How could there not be a Mesopotamian civ in [civ4]??? It's supposed to be the first Civilization in REAL history. DUH!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

How could there not be a Mesopotamian civ in [civ4]??? It's supposed to be the first Civilization in REAL history. DUH!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

I'd like to see a Mayan civilization added. Anyone who needs to know why need only study a little. One example... they had water pressure before the Romans. They also discovered the concept of zero (which seems absurd to us and maybe irrelevant- a math guy can explain better than I) over 800 years before it was uncovered in Europe (ca. 800 AD I think.)

Yes, I know what you mean with the zero comment. But DUH!!! MESOPOTAMIA!!

Mesopotamia is a region, not a defined group of civilizations. Many civs in the game are actually from Mesopotamia. These include the Sumerians, the Babylonians, the Hittites, and the Assyrians. I do not know if the last two are in it, though.

What Theryman said. The Babylonians should of course be in the game (not only on their own merits, but also as a civ tradition!), but calling it a "Mesopotamian civilization", is like renaming Rome "Mediterranean civilization", or Germany "European civilization". Makes no sense.

Okay, Sumerians, then! They were really the first Civilization.

Actually, it seems that the original plan was for Sumer to be among the playable civilizations in the original game, but was cut on account of time constraints. It doesn't look like it fared much better in Warlords. Maybe the second expansion pack will fix this...

while actually the first EMPIRE is assyria, but Sumeria would be good to

Sumerias leader could be Gilgamesh (he did exist, he was the king of the city state Uruk he may not have done everything the story says, BUT HE DID EXIST)

Assyrias leaders could be Sargon and Ashurbanipal

For Babylonia i dont know(Nebuchanezzar was the leader of the Chaldeans not the babylonians) it could be Hammurabi

After them, Cyrus came in and conquered. This could be a good Scenerio, you play as one of the Civs: Sumeria, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia or Egypt and you fight to control the area

For Babylonia ... it could be Hammurabi


Babylonia/Hammurabi is Civ tradition, if nothing else. I was disturbed not to see the Babylonians included in Civ 4, or even Warlords!

while actually the first EMPIRE is assyria, but Sumeria would be good to

Sumerias leader could be Gilgamesh (he did exist, he was the king of the city state Uruk he may not have done everything the story says, BUT HE DID EXIST)

Assyrias leaders could be Sargon and Ashurbanipal

For Babylonia i dont know(Nebuchanezzar was the leader of the Chaldeans not the babylonians) it could be Hammurabi

After them, Cyrus came in and conquered. This could be a good Scenerio, you play as one of the Civs: Sumeria, Assyria, Babylonia, Persia or Egypt and you fight to control the area

By 626 BCE, Assyria already controlled all of the land you are proposing in this scenario. And at the peak of the Assyrian Empire, their leader was Tiglath-pileser III. He was the one who organized a hierarchical army with professional generals leading units. Sorry if it sounds like I'm burning you, just putting my two cents in.

no you sound correct. i just have a thing for the Fouder and i like Ashurbanipal because of his great library

You guys are being unfair to Firaxis. They gave everyone a survey before announcing the expansion pack to see which leaders and civilizations people wanted. That's why the unpopular Stalin was included according to the weighing results. Next time, participate and you're vote might be chosen.

The Sumarians should be added.

But if Babylon first discovered Code of Laws, don't they have to move Confucianism?

I'd support an Assyrian civ. I like changes and I think Assyria is more exciting than Babylonia