Expansion Civilizations

what about poland and venezuela? we need Bolivar, it's murder to not have him.

and come on Poland has to be in to.

Venezuela/Bolivar
UU: I'll check what would be good

Poland/ (so much good leaders.. what to choose) i geuss Sobieski
UU: Winged Hussar

and austrians should have pikeman and Netherlands should have Grenadiers or Musketeers

And it would bee sweet to add Protestant to the game as it is a huge part of history.

Swein Forkbeard said:

Sumeria/Gilgamesh
UU: Vulture (somewhere I saw the Sumerians were going to be in Vanilla Civ4 and this was their UU)

Click to expand...

Vultures? Would they cause collateral damage to wild animals?

Fear the scavenging buzzards!

Venezuela/Simon Bolivar
UU: Liberator

Liberator was an elite class in Simon Bolivar's army.

Rancid Sushi said:

Vultures? Would they cause collateral damage to wild animals?

Fear the scavenging buzzards!

Click to expand...

Vulture Warrior is what I meant. A spearman replacement.

Just makinhg a list of candidates:

Babylon/Hammurabi and Nebuchadnezzar II
UU: Bow Man

Maya/Smoke Jaguar
UU: Holcan Spearman

Netherlands/William of Orange or Maurice of Nassau or Louis of Nassau (take your pick)
UU: Grenadiers

Austria/Maria Theresa
UU: Pikeman

Portugal/Henry the Navigator
UU: Cassador

Sumeria/Gilgamesh
UU: Vulture

Poland/Sobieski
UU: Winged Hussars

Venezuela/Simon Bolivar
UU: Liberator

Mexico/Santa Anna

Lakota/Sitting Bull

Possible Candidates:
_____________________

Iroquois/Hiawatha

Cherokee/Sequoyah
add to the list of good candidates to the game, but give a good reason.

an example of a bad reason is, " Add canada because they added the USA "

oh and add uu's for them to.

Like I said before: this game give-in N possibilities of choise for leaders in such a way as great politicians, genereais, or monarchs, but also the possibility for others characters as great scientists, philosophers, or religious.
I rock to see Confucius as a leader!!!
Also other figures that had detached or had historical importance, like Nelson Mandela, King Solomon, Atila, and why not Pocahontas!!!

AND OF COURSE:
THE PORTUGUESE CIV!!!

A curiosity: in this precise moment in Portugal there is a TVprogram to choose the best Portuguese ever! See at RTP .

(the next URL I link to wikipedeia)
The 10 final are:
1st king of Portugal and also the founder of PORTUGAL - D. Afonso Henriques
Álvaro Cunhal
Salazar
Aristides de Sousa Mendes
Fernando Pessoa Infante D. Henrique (Henry in Civ III)
D. João II
Luís de Camões
Marquês de Pombal
Vasco da Gama

Curiosity:
On the top 100: JOSÉ MOURINHO (20), LUÍS FIGO (30), CRISTIANO RONALDO (69), Brites de Almeida (51) (Spainish joke) ...

@Zenon_pt: I beg to differ on a few points--I prefer to see Generals and actual political heads of state (or at least figureheads) as the rulers of countries. Having a country led by Confucius makes little sense to me, as well as a country run by Neils Bohr. Leave them as other Great People--that's why we have Great Scientists, Merchants, Prophets, Engineers, and Artists.

I think Poland is more of an outside shot, but I would through in King Casimir as another name to consider as a leader. His name probably already came up, but I haven't kept up with the 1000+ posts in this thread. (Sorry! )

I think Babylon/Sumeria, the Maya, and Austria are pretty much a guarantee. The Portuguese and Netherlands I would put in the second group, along with the Poles and the Byzantines--groups I want to see in, but not probably a shoo-in. That's a total of 7/8 (depending on whether or not Babylon and Sumeria will be separate) civs...more than they put in the last expansion pack.

Venezuela and Mexico I don't think have a reasonable chance. That's just me being honest, though--I doubt the Civ4 game designers will want to put them in over the civilizations mentioned above. And I'd rather have the Iroquois in before either of these civilizations--I think having been in a previous incarnation of Civilization should award that civilization some place in the game, even if it's in the second XP. Also, we have unlimited slots for civilizations in Civ4, so they can be added with little difficulty. As can every other civ mentioned here, but I think the top group have better shots than Venezuela and Mexico.

I would actually through out Brazil's name before Venezuela--Brazil is the current South American leader, if I'm not mistaken. They might make the final cut.

I'm sold on including Byzantines as a civ. I remember how much I loved them in Age of Empires 2. Not sure what their UU or UB would be though.

the only problem is that they were the romans in another place, and there history was pretty short compared to alot of other civs.

and i agree Iroquois or another one will make it in.

Poland is more of a resonable choice then you think, if you research all the battles they had, most of them were won by the poles. for example that battle in WWII (with the mountain, foregot what it was called) where every singal allied country couldn't take untill a small force of polish fought and won it. and that was way after the poland was token over by germany. fighting even thought there own country was token over.

Venezuela is just a country just to have Simon Bolivar (it's murder without him) I could'va said Colombia but Venezuela was the most major country in the area at the time. Mexico was just another Candidate.

are you polish?

actually i'm Belorussian, small bit polish.

ah yes. Belarus.

anyway, I don't think poland should be added because it isn't so culturally different as for instance germany.

however, their historical importance makes me abstain on such a choice

Sebiche said:

anyway, I don't think poland should be added because it isn't so culturally different as for instance germany.

Click to expand...

wrong again, modern day yes, but in historical past no.

but then again, now Japanese cities look like american cities. it's more of the modern look of cities... i'm getting of topic now but.

It's hard to say that polish cities look the same from russian cities in both now and in the past. it's really depands on the area and the city.

you know what, I looked up Poland's history, and I find that their crucial part in almost all european history and interesting culture, I think that Poland would make an interesting addition to civ

(god bless wikipedia)

TheLastOne36 said:

the only problem is that they were the romans in another place, and there history was pretty short compared to alot of other civs.

and i agree Iroquois or another one will make it in.

Poland is more of a resonable choice then you think, if you research all the battles they had, most of them were won by the poles. for example that battle in WWII (with the mountain, foregot what it was called) where every singal allied country couldn't take untill a small force of polish fought and won it. and that was way after the poland was token over by germany. fighting even thought there own country was token over.

Venezuela is just a country just to have Simon Bolivar (it's murder without him) I could'va said Colombia but Venezuela was the most major country in the area at the time. Mexico was just another Candidate.

Click to expand...

Eh...I don't think somebody has been reading up on Byzantine history. The Byzantines have a longer history than Rome (they survived until 1453, when Constantinople fell to Mehmed II...is that not a millennium or so after Rome fell in the 5th century?). Also, they adopted a more flexible military structure over the years, unlike the more rigid east Romans (gasp! Cavalry!). The Byzantines, culturally, cannot be lumped into a "Roman" category or an "Eastern" category--they are more of a bizarre synthesis of Greek culture with the Eastern Orthodox and Roman traditions, etc. I think they have left enough of an impact on the sciences and the arts to warrant a position in Civ, not to mention they shielded the Western Christians for the longest time against potential Eastern invaders.

On Poland: I believe the Polish are also worthy of a position in a civ expansion pack, along with the Austrians (the Portuguese and the Dutch have the "right" of being in a previous incarnation of Civ, while these civilizations would be a first in the "official" game). However, I think the game designers will push Poland to the back-burner in favor of Civs like the Maya and Babylon, which will likely be the first ones they develop for the expansion.

Isn't Simon Bolivar a great general? Or am I just imagining that...I agree his name should at least be mentioned in the Civ series.

Antilogic said:

Isn't Simon Bolivar a great general? Or am I just imagining that...I agree his name should at least be mentioned in the Civ series.

Click to expand...

He is. You display the leadership abilities of Simon Bolivar if you score around 8000 or so. Quite sad.

the thing is they don't want to spend money and time to make new civs, so that's why civs like the babylonians will come first. Then they'll try to make at least 2-4 or 2-5 more civs that are completely new. That's when civs like Poland and Venezuela come in. and more that i think of it, venezuela is more of a host nation for simom bolivar, but it's true, Simon Bolivar was born and lived in venezuela and venezuela was the major power in the region. (you could even stay they still are.. to bad that Chavez guy is coming up and trying to control venezuela)

The Easter Roman Empire reign is a period of Greek history. The today Greek state and the ancient Greek state are different but they are still the ancestors of it. Basically Historically it will be wrong to have the Easter Roman Empire as a different civilization because it is the evolution of the ancient Greek world.(like it would be wrong to have today's Italy and Rome as different civilizations or the state of Venise/ Italy and Rome . ) Though The Eastern Roman Empire geopolitical and culture was different than ancient Greece and they are very important in a point that they must be included (but not as a different civilization). They could add Constantine with a new UU (Cataphracts) and Ub.

Excuse my bad English.

scy12 said:

The Easter Roman Empire reign is a period of Greek history. The today Greek state and the ancient Greek state are different but they are still the ancestors of it. Basically Historically it will be wrong to have the Easter Roman Empire as a different civilization because it is the evolution of the ancient Greek world.(like it would be wrong to have today's Italy and Rome as different civilizations or the state of Venise/ Italy and Rome . ) Though The Eastern Roman Empire geopolitical and culture was different than ancient Greece and they are very important in a point that they must be included (but not as a different civilization). They could add Constantine with a new UU (Cataphracts) and Ub.

Excuse my bad English.

Click to expand...

That is what i meant in my other post.

If we get Poland, I would suggest Taddeusz Kosciusko as a leader. We already have so many Kings in the game and I really think that he would be better than the slightly overrated Sobieski. But that is just personal taste... Who does not know who Kosciusko is, --> wikipedia, I'm not going to write something elaborate in here...

In General, I would prefer Poland before Austria, Poland and Netherlands (C3C), and before Hungary or Jugoslavia or Bulgaria... In any case I am astonished on the high level of discussion in this thread (at page 70!).

Btw. this thread should be closed and reopened (more than 1000 posts, not?)

mick