TPangolin, you're implying that my decision to separate the HRE and the Papal States was either not fully thought out, or that it was for lack of a better option at the time of formulating the basic outlines of these groups. Neither of these are true. From the beginning this mod was a conscious decision to facilitate the unique mechanics always present in other euro-centric historical games (obviously this is not in the strictest sense) for these two polities (e.g. the Total War series, the EU series, CKII, even the Into the Renaissance scenario). If anything, this project is a consequence of a desire for these things, but never a true justification for them. Sure, there is a case to be had that the Papal States could go into the same group as the Latin civs, or that the HRE could go in the same as the Central Europeans. From a strictly cultural perspective, ignoring all historical and political differences and significances, that would likely be a great idea. But you're interpreting the title of this project too literally and too narrowly, I believe.
Now, the political and cultural differences of the Papal States and the HRE are vastly - vastly - different than the differences between Latin American post-colonial civs and other post-colonial civs. Until recently, the Western world revolved around the former - it is the reason for the Spanish success in the New World, the reason for the success or stagnation of art, literature and science, etc. And all that really needs to be said about the latter is that it is so vastly different that it doesn't really belong in a civ game - for that it has little to no ethnic merit that cannot be already assumed by civs such as Austria or Germany or Spain. Simply, one cannot maintain advocacy for Japan whilst not doing so for these two groups. Incidentally, the reason for Japan's - tentative - inclusion in its own group is that I feel it is both culturally and mechanically justified; not so much as for the Papal States and the HRE, but certainly more so than any other civ after them.
Leugi does bring up an excellent point, which lies in the case for America. America has had such a devastatingly effective impact - in such a short time period too - upon the world that there may be justification for them being in their own group. But because I have not conceived any functional, or mechanical, justification as of yet, I feel no need to separate them.
Perhaps it has not been so obvious, but a lot of my decisions come from an emphasis on the political culture of certain civs - this is simply a consequence of my personal interest in politics over other areas of history.
I'm just stating possible groupings for the lone civs (and in my head these ones make sense). I think that HRE could fit in with civs like Germany (which as we all know is fashioned from it's ruined and is made of of lots of states), Switzerland (which again, is a unification of states not unlike germany) and as was Prussia.
Heh, direct quote. Some lines just stick in your head after a while. But, whilst true much of Germany's territory were formerly electorates and possessions within the HRE, applying a cultural label to the HRE is simply a matter of not understanding its nature as a non-cultural entity.
I also find it a it strange that we can suggest that civs like Gran Colombia and Australia can be very similar and have them in the same grouping but as soon as I suggest otherwise - I'm looked at like a stray dog with [insert_dog_specific_disease_here].
This has a subtle matyr-like tone to it, from my interpretation. The reason your opinion that Australia and Gran Colombia, for instance, can be separated is dismissed so quickly is because you have made no contextual case for doing so. You haven't really said how these "Fronter" civs would be different to the Latin American ones. In my mind, the same effects that would be granted unto one of these groups would equally apply to the other. This mod hasn't the personal objective to validate the cultural diversity of people, it has the job to facilitate it in a way that is acceptable within the frame works of the game.
It's kinda the same way I feel between say grouping the Tupi and the Inuit together. Just doesn't feel right.
This statement indicates to me that you're having a hard time swallowing the nature of the mod, and are having difficulty in seeing past the arbitrary implications that the project's title has given it. If I was so subjective, I would want to put England in its own group too - but that has little merit mechanically, and culturally would be down to complete and utter bias. I, like Jan, also hate the idea of putting Byzantium - as well as Armenia - in the Eastern group. It just doesn't fit thematically. But, for that this is a game, I must consider mechanics above all else. I am grateful that he shares, understands and accepts this view.
I think however in terms of Anglo-Western Civs - Australia, Canada and America all have extremely vast tracks of land, historical immigration that surpasses the indigenous populations, have a high quality of life and are all tourism powerhouses.
The only two things here that translate well into game mechanics are immigration and tourism. Both of these fit as equally for Latin American civs as they do for these ones. And, as Jan pointed out, high quality of life is a subjective matter that doesn't truly have any place in this sort of video game, where population is simply unhappy for existing.
That said, all of your input is certainly welcome. But, perhaps, a little less of the "beating a dead horse" on the matter of the Papal States and the HRE is called for. I am still open to splitting Colonial civs if there is an exceptionally good case, but as yet, I haven't received one.
Phew...
(and without that heart-stopping sound that you get when you lose a wonder race, too).
In the end, it's JFD's mod, not ours, so I guess he will be doing what he wants anyway.