What civilizations do you WANT in?
- Thread starter trexeric
- Start date
- Status
AbsintheRed
Deity
Hungary and
Phoenicia or Sumer or Hittite or Armenia or Khmer or Vietnam or Mali or Kongo or Nubia or Tibet or Khazars
Phoenicia or Sumer or Hittite or Armenia or Khmer or Vietnam or Mali or Kongo or Nubia or Tibet or Khazars
True_Candyman
Emperor
Hey, could you provide link and/or more info about this antiquity site / burial tomb? Would love to learn more about it!
http://www.cherokeeregistry.firstlightonline.org/cahokia.pdf
Page 5 from 'Mound 72' heading has the bit about Birdman
Nyeyedyaka
Chieftain
Surprised to see so many votes for Ukraine. May be it's because it was one of the main competitors of Venice for some time?
My choice would be Hungary and Kyivan Rus.
My choice would be Hungary and Kyivan Rus.
Inhalaattori
Emperor
Finland and Norway dont necessarily "deserve" to be in, but I could come up with very interesting UUs, UBs and UAs.
For example Finnish Runesinger would make very interesting special replacement for great artist or great musician.
Stave churches would make good religious UBs for Norwegians.
etc.
Civciv5
Grand Emperor
Tibet and the Khmer or Burma.
Ikael
King
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 873
Kongo
Ashanti
Khmer
Afganistan
Canada
Tibet
Kazars
Summers
Kingdom of Israel
Vietnam
There are much interesting civilizations than the ones that are the most likely to be included yet (Venice & some random North American tribe). Still, I can't complain: Indonesia, Brazil and Morocco, yay!
Ashanti
Khmer
Afganistan
Canada
Tibet
Kazars
Summers
Kingdom of Israel
Vietnam
There are much interesting civilizations than the ones that are the most likely to be included yet (Venice & some random North American tribe). Still, I can't complain: Indonesia, Brazil and Morocco, yay!
Merciorum
Prince
Cherokee
Oman
Vietnam
Kongo
Venice
Sioux
Khmer
Phoenicia
Hittites
Sumer
Timurids
If Venice and the Sioux are in, then there's enough here for another expansion
.
Oman
Vietnam
Kongo
Venice
Sioux
Khmer
Phoenicia
Hittites
Sumer
Timurids
If Venice and the Sioux are in, then there's enough here for another expansion
.hentrueblue
Chieftain
1. Another Southeast Asian (Vietnamese or Khmer)
2. Another Colonial civ (Australia, Argentina, Mexico, Canada, Grand Colombia)
3. Another Ancient-Classical civ (Sumer, Phoenicia, Harrapan, Scythians, Nubians, Israelites etc)
4. A silk road civ (Khazars, Timurids, Mamluks etc)
5. Another Native American civ (Sioux, Mississippians, Apaches, Inuits, Olmecs, Arawaks etc)
6. Another African civs (Kongo, Zimbabwe, Ashanti etc)
7. A Medieval Europeans civ (Goths, Franks/HRE, Vandals, Kievan Rus (Ukraine) etc)
8. Eastern Europeans civ (Bulgars, Romanians, Hungarians etc)
9. East Asians? (Tibetans, Manchus etc)
2. Another Colonial civ (Australia, Argentina, Mexico, Canada, Grand Colombia)
3. Another Ancient-Classical civ (Sumer, Phoenicia, Harrapan, Scythians, Nubians, Israelites etc)
4. A silk road civ (Khazars, Timurids, Mamluks etc)
5. Another Native American civ (Sioux, Mississippians, Apaches, Inuits, Olmecs, Arawaks etc)
6. Another African civs (Kongo, Zimbabwe, Ashanti etc)
7. A Medieval Europeans civ (Goths, Franks/HRE, Vandals, Kievan Rus (Ukraine) etc)
8. Eastern Europeans civ (Bulgars, Romanians, Hungarians etc)
9. East Asians? (Tibetans, Manchus etc)
Merciorum
Prince
Why no Sioux?
True_Candyman
Emperor
Because they aren't one of the more significant Indian peoples. The Sioux took advantage of the changing power dimensions in America with the arrival of the Americans, and didn't stand the test of time.
Essentially, they stand alongside peoples like the Comanche, Navajo etc as famous peoples that stood against the USA. This is for the most part how they're remembered. However, the Comanche and the Navajo have a long and successful history in the region before the arrival of the Americans. The Sioux didn't even have horses until the late 18th century, and the only reason we remember the name of their tribe instead of another is because of a man named Custer.
TLDR: Including the Sioux is Americo-centric pandering for sales when there are far more significant american peoples in their own right.
Inhalaattori
Emperor
I think Shawnee led by Tecumseh would make the most sense for North-American Native Civ. Tecumseh succeeded to create a large tribal confederacy. Something that very few Native leaders could achieve in North-America. Shawnee is better candidate than Sioux IMO.
I think there are Civs that deserve to be in the game, but I still dont want them in the game. One of them is Sumeria. Reason is that we dont have a decent real life leader for them. Same can be said about many Native American civs.
So what you're saying is Sioux Civ confirmed?
Villager720
Warlord
And they never practiced agriculture or built cities.
Opinions - everyones got them.
I think most anything is viable if it offers design elements which is why right down the end I put in USSR and CSA because I think they offer design elelments.
In the end any list that long is a pipe dream and we know it.
Neither the CSA or the USSR are civilizations, and the USSR itself is directly represented within the game within the Russian Civilization as they always have been. If you think we can have the USSR and Russia, then why not Qing China, Ming China, the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China. Why not England, Great Britain and the UK? Why not The Kingdom of France, Empire of France and Republic of France? Why not Prussia, German Empire and Germany?
Princeofnigeria
The illustrious
I think you need to calm down. This man just stated it was purely for gameplay, and also he was not looking for an argeument, he just stated his opinion, and said so explicitely. I don't agree with him, but I think he has the right to say what civ he wants on the wanted civ list.
IkM
King
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2013
- Messages
- 862
There is Denmark and Sweden already.
- Status
Similar threads
