19 Civilizations, lets vote!

[Craterus22]

Apologies to the other thread - thought I would add a poll that would allow people to pick multiple choices.

Chinese, English, French, Germany, Greeks, Japan, Rome, Russia were left out of the poll (only as a result of the limitation of the polling mechanism) as they are most likely (IMHO) to be supported by most civ players.

You can vote for as many civs as you want... but you might want to only select 11 choices to represent the total of 19 civs (11 choices plus the 8 listed above)

 

[Craterus22]

My original plan was to list all the currently supported civs plus those others from various mods (RAR and Rhys to start).

Unfortunately, polls are limited to a selection of 20 choices, I tried to include as many from the currently supported civs as possible. I have removed from the list those civs that seem to be no brainers: Chinese, English, French, Germany, Greeks, Japan, Rome, Russia. I left America in - only to see how it would perform in a poll like this - since it has a history of being a debated topic here.

To the Administrators: Is there anyway to have a 50 selection poll made with all the civs from civ3 plus expansions (along with a selection of other popular non supported civs)?

I would be glad to make the poll - but current forum limits prevented me...

 

[Louis XXIV]

Americans, Babylonians, Egyptians, Indians, Iroquois, Persians, Arabs, Carthaginians, Spanish

I probably should have clicked on the Ottomans. Another choice would have been Korea.

 

[Lockesdonkey]

Who didn't vote for the Egyptians?

 

[Commander Bello]

Who didn't vote for the Egyptians?

Me - due to mis-clicking

 

[Lockesdonkey]

Okay, phew. Then it's unanimous.

 

[Dachs]

Not anymore. Somebody else decided Egypt was bad. (must hunt down and kill)

 

[Craterus22]

Thanks to everyone for voting and commenting.

As I was looking through the list to find obvious civs to replace (due to poll limit limitations)... I missed Egypt - which would have been replaced by one of the other expansion civs.

Its nice to see that Egypt is holding up and I feel that it is safe to assume that any non-unaminous vote is a voting error (unless there is a comment posted to this thread).

Sincerely,

Craterus - Former Elections Minister of ****

**** = Country blocked out. Feel free to substitute any country that has an election process that outrages you - just don't post it here (otherwise it would be considered off topic)

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Personally, I am disappointed that they are going in the direction it sounds like they are going. Namely, a predefined number of playable vs. non-playable civs (at least, I THINK thats what they mean).
What I wanted to see was for ALL civs-both 'major' and 'minor'-being selectable by players at the start of the game, based on culture group.
For instance, lets say that you decide to play a civ from the Western European culture group-in the list you would have all the well-known civs, such as England, France and Germany, but then you would a host of minor civs, like Macedonia, Portugal, Switzerland and the like. Then, after you have chosen the civ YOU want to play, the 'minor civs' who formed the old 'goody huts' and barbarian tribes (or Minor Nations, as I hope they will have) would be selected from any nations NOT picked by players from that culture group. That way, you could have one game with the Polish up against the Swiss and the Danes, with Germany and France being just a couple of minor powers of no more than 3 cities each !
As I said, though, it doesn't SEEM like they are taking this approach, which is unfortunate.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[MeteorPunch]

Let's have some type of bracket voting. If you made 4 separate polls, you could have 80 contenders ...this way any possible civ could be voted for. The winners then obviously move to the next bracket.

We could start by a thread in which people name every civ they would *seriously* like to see in the game, then make the poll from those results.

 

[Craterus22]

Aussie - if only you were on the design team... lets hope for the best.

Meteor - good idea... my thinking though is that a more representative vote of what people ACTUALLY would put together would be done by one poll. If an exception can not be made with the polling - it might be something to pursue.

The real SAD thing is though - the civs are probably already chosen. Its fun to talk about, but maybe we can have some influence. Hopefully the game is coming together and they are makin progress.

 

[Idylwyld]

Why not include the Jews? Judaism is a historically important non-state nation and distinct culture in and of itself. Don't overlook them just because the modern state of Israel is small and new. While we're at it how about the Basque? Quite distinct from their Spanish and French neighbors. Just because a culture has no country doesn't mean they aren't a distinct and mature civilization.

I can come up with more, and will if necessary to make my point. Sandbox custom CIV's! I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. The only reason for premade civs is for the AI to use, and for casual (i.e. lazy) players.

 

[sir_schwick]

I can come up with more, and will if necessary to make my point. Sandbox custom CIV's! I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. The only reason for premade civs is for the AI to use, and for casual (i.e. lazy) players.

Whats even worse is the fact there is an elegant solution for both those groups; templates. A computer does not think Egypt is Agricultural and Comercial(?) because it knows something about Egypt, a file told it that. The War Chariot is just a 2/2/1 unit that is in the same tech spot as the Chariot, but only avaliable to civ.name=Egypt . How about we drop the pretention and allow players to chose the trait/UU combo(pre-defined for balance) and the civ they want. They could use an Egypt template, but play as China.

Why not include the Jews? Judaism is a historically important non-state nation and distinct culture in and of itself. Don't overlook them just because the modern state of Israel is small and new. While we're at it how about the Basque? Quite distinct from their Spanish and French neighbors. Just because a culture has no country doesn't mean they aren't a distinct and mature civilization.

Lets also not forget the Kurds and the Slavs(Slovakia I know, but still have not seen a true Slovik civ). What about the Tibetans, or the Songhay(big empire)?

 

[QuoVadisNation]

Why not include the Jews? Judaism is a historically important non-state nation and distinct culture in and of itself. Don't overlook them just because the modern state of Israel is small and new. While we're at it how about the Basque? Quite distinct from their Spanish and French neighbors. Just because a culture has no country doesn't mean they aren't a distinct and mature civilization.

I can come up with more, and will if necessary to make my point. Sandbox custom CIV's! I've said it before and I'll keep saying it. The only reason for premade civs is for the AI to use, and for casual (i.e. lazy) players.

I hate to say this, but History tends to portray Ancient Israel in a very.. unimpressive light as opposed to the Romans or Greeks. It, in fact, ends up bordering on the line of being offensive towards those who really love the history they’ve both been taught and grown up with.

And because of which, I don't see how Israel should become a civilization unless they openly slanted the historical information to focus just on its religion.

 

[Idylwyld]

Why not make UU's dependent on certain traits or trait combos. Some traits are more defensive/passive in nature, other more offensive/aggressive. Set up the UU's to generally match those combos. An expansionist, militaristic UU would be strong offensively and fast. An agricultural, religious UU would be very strong defensively. Obviously Seafaring allows ship UU's. Industrious civ's could have a UU with worker abilities. This sound like a good idea to anybody else?

 

[Synthshadow]

Who thought to include America and not England as a priority? Yes I do realise that America is the "bigger market" but whose language did they adopt amongst other things? PLEASE PEOPLE!

 

[dh_epic]

Synthshadow, England is one of the civilizations that the author took for granted. (Which, I think, is quite reasonable. I'm sure you'll agree.)

The 8 Civs that "must" be in, according to the author:

Chinese, English, French, Germany, Greeks, Japan, Rome, Russia

(Emphasis mine.)

 

[Idylwyld]

I hate to say this, but History tends to portray Ancient Israel in a very.. unimpressive light as opposed to the Romans or Greeks. It, in fact, ends up bordering on the line of being offensive towards those who really love the history they’ve both been taught and grown up with.

And because of which, I don't see how Israel should become a civilization unless they openly slanted the historical information to focus just on its religion.

That's because the Romans won. But here, 2000 years later there's a synagogue down the street and I don't see a Temple of Zeus anywhere in town. Just because Judaism doesn't have the exalted history of Rome or Greece doesn't mean that it's history hasn't had an effect on the world. Remember, without the Jews in Europe during the middle ages modern banking may never have developed (the Jews weren't bound by the christian prohibitions on usury at the time). Plus, they've been one of history's most stable, longest lived cultural units. Also, there's a lot more to the Jews than the religion. The religion has just been the container that kept everything together.

 

[Idylwyld]

My previous post was mostly a digression. I don't care what Civs are included out of the box as long as the ability to "roll your own" is available in the basic game setup. Make whatever civ you choose to play out of the "tinkertoys" of traits and UU's that are available. I, personally, would play with the Iowans, an industrious, scientific civ with the Bachelor Farmer UU (high defense w/ worker abilities).

 

[Dachs]

(...) Remember, without the Jews in Europe during the middle ages modern banking may never have developed (the Jews weren't bound by the christian prohibitions on usury at the time). (...)

Not taking away from Jewish accomplishments, the Knights Templar were the ones who established banks in every city, and they weren't really Christian or Jewish.