lol this topic title rhymes

Either way. A bit more serious. I've been thinking about it for a while, and could it be possible that that Alex fellow might've said something like this just to put you guys off on the wrong foot? I mean, look at all these reactions here. Must be pretty hilarious for him to read all this, especially if he knows it's not true.

Look, the manual might say Firaxis aren't theologians. But they are historians. Some of them even German historians. They should know the HRE was a previous incarnation of Germany.

Just a thought I came up with really...

No, it's definitely not a joke. Many things are confirmed about it. I was in the chat when it was announced, and I can confirm too that they talked about it for quite some time.

maybe they wanted it to be a BIG joke...

:lol: That would be really funny, if this turned out to be another merger-type prank.

Of course it's not a joke...

One thing is for sure: this forum has set on fire with the HRE thing.... Civfanatics sponsors should call the Firaxians and give them a warm and sincere "thank you" :p :rotfl:

I hope it is a joke

I, for one, welcome our new Holy Roman overlords. I'd like to remind them that as a trusted Civ 4 personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others who don't bow down to the new world order.

(Shamelessly stolen from Babbler in the OT anti-merger thread. :D)

Dev's in games dont normally joke like this, if it were a "joke" he would have insisted that Mehmet II would lead it!!!!

If it were a "Pun" he may have insisted that Byzantium and HRE would be added and would both have Claudius and Constantine as their 2 leaderheads.

I wish. AUSTRIA would've been better!

I can't believe their doing this. First Byzantines, a second Greece, now the Holy Roman Empire. It's going to have almost the exact same name as Rome, and occupy the same area as Germany, Netherlands and Rome, which already exist in the game.

Instead of adding new civs to take the same place as the already existing civs, I wanted them to add Poland, and Israel to represent the Jews.

They are also going to have a Rhye's and Fall of Civilization based on an Earth map. How are they going to keep Europe from overcrowding?

It's also an insult having a "Native American" civ to represent all the Native American civilizations.

Austria would have been awesome.

I wasn't in the chat, had to work, but I think it came out something like this "did anyone mention charlmaignes civilization? The Holy roman empire?" in response to REPEATEDLY ignored pestering for info on new civs.

So it might be a joke just to get people to shut up. Or it could be really in. I give it a 50% chance. I know all the quick reposted and ignored pleas for info were annoying ME as I tried to read the log. So I'm betting the developers were getting even more annoyed IF they didn't plan on answering such questions just yet.

Dev's in games dont normally joke like this, if it were a "joke" he would have insisted that Mehmet II would lead it!!!!Well, this being said, Charlemagne as leader of the HRE is as much a joke as would be Mehmet II. Charlemagne was a Frankish King !

The HRE certainly isn't a joke. Alex was asked whether any eastern European civs were included, and his answer was whether the HRE would count. He (or another Firaxian, I'd have to look that up) was then asked whether the HRE was in the main game or just in a scenario, and confirmed its inclusion in the main game.

One of the modders also mentioned that the HRE was his favorite among the new civs.

Guys sincerely why all this mess for a single civ?It seems that BtS content is all about HRE, there are a lot more important features to discuss than open 27 threads "WTF why they have made HRE!"

Guys sincerely why all this mess for a single civ?It seems that BtS content is all about HRE, there are a lot more important features to discuss than open 27 threads "WTF why they have made HRE!"
Well, it's the sole "big" news from the chat session. Other news were mainly details about features that were already announced. And it naturally upsets a number of people, civ choices always call up emotions.

Anyways, focus will shift towards the many positive aspects of BtS in a matter of days, I guess. HRE will continue to be criticized, but it won't remain the sole topic on the board.

It will probably be criticized until they announce the next new civ...

Maldives

^ When I opened the spoiler, I first read it as "Malta". :D

I can't believe their doing this. First Byzantines, a second Greece, now the Holy Roman Empire. It's going to have almost the exact same name as Rome, and occupy the same area as Germany, Netherlands and Rome, which already exist in the game.

Instead of adding new civs to take the same place as the already existing civs, I wanted them to add Poland, and Israel to represent the Jews.

They are also going to have a Rhye's and Fall of Civilization based on an Earth map. How are they going to keep Europe from overcrowding?

It's also an insult having a "Native American" civ to represent all the Native American civilizations.

QFT man, QFT. :goodjob:

The Holy Roman Empire could be considered many things in addition to German (French, Austrian, Italian, and Dutch). I think Firaxis is really trying represent the Franks with the HRE. If the UU and UB are Frankish, I will change the name to the Franks.

The Holy Roman Empire could be considered many things in addition to German (French, Austrian, Italian, and Dutch). I think Firaxis is really trying represent the Franks with the HRE. If the UU and UB are Frankish, I will change the name to the Franks.

Why franks when france?

Why franks when france?

Part of a civilization is its language. If a group of people speak a different language than what what is considered the language of that Civilization, it is not part of that civilization. The Franks spoke Frankish.

Sweet baby Jesus and the apostles this'd better be a joke.

The Byzantine Empire is not, in any way, a 'second Greece'. It's not a second Greece anymore than the USA is a second 'Native Americans'. It's an off-shhot of the Eastern Roman Empire, but it has a culture distinct from both that of the Romans and the Greeks.

I'm sorry, but the Byzantine Empire is more deserving of a spot than Poland. 'The Jews' are represented by 'Judaism'.

I'm not on board with the idea of having a single Civ called 'The Native Americans', although I suppose it's marginally less insulting to them than having them be represented by Barbarians. I wonder if 'The Native Americans' will go on the Americas continent in Terra maps.

Despite criticisms, Charlemagne is basically responsible for the creation of the Holy Roman Empire. I don't really like the idea of having it in the game, but oh well, not everything can be to each individual's personal tastes.

Edit: I don't see how, in a single post, you can assert that lumping all the Native American tribes into a single Civ is insulting; and also claim that the Byzantine Empire is 'a second Greece'.

im not saying Byzantine is a second Greece, but it was founded by a greek city-state, Megara


EDIT: woot woot 701 posts

Honestly I'd prefer to lump HRE and Byzantium with Rome using the new leader system. Since different leaders almost represent different civ I-III civilizations and those "civs" have very close ties.

On the other hand I'd also rather see the cherokee, Iroquois, and Pueblo as seperate civilizations because they really don't have any common ties in language, culture, or location.

Unfortunately there will always be people on the forums who feel strongly one way or the other, and we could argue forever. One thing is certain . . . after the developers have put all the work into making a whole seperate civilization it's probably too late to ask them to change things.

They aren't going to combine three civilizations/leaders into one, even if it will sound odd to have the romans warring with the holy romans, or even the byzantines. Nor do I think they will MAKE three other civilizations that I feel should be included to replace the two I think shouldn't exist at the same time on the same map.

It's a done deal. The work has been done. I'm sure someone was consulted over the decision, I hear rumours of polls. I missed those so my vote, all our votes, won't count till the next expansion, or until the next version of civilization.

The native americans are in, the pueblo, iroquois, and cherokee are not, the romans, byzantines, and HRE are in, I doubt I'll see a new spanish leader, or to make my point very clear Hitler.

We could argue forever. But why? Does it really alter our game THAT much?

I could maybe accept lumping the Byzantines in with the Roman Empire, especially since the term 'Byzantine Empire' didn't come into use until after the fact.

The Holy Roman Empire though, was not holy, most certainly not Roman, and was only breifly an empire. It has nothing to do with the Roman Empire, nothing at all, except that it occupied some of the same land, and was created as an attempt to rehash the Eastern Roman Empire.

The Byzantine Empire is an evolution or the Western Roman Empire. Sure, it was sort of Greek, there's no denying that, but to call it a second Greece is just wrong. Especially if you object to the lumping of the Native American Tribes, as I do. But the poster above me is correct- this is a fairly pointless argument in the context of a BTS forum.

Why franks when france?

Because it's not the same, it's even not the same area.
why do think that the name means their are the same?

The Roman part in the HRE doesn't mean it's the same as Rome.

Franks are a Germanic tribe, just as the Celts where a ancient tribe

If they wanted to add european civ... Dacia would have been great choice, led by Burebista.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burebista

Poland and Hungary would have been good choices also.

I believe the reason HRE is in the game is that they had made Charlemagne scenario and wanted then to use leaderhead, UU and UB from that scenario.

Guys sincerely why all this mess for a single civ?It seems that BtS content is all about HRE, there are a lot more important features to discuss than open 27 threads "WTF why they have made HRE!"

It's a good sign. If HRE and Boudicca are the only faults BTS has, it's bound to be the best expansion ever.

If they wanted to add european civ... Dacia would have been great choice, led by Burebista.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burebista

I can only support that, but I'm afraid most people when seeing that would say something along the lines of "omfg wtf what is this?!!11!". BTW, Burebista is indeed the best choice for their leader, though most people heard about Decebalus, not Burebista.

The thing is they lasted to little... only from 82 BC to 106 AD (though Roman Dacia lasted until 271 AD).

Will the new Alliance race REALLY be Draenie?!? Come on!


I'm guessing it's true :P

How long it takes to remove a civ and put the other into package?
I don't think it is something difficult to do.
Maybe Firaxis checked if HRE is a good idea, said a word about it and now will decide if to put it or not. If they don't include HRE, they would always be able to say - "that was just a joke!"

Actually, I don't mind the HRE as an Empire. It was just... unexpected. But heck, I can finally play as Charlemagne. xp

One thing that seems to be forgotten is that this is a GAME. It's not a history package. the whole idea of it is to have fun, not to learn. It is essentially a toy. And the people on this forum make up just a small percentage who actually play the game. Obviously, I can't draw up figures, but I would imagine that most of the users have little, or no interest in history, and bought the game simply because they thought it would be fun.

Now, say we have one space for a civ left, and we have to choose between Poland, Austria and the Holy Roman Empire. From a marketing point of view, which one do you chose? Well if we consider that most of the users are likely not have any interest in history, or just don't give a toss, then Holy Roman Empire certainly sounds better. To the average guy, it is likely to sound a lot more interesting then what they would consider a minor country who their nation stuffed 4-0 in the football a week or two ago.

As I have stated in previous topics, HRE would not be my first choice civ, and initially, I was a little dissapointed, but now I couldn't care less. Why? Because it is such a small part of what is going to be such an exceptional expansion pack. If they are well balanced and have a fun UU and UB, then I look forward to playing as them.

im not saying Byzantine is a second Greece, but it was founded by a greek city-state, Megara

but that was a long long time ago, long before Constantine came to the site and said "WTF this is a good site for a new ROME, what the heck, lets build a city here" and Constantinople was born.

Constantine also looked at the ancient site of Troy when considering locations for the new capital.

Just thought I'd throw that in. :D

A question for you, cybrxkhan... what do you mean by, "If you meet the Buddha, kill him" ?

....But then a eagle grabed the city plans and took them into the ancient city site of Bizantium. Constantine said that was a God given sign and ordered that the new city should be built in the other side ( so says the legend... )

Bongo makes a good point. It does have a nice title. Either playing as or against there are certain associations to the word "Empire" that would appeal to a gamesters immersion.

Wait the name of the civ is the Holy Roman Empire so technichaly wouldn't it be called the Holy roman Empire's Empire?

It's a good sign. If HRE and Boudicca are the only faults BTS has, it's bound to be the best expansion ever.

What's wroung with Boudica? If your saying she shouldn't be in because she lost, didn't Hannibal lose?

What's wroung with Boudica? If your saying she shouldn't be in because she lost, didn't Hannibal lose?

I think the main reason why people dislike her inclusion is because she is a second leader for a civ that isn't so important, while several important civs like Persia, Arabia, SPain etc still only have one.

What's wroung with Boudica? If your saying she shouldn't be in because she lost, didn't Hannibal lose?

Oh no no, I meant that she and HRE have both spawned endless topics. I have nothing major against Boudicca myself.

A question for you, cybrxkhan... what do you mean by, "If you meet the Buddha, kill him" ?


im a Budhidst, so dont think i hate Buddhism. ;) anyhow, the phrase there is a Zen one, doesn't mean to actually kill the budda, but it was kinda a way for Zen masters to tell "devout" Buddhists not to get too attached to the Buddha, because that in itself is not good

anyhow...

on Boadicea, the reason people are so pissed off is because why her instead of someone else and more "important"?

on HRE, people are angry because why the HRE instead of some other "important" civilization?

bottom line, a lot of people will be looking to mod the game to replace HRE with Poland, Israel, etc. Hopefully one of the big modders will do this for us little people and post it after BtS is released.

We haven't heard what the other two civs are yet... maybe they're worse than the HRE! :eek:

Not likely.

We haven't heard what the other two civs are yet... maybe they're worse than the HRE! :eek:

Not likely.

Who knows... Maybe South China and High Egypt will have their rightful place in civ family :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Worse than HRE?

:sniper: :badcomp:

That is enough to make me sick. What would such a "civilization" be? Atlantis?

Maybe they will include the Hansaic league (I know I mispelled that), or the Repbulic of Venice. The papal states also come to mind on the list of civs not to include, or the individual countries of Great Britain/The Commonweath. It could get pretty bad. But I hope it doesn't.

even Atlantis is better. at least it was a clearly unique civilization, the father of all civs, and therfore the father of Pho.

actually, im surprised they never put Atlantis in, its like the very symbolism of civilization (and its fall). ;)

We haven't heard what the other two civs are yet... maybe they're worse than the HRE! :eek:

Not likely.

If the last two aren't Cornwall and Andorra then I'm afraid it's :suicide: for me.

If the last two aren't Cornwall and Andorra then I'm afraid it's :suicide: for me.

Both of which are better ideas then a second germany.

I am not the upset with HRE. I think it was a clever way of adding many of the European civs not yet included in one fell swoop. Originally, HRE included parts of Germany, France and Italy (including cities not on Rome's city list, like Florence, Milan, Genoa). It also included Austria, Bohemia, and other central European regions that would later become the European powerhouse of the Austrian-Hungarian empire.

Call it a cope-out if you will, but I think the game developers were only trying to appease the many calls for the various minor civs in Europe by creating another "Native American" type civ with HRE.

Btw, I have a strong feelings that the Teutonic knight we've seen in screenshots is none other than the HRE UU.

could it also be a Paladin?

could it also be a Paladin?

Yeah, I could see calling it that. I'd just as well as assume "Teutonic Knight" for authenticity sake, but Paladin works. My main point is that the little guy in armor-and-tunic on a horse is my guess for HRE's UU (I honestly can't think of a better one for a culture as historically and geographically broad as the Holy Roman Empire).

(I honestly can't think of a better one for a culture as historically and geographically broad as the Holy Roman Empire).

which civs could be more historically and geographically broader than the HRE... India, Arabia, China... ;)

This is terrible news. Essentially, I will never be able to play normal game maps, 'cause I couldn't tolerate the absurdity of having the modern Germans, the medieval Germans, the ancient Romans, the medieval Romans, etc, all on the same map. I think I've now decided not to buy this game; they've just pushed credibility too far now ... although I still really hope they're joking.

Since Germany and Rome are getting two civs, the next expansion could contain earlier versions of other civs, such as the Franks for France, the Anglo-Saxons for the English, Rus for Russia, etc (heck, the HRE of the German Nation lasted until 1806; it is not so much medieval Germany, but pre-1806 Germany!!!!!); we could even have like ten Chinese civs .

Hey, we could also have an ancient version of the Germans, "Germanic tribes" or something to complete Germany's three era representation. The absurdity of it is that although civ is supposed to go through every era, when it actually comes down to it, the same cultures are always thought so different in different eras among many users here that they demand representation? Can't we add important non-European or even European civs before adding earlier versions of other included civs?

This is terrible news. Essentially, I will never be able to play normal game maps, 'cause I couldn't tolerate the absurdity of having the modern Germans, the medieval Germans, the ancient Romans, the medieval Romans, etc, all on the same map. I think I've now decided not to buy this game; they've just pushed credibility too far now ... although I still really hope they're joking.

Since Germany and Rome are getting two civs, the next expansion could contain earlier versions of other civs, such as the Franks for France, the Anglo-Saxons for the English, Rus for Russia, etc (heck, the HRE of the German Nation lasted until 1806; it is not so much medieval Germany, but pre-1806 Germany!!!!!); we could even have like ten Chinese civs .

Hey, we could also have an ancient version of the Germans, "Germanic tribes" or something to complete Germany's three era representation. The absurdity of it is that although civ is supposed to go through every era, when it actually comes down to it, the same cultures are always thought so different in different eras among many users here that they demand representation? Can't we add important non-European or even European civs before adding earlier versions of other included civs?

im assuming this is part sarcasm. :)

im assuming this is part sarcasm. :)

I don't think it was. :blush:

darn. but as said before, the HRE is not the end of the great glory of Civ which can only be surpassed by the Byzantines and Pho... just choose the civs you wanna play with, download a mod, or delete them completely... the good stuff of BtS is too good to miss

im assuming this is part sarcasm. :)

Well, a sarcastic take on the HRE news.

darn. but as said before, the HRE is not the end of the great glory of Civ which can only be surpassed by the Byzantines and Pho... just choose the civs you wanna play with, download a mod, or delete them completely... the good stuff of BtS is too good to miss

Well, what about normal game mode or multiplayer? Puts a lot of work on everyone to make sure they have the same edited out HRE main game files on MP.

darn. but as said before, the HRE is not the end of the great glory of Civ which can only be surpassed by the Byzantines and Pho... just choose the civs you wanna play with, download a mod, or delete them completely... the good stuff of BtS is too good to miss

The only way to make him by the game and get fireaxis money now is..

To convince them to put Pho as a new natural resource

Well, what about normal game mode or multiplayer? Puts a lot of work on everyone to make sure they have the same edited out HRE main game files on MP.

i'll mod HRE out, if anyone would like, once i get me hands on BtS. :) and i'll replace it with Pho and Vietnam (assuming Firaxis was not awesome enough to add in Vietnam in the first place) or Poland or whatever is better

i'll mod HRE out, if anyone would like, once i get me hands on BtS. :) and i'll replace it with Pho and Vietnam (assuming Firaxis was not awesome enough to add in Vietnam in the first place) or Poland or whatever is better

I'm just taking away HRE and putting in Poland, Polynesia and Austria to make things fair and decent. I might seperate Native america into Sioux and Iroquois.

Hmm, I think I know what the last 2 Civs will be... everyone else gets multiple Civs, why can't we?

Confederacy & Texas!!

Say it ain't so!!

don't forget the future Byzantium of AMerica.... CALIFORNIA!!!!

Hmm, I think I know what the last 2 Civs will be... everyone else gets multiple Civs, why can't we?

Confederacy & Texas!!

Say it ain't so!!

Haha. That would be worse!

Eh, I'm going to mod it to be poland, simply because we will get a proffesional quality LH and Charlamagne is easy to pass as Casimir III
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/40/CasimirtheGreat.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/a/a4/Charlemagne-by-Durer.jpg/250px-Charlemagne-by-Durer.jpg

^ Wow, only the hair color is different!

(and the clothes, but that doesn't matter)

Exactly, its a perfect LH!

hmm maybe they put Charlemagne in to make it easy for modders to mod in Poland. Maybe the power of Kielbasa is WORKING! < So long Pho.

Also the Polish mod already done would be better then any other polish mod. It was made by Polish people for polish people. And the Casimer LH looks great to.

Maybe BTS is just entirely a joke. :joke:

i'll mod HRE out, if anyone would like, once i get me hands on BtS. :) and i'll replace it with Pho and Vietnam (assuming Firaxis was not awesome enough to add in Vietnam in the first place) or Poland or whatever is better
I was going to do something like that too, except I'm axing the Byzies too. Where's that Polynesia-supporter? I need ideas...

Maybe BTS is just entirely a joke. :joke:

Yeah, but then I could say that even your post is a joke!

Wait...

hmm maybe they put Charlemagne in to make it easy for modders to mod in Poland. Maybe the power of Kielbasa is WORKING! < So long Pho.


TRAITOR!!!!!!!!!! DUMP STEAMING PHO DOWN HIS THROAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:)

wow....i think you guys may be taking the idea of a video game (one that is meant to be played for FUN) and tried to makeit into a text book.

I am a civ fanatic like most of you...but the thought of dozens of different threads complaining about a SINGLE addition to a video game is absurd

very absurd..it is a video game...not a real life reflection of history

if your looking for that it seems that a video game is the last place any of you should be looking... cut the designers some much deserved slack and lighten up




im a teenager and i fret over the stupidest stuff.....but this mass pandomonium surprises even me

we here at CFC do fret over the tiniest stuff, but thats the fun part. i realize that it is not supposed to be a history book, but i like them to stay as close to history as possible because that makes the game more interesting and fun

we here at CFC do fret over the tiniest stuff, but thats the fun part. i realize that it is not supposed to be a history book, but i like them to stay as close to history as possible because that makes the game more interesting and fun

Agreed.While the designers favor balance over historical accuracy, they try to keep it educational and to make history more interesting so that players might delve into it.

I too, was thinking that a Confederate States of America and a Lone Star Republic (both led by George Washington or Andrew Jackson )would be worse.

Double post

It is getting kind of silly. I'd actually like to hear some response from firaxis, they can't be totally clueless that the forums here are blowing up under them. Between the byzantines, the Native Americans, and the HRE you could call it a thread riot! And that's not including the celts. lol

The marketing people at the very least should be worrying about this. The very fact that there are so many passionate threads against so many of their new civilizations should tell them something, even if they never read a single post.

The game should include civilizations people WANT, and that are fun. If your sending people into riots, debates, and fits with each new team . . . then your doing something very wrong.

I don't think any of us are going to debate THAT.

The level of complaing is getting stupid. There are 4 threads saying why the HRE shouldn't be in civ. It is turning into a spamfest with people posting the same arguements in mutiple threads.

I am 90% sure that Firaxis trying represent the Franks with the HRE. Could please wait tell we learn what the UU and UB are before you complain?

What I like even more is a comment that HRE "controlled much of Eastern Europe".

Someone apparently didn't learn much of history or geography. Or at all. I mean wtf, school kids know how untrue this statement is. :confused:

What I like even more is a comment that HRE "controlled much of Eastern Europe".

Someone apparently didn't learn much of history or geography. Or at all. I mean wtf, school kids know how untrue this statement is. :confused:

That's what I wondered too. How could they say something like that? :confused:

(and yeah, I did point it out myself in another thread, so it's true I'm repeating myself ;))

Edit: 9000th post!!!

Awesome. I'll have to buy BTS so I can play HRE and crush all those nasty heathens. Hopefully Teutonic Knights will be the UU.

Thank you sushi, that is the FIRST post I've seen thus far saying anybody actually liked, or looked forward to playing one of these civilizations.

Awesome. I'll have to buy BTS so I can play HRE and crush all those nasty heathens. Hopefully Teutonic Knights will be the UU.

or i can play as someone else and crush those heathen HRE. :)

or take the awesome might of China and squash the HRE like a little bug. :)

in my game HRE is out no matter what you say. I'm gonna welcome the Byzantines even though i hated the idea. Native Americans i'm not to fund of either. I'm separating them to Sioux and Iroquois only and them i'm truly fine with the x-pack.

Thank you sushi, that is the FIRST post I've seen thus far saying anybody actually liked, or looked forward to playing one of these civilizations.

I'm looking forward to that, too. Squash the Chinese like a buck...:lol:

if anyone wants to try to squash the Chinese... well, first of all, your foot would be too small to squash all of them, and by the time you squash a good number, more Chinese would appear. for every dead at least 5-1000 appear.

Good point. But, remember when Firaxis release that survey after vanilla civ 4 was released? Maybe lots of people checked Holy Roman Empire. Just because the anti-HRE are very vocal does not mean anything. Also, there have been people defending HRE but they probably got sick of all the complaints and took their kids to the beach or something...



The game should include civilizations people WANT, and that are fun. If your sending people into riots, debates, and fits with each new team . . . then your doing something very wrong.

I don't think any of us are going to debate THAT.

After reading the chat again, I'm pretty certain they weren't joking. The comment about eastern Europe and Charlemagne's place as leader seem to confirm that the developers have simply made a historical error, i.e. they believe that the Frankish kingdom was the same as the Holy Roman Empire, which of course is false. There have been so many historical mistakes and inaccuracies in Civ 4 - it is now clearly one of the most historically inaccurate history games ever made - that they would probably do well to use their easily gotten millions to hire some historical advisers. Better still, they could do what Paradox do and consult the community on historical matters as well as having historical advisers.

LOL the comment about East Europe haha that is soo funny
Really I thought Civ developers made a good job with Civ 4 history

Though maybe HRE is not too bad?
think about who you would want to meet in a Random game?
Like in Civ I would not like to meet Native Americans, Inca's or mayans or germans
But I would love to meet America, China, Russia, HRE
Germany is tooooo boring in normal game anyways

I'm surprised to see so many people complaining abut HRE or other civs/leaders.

I was little disappointed too, because I would have liked to see Austria better (which is now not very probable), but honestly, that’s only because I’m from Slovakia, so it was the only chance I could see for example Pressburg (German name of Bratislava) on the map (of course you can rename cities, but… u no). And because I think Maria Theresa deserves to be in, but so does Charlemagne….

But my point is that, there are maybe 30 civs now in Civ4+expansions, right? And you know what? I have probably never played as Zulu or Persians, because I don’t like them… But I don’t mid that they are in. And I am sure many people love to play as one of them. There are so many great civs and leaders to choose from… Why be angry that one civ you don’t like is in the game? Some other people might like it.

Personally I’m glad that Baudica is in. Finally playing as Celts might be interesting. And honestly I like the idea of having one “native American” civ better than having all those minor tribes. And for those who like it the other way, you already had a chance playing Sioux and Iroquois in the past right? So why not try something different? It’s just a game…

After reading the chat again, I'm pretty certain they weren't joking. The comment about eastern Europe and Charlemagne's place as leader seem to confirm that the developers have simply made a historical error, i.e. they believe that the Frankish kingdom was the same as the Holy Roman Empire, which of course is false. There have been so many historical mistakes and inaccuracies in Civ 4 - it is now clearly one of the most historically inaccurate history games ever made - that they would probably do well to use their easily gotten millions to hire some historical advisers. Better still, they could do what Paradox do and consult the community on historical matters as well as having historical advisers.

Well I know content in Wikipedia is not always taken seriously so this may not change people's minds still but here is the introduction from its article on the HRE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire):

The Holy Roman Empire was a mainly Germanic conglomeration of lands in Central Europe during the Middle Ages and the early modern period. It was also known as the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation from the late 15th century onwards.

It originated with the coronation of Charlemagne by Pope Leo III on Christmas Day, AD 800, and lasted until the abdication of Emperor Francis II in 1806 during the Napoleonic Wars. After the partition of the Frankish Empire by the Treaty of Verdun in 843, the de facto sovereignty of the Emperors became confined first to the central and later (and for most of the Empire's subsequent history) to the eastern portion of the former Frankish dominions.

At its post-Carolingian peak, the Holy Roman Empire encompassed the territories of present-day Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Czech Republic, Slovenia, Belgium, and the Netherlands as well as large parts of modern Poland, France and Italy. At the time of its dissolution it consisted of its core German territories including Austria, the Czech Republic, and Slovenia, and smaller parts of Italy, Poland, and Croatia.

So Poles can rejoice! They are partly in the game. :)

Very little of Poland was ever withen the borders of the HRE.

I'm surprised to see so many people complaining abut HRE or other civs/leaders.

But my point is that, there are maybe 30 civs now in Civ4+expansions, right? And you know what? I have probably never played as Zulu or Persians, because I don’t like them… But I don’t mid that they are in. And I am sure many people love to play as one of them. There are so many great civs and leaders to choose from… Why be angry that one civ you don’t like is in the game? Some other people might like it.


I'm not angry, but I am disappointed. One advantage civ has over other games is the feeling of replaying world history. I play versus random opponents, and when the odds favor over half the civs coming from Europe and the Middle East the game loses some appeal.

It doesn't affect the game mechanics, but the fact is you'll have games where the Celts, French, Romans, Holy Romans, and Germans are out at once when you could have had a game where the Kongo, French, Romans, Polynesians, and Germans are out. The second game has more interest in me, even though it might play exactly the same.

Germany is tooooo boring in normal game anyways

Why exactly?

Awesome. I'll have to buy BTS so I can play HRE and crush all those nasty heathens. Hopefully Teutonic Knights will be the UU.
hahaha
that's my man ;)

In Soviet Russia, heathens crush you!

Look at this way. It will be interesting seeing which Germany wins during the game.

I haven't read the entire thread, and not really going to, but to all the folks that have a problem with HRE, I ask you this - wth!? I mean seriously, nobody seems to have a problem with the fact that you can start as America in the stone age even though the country didn't exist until little over 200 years ago. So why such a big uproar over HRE? It's a game, there's certain amount of suspension of disbelief involved. You don't think of HRE as a legit civ then don't play it, or you can even rename it, it'll take you the whole of 2 minutes to do that.

I mean really guys... relax, take a breath, and enjoy civ until BtS comes out and then enjoy BtS. It's all good. :)

Double Post

I haven't read the entire thread, and not really going to, but to all the folks that have a problem with HRE, I ask you this - wth!? I mean seriously, nobody seems to have a problem with the fact that you can start as America in the stone age even though the country didn't exist until little over 200 years ago. So why such a big uproar over HRE? It's a game, there's certain amount of suspension of disbelief involved. You don't think of HRE as a legit civ then don't play it, or you can even rename it, it'll take you the whole of 2 minutes to do that.

I mean really guys... relax, take a breath, and enjoy civ until BtS comes out and then enjoy BtS. It's all good. :)

quote for truth

im just going to mod it out and be the first one to do so.

I haven't read the entire thread, and not really going to, but to all the folks that have a problem with HRE, I ask you this - wth!?

Never there had been two civilizations representing one.