In colonization did you get the USA flag after you declare independent with any nation. Even the Spanish used the USA flag. But wouldn't it be better if the flag you get depends on the nation your play? Or even better you can choice your flag.

So for example the English could choice between the USA and Canadian flag. Spain would have many nations to choice from like Mexico, Bolivia and Argentina. The French could choice between Quebec and Haiti. The Dutch can take the flag of Suriname or Netherlands Antilles.

Yes, in the original colonization every nation would get stars and stripes after the declaration of independence. I found that rather annoying.

After winning the game, in hall of fame was the name of the new country:

England --> The Democratic People's Republic of North America (aka. USA)
France --> Republic of Quebec
Spain --> Republic of Mexico
The Netherlands --> Republic of Surinam

In colonization did you get the USA flag after you declare independent with any nation. Even the Spanish used the USA flag. But wouldn't it be better if the flag you get depends on the nation your play? Or even better you can choice your flag.

So for example the English could choice between the USA and Canadian flag. Spain would have many nations to choice from like Mexico, Bolivia and Argentina. The French could choice between Quebec and Haiti. The Dutch can take the flag of Suriname or Netherlands Antilles.This is a nice touch maybe, but it matters very little if you ask me.

As with most things, if Firaxis doesn't put this in, a modder likely will.

I think they will fix this with the new Colonization. I mean, it doesn't make sense to leave it as it was in the original.

Will the crash and trade bug remain or will they get improved?:D

LOL

But seriously I would like to see more new not the same old game. The old version still works in my computer(runs with Windows XP) so when I want to play old game I would play that.

Also I would like to see better combat system than it was in colonization when you attacked caravels by frigate and lost.

But choosing nation... why not dutch can make USA?

Technically speaking, all of the 4 nations settled areas of the modern United States. :crazyeye:

So for example the English could choice between the USA and Canadian flag. Spain would have many nations to choice from like Mexico, Bolivia and Argentina. The French could choice between Quebec and Haiti. The Dutch can take the flag of Suriname or Netherlands Antilles.

IMO it would be neat if you could pick the flag you want after Colonization. Of course, it wouldn't really affect gameplay.

Certainly, with J. Adams and G. Washington, the English would have no other option but to revolt into the U.S. French, well, maybe Canada (I don't see how Canada could fit in since their nation came about several years later), the U.S., or Haiti. The Dutch, well, they point towards going also to the U.S., or maybe Brazil.

The Spanish would be a tad more difficult to decide considering Bolivar and San Martin helped create several nations in South America. Of course, the first thought would be Colombia for Bolivar and Argentina for San Martin. On second, there's also nations like Peru, Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Chile, and Paraguay. Yet, keeping the average idiot in mind, it wouldn't surprise me if both of these turned into Mexico. :mischief:

Then again, Spain itself could become the U.S. since nearly half of the country (excluding Alaska) used to be ruled by Spain. It really wouldn't fit right with the leaders, though. :scan:



I like this response as the most likely:

As with most things, if Firaxis doesn't put this in, a modder likely will.

i think colonization should expand beyond the americas. C'mon! Africa, Asia, Austrlia (maybe a lil' "help the motherland!" fighting and rewards in europe), even antartica would b cool. However, that would only work with more civs, not just european (natives, asian, even post-independance colonial). eg, with present civs, england=Australia, France=Vietnam, Netherlands= South Africa
Spain= Well, best stick 2 America! It would only work with more civs though":mad:

sounds like a job for a modder, anyone?:cry:

Australia wouldnt work IMO.

In tasmania they literally wiped out every aboriginal on the island, as Aborigionals were relatively peaceful, and horribly underpowered in terms of avaliable weapons.

In other areas they could never fight off the English.

So it would be English land, kill/push out all the locals and build a colony... not much fun.

We also are still not independent, were part of the monarchy here still, and have been allowed to leave it if we vote for it (last time was a few years ago, and the vote came out that we stay in the monarchy)

antartica would b cool

LOL! :D "Cool" isn't quite strong enough, I'm afraid! :D

I think an Australian colonisation would be cool. But it wouldn't be much fun if you were repeating history, so you should make the aboriginals a bit stronger, and have more civs fiercely competing for the land, like the French and the Dutch.

You could also include New Zealand on the map. :p

I'd go for an Australian map - with the stronger tribes. Sort of a 'what if' scenario where the Aboriginal people were better able to resist British settlement.

Of course, that's exactly what happened in New Zealand, where the Maoris gave the British a run for their money.

Am I the first to notice that ''choicing'' isn't just the right term...

I just didn't like to bring that up. :mischief:

Really like those australia idea.but personally, i really like to play as an indonesianese that fight for 350 years for get them independence from netherland, with them famous bamboo spears

Wow
Bamboo spear versus rifle.

Can't wait for the other epic from spearman versus tank or phalanx versus battleship!!
Bamboo with rifle

Australia wouldnt work IMO.

In tasmania they literally wiped out every aboriginal on the island, as Aborigionals were relatively peaceful, and horribly underpowered in terms of avaliable weapons.

In other areas they could never fight off the English.

So it would be English land, kill/push out all the locals and build a colony... not much fun.

We also are still not independent, were part of the monarchy here still, and have been allowed to leave it if we vote for it (last time was a few years ago, and the vote came out that we stay in the monarchy)
OK, well on behalf of england, im sorry. i knew we did all that, but if the game is going 2 include such evils as slavery, what will stop a modder from adding genocide? but i understand your point, and accpet it. I also reckon your nation will b far better off without our queen. C'mon, its not as if oyur part of the UK! Australia is a big boy now, and i reckon he can look after himself. good luck with liberation!

Apparently, we're not ready to go solo yet. :mischief: According to our last vote, anyway.

As I said before, if you were to make a scenario with Australia, then you should make the natives stronger, and add a bit more competition like the French, Spanish and Dutch. Realism isn't always fun or challenging. So we need to improvise to make a better scenario.

After all, I could be living in New Holland. :mischief:

Australia wouldnt work IMO.


We also are still not independent, were part of the monarchy here still, and have been allowed to leave it if we vote for it (last time was a few years ago, and the vote came out that we stay in the monarchy)I would hate to correct an australian about his own country, but you are independant. The only link with britain is a "shared" monarch. If britain for whatever reason changed their succesion laws and skipped charles to be king and went directly to his oldest child. Then Charles would still be king of australia. Furthermore the british have little or nothing to say about internal austrlaian affairs( only the queen and only when she's in australia herself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_history_of_Australia

But on topic. It would be nice to pick your own flag after independance.

Will the crash and trade bug remain or will they get improved?:D

LOL

But seriously I would like to see more new not the same old game. The old version still works in my computer(runs with Windows XP) so when I want to play old game I would play that.

Also I would like to see better combat system than it was in colonization when you attacked caravels by frigate and lost.

But choosing nation... why not dutch can make USA?

Aboriginals were far from peaceful and killed plenty of settlers. it certainly wasn't easy for the english! it simply seems that way in historical hindsight.

we have been ruled by a military junta for a time following the rum rebellion and the english had to send out more troops to regain control of the colony. the events of the eureka stockade and the opening of the sydney harbour bridge could easily have turned into civil war or revolution. and western australia has always had a strong seperatist movement. if it wasn't for the french revolution we may well have seen french colonies settling in the australian continent also. not to mention the frequent irish uprisings in hobart and norfolk island, perhaps if one of them suceeded the irish could've helped out the local aboriginals (if they could avoid being speared by them!)

as far as independence is concerned, the last ties (judicial appeal to the privy council) were ended in the 1980s although in practice we have been independent since the statute of westminster 1931(?). the monarchy of australia is not technically the same as that of britain, although they are the same person. for example, an event such as abducation by charles that is rejected by the british parliament but accepted by the australian one would probably split the throne into 2 people. can it be argued that britain or japan or denmark are not independent because they have a monarchy?

i would love to play out a game where the rum rebellion militants fought off the brit's reinforcements, or the euraka stockaders sparked a french inspired revolution, or the communist and nationalists fight out a civil war in the 1920s. maybe if i get some skillz i can create a mod so ppl can realise that australia actually has some intereting history even if it is pretty short. ;)

A bit off topic but certainly interesting.

Anyhow why not just give the player the ability to enter a custom name?

Sure you are going to get a lot of genital references but no one else has to see them.

Yes I Hate The America We Should Not Have The America On Everything.

Frankly, I don't care. It's minor.

I agree with the customization. It just fits with the whole Civilization 4 feel. I mean, if you can customize slavery, separation of church and state, et cetera, why not something cosmetic like flag or name?

If not, maybe something like in Age of Empires 3: The War Chiefs

Yes I Hate The America We Should Not Have The America On Everything.

Frankly, I don't care. It's minor.

The US is a minor? Adolescent? Come, come, young sir, you are too strict.

i think colonization should expand beyond the americas. C'mon! Africa, Asia, Austrlia (maybe a lil' "help the motherland!" fighting and rewards in europe), even antartica would b cool. However, that would only work with more civs, not just european (natives, asian, even post-independance colonial). eg, with present civs, england=Australia, France=Vietnam, Netherlands= South Africa
Spain= Well, best stick 2 America! It would only work with more civs though":mad:

sounds like a job for a modder, anyone?:cry:

a modder/scenario maker will likely make a world map..and specific maps for specific places

A bit off topic but certainly interesting.

Anyhow why not just give the player the ability to enter a custom name?

Sure you are going to get a lot of genital references but no one else has to see them.
That's how it was in the original Colonization, regardless of the colours that flew over your towns after declaring independence. Your free country is named after the name you entered when you first saw land (defaults are: New England, New Spain, New France and New Netherlands).

That's how it was in the original Colonization, regardless of the colours that flew over your towns after declaring independence. Your free country is named after the name you entered when you first saw land (defaults are: New England, New Spain, New France and New Netherlands).

Not as I recall it. On indeoendence, your country was always called the same thing, no matter what you called your colony when you founded it. The only difference was that the name differed according to which colonizing power you played as: it was always the United States of America for the English, Quebec for the French, Suriname for the Dutch and Mexico (I think) for the Spaniards.

Hmm. I remember the original colony's name was kept, but I also recall I always customized that name. Perhaps the name changed to those you mentioned if you used the default territory name. Not sure, really.

I would hate to correct an australian about his own country, but you are independant. The only link with britain is a "shared" monarch. If britain for whatever reason changed their succesion laws and skipped charles to be king and went directly to his oldest child. Then Charles would still be king of australia. Furthermore the british have little or nothing to say about internal austrlaian affairs( only the queen and only when she's in australia herself.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_history_of_Australia

But on topic. It would be nice to pick your own flag after independance.

That's a big can of worms you're about to open up... :)

Actually, as the Head of State (via the Governor General), the Queen has an awful lot to do with Australian internal affairs... If you're interested enough, look up Gough Whitlam on Wikipedia.. that particular affair caused a constitutional crisis within Australia that is yet to be resolved and has significant political ramifications...

Although you are quite correct really... In practice Australia has been 'independant' for some time. The Monarchy hasn't tried to do anything in reference to Australia arbitrarily since it offered David Ben Gurion a chunk of the Pilbara for the establishment of a modern Israeli state back in the 40's.... having said that, Whitlam/Kerr was just one example of the quirks of a constitutional monarchy.

Enlistment into the ADF is another good example. You swear an Oath (Or Affirmation if not Christian) to the Queen primarily. Loyalty to Australia, it's people and it's allies is in that vow or affirmation extended as a result of the fact that Australians are legally the Queen's subjects, Australia the Queen's territory, and Australia's Allies, the Queen'ss Allies. :)

In the immortal words of Leslie Nielsen, "The idea of having a queen is silly."

That's really ironic considering Nielsen is Canadian, but still.

The Dutch can take the flag of Suriname or Netherlands Antilles.

That won't work... The NA are still under Dutch reign.
That's a big can of worms you're about to open up... :)

Actually, as the Head of State (via the Governor General), the Queen has an awful lot to do with Australian internal affairs... If you're interested enough, look up Gough Whitlam on Wikipedia.. that particular affair caused a constitutional crisis within Australia that is yet to be resolved and has significant political ramifications...

Although you are quite correct really... In practice Australia has been 'independant' for some time. The Monarchy hasn't tried to do anything in reference to Australia arbitrarily since it offered David Ben Gurion a chunk of the Pilbara for the establishment of a modern Israeli state back in the 40's.... having said that, Whitlam/Kerr was just one example of the quirks of a constitutional monarchy.

Enlistment into the ADF is another good example. You swear an Oath (Or Affirmation if not Christian) to the Queen primarily. Loyalty to Australia, it's people and it's allies is in that vow or affirmation extended as a result of the fact that Australians are legally the Queen's subjects, Australia the Queen's territory, and Australia's Allies, the Queen'ss Allies. :)

One serious can of worms. I was thinking the Australian situation was comparable to Canada's... It seems a good deal more complex.

My country too is going through a lot of debate with regards to English rule. There's a movement for independence, and one for full internal self government while still linked to England, and a good few who think it's all going a little too fast... A whole other can of worms.

My country too is going through a lot of debate with regards to English rule. There's a movement for independence, and one for full internal self government while still linked to England, and a good few who think it's all going a little too fast... A whole other can of worms.

How is Anguilla's economy? Can you actually survive breaking the ties with the UK? I know a few examples of former colonies that have had serious trouble staying afloat after gaining independence, after all. Then again, I guess your main industry is tourism, so you might be able to do OK on your own.

How is Anguilla's economy? Can you actually survive breaking the ties with the UK? I know a few examples of former colonies that have had serious trouble staying afloat after gaining independence, after all. Then again, I guess your main industry is tourism, so you might be able to do OK on your own.

We're in a tourism boom, so things are looking up, but its entirely possible we could spiral out of control, especially seeing as our constitution is outdated and as in most Caribbean islands, corruption is easy to be a part of and hard to get rid of.

Most islands which gained independence following the dissolution of the West Indian federation suffered greatly partly as a result of their unpreparedness, and a lot at the fact they were at the mercy of much more developed economies (see the banana dispute with South American nations...) Haiti's economy was actually purposely destroyed by France as revenge for their declaration of independence. So it's a rough world out there for a new country...

The US is a minor? Adolescent? Come, come, young sir, you are too strict.

The deal with the nation you pick is minor. Stop being a troll.

The deal with the nation you pick is minor. Stop being a troll.
He misunderstood, and posted that 10 days ago...

We're in a tourism boom, so things are looking up, but its entirely possible we could spiral out of control, especially seeing as our constitution is outdated and as in most Caribbean islands, corruption is easy to be a part of and hard to get rid of.

Most islands which gained independence following the dissolution of the West Indian federation suffered greatly partly as a result of their unpreparedness, and a lot at the fact they were at the mercy of much more developed economies (see the banana dispute with South American nations...) Haiti's economy was actually purposely destroyed by France as revenge for their declaration of independence. So it's a rough world out there for a new country...

It sure is, but Haitis struggle for independence happened a long time ago. And Britain tends to get along well with former colonies, for the most part, so I don't think you should have much to fear. When it comes to structuring the economy to avoid corruption and crime, I'd recommend looking to Aruba, which has a great economy and good transparency. Surely your country is small enough for an effective administration to curb corruption - if it is really interested, of course.

Well, it'll be interesting to see what course your nation will take.

Most islands which gained independence following the dissolution of the West Indian federation suffered greatly partly as a result of their unpreparedness, and a lot at the fact they were at the mercy of much more developed economies (see the banana dispute with South American nations...) Haiti's economy was actually purposely destroyed by France as revenge for their declaration of independence. So it's a rough world out there for a new country...

Well, case could be defended that Haïti's economy never has been as successfull as when it was under the French... ever. The fact that the slaves, out of control, burned down everything on the island and didn't care to rebuild the country didn't help. It got back on its feet with Toussaint Louverture but that ended when France tried to rest control from Louverture of former Saint-Domingue - Louverture ended up in a French prison. That being said, up to this day, Haïti's story is surely not one of success but I can't think France is responsible for any of this. Nations, like people should assume their own destiny and stop rejecting their flaws and failures on exterior agents.

Well, it didn't help that Haiti had to agree to pay 80 million francs to get France to recognise the poor nation's independence... But you're right, of course. Haiti is still the least developed country in America, and that isn't France's fault.

This thread is all over the place, and I feel like responding to lots of it...


As I said before, if you were to make a scenario with Australia, then you should make the natives stronger, and add a bit more competition like the French, Spanish and Dutch. Realism isn't always fun or challenging. So we need to improvise to make a better scenario.

After all, I could be living in New Holland. :mischief:

Well, perhaps for a more historically accurate scenario, you could model the whole area around Australia, with the stronger 'natives' in indonesia. In one game, perhaps the Dutch grab West Australia in addition to Indonesia, the French grab New Zealand, and the English get parts of Papua New Guinea and Eastern Australia. The French then proceed to arm the Aborigines and ally with them and the Dutch to drive the English out of the game.

Well, case could be defended that Haïti's economy never has been as successfull as when it was under the French... ever. The fact that the slaves, out of control, burned down everything on the island and didn't care to rebuild the country didn't help. It got back on its feet with Toussaint Louverture but that ended when France tried to rest control from Louverture of former Saint-Domingue - Louverture ended up in a French prison. That being said, up to this day, Haïti's story is surely not one of success but I can't think France is responsible for any of this. Nations, like people should assume their own destiny and stop rejecting their flaws and failures on exterior agents.

Well, the fact that Haiti was treated like a pariah for many decades after its independence seriously hurt Haiti's development (no nation wanted to be associated with a slave rebellion). Its current problems have little to do with that, but they also don't have much to do with slaves burning down things in the early 1800s.

---

Now, why don't I add some wacky ideas to other off topic items of conversation in this thread?

That's a big can of worms you're about to open up... :)

Actually, as the Head of State (via the Governor General), the Queen has an awful lot to do with Australian internal affairs... If you're interested enough, look up Gough Whitlam on Wikipedia.. that particular affair caused a constitutional crisis within Australia that is yet to be resolved and has significant political ramifications...


If Australians like the monarchy system but don't like it based in London, has anyone thought of asking the younger prince (I'm too lazy to look up his name) to move to Canberra and become your king? His future kids would be Aussies and not Brits.

Of course I realize that wouldn't satisfy the Aussies who don't like the idea of a monarchy in general, but it would end even the appearance of being 'dependant' on Britain. (yeah, at first they'd talk about 'importing a king', but after he lived there a decade or so and had kids born there, it would pass).


My country too is going through a lot of debate with regards to English rule. There's a movement for independence, and one for full internal self government while still linked to England, and a good few who think it's all going a little too fast... A whole other can of worms.

One problem with a small independant island is that it naturally becomes dependent on one or two industries. This makes it quite difficult whenever that industry experiences a downturn.

Has there ever been any other option discussed? Has Britain ever considered giving you representation in parliament? Has anyone entertained the idea of affiliating with other English Caribbean islands and becoming a Canadian province or a US state? You wouldn't be 'independent', but you would be equal to other citizens of the UK, Canada, or US.