DLCs

[Lord Yanaek]

...I think the DLCs are just map packs (no Civs, no scenarios, no nothing interesting). Dull, but probably true. My hunch is that the "Continents" one will be some more generic map scripts, while the "Nations" one will likely be some actual semi-accurate maps of specific regions.

Well, if they finally manage to release a very good map script that can create maps with mountain ranges (and not lones peaks scattered all over the map), nice islands that won't all be taken by CS (as in Pangea/Continents plus), good ressources distribution (some balance on strategics placement should be default and not require some half working option), realistic rivers (i mean rivers that won't start 2 tiles away from sea and then flow 15 tiles to end up in some 2 tiles lake ), no ice-locked ocean (where some civs will never be able to explore the world seas even with coastal start), i wouldn't mind buying a DLC for just that maps script alone

 

[EricTheGreat12]

Canada is already in the game. They are called England who actually had an empire consisting of, well Canada.

IMO, people like you don't know what they're saying: the US was made first made from british immigrants and then native americian tribes. It doesn't matter if the US is more important diplomaticaly than Canada, we're still a different nation. TBH, they said that they put in Brazil because there was a lot of fan support for them. So if my theory is correct, our support for Australia and Canada will make them a DLC

 

[Deggial]

The thing is named 'map pack'. How on earth do you people come to the conclusion, that anything else than exactly some new maps (hopefully: map scripts) will be the content of this DLC?

Yes, peronally I would like to see some more civs, too. Why not? But not in the upcomming DLC. To belive otherwise means fooling yourself...

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

IMO, people like you don't know what they're saying: the US was made first made from british immigrants and then native americian tribes. It doesn't matter if the US is more important diplomaticaly than Canada, we're still a different nation. TBH, they said that they put in Brazil because there was a lot of fan support for them. So if my theory is correct, our support for Australia and Canada will make them a DLC

Hey, it was just a bit of tongue in cheek. It would just be strange to play a game as Australia or Canada then encounter the queen of England, who would also be Queen of Canada and Australia. But the same goes for Brazil and Portugal and even do the Brazilian empire had it´s own king it was still part of Portugals royal house, so I believe anyway. Not 100% sure about that one.

And to be honest, neither of those nations seem to have anything that stands out that would make them a fun to play civ. Just lack of history, independence and role in the world affairs.
That America is a civ is pretty obvious since even do they started out similar they fought England and won their independence, they have had a big impact on the global affairs for the past 150+ years and they are currently one of few empires that exist today (even do most americans wont admit it).

 

[Mudrac]

IMO, people like you don't know what they're saying: the US was made first made from british immigrants and then native americian tribes. It doesn't matter if the US is more important diplomaticaly than Canada, we're still a different nation. TBH, they said that they put in Brazil because there was a lot of fan support for them. So if my theory is correct, our support for Australia and Canada will make them a DLC

Canada was called "Province of Canada" until 1867 when it became a "Dominion". Even then it was still a semi-independent nation, it would became full independent by the WWII. Countries that became independent in 20th century are a bad choice for civ game. Those that became independent in the 19th century are relatively "ok" and can make it into a civ game. 200 years of history isn't much, but it's better than a history of less a century. Brazil made it into the game because the country at least has some history through the 19th century. That's why since we are running out of civ ideas, I wold rather take countries that at least existed in the 19th century. That's why Mexico is a better choice, as for Australia I would rather go for Aborigines.
And of course I don't deny the influence of Canada today. It is a very strong nation and a very organized one. Many people from my country want to go there, especially because of the high salaries and standard of living.

 

[uncle bulgaria]

IMO Canada or Australia are both great picks for new civs. Not because they're historical empires but because it's conceivable that they could have been, just like Brazil.

How about native Australian Aborigines as a new Civ? Could give them all sorts of desert boosts?

 

[EricTheGreat12]

Canada

Canada was founded by France but then conquered by UK short after. During Britain's influence over Canada, Canada had little influence in world affairs (except for the war of 1812 but that was between Canada, USA, Britain and France only). When World War I came, it was forced to join the Allies because it was part of the British Commonwealth. During the war, Canadian soldiers played many battles that, tbh, changed the course of the war and they were probably some of the best soldiers of the war. Unfortunately, the country didn't have a lot of influence for the Versailles Treaty, but until 1939 we didn't continue in world affairs. When World War II started, Canada joined a few days after the UK and France and sent an army to Britain. They then participated in Siciliy, and made a big effort in D-Day landings and we invaded and conquered the Netherlands (which is why we have the tulips ) They had the 3rd biggest fleet and I think they had the 5th biggest airforce (I'm probably wrong) Ever since then, Canada has been in many diplomatic groups and agreements and has tried to make piece between wars.

This is why it deserves to be in a next new civ game or DLC

Mexico
Small country that revolutioned against the Spanish, they fought against the US and since then, it has been a center of drug cartels and it may be beautifull in some regions, it's one of the most corrupt governments I've ever heard of. Not an interesting history overall.

Doesn't deserve a spot

Australia
Gaining full independance from the UK after World War II, it made its citizens proud in both World Wars and its peace efforts.

This really deserves a spot (natives of the region would be thine)

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

Perhaps a game that focus on WW1 and WW2 would suit the good sir better.

 

[Mudrac]

Canada

Canada was founded by France but then conquered by UK short after. During Britain's influence over Canada, Canada had little influence in world affairs (except for the war of 1812 but that was between Canada, USA, Britain and France only). When World War I came, it was forced to join the Allies because it was part of the British Commonwealth. During the war, Canadian soldiers played many battles that, tbh, changed the course of the war and they were probably some of the best soldiers of the war. Unfortunately, the country didn't have a lot of influence for the Versailles Treaty, but until 1939 we didn't continue in world affairs. When World War II started, Canada joined a few days after the UK and France and sent an army to Britain. They then participated in Siciliy, and made a big effort in D-Day landings and we invaded and conquered the Netherlands (which is why we have the tulips ) They had the 3rd biggest fleet and I think they had the 5th biggest airforce (I'm probably wrong) Ever since then, Canada has been in many diplomatic groups and agreements and has tried to make piece between wars.

This is why it deserves to be in a next new civ game or DLC

Mexico
Small country that revolutioned against the Spanish, they fought against the US and since then, it has been a center of drug cartels and it may be beautifull in some regions, it's one of the most corrupt governments I've ever heard of. Not an interesting history overall.

Doesn't deserve a spot

Australia
Gaining full independance from the UK after World War II, it made its citizens proud in both World Wars and its peace efforts.

This really deserves a spot (natives of the region would be thine)

Brazil
This civ was mainly put in because of its very strong fan support. I'm not a historian about South American history, so with all I know about Brazil, it shouldn't have been added

Don't make me start mentioning what Serbia did during the Middle Ages the 19th century and especially during WWI, it would make both Canada and Australia very small. But for the sake of Moderators and since we are not here to discuss which country is better, but to talk about which civs we would like to see, I will stay silent.

 

[EricTheGreat12]

Perhaps a game that focus on WW1 and WW2 would suit the good sir better.

On a CIV 5 engine, it would actually be pretty cool. I know that there is many mods and scenarios on it but I have a MAC App Store version so I don't think that I can do it.

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

How about native Australian Aborigines as a new Civ? Could give them all sorts of desert boosts?

What did they invent or contribute with? The boomerang and what else? Feels like a fairly weak civ.

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

On a CIV 5 engine, it would actually be pretty cool. I know that there is many mods and scenarios on it but I have a MAC App Store version so I don't think that I can do it.

I have a mac as well but bought Civ trough Steam but there is such a pain to get the mods work when on a mac. And since I am on a laptop with a intel graphic card that is not supported, I dont dear mixing with the game to much.

But I recommend the R.E.D mod that focus on the WW2. Looks awesome on youtube anyway.

 

[JanghanHong]

What did they invent or contribute with? The boomerang and what else? Feels like a fairly weak civ.

Not only that, but they never founded cities, or semi-permanent settlements.

The most backward tribes in bunghole, Nowhere, North America was still more advanced than the Aborigines.

 

[Monado]

Brazil
I'm not a historian about South American history, so with all I know about Brazil, it shouldn't have been added

I can't stop laughing after reading this.

 

[isau]

Based on stats from 2008, Canada was the second largest country in the world by land area. The country covered an approximate area of 9,976,140 sq. miles. India, the seventh largest by area, only covered about 3,287,590 sq. miles. Canada is the definition of a wide peaceful(ish) empire.

Interesting fact: the top seven countries by land area in the Information era, Russia, Canada, USA, China, Brazil, Australia, and India combined take up slightly more than 50% of all nationalized land in the world on their own. 5 of these 7 are already represented in Civ.

 

[bonafide11]

The thing is named 'map pack'. How on earth do you people come to the conclusion, that anything else than exactly some new maps (hopefully: map scripts) will be the content of this DLC?

Yes, peronally I would like to see some more civs, too. Why not? But not in the upcomming DLC. To belive otherwise means fooling yourself...

Exactly. Why has this thread turned into a debate over Canada and Australia when it's very clear from the title that it's a MAP PACK and not additional civs?

 

[EulerMcE]

Exactly. Why has this thread turned into a debate over Canada and Australia when it's very clear from the title that it's a MAP PACK and not additional civs?

Because wishful thinking and nobody really wants to talk about map scripts they'll never use.

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

Based on stats from 2008, Canada was the second largest country in the world by land area. The country covered an approximate area of 9,976,140 sq. miles. India, the seventh largest by area, only covered about 3,287,590 sq. miles. Canada is the definition of a wide peaceful(ish) empire.

Interesting fact: the top seven countries by land area in the Information era, Russia, Canada, USA, China, Brazil, Australia, and India combined take up slightly more than 50% of all nationalized land in the world on their own. 5 of these 7 are already represented in Civ.

Canada is not an empire and have never had an empire. They have however been part of two different empires but I dont think that qualify them. Perhaps Canada could be added as a peaceful mercantile CS?

 

[cpm4001]

Canada is not an empire and have never had an empire. They have however been part of two different empires but I dont think that qualify them. Perhaps Canada could be added as a peaceful mercantile CS?

Vancouver and Quebec City are already in the game, both as Maritime City-States. I think those fit better than Mercantiles would.

Because wishful thinking and nobody really wants to talk about map scripts they'll never use.

Yeah, regrettably, these DLCs are going to be really boring. Which sucks. But that's how things stand.

 

[bonafide11]

Because wishful thinking and nobody really wants to talk about map scripts they'll never use.

With how bored I am of the current maps, some new interesting maps could bring more excitement to the game for me than releasing two unworthy civs that don't belong in the game. I want a map with a nice combination of islands and continents, but that don't put all the city-states on islands, and diverse terrain. A map that requires you to use both your navy and ground troops. I'm tired of maps that are just one chunk of land or two chunks of land, with a large ocean in between. Or to get islands, you have to sacrifice continents altogether and it's all islands, that's all you get.

I would much prefer some more fun maps than playing as Canada. What could they possibly make Canada's unique features to make them a fun, unique civ, eh?