Guess the New Civs

George Washington was British in his own right until he took a role in the American Revolution on the side of the rebels. Yes, he had identified himself as American for some years before the actual war for independence, he was British, his parents were British, and his family was British. He was not American until Independence was official.

The term "American" originated in the Britain to refer to the inhabitants of the colonies. Of course some colonial inhabitants would pride themselves on their British ancestry and loyalty to the crown. If Washington would have gone to London before Independence he would have still been called an American just not as a reference to his nationality. Some people still would rather see the term American apply to a boarder group of people and not just citizens of the United States.
 
The discussion was about its origins. The idea that America sprang from one (English) colony is inaccurate.

This.

Parts of the current US were originally French, Spanish, Russian, and of course Native American nations in addition to the relatively small British part before being incorporated into the United States. Texas, and unless I'm mistaken California, were also independent states for a time.
 
This.

Parts of the current US were originally French, Spanish, Russian, and of course Native American nations in addition to the relatively small British part before being incorporated into the United States. Texas, and unless I'm mistaken California, were also independent states for a time.

Also, Mexican. The U.S. probably took more territory from Mexico than it acquired from any other country with the exception of France, which it also bought a huge chunk of land from. The land of the original British colonies are minor compared to the land taken from Mexico or bought from France.

Nevertheless, I don't see what this has to do guessing a new Civ, so my guess is that the new civilization will NOT be Mexico, nor will there be a reliving the Mexican-American War scenario, though it would be pretty fun if there was.
 
Also, Mexican. The U.S. probably took more territory from Mexico than it acquired from any other country with the exception of France, which it also bought a huge chunk of land from. The land of the original British colonies are minor compared to the land taken from Mexico or bought from France.

Nevertheless, I don't see what this has to do guessing a new Civ, so my guess is that the new civilization will NOT be Mexico, nor will there be a reliving the Mexican-American War scenario, though it would be pretty fun if there was.

I agree... I don't know how a simple question of how many Colony civilizations are there got to another histroical discussion, I guess my point was they are very unlikely to add a Colonized (post Renaissance) nation as a civ, they are more likely to add a Native (Inca, Aztecs, Iroquois etc) instead of Canada, Brazil, whatever.
 
Khmer and Mali are out from far too similar existing Civs, that is, Siam and Songhai.

I don't disagree with them being out, but I really hope that Khmer isn't out for the reason you are giving. Surely from an objective point of view there is *at least* as much different between Khmer and Siam as there is between Austria and Germany. I think that "we" (Westerners) conflate SE Asia in a way that is over-broad and specious. I would love to see another Asian or African civ (or Inuit!), but despite my bias, I believe the point I'm making is fairly made.
 
The Khmer and Thai languages are also not related. They're both tonal though. Khmer is in the Austro-Asiatic language family (which includes Vietnamese, Mon, and others) and Thai is in the Tai-Kadai family (Includes Lao, Zhuang, and others). So it's more like Austria and Hungary (having two unrelated languages)

Also, I don't recall the Khmer empire having the Father governs children concept.
 
Timur will finally appear, cos they have horses. As far as I can tell, that's the reason why we have the Huns.

It didn't exist as a nation before.

It had been unified before...

Fun fact - even under the British it wasn't completely unified, the Portuguese and French held (albeit small) territories there until India was independent of Britain. Then there's the whole princely state thing...
 
I agree... I don't know how a simple question of how many Colony civilizations are there got to another histroical discussion, I guess my point was they are very unlikely to add a Colonized (post Renaissance) nation as a civ, they are more likely to add a Native (Inca, Aztecs, Iroquois etc) instead of Canada, Brazil, whatever.

But Inca,Aztecs and Iroquois ARE ALREADY in the game(use Caps because people insists to forget this fact) . And Western North American natives were partially represented in Civ 4 BTS,while Eastern South America keeps empty . And it's not possible to add an Native civilization from there,because I can assure that ALL of their cities' name would come from Brazil's minor cities .
 
God damn it, why wasn't history as intresting in school! I never knew that D:.

This is because schools have no real interest in making history interesting, they'd rather talk about who made the lawnmower and witch congressman talked a hole in the ground to create the 10th amendment.
 
Since Ehtiopia uses the most modern leader of all available in Civ 5, then Brazil under Pedro II or Gran Colombia under Bolivar make much more sense - especially to fill out South America. They would be much more a representation of a certain state or country rather than a civilization, though. Gran Colombia in particular, as it was (and is via its successor states) a part of Latin American culture and civilization group, which is still strongly tied to Spain (unlike the US, whose cultural connection to England/France/Germany has loosened up a bit since the 1700s). Brazil developed a more unique culture, and therefore could be the last mystery civ, but I doubt it - it would be stupid then not to include Portugal. And as we know, Lisbon is just a city-state now (but it might be a sign that a Portugal DLC will arrive some time)

After all the PAX news I'm still guessing the mystery civ will be African or Asian. Most likely Kongo, the Zulu, or an Indonesian civ (I mean the region, not the modern state). What I wish it would be, then Lithuania (unique religious playstyle - maybe prolonged immunity to conversion) or Sumer. I've ruled out Hungary and Poland, because they have remained as city-states in the lates coverages, but as we know, it's easy to swap a CS name with a new one to make place for a full civ.
 
Maybe the addition of Citrus and Coffee as new resources could be related to the addition of Brazil in the expansion.
Brazil is the largest producer of both resources in the world today.
 
Actually, it's Citrus or Coffee, not and. There's one resource starting with a C and people were debating what it is.
 
my guess is on coffee.
 
ok after viewing it carefully it's citrus. You can just make out the "I", and wouldn't coffee appear brown on the screen? Oh and one more thing, where he get that is it new or a new interview?
 
But Inca,Aztecs and Iroquois ARE ALREADY in the game(use Caps because people insists to forget this fact) . And Western North American natives were partially represented in Civ 4 BTS,while Eastern South America keeps empty . And it's not possible to add an Native civilization from there,because I can assure that ALL of their cities' name would come from Brazil's minor cities .

You missed my point. COmpletely.

I know they are in there.

My point is that if they are going to add a civilization I think they will always choose the proper heritage over a colony (so they will pick the natives who lived in Brazil over Brazil, that's my point) I think America is the only colony that has their represntation, don't think Canada, or Australia have ever been properly represnted.
 
Top Bottom