Serenes Forest's Teehee Thread

[ping]

29 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Hmm, not my first choice, as it were.

Juarez, Santa Anna, Porfirio Diaz... heck, even Emperor Maximilian could work.

As I said, I really don't know a lot about Mexican history. I believe Mexico practically isn't part of the high school history curriculum here, so my main source of knowledge in that regard comes from Mike Duncan's Revolutions podcast, which of course might be the reason why my mind went to Villa when I was thinking about the "most famous Mexican leader".

But to be clear, "famous" =/= "important" or "great" here. I have no doubt that the guys you name were more important than Villa in the grand scheme of things, but I think Villa will be more well-known to people who only have passing knowledge (if any) about Mexican history than any of them, being the last guy trying to invade the US on land and all (...as part of a larger plan, but let's not get bogged down with the details).

So basically, I don't think Villa would be the best representive for Mexico... but he would've been it, had Mexico been in Civ1. To illustrate the point:

• the Aztec leader is Monty II. - the one who was overthrown by the Spaniards, not the one who built the Aztec Empire. Not exactly the greatest leader, but if somebody knows of one Aztec ruler, it's probably going to be him.
• the Russian leader is Stalin, because who will 'muricans think of when they think of Russia? - Especially considering that Civ1 was released very shortly after the end of the Cold War.
• Same with China and Mao.
• Same with India and Gandhi. Like, not to downplay his importance for Indian independence, but it's a bit silly that Civ keeps defaulting to him as its leader when there's millenia of history to choose from.
• Luckily not the same with Germany and the old Fritz. I think I mentioned before that Sid totally would've gone with Hitler if he could get away with it because, well... same reason as above.

[Codename Shrimp]

7 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

So I get why those with plenty of African pride would want to adopt her as their own.

I don't. Not only do i think pride in ancestry is something stupid (just like national pride etc.), but atleast have a sense to pick something that is part of your culture. What they are doing is literally cultural appropriation.

Not to mention North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa don't really have much in common.

Edited December 30, 2023 by Shrimpy -Limited Edition-

[Interdimensional Observer]

6 hours ago, ping said:

Funnily enough, Mexico shares a fate with Italy, which apparently counts as exhaustively represented by the Roman Empire

We need either Venice again, or Florence. Or, I've heard of using Victor Emmanuel or Camillo Cavour for a unified modern Italy -but only to have a thoroughly-Renaissance Italy beneath the leader. It's odd that an entire era gets named after a thing that began in city-state Italy, without a playable Italy representing that era. (Just change to "Early-Modern" next game.😛)

4 hours ago, ping said:

Same with India and Gandhi. Like, not to downplay his importance for Indian independence, but it's a bit silly that Civ keeps defaulting to him as its leader when there's millenia of history to choose from.

They did add Ashoka as a second in Civ4, and Chandragupta in Civ6.

The Cholas sound unique in Indian history, I wouldn't mind seeing them get a leader next Civ. Naval and trade-oriented, much different from how India has been portrayed in Civ.

While Civ5 had the Mughal Fort, I think it'd be better to have the Mughals show up as a separate entity. Not to play into modern nationalism, but if you're going to de-blob India to any extent, having a separate Mughal civ from the India civ would make the most sense.

 

5 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Juarez, Santa Anna, Porfirio Diaz... heck, even Emperor Maximilian could work.

Wouldn't he be generally considered an awful choice? Was important yes, but wouldn't it be much better to pick someone who showed the promise of Mexico, not the worst of its autocratic experiences?

 

38 minutes ago, Shrimpy -Limited Edition- said:

Not to mention North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa don't really have much in common.

I'm in agreement with that. I mean the Sahara isn't an impassable barrier, Islam crossed the sandy divide, so did some gold and salt, but they're very much very distinct and separate cultural-ethnic-historical regions, with very different histories.

The Nubians/Kushites are far more feasible to adopt as sub-Saharan pharaohs (even if Sudan seems North African?). -But they don't have the name recognition of Cleopatra.

[Armagon]

9 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

For how diverse India actually is, you can make the argument that it also falls under the problem of "only 1-2 things get represented, the rest tends to be glossed over".

Sri Lankans get fucked over by being in such close proximity to India to the point that it gets mistaken as being part of India.

7 hours ago, ping said:

although Armagon might be happy to hear that the second LatAm entry is Gran Columbia led by Simón Bolívar.

Time to begin my conquest, for the glory of Gran Colombia.

1 hour ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

They did add Ashoka as a second in Civ4

Oh so that's not a Star Wars original name.

[Interdimensional Observer]

33 minutes ago, Armagon said:

Oh so that's not a Star Wars original name.

Grandson of the also-aforementioned Chandragupta Maurya (350-295 BCE birth-death), founder of the Maurya Empire (322-185 BCE). (Chandy happened to live at the same time as Alexander the Great, though Al approached the Indian subcontinent, he was convinced/forced to return west, so the two famous warrior kings never met.)

Almost all of modern India. The closest things ever got to that. -Plus Bangladesh and Pakistan, even some Afghanistan. (You can also see on the above map how far Al the G got.)

Ashoka (304-232 BCE) was a victorious conqueror like his grandfather, who brought the Maurya Empire to its peak. Ashoka later abandoned violence, and adopted Buddhism as his personal faith and promoted it through India as he turned from war to governing and building stuff. (Though centuries later, Hinduism would have its resurgence and basically wipe out Buddhism in India.)

Edited December 30, 2023 by Interdimensional Observer

[Armagon]

18 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

(Chandy happened to live at the same time as Alexander the Great, though Al approached the Indian subcontinent, he was convinced/forced to return west, so the two famous warrior kings never met.)

Now that would be an interesting what if. Could he stand up to Alexander, hypothetically? That guy basically steamrolled the Mediterranean (ok maybe i'm simplifying here), he was only ever beaten by disease. Or assassination or whatever truly happened to him.

[Acacia Sgt]

7 hours ago, ping said:

As I said, I really don't know a lot about Mexican history. I believe Mexico practically isn't part of the high school history curriculum here, so my main source of knowledge in that regard comes from Mike Duncan's Revolutions podcast, which of course might be the reason why my mind went to Villa when I was thinking about the "most famous Mexican leader".

But to be clear, "famous" =/= "important" or "great" here. I have no doubt that the guys you name were more important than Villa in the grand scheme of things, but I think Villa will be more well-known to people who only have passing knowledge (if any) about Mexican history than any of them, being the last guy trying to invade the US on land and all (...as part of a larger plan, but let's not get bogged down with the details).

So basically, I don't think Villa would be the best representive for Mexico... but he would've been it, had Mexico been in Civ1. To illustrate the point:

Still... Villa never actually ruled Mexico. He was never a country leader to begin with. Has Civilization ever done that? 

3 hours ago, Shrimpy -Limited Edition- said:

I don't. Not only do i think pride in ancestry is something stupid (just like national pride etc.), but atleast have a sense to pick something that is part of your culture. What they are doing is literally cultural appropriation.

Not to mention North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa don't really have much in common.

Well, I guess me acting Hispanic instead of Cucapá means I've been doing cultural appropiation all this time. Guess I owe Ruben an apology then.

On a serious note, Cleopatra at least was born in Egypt, and the Ptolemaic Kingdom had already ruled by over two centuries at that point. It'd be a bit weird to say it had nothing to do with Egypt, even if it was founded by a non-Egyptian.

2 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Wouldn't he be generally considered an awful choice? Was important yes, but wouldn't it be much better to pick someone who showed the promise of Mexico, not the worst of its autocratic experiences?

Perfect to represent us.

Edited December 30, 2023 by Acacia Sgt

[Saint Rubenio]

Okay, I think I've put it off long enough. I need to wrap up the Vestaria revisit. It's been fun, experiencing Kaga's nonsense (good and bad) once more, but I'm getting to the point where I'm starting to want it over so I can do something else. A friend gifted me Mass Effect, and I got something for myself as well that I wish to toy around with.

So, time to play the worst map in VS2. Road to Deliverance: The Sequel, appropriately named Another Road to Deliverance.

17 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

While "creative products" and "intellectual contributions" are different -self-expression for fun vs. the revealing of True Knowledge for the sake of humanity- it's a not-dissimilar story.

If you're science guy/gal doing research on the lives of red Malay beetles (to invent a species nobody would care about), going out into the field and collecting evidence over years, the findings of which you then get published in a scientific journal, don't expect it to bring in any money. If you're a historian writing a book about the history of gender in Central America, maybe the proceeds from book sales will buy you lunch, once.

Pretty much. When it comes to creative pursuits, capitalism only rewards hard work if it's done towards specific products a lot of people will want, and all of it sprinkled with a healthy dose of luck and/or connections. Otherwise you better have a day job.

13 hours ago, Capt. Fargus said:

Had my sister tellin me that growin up

”gee, you should try making those games”

Nah.... I just wanna play em, not make em. Hell, I knew that back in the 80’s. Lol

I do like making stuff, but as of now I can only make very small things. Taking most of the ideas I've fantasized with and trying to make them into real games would only end in sore disappointment.

12 hours ago, Armagon said:

You don't have to join Triple A Studio 3000. There are smaller studios you can join.

But if you're going full on indie, best keep another job as your main one and focus on your games in the spare time. That Eterknights "i quit my job to make a Persona 5 clone because i love P5 so much" is lucky things seemed to have worked out for him.

Yeah, basically this. Of course, smaller studio doesn't necessarily mean good work environment. Videogames is an industry that's as private as they come, as evidenced by the many, many cases of worker abuse, deplorable working conditions, crunch and other such fun words.

[Saint Rubenio]

Of course, "the worst map in VS2" still means it can be a pretty fun map, but dang, the design's just so weird here. Relying on the honor system for its pathetic excuse of a time limit when one of the two major character events taking place in the map alone allows you to just destroy it utterly. And then if you actually play it as (seemingly) intended, the game drops boats full of ambush reinforcements on top of you, that spawn very far away otherwise. It's like Kaga wants you to make a mockery of this map.

[Acacia Sgt]

I don't know why, but my cat seems awfully interested in my Switch as of late.

[Interdimensional Observer]

Okay, gave a try at Berwick again. Took like an hour just to dispatch the dragons, because only two units can harm them, the "better" one having a 61 Hit rate at best, and needing three hits for a KO without any crits. Way to endear me to you BS.😑

-I get the map says "escape" for the win condition, but who is seriously going to forsake so much EXP and items? At least the rest of the map is extremely stationary, barring the newly-arrived reinforcements. Take out those by loading my turn 11 save state and then sloooowly dispatch the rest.

 

2 hours ago, Armagon said:

Now that would be an interesting what if. Could he stand up to Alexander, hypothetically? That guy basically steamrolled the Mediterranean (ok maybe i'm simplifying here), he was only ever beaten by disease. Or assassination or whatever truly happened to him.

Alexander turned back not for lack of will, but because his soldiers threatened mutiny after a near-decade of nonstop war, and going so far away from their homeland.

As strong as Al was (and only 33 at his death, still plenty o' ambition in those bones no doubt), I would have to imagine he was approaching some geographic limit to his conquests.

Actual estimations of Chandragupta vs. Alexander would demand too much informed yet still very uncertain hypothetical guesswork for me.😵 -Just make it into supremely anachronistic action flick, ancient West vs. ancient India in glorious exaggeration.

 

2 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Still... Villa never actually ruled Mexico. He was never a country leader to begin with. Has Civilization ever done that?

And Gandhi never ruled India. -As much of a protest leader as he was.

Civ has had mythic rulers, and not-so-great rulers (the last wave of Civ6 DLC added Ludwig II of Bavaria, Mr. Neuschwanstein). A different, earlier DLC added Vietnam under Ba (Lady) Trieu, who was nothing more than a short-lived rebel against the Chinese herself. (Vietnam at the time included coastal southern China, Ba Trieu rebelled against a late-60s Sun Quan.)

[ping]

2 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Still... Villa never actually ruled Mexico. He was never a country leader to begin with. Has Civilization ever done that? 

Gandhi. Hannibal, although you could maybe squint a bit and say that he was the leader of Carthage's Hispanic colonies. Old Fritz was king in/of Prussia, not Germany. Technically, Bismarck wasn't the ruler of Germany, either. Several mythical and semi-mythical figures. Don't get me started on Civ2, which has just about the worst way of adding female representation, by giving every civ a male and female leader. As a result, while there's reasonable picks like Elizabeth I. or Katharina the Great, there's also mythical figures (Hippolyta for the Greek, Amaterasu for Japan), fiction (Scheherazade for Persia), and complete bullshit ("Shakala" for the Zulu; Nazca for the Aztecs). ...although all that stuff about Civ2 doesn't really relate to the Pancho question. My apologies for ranting

I'd be really surprised if, should Mexico finally be included in Civ7, Villa would be its representative, for the reasons you said. But Sid's mindset was different in 1991, although I'm obviously speculating about his hypothetical pick here.

4 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

They did add Ashoka as a second in Civ4, and Chandragupta in Civ6.

The Cholas sound unique in Indian history, I wouldn't mind seeing them get a leader next Civ. Naval and trade-oriented, much different from how India has been portrayed in Civ.

While Civ5 had the Mughal Fort, I think it'd be better to have the Mughals show up as a separate entity. Not to play into modern nationalism, but if you're going to de-blob India to any extent, having a separate Mughal civ from the India civ would make the most sense.

Yeah, but after Ashoka, Civ5 returned to just Gandhi (as it doesn't have alternative leaders) and Civ6 initially started with just Gandhi too, until Chandragupta was added with one of the expansions (or as DLC, I don't remember). Gandhi is still their default, and it's really just for the memes at this point. Monty II. was at least quietly changed to Monty I. in Civ5.

Honestly, now that you mention it, India really should be represented by multiple civs, not just leaders. Keep modern India if they have to keep the Gandhi train running, but add, say, the Chola, Vijayanagar, Delhi, Mughals, or Maurya...

[Saint Rubenio]

9 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Okay, gave a try at Berwick again. Took like an hour just to dispatch the dragons, because only two units can harm them, the "better" one having a 61 Hit rate at best, and needing three hits for a KO without any crits. Way to endear me to you BS.😑

-I get the map says "escape" for the win condition, but who is seriously going to forsake so much EXP and items? At least the rest of the map is extremely stationary, barring the newly-arrived reinforcements. Take out those by loading my turn 11 save state and then sloooowly dispatch the rest.

Oof... Yeah, if you haven't done much training of the mages that map can be a bit tough. As you say, you can just leave if the going gets tough, but who wants to do that?

7 minutes ago, ping said:

Gandhi is still their default, and it's really just for the memes at this point.

Pretty much. I mean, didn't they actually implement the whole "Gandhi loves nukes" thing at this point? Even though I'm pretty sure the original meme was actually a hoax, it sure as hell caught on.

[Acacia Sgt]

1 minute ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Pretty much. I mean, didn't they actually implement the whole "Gandhi loves nukes" thing at this point? Even though I'm pretty sure the original meme was actually a hoax, it sure as hell caught on.

Not a hoax. From what I recall, it was an underflow (overflow?) bug with his aggressive score that caused it to max out when forced to go below 0.

[ping]

3 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Pretty much. I mean, didn't they actually implement the whole "Gandhi loves nukes" thing at this point? Even though I'm pretty sure the original meme was actually a hoax, it sure as hell caught on.

Indeed:

 

[Acacia Sgt]

Oh, really? Interesting.

[ping]

"Don't believe everything you see on the internet" - Abraham Lincolm

It's honestly funny how the myth started just from somebody vandalising a TvTropes page, but I guess it's the kind of story that people would want to be true. Nuclear Gandhi was a funny joke, but it's one that has overstayed its welcome at some point.

[GuardianSing]

15 hours ago, Armagon said:

Just found out about the Venezuelan Marvel superhero

Sofia Mantega a.k.a Wind Dancer. A Mutant.

This had me thinking about the general state of Latino representation in American media. I'm sure you can dig deep enough in something as expansive as Marvel but Latino rep generally is either "the character is Mexican" or "the character is Puerto Rican" and that's about it. The map of Latin America might as well be those two countries only (though there was Encanto, that did put Colombia on the map for the average American).

Basically what i'm saying is that i'd like to see more Venezuelan characters, more Colombians, more Peruvians, Guatemalans, Paraguayans, etc.

I remember telling a yankee friend of mine that I was from Central America and they were like "Oh so you're from the midwest?"

15 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Sadly, this is a case where when it's not the "stock Latino choices", it will instead be Native representation. So if you hope for Peruvian representation, it will more often be Quechua than Hispanic. To give an example. Even we fall on that from time to time. Why use Hispanic Mexican when you can use Nahua or Mayan instead.

Most Americans don't know anything about the modern history of Latin America, even concerning the native history people talk about the ancient Maya or Aztecs without going into their recent histories.

14 hours ago, Armagon said:

I see. So even when it's a character from a particular country, it's not necessarily that they are Latino, that's what you're saying?

Although, quite a few Latin American countries to begin with have significant indigenous populations. As of 2021, i found this chart where Guatemala and Bolivia tower above the other nations in indigenous populations, with Peru in third place. I don't have statistics but there's probably been noticeable intermingling between Latinos and indigenous.

Most Latino's have a decent amount of indigenous blood in them, though it's no coincidence the class disparities between darker skinned and white folks is still very prevalent down here.

14 hours ago, Armagon said:

Yeah Brazil speaking Portuguese is a big plus for them. Brazil also got shown off a lot in the Rio movie, about the Spix's Macaw, which i think ended up bringing attention to them. I mean, they're still extinct in the wild but it did bring the birds into public conscious for a time.

They brought them back!!

It was nice of that movie to bring attention to poachers in Brazil being a big problem for endangered species, though I personally recommend "Boy and the World" as an animated film that takes place in Brazil and takes it a step forward by showing how direct action or inaction from the government is what destroys ecosystems.

14 hours ago, Armagon said:

Also

Laura Matsuda, Brazilian-Japanese character in Street Fighter. That's pretty big.

There's also Blanka.

Him being the only other Brazilian character kind of implies that that's just what the sexual dimorphism is for Brazilians in the Street Fighter universe which is very racist but also incredibly funny.

14 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Yeah, it falls into the whole "lumped together" thing. With so many Hispanic Latin American countries, it's easier to stick to 1-2. This, conversely, gives the opportunities to other groups in the same areas to have more chances of representation, so it's not all negative... but still kinda sucks.

Mhm, that's different management for ya, even if it still was far from perfect. I wouldn't say they tower, since that's just percentages. 43% sounds a lot, but Guatemala has not even 20M population. Meanwhile, Mexico has only 19% but with about 120M people, the net total is much higher than Guatemala's. More than double, even. And yes, intermingling was a lot more common here.

Guatemala is one of the few Latin American countries to really celebrate their indigenous heritage in their tourism sector. Of course they'll quietly swipe the Mayan Genocide that took place a mere 40 years ago under the rug...

14 hours ago, Armagon said:

Yeah. Other regions don't seem to get lumped together like that i think. Well.....Asia's so big you basically have to split it to three regions. East Asia generally gets off easy. The prominence of China, Japan and South Korea in media allows the three to co-exist without getting lumped together. Taiwan and Vietnam are kinda left behind unfortunately but they still have it better than Mongolia. And North Korea but that has it's own issues.

Southeast Asia rep is....less impressive. Indonesia, The Philippines, etc. Not much makes it off the top of my head.

Vietnam I would say is SEAsian. Most Americans sort of subconsciously see it as diet China but other than the war I can't think of much representation of it in the media at the top of my head.

Mongolia does have the whole Mongol Empire that teens are obsessed with and that throat singing video got super viral but yeah, can't think of any popular pieces of media about a Mongol character.

Singapore gets a huge break in Pirates of the Caribbean 3 at least.

14 hours ago, Armagon said:

The Middle East isn't even regarded as Asian most of the time. You tell a weeb that Pakistanis are Asians and that fact would deep fry their brains.

On the topic of popular media about the middle east, Aladdin as a film is pretty racist for having a mingled view of middle eastern cultures, but it's also funny how much it insisted in keeping that American perceived aesthetic. They make direct references to "Allah" and it's like, not even a Disney movie taking place in White Christain land would make a reference to capital G God.

14 hours ago, Armagon said:

As for the rest of the world, Africa is a really weird spot because the African rep in American media is usually specifically about African Americans rather than specific African nationalities, because of the specific history. You know what i'm talking about. The protagonists of the Kane Chronicles are Egyptian, as are most of the supporting cast, but that's about it as far as what comes to mind in terms of characters representing African nationalities.

Ancient Egypt is pretty popular in the public conscious, though lots of films about ancient Egypt tend to generalize in the Arab direction with some of it's aesthetic choices even if that isn't entirely accurate for the time. Though that's less of an offense in my mind.

And there's also somewhat of an idea of African tribes down south but of course those are generalized to hell and back. Marvel's Black Panther is pretty popular (And is also the only good marvel film in my opinion) but I admit to not knowing what part of Africa they were trying to represent. My brain wants to say central Africa in the Congo region but I don't know enough about the continent and it's many many cultures to say for sure.

The wikipedia says in East Africa of the Sub-Sahara.

14 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

For its worth, they have Moana.

Even within Oceana I feel Polynesians have got it better than Micronesians and Melanesians.

Not that I need daddy disney to validate my racial identity but I am very jealous of Polynesians for getting Moana as a film where as I'm stuck with Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom as representation.

13 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Southeast Asia, oh what a shame that for Americans it's just the place of the Vietnam War. Albeit I don't know that much more, other than it being the center of Theravada Buddhism, plus Angkor Wat and the Khmer Empire that built said grand temple.

Vietnam says trans rights. That's pretty cool.

Socialism wins this time.

13 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Not untrue, even though I'm not exactly well-informed about the differences within India to this day.😅

I never recognized that in GS. This said, it show up as a City-State in Civ6, with the following bio description.:

  Reveal hidden contents

As the Khmer Empire declined in the 14th century, the lands that it dominated started to assert themselves. In the Chao Phraya valley, in modern-day Thailand, a series of Theravada Buddhist city-states called “mueang,” populated by Thai-speaking and Lao-speaking peoples, began to split off from the Khmer, asserting their own linguistic and cultural independence while retaining the religion, royal traditions, and many other cultural and legal features of the Khmer. Mueang were “mandala states,” kingdoms without defined borders but centered on a city that stressed beauty, artistic achievements, and cosmopolitan outlook – think of countries in that time not as the bounded puzzle pieces we see on a map today (or the bordered civilizations in your current game), but as magnets, drawing in people and power from the landscape. Power and profits came via royal monopolies on certain goods – especially porcelain or incense (the name of Vientiane, a Lao “mueang” from the same time, means “city of sandalwood”).

Once the mueang were free of the Khmer, they made war on each other. And, through the course of the 14th and 15th centuries, one became dominant. Ayutthaya, named after the city in the Hindu epic Ramayana [Ramakien, in Thai], became first the center of the Chao Phraya river plain, and, later, a significant power in mainland Southeast Asia, one that European travelers compared with India and China. In the course of its rise, Ayutthaya struggled diplomatically and militarily with its neighbors, especially the Burmese, who conquered Ayutthaya in the 1500s, but were rebuffed by the ambitious warrior-king Naresuan. Ayutthaya could also be the aggressor: at its height, Cambodia, parts of Malaysia, and Laos were controlled by the kings of Ayutthaya.

The city flourished in the 1600s, and the kingdom was called by some travelers a name we might find more familiar – Siam (itself derived from a Khmer word, or possibly a Chinese term). The kings of Ayutthaya were curious about the world and open to it, and employed Japanese, Arab, and European councilors to help them navigate the tricky realm of international diplomacy. The city itself, situated on an island in the middle of the Chao Phraya river, was large for the time, with about a quarter million residents, and had a cosmopolitan, polyglot nature – communities of Japanese, Chinese, and Europeans were established in the city and mingled with the locals. Gender roles, too, were relatively progressive in comparison with East Asia, South Asia, or Europe. One Chinese traveler remarked that “it is [Siamese] custom that all affairs are managed by their wives,” and Alexander Hamilton noted that the “Women in Siam are the only Merchants in buying Goods.”

Ayutthaya did not decline; it crashed. Specifically, it crashed against the Burmese army, yet again. In 1767, the Burmese sacked Ayutthaya and destroyed it, carrying off the gold of its temples, many of its skilled artisans, and putting most of the city to the torch. Siam reformed some years later further south, in a city called (in part) Krung Thep, a city known to foreigners as Bangkok. Today, Siam – Thailand - remains the only country in the region not to be formally colonized by a European power.

They could make an entire saga about the Sikh Empire.

11 hours ago, ping said:

An excuse to ramble about Civilization, you say?!

Unless I'm pulling a blank, I think the first non-native LatAm civ in the series was Brazil in the fifth game of the series. Now, in Civ6, that number has been doubled (wow!), although Armagon might be happy to hear that the second LatAm entry is Gran Columbia led by Simón Bolívar. It's only the third non-US, non-native American civ, though, as Canada was added to Civ6 before Gran Columbia was.

The big omission here is Mexico, of course, with a main cause probably being the Aztecs and (since Civ3) the Mayans being permanent residents in Civ Town, representing Central America. I'd very much be against throwing either of those out, but c'mon, would it really be such a big deal to have three "Mexican" civs when they're very much distinct from one another?

Funnily enough, Mexico shares a fate with Italy, which apparently counts as exhaustively represented by the Roman Empire, even though I'm told that the Romans kiiinda outgrew the home peninsula during their reign.

I can understand Italy somewhat, and I'm glad 5 had Venice as a separate Civ, but Mexico definitely should be in there. If Rome, Byzantium, and Greece can coexist, so can Mexico, Maya, and Azteca. I'd say they have even more a reason to than the first three.

10 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Hmm, not my first choice, as it were.

Juarez, Santa Anna, Porfirio Diaz... heck, even Emperor Maximilian could work.

*Cough* Zapata *Cough*

9 hours ago, ping said:

So basically, I don't think Villa would be the best representive for Mexico... but he would've been it, had Mexico been in Civ1. To illustrate the point:

• the Aztec leader is Monty II. - the one who was overthrown by the Spaniards, not the one who built the Aztec Empire. Not exactly the greatest leader, but if somebody knows of one Aztec ruler, it's probably going to be him.
• the Russian leader is Stalin, because who will 'muricans think of when they think of Russia? - Especially considering that Civ1 was released very shortly after the end of the Cold War.
• Same with China and Mao.
• Same with India and Gandhi. Like, not to downplay his importance for Indian independence, but it's a bit silly that Civ keeps defaulting to him as its leader when there's millenia of history to choose from.
• Luckily not the same with Germany and the old Fritz. I think I mentioned before that Sid totally would've gone with Hitler if he could get away with it because, well... same reason as above.

I honestly think this. Civ should have like a controversial leader pack for Civ 7. Having Mao and Stalin back as leaders would be very entertaining.

7 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Civ has had mythic rulers, and not-so-great rulers (the last wave of Civ6 DLC added Ludwig II of Bavaria, Mr. Neuschwanstein). A different, earlier DLC added Vietnam under Ba (Lady) Trieu, who was nothing more than a short-lived rebel against the Chinese herself. (Vietnam at the time included coastal southern China, Ba Trieu rebelled against a late-60s Sun Quan.)

 Firaxis when adding Vietnam: "Well we want the leaders to be clean uncontroversial figures as to not offend anyone, so we went for an ancient figure."

Vietnam: "Our capital is literally called Ho Chi Minh city."

 

[BrightBow]

26 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Okay, gave a try at Berwick again. Took like an hour just to dispatch the dragons, because only two units can harm them, the "better" one having a 61 Hit rate at best, and needing three hits for a KO without any crits. Way to endear me to you BS.😑

-I get the map says "escape" for the win condition, but who is seriously going to forsake so much EXP and items? At least the rest of the map is extremely stationary, barring the newly-arrived reinforcements. Take out those by loading my turn 11 save state and then sloooowly dispatch the rest.

It's actually possible to do a sneak attack on the Wyrmspeaker to put the dragons into a permanent confuse state and wait until they all kill each other.

The Wyrmspeaker is unarmed and hidden. And as it turns out the Brave Crossbow loaded with Sniper Arrows has exactly enough power for an one-round kill. So you can just have Sylvis run into him and he will die.
The bushes on the way to this hill also allow you to hide and the wyvern have a set patrol path.
 

16 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Oof... Yeah, if you haven't done much training of the mages that map can be a bit tough. As you say, you can just leave if the going gets tough, but who wants to do that?

I used the randomizer to make those guys less dodgy. As is, there is like no way to reliably deal with them.
Also removed the crit bonus on their multi-hit breath attacks while I was on it.

Can't keep them in check with Provoke either, because they get confused after they engage in combat. At that point Provoke will no longer work.
Wish I had a way to disable that property.

Edited December 30, 2023 by BrightBow

[BrightBow]

46 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

Okay, gave a try at Berwick again. Took like an hour just to dispatch the dragons, because only two units can harm them, the "better" one having a 61 Hit rate at best, and needing three hits for a KO without any crits. Way to endear me to you BS.😑

Only two units? Do you mean Perceval and Enid? Because everyone with a bow can take advantage of their electric weakness by firing Raijin Arrows at them. You don't necessarily need actual magic for it.
Or Freeze Arrows, in the case of that one Fire Wyvern.
Killer Arrows can also do in a pinch, because they synergize nicely with the crit vulnerability the dragons already have from their scales.

Also Sherpa could bonk one with a Thunder Sword if he is the one who lures them in. He can't initiate combat against them, but he can counter.
Larentia is the only one capable of actually initiating 0 range combat against enemy fliers, so she could hit them with the Euthyphro. But if she misses, the counter is gonna hurt.

Edited December 30, 2023 by BrightBow

[Interdimensional Observer]

1 hour ago, ping said:

Yeah, but after Ashoka, Civ5 returned to just Gandhi (as it doesn't have alternative leaders) and Civ6 initially started with just Gandhi too, until Chandragupta was added with one of the expansions (or as DLC, I don't remember).

The Rise and Fall expansion. I'd actually say Chandragupta works better with India's overall setup, minus the Stepwell. Gandhi's +5 Faith per founded religion he is at peace with is too weak in the long run, 5% would've been better.

With Chandy, you will be making war (ideally with Varu for a time). As you do, you'll inevitably pick up cities belonging to other religion founders (not that you have to found, but India should to be fully flavorful), or to neutrals converted by other founders. You buy your extra-use Missionaries not to convert your other cities, but to plant a follower or two of every religion in every city you own. You'll pick up another Follower Belief and an Amenity in every city in the process, the latter will help deal with the fact you'll own so many cities. It's a good blending of faith and fighting.

1 hour ago, ping said:

Honestly, now that you mention it, India really should be represented by multiple civs, not just leaders. Keep modern India if they have to keep the Gandhi train running, but add, say, the Chola, Vijayanagar, Delhi, Mughals, or Maurya...

China works with multiple leaders, because ever since at least the Qin & Han, the idea of a singular China that should be politically unified, even when it isn't, has been unquestionably accepted. India doesn't have that, multiple civs suit it better.

 

46 minutes ago, GuardianSing said:

They could make an entire saga about the Sikh Empire.

Short-lived, but modern, with a religion that hasn't a civ to rep it ever before b/c lack of options. I wouldn't mind it for sure some Indians might.😀 Make it a blend of religious and militant (perhaps defensive) elements. For a piece of unique infrastructure, maybe those Sikh community kitchens I've heard of?

Completely different part of Eurasia, but Civ7 could throw in the Hetmanate as Ukrainian representation (Russia would need to lose the Cossack as its unique unit, however). I read a brief article on Ivan Mazepa this month, who happens to be on Ukrainian currency nowadays. Kyivan Rus would be nice too, but that would require explaining to a mass audience the difference between "Rus" and "Russia".

46 minutes ago, GuardianSing said:

Firaxis when adding Vietnam: "Well we want the leaders to be clean uncontroversial figures as to not offend anyone, so we went for an ancient figure."

Vietnam: "Our capital is literally called Ho Chi Minh city."

I'm sure many breathed a sigh of relief when Vietnam turned to be something other than the American experience. Still very defensively-flavored, but Vietnam got some nice Civ6 representation.

 

58 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Oof... Yeah, if you haven't done much training of the mages that map can be a bit tough.

The fact orbs aren't infinitely buyable at all means I try to be conservative with spell use. And, as good BS players admit, the mages aren't useful early on, they don't shine until bulky things with strong shields become a big deal. No surprise they weren't exactly well-trained?

 

29 minutes ago, BrightBow said:

Only two units? Do you mean Perceval and Enid? Because everyone with a bow can take advantage of their electric weakness by firing Raijin Arrows at them. You don't necessarily need actual magic for it.
Or Freeze Arrows, in the case of that one Fire Wyvern.

I figured elemental damage physical weapons could possibly work, even had a full pack of Raijin Arrows laying around (no idea where I got them) that I didn't use. -But I continued not using them.

Edited December 30, 2023 by Interdimensional Observer

[Saint Rubenio]

3 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

The fact orbs aren't infinitely buyable at all means I try to be conservative with spell use

Ahhhh the hoarding mindset! Pesky, pesky, pesky!

3 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

And, as good BS players admit, the mages aren't useful early on, they don't shine until bulky things with strong shields become a big deal. No surprise they weren't exactly well-trained?

Eh, I was pleasantly surprised by Aegina in my last run. Girl pops off pretty hard with a bit of early investment.

Still, the mages aren't so easy to use properly, so I can't fault you.

4 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

even had a full pack of Raijin Arrows laying around (no idea where I got them) that I didn't use.

Probably from Sherlock's citizen request in chapter 7-main

[Interdimensional Observer]

36 minutes ago, Saint Rubenio said:

Ahhhh the hoarding mindset! Pesky, pesky, pesky!

As much unnecessary frustration as it likely causes me, I continue to bear with it.😅

Although I don't get the point of making the most basic of spells, including Soothe and Heal, finite. Heck, even Daggers aren't infinite. Really? You can't just sharpen some kitchen knives for the war effort? Feels like an unnecessary quirk. I haven't used Burroughs once yet either, I think. And why did Kaga not make anything stronger than most basic Bronze/Slim/Log/Short&Wood infinite? FE back to old Archanea has had no qualms making steel and silver bountiful.

Feels like maaaaaaaaaaaaaybe on a second playthrough, I'd be more willing to use rare stuff. If only b/c I'd know everything at that point.

I also used SF's data to write down the actual durability values of equipment. (Hopefully this is right?):

Berwick Saga durability- All weapons begin with 101 Durability points.

• S
  • Weapons- 1 depleted per use, 101 uses total.
  • Shields- 4 depleted per use, 26 uses total.
• A
  • Weapons- 2 depleted per use, 51 uses total.
  • Shields- 8 depleted per use, 13 uses total.
• B
  • Weapons- 3 depleted per use, 34 uses total.
  • Shields- 12 depleted per use, 9 uses total.
• C
  • Weapons- 4 depleted per use, 26 uses total.
  • Shields- 16 depleted per use, 7 uses total.
• D
  • Weapons- 5 depleted per use, 21 uses total.
  • Shields- 20 depleted per use, 6 uses total.
• E
  • Weapons- 6 depleted per use, 17 uses total
  • Shields- 24 depleted per use, 5 uses total.
• F
  • Weapons- 7 depleted per use, 15 uses total. 
  • Shields- 28 depleted per use, 4 uses total.

S is only the sacred swords though, and A is extremely rare too. B is the practical highest end.

34 uses seems low for the high end by FE standards, but then normal doubling isn't a thing in BS, so combat usually only consumes 1 use instead of the usual FE ideal of 2.

-But if I can't see these values ingame, it does nothing to undermine the hoarding mindset.

Edited December 30, 2023 by Interdimensional Observer

[Codename Shrimp]

4 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

n a serious note, Cleopatra at least was born in Egypt, and the Ptolemaic Kingdom had already ruled by over two centuries at that point. It'd be a bit weird to say it had nothing to do with Egypt, even if it was founded by a non-Egyptian

yes, but not black or sub-saharan african

[Armagon]

15 hours ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

True. Just getting diverse people on the screen in good roles is better than nothing, it opens the door to the possibility of fuller representation later down the line.

Just remembered on this topic, Yaz, one of the Thirteenth Doctor's companions, was Pakistani. One of the stronger episodes of Series 11 was Demons of the Punjab, a historical-ish story set during the partition of India, where they meet Yaz's grandmother in her younger years.

1 hour ago, GuardianSing said:

remember telling a yankee friend of mine that I was from Central America and they were like "Oh so you're from the midwest?"

He's a little confused but he got the spirit.

1 hour ago, GuardianSing said:

They brought them back!!

Awesome.

1 hour ago, GuardianSing said:

They make direct references to "Allah" and it's like, not even a Disney movie taking place in White Christain land would make a reference to capital G God.

This is Hellfire erasure