This one turned out quite long. 19 civs is a lot to go through! Which is looking like your favourite though? I'm feeling maybe good old Rome for my first game. A bunch more civs have been announced since release! If you want to support the channel, buy games using this *GOG* referral link: af.gog.com/?as=1715648857 They have lots of sales... Thanks!
arbalest T it's not too hard. My first civ game was Civ 5 and I was able to jump in easily. Don't see why Civ 6 would be different. I think you should wait a bit after it comes out, watch some gameplay vids, and see if you like it
For a 1st timer I would say go either Rome or Brazil. Both very flexible and doesn't lean too hard towards any specific victory condition. They also don't rely too much on specific plays, like Japan fully utilising districts or France focusing on spies. Also, there are really clear tutorials this time around from what I've seen and starting on a lower difficulty AI map should get you settled in pretty quick.
I hope they will add the Persian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, Babylon and Assyria in the next DLC. We need more middle eastern/mesopotamian empires!! :D
The Ottoman Empire under Mehmed ii would be great, I hated that Mehmed ii was not the ottoman leader in civ v and that the unique unit was not the bombards
whiteknight Yeah I hope its Mehmed too. Maybe they could add the Janissary as their unique unit and the bombards as Mehmed's special ability so the Ottomans under Mehmed could have 2 powerful unique units :D
Bini Farmer I think they'll add them all in a DLC, but there are already civs oriented to commerce: Britain is very maritime and has bonuses to other continents, Spain has bonuses to intercontinental trade and early maritime strength, Rome has a strong commerce by land using its extension, so does Egypt attracting trade routes... I think we have decent commerce already, it's true commerce is not their only main bonus, but they have one for it nonetheless.
Casrv Sfv Fair enough, though I don't see how Britain is commerce-oriented other than the fact that it's a maritime Civ. Spain's bonus I think would work better if it gave you gold for internal trade routes, so that way they could accurately represent actual Spanish treasure fleets.
Bini Farmer about Britain yes I meant that they have a strong navy and can establish routes better, also they will have better knowledge of the sea and will be able to reach civs that are further away, the dockyard will give them gold, but it's not really trade. Now, Spain can trade with other nations and get extra yields (not just from itself), so it will get extra gold from trade too. I agree that adding some extra gold in internal routes would be more accurate. I don't think they did that because they know that much about economy, but internal trade routes in mercantilism mainly boost the industry and production (eg. Britain in the XIXth century, and all of Europe actually), the coastal industrial zones in Spain appeared thanks to this trade, so it's actually accurate too that they boost production and therefore growth (creating jobs). But that's in the real world, again I doubt they did this thinking about real world economy.
Civ 6 American leader George W. Bush. Special Leader Ability: (False Flag) This ability allows this Civ to attack it's own cities, and blame it on any Civ in the game. This ability eliminates the warmonger penalty from declaring war. Booya!
I doubt that it will be Commonwealth, in previous civilization games there were sometimes Poland but never Commonwealth(if I remember correctly), second thing is that people anywhere on the world often at least heard about Poland but Commonwealth? It's much less known. And as far as I know Jadwiga is gonna be leader, and Commonwealth back in her times didn't exists. Only problem is that there are dozens better suited persons for leaders of Poland than Jadwiga... Jan III Sobieski, Boleslaw Chrobry, Mieszko I, Kazimierz Wielki, Marszalek Jozef Pilsudski, Stefan Batory(technically he was Hungarian, but holy cow he was a badass king), Wladyslaw Lokietek, even husband of Jadwiga Wladyslaw Jagiello would be much better. But i recon they wanted woman, so they had to choose Jadwiga... although I would say that Bona Sforza would be better choice, but she wasn't really polish(and she was... well ugly, the same with her daughter Anna Jagiellonka). But it was first queen that really interfer with politics
I really love how Firaxis is developing the civ unique buildings and improvements. It means that the civs get to grow over time to Look as they really do in real life. The sphinxes being built in Egyptian lands while their cities nestle closer to desert rivers than other civs can build districts, and the Great Wall being built piece by piece in Chinese lands. Just awesome.
Would've been hilarious if Caligula was the Roman leader. His Bonus: All cavalry units gain a health bonus and a seat in the senate (Latin nerds will get this)
Again, very high quality, highly informative video of yours, which nicely sums up the different pros and cons for each nations. Favourite nation(s)? There are too much! As I know myself, I will sit hours and hours before the main screen, listening the beautiful theme song and try to select one nation which fits my play style. Although I'm watching other videos of yours regularly (simply love nostalgia!), the CIV6 videos are the ones I'm mostly looking forward to on every Friday. Nothing better after a tiresome week with full of work than look one of your videos and just relax. I really appreciate the work you put into these videos for our enjoyment! Keep it up! :)
Thank you! Took me a while to write and edit this video. I'm wondering how long I sit at the main screen too. Christopher Tin composed the new main theme song, so it's going to be compared to Baba Yetu. Yeah, the Civ 6 videos are currently the best work I'm producing. One a week is sort of the limit for these sorts of videos. The live stream vods are more for me relaxing and experiencing other games so I don't get stuck in just one thing, though when Civ 6 releases I'll probably stream Civ 6 on both days haha!
Gotta agree with this! Norway on an ocean map, Rome on a land map. Both are extremely wide civs, although one is super focused on earlygame aggression while the other is focused more on wealth and growth.
I dunno, I think germany can be plenty strong early on too, due to the extra military policy slot. Those things are really strong if you're going for a rush. As well as being able to spam cities early on and get up bonus districts in them to power your war machine.
I also think Greece retains it's strength throughout the whole game due to the bonuses from being a suzerain (you keep growing your amount of city states throughout the game). Their "weakness" late game is that they are entirely focused on culture at that point, not that their bonus weakens in its specific area. Although the extra wildcard slot is definitely powerful throughout the entire game. I actually think Greece will be my first playthrough, and I'm not a "focus on the early game" kinda player.
Kongo DEFINITELY seems like a mid game civ to me. You get uber housing, as well as starting to absorb and sort out faiths from other civs at that point. And you'll also start to rack up great works at that point. The unique unit (swordsman) seems to be there to let you fight for the good city locations early on, but it's not at that point you really shine.
I agree that Norway is an early game civ (obviously). But I do think the focus is on crippling your opponents, not outright winning. Letting you pull ahead by a far margin. You don't get many tools to actually win at that stage, but lots of tools when it comes to inflicting crippling damage (and of course, pillaging gives you resources as well) to your opponents without putting yourself at risk. Then early mid game you can take out your opponents because they're behind on tech, production, etc.
Rome seems like a strict early game domination civ. Their bonuses are all focused around either giving you power early on, or saving you turns. If they're not ahead come mid game they're probably going to be very weak.
If I'm not mistaken, "Light cavalry" is just a class of unit, so I disagree that Scythia is an early game civ. In fact, they seem to be a civ that isn't bound to any part of the game at all. All their bonuses (except unique unit) are very useful throughout the entire game (well, at least until light cav unit type becomes completely obsolete if tanks don't count).
I can't decide on a favourite-they've all got something really fantastic about them. For this reason my first 4 or 5 games will be with a random civilization. Next DLC has to have Persia in it, though I suspect that Babylon, Korea, Ottomans, Zulu & Mali will turn up as DLC within the first 12 months that the game is out. Oh, and well done on a fantastic and extremely comprehensive video :).
Thanks! Yeah, I'm having a hard time figuring out what I should play first too. I'll be streaming my first game, so maybe one of the new ones, Kongo or Scythia.
I'm sure. Hey, any word why they have NINETEEN Civs? Seems like an even 20 would make sense. And I'm with you re. se. asian civs being a great idea, or maybe more from S. America or Africa. In fact, maybe a Polynesian civ with islands for an interesting navy game?
DL Fendel It's actually 18 civs, the same number that Civ 5 launched with. The Aztecs are the 19th and technically free DLC but you get 'early access' to them if you pre-order. They unlock for everyone in January next year.
Need a Civ 6, a-hole edition....Germany - Hitler, Russia - Ivan the Terrible, Rome - Nero, Belgium - King Leopold II, Ottoman Empire - Talat Pasha, France - Maximilien Robespierre etc.
for those of you who are like "wtf !! only 19 civs !!" - dont worry ! they will release the others just few months after the launch ! in dlc's !! containing 4-5 civs and costing 15-20 bucks each !!
CallMeCactusSok This helmet identified him as a Strategos, a high military rank. Like a rank insignia. And its unknown if it was just a bust thing or if it was a real thing. Probably not, because it would bd hard to wear it that way, but maybe a Strategos carried it around on official occasions.
Natanael85 Before I revised it the original version of my comment mentioned having him hold it. Also the badge of office function of that particular style of helmet is interesting. At first glance it looks like a typical Corinthian helmet, but there are some major differences. Regardless, the point of my comment was that it looks ridiculous sitting on his head like that, especially when he's not dressed for war.
Thanks for taking the time to put this together. A note on Scythia - the recent pre-release footage suggest that the restriction on Kurgans being built adjacent to one another has been eliminated. But of course everything is subject to change until the game is released (or even after) :-)
You're welcome! Yeah, they're still tweaking a couple things. I heard they made some changes to Sumeria too but nothing too drastic that would change the overall civ as far as I know.
I agree. A Southeast Asia civ would be refreshing. Go with Melaka or Srivijaya this time. The special unit can be penjajap, a Medieval or Renaissance galley. The building could be an istana (palace) or some sort of marine trading post.
Would be "interesting" to play Hitler. Many of these other leaders aren't exactly saints either. I realize that won't happen though. "Too soon". On the other hand, you indirectly play Hitler in all strategy games based on WW2. Thoughts?
It's not that it's 'too soon' as much as every leader in Civ was in power at least over 100 years ago. That, and if you put Hitler in the game, Civilization 6 will be banned in Germany.
That is simply not correct. Ghandi is in the game. Also, previous games have included Stalin, Roosevelt, Mao and Churchill. As you said, I think the issue is that it will be banned in some countries. And probably people will be offended and protest. Resulting in bad PR and less games sold. That is what I meant by "too soon". I would argue Stalin and Mao were as big "monsters", yet they have been featured in CIV. Could it be the case that countries like China and Russia aren't ashamed of Mao and Stalin respectively, in the same way that Germany is over Hitler? They are all responsible for horrible genocides, but Htiler is the only one that lost a war. "History is written by the victors", just saying :)
Good analysis. I have not yet decided who I will try first. All the civs sound so good this time, that everytime a new civ is announced, I am intrigued and want to try it. I am currently leaning towards my own nation, Norway, or Greece for my first playthrough. Sumeria is also an option. Generally I like civs which have a strong early game, and preferably a strong early UU. The Shoshone were my favorite in Civ 5 for those reasons. I am also quite interested in trying Russia. They have the land grab powers of the Shoshone, and their tundra bonuses mean they may find good territory where others will not. Depending on how you play them, they might be a strong faith civ. Their unique district is a lot better than some people think, because: * It replaces the holy site, one of the earliest districts available. This means you get a discount for building it, and it won't count towards your district limit. Getting this for one of the earliest districts is very useful. * There are more great people than before, and some have multiple uses, so you will get more tiles than you might think * Border growth seems to be slower in Civ 6, so getting extra tiles for free is extra useful * Tiles are generally more useful in Civ 6 * Also, I just think it looks beautiful Russia is probaly the civ I am currently most intrigued by, but I don't think I want to play them for my first game, because their tundra preference makes them a bit too unusual.
First video I've seen of you. Your voice is quite suiting, calming, kind off like a narrator. Also the microphone quality is superb! The video cutting and editing is amazing, very well done. I felt I didn't waste one moment, you provided a well phased video with lots of information without pauses making us waiting. Neither did you provide us with too much personal thoughts nor opinions, these types of videos are the ones I love, thanks man.
I am sad that Austria is not in list anymore. That was actually the most beautiful extension of CIV V that added Austria with my loved Husars and coffee houses :)
Catherine de who? ....jokes aside, I realize that Catherine was important. But important enough to ignore people like Charlemagne or Louis XIV for? GTFO with your political correctness, Firaxis.
Are you saying they picked Catherine because she's a woman and that Firaxis is including a lot of women leaders disproportionately? Because only 4 out of 19 civilizations are led by women right now. I think it's more likely they wanted a leader that focused on spies and espionage and found her to be a good candidate for that mechanic.
I admit that is one possibility. In today's climate, though, I think that the PC-theory is more likely. The other leaders (male as female) are demonstrably among the absolute best and most iconic leaders of their respective civilizations. Catherine? Not so much. Which makes me think they went: "Shit, we need ONE woman more, at least.....how about the Italian queen of France?"
I don't think it's as demonstrable as that. People are saying the leaders for Kongo, Japan, Egypt, and Arabia are lesser known and/or undeserving of their positions.
Red Rock Seven Yeah and many are saying she was one of the the worst too haha. Plus she was Greek. I said 'and/or' undeserving of their positions. They just asked why not Hatshepsut and it'll still be a woman.
Great video, informative and concise and, possibly most importantly, translates the details into "what does this mean for how it's likely to play?". Probably the most useful vid I've seen on this game so far. Excellent work, thanks.
lmao at Gandhi's leader bonus. "Aww, can't believe I'm beating up poor little Gandhi, maybe I should go easy on him" I KNOW YOU YOU BALD FUCKER I SAW YOU BURN THE WORLD AND LAUGH AT THE ASHES
IMO, they could easily replace Scythia, Norway, and a couple of others. No Mongolia? No Siam? No Korea? No Persia? No Ottomans? No Babylon? No Portugal? No Zulus?
The Aztec empire is undeniably more present in the minds of the modern world, though. And more exotic. Though I definitely do want more American civs--Mexico and America aren't enough representation.
They aren't looking for "importance", they are looking for recognizable names. Aztecs are sorta fan favorite for most of the Civ players, so it doesn't surprise me they are in Civ6 from the start. Sorta like Ghandi is in pretty much any Civ game. What, there were no other Indian leaders?
It says on the Civ website that Gorgo has a different agenda from Pericles. "LEADER AGENDA: WITH YOUR SHIELD OR ON IT Gorgo seeks glory in combat, therefore she will never give up items in a peace deal. She prefers civs who haven’t yielded in a peace deal and dislikes any civ who has surrendered in a peace deal or any civ who has never engaged in war." That seems cool. A true warrior, that Gorgo!
I'll likely play either Japan or America first. Spain and Rome seem interesting too. Personally, I hope we see more Native American Civs like the Inca or the Iroquois. Perhaps the Mayans too.
Well yeah, but there are around 200 nations today not counting the ones that don't exist anymore. They can't all be in the game. There are currently entire regions of the world with no civ coming from them.
GamerZakh True. However, England is in almost every civ game, as are many other European countries. Scotland (which would be my main preference for a civ to be added) has never technically had a civ to itself, and it played a very important role in European history fighting against the English.
Ireland, Wales, and Scotland have never ruled the whole of Britain and Ireland though have they? England has. Having said that though, I think the civ should have been Britain rather than England, though they may have not done this because they are planning to release the Celts as DLC.
***** I agree with your comment about Britain. Alone, England was nowhere near powerful enough to build an empire. They could hardly control Scotland. In fact, they couldn't. Scotland rose up and claimed their independence, and in turn liberated Ireland too under the rule of the Bruces.
Another great job. Wish the developers gave you access, would have been interesting seeing you play. Rome and Spain are my usual Civs and plan on using them in this game too.
Thank you! Haha bigger channels than I didn't get access, so I don't know what 2K is looking for when it comes to press access for Civ 6. Was watching the Yogscast and they said even Duncan didn't get a copy. I'll be streaming as soon as I can though. First game I'm now leaning towards playing Kongo.
I am so glad firaxis doesn’t start including Stalin or Hitler as playable Civ. Some of the Civs we do have have kind of shocking lists of evil deeds behind them but at least most are from past centuries or ancient history.
It's a bit more complicated than that. The king of Spain inherited Austria (among other territories) but he was about as austrian as he was spanish. I would not say that Spain was over Austria in that union, and Austria was definitely not spanish. He's even generally called Charles V, his german title, rather than Charles I, his spanish title.
Well, I guess Rome, France, India or Arabia. I hope they'll add Poland in a DLC, though as far as the leaks say, they'll give us Jadwiga as the leader, which is lame as hell. She didn't really do anything, she got married of to the Grand Duke of Lithuania and died ten years later. Sure, she was a patron of hospitals and arts (via the Church, she's a Saint) so she might work for a religious/cultural victory, but seriously... Sigismund the Old, Sigismund II Augustus, Casimir the Restorer, Casimir the Great, John III Sobieski...
It's pretty much the same story with France being led by a Medici. While the Medici family was certainly influential in European politics, they were predominantly involved with Italian government, and only briefly had significance in France through Catherine iirc. It's a really strange leader choice that seems like it's either trying to break the norm in some odd way or push for gender equality. And in Civ, neither is necessary, so long as the most recognizable, most important leaders make an appearance. Don't even get me started on how Frederick Barbarossa leads Germany. He was a Holy Roman Emperor, Holy Rome =/= Germany.
Captain Greninja Yeah, they could've stuck with Bismarck or switch Germany to Prussia. Adding the Holy Roman Empire makes little sense, and selling them as Germany even less. Or they could just scratch Germany and add Persia, the Maya/Inca/Aztecs, the Ottomans, etc.
I hate the developer's need to add worthless female leaders for some reason. Victoria, Catherine the Great and the Scythian Queen are great, for example, but Cleopatra, Catherine de Medici or Jadwiga are not, especially when they take other awesome leader's places. -.-
Falcon Wing I'm guessing Cleopatra was selected more for her mainstream fame than anything, though that makes it even more of an odd choice when compared with people like Hojo Tokimune and de Medici who are quite frankly obscure. If they wanted to pick a female Egyptian leader who actually did useful stuff during her reign, Hatshepsut would have been a much better choice. Heck, I probably would have rather seen her be a leader than the overused (but still great) Ramesses.
Captain Greninja Ancient Egypt had great leaders other than Ramesses, such as Amenhotep or Tutankhamun, who deserve a mention far more than Hatshepsut. Hojo Tokimune, I searched after the video, defended Japan during the Mongol invasions, but de Medici hardly even ruled France! You shouldn't choose a leader because of gender and ignore others far more illustrious, damnit! Victoria is chosen because she is truly representative of Britain at it's height, not because she was female. de Medici did not rule France, was not French, and did not do anything particularly impressive.. So why? If you had no one to choose, just go with Napoleon :S
What I don't get about Germany is... it isn't Germany. Frederick I existed long; long; long before Germany ever did. He was Holy Roman Emperor; making him 'King of all Germans' [As in the Germanic people] and Italy. There was no German civ at that time. Frederick was basically head of what amounts to the EU.
Werbekball Except it wasn't just Germany. It was the Netherlands; Austria; North Italy; the Chech Republic and even part of Denmark and modern France. And at one point the Emperor was Spanish to boot. It's much more appropriate to compare the HRE to the EU. Both pan-european Germanic-led unions of multiple countries. Also HRE + Rome means we have TWO Italian civs. Without actually having an 'Italy'. Calling a Holy Roman Emperor the head of the 'German' civ is just wrong. At least it's an Emepror from a part of modern Germany; not a Hasburg [Austrian; also Spain has one already]. It's not completely inaccurate; since he did rule over all of what is modern Germany, but the HRE was not Germany. The HRE wasn't even a country.
I imagine the historians working in development had wanted to call this rendition of German society, "the Holy Roman Empire," but anyone playing the game without a background in history, (which accounts for the majority of players) would not know what this is. I suppose the developers wished to simply represent all of German history, from the barbarian kingdoms to the HRE to the modern state, as one unified civilization while still calling it something recognizable by the public.
Not entirely accurate. Although the modern BeneLux were actual part during the founding of the HRE in 962, the only 'french' part was Burgundy (which was later acompanied by Lombardy due to conquest) but subsequently lost around the 16th to 17th century(gradually). Same things happend to the northern Italian territories. These losses promted the 'official' suffixiation of ' of german Nation' in the early 1500's, to signify the importance of the german rule over the HRE. Denmark never was part of the HRE, and Bohemia(what is now more or most likely less the Czech Republic) was added later as a kingdom set up under german rule as part of a eastward germanic colonization and germanization process during the 12th century. One important fact to mentioned is: All HREmperor where german kings or counts, and even the aformentioned spaniard belonged to the german royal family of Habsburg, and was german by birth(only his complicated dynastial situation lead him to be crowned King of Spain before being appointed Emperor of the HRE) . So the conclusion with it: Although the HRE never really was a nation in the modern sense, but more like a federation, it was regarded as such for the most time of it's existance. And since the majority of it's territory was ruled by german astocracy and located on germanic soil, as well as all HRE rulers were germans it is quite logical to conclude that the HRE was the forerunner to the german nation, and can be called Germany in a general meaning, and is referred to it by quite many people, even outside Germany itself, historically.
well...after bismarck from civ 5 .. i dont know who they could put for the leader...if you know what i mean...it would be too easy to play with them if they had merkel...or adolf...and btw why are the russians lone slavic wolf again and we have fckin random countries instead of poland or bulgarians?
Hey Sega have you heard this - there are Games with 19 Factions available on RELEASE ! They didn't even split up their game into several DLC's or try to sell you a 120$ Edition because of Expansion Pass - DICE ! And for GODs Sake WHAT? No console release prior to PC release how dare they!! And now the Overkill - No. Payment. Within. The. Game. - No microtransactions. Wow did not think this would be possible anymore.
I wish they added some more weird civs (like Holland in civ 5 was fun) from throughout history, not just established favorites. Maybe a Holy Roman Emperor who wasn't German would be nice.
Of course it would be nice to have more civs, but we are comparing a game that has all its dlc and is fully released versus a new game with no dlc. Civ V had the same number of civs as this at launch.
Nonprophet. Of course I'm happy with the type and amount of civs here. I was just pointing out the idea of adding really bizarre civs (think Venice in Civ 5) as dlc or updates, which make the game much more interesting. I'm still satisfied with how the game looks and will probably buy it come launch day.
Seeing as how we've seen a city called Stockholm on released footage of the game already (can't be bothered to find the video right now though), Sweden seems likely for a DLC release Civ.
I'm pretty sure the next Civ added will be Poland or Persia due to rumors circulating the Civfanatics forums. As for civs I'd like to see personally I always thought Nepal led by Prithvi Narayan Shah would be a great addition with massive bonuses to religion and adjacency bonuses to mountains/being able to move units through mountains. A Gurkha unique unit would of course be another obvious fit with them. Also the Olmec are another one I'd love to see as they were effectively the Sumeria of the Americas. Led by Po Ngbe and sporting the unique Collosal Heads building (replacing the monument) the Olmec would have a civ geared towards early game culture and faith, perhaps linking their culture and faith gain to trade in some way as the fact that Olmec artifacts have been dug up hundreds of miles from their heartlands shows that they were very much active traders and spread their ideas like bloodletting, writing, traditions, and the famed Meso-American ballgame far and wide from foreign traders.
Anyone else find it odd they chose the fictional character of Gilgamesh for the leader of Sumer? I mean, I'm pretty sure there are documented ACTUAL leaders of the Sumerian people, right?
I think they're going for some very 'out there' choices, deviating farther from previous games to give Civ6 more of its own identity rather than 'just Civ 5 again'. A reckognizable name is more important than the guy existing in reality, really.
Just because they made a poem about him, doesn't mean he was fictional. Wikipedia: "Gilgamesh is generally seen by scholars as a historical figure, since inscriptions have been found which confirm the existence of other figures associated with him in the epic. If Gilgamesh existed, he probably was a king who reigned sometime between 2800 and 2500 BC."
the races in this are really bizarre.... English empire...? what...? lol. Don't you mean British...? and man of war rather than sea dog..? And France? King Louis no..? and giving America massive cultural bonuses...? hahaha are they having a laugh..?? 😅😂
They maintain the word English and British mean different things, so keeping it 'English' opens up the possibility of introducing Scotland and Ireland as separate civs late on. There are multiple viable leaders for every civ, for France they wanted to have someone that they could focus on the new spies mechanics, so Catherine is a suitable choice if they're looking for someone like that. And 'culture' doesn't mean culture in the sense of just art and history. Coke is sold everywhere, people all around you wear jeans, and how long has it been since you've seen a McDonalds or Starbucks? Video games and movies are in high proportion from America too, notable, the Civilization series. All of those are you being exposed to and experiencing American culture. Where I live, Malaysia, we have lots of rich and colourful history, food, and art. However, do you see nasi lemak sold commonly, people wearing sarungs, or any kind of kopitiams at every commercial corner? Ola Bola was our biggest movie this year but not many people outside of Malaysia have even heard of it.
Well. Firstly thanks for the reply! I see what you mean about opening it up so that you can have leaders from Ireland, Wales etc, however the English empire just isn't accurate historically, it was the British empire, and furthermore, that would still be open to more leaders like Scottish Irish etc, which were indeed leaders within the British empire, making it far more historically accurate. For France why not Bonaparte? He was absolutely the most notable historical French leader, it seems sad that the game seems to be trying to reshape history. Feels a little like American (specifically left wing) propaganda. Which is kind of sad, and takes quite a lot of the joy out of the game for me. And regarding culture, the European nations dominated classical culture for thousands of years, most notably British culture, as most obviously seen in how now the universal language of the planet, is English, and suits are worn universally for business. American culture has only been around for a few hundred years. So the perspective of the game just seems a little.. well. Sad. For me anyway. In the board game, the British weren't even in it, the Biggest Empire the world has ever seen, but the Americans were.. which to me shows the mentality of the game makers. They sadly don't seem to be interested in history over subtle propaganda
Ah, if you're on the word 'empire', they just used that for consistency. There's no American Empire or Brazillian Empire either, just in the context of the Civ game, 'empire' is the most generic word to apply to all civs. The game starts in the ancient era where empires don't even exist and is represented by no restrictions on national borders. It's just a simplification on somethings that could cause confusion where no confusion is necessary. For France, Bonaparte wasn't really known for his use of spies really, though they have opened up the possibility of having multiple leaders for each civ, so he might come later on. The point of Catherine is to tune into the spies and espionage mechanics. I don't see this as trying to reshape history at all, the 'civs' are just represented by the time the current leader was in charge of things. Bonaparte's France is very different from Catherine's time 200 years prior. They aren't saying either one is more or less important. I don't see how leader choice has anything to do with American left wing propaganda. Is the choice of Catherine associated to American left wing propaganda? On culture, yes, European culture dominated for a very long time. That's why Greece and England have massive cultural bonuses that come much earlier in the game. America's cultural bonuses are late-game only with the film studio and national parks. They don't get those until at least the industrial age and beyond, whereas Greece gets cultural bonuses in the classical era and England has museums. This seems entirely correct from a perspective and historical standpoint. The board game is made by entirely different people. Even if it says 'Firaxis' on the box, it's not the same people. You need to see who the lead developer is, and in this case, it's Ed Beach. The board game didn't say Firaxis or even 2K on the box though, it was made by Kevin Wilson and published by Fantasy Flight Games.
Well, fair enough. I can't say I 100% agree but I'm sure you aren't entirely wrong. and regarding the board game, I didn't know it was from different developers so again, fair enough
"Is the choice of Catherine associated to American left wing propaganda?" What Matthew Clark is trying to say is he doesn't like feeemales in his video games.
In terms of CIVs to play... I expect some from CIV Vs DLC to return as well as some new ones... as for new ones... well it would be kinda funny to play as Canada
You guys are assholes. Mexico and Canada are great nations and epitomize what it means to contribute to the world's... who am I kidding? They are meme-tier shitholes.
Canada is an interesting nation-state, but not much of a defining civilization. Canada's culture is a mixture of all other nations, history and scientific progress has been largely in collaboration or disagreement with the United States. There's not much unique material to build a civilization off of.
Krixig I think it's more complex than that, I fully understand and support Germany's position but Greece is not just some country who loves taking money from others either. The EU needs some serious reforms right away so neither Germany nor Greece had to be in their current positions with each other.
those pronunciations are on point! Also why are ziggurats not allowed on hills? I thought their whole point was to be on a hill to protect them from floods
Jackson DeCourcy well, it depends it's true Classical Latin (around Augustus' Time) pronounced Cs like Ks, but in the latter Latin it changed to modern Italian Cs before Es and Is (like CH in modern Spanish too). Although it's true it was never pronounced as it would be in English, but it's hard to know all this when the main point is the game.
Jackson DeCourcy yes, if you've studied Latin you probably just learnt the classical version, I only know the evolution because I'm from Spain so when I study the evolution of Spanish it always connects with Latin, also because I like Rome.
Jackson DeCourcy yeah, latter Latin (or early Spanish) in Spain (and everywhere else really) was a mess, it was some unstandardised mixture of Latin and Spanish very difficult to understand. The epic novels from this time in French, Spanish... are impossible to read even for native speakers, they are called the Dark Ages for a reason, I like Classical Latin better.
There should be a Danelaw Civ lead by Cnute the Great Leader Bonus is North Sea Empire: Units receive a big combat bonus for 2 turns after disembarking Civilization Bonus is Anglo-Scandinavian: Gets a free extra civic and military policy Unique Unit is the shield wall: gets +20 bonus when defending and +5 bonus when attacking an enemy unit from behind. Replaces the Swordsman Unique infrastructure is parish church: gives a science, culture and happiness bonus when adjacent to a wonder. Replaces temple. Can be built throughout the whole game
I think civ should make "Wonder Units": Extremely powerful units that can take on multiple units, but only one can be made. Just some examples could be the Bismark, Big Bertha, Seal Team Six, Enola Gay, the 300, etc.
I do have mixed feelings about it. While I do like the style, I feel that Civilizations is best with a more realistic style. That being said, I definitely approve of flirty Victoria :D
If they put Poland in they would have to put code in the game so that they can't spawn on the same continent as Germany or they would only last 2 weeks....guess it's better than the French that couldn't hold up for 1 week lol
scythia is sounding pretty sweet, same with rome. being able to double up ANY unit for the price (and time) of one is HUGE, but you add onto it that it would normally be a unit that costs a resource.. that's very good. Assuming that it has the movement of a typical mounted unit, this will allow very crazy levels of scouting and eliminating barbarians.. lots of gold and city state rep for clearing encampments.. then after you've established several allied city states as well as amassed a nice bit of coin, you can either wage war with your current units or upgrade them and bide your time. honestly though, it's sounding like many of the civs are pretty damn good.. I like this trend. Too many civ 5 civs were not all that viable and you were surely going to lose in certain match ups
Things that will be pretty cool to happen: If your neighbors have negative happiness and lower tourism than you, you are presented with the option to have them be part of your empire. If you have been allies with a City State for 10 turns and are neighbors, you may chose to have them join your empire. City States can unite to form it's very own Civ if they are reasonably close together and there are no other civs in the way.
To my knowledge, continents are not the same as what the unique units are referencing. When we think of continents, we think of the whole continent until it hits an area of water. From the previews, if the continent is too large, it'll be split into smaller "continent" regions. Think of it like how we split North and South America or split Europe from Asia, despite being connected to each other. So, even if you play on pangea, Britain could still get its bonuses as long as you're not in the home continent region.
Luke Gonzalez Yeah, I've mentioned this before in earlier videos. Continents in Civ 6 are more like tectonic plates and nothing to do with landmasses. England and France can still end up on the same continent as it's been stated that they want to average it to about 2 civs per continent.
Te rumor says that our civilization... oh! I mean Polish civilization of course... ;-) will be in DLC and Saint Hedwig will be the leader. www.zam.com/article/796/civilization-vi-civilizations-and-leaders-revealed
From that zam site quote "Jadwiga is one of Poland’s greatest leaders". It's pretty much saying something like "Millard Fillmore is one of USA greatest leaders"
The weird thing about the US is that the Naturalist is a Religion unit (and a rather expensive one), so unless you focus heavily on Religion/Culture push, the advantage is largely lost. Arabia focuses on a Religion/Science push, with synergy between Holy Sites and Campuses. The guaranteed religion is nice, but since you already want Holy Sites early on, it's kind of wasted. Aztecs look very much like a city expansion civ, with their emphasis on district building bonus and Amenity generation. Worth mentioning that the Leader Bonus only applies to Luxury tiles you work, not those obtained through trade or Suzerainty. Brasil is kinda iffy; the leader bonus is quite useful, but the civ bonus is dependent on rainforests that can be permanently destroyed. I also can't think of a situation where I have a city working on a Project when I could be building more units and buildings. Finally, there doesn't seem to be a clear synergy between any of them. China's leader bonus can be very useful in Boosting tech, especially if it can get enough Gold income to buy Builders. Worth noting that there are Policies that add even more additional charges to Builders, stacking to a whopping six charges. Its civ bonus is very strong, considering how often you'll get Boosts and the fact that progress on Tech can be saved when research is changed. Egypt's civ bonus is going to hamstrung on a Small Island map. Also guessing that Egypt prefers tall civs, as riverside real estate runs out fast.
That was just a leak and could end up being an alternative leader for Greece. Since it was leaked, they might even consider scrapping the idea or maybe it was just a test.
I usually play with a production focus, so Japan is looking pretty good. I think at the beginning at least Japan will be my main, Rome, America & Greece will be my off-civs.
I gotta disagree with you about Russia^^ The extra landgrab sounds very good, the UU and Peters bonus are okay but their special building is just pure garbage. I think Brasil is way stronger than russia.
Darius I Lavra is a unique district, I.E: it can be built at half the production cost in every city and won't count towards your district count, making it super spammable. Also note it works with every great person charge, and many great persons have multiple uses in Civ VI. So a single Great Artist will actually give you 3 tiles. If you focus on culture a lot (which you probably should) and thus get many writers/artists/musicians, I'm sure you could get 30+ great people over the course of a game. On average that should then be able to easily give you 60+ tiles from the Lavra ability alone, and that's on top of the regular boost you get from founding cities Russia is the only civ which can generate faith from turn zero, and should thus always get the first pantheon unless someone else finds a religious city state quickly. Regardless however, the pantheon Russia wants should always be available because no one else wants it: Dance of the Aurora, which gives bonus faith from tundra adjacency to holy sites, and that's on top of the inherent tundra faith yield. This'll give them a ton of faith to buy more great persons with, and thus even more land that way. Massive faith amount and a ton of land area also happens to be the exact two things you need to create National Parks, which is huge for Cultural Victories. Especially if you as Russia manage to build the Eiffel Tower you could potentially get an obscene amount of tourism. So yeah it's like a chain reaction of faith, great people and culture/tourism On top of all that you'll save a ton of gold simply from not having to buy tiles so you can just spend all your gold on buying units instead so you even have a strong military as a result. And you'll be able to settle your cities on areas of the map where no one else can realistically do so. I'd say they're pretty good
![Top 20 Best Civs and Leaders in Civilization 6 [Civ 6 Strategy]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mq7LNEr_7FY/mqdefault.jpg)
This one turned out quite long. 19 civs is a lot to go through! Which is looking like your favourite though? I'm feeling maybe good old Rome for my first game. A bunch more civs have been announced since release! If you want to support the channel, buy games using this *GOG* referral link: af.gog.com/?as=1715648857 They have lots of sales... Thanks!
never played Civ. Would it be easy for 1st timer?
GamerZakh Japan is versatile so that's my first pick
arbalest T it's not too hard. My first civ game was Civ 5 and I was able to jump in easily. Don't see why Civ 6 would be different. I think you should wait a bit after it comes out, watch some gameplay vids, and see if you like it
brazil
im going for a culutral at first
For a 1st timer I would say go either Rome or Brazil. Both very flexible and doesn't lean too hard towards any specific victory condition. They also don't rely too much on specific plays, like Japan fully utilising districts or France focusing on spies. Also, there are really clear tutorials this time around from what I've seen and starting on a lower difficulty AI map should get you settled in pretty quick.
"Indian Empire"
I knew it. Gandhi, you son of a bitch.
Oh no... ITS A GANDHI WITH HIS NUCLEAR WEAPONS!
His agenda should have been: Nuke Everything
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win (with nuclear weapons)". -Gandhi.
***** HAIL GHANDI ,GHANDI THE BEST ,AVE GHANDI
*BEEP BEEP* Nuclear Launch detected.
the question is. Would you be interested in a trade agreement with England?
Slaghead Glogbrok never
@@lacaboom5032 Options:
Yes! Of course!
Yes! Of course!
Just to help out! Time stamps, in case you are curious about a specific Civ:
America: 1:17
Arabia: 2:18
Aztecs: 3:12
Brazil: 4:36
China: 5:40
Egypt: 6:57
England: 8:12
France: 9:27
Germany: 10:42
Greece: 12:00
India: 13:12
Japan: 14:15
Kongo: 15:27
Norway: 16:44
Rome: 17:55
Russia: 18:59
Scythia: 19:53
Spain: 21:08
Sumeria: 22:24
Legend
Thanks, no point wasting my time waiting for a rundown on Australia.
I thought Canada was in the game
@@garra123454 dlc
@@halloween7275 f the dlc is like $70 Canadian dollars
The Spanish Inquisitors have 1 extra Remove Heresy charge... I wasn't expecting that.
NO ONE EXPECTS THE- ohwait
A fresh new way to bring the joke, thank you!
Shut up, never want to see you again xD
Frankly, everyone expects the Spanish Inquisition sketch, but this was a fresh take. Me gusta.
I guess you are right, by now it is one of the most expected things... :-)
I hope they will add the Persian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, Babylon and Assyria in the next DLC. We need more middle eastern/mesopotamian empires!! :D
...and the Malian Empire under Mansa Musa....all that African gold!!!!!!!
Detroit Red Yep, them too^^
The Ottoman Empire under Mehmed ii would be great, I hated that Mehmed ii was not the ottoman leader in civ v and that the unique unit was not the bombards
whiteknight Yeah I hope its Mehmed too. Maybe they could add the Janissary as their unique unit and the bombards as Mehmed's special ability so the Ottomans under Mehmed could have 2 powerful unique units :D
Nayal Chowdhury Braveheart!!!
It's so weird to see Dom Pedro II young. Most portraits of him go for his later years and iconic white beard.
dom pedro II was the emperor for 58 years...
m123IAN I know. Its just that normally in Brazil the popular image is him with his "Santa" look, with full white beard.
remind me, Pedro the second is what in family relations to Pedro the first?
United Gamers pedro second is his son
m123IAN thanks mate, im Portugues so i know about Pedro the emperor of Brasil but beyond that only his daughter cuz she was our queen
The leaders in Civilization VI look like they came straight from a Disney Pixar film.
Gandhi looks like a nazi caricature.
+lul lul Gandhi Looks Like He's Been Exposed To Radiation
bahahahaha@@Slyhades1
Hopefully they add Persia and Mongolia as DLC Civs. Perhaps also the Portuguese or the Dutch to give us some more commerce-oriented Civs.
Bini Farmer I think they'll add them all in a DLC, but there are already civs oriented to commerce: Britain is very maritime and has bonuses to other continents, Spain has bonuses to intercontinental trade and early maritime strength, Rome has a strong commerce by land using its extension, so does Egypt attracting trade routes... I think we have decent commerce already, it's true commerce is not their only main bonus, but they have one for it nonetheless.
Casrv Sfv Fair enough, though I don't see how Britain is commerce-oriented other than the fact that it's a maritime Civ. Spain's bonus I think would work better if it gave you gold for internal trade routes, so that way they could accurately represent actual Spanish treasure fleets.
Bini Farmer about Britain yes I meant that they have a strong navy and can establish routes better, also they will have better knowledge of the sea and will be able to reach civs that are further away, the dockyard will give them gold, but it's not really trade.
Now, Spain can trade with other nations and get extra yields (not just from itself), so it will get extra gold from trade too. I agree that adding some extra gold in internal routes would be more accurate. I don't think they did that because they know that much about economy, but internal trade routes in mercantilism mainly boost the industry and production (eg. Britain in the XIXth century, and all of Europe actually), the coastal industrial zones in Spain appeared thanks to this trade, so it's actually accurate too that they boost production and therefore growth (creating jobs). But that's in the real world, again I doubt they did this thinking about real world economy.
No argument here.
Hopefully they add Poland as DLC civ
"Greece won't get along well with Germany."
lul
Speaking of which, France also had somewhat to do with with City States.
I smell trouble.
Haha! A well-deserved jab!
gib monies
or take a loan and pay it x3 times
@Catasstrophy I laughed then I cried inside... and no I'm not german but it's sad to watch none the less.
Civ 6 American leader George W. Bush.
Special Leader Ability: (False Flag)
This ability allows this Civ to attack it's own cities, and blame it on any Civ in the game. This ability eliminates the warmonger penalty from declaring war. Booya!
Monty Christo take of the foil hat buddy.
Nicholas B, don't try to reason with it, it still thinks it's a dank memer.
Monty Christo they should make germany incapable of winning wars. because they lost every war they started
laughed so hard on this one!
They are more like the Shadows from Babylon 5 - reap the fat and weak and force the promising to flourish into strong empires.
I gotta say, the leader animations are fantastic.
India "and maybe go for a domination victory later on". Sounds like warlord Ghandi is at it again.
"The great peace is achieve when there is only one people on earth. The chosen one." - Nuclear Warlord Gandhi
*Gandhi
The idea that there once were only 20 civs is astounding now
It's gotten a lot of new ones since hasn't it? And the new leader packs finally take advantage of multiple leaders per civ.
Hope they add Poland next
It's confirmed as a DLC
So far all leaks have been 100% accurate. I'd personally take the leak as what it is. But, anything can happen I guess.
It might not be Poland. It could be the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth [Which could easily be labeled Commonwealth and not Poland]
I doubt that it will be Commonwealth, in previous civilization games there were sometimes Poland but never Commonwealth(if I remember correctly), second thing is that people anywhere on the world often at least heard about Poland but Commonwealth? It's much less known. And as far as I know Jadwiga is gonna be leader, and Commonwealth back in her times didn't exists. Only problem is that there are dozens better suited persons for leaders of Poland than Jadwiga... Jan III Sobieski, Boleslaw Chrobry, Mieszko I, Kazimierz Wielki, Marszalek Jozef Pilsudski, Stefan Batory(technically he was Hungarian, but holy cow he was a badass king), Wladyslaw Lokietek, even husband of Jadwiga Wladyslaw Jagiello would be much better. But i recon they wanted woman, so they had to choose Jadwiga... although I would say that Bona Sforza would be better choice, but she wasn't really polish(and she was... well ugly, the same with her daughter Anna Jagiellonka). But it was first queen that really interfer with politics
Unique unit:
The witcher, gets 50% attack bonus against mounted units and can traverse any terrain without suffering movement penalties. :3
I really love how Firaxis is developing the civ unique buildings and improvements. It means that the civs get to grow over time to Look as they really do in real life. The sphinxes being built in Egyptian lands while their cities nestle closer to desert rivers than other civs can build districts, and the Great Wall being built piece by piece in Chinese lands.
Just awesome.
Would've been hilarious if Caligula was the Roman leader.
His Bonus: All cavalry units gain a health bonus and a seat in the senate (Latin nerds will get this)
YESS
Incitatys
BAHAHAH
After playing EUIV, it's like, what, only 19?
lel
EU4 was too easy and boring. CK2 was way better.
vic2 is better than both of them
Mingwan Wang Better in what ways?
let's be honest if you play any of those games and go back and play civ you just kind of sit there and say wow how simple can you get.
Again, very high quality, highly informative video of yours, which nicely sums up the different pros and cons for each nations. Favourite nation(s)? There are too much! As I know myself, I will sit hours and hours before the main screen, listening the beautiful theme song and try to select one nation which fits my play style.
Although I'm watching other videos of yours regularly (simply love nostalgia!), the CIV6 videos are the ones I'm mostly looking forward to on every Friday. Nothing better after a tiresome week with full of work than look one of your videos and just relax.
I really appreciate the work you put into these videos for our enjoyment! Keep it up! :)
Thank you! Took me a while to write and edit this video. I'm wondering how long I sit at the main screen too. Christopher Tin composed the new main theme song, so it's going to be compared to Baba Yetu.
Yeah, the Civ 6 videos are currently the best work I'm producing. One a week is sort of the limit for these sorts of videos. The live stream vods are more for me relaxing and experiencing other games so I don't get stuck in just one thing, though when Civ 6 releases I'll probably stream Civ 6 on both days haha!
"Greece won't get along well with Germany."
art reflects life
Different leaders to choose between? Yes please, I'm waiting this feature since Civ 4.
Norway and Rome are looking like my favorites so far, they both suit how I tend to play.
AustralianSpartan you have two very different ways of playing then.
Gotta agree with this! Norway on an ocean map, Rome on a land map. Both are extremely wide civs, although one is super focused on earlygame aggression while the other is focused more on wealth and growth.
I dunno, I think germany can be plenty strong early on too, due to the extra military policy slot. Those things are really strong if you're going for a rush. As well as being able to spam cities early on and get up bonus districts in them to power your war machine.
I also think Greece retains it's strength throughout the whole game due to the bonuses from being a suzerain (you keep growing your amount of city states throughout the game). Their "weakness" late game is that they are entirely focused on culture at that point, not that their bonus weakens in its specific area. Although the extra wildcard slot is definitely powerful throughout the entire game. I actually think Greece will be my first playthrough, and I'm not a "focus on the early game" kinda player.
Kongo DEFINITELY seems like a mid game civ to me. You get uber housing, as well as starting to absorb and sort out faiths from other civs at that point. And you'll also start to rack up great works at that point. The unique unit (swordsman) seems to be there to let you fight for the good city locations early on, but it's not at that point you really shine.
I agree that Norway is an early game civ (obviously). But I do think the focus is on crippling your opponents, not outright winning. Letting you pull ahead by a far margin. You don't get many tools to actually win at that stage, but lots of tools when it comes to inflicting crippling damage (and of course, pillaging gives you resources as well) to your opponents without putting yourself at risk. Then early mid game you can take out your opponents because they're behind on tech, production, etc.
Rome seems like a strict early game domination civ. Their bonuses are all focused around either giving you power early on, or saving you turns. If they're not ahead come mid game they're probably going to be very weak.
If I'm not mistaken, "Light cavalry" is just a class of unit, so I disagree that Scythia is an early game civ. In fact, they seem to be a civ that isn't bound to any part of the game at all. All their bonuses (except unique unit) are very useful throughout the entire game (well, at least until light cav unit type becomes completely obsolete if tanks don't count).
14:12 How do you go domination with India?
*BEEP BEEP* Nuclear launch detected.
...oh
I can't decide on a favourite-they've all got something really fantastic about them. For this reason my first 4 or 5 games will be with a random civilization. Next DLC has to have Persia in it, though I suspect that Babylon, Korea, Ottomans, Zulu & Mali will turn up as DLC within the first 12 months that the game is out.
Oh, and well done on a fantastic and extremely comprehensive video :).
Thanks! Yeah, I'm having a hard time figuring out what I should play first too. I'll be streaming my first game, so maybe one of the new ones, Kongo or Scythia.
there is no ottoman but scythia game has gone back in time so btw i think you should go with scythia too
I really like the list on the side., it really helps get a full picture of the civilization, I think.
Thanks! Glad you liked it! Took me a while to make the visual and get all the text on there right.
Your best yet, Zakh. I'll be saving this to refer to as the game arrives.
Thanks! This one did take quite a while to write and edit.
I'm sure. Hey, any word why they have NINETEEN Civs? Seems like an even 20 would make sense. And I'm with you re. se. asian civs being a great idea, or maybe more from S. America or Africa. In fact, maybe a Polynesian civ with islands for an interesting navy game?
DL Fendel It's actually 18 civs, the same number that Civ 5 launched with. The Aztecs are the 19th and technically free DLC but you get 'early access' to them if you pre-order. They unlock for everyone in January next year.
AND I see they just put up a second leader choice for Greece! Wonder how many of those are en route before release?
you really outdid yourself with this one!
Thanks!
Need a Civ 6, a-hole edition....Germany - Hitler, Russia - Ivan the Terrible, Rome - Nero, Belgium - King Leopold II, Ottoman Empire - Talat Pasha, France - Maximilien Robespierre etc.
for those of you who are like "wtf !! only 19 civs !!" - dont worry ! they will release the others just few months after the launch ! in dlc's !! containing 4-5 civs and costing 15-20 bucks each !!
No, zulu? I NEED MY IMPIS! 😫
Congolese for you!
they dont have impis but i gues they will do -__-
*Watches video and see's Gandhi*
Please no...
Please yes!
It's not Civ without Gandhi
Honestly, I'm a little more tired of Cleopatra than Ghandi..
too many nukes
Mitchell Edwards if you don't place the city he can't nuke it
I know that Pericles' appearance is based off the bust of him, but that doesn't mean the helmet sitting perched on his head doesn't still look silly.
CallMeCactusSok This helmet identified him as a Strategos, a high military rank. Like a rank insignia. And its unknown if it was just a bust thing or if it was a real thing. Probably not, because it would bd hard to wear it that way, but maybe a Strategos carried it around on official occasions.
Natanael85 Before I revised it the original version of my comment mentioned having him hold it. Also the badge of office function of that particular style of helmet is interesting. At first glance it looks like a typical Corinthian helmet, but there are some major differences. Regardless, the point of my comment was that it looks ridiculous sitting on his head like that, especially when he's not dressed for war.
Thanks for taking the time to put this together. A note on Scythia - the recent pre-release footage suggest that the restriction on Kurgans being built adjacent to one another has been eliminated. But of course everything is subject to change until the game is released (or even after) :-)
You're welcome! Yeah, they're still tweaking a couple things. I heard they made some changes to Sumeria too but nothing too drastic that would change the overall civ as far as I know.
I agree. A Southeast Asia civ would be refreshing. Go with Melaka or Srivijaya this time. The special unit can be penjajap, a Medieval or Renaissance galley. The building could be an istana (palace) or some sort of marine trading post.
All these Egyptian rulers to choose from and you pick one who isn't even Egyptian...
GG Civ
And what do you mean by egyptian? Black or arabs? Cause none of them were egiptian.
Egyptians were conquered by Alexander the great, and Cleopatra is a greek queen, unlike Ramses II, Kheops, or dozens of others.
Just out of curiosity, go and ask people do they know who Cleopatra is and who Ramses II is. You'll be surprise how many have no idea who Ramses is.
+Ernest Domagała I mean actually Egyptian. Cleopatra was a descendent of Ptolemy, one of Alexander the Great's generals.
^ some racist propaganda
Would be "interesting" to play Hitler. Many of these other leaders aren't exactly saints either. I realize that won't happen though. "Too soon". On the other hand, you indirectly play Hitler in all strategy games based on WW2. Thoughts?
It's not that it's 'too soon' as much as every leader in Civ was in power at least over 100 years ago. That, and if you put Hitler in the game, Civilization 6 will be banned in Germany.
That is simply not correct. Ghandi is in the game. Also, previous games have included Stalin, Roosevelt, Mao and Churchill.
As you said, I think the issue is that it will be banned in some countries. And probably people will be offended and protest. Resulting in bad PR and less games sold. That is what I meant by "too soon". I would argue Stalin and Mao were as big "monsters", yet they have been featured in CIV. Could it be the case that countries like China and Russia aren't ashamed of Mao and Stalin respectively, in the same way that Germany is over Hitler? They are all responsible for horrible genocides, but Htiler is the only one that lost a war. "History is written by the victors", just saying :)
Oh right sorry, I forgot about Gandhi haha, my bad!
It probably is a legal thing mainly because of being banned.
GamerZakh To your defense, Ghandi was a tad less controversial (to use a nice word) than Hitler :)
someone will make the mod don't you worry. if you which you play Hitler now I know that some have been made for civ 5
Yea I might be Brazil or the Congo. They seem to me they have a good balance.
Good analysis. I have not yet decided who I will try first. All the civs sound so good this time, that everytime a new civ is announced, I am intrigued and want to try it. I am currently leaning towards my own nation, Norway, or Greece for my first playthrough. Sumeria is also an option. Generally I like civs which have a strong early game, and preferably a strong early UU. The Shoshone were my favorite in Civ 5 for those reasons.
I am also quite interested in trying Russia. They have the land grab powers of the Shoshone, and their tundra bonuses mean they may find good territory where others will not. Depending on how you play them, they might be a strong faith civ. Their unique district is a lot better than some people think, because:
* It replaces the holy site, one of the earliest districts available. This means you get a discount for building it, and it won't count towards your district limit. Getting this for one of the earliest districts is very useful.
* There are more great people than before, and some have multiple uses, so you will get more tiles than you might think
* Border growth seems to be slower in Civ 6, so getting extra tiles for free is extra useful
* Tiles are generally more useful in Civ 6
* Also, I just think it looks beautiful
Russia is probaly the civ I am currently most intrigued by, but I don't think I want to play them for my first game, because their tundra preference makes them a bit too unusual.
First video I've seen of you.
Your voice is quite suiting, calming, kind off like a narrator.
Also the microphone quality is superb!
The video cutting and editing is amazing, very well done. I felt I didn't waste one moment, you provided a well phased video with lots of information without pauses making us waiting. Neither did you provide us with too much personal thoughts nor opinions, these types of videos are the ones I love, thanks man.
Hey thanks so much! I really appreciate that. Glad you enjoyed the video!
I am sad that Austria is not in list anymore. That was actually the most beautiful extension of CIV V that added Austria with my loved Husars and coffee houses :)
well we are getting Hungary in the next expansion, so that is something :) But Austria was great. Diplomatic marriage was so op.
Who's ready for Gandhi?
Every-ones ready for Gandhi.
Marshall H. No one's ready for Gandhi. You can never be ready for Gandhi.
Let the peace nukes fall
Oh It You, Heh. Were Still Friends Right Gandhi?
Really? No Netherlands? Persia, Ottomans or Byzantium? Kind of let down.
Norway is basically netherland
hahahahaha
no
wait i got denmark confused with the netherlands.
MSF soldier Alligator And Greece is actually byzantium if an alliance with Rome happens
No Celts either fml
Catherine de who? ....jokes aside, I realize that Catherine was important. But important enough to ignore people like Charlemagne or Louis XIV for? GTFO with your political correctness, Firaxis.
Are you saying they picked Catherine because she's a woman and that Firaxis is including a lot of women leaders disproportionately? Because only 4 out of 19 civilizations are led by women right now. I think it's more likely they wanted a leader that focused on spies and espionage and found her to be a good candidate for that mechanic.
I admit that is one possibility. In today's climate, though, I think that the PC-theory is more likely. The other leaders (male as female) are demonstrably among the absolute best and most iconic leaders of their respective civilizations. Catherine? Not so much. Which makes me think they went: "Shit, we need ONE woman more, at least.....how about the Italian queen of France?"
I don't think it's as demonstrable as that. People are saying the leaders for Kongo, Japan, Egypt, and Arabia are lesser known and/or undeserving of their positions.
Egypt? Cleopatra is one of the most famous historical figures...
Red Rock Seven Yeah and many are saying she was one of the the worst too haha. Plus she was Greek. I said 'and/or' undeserving of their positions. They just asked why not Hatshepsut and it'll still be a woman.
Great video, informative and concise and, possibly most importantly, translates the details into "what does this mean for how it's likely to play?".
Probably the most useful vid I've seen on this game so far.
Excellent work, thanks.
Thank you! This one took a while to make. Glad you liked it!
Great analysis.. nicely summed up
Thanks! Glad you liked it!
True
lmao at Gandhi's leader bonus. "Aww, can't believe I'm beating up poor little Gandhi, maybe I should go easy on him" I KNOW YOU YOU BALD FUCKER I SAW YOU BURN THE WORLD AND LAUGH AT THE ASHES
IMO, they could easily replace Scythia, Norway, and a couple of others. No Mongolia? No Siam? No Korea? No Persia? No Ottomans? No Babylon? No Portugal? No Zulus?
Those were all DLC civilizations.
Most weren't actually
The INCA empire was far more important than the aztec one, but I will have to wait for dlc anyway :(
The Aztec empire is undeniably more present in the minds of the modern world, though. And more exotic. Though I definitely do want more American civs--Mexico and America aren't enough representation.
They aren't looking for "importance", they are looking for recognizable names. Aztecs are sorta fan favorite for most of the Civ players, so it doesn't surprise me they are in Civ6 from the start. Sorta like Ghandi is in pretty much any Civ game. What, there were no other Indian leaders?
It says on the Civ website that Gorgo has a different agenda from Pericles.
"LEADER AGENDA: WITH YOUR SHIELD OR ON IT
Gorgo seeks glory in combat, therefore she will never give up items in a peace deal. She prefers civs who haven’t yielded in a peace deal and dislikes any civ who has surrendered in a peace deal or any civ who has never engaged in war."
That seems cool. A true warrior, that Gorgo!
Very smooth, professional, and direct with explaining the Civs. You just got a subscriber.
Thank you! Glad you liked it and welcome to the channel!
YES! We finally made it! Go Norway!
no offense but you do know how devastating was his defeat right? I mean killed with an arrow to the throat and only 24 out of 300 return home.
Carstea Florentin
And that matters because?
probably not a good option for a "great leader"
I think a single "Norse" faction, possibly under the leadership of Ragnar Lothbrok, would've been a better choice, personally.
No. He was just a petty king, if he existed at all (still disputed)
I'll likely play either Japan or America first. Spain and Rome seem interesting too. Personally, I hope we see more Native American Civs like the Inca or the Iroquois. Perhaps the Mayans too.
Winged Hussar in trailer....
*heavy breathing* wrr....
I´m going for France on my first go, feels like an easy civ to get introduced into civ VI
I didn't expect the spanish inquisition
I hope they add Carthage, the Celts, the Ottomans and Korea in DLC.
2 and 1/2 right
If England has a Civ, then Ireland, Wales and Scotland should too.
Well yeah, but there are around 200 nations today not counting the ones that don't exist anymore. They can't all be in the game. There are currently entire regions of the world with no civ coming from them.
GamerZakh True. However, England is in almost every civ game, as are many other European countries. Scotland (which would be my main preference for a civ to be added) has never technically had a civ to itself, and it played a very important role in European history fighting against the English.
Ireland, Wales, and Scotland have never ruled the whole of Britain and Ireland though have they? England has. Having said that though, I think the civ should have been Britain rather than England, though they may have not done this because they are planning to release the Celts as DLC.
GamerZakh yea okay, but thats why there are mods;)
***** I agree with your comment about Britain. Alone, England was nowhere near powerful enough to build an empire. They could hardly control Scotland. In fact, they couldn't. Scotland rose up and claimed their independence, and in turn liberated Ireland too under the rule of the Bruces.
This game is going to need a RED mod. Fast.
Another great job. Wish the developers gave you access, would have been interesting seeing you play. Rome and Spain are my usual Civs and plan on using them in this game too.
Thank you! Haha bigger channels than I didn't get access, so I don't know what 2K is looking for when it comes to press access for Civ 6. Was watching the Yogscast and they said even Duncan didn't get a copy. I'll be streaming as soon as I can though. First game I'm now leaning towards playing Kongo.
I am so glad firaxis doesn’t start including Stalin or Hitler as playable Civ. Some of the Civs we do have have kind of shocking lists of evil deeds behind them but at least most are from past centuries or ancient history.
Spain, Deus Vult!
I really hope they bring back Austria for another round.
ICHBinCOOLERalsJemand what do you mean with Austria??
ICHBinCOOLERalsJemand Play as Germany or Spain. Both there leaders controlled Austria
StylesisTNA thats the plan, Spain DEUS VULT
StylesisTNA ahhh, you meant that Austria was Spanish, ok.
It's a bit more complicated than that. The king of Spain inherited Austria (among other territories) but he was about as austrian as he was spanish. I would not say that Spain was over Austria in that union, and Austria was definitely not spanish. He's even generally called Charles V, his german title, rather than Charles I, his spanish title.
Think I'm gonna go with Norway. For Scandinavia!!! I want Sweden though
Why Sweden if we could have Denmark?
Sweden had an interesting empire era, Denmark too earlier, but Denmark was covered in Civ V
Mauricio Lima Sweden was also covered in Civ 5
I also hope for the Lion of the North to be represented soon.
Luis Arturo Sánchez Gutiérrez Why not Christian the Fourth spender of money and loser of wars?
Well, I guess Rome, France, India or Arabia. I hope they'll add Poland in a DLC, though as far as the leaks say, they'll give us Jadwiga as the leader, which is lame as hell. She didn't really do anything, she got married of to the Grand Duke of Lithuania and died ten years later. Sure, she was a patron of hospitals and arts (via the Church, she's a Saint) so she might work for a religious/cultural victory, but seriously... Sigismund the Old, Sigismund II Augustus, Casimir the Restorer, Casimir the Great, John III Sobieski...
It's pretty much the same story with France being led by a Medici. While the Medici family was certainly influential in European politics, they were predominantly involved with Italian government, and only briefly had significance in France through Catherine iirc. It's a really strange leader choice that seems like it's either trying to break the norm in some odd way or push for gender equality. And in Civ, neither is necessary, so long as the most recognizable, most important leaders make an appearance.
Don't even get me started on how Frederick Barbarossa leads Germany. He was a Holy Roman Emperor, Holy Rome =/= Germany.
Captain Greninja Yeah, they could've stuck with Bismarck or switch Germany to Prussia. Adding the Holy Roman Empire makes little sense, and selling them as Germany even less.
Or they could just scratch Germany and add Persia, the Maya/Inca/Aztecs, the Ottomans, etc.
I hate the developer's need to add worthless female leaders for some reason. Victoria, Catherine the Great and the Scythian Queen are great, for example, but Cleopatra, Catherine de Medici or Jadwiga are not, especially when they take other awesome leader's places. -.-
Falcon Wing I'm guessing Cleopatra was selected more for her mainstream fame than anything, though that makes it even more of an odd choice when compared with people like Hojo Tokimune and de Medici who are quite frankly obscure. If they wanted to pick a female Egyptian leader who actually did useful stuff during her reign, Hatshepsut would have been a much better choice. Heck, I probably would have rather seen her be a leader than the overused (but still great) Ramesses.
Captain Greninja Ancient Egypt had great leaders other than Ramesses, such as Amenhotep or Tutankhamun, who deserve a mention far more than Hatshepsut. Hojo Tokimune, I searched after the video, defended Japan during the Mongol invasions, but de Medici hardly even ruled France! You shouldn't choose a leader because of gender and ignore others far more illustrious, damnit! Victoria is chosen because she is truly representative of Britain at it's height, not because she was female. de Medici did not rule France, was not French, and did not do anything particularly impressive.. So why? If you had no one to choose, just go with Napoleon :S
What I don't get about Germany is... it isn't Germany.
Frederick I existed long; long; long before Germany ever did. He was Holy Roman Emperor; making him 'King of all Germans' [As in the Germanic people] and Italy.
There was no German civ at that time. Frederick was basically head of what amounts to the EU.
Well it was the holy Roman Empire of German Nation. So you Could say it was the prototyp of a german nation.
Werbekball
Except it wasn't just Germany.
It was the Netherlands; Austria; North Italy; the Chech Republic and even part of Denmark and modern France. And at one point the Emperor was Spanish to boot.
It's much more appropriate to compare the HRE to the EU. Both pan-european Germanic-led unions of multiple countries.
Also HRE + Rome means we have TWO Italian civs. Without actually having an 'Italy'.
Calling a Holy Roman Emperor the head of the 'German' civ is just wrong. At least it's an Emepror from a part of modern Germany; not a Hasburg [Austrian; also Spain has one already]. It's not completely inaccurate; since he did rule over all of what is modern Germany, but the HRE was not Germany. The HRE wasn't even a country.
I imagine the historians working in development had wanted to call this rendition of German society, "the Holy Roman Empire," but anyone playing the game without a background in history, (which accounts for the majority of players) would not know what this is. I suppose the developers wished to simply represent all of German history, from the barbarian kingdoms to the HRE to the modern state, as one unified civilization while still calling it something recognizable by the public.
Not entirely accurate. Although the modern BeneLux were actual part during the founding of the HRE in 962, the only 'french' part was Burgundy (which was later acompanied by Lombardy due to conquest) but subsequently lost around the 16th to 17th century(gradually). Same things happend to the northern Italian territories. These losses promted the 'official' suffixiation of ' of german Nation' in the early 1500's, to signify the importance of the german rule over the HRE.
Denmark never was part of the HRE, and Bohemia(what is now more or most likely less the Czech Republic) was added later as a kingdom set up under german rule as part of a eastward germanic colonization and germanization process during the 12th century.
One important fact to mentioned is: All HREmperor where german kings or counts, and even the aformentioned spaniard belonged to the german royal family of Habsburg, and was german by birth(only his complicated dynastial situation lead him to be crowned King of Spain before being appointed Emperor of the HRE) .
So the conclusion with it: Although the HRE never really was a nation in the modern sense, but more like a federation, it was regarded as such for the most time of it's existance. And since the majority of it's territory was ruled by german astocracy and located on germanic soil, as well as all HRE rulers were germans it is quite logical to conclude that the HRE was the forerunner to the german nation, and can be called Germany in a general meaning, and is referred to it by quite many people, even outside Germany itself, historically.
well...after bismarck from civ 5 .. i dont know who they could put for the leader...if you know what i mean...it would be too easy to play with them if they had merkel...or adolf...and btw why are the russians lone slavic wolf again and we have fckin random countries instead of poland or bulgarians?
Hey Sega have you heard this - there are Games with 19 Factions available on RELEASE ! They didn't even split up their game into several DLC's or try to sell you a 120$ Edition because of Expansion Pass - DICE ! And for GODs Sake WHAT? No console release prior to PC release how dare they!! And now the Overkill - No. Payment. Within. The. Game. - No microtransactions. Wow did not think this would be possible anymore.
I wish they added some more weird civs (like Holland in civ 5 was fun) from throughout history, not just established favorites. Maybe a Holy Roman Emperor who wasn't German would be nice.
Like maybe Bohemia? Charles IV? That could be interesting instead of Poland every damn time.
What? Huh? Rumors of Poland for DLC?
GODDAMMIT POLAND!!!
Of course it would be nice to have more civs, but we are comparing a game that has all its dlc and is fully released versus a new game with no dlc. Civ V had the same number of civs as this at launch.
Nonprophet. Of course I'm happy with the type and amount of civs here. I was just pointing out the idea of adding really bizarre civs (think Venice in Civ 5) as dlc or updates, which make the game much more interesting. I'm still satisfied with how the game looks and will probably buy it come launch day.
I gotcha, and yeah I agree that would be interesting.
The Dutch weren't that weird of a civ were they?
Damn I was hoping for Persia with Cyrus as leader. Maybe DLC.
Needs Sweden, NA Indians, mongols, and poland.
Seeing as how we've seen a city called Stockholm on released footage of the game already (can't be bothered to find the video right now though), Sweden seems likely for a DLC release Civ.
Scias as a Indian, what are NA Indians ?
RockMaster Maybe you don't call them that in English hm...
In Sweden we say indians to both "real" indians, and native americans.
I really want Sweden back, the noble prize perk was fucking amazing.
I'm pretty sure the next Civ added will be Poland or Persia due to rumors circulating the Civfanatics forums. As for civs I'd like to see personally I always thought Nepal led by Prithvi Narayan Shah would be a great addition with massive bonuses to religion and adjacency bonuses to mountains/being able to move units through mountains. A Gurkha unique unit would of course be another obvious fit with them. Also the Olmec are another one I'd love to see as they were effectively the Sumeria of the Americas. Led by Po Ngbe and sporting the unique Collosal Heads building (replacing the monument) the Olmec would have a civ geared towards early game culture and faith, perhaps linking their culture and faith gain to trade in some way as the fact that Olmec artifacts have been dug up hundreds of miles from their heartlands shows that they were very much active traders and spread their ideas like bloodletting, writing, traditions, and the famed Meso-American ballgame far and wide from foreign traders.
Another quality video mate!
Thank you!
Doctor: you have 24 minutes to live
Me:
Anyone else find it odd they chose the fictional character of Gilgamesh for the leader of Sumer? I mean, I'm pretty sure there are documented ACTUAL leaders of the Sumerian people, right?
I think they're going for some very 'out there' choices, deviating farther from previous games to give Civ6 more of its own identity rather than 'just Civ 5 again'. A reckognizable name is more important than the guy existing in reality, really.
Natasel Germany = Hansel & Gretel?
Just because they made a poem about him, doesn't mean he was fictional. Wikipedia: "Gilgamesh is generally seen by scholars as a historical figure, since inscriptions have been found which confirm the existence of other figures associated with him in the epic. If Gilgamesh existed, he probably was a king who reigned sometime between 2800 and 2500 BC."
Natasel or you know, Germany could just have Hitler lol
@@zachryan2455
So does that mean that Jesus is a possibility?
the races in this are really bizarre.... English empire...? what...? lol. Don't you mean British...? and man of war rather than sea dog..? And France? King Louis no..? and giving America massive cultural bonuses...? hahaha are they having a laugh..?? 😅😂
They maintain the word English and British mean different things, so keeping it 'English' opens up the possibility of introducing Scotland and Ireland as separate civs late on. There are multiple viable leaders for every civ, for France they wanted to have someone that they could focus on the new spies mechanics, so Catherine is a suitable choice if they're looking for someone like that. And 'culture' doesn't mean culture in the sense of just art and history. Coke is sold everywhere, people all around you wear jeans, and how long has it been since you've seen a McDonalds or Starbucks? Video games and movies are in high proportion from America too, notable, the Civilization series. All of those are you being exposed to and experiencing American culture. Where I live, Malaysia, we have lots of rich and colourful history, food, and art. However, do you see nasi lemak sold commonly, people wearing sarungs, or any kind of kopitiams at every commercial corner? Ola Bola was our biggest movie this year but not many people outside of Malaysia have even heard of it.
Well. Firstly thanks for the reply!
I see what you mean about opening it up so that you can have leaders from Ireland, Wales etc, however the English empire just isn't accurate historically, it was the British empire, and furthermore, that would still be open to more leaders like Scottish Irish etc, which were indeed leaders within the British empire, making it far more historically accurate.
For France why not Bonaparte? He was absolutely the most notable historical French leader, it seems sad that the game seems to be trying to reshape history. Feels a little like American (specifically left wing) propaganda. Which is kind of sad, and takes quite a lot of the joy out of the game for me. And regarding culture, the European nations dominated classical culture for thousands of years, most notably British culture, as most obviously seen in how now the universal language of the planet, is English, and suits are worn universally for business. American culture has only been around for a few hundred years. So the perspective of the game just seems a little.. well. Sad. For me anyway. In the board game, the British weren't even in it, the Biggest Empire the world has ever seen, but the Americans were.. which to me shows the mentality of the game makers. They sadly don't seem to be interested in history over subtle propaganda
Ah, if you're on the word 'empire', they just used that for consistency. There's no American Empire or Brazillian Empire either, just in the context of the Civ game, 'empire' is the most generic word to apply to all civs. The game starts in the ancient era where empires don't even exist and is represented by no restrictions on national borders. It's just a simplification on somethings that could cause confusion where no confusion is necessary.
For France, Bonaparte wasn't really known for his use of spies really, though they have opened up the possibility of having multiple leaders for each civ, so he might come later on. The point of Catherine is to tune into the spies and espionage mechanics. I don't see this as trying to reshape history at all, the 'civs' are just represented by the time the current leader was in charge of things. Bonaparte's France is very different from Catherine's time 200 years prior. They aren't saying either one is more or less important. I don't see how leader choice has anything to do with American left wing propaganda. Is the choice of Catherine associated to American left wing propaganda?
On culture, yes, European culture dominated for a very long time. That's why Greece and England have massive cultural bonuses that come much earlier in the game. America's cultural bonuses are late-game only with the film studio and national parks. They don't get those until at least the industrial age and beyond, whereas Greece gets cultural bonuses in the classical era and England has museums. This seems entirely correct from a perspective and historical standpoint.
The board game is made by entirely different people. Even if it says 'Firaxis' on the box, it's not the same people. You need to see who the lead developer is, and in this case, it's Ed Beach. The board game didn't say Firaxis or even 2K on the box though, it was made by Kevin Wilson and published by Fantasy Flight Games.
Well, fair enough. I can't say I 100% agree but I'm sure you aren't entirely wrong.
and regarding the board game, I didn't know it was from different developers so again, fair enough
"Is the choice of Catherine associated to American left wing propaganda?"
What Matthew Clark is trying to say is he doesn't like feeemales in his video games.
Glad I found your channel, you are making some really good quality videos! :D
Thanks! I just try my best haha
In terms of CIVs to play... I expect some from CIV Vs DLC to return as well as some new ones... as for new ones... well it would be kinda funny to play as Canada
And Mexico
You guys are assholes. Mexico and Canada are great nations and epitomize what it means to contribute to the world's... who am I kidding? They are meme-tier shitholes.
Canada is an interesting nation-state, but not much of a defining civilization. Canada's culture is a mixture of all other nations, history and scientific progress has been largely in collaboration or disagreement with the United States. There's not much unique material to build a civilization off of.
Greece and Germany are going to clash A LOT if they're neighbors
Hmm, wonder where that came from
+ANJROTmania greece aint serbia m8
ANJROTmania well, Germany clashed with Rome not with Greece. If you mean now, I wouldn't call it clashing hahhaha.
Germany just wants its loans back.
Krixig I think it's more complex than that, I fully understand and support Germany's position but Greece is not just some country who loves taking money from others either. The EU needs some serious reforms right away so neither Germany nor Greece had to be in their current positions with each other.
those pronunciations are on point!
Also why are ziggurats not allowed on hills? I thought their whole point was to be on a hill to protect them from floods
I always try my best haha! I hope I didn't get anything wrong but a 20+ minute video gives a lot of room for mistake.
Jackson DeCourcy well, it depends it's true Classical Latin (around Augustus' Time) pronounced Cs like Ks, but in the latter Latin it changed to modern Italian Cs before Es and Is (like CH in modern Spanish too). Although it's true it was never pronounced as it would be in English, but it's hard to know all this when the main point is the game.
Jackson DeCourcy yes, if you've studied Latin you probably just learnt the classical version, I only know the evolution because I'm from Spain so when I study the evolution of Spanish it always connects with Latin, also because I like Rome.
Jackson DeCourcy yeah, latter Latin (or early Spanish) in Spain (and everywhere else really) was a mess, it was some unstandardised mixture of Latin and Spanish very difficult to understand. The epic novels from this time in French, Spanish... are impossible to read even for native speakers, they are called the Dark Ages for a reason, I like Classical Latin better.
There should be a Danelaw Civ lead by Cnute the Great
Leader Bonus is North Sea Empire: Units receive a big combat bonus for 2 turns after disembarking
Civilization Bonus is Anglo-Scandinavian: Gets a free extra civic and military policy
Unique Unit is the shield wall: gets +20 bonus when defending and +5 bonus when attacking an enemy unit from behind. Replaces the Swordsman
Unique infrastructure is parish church: gives a science, culture and happiness bonus when adjacent to a wonder. Replaces temple. Can be built throughout the whole game
I think civ should make "Wonder Units": Extremely powerful units that can take on multiple units, but only one can be made. Just some examples could be the Bismark, Big Bertha, Seal Team Six, Enola Gay, the 300, etc.
graphic style is strange... but we will see:D
Butthurt McWowimacunt
I with there where full version of civ on mobile :P
I do have mixed feelings about it. While I do like the style, I feel that Civilizations is best with a more realistic style.
That being said, I definitely approve of flirty Victoria :D
Sines314 after playing a bit, ye realistic style is better
Poland can't into civ 6 :(
Nor Sweden. :(
If they put Poland in they would have to put code in the game so that they can't spawn on the same continent as Germany or they would only last 2 weeks....guess it's better than the French that couldn't hold up for 1 week lol
How ignorant.
poland is confirmed for dlc
no!! where are the dutch !
They'll come later more likely
Or just download the mod if you can't wait ;)
Zulu and Iroquois aren't that impressive but yeah Babylon and especially Persians should be in.
Expansion Packs. Doesn't everyone realize that you can't get the full game until they are 2 months away from releasing the next generation?
***** Yes he is :)
scythia is sounding pretty sweet, same with rome.
being able to double up ANY unit for the price (and time) of one is HUGE, but you add onto it that it would normally be a unit that costs a resource.. that's very good. Assuming that it has the movement of a typical mounted unit, this will allow very crazy levels of scouting and eliminating barbarians.. lots of gold and city state rep for clearing encampments.. then after you've established several allied city states as well as amassed a nice bit of coin, you can either wage war with your current units or upgrade them and bide your time.
honestly though, it's sounding like many of the civs are pretty damn good.. I like this trend. Too many civ 5 civs were not all that viable and you were surely going to lose in certain match ups
Things that will be pretty cool to happen:
If your neighbors have negative happiness and lower tourism than you, you are presented with the option to have them be part of your empire.
If you have been allies with a City State for 10 turns and are neighbors, you may chose to have them join your empire.
City States can unite to form it's very own Civ if they are reasonably close together and there are no other civs in the way.
hope they add sweden with charles XII as the leader
And his ability could be to die randomly when you attack a city with a carolean and so lose the game
Death Grunty it HAS to be Carolus Rex if Russia has Peter the Great as their leader. Imagine they clashes of historical proportions that would be!
so England and France in this game are gonna cancel out each others riflemen bonuses by the looks of it
Not if they end up on the same continent.
To my knowledge, continents are not the same as what the unique units are referencing. When we think of continents, we think of the whole continent until it hits an area of water. From the previews, if the continent is too large, it'll be split into smaller "continent" regions. Think of it like how we split North and South America or split Europe from Asia, despite being connected to each other. So, even if you play on pangea, Britain could still get its bonuses as long as you're not in the home continent region.
Luke Gonzalez Yeah, I've mentioned this before in earlier videos. Continents in Civ 6 are more like tectonic plates and nothing to do with landmasses. England and France can still end up on the same continent as it's been stated that they want to average it to about 2 civs per continent.
The next civilization added as dlc could be Korea or Siam/Thailand, both have so much potencial :-) Poland could also be great.
POLSKA! (Poland should be under Casmir the Great)
Te rumor says that our civilization... oh! I mean Polish civilization of course... ;-) will be in DLC and Saint Hedwig will be the leader. www.zam.com/article/796/civilization-vi-civilizations-and-leaders-revealed
From that zam site quote "Jadwiga is one of Poland’s greatest leaders". It's pretty much saying something like "Millard Fillmore is one of USA greatest leaders"
Przemysław Kozieł Well that is probably why it is not the only thing they wrote about her.
tYLKO emerytowany zbawca narodu KIM JAR KACZ !!! Unique agenda: 500+. Unique unit: ONR Thugs. Unique district: Temple of Divine Providence.
The weird thing about the US is that the Naturalist is a Religion unit (and a rather expensive one), so unless you focus heavily on Religion/Culture push, the advantage is largely lost.
Arabia focuses on a Religion/Science push, with synergy between Holy Sites and Campuses. The guaranteed religion is nice, but since you already want Holy Sites early on, it's kind of wasted.
Aztecs look very much like a city expansion civ, with their emphasis on district building bonus and Amenity generation. Worth mentioning that the Leader Bonus only applies to Luxury tiles you work, not those obtained through trade or Suzerainty.
Brasil is kinda iffy; the leader bonus is quite useful, but the civ bonus is dependent on rainforests that can be permanently destroyed. I also can't think of a situation where I have a city working on a Project when I could be building more units and buildings. Finally, there doesn't seem to be a clear synergy between any of them.
China's leader bonus can be very useful in Boosting tech, especially if it can get enough Gold income to buy Builders. Worth noting that there are Policies that add even more additional charges to Builders, stacking to a whopping six charges. Its civ bonus is very strong, considering how often you'll get Boosts and the fact that progress on Tech can be saved when research is changed.
Egypt's civ bonus is going to hamstrung on a Small Island map. Also guessing that Egypt prefers tall civs, as riverside real estate runs out fast.
But.....Gorgo's not revealed yet? MADNESS?!
That was just a leak and could end up being an alternative leader for Greece. Since it was leaked, they might even consider scrapping the idea or maybe it was just a test.
what proof do you have that there will only be 19. and no Gorgo?
Brandon Debruin The developers have repeatedly said for months that there will be 19 civs on launch.
Gorgo just announced if you're interested. Alternate leader for Greece, so still only 19 civs but 20 leaders.
ruclips.net/video/syS-SFtr-44/видео.html
do you think there will be other alternate civs? if so, for all civs or just a few?
I hope there will be Poland in DLC (I'm Polish)
I'm hoping for way more Native American civs and for the Celts to be divided up.
so it has brasil but it doesnt have portugal that actually created brasil
One of the best ways to domination victory is via Crusader religious bonus. This makes Yerevan especially powerful for domination.
I usually play with a production focus, so Japan is looking pretty good. I think at the beginning at least Japan will be my main, Rome, America & Greece will be my off-civs.
9:58. Those impact effects look terrible.
Arabia, Greece, Rome and Russia look the strongest to me, but I guess only time will tell. Russia looks the most fun to play though
I gotta disagree with you about Russia^^ The extra landgrab sounds very good, the UU and Peters bonus are okay but their special building is just pure garbage. I think Brasil is way stronger than russia.
Darius I Lavra is a unique district, I.E: it can be built at half the production cost in every city and won't count towards your district count, making it super spammable. Also note it works with every great person charge, and many great persons have multiple uses in Civ VI. So a single Great Artist will actually give you 3 tiles. If you focus on culture a lot (which you probably should) and thus get many writers/artists/musicians, I'm sure you could get 30+ great people over the course of a game. On average that should then be able to easily give you 60+ tiles from the Lavra ability alone, and that's on top of the regular boost you get from founding cities
Russia is the only civ which can generate faith from turn zero, and should thus always get the first pantheon unless someone else finds a religious city state quickly. Regardless however, the pantheon Russia wants should always be available because no one else wants it: Dance of the Aurora, which gives bonus faith from tundra adjacency to holy sites, and that's on top of the inherent tundra faith yield. This'll give them a ton of faith to buy more great persons with, and thus even more land that way. Massive faith amount and a ton of land area also happens to be the exact two things you need to create National Parks, which is huge for Cultural Victories. Especially if you as Russia manage to build the Eiffel Tower you could potentially get an obscene amount of tourism. So yeah it's like a chain reaction of faith, great people and culture/tourism
On top of all that you'll save a ton of gold simply from not having to buy tiles so you can just spend all your gold on buying units instead so you even have a strong military as a result. And you'll be able to settle your cities on areas of the map where no one else can realistically do so. I'd say they're pretty good
*Looks up at sky* GHANDIIIIIIII!!!!!!
I'm liking the look of china because I love playing the defensive game and also those cannons look badass! XD
I think Ghandi's agenda should be "great warlord" and he just goes to war with everyone