Capt Ajax
Warlord
I'm sure if the game is popular there will be patches coming out that will include new civs.
Which Civilization do you think is missing from CIVrev?
- Thread starter Exoma
- Start date
PimpyMicPimp
Regrets His Username.
A non-European civ. All Civ games are pretty Westerncentric, but this game feels particularly stifling.
shadowplay
your ad here
I didn't know Mongolia, China, Japan, India, Zulu, Egypt and the Aztecs were Europeans.
Mad Man
Your lord and master
I dont care civ rev needs a hell of alot more civs
But my vote is for none of the above but for something brand new not used in any other civ game.
But my vote is for none of the above but for something brand new not used in any other civ game.
There might be one update for CivRev on the 360/PS3, but they might not want to do it to be fair to DS users.
There will probably be a sequel with more civs too (is it too early to think of a sequel
?).EDIT:
I wish that they had the Mughals or Mauryas instead of India.
As it stands now there is:PimpyMicPimp said:
America
England
Japan
Aztec
China
India
Mongolia
Rome
Egypt
France
Arabia
Greece
Spain
Germany
Zulu
Russia
That's 7 European civs.
1 Central Asian civ.
2 East Asian civs.
1 Southern African civ.
1 Indian subcontinental civ.
1 North African civ.
1 Northern American civ.
1 Mesoamerican civ.
1 Middle Eastern civ.
That's pretty bad...
There should have been at least 3 Middle Eastern civs.
Ottoman1453
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2008
- Messages
- 13
Actually, Persians had a bigger empire than the Ottomans, AND existed longer.
AND created the first declaration of Human Rights (Cyrus the Great).
All the Ottomans did was oppress people.
The Ottomans conquered and controlled areas the Persians never touched.
Ottomans controlled 4 Wonders of the World, at the same time. Did Persia do that? LOL...
Historically rich, and important, Ottoman wins hands down. Persians are good at what? Rugs? LOL. Ottoman Empire at their greatest might would've dominated Persia... easily.
FourtyTwo
Chieftain
Well the persians let the greeks kick their butts under alexander, and the helenistic age was pretty influential.
Plus persia came first... that pretty much wins it by default. Its like saying that the Italians have been more influential than the Roman empire... it just doesn't work.
FourtyTwo
Chieftain
1. Okay in real life, owning wonders is not a measure of greatness. Modern Egypt is sitting on a whole museum in 'wonders' terms and they don't seem to be doing so hot.
2. Well duh, of course the Ottomans would of beaten the persians, the empire came 1800 years latter. Thats like saying the modern Americans would of beaten the Romans... of course they would of, they have guns.
3. From the fact your name is 'Ottoman1453' I'm just going to guess you have a bit of a personal bias
shadowplay
your ad here
Um, no. Using this buttheaded logic, the Indo-European Aryan's of pre-persian Iran would win by default over ancient Persia because they came first. Whatever buddy.
I'm not trying to argue that Persia is insignificant, just that Ottomons are at least equivilent in terms of historical importance.
The Persian empire lasted longer. It had three great dynasties - the Achaemenids, Sassanids and Safavids. They where one of the three great Islamic empires, alongside the Ottomans and Mughals, even in Ottoman times.
The point about it lasting longer was that it lasted longer and REPEATEDLY created empires. It was the dominant power of Iran for thousands of years - the only other Iranians that came close where the Medes and Parthians.
The point about it lasting longer was that it lasted longer and REPEATEDLY created empires. It was the dominant power of Iran for thousands of years - the only other Iranians that came close where the Medes and Parthians.
Ottoman1453
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2008
- Messages
- 13
1. Okay in real life, owning wonders is not a measure of greatness. Modern Egypt is sitting on a whole museum in 'wonders' terms and they don't seem to be doing so hot.
2. Well duh, of course the Ottomans would of beaten the persians, the empire came 1800 years latter. Thats like saying the modern Americans would of beaten the Romans... of course they would of, they have guns.
3. From the fact your name is 'Ottoman1453' I'm just going to guess you have a bit of a personal bias
1. Owning wonders is a measure of greatness. Conquering desert villages is not as important as Cairo/Athens/Constantinople/Jerusalem, etc etc. Yes or no?
2. Ottomans fought harder battles, against diverse and advanced enemies. They faced a tougher challenge when it came to conquering nations. Ottomans were almost like a big gang when they first started out, and became a world power very fast. Of course there is a time-gap between 2 Empires, but if you compare military achievements, we win. We scared Europe to sh!t their pants. Even without Europe, we controlled the Middle East/Eastern Europe/Northern Africa, etc etc. Persia stays only in Middle East. Persian Empire was big, but nothing spectacular. Not as diverse population or strategically placed as the Ottoman Empire. Less culture. Less influence on world.
3. Read how Ottomans captured Constantinople, the city that would never get captured, gets captured overnight. No military achievement in Persian history comes as close to this.
So... that's why Ottoman Empire was the last world power, and a better empire overall compared to Persian Empire...
Huayna Capac357
Deity
Persia, followed by Babylon, followed by Inca. We can say THIS IS SPARTA! but not The thousand nations of the Persian Empire descend on you! Babylon is awesome. South America is empty 
Huayna Capac357
Deity
I soooooo want Persia!
Starting: Free Religion Tech
Ancient: -50% Corruption
Medieval: +50% GP rate
Industrial: Free Refining Tech and Fundamentalist Gov't
Modern: +10 Gold per turn if you have oil
Leader: Cyrus
UU: Immortals (Swordsman), Parthian Archer (Archer)
Starting: Free Religion Tech
Ancient: -50% Corruption
Medieval: +50% GP rate
Industrial: Free Refining Tech and Fundamentalist Gov't
Modern: +10 Gold per turn if you have oil
Leader: Cyrus
UU: Immortals (Swordsman), Parthian Archer (Archer)
Huayna Capac357
Deity
I was thinking maybe Ethiopia but okay.
Carthage:
Starts: 3 Free galleys
Ancient: +1 Trade from each worked water square
Medieval: +1 attack for melee units
Industrial: Up one level in diplomatic relations with each civ
Modern: 3 Free Battleships
Carthage:
Starts: 3 Free galleys
Ancient: +1 Trade from each worked water square
Medieval: +1 attack for melee units
Industrial: Up one level in diplomatic relations with each civ
Modern: 3 Free Battleships
Why would Persia have a Parthian as its UU? While Parthia doesn't deserve it over quite a few other civs - it should be its own civ, or not be in the game at all.
Huayna Capac357
Deity
Hey, the French have the DUTCH Howitzer as their UU!
Can't wait for a future civ pack!
I thought after all the expansions Civ4 had a good lineup of civs. But I think a good first pack would be the Dutch, Carthage, Persia or the Ottoman Empire, Cambodia, the Incan or Mayan, and the Celts or the Vikings.
Maybe switch things up and include an eastern European civ, like Poland? Their power could be if they get conquered, they will reappear at some point in history
I thought after all the expansions Civ4 had a good lineup of civs. But I think a good first pack would be the Dutch, Carthage, Persia or the Ottoman Empire, Cambodia, the Incan or Mayan, and the Celts or the Vikings.
Maybe switch things up and include an eastern European civ, like Poland? Their power could be if they get conquered, they will reappear at some point in history
Similar threads
