Byblos is historically more associated with Phoenicia than Egypt, and does not lie in the core area of what is popularly seen as Egyptian territory. Removing it from Egypt is not really removing it from Egypt as historically it fits better outside of an Egyptian civ anyway.
Even if Civ already does have some city-states that are technically part of an included Civ (Wittenberg + Germany), I'd rather they not start taking cities out of existing Civs when there are so many worthy potential city-states that are not yet represented in the game.
To be honest I was always amazed that Amritsar wasn't added as a Religious City State. Since no civ has Sikhism as a favorite Religion, it's holy city should at least have been added. Don't remember if it's on the Indian Citylist though (if it is it's really low on the list as I've never seen it on the map). Also 'Pagan" would be a great Religious City State with it's thousand of temples.
And since the Hittites aren't in maybe they could have added Hattusa as a militaristic city state.
Well, they're quite a bit different. Salt Lake City has mostly an American city except the beginning of their history (where they were obviously quite hostile). Byblos was essentially an Egyptian vassal, not a truly Egyptian city. The New Kingdom Empire did essentially consist of vassals in the Levant so it makes sense to make it a city, but it's perfectly valid not to.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.