We need the Canadians as a new Civ!

[travlake]

They should get their second trait when they break off.

As it currently stands, before they break off they are lead by the "motherland's" leader and so have no separate traits.

After they break off, my original idea was that they only have the "colonist" trait in order to make them identifiably different and bit weaker than their parents.

But I changed my mind. As it stands now colonies always suck and, at least in my games, never do anything interesting. So maybe they should have stronger traits to make up for what will likely be underdeveloped land.

All colony civs have two traits:
1) Colonist
+50% production of settlers and workers
+50% overseas trade route yield

and 2) Randomly chosen from their parent civ.

I.e. a colony spawned from the inca will be randomly selected from the colony civ list, which will determine the UU and UB, and will have traits colonist + (indu 1/2 of time fin 1/2 of time).

Cool because they will have be similar to, but different from, their parents.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I like the "Colony," Idea, but the US definitely needs to be a Civ outright. I am not biased because I live there. Has anybody since Rome had the kind of impact on THE WORLD as America. I think not. America has many achievements and world effect:

First Nation to Successfully break off from its European Civ.

Defeated the Axis, twice.

Defeated Communist Russia in the Cold War.

exc. exc. exc.

America has to be a Civ.

Also, "Years in existence is not set in stone. 40 years now is more than 40 years in Roman times. In fact, Gunpowder was invented 500 years ago. 5,500 years before that, since the dawn of time, we couldn't get there. Where are we now?

Very, very far in tech. Rome wasn't around too long comparatively, but Rome deserves to be in the game, As does America.

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

Domination, this is the Canada thread. And common sense dictates that the U.S. will be there. Why would they get rid of it?


Getting this topic back on topic...

I don't think their second trait should be from their parent civ. I think it should matter on what AI they are stuck with. Since the colony leaders would have to be specialized stock, their AI would be determined by their leader, or, for interesting situations, their AI would be randomized from the stock. For example, an Aggressive Colonist (Oxymoron!) or an Imperialistic Colonist (The colonist wants to control a sub-colony?) would be possible with whatever leaderhead they got.

 

[travlake]

Domination, this is the Canada thread. And common sense dictates that the U.S. will be there. Why would they get rid of it?


Getting this topic back on topic...

I don't think their second trait should be from their parent civ. I think it should matter on what AI they are stuck with. Since the colony leaders would have to be specialized stock, their AI would be determined by their leader, or, for interesting situations, their AI would be randomized from the stock. For example, an Aggressive Colonist (Oxymoron!) or an Imperialistic Colonist (The colonist wants to control a sub-colony?) would be possible with whatever leaderhead they got.

Not to keep bringing this back to the US, but many people would say the US is both imperialistic and aggressive.

In the game these traits could manifest as a desire to break free from the parent nation asap.

Anyway you make a good point, which is that the ai for colonists would have to be adaptive to the trait they receive, which is wayy too complicated.

So that leaves us with each colony civ has two traits
1) colonist
2) other selected from the normal pool

 

[GhostWriter16]

What if when you spawn a colony it doesn't pull from the same pool of leaders the game starts with, but instead from a smaller pool of "colony only civs," each with their own UU, and UB but with only one trait:

Colonist
+50% production of settlers and workers
+50% overseas trade route yield

Pool of "colony" civs:
America
Canada
Australia
Brazil
Argentina
Indonesia

This is the post I refer to. I like this idea, however I feel the United States should be a Civ because of their massive historical effect.

 

[travlake]

This is the post I refer to. I like this idea, however I feel the United States should be a Civ because of their massive historical effect.

I'm fine with that, and obviously there is no way a civ game will ever be released without america as a civ, they are on the "must have" list with rome egypt etc.

That list was a starting point of "famous former-colonies-turned-independent." Some may fit better as non-colonial civs. Perhaps colonial america could exist in addition to a normal-civ america?

I just like the idea of spawning a colony but dreading it will turn out to be US because they'll do everything they can to grow enough and break free asap, and even ally with my neighbors if I try to fight their independence.

 

[GuessWho]

Wasn't Britain a colony of Rome?

Not Scotland

Therefore there should be a Scotland nation OR a British Nation which is far more sensible than just having England.

 

[GuessWho]

Defeated the Axis, twice.

On It's own I think not

 

[Jarlaxe Baenre]

I like the "Colony," Idea, but the US definitely needs to be a Civ outright. I am not biased because I live there. Has anybody since Rome had the kind of impact on THE WORLD as America. I think not. America has many achievements and world effect:

First Nation to Successfully break off from its European Civ.

Defeated the Axis, twice.

Defeated Communist Russia in the Cold War.

exc. exc. exc.

America has to be a Civ.

Also, "Years in existence is not set in stone. 40 years now is more than 40 years in Roman times. In fact, Gunpowder was invented 500 years ago. 5,500 years before that, since the dawn of time, we couldn't get there. Where are we now?

Very, very far in tech. Rome wasn't around too long comparatively, but Rome deserves to be in the game, As does America.

And another rant...

1: So what?

2: America did not contribute all of the effort that went towards those. That's like a really strong guy and a really weak guy teaming up against another guy, the really strong guy beats the other guy up, and then the really weak guy claims that he defeated that defeated guy. Ok, maybe the U.S. was not the 'really weak guy' but they were not the only player in those wars.

3: They didn't defeat Russia. The Cold War is hardly even a war! It was just a massive grudge!

4: exc?

 

[civ_king]

I like the "Colony," Idea, but the US definitely needs to be a Civ outright. I am not biased because I live there. Has anybody since Rome had the kind of impact on THE WORLD as America. I think not. America has many achievements and world effect:

First Nation to Successfully break off from its European Civ.

Defeated the Axis, twice.

Defeated Communist Russia in the Cold War.

exc. exc. exc.

America has to be a Civ.

Also, "Years in existence is not set in stone. 40 years now is more than 40 years in Roman times. In fact, Gunpowder was invented 500 years ago. 5,500 years before that, since the dawn of time, we couldn't get there. Where are we now?

Very, very far in tech. Rome wasn't around too long comparatively, but Rome deserves to be in the game, As does America.

1) so? not very special to break off first
2) twice? WWI winding down when America joined, and the USSR did 4 times as much as the US in WWII
3) Communist Russia? you mean the USSR or the Soviet Union? it collapsed from oil prices, not Reagan (who propped it up) or who ever you think killed it
4) it is etc!
5) Gunpowder was closer to 1,000 years ago
6) you underestimate the effects of Rome

 

[President]

1) so? not very special to break off first
2) twice? WWI winding down when America joined, and the USSR did 4 times as much as the US in WWII
3) Communist Russia? you mean the USSR or the Soviet Union? it collapsed from oil prices, not Reagan (who propped it up) or who ever you think killed it
4) it is etc!
5) Gunpowder was closer to 1,000 years ago
6) you underestimate the effects of Rome

Well, no. You can't just narrowly focus on the economy of the Soviet Union. (The United States may or may not have deliberately destroyed the Soviet economy through the international market. There are arguments for both sides on this.) There are also politics to consider as well. Another big reason that the Soviet Union fell was because of Gorbachev, who was aided and supported by President Reagan of the United States. Gorbachev couldn't maintain Soviet imperialism. The Warsaw Pact, with Hungary, Poland, East Germany, etc. fell apart. That broke the USSR's backbone. The reason that it could stand up against the United States was exactly because of the Iron Curtain. The two forces were evenly matched. The Cold War wasn't about military battles. It was about dangerous competition in the world -- it would be won by which country had the most influence on the world. It was a battle of ideologies -- of whether Capitalism or Communism would have more influence in the world.

And, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see the USSR anymore today. I do, however, see the United States, and all its imperialism, but that's another story. The point is that, no matter how you look at it, the US absolutely won the Cold War, whether or not they directly caused the fall of the USSR, because they didn't have to do so to win. It was a survivalist war, and the US survived a war that could have potentially ended all mankind, if you look at the Cuban Missile Crisis. In all honesty, no one can say that the US hasn't left its mark on history.

 

[Thormodr]

This seems to be straying off topic.

America deserves to be in ciV.

Why argue it here?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think Canada would be great addition to an expansion pack.

Do it for your mother country Sid Meir.

 

[LysartheRift]

In civ 4 we had a lost of WW2 leaders, so maybe Prime Minister W.L. Mackenzie would be a viable leader, or the guy that founded Quebec and basically the rest of canada from that. I apologize that i forgot his name.

 

[battlepancho]

The USA being a civ choice was felt to be rather favorism because the creators were american but USA does merit a civ choice status, just barely. Though it didn't have an effect on the world as per say the british empire did for hundreds of years but noticeably within the past 200 years it has marked its place with technology, participation in political affairs and trade(stock market, merchandise..). Though these attributes could generally be applied to any civilization they have really taken its spotlight in the past 200 years. That and the creators probably didn't need to do research to choose who would be the UU, leader and UB, the civ was created in good ol American fashion lazyness. lol.

Im a Canadian and would love to be able to play Canada but personally using an educated answer and not one from the heart I would say Canada isn't suited for it...yet...(socialism is the only way, you will all assimilate lol). The reason we are not exactly suitable is because our history doesnt exactly gander up as one of a great civilizations like Rome or the Egyptians. we've done our duty in battle, we've had our part in social political reforms, we invented a few breakthrough technologies but nothing as serious as a "the world will never be the same" effect. You could always make a download able add-on that people can zip into there folder. If we did have it as a civ choice this would be my leader UU,UB choice

Pierre Elliot Trudeau, charismatic, organised

UU, RCMP (these mofos play a huge part in maintaining order and justice in our country), everything same as calvary but +1 to city and 25% or something to deter spies. basically a police unit...its the RCMP!
other UU unit, Infantry, can move 2 tiles, WW1 and WW2 our infantry were reknown to make ridiculous treks and marches into and right through enemy lines that were 100kms away. if move 2tiles is a bit absurd how about an advantage over fighting other infantry units 25% ontop of 25% gunpowder unit, it be like the German landskneght but for Canada.

UB, Lumbermills have +1hammer and +1, as alot of you make fun of us for Canada is full of trees and wilderness, we've had alot of timber barons come here in the 17-18-19th centure for our lumber and it certainly has transformed our country. Our capital, Ottawa was primarily an important location due to its rivers which transported the logs to the st-Lawrence river. I feel this +1hammer would be realistic.
the +1 is due that we all enjoy very much the outdoors, our land is our backyard and we have a ton of outdoory stuff, especially ice pond hockey like me. As well Canadians are environmental, so just like what is already in civ, having a forest near a city is a +1.

 

[fromeast2west]

I just can't see Canada being in the game, on almost any level. (and I was born there).

If you're going to do it you should at least embrace the selfdeprecating humor that is such a part of the Culture.

Leader: Bob and Doug McKenzie
UU: Seal Clubbers. Attack/Defend like warriors, but provide 1 food and 1 fur
UB: Beer Brewery. Increases happiness, decreases science
Ability; can convert barbarian cities with by spending money or food
cities have a 10% chance of defecting to France.

 

[GhostWriter16]

[QUOTE(socialism is the only way, you will all assimilate lol).[/QUOTE]

Umm....., USSR ring a bell?

 

[MrHan]

mm. I haven't read too much into it but the Colony Civ idea sounds good to me. Maybe we'll get overseas territories breaking off to become their own things. Adding to that, maybe overseas conquered territories could fight for independence, get some good Imperialism & its effects in the game. Would love to have this in an expansion, if not vanilla.


Going back to the OP though..
Dear OP poster: I sincerely hope you were not serious about suggesting Canada.
Please, for the sake of common decency, no more suggestions for Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or anything else so ridiculous like that. They are THE worst choices to be included in Civ, vanilla or otherwise. Wait for a mod or make your own.

 

[Thormodr]

The USA being a civ choice was felt to be rather favorism because the creators were american but USA does merit a civ choice status, just barely. Though it didn't have an effect on the world as per say the british empire did for hundreds of years but noticeably within the past 200 years it has marked its place with technology, participation in political affairs and trade(stock market, merchandise..). Though these attributes could generally be applied to any civilization they have really taken its spotlight in the past 200 years. That and the creators probably didn't need to do research to choose who would be the UU, leader and UB, the civ was created in good ol American fashion lazyness. lol.

Im a Canadian and would love to be able to play Canada but personally using an educated answer and not one from the heart I would say Canada isn't suited for it...yet...(socialism is the only way, you will all assimilate lol). The reason we are not exactly suitable is because our history doesnt exactly gander up as one of a great civilizations like Rome or the Egyptians. we've done our duty in battle, we've had our part in social political reforms, we invented a few breakthrough technologies but nothing as serious as a "the world will never be the same" effect. You could always make a download able add-on that people can zip into there folder. If we did have it as a civ choice this would be my leader UU,UB choice

Pierre Elliot Trudeau, charismatic, organised

UU, RCMP (these mofos play a huge part in maintaining order and justice in our country), everything same as calvary but +1 to city and 25% or something to deter spies. basically a police unit...its the RCMP!
other UU unit, Infantry, can move 2 tiles, WW1 and WW2 our infantry were reknown to make ridiculous treks and marches into and right through enemy lines that were 100kms away. if move 2tiles is a bit absurd how about an advantage over fighting other infantry units 25% ontop of 25% gunpowder unit, it be like the German landskneght but for Canada.

UB, Lumbermills have +1hammer and +1, as alot of you make fun of us for Canada is full of trees and wilderness, we've had alot of timber barons come here in the 17-18-19th centure for our lumber and it certainly has transformed our country. Our capital, Ottawa was primarily an important location due to its rivers which transported the logs to the st-Lawrence river. I feel this +1hammer would be realistic.
the +1 is due that we all enjoy very much the outdoors, our land is our backyard and we have a ton of outdoory stuff, especially ice pond hockey like me. As well Canadians are environmental, so just like what is already in civ, having a forest near a city is a +1.

Why the American bashing? It seems fashionable amongst Canadians unfortunately. I am Canadian but I am 1/4 American. America unquestionably deserves to be a Civ.

As far as the creators of Civ, Sid Meir is Canadian as I have mentioned several times in this thread. Sid Meir is the real brainchild of Civ so it hardly could be considered favouritism.

 

[Thormodr]

mm. I haven't read too much into it but the Colony Civ idea sounds good to me. Maybe we'll get overseas territories breaking off to become their own things. Adding to that, maybe overseas conquered territories could fight for independence, get some good Imperialism & its effects in the game. Would love to have this in an expansion, if not vanilla.


Going back to the OP though..
Dear OP poster: I sincerely hope you were not serious about suggesting Canada.
Please, for the sake of common decency, no more suggestions for Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or anything else so ridiculous like that. They are THE worst choices to be included in Civ, vanilla or otherwise. Wait for a mod or make your own.

I don't think Canada should be in the Vanilla version either but it might possibly be a candidate to be in an expansion. I somewhat doubt it however. Calling it the worst choice or ridiculous however is pretty rude if you ask me. Saying that including Canada would be against common decency is also pretty insensitive.

Judging by your avatar, signature and name I am going to guess that you are either Korean or of Korean heritage. I certainly wouldn't say the same things about your nation of origin and would have a lot more tact.

 

[Aesus]

oh, and canada's never really done anything significant enough for a place in the game, at least not as a sovereign nation.

Hate to break it to ya, but Canada was extremely vital in both world wars. Canadian soldiers in WWI were known internationally as highly skilled "storm troopers", the Royal Canadian Navy was the Atlantic Navy for the entire first half of WWII. Modern urban-style warfare was perfected by Canadians in Italy during WWII. The Canadian Armed Forces are known as some of the best peacekeeping forces in the world.These are just focusing on warfare, but there are many technological and humanitarian projects that are essencially Canadian. And yes, all above things occured AFTER Confederation.

This does not mean I agree with Canada in Vanilla, there are far better candidates, however the above statement is terribly mistaken.