Inuit Civilization

Just played for the first time and found that my city view in an ice city is bugged. I tracked the lua error to the custom CityView.lua, line 1228, which looks for the description for the dummy building but gets a nil, then crashes. If I add a description to the dummy building XML there are no problems (and the building is correctly not displayed). I have no other mod active which alters the city screen, double checked.

Could this be because of a recent version? I would think this would have been noticed before otherwise. I love this civ btw :goodjob:
 
Hrmm, that is interesting. I remember having tested cities that take the dummy building before and not finding this issue. Thanks for letting me know! Will update a new version in the next couple of days.
 
I read that a new expansion is being made. We have a good chance then to see the Inuit as a real civilization.
 
I read that a new expansion is being made. We have a good chance then to see the Inuit as a real civilization.

I don't want to sound rude, but no, not at all
There is very slim chance for the Inuits in One World
No chance at all if Firaxis has a little sence in their civ choices
(which was more or less the trend in Civ V so far)

I don't even want to get into the topic of Inuits being a real civilization or not, at least in the sense Civ V handles civs...
Even if we don't look at that all, there are soooo many way more worthy candidates
 
I don't want to sound rude, but no, not at all
There is very slim chance for the Inuits in One World
No chance at all if Firaxis has a little sence in their civ choices
(which was more or less the trend in Civ V so far)

I don't even want to get into the topic of Inuits being a real civilization or not, at least in the sense Civ V handles civs...
Even if we don't look at that all, there are soooo many way more worthy candidates

I actually do think another Native American civ is likely; however, if one is chosen it will most likely go to the Sioux being a series veteran.
 
I actually do think another Native American civ is likely; however, if one is chosen it will most likely go to the Sioux being a series veteran.

Agreed
Sioux, Comanche and Apache are the most likely candidates for that additional native civ IMO
 
My post from another recent thread:
First: 34 civs already in, not 32
Second: Portugal, Zulu, Sioux, Sumer, Hittite, Khmer, Mali
Only mentioning the full civs from previous civ titles (and not counting idiotic ones like Native America and the HRE)

Other than these, at least 15-20 civs are totally worthy candidates
Only mentioning the most popular and important ones: Poland, Hungary, Assyria, Armenia, Phoenicia, Hebrews, Tibet, Vietnam, Indonesia (Majapahit/Srivijaya), Morocco (Moors/Berbers under Al-Andalus, Almoravids, and Almohads), Kongo, etc...
We have enough for at least 2 full expansion packs, even if we are only choosing from the most deserving civs
Also, check out the civ poll:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=460009
This is a recent result, from a couple weeks ago:
Current vote number: 289 (+116):

1. Portugal: 139 (+65)
2. Zulu: 135 (+59)
3. Indonesia: 118 (+36)
4. Brazil: 103 (+53)
5. Sumer: 100 (+38)
6. Poland: 98 (+38)
7. Kongo: 94 (+28)
8. Hittites: 88 (+36)

9. Sioux: 81 (+27)
10. Tibet: 74 (+24)
11. Khmer: 69 (+24)
12. Assyria: ~65 (+27)
13. Phoenicia: 63 (+26)
14. Hungary: 62 (+29)
15. Hebrews: ~60 (+24)
15. Morocco/Moors: 60 (+18)

17. Armenia: ~50 (+18)
17. Zimbabwe: 50 (+13)
19. Mali: 49 (+18)
20. Vietnam: ~46 (+15)
21. Khazars: 45 (+11)
21. Nubia: ~45 (+15)
21. Swahili/Kilwa: ~45 (+15)
With at least 3-4 North American Native civs going in this list somewhere between 45-70 votes
Apache, Navajo, Comanche, Mississippian are among the most likely candidates that made it over 45.
 
The Hittites and Sumerians are civilizations already, only in one scenario. Mali will not be chosen because Songhai is a civilization. Phoenicia will not make it because the Carthaginians are in the game and have a Phoenician leader and unique unit. The Hebrews are unlikely because Jerusalem is a valued city-state, and similar for Tibet. Armenia does not seem likely either. Nubia is too similar to Egypt.
Some of the civilizations there cannot be viewed as 'more worthy' than the Inuit. How is Kongo, Kilwa or Zimbabwe more worthy? The same can be said for the Sioux and Zulu, only they are veterans of the Civilizations series, so we probably will get them anyway.

Portugal, Poland, Zulu, Sioux, Khmer or Vietnam (not both), Indonesia, Assyria, Brazil. Eight of those civilizations you listed might be included. There is a chance we will see the Inuit.

You should read through the information we have on the Inuit. They are more worthy than you think.
 
i noticed that your mod seems to have an issue with the canadian civ I got off this site. Do you know how to fix it?
 
Khmer and Vietnam wont be included because there is Siam already in the region.
Dont think they'll include Poland or Assyria
So good candidates are Zulu/Zimbabwe, Sioux, Brazil or Portugal (dont think they'll include both), Indonesia..
not so many.
 
Guys, let's not turn both Inuit threads into endless discussion about new civs in the expansion (that has it's own thread). Discussing the chances of the Inuit in the Inuit thread seems on topic, but we don't need to argue about Kongo, Brazil, etc. here.
 
I like the civ, but perhaps give it even stronger bonuses for snow and tundra while making it weaker outside of snow and tundra. The Inuits were and are hardcore specialists.
 
i disagree. I think the civ is really underpowered right now. After the novalty wears off why should I pick this civ? Snow and tundra is a bad place to build a city and most of the time inuit doesn't start near snow anyways

I think the UA needs to be reworked into something better that is still very good even when they don't start near snow.

I also think the UU should be as good as a chariot archer, having then weaker is lame.

BTW as I said above this civ seems to have an issue with the Canada civ on this site. i'd really like to use them together in the same game.
 
i disagree. I think the civ is really underpowered right now. After the novalty wears off why should I pick this civ? Snow and tundra is a bad place to build a city and most of the time inuit doesn't start near snow anyways

I think the UA needs to be reworked into something better that is still very good even when they don't start near snow.

I also think the UU should be as good as a chariot archer, having then weaker is lame.

If the Inuit were one of the civilizations then you would sometimes play against them as AI, or other players will choose them. Even if you stop playing as them they will still be interesting civilizations on the map. It is good to know that whenever you feel like it you can play as a civilization that is effective on snow and tundra tiles.

What change would you suggest for their Unique ability? Remember that it is important for new civilizations to have unique game mechanics and styles of play. No other civilization has such an ability at this point.

Thinking about it, I agree. I would prefer the Qamutik unit not to be weaker than the Chariot archer.
 
As the poster above said, starting on snow sucks. Maybe in addition to granting a unique luxury when on coast next to snow (which is also limited because often this coastal city will be locked down by ice), maybe give them additional food or production from snow/tundra tiles? Added to the Qamutik buff, they'll be in a better place.
 
As the poster above said, starting on snow sucks. Maybe in addition to granting a unique luxury when on coast next to snow (which is also limited because often this coastal city will be locked down by ice), maybe give them additional food or production from snow/tundra tiles? Added to the Qamutik buff, they'll be in a better place.

Starting near desert tiles sucks, but some civilizations start around deserts.
 
no it doesn't. Desert can ne worked and made into farms. Usually there are hills in desert too for bonus production, making it decent.

Besides most civs that do start in desert also start on a river or a coast.

snow cant be worked making it worthless.

Tge inuit civ need to have a different UA to suit them when they dont start on snow or near tundra.
 
Besides most civs that do start in desert also start on a river or a coast.

This line isn't true. You can't have both a desert priority AND a river or coast priority. If that ever happens it's just luck.

Anyway, the desert start isn't bad because of that belief which gives +2 faith to desert tiles and the Petra wonder.

However, the Inuit mod does not have a snow start, they have a tundra priority (as a snow priority doesn't exist). The tundra priority isn't bad in itself (Russia also has it). Also, neither the UU or UB bonuses are dependent on the snow terrain. Honestly, I think the way the free resource is set up is fine (a unique resource you have a monopoly on is an extremely powerful advantage. All the civ needs is to drop the second part of the UA "+21% Combat Strength in Snow and Tundra". This should be replaced with an ability that is universal regardless of terrain, that way the civ has an advantage in snow but is not entirely dependent on it preventing them from being limited if settling in the normal terrain.
 
no it doesn't. Desert can ne worked and made into farms. Usually there are hills in desert too for bonus production, making it decent.

Besides most civs that do start in desert also start on a river or a coast.

snow cant be worked making it worthless.

Tge inuit civ need to have a different UA to suit them when they dont start on snow or near tundra.

Snow often has hills and rivers as well. Snow is usually next to or near the coast, so the ability works with it in most cases. I have noticed that it is more likely for snow to be near coastal tiles than deserts.
 
Top Bottom