Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
a modern german leader like bismarck would probably have berlin as his capital. a soviet leader would have moscow etc.
for barbarossa, aachen is a decent pick. germany didn't really have a capital back then. and it wasn't really called germany, either. aachen is probably the clostest thing to a capital in that time period.
don't know much about russian history, but i think st. petersburg was the capital of the russian czars.
Under-educated is a better word. In a game based on real history, I recommend studying it some before you quibble too much over details in the background info.
Not really a matter of education, it is a matter of perspective. Looking at it from the time period of the leader in question not the civilization in general
Well it is called St. PETERsburg for a reason. But yes it was the Imperial Russian capital for a while.
Don't take someone calling you "under-educated" as a description of your total knowledge. You asked yourself if you are the stupid one or the developers. If that was a rhetorical question, well, don't ask questions you don't want to hear answer to :P You could be halfway through inventing a cure to cancer which is a super brilliant thing and requires a lot of study, research and education, but we are not talking about this. We talking about capitals of countries.
And not knowing that the capitals changed throughout time is a lack of knowledge in the field of history taught in schools. And lack of a piece of knowledge from school feels appropriate to be named with "under-educated" in that specific thing. It's not saying you lack any education in any field. Neither anyone in this thread tried to insult you.
At this point I don't know anymore if I'm feeding a troll or responding to someone who is genuinely offended...
Also if you "never had any leader of civ 6 in school" it can only mean you had no history lessons at all. It is impossible to have history lessons without Trajan, Pericles, Cleopatra, Theodore Roosevelt OR Queen Victoria.
Or just a ♥♥♥♥ school. My school sure as hell didn't teach me about any of those people.
Tsar Peter founded the city of St. Petersburg, so it makes total sense that it would be his capital too.
The one that bothers me is Victoria being leader of the 'English', when it should obviously be the 'British Empire'.