New IGN preview

I would prefer a different civ (say some Persian leader) with similar traits much as Songhai seems to be very similar to Zulu. I love the Vikings, but I don't want to see them in over Persia and Spain and Babylonia.
 
The only problem with that is that they already have plenty of classical Civc and leaders, but barely any medieval Civs and leaders and Vikings would fall perfectly into that category.
 
2 Spots left and 5 front runners. Greece, Spain, Persia, Vikings and Babylon. If Civrev was any example. Things are going to get really intense on these boards if they leave Persia out. LOL. "Oh the humanity".
 
I'm starting to think Greece won't be in as one nation, probably just a bunch of city states, like Sparta and Athens, with the Greek civ being Macedon, since Alexander is Macedonian, and he's really the first pick for a Greek leader. The only problem with this layout is that when Greece was actually around, they did try to conquer stuff, while city-states in game don't. But I am 99.99999% sure that the Greeks will be in in some shape or form.

I am also personally wanting Spain to be in as the 18th, and also think they would be the most likely. Ragnar would be a lot like Askia, and so would Leif Erricson, or almost any Viking leader. Persia has probably been replaced by Ottomans, and Babylon isn't important enough for a top-18 release (Not that I don't like Babylon, they're #4 or somewhere like that on my list of favourite civilizations, historically. I just think that other civs have contributed to history more, since Babylon's history hasn't been documented as much.).
 
Actually, it *would* be nice if some City-States could be aggressive & pose a threat to you if you're not sufficiently careful. Could make for a very intriguing game. Also, hopefully this means an end to the almost game-breaking (though also immensely fun) Goody Huts ;)!

Aussie.
 
For the sake of geographic distribution, I'd go with Persia and Spain. I'm guessing that much of Africa and North America will be covered under the City State (tribes) concept. Honestly, some of the others (Mongols) probably belong under that as well. They just need to make it so ticked-off City States produce Barbarians, and it'd work just fine.
 
I'm starting to think Greece won't be in as one nation, probably just a bunch of city states, like Sparta and Athens, with the Greek civ being Macedon, since Alexander is Macedonian, and he's really the first pick for a Greek leader. The only problem with this layout is that when Greece was actually around, they did try to conquer stuff, while city-states in game don't. But I am 99.99999% sure that the Greeks will be in in some shape or form.

I am also personally wanting Spain to be in as the 18th, and also think they would be the most likely. Ragnar would be a lot like Askia, and so would Leif Erricson, or almost any Viking leader. Persia has probably been replaced by Ottomans, and Babylon isn't important enough for a top-18 release (Not that I don't like Babylon, they're #4 or somewhere like that on my list of favourite civilizations, historically. I just think that other civs have contributed to history more, since Babylon's history hasn't been documented as much.).

I have no preference at all when it comes to the final list. Some folk, however, see it as not only an insult to them personally, but an insult to their ancestors, when their civ is left out. Quite amusing actually.
 
I was particularly intrigued by their discussion of the various traits for the different leaders. One that they dismissed as too powerful was using forests like roads.

I wonder what Civ that could have been for? The one that immediately sprung to mind would be the Native Americans.

I could be wrong of course but it is entirely possible that Greece and the Native Americans (or whatever they choose to call them) will be the other Civs.
 
For the sake of geographic distribution, I'd go with Persia and Spain. I'm guessing that much of Africa and North America will be covered under the City State (tribes) concept. Honestly, some of the others (Mongols) probably belong under that as well. They just need to make it so ticked-off City States produce Barbarians, and it'd work just fine.

Amassing the largest empire in history not good enough to be included in the game? The Mongols deserve to be a Civilization in the Vanilla version.
 
Perhaps they'll rename Greece Macedonia. Just for the hell of it.
 
Perhaps they'll rename Greece Macedonia. Just for the hell of it.

Macedonia certainty has merit as a civilization. while they seem to be under foreign rule they produced histories greatest generals and rulers. Alexander, Trajan, the Macedonian Dynasty from the top of my head.
 
the walls, castles and towers still need people to operate.

who is there to operate it?

Denizens. City watch. Recruited peasants and noblemen.
 
No matter what two civs make it into the final spots, many great and historically important ones will be left out.....but no worries, they'll all make it in, just as the highlights of the next few expansion packs.

My only guess is that Alexander of (most likely) Greece is one of the two. I just think Firaxis dividing Greece (a staple civ of the series) into city states (though its more historically accurate) would be just as shocking than the loss of religion and espionage.

One thing I am left wondering though is, its been mentioned how important diplomacy with the city-states is going to be, but will they have animated leaders or just a text box (etc..) to talk with?
 
Denizens. City watch. Recruited peasants and noblemen.

one thing: who woudl recruit them? there's no military in the building, no one to train them, and no one to equip them.
 
one thing: who woudl recruit them? there's no military in the building, no one to train them, and no one to equip them.

The city ruler(s) (or the previously mentioned city watch). And the recruits are poorly trained and equipped with whatever can be used with a weapon. It makes them weaker than an army defender, but they can still put up a fight, and they have the walls to help them do this.

Not only is this is an unoriginal concept for strategy war games, but this is also history. There have been occasions in history where a city would be threatened while no friendly army is present, and they make a stand. Often they would lose, but sometimes they could stand siege long enough for relief from a friendly army.
 
Perhaps they'll rename Greece Macedonia. Just for the hell of it.

If they rename Greece to Macedonia, it is likely that that could cause a very real diplomatic indecent, which would be quite ironic.
 
Top Bottom