Brave New World's 9 new Civs

[Gucumatz]

Since I have never really seen too much discussion on Benin I thought I would post Tomatekh's Benin Mod (A great mod by the way) to show what it could be

Benin (Gods and Kings):

Spoiler :

Civfanatics Link
Steam Workshop Link

Details:

Leader: Ewuare

UA: Shield of the Warrior King: Defensive Buildings in all Cities are 20% more effective and your Capital starts with Walls already constructed. Each mined source of Copper may be used to fulfill one Iron requirement.

UU: Isienmwenro: Replaces Pikeman. +15% Combat Strength in Friendly Lands. +25% Flank Attack bonus.

UB: Iya: +25% Tile Defense. Heals adjacent Friendly Units +5 HP per turn. +1 Gold if built adjacent to a City. +1 Culture after Archeology is Researched. Generates double Gold if pillaged and is destroyed rather than damaged. May only be built on flatlands. May not be built on Resources.

Images:

 

[Liex]

Since I have never really seen too much discussion on Benin I thought I would post Tomatekh's Benin Mod (A great mod by the way) to show what it could be

Spoiler :

Unless that was intended, some images you posted are actually about the Timurids, not Benin. (Although you provided the link, so it's not really a problem)

It seems like a nice mod, and a great alternative for Kongo.

 

[Gucumatz]

And officially embarrassed... not sure how I could so badly mangle a copy and paste...

 

[Njegos]

I see people are concerned about losing plenty of city states if Italy becomes a Civ... if u think about market its even better, couse u can put more today nations or civs capital citys and get some sort of new fans...
Example, more CS from small europe,asian,african or central-south america nations

This would make something of a full representation, coause if we think of importance and general knowledge, cmon, there would be no african,native americans civs at all...

I would put Aboridgines with UU boomerang throwers with duble movement in desert probably, put some Papuan UB ( they are similar to aboridgine) that gives jungle tile pluses...Put UA that also is tile movement,usage kinda thing...so that could be a civ with a tile terrain bonuses... also it would represent real Australia, not english one (dont want to insult any1)

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

There's still plenty of cities in the world that can be made into city-states.

Vancouver
Havana
Buenos Aires
Great Zimbabwe
Toronto
Kiev (unless that's already Russian)

 

[Botswana]

Also Lima, Bogota, Tallinn, Tel Aviv, Cairo, Tashkent, Melbourne, Zagreb etc...

 

[anandus]

Vancouver and Toronto? Eh? Aren't they a bit young and insignificant?

But there are plenty of cities to use as city states, indeed.

 

[Gucumatz]

And no one mentions Mesoamerican city states...

Really its a shame we only have La Venta. Mesoamerica's history is just chock full of city states with unique cultures, histories, religion, trade, etc.

 

[Menzies]

Why not Yugoslavia???? there ist one civ from the balkans

I would have thought this was quite obvious.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Yeah, I used a pretty bad definition. I mean central asian, which exploited closeness to the silk road commerce.

A silk road civ would be great - there's many possibilities here:

• Khazars
• Seljuks
• Kushans
• Timurids
• Uighurs

Those are the ones I see within the realm of possibility (though very low, unforrtunately). Others that I think would be great (but unlikely) would be:

• Khitan
• Xiongnu
• Dzungars
• Gokturks
• Toba Wei
• Khwarezm/Ghaznavid/some sort of medieval Turco-Persian state

And no one mentions Mesoamerican city states...

Really its a shame we only have La Venta. Mesoamerica's history is just chock full of city states with unique cultures, histories, religion, trade, etc.

Frankly the city-state list is also somewhat Eurocentric - granted it's not as Eurocentric as it could be, and certainly has a healthy share of examples from around the world, but it's noticeable, at least ot me.

Actually, perhaps its better described not as Eurocentric, but modern-centric. You basically have the large majority of city-states being modern-day capitals (or historical capitals that survive to the modern day as capitals or major cities). There aren't a lot of stuff from before the modern era, to be honest. Where are the cities on the Silk Road, the Swaili coast (besides Zanzibar), ancient MesoAmerica, south Asia at the height of the Indian Ocean sea trade, and so on? Why aren't many of the capitals of the nomadic empires used for military city states? Yes, I do know that it has much to do with the general public knowing more about the modern cities, but it wouldn't hurt to throw in some of the important (at least regionally) cities from history.

 

[039]

Great Zimbabwe and Nubia would be good civs, given the lack of african civs so far and Zimbabwe and Nubia's historical importance

 

[seasnake]

I think Khazars would be great, as well as the Timurids. But I at best we'll only get one (if that), and for my thinking it should be the Khazars.

Poland
Assyria
Italy
Portugal
Kongo
Zulu
Cherokee
Indonesia

Are my current "final guesses" and I think I would ask for the Khazars as the final.

 

[Zodan_Mir]

Poland (confirmed) Assyria, Indonesia and Zulu seem very likely. With the Civil War scenario, I would like to see another Native American civ--maybe the Shawnee, under Tecumseh? The Shawnee fought with the Union in the Civil War.

 

[fat_tonle]

I think you are creating your own definition of modern nations and putting inside it every nation people haven't heard in History classes until the 20th century. I'm only going to defend Brazil, but this may serve to all nations.

Brazil has more than 500 years of documented History (with maybe thousands of years of human occupation). In 1808, it becomed the the first place in America to receive not only a monarch but an entire Royal Family, abandoning its colony status in 1815, with Rio de Janeiro turning the capital of an united kingdom between Brazil and Portugal, in a total invertion of the colonial system. As a full independent nation in 1822, Brazil become one of the world's largest monarchies and the only one to succeed in America, managing to keep political stability and territorial unity against the continental tendencies of civil wars and fragmentations. Talking of wars, Brazil consolidates its position of great south american power winning most of the wars it has participated, but also managing to settle its borders with great advantages through diplomacy. With the end of the empire, the country achieved substantial levels of population and economic growth, becoming the 5th world's most populated and the 7th world's economy during the 20th century. As you can see, Brazil didn't just pop out of nowhere. We have History, and we have more reasons to be in this game than some of the the civs that already are.

But taking another approach, you mentioned dominace over the world stage. Can you tell me the impact that civilizations like the Songhai, the Maya, the Aztecs, the Inca, the Iroquois, Siam or Korea had in the world as a whole? And when civilizations such as the Vikings or even Sweden had relevance beyound its own sphere of influence? If we follow your line of thinking, the game would have a few more than 10 civs.
Well, I'm also against Australia, Canada and some other nations but only because they can't differentiate themselves enought with preexisting civs in the game. And I don't think that is the case of Brazil.

Thanks for the history lesson. But you answered the predicament at large. Why are people not familiar with Brazillian history? Because nobody else cares. It was never mentioned in history classes to people outside of Brazil/South America. I wasn't in any advanced history courses, but what I remember was Portugal dominating the colonial expansion in South America, and some nation cropping up from the woodwork that became known as modern Brazil.

I agree with some other nations though. Sweden has done nothing I can make a note of off the top of my head. Maya, Inca, Iroquois, they get in no question. The uniqueness for starters. They were here before everyone else. Don't know why you lump those civs into the mix.

Again, this about Old World vs New World. And no modern New World civs have any business in the base game, other than America for obvious reasons. Indigenous Africa, I can dig it (although Ethiopia is too modernized for my liking). Indigenous Australia? The Aborigine didn't really leave anything significant behind to be admired for generations to come. I can do without them. Same for Inuits.

When it comes to Old World, we are talking Eurasia and parts of North Africa. Everything else should be off the table, as they more than likely cropped up from Old World roots.

 

[maestro35]

Lot of speculation about Italy as a civ, I like it. Italy would be a fantastic addition to the game. I'd also like to see Israel in the game, one of the most influential civilizations of the ancient world, particularly religiously... And really, they're still extremely important today. It's a no-brainer to me. Other hopes of mine include Australia and Canada, for no apparent reason.

 

[Imalich]

Thanks for the history lesson. But you answered the predicament at large. Why are people not familiar with Brazillian history? Because nobody else cares. It was never mentioned in history classes to people outside of Brazil/South America. I wasn't in any advanced history courses, but what I remember was Portugal dominating the colonial expansion in South America, and some nation cropping up from the woodwork that became known as modern Brazil.

I agree with some other nations though. Sweden has done nothing I can make a note of off the top of my head (producing Roger Federer???). Maya, Inca, Iroquois, they get in no question. The uniqueness for starters. They were here before everyone else. Don't know why you lump those civs into the mix.

Again, this about Old World vs New World. And no modern New World civs have any business in the base game, other than America for obvious reasons. Indigenous Africa, I can dig it (although Ethiopia is too modernized for my liking). Indigenous Australia? The Aborigine didn't really leave anything significant behind to be admired for generations to come. I can do without them. Same for Inuits.

When it comes to Old World, we are talking Eurasia and parts of North Africa. Everything else should be off the table, as they more than likely cropped up from Old World roots.

Oh yeah, you never heard of them, so they certainly aren't important. Way to make a good point.

Did you ever stop to think that the "world" you live in is not the same as everyone else's? Brazil might not be as important for some countries as it is for others. And when you argue that it isn't important because it's not present in history lessons outside Brazil/South America you are just saying that a whole continent's perception is not relevant to the world. Seriously, man...
And really, by that criteria, we would take what? More than half of the civilizations out of the game?

I'm not arguing that Brazil's a necessary addition to the game, but if it isn't a good fit, it's certainly not by the reasons you put forward.

 

[Arachnofiend]

We'll probably see several Native American civs in the Civil War scenario. You can expect at least one of them to make it as a real civ, too.

 

[MacAttack]

I find it CRAZY that people are talking that there is a lack of African Civs and not New World civs that are NOT DLC that cost $$$:

Africa Count (4):
Egypt
Carthage (which was called Africa when it was a Roman province, hence the continent's name)
Songhai
Ethiopia

Americas count (4):
America (United States)
Maya
Aztecs - which they actually called their country Mexica (pronounced Me-she-ka in Nahuatl) originating from Aztlan (location unknown) and referred themselves as Mexicas
Iroquois

They need more New World civs because there are vast open lands there if you play an Earth map game with actual starting locations. They thew in the Inca as a DLC because they realized too late that all of South America was vacant.

If they add the Zulu, which seems very likely, they ought to add Brazil, Argentina, Colombia or make the Inca non-DLC. The Caribs since there is a whole Sea named after them or another native South American civ would be fine too.

I will throw this out there too. If no new New World civs are added, they need to give more city state names to the Americas as mentioned in this thread, my quick hit list of City State worthy names (not all just some should be included):

Guadalajara, Monterrey, Vancouver, Little Bighorn, Wounded Knee, La Quemada, Buenos Aires, Bogota, Caracas, Montevideo, Panama City, Havana, Santo Domingo, Veracruz, Nunih Waya, Toronto, Awatovi, Guatemala City. Torn about Mexico City since it was previously called Tenochtitlan, but we do have Constantinople and Istanbul in the game....

 

[Gucumatz]

To be fair, I wouldn't choose almost any of those city states to be in game. And Guatemala City already exists in game (Kaminaljuyu). There are plenty of Mesoamerican and other native cities in the Americas that all were unique cultures or had massive influences that would make better city states, imo.

We only have 2 native city states in the Americas: Cahokia and La Venta

 

[fat_tonle]

Oh yeah, you never heard of them, so they certainly aren't important. Way to make a good point.

Did you ever stop to think that the "world" you live in is not the same as everyone else's? Brazil might not be as important for some countries as it is for others. And when you argue that it isn't important because it's not present in history lessons outside Brazil/South America you are just saying that a whole continent's perception is not relevant to the world. Seriously, man...
And really, by that criteria, we would take what? More than half of the civilizations out of the game?

I'm not arguing that Brazil's a necessary addition to the game, but if it isn't a good fit, it's certainly not by the reasons you put forward.

So address the point, what New World modern civs are in the game right now? Other than America? And why should we change the precedent now all of a sudden?