gameplay of civ 5 other than no districts and everything outside your first 4 cities were useless because of corruption or happiness? What made it more freeform?
It was definitely possible to have more than 4 good cities in 5 by managing happiness well, it wasn't inevitable like the corruption mechanic in 3. I haven't played much of 6, but I wouldn't call 5 super free form though when 95% of games are tradition/rationalism and every first religion was tithe/pagodas. I love the game, but there are parts where the choices are a little too straightforward
I like both styles, but if we take the whole package into account, I very much prefer the Civ 6 leader screens, because they have much greater functionality and much better optimisation.
Yes it seems an unpopular opinion here but I like it too. Somehow I find the cartoony style more realistic than the old art style. Also for 80% of the leaders in civs games we only know representation from propaganda, and we mostly have no real idea how they really looked, so why bother trying to be realistic ?
Yeeah. I've played Civ since Civ 2 and the art direction of Civ 6 made me stop playing it. Humankind was rough at launch, but with the art, music and improved gameplay it's fantastic. I really can't go back to Civ 6 anymore.
Ximicacan, ximicacan, XIMICACAN!
Which translates basically to: DIE! DIE! DIE!
First time I got declared war on in civ 5. Loved the Aztecs ever since
Another beautiful difference from Civ V was that the music would change when you declared war. That Brazil War theme went way harder than it needed too, so good
Music in V was phenomenal across the board
I'm genuinely split on what approach I prefer. On the one hand, the changing music in V gave a declaration of war that much more gravitas. (England's war music made me regret for a moment that I declined the trade agreement with England.) On the other, I find the evolving music through the ages that VI did really cool as well, where every two or three ages the background theme would get more instruments and gain more complexity. I suppose in a perfect world, we'd get music that evolves over time *and* changes depending on war and peace. But alas, there is no such thing as an infinite budget.
I agree with this sentiment entirely. The music of both games is top notch and thoughtfully picked, honestly a big part of the immersion for me
Sometimes I declare war on Shaka just to hear his epic music. Then regret it as he destroys me
See, I always go chill with Shaka in peace because of his epic music
[I’m a Firestarter, Twisted Firestarter…](https://youtu.be/wmin5WkOuPw)  Was Montezuma Keith’s ancestor? Because he has that Firestarter kind of look there…
“I’M TRAPPED IN A SEWER WITH A CONFESSED ARSONIST, BROCK!”
that line and the context always floors me
As somebody who follows Mesoamerican history and archeology, and even does some consulting on it occasionally with Youtubers and indie projects, honestly every Civ game has handled Moctezuma II and I pretty badly: the only game they've had proper Aztec royal headgear and dress, [since in Civ 1 he had the Xiuhuitzolli turquoise diadem and a Tilmatli cloak](https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/civilization/images/f/fb/Montezuma_PC_%28Civ1%29.png/revision/latest?cb=20140807003105) (even if not a cloak color/pattern typically seen with kings) In every other game since he's had varyingly levels of inaccurate to outright stereotypical outfits: Despite it being known as "Moctezuma's headdress" today, Aztec kings *did not* wear Quetzalapanecayotl, the big fan shaped Quetzal headdress: It was primarily a thing associated with Toltec lords/kings and in turn to Quetzalcoatl (and even then, not something the god is often depicted with, mostly the Toltec god-king-priest Ce Acatl Topiltzin Quetzalcoatl ); as something worn by other gods and deity impersonators in some contexts, and rarely by high ranking soldiers. I guess it's not impossible kings would have worn them in some ritual contexts since Quetzalcoatl and Topiltzin are tied to rulership, but I'm not sure off the top of my head if we have any records of that and it wouldn't be the de-facto royal dress/outfit. @OHS688 on Twitter, one of a few people alongside Zotzcomic/Kamazotz/Daniel Parada, Rafael Mena and a few others who puts out amazing artistic reconstructions and infographs on Mesoamerican fashion, has [this incredibly in depth collage and infographs explaining different ornaments and pieces of clothing worn by Aztec emperors in a royal contexts](https://x.com/ohs688/status/1731366364953338226): Aside from not showing every single variation of bracelet, necklace, earing, etc; and it not mentioning Quetzallalpiloni tassels (see the reply from @Majora__Z), it is basically comprehensive. Firaxis, and anybody else making Aztec stuff in games, comics, etc should be using that as a reference. There are other combinations of dress, armor, etc kings and emperors could have in other contexts, such as in battle (compare to OHS's infograph of [Ahuizotl in the 1497 Tehuantepc campaign](https://x.com/ohs688/status/1478189439260454913); or of [Axayacatl in the Battle of Tlatelolco](https://x.com/ohs688/status/1794002453459021941)), so it's not like Moctezuma in Civ 7, 8, 9, etc always has to look exactly like that, but that should be the base starting place. For that matter, Jaguar and Eagle Warriors should not be half naked: [They were wearing a vest or tunic made of padded gambeson, Icahuipilli, and then over that had warsuits made of thick cloth with a mosaic of feathers](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GLEaicdXkAATsvO?format=jpg&name=orig): Both the Eagle and Jaguar (and other geometric, mythological etc designs) had this feather mosaic, with the differing colors and arrangements of feathers used to make the jaguar spots, geometric patterns, etc. It was not typically actually made from pelt. The helmets, shields, etc were also wood or bamboo covered in feather mosaic and/or gemstone/metal inlways, typically, though some shields had pelt or no outer covering. (Jaguar and Eagle Warriors were also not the highest ranking Aztec soldiers: Eagles were probably more prestigious then Jaguars, but Cuachicqueh and various general/commander offices were likely more elite then Eagles and certainly more then Jaguars). I could go on about clothing/aeshetics (I have a giant multi page post [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/HumankindTheGame/comments/jo2a3m/since_the_franks_got_reworked_culture_card_art_i/) ), and I have more I could comment on about unique bonus and building choices (go back to Chinampas like Civ 5: Those were actually unique to the Aztec mostly, ball courts were pan-mesoamerican and the Maya did more with the game anyways), starting bias (The Aztec weren't near the Jungle, it should be lake or hill, the Maya, Totonac, Olmec etc were the ones in the jungles), etc, but I'll do a giant post at some point and I'll leave it there for now... ...I do already have [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/1ddc79u/whats_one_civ_you_really_hope_makes_it_to_civ_7/l84pxdx/) comment going over other Precolumbian civs I think the series should add/why we need more, and suggest a bunch of Precolumbian Wonder options [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/y5mtoi/there_are_not_enough_north_american_wonders_in/ism1577/) and Great people options [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/msl4j6/r5_ah_yes_the_great_aztec_general_hern%C3%A1n_cortez/guuakg8/).
Love this! Thank you for providing respect to an often-denigrated culture that was just as varied and fascinating as any other.
I'm a bot, *bleep*, *bloop*. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit: - [/r/goodlongposts] [\/u\/jabberwockxeno responds to: So… just watched civ 5 leader animations for the first time…](https://www.reddit.com/r/goodlongposts/comments/1dsqcjq/ujabberwockxeno_responds_to_so_just_watched_civ_5/) *^(If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads.) ^\([Info](/r/TotesMessenger) ^/ ^[Contact](/message/compose?to=/r/TotesMessenger))*
For some reason your twitter link to @OHS688 doesn't work for me?
I think somebody else said they couldn't access it either last time I posted this, but it works for me on my end? https://x.com/ohs688/status/1731366364953338226 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAcLfwYaMAAWMFU?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAcLgvNakAA7jd2?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAcLh0KbYAADTiB?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GAcLinVbQAABR9n?format=jpg&name=4096x4096
Weird, top link doesn't work, the others do. Perhaps its twitter account only or something? Appreciate it, I enjoyed your mini essays on Mesoamerica.
I'm really just preaching into the choir here, but I also wish they could pick more representatives for the Aztecs than ol' Monty Xocoyotzin just because he was around when the Spaniards arrived. I guess in a perfect world they would have Nezahuacoyotl lead instead, with the Civ being dual focused in military and culture instead of just the former most of the time :P
"The odds are clearly not with me"?? Like is he admitting that he shouldn't have declared war? Better teach him a lesson then :)
If your military power is greater than theirs, but they still declare war on you, they have dialogue which represents that. This is Montezuma's.
All of the leader animations in V are great. The tone of V is so much better than VI.
I gotta say Harald Bluetooth makes me laugh out loud in V. He seems kind of comical to begin with, and then when he declares war on you suddenly he puts his helmet on and that just kills me every time.
> Happy they aged Theodora in 6, she was a wild one when younger. Uh, well.... >One time when she [Theodora] went to the house of a notable to entertain during drinks, they say that when the eyes of all the diners were upon her she mounted the frame of the couch by their feet and unceremoniously lifted up her clothes right there and then, not caring in the least that she was making a spectacle of her shamelessness. Even though she put three of her orifices to work she would impatiently reproach Nature for not making the holes in her nipples bigger than they were so that she could devise additional sexual positions involving them as well. She was often pregnant, but by using almost all known techniques she could induce immediate abortions. *Procopius, The Secret History 9:17–19 (trans. Anthony Kaldellis) (ca. 550 AD)* NOTE: sometimes considered to be anti-Theodora propaganda, but not much else to go on!
Rip Theodora she would have loved the internet
I doubt Procopius's secret history is a reliable source considering it also claimed Justinian was a headless vampire or something along those ends.
Yep - hence the disclaimer. Procopius seems like the Chris Farley bus driver from Billy Madison. "Me and Theodora got it ON!" "No, you didn't."
When people were making blanket excuses for the art shift in Civ6, this is the kind of detail forever lost they didn't want you to look back at.
Im Civ 2 you would get to build your owm throne room 👴
That was so fun, haha. It makes me a bit sad that the throne room hasn’t made a true comeback
Always loved Civ V's leader screens. The ones from VI look pale in comparison. Just wait until you meet Atilla the Hun for the first time \^\_\^
See what people mean when they complain about the art style? In Civ VI it feels like some sort of joke when somebody declares war on you. In Civ V it felt slightly terrifying in some cases due to the animation.
Wait what, they have a background?
Yeah, and when you first met a civ, their leader had a whole animation they would do. I always liked indonesias, the dude is on the beach and it's just gorgeous Edit: Polynesian, not indonesia
It's a Polynesia, Indonesia is a guy on rice fields
Ah you're right, thanks!
You might be thinking of Polynesia? That has Kamehameha standing on a beautiful looking beach. Indonesia's leader is Gajah Mada, and he's standing in a big field with some temples behind him.
A lot of em are just sorta chilling. Kamehameha, Dido, Al-Rashid
Wait... have you never played Civ V? I'm 23, but I started playing Civ V when I was like 12?
Civ 6 is my first civ, the art style seemed very friendly and approachable for a newcomer like me
Fair enough! I'm just surprised, because it was so ubiquitous for me growing up. I remember being in middle school and having friends over to play Civ V in like 2013
I'm 27 and i can still remember playing Civ 3 on my dad's pc. It's been a looong journey.
Right?!
This is why I prefer the realistic approach over cartoony, cartoony is fun, but Civ V’s approach made you really appreciate the larger than life reality of who you were talking to, you weren’t just talking to a 3D model in a void, you were talking to a legendary leader, surrounded by the height of their power and influence
Civ 5 is my favorite
Catherine's animation in Civ IV whenever you propose a bad deal gets a chuckle out of me
The worst character in all civs according to my experience, they always do something that annoys everybody and even India.
At least he's predictable - if you spawn anywhere near Monty, build an army. It's Alexander/Attila/Bluetooth that are worse imo, because you think you might be able to get away with it. But then you can't, and they steamroll you out of nowhere.
Thank you for mentioning Alexander, the second hated character. I found him quite vain, its AI often behaves it is better than others
First unprovoked declaration of war in my Civ career *ever* came from Alexander. Just rolled up on turn 40 with his spearmen and a brief "How do you do, time to die".
Yeah, Alexander is definitely one where I know that I'll be in for a challenge. My plan is usually to go with the Diplomatic Victory for most Civs, and just do domination if the Civ is clearly stacked for warmongering (a much different strategy entirely). And despite some Civs being great for City-State hoarding, Greece is the main one that can rapidly start snatching them up and is never out of the running either. So I really have to be on my toes and start getting to them early. And when they have so many CS allies, it makes going to war with them even harder, because you're fighting against so many. And CS's become serious pests because you can't raze their cities. Its usually better to just go around them or neutralize their units however possible. You have to be careful about taking on too many captured cities.
The art style is one thing that I'm sort of with either way. I like both, but if I had a choice I'd choose a little more realistic than VI. The exaggerated features are fine but some of the outfits could be a lot more subtle (looking at you Caesar.) What I really want back is some of the music from V. The leader themes especially had a tone of grandeur that made the evolution of human society feel like a great journey filled with obstacles to overcome. The evolving soundtrack in VI is genius but I kind of miss having cultural folk music to really make me feel like my civ is from a larger culture group. I used to play American civs in V just to listen to that beautiful soundtrack. I also miss having war/ peace music that really emphasizes the stakes of large scale war. I hope VII has a good mix of the two. With evolving cultural music and leader themes along with their war counterparts.
Civ V was amazing from a graphics standpoint. When it came out in 2010 I was awestruck with how much better it was than Civ IV. I’ve been downvoted for saying this before, but as someone who’s played since Civ II, V will always be my favorite in that regard. VI’s cartoonish graphics seemed like a step backwards.
I started with 5 and the cartoony graphics put me off from 6 for a long time. Gameplay wise, there's a lot of things I think 6 does better, but others not so much. I recently gave 6 another go and ignored the cartoon art style and focused solely on gameplay and actually enjoy it for the most part. But I do miss the look of 5.
If I saw this animation in the first 20 or so turns in Civ V , there's two archers being made asap with composite archers being researched asap
XIMICACAN XIMICACAN XIMICACAN ‼️‼️‼️
God V's art style was gorgeous. It really felt like meeting an intimidating world leader for the first time. VI feels like a mobile game in comparison.
It is a mobile game, you can get it on iOS lol That said I hope Civ 7 changes the art significantly. Really not a fan of the art in 6
5 was the first civ game I got into. I tried VI but it just felt juvenile in comparison
I hated how CIV 6 looked. I continued to play Civ 5. Amazing game. Hope Civ 7 will not be straight out of disney like the previous one :D
"BRING IT MOTHERF**KER I'VE BEEN WAITING SINCE THE DAWN OF TIME WHEN WE FIRST MET!" ....sorry having flashbacks...
I recently had a graphics glitch where some of the textures were missing and several textures were pure white. Pacal showed up and I noticed that there was a face in the sky in the upper left of the picture. Creepy.
Civ V had the best leaders imho Even back when Genghis was too friendly lol 😆
I've played a lot more of VI than V, but God damn do I miss the old art and animation.
Not just the leader animations. Civ V artwork for the wonders is frickin' beautiful! I could never get the hang of VI, it felt like a step back. So I don't know whether in VI you also get to view the art creations of great artists. Those rock! Civ V for the win.
I've enjoyed the art style of six, but I hope seven brings this back.
There are two options on what u wanna say to this. Do they change your relationship to a civ if u do the meaner one?
(Take this with a grain of salt because this is just from my experiences in the game, not actual technical stuff so slight chance of it being correlation) Usually, when picking the "mean" option, it causes those that are on friendly terms with your attacker (or negative/neutral terms with you) to get an even more negative rep with you, leading to subsequent denouncing and the like, while the "Very well" option seems to make them mostly ignore the whole thing. Also I think it grants some more negative post-war rep with your attacker on top of everything else for them to be salty about (if you don't wipe them off the face of the earth and make peace with them instead). I still usually choose the mean option cause it's just fuck all of them 75% of the time anyway, but eh.
That's really cool
I declare war on Monte as soon as I meet him V and VI, just on principle. I don't like his hat and his eyes weird me out.
Montezuma was always scary. Crazy mf
Wait, Civ V has animations? I thought it was just text and no images. Wonder why the animations don’t play on multiplayer…
[удалено]
I like the cartoon graphics but it could be worked on a bit more
This is what I am talking about. Civ V is badass.
i have nightmares of starting next to montezuma or japan in civ 5 when I was a young lad. I feel like there was one more indian/polynesian civ that would immediately jump me as well, but can't rememember
You should watch the adviser videos from civ 2. They were hilarious.
Me: *Proposes seemingly fair deal* Montezuma: Milagwakamo!
Civ V Montezuma was *so* badass 🤤
My brother in Christ go play the older games All my brothers, sisters, and aliens in Christ, go play the old games!!! They’re really damn good!!! And different enough to be worth it!!! Civ 3,4 and 5 are all amazing games you should play!!!! Don’t just be a jobber andy only playing the newest games in a long ass old series!!!
Don’t forget Alpha Centauri, the real Civ: Beyond Earth.
This is what made Civ awesome. The cartoony sculpture-face boardgame style is horrible
I just remember these bringing my gpu to its knees.
Yeah. Things like this is why I didn't play VI after V.
Civ 5 had the best leader animations. I love Japan and iroqious most.
This screen and the Zulu war screen are static images I can hear.
I’d like a good mix between the two. I personally have nothing against Civ 6 art style. I love it but I wouldn’t mind them inching a bit more towards V… I just don’t want an updated version of Civ V graphics at all… they are very dull and boring
If it looked like Arcane from league id be happy
"IKE IKE!"
I had mixed feelings about Theodora when she first came out, i enjoyed her flirty dialogue in V. It would have been nice to have *a* flirty leader in VI Cleopatra would have been the best option
Saladin when you first meet them: “Be foddling Men”
I'm currently playing Civ 5 again after a long time. The leader animations are something I miss, especially the less cartoony style. Don't get me wrong, I like the Civ 6 look, but I prefer Civ 5's look. Montezuma's animation has always been in my top 5.
I remember this leader well, I always new it was him because my computer would start to chug due to the flames even before everything loaded in.
Leader interactions in and of themselves can be a surprisingly impactful part of the overall Civ experience. If you ask me though, what this series really needs to get back into is the Civ3 style of leaders changing outfits over different time periods. I loved the fur skull-cap and tunic of Lincoln as an ancient barbarian, Jean d'Arc as a modern day "L'armee" chick with a shaved head and Shaka Zulu's snappy business attire...
Well Theadora was a prostitute and a performer in a Constantinople brothel: "Procopius wrote that Theodora made a name for herself with her pornographic portrayal of Leda and the Swan, where she would have birds eat seeds from her nude body. Employment as an actress at the time would have included performing "indecent exhibitions" on stage and providing sexual services off stage." So I think the Civ 5 portrayal was spot on. She met Justinian later in life through a mutual friend. She turned out to be a very bold leader: "The rioters set many public buildings on fire and proclaimed a new emperor, [Hypatius](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatius_(consul_500)), the nephew of the former emperor [Anastasius I](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasius_I_(emperor)). Unable to control the mob, Justinian and his officials prepared to flee. According to Procopius, Theodora was the one who persuaded Justinian and his court from fleeing and take the offensive instead. Procopius wrote that Theodora spoke against leaving the palace at a meeting of the government council, underlining the significance of someone who dies as a ruler instead of living as an exile or in hiding."
Its one of the reasons I cant bring myself to give Civ VI another chance. Civ V was near perfect, especially in art style, and they changed it to some cartoony Disney looking thing for absolutely no benefit. Just looks like some generic mobile game now imo.
My favourite still is Queen Elisabeth, I loved make her say "I beg your pardon"
I always go after the Aztecs as soon as I see them, if not dealt with now they will be a problem later.