Well at ~7 civs per xpack there is still hope, perhaps adding the CN tower was a sign!
Or away to make us canadians shut up
Well at ~7 civs per xpack there is still hope, perhaps adding the CN tower was a sign!
Or away to make us canadians shut up
I'm assuming you are talking about ancient egypt. Duration would be from 3150 to around cleopatra's rule and get a 1.33 modern bonus
Vinland failed because it was supplied by another colony that was barely self-sustaining. Greenland is the aforementioned barely self-sustaining colony. Also keep in mind we were in a mini-ice age. Once water levels rose, it became more difficult to reach these areas. Such Scandinavian settlements declined at the same time the so-called Viking age ended anyway. The natives they encountered were not the most significant factor.
The mini ice-age actually killed of the Vikings on Greenland who relied on their cattle and were too proud to switch to a fish based diet.* While I do not doubt the war prowess of the Inuit, kicking a few half starved Vikings back into the ocean cannot be compared to the empire building of other civs.
*NRC Next 16/04/2012
/sigh
I am inclined to agree
Too bad Civ will never add such a game-breaking Civ as Canada, I guess we are just too awesome for them to implement correctly so they just avoid the issue and give us the tower...
tofofnts, can you work out the score for these? Texas, South Africa, Australia, Argentina, Mapuche, Tupi, Kongo, Great Zimbabwe, Songhai, Mali, Scythia, Chola.
Are you serious with Texas and with Tupi?
Tupi is just a way that the Portuguese found to name the tribes who lived where is Brazil now and happen to share the same language and a fairly similar culture,although it wasn't uncommon for them to fight with each other,even before Portuguese sailed in Brazilian coast . And unlike their Northern American counterparts,they haven't united themselves to resist to Portuguese Invasion(in fact,they even helped the Portugueses to populate their colony and they left their legacy in the Vocabulary of Brazilian Portuguese and many Brazilians have a Native Ancestor) .
When we're calculating, let's say, Rome's score, should we take into account every single UNESCO World Heritage Site under its greatest extent? I mean, from Westminster to Abu Simbel and beyond?
Texas may just be fun to have a number to compare with.
Well, here's the score for TexasTexas may just be fun to have a number to compare with.
I think there needs to be a lot of recalculation. If it's for a historical civ, it should only be the UNESCO sites relevant to that historical civ.
UpdatedHah, completely misread and bollocked up all my numbers, I was taking C for 'Civs on continent' rather than number of in-game civs existing (DERP).
This would make it:
New Zealand
C - Just Polynesians
Just New Zealand: 1.67*172/3*.0044*5 - 2.1
Oceania: 1.67*172/3*.038*5 - 18
Wider Oceania: 1.67*172/3*.403*5 = 192.9
Australia
C - Just Polynesians
Just Australia: 224*1.67/3*.0229*21 = 59.7
Oceania: 224*1.67/3*.038*21 = 99.5
Wider Oceania: 224*1.67/3*.403*21 = 1055
Minoan Crete
Due to its location, still have to fudge the 'Modern continent population' numbers and just go with the relevant surrounding countries:
C - Greece, Egypt, Ottomans, Persia
2480*1/6*.174*3 = 215
Should probably take the 'Oceania' as continent numbers, giving NZ 18, Australia 99.5, and Minoans 215