What civilizations do you WANT in?

Status
Not open for further replies.
And they never practiced agriculture or built cities.

That's irrelevant to the term civilization these days. There were hunter gatherer societies that settled and lived sustainably.

Nomadic peoples have also been a hugely significant part of human history, even recent history. Need you look any further than the Huns bringing down the Romans?

I don't mind if they add a nomadic, hunter gatherer plains tribe. I do mind if they add one because it's romanticised out of proportions as part of American history.

So what you're saying is Sioux Civ confirmed?

Basically yes. Imagine your hate for Venice, and double that. You begin to get close to how much i don't want the Sioux in this expansion. I actually think it's a step backwards for native american inclusion.

So how can they possibly resist including it? :(
 
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.

What makes you think so? Of course, it is how we understand 'decent'... But I agree that Gilgamesh is a bit too 'obscure'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_king_list

Queen Kubaba , Ur-Zababa, Lugalzagesi or Sargon the Great for example are great choices in my opinion. :)
 
I would have liked to have seen Israel led by David or Solomon and Mexico led by Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna or Benito Juarez. Kongo would have been great too.
 
That's irrelevant to the term civilization these days. There were hunter gatherer societies that settled and lived sustainably.

Nomadic peoples have also been a hugely significant part of human history, even recent history. Need you look any further than the Huns bringing down the Romans?

But the Huns captured cities. The Sioux never did anything, pre-reservations, that actually takes place in the game. No besieging cities, no farms, no wonders, no writing. If you're going to pick a people to include in a game, they should at minimum have managed to do something within the game.
 
But the Huns captured cities. The Sioux never did anything, pre-reservations, that actually takes place in the game. No besieging cities, no farms, no wonders, no writing. If you're going to pick a people to include in a game, they should at minimum have managed to do something within the game.

Well you see, now you have my point exactly.

They didn't do anything. But they were the Indians in western films, so somehow that makes them better.

Damn it America, why did you win the culture game in life :(

Of course they did do some things, their culture and religion was quite snazzy etc. But all of that is unique cultural stuff really, and at the end of the day they are no more unique than anyone else.
 
http://www.cherokeeregistry.firstlightonline.org/cahokia.pdf

Page 5 from 'Mound 72' heading has the bit about Birdman :goodjob:
I agree! I would love to see Sumeria some day...

Speaking of which, i put a source for the Cahokia leader on the previous page for you :goodjob:


and I forgot to say thanks! Many thanks dude :goodjob:

Really interesting read - had the time to read it before coming to work. Shame that Americans aren't/can not (guess, it is a political and financial issue) but more effort to anthropology/archaeology... all the thing we could discover about ancient native americans. Cahokia / Hopewell cultures and the Mississippian leaders like the 'Birdman' are truly fascinating! :D
 
Well you see, now you have my point exactly.

They didn't do anything. But they were the Indians in western films, so somehow that makes them better.

Damn it America, why did you win the culture game in life :(

Of course they did do some things, their culture and religion was quite snazzy etc. But all of that is unique cultural stuff really, and at the end of the day they are no more unique than anyone else.

this! :goodjob: lol
 
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?

Why not any of them. Heck I would have put in some of the Chinese ones but I know that isn't a remote chance of happening.

I've said before that the game is a World Builder which uses real world societies as the basis for it's mythical civs. To me Russia and the USSR are such distinct entities that I would have no problem with them both being in. I'd be happy with Burgandy coming in from France and the Normans. I'd be happy with the CSA. I'd be happy with the HRE and Germany being in.

City lists are a little problematic with two civs that overlap but Communist USSR and Imperial Russia definitely have very different flavors as civilisations and could easily be tweaked to feel different from one another.

I had them way down the list because I'd only be going down that road late in the game when most other options are exausted but frankly I wouldn't mind playing a duel between White Russia and the Soviets - throw Kieven Rus in for a interesting 3 way battle.

As I said 50 choices is a pipe dream and I'm sure I forgot things ... like Sparta. I'd love Sparta in.
 
and I forgot to say thanks! Many thanks dude :goodjob:

Really interesting read - had the time to read it before coming to work. Shame that Americans aren't/can not (guess, it is a political and financial issue) but more effort to anthropology/archaeology... all the thing we could discover about ancient native americans. Cahokia / Hopewell cultures and the Mississippian leaders like the 'Birdman' are truly fascinating! :D

No worries MARDUK80! Glad i could peak your interest.

The real big trouble with Cahokia is that St Louis was built literally on top of it and a lot of mounds apparently got destroyed in the 19th century before they knew what they were (though i suspect there was a certain lack of caring involved too...)

Still, the more you study the more you learn. So every night i say a little thank you to Timothy Pauketat and hope to God he gets more funding.
 
Phoenicia and Romania

Maybe Israel so I can wipe them out for good :lol:

edit: Oh, I mean the biblical Israel btw, not the modern one
 
ಠ_ಠ

I mean really, what?! That's not even funny. I've seen some offensive things on the internet, but wowee. That's something special!
 
What makes you think so? Of course, it is how we understand 'decent'... But I agree that Gilgamesh is a bit too 'obscure'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumerian_king_list

Queen Kubaba , Ur-Zababa, Lugalzagesi or Sargon the Great for example are great choices in my opinion. :)

Sargon never was the leader of the sumerian civilization, but the akkadian one (which Babylon and Assyria are both). Although the territory was the same (enlarged by Sargon and his descendants until up to the dynasty demise), sumerians and akkadians were ethnically different, akkadians being semitics (like arabs, hebrews, ...), while sumerians ... where that's what is th most interesting with sumerians : they don't belong to any ethny we know ! Besides, Lugalzagesi has the problem of being to short lived, and his conquests were completely shadowed by Sargon of Akkad (who, by the way, made Lugalzagesi walk on a donkey in front of his troops, after his loss). Instead of going with people like Gilgamesh, I'd go with somelike Ur-Nammu or his son Shulgi, who really made a unified sumerian empire, and who really existed and made a long lived royal career.

Here goes my list :

Sumeria, led by Ur-Nammu (It's just the most ancient civilization we know, in the modern sense of the term)

Israel, led by Solomon (At least, judaism would get a civilization with that religion, and second, their influence is high, like or not)

Kongo, led by Nzinga (I'd love another sub-saharian civilization, who actually was long-lived kingdom)

Yugoslavia/Serbia, led by Tito (I know some say just another european civ, but this one not only fits with the ideology theme, but also was the leader of the non-aligned during cold war. Like it or not, under Tito, Serbia/Yugoslavia was highly important)

Tibet, led by Songtsen Gampo (I don't actually care if China doesn't like it. We're not even talking about the Tibet today, but an empire which existed more than a millenia ago. Tibet higly influenced Asia during that time, and I'd love to see them in the series)

Khmer, led by Jayavarman VII (Well, maybe because they had what certainly was, according to historains and archeologists, the greatest capital of the world during their time. Because of their genious engineering abilities. Because of their long-lived empire. Seriously, I'm sure that saying Khmer is the same than Indonesia or Thailand, it's like saying that Germany and England are the same ! Yes sir, I'll go that far, eurocentric villains ;) !)

Last but not the least, Timurid, led by Tamerlane (The third empire of the steppes. Certainly another warmonger, but a warmonger with artistical tendencies ! Seriously, the timurids were highly proficient during their time, made great impression in the west, the european court all trying to gain the friendship of Tamerlane out of fear. He also destroyed, razed, killed huge amounts of cities and people (17 millions during his live !)
 
Last but not the least, Timurid, led by Tamerlane (The third empire of the steppes. Certainly another warmonger, but a warmonger with artistical tendencies ! Seriously, the timurids were highly proficient during their time, made great impression in the west, the european court all trying to gain the friendship of Tamerlane out of fear. He also destroyed, razed, killed huge amounts of cities and people (17 millions during his live !)

17 million in 15th century? seems exaggerated.
 
I'm really not going to deny that this hasn't been said at least 1000 times, but Australia (not just on account of having their geographical inclusion being brilliant on TSL maps) would be as super to have in the game.

Sure, it's a Colonial nation, a constitutional monarchy and historically a loose bunch of co-existent native tribes, but I find Australia has a lot to offer and seeing as both the Russian and German civs in this game borrow UA's, UB's and UU's from throughout their century-long existence as an empire/peoples that cover a general geographic area.

So I'm not asking for an Aboriginal civ per say, or even just a strictly modern one, but rather one in the same vein as the two aforementioned civs. Strictly speaking - no, Australia is not a Civilization - but it's unique history as an amazingly vast and isolated landmass with a multicultural peoples and a thoroughly rich and interesting history (even as a colonial nation) is at least worthy of an inclusion in the series.

I mean, off the top of your head one could easily come up a myriad of options pertaining to an Australian 'Civ':

Emblem: White Field - Ochre Aboriginal Waterhole symbol (inverse of England), Green field and Gold symbol works too.

Start Bias: Coastal, near Stone

Leader: Menzies/Barton/Chifley

Unique Ability: Upstart Convicts - Settlers are 50% cheaper and found cities that provide +5 :c5unhappy: Unhappiness for 20 turns. +3 :c5happy: Happiness for Coastal Cities

-or-

Unique Ability: Dreamtime - -50% off your next Golden Age for every natural Wonder Discovered (one per NW). +1 :c5faith: for every unworked stone tile

-or-

Unique Ability: Boundless Plains to Share - +2 :c5happy: Happiness for Coastal Cities. +1 :c5citizen: Population for first 3 Coastal Cities every 10 turns once Australia reaches the Modern Age

----

Unique Unit: Aboriginal Hunter - Has ranged attack. Unique Promotion (Stealth) Ignore enemy zone of control. Replaces Scout, Upgrades to Archer.

Unique Unit: Digger Infantry - Unique Promotion (Trench Warfare) 35% Fortification Defense Bonus, replaces Great War Infantry.

Pick 'n choose. There are heaps more options out there, but these are just the ones I scraped off the top of my head.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom