Brave New World's New Civilizations - REVISED!
- Thread starter Stonecutter9
- Start date
cybrxkhan
Asian Xwedodah
The elder Trung sister, Trung Trac, can be sort of considered the more important of the two - she was the one who decided to lead the rebellion against the Chinese in the first place, and the younger sister, Trung Nhi, sort of just followed along; and Trung Trac is, well, the older one anyways. Similarly to how Justinian or Theodora are chosen instead of both, I can see Trung Trac being chosen instead of both Trung sisters. That said, this thread is just for wishful thinking anyways, so having a two-headed leaderhead would be nice.
Well, again, this is just wishful thinking of course, which is the point of the thread. However, the Mississipians had several urban centers, of which Cahokia was the first; additionally, having a Mississippi blob is still in my opinion more sensible than the Polynesia aglamation of cultures that's already present in Civ4. Lastly, while we could debate whether they are distinctive or "deserving" (which would be somewhat pointless in this thread since this thread's for wishful thinking in my opinion), the north american native groups have a bit more clout in North America where a large amount of the sales are and would be more easily marketable for the devs.
durfal
The Dutch Daredevil
Portugal and Zulu. I love both and I would be really amazed if they where not in it.
Portugal has to be in now that Brazil is confirmed.
I know the Zulu aren't the biggest African civ but they belong in civ, even if it's only as a tradition. I always saw them as a representation of the Southern African tribes anyhow.
For the rest, Kongo, Indonesia, Vietnam and Italy are my preferred civs to get in.
Would have liked Israel, Sumeria or the Hittites before Assyria but I'm content with them and don't want multiple ancient civs from that region.
I think most of them have a really good shot of getting in.
In stead of Italy we'll probably get another Native North American one though, seeing that they already tried to get the Pueblo in.
Portugal has to be in now that Brazil is confirmed.
I know the Zulu aren't the biggest African civ but they belong in civ, even if it's only as a tradition. I always saw them as a representation of the Southern African tribes anyhow.
For the rest, Kongo, Indonesia, Vietnam and Italy are my preferred civs to get in.
Would have liked Israel, Sumeria or the Hittites before Assyria but I'm content with them and don't want multiple ancient civs from that region.
I think most of them have a really good shot of getting in.
In stead of Italy we'll probably get another Native North American one though, seeing that they already tried to get the Pueblo in.
Sid Simelia
Warlord
I'm thinking the Americans might get a second leader, I mean one of the new scenarios is American Civil War..
Thewholeworld
Chieftain
-A native american civ would be nice since there is only one (Iroquois) so it would be nice to see another one.
-Portugal had a the first and the longest surviving colonial empire.
-Italy because I'd love to see one civ instead of several city states
-Belgium is a founding member of the Eu and the headquarters of it (I also have family there
).
-The Zulu have been in the Civilization franchise eversince it came out and I think it is impressive how they fended off the British for so long.
-Isreal was the birth place of Judaism and Christianity they also were great warriors for their time.
-The Hittites were great diplomats in their day and most of its empire was the result of treatys.
-Tibet is an unlikely choice considering China occupies Tibet but it was a major religious center and it had an empire that lasted around 200 years.
-Indonesia is also an important nation today and I think it deserves to be a civilization in Civ5.
-Portugal had a the first and the longest surviving colonial empire.
-Italy because I'd love to see one civ instead of several city states
-Belgium is a founding member of the Eu and the headquarters of it (I also have family there
).-The Zulu have been in the Civilization franchise eversince it came out and I think it is impressive how they fended off the British for so long.
-Isreal was the birth place of Judaism and Christianity they also were great warriors for their time.
-The Hittites were great diplomats in their day and most of its empire was the result of treatys.
-Tibet is an unlikely choice considering China occupies Tibet but it was a major religious center and it had an empire that lasted around 200 years.
-Indonesia is also an important nation today and I think it deserves to be a civilization in Civ5.
HaloCapella
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2012
- Messages
- 54
I'll mention something that will least likely be added to this game.
Atlantis.
Atlantis.
True_Candyman
Emperor
I bet you both of my kidneys that this won't happen.
I'm very curious.
Why everyone seems to like the idea of a venetian civilization more than the idea of an italian civilization?
I mean, it would be like having a prussian civilization instead of a german one, or a catalan civilization instead of a spanish one.
Italy would be like Venice, but with more!
Mine is just curiosity, is it only because of the city states that should be changed?
I would love to see Venice as a civ in the game (I have kind of a venetian heritage myself
PS: I'm sorry if what I wrote makes no sense in english, I'm struggling with conditional mood XP
A Venetian civ would embody the Medieval and Renaissance periods with a mercantile focus whereas an Italian civ would probably be post Risorgimento. A civ based on Emanuele's unified, industrializing Italy would be very different than one based on Venice.
Is nomenclature really such an obstacle?
Calling the civ "Italy" is just a convenience. A cursory examination of the civilizations in this game establishes that civ's don't only represent the point in history after which they decided what to call themselves collectively. Germany's a prime example. The civ we have incorporates the Holy Roman Empire and the Teutons, among others. Of course, Germany wasn't Germany back then, but everyone seems to get it all the same. It's not a problem.
You can easily have an Italy that incorporates uniques from multiple eras. Genoese crossbowmen or condottieri from renaissance Italy, and industrial-era berseglierri or alpini. Numerous civ's span eras in this fashion. Or, you can have a bunch of stuff from pre-unification italy and still call it Italy, and it's still no biggie.
The first reply in this thread was somebody voting "other" because they'd rather have "Florence" than "Italy". Then another guy votes "other" because they want "Venice". What a shame, because what does that fixation on semantics really accomplish? To my mind, it only serves to create the impression that in this area there's not as much interest as there actually is.
TheSovietMuffin
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2013
- Messages
- 7
I am definately sure that the Zulu will be a civ. But a little more South American civs if any! I would appreciate a ukrainian civ, my homeland, but I doubt that would be added 
meteo63
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2007
- Messages
- 69
My other vote was for the Inuit, since this not the most likely civ thread but the most wanted civ thread... The Inuit would be great for snow and ice regions, but it would require a massive terrain-related overhaul, like not making snow and ice worthless, so we'd need more food and production in those areas first for the Inuit to make sense and for all other civs to allow them to compete with the Inuit. And I don't believe this is very likely at all, unfortunately. The furthest north civs can currently go is tundra and still be successful and that's probably how it's gonna be.
Villager720
Warlord
Yep. Perhaps a Lincoln leader loading screen for the Union, but one Civ alone won't be given an additional fully functioning leader screen.
kingchris20
Wisdom Seeker
So what do you call the Inca, Maya, and Aztec? All Native American
But yeah, I'd love to see the Sioux, Cherokee, Comanche, Hopi or Apache make it in!
JFD
Kathigitarkh
Except I don't want an amalgamation; I distinctly want Venice. It is not semantics for me, and perhaps not for the rest who voted Other for Venice; it is the promise of a specific focus on a merchant empire (which, perhaps, is unfulfilled by the Netherlands or will be by Portugal, and would almost certainly be unfufilled by Italy), the promise of something unexpected or the expectation that the Venetian Empire resolves the problems of an incorporated Italian civ.
I'm very familiar with Venetian history, but not as so with the history of any other Italian state, save the Papacy, including the unified one. If the poll had asked me what I expected to come, I would have opted to choose Italy, but instead it asked what I would like. What I would like is a Civ that I am familiar with and which appeals to me: ergo, Venice. It's not a matter of 'I'll take Italy in any form; just so long as Italy's in the game' for me.
Hannibal XIII
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 120
Out of all of those, I think we'll definitely have Portugal, Zulu and Indonesia. Of the rest, I want:
Kongo (under Nzinga)
Vietnam (under Trung Trac)
Hittites (please please please have Hittites...)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Possible other options:
Timmies
Nepal
Native Americans (Comanche or Cherokee preferably for me)
Khmer
And if they have any other Europeans, or god forbid Canada or Israel, Imma be fairly irritated. Already bad enough we have the Celts and the Huns...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kongo (under Nzinga)
Vietnam (under Trung Trac)
Hittites (please please please have Hittites...)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Possible other options:
Timmies
Nepal
Native Americans (Comanche or Cherokee preferably for me)
Khmer
And if they have any other Europeans, or god forbid Canada or Israel, Imma be fairly irritated. Already bad enough we have the Celts and the Huns...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
SolInvictus
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2013
- Messages
- 183
The elder Trung sister, Trung Trac, can be sort of considered the more important of the two - she was the one who decided to lead the rebellion against the Chinese in the first place, and the younger sister, Trung Nhi, sort of just followed along; and Trung Trac is, well, the older one anyways. Similarly to how Justinian or Theodora are chosen instead of both, I can see Trung Trac being chosen instead of both Trung sisters. That said, this thread is just for wishful thinking anyways, so having a two-headed leaderhead would be nice.
Well, again, this is just wishful thinking of course, which is the point of the thread. However, the Mississipians had several urban centers, of which Cahokia was the first; additionally, having a Mississippi blob is still in my opinion more sensible than the Polynesia aglamation of cultures that's already present in Civ4. Lastly, while we could debate whether they are distinctive or "deserving" (which would be somewhat pointless in this thread since this thread's for wishful thinking in my opinion), the north american native groups have a bit more clout in North America where a large amount of the sales are and would be more easily marketable for the devs.
I'm not really a big fan of blob or agglomeration civs. I know its a very long shot, but I think the Caddo would be good representatives of the Mississippian culture. They survived late, their are projects to preserve the Caddoan languages so a voice actor would be available, the Hasinai capital Nacogdoches already made an appearance in Civ 4 on the Native America city list. Their are several choices for leaders. It's just wishful thinking, but a Caddo civ would be awesome!
I'm very curious.
Why everyone seems to like the idea of a venetian civilization more than the idea of an italian civilization?
I mean, it would be like having a prussian civilization instead of a german one, or a catalan civilization instead of a spanish one.
Italy would be like Venice, but with more!
Mine is just curiosity, is it only because of the city states that should be changed?
I would love to see Venice as a civ in the game (I have kind of a venetian heritage myself
PS: I'm sorry if what I wrote makes no sense in english, I'm struggling with conditional mood XP
For me (Florence) it's that I want Renaissance Italian City States represented, not necessarily the modern state of Italy... which I see as completely different cultures and entities. Florence is largely considered the birthplace of the Renaissance, so that's why I say Florence rather than Venice.
The difference is these were different entities led by different centers of power driven by different cultures. They're just not the same. I am at least consistent on this point though (this thread is about what we each WANT, not what we think will happen): I'd LIKE to see the Celts broken apart into Celts and have a separate Scottish civ added. I see them as a different and unique culture with only similarities and some shared origin (but not a complete shared origin either)... cousins if you will.
Martinus
Emperor
Voted Portugal, Israel, Italy, Phoenicia, the Khmer, and Vietnam.
But I really want to stress the case for Phoenicia and Israel. Despite being small, they had an immense influence on the world's civilization - Phoenicians invented money and Israel is the birthplace of two major religion groups. It is a bit of a sad joke that none of them has made it to any iteration of Civilization so far.
But I really want to stress the case for Phoenicia and Israel. Despite being small, they had an immense influence on the world's civilization - Phoenicians invented money and Israel is the birthplace of two major religion groups. It is a bit of a sad joke that none of them has made it to any iteration of Civilization so far.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
