19 of 18 Civs now confirmed!

[mechaerik]

I don't see anything about 25 civs. Just 25 leader flavors.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

I think it's been stated pretty clearly that there will be 18 civs. That there will be 25 flavors hardly contradicts that...

 

[bonafide11]

I'm very skeptical that there will be 25 civs. Leader flavors don't equal civs. And they're not going to include all the civs right away, they want to save some for expansions.

 

[Dale]

New information alleging that there will be 25 civilizations.

That comment does not say 25 Civs. It says 25 flavours, and that flavours have replaced traits.

I hate being para-phrased.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Alright... But we still aren't sure whether there are 19 or 18 civs...

 

[Chalks]

New information alleging that there will be 25 civilizations.

Is there a thread on this info here? I had completely missed it - some of that stuff is extremely interesting (in particular the land units providing their own boats for crossing water).

 

[Agarwaen]

http://www.weplayciv.com/node/187

There are currently 25 leader flavours.
+
Because of the resources and time to make one leader, only one leader per Civ.
= 25 Civs

 

[Thormodr]

It is likely that they have 25 flavours laid out but that they won't use all of them until the expansions. Still, I think it would be a nice surprise to have 25 Civs in the vanilla version.

 

[EMT]

If there are indeed 25 civs, and Persia and Siam are included, I want the remaining 6 to be Spain, Viking, Babylon, Maya, Sumeria, and Ethiopia.

You and I would get along just fine IMO I support that entirely, except maybe Sumer for a expansion. But Sumer in vanilla would be fine by me. The only other civ that I'd consider replacing Sumer for are Hungary, Austria, or Zulu. Wait, no. Still liking Sumer better. I want to see SARGON DAMMIT.

 

[Chalks]

http://www.weplayciv.com/node/187

There are currently 25 leader flavours.
+
Because of the resources and time to make one leader, only one leader per Civ.
= 25 Civs

Leader flavours != leaders.

The idea being that a single leader may act in more than one way (flavour) - in the same way that there were multiple leaders per civ in the previous game. Flavours replace the concept of multiple leaders.

I'm sure 18 civs is confirmed somewhere in stone... but I have no idea where.

 

[kivanc]

I'm now highly doubtful of Inca being in, and seeing Siam as more confirmed. One article mentioned raising the dead Aztec language for Montezuma. They mention Civ and Leader by name. The other article just used the language name.

i am not sure about inca neither but i'm even more highly doubtful of Siam being in. it should be a mistake of the magazine just as cyberxhan mentioned or it could just be a joke.

i believe there should be a solid reason why it has been confirmed 16/17 civs of civ4. it seems they just want gamers to wonder much about it. if u make people wonderso much, you should not disappoint them in the end. so the last civs to be confirmed has to be one of the pop civs like Spain, Persia, Vikings.
I wouldn't be surprised and/or disappointed to see Celts neither. Anyway, we will get dutch, portugal and rest in EP sure but siam in 18 should be a mistake or a joke.

 

[Thormodr]

i am not sure about inca neither but i'm even more highly doubtful of Siam being in. it should be a mistake of the magazine just as cyberxhan mentioned or it could just be a joke.

i believe there should be a solid reason why it has been confirmed 16/17 civs of civ4. it seems they just want gamers to wonder much about it. if u make people wonderso much, you should not disappoint them in the end. so the last civs to be confirmed has to be one of the pop civs like Spain, Persia, Vikings.
I wouldn't be surprised and/or disappointed to see Celts neither. Anyway, we will get dutch, portugal and rest in EP sure but siam in 18 should be a mistake or a joke.

I could certainly see it as being a mistake but I don't think anyone would joke about it.
Anyway, here's hoping Siam is in.

 

[kivanc]

i will say again and highlight this; last civs to be confirmed is a marketing issue. firaxis does this consciously, they didn't confirm all civs 1 at a time and they confirm 1by1 to make it more excited.


what do we have recently? look to the case; if you announce 16-17 of 18 civs, the last 1-2 civ becomes a high importance secret.

everybody wonders about it and discusses who would be the last pick. when the community is in such a mood, putting a "first appereance civ" into the table would be very very weird.

every civ saga has tried to put a few surprises (with 1st appereances) into the game to make the new publish more exciting. but with a small marketing rule; 1st appereance civs like songhai etc can be in vanilla only if they were confirmed in the very beginning. then that wouldn't be weird for anybody.

but for the last minute, putting siam IN would be like a joke only.


shortly confirming in the beginning and confirming in the last minute is very different about marketing. the disappointments they will create is just very different. for example, IMO, the timing of confirmation of GREECE and PERSIA was very correct. they are core elements of the civ saga and a last minute confirmation on them made the marketing stronger.
similarly a last minute bomb of spain/vikings could be good, even celts could be a good last minute goal. but siam, NO!

 

[Dale]

You can't say Persia is in and Siam not when they're revealed in the same article. Either the article is right and both are in, or the article is wrong and neither are in.

Personally I'd love to see Siam in as South-East Asia always get bypassed. We've got too many European Civs already, give the last spot to an area that is just as deserving but with no Civs.

 

[Thormodr]

You can't say Persia is in and Siam not when they're revealed in the same article. Either the article is right and both are in, or the article is wrong and neither are in.

Personally I'd love to see Siam in as South-East Asia always get bypassed. We've got too many European Civs already, give the last spot to an area that is just as deserving but with no Civs.

Agreed. Slip Siam in and add a Malayo-Polynesian Civ in one of the expansions and they'll have all bases pretty well covered.

 

[CMKMStephens]

You can't say Persia is in and Siam not when they're revealed in the same article. Either the article is right and both are in, or the article is wrong and neither are in.

Don't forget the Landsknecht; same article and all...though they weren't called 'Holy Roman Landsknecht' like 'Siamese Elephants' or 'Persian Immortals'

 

[azzaman333]

Firaxis be trollin'

 

[Art Grin]

The Landsknecht is probably the German UU, if Germany has several of these. Also I can understand that people want to fill the entire world map with civs ,but really you can't compare Siam or Polynesia to such giants like Persia, Spain or even Scandinavia. While were at it a large part of Polynesia is still a French Colony. So South-East Asia will most likely get a representation in an Expansion Pack.

 

[Dale]

Don't forget the Landsknecht; same article and all...though they weren't called 'Holy Roman Landsknecht' like 'Siamese Elephants' or 'Persian Immortals'

Landsknecht wasn't linked to a Civ, so didn't want to muddy the waters there.

 

[Dale]

The Landsknecht is probably the German UU, if Germany has several of these. Also I can understand that people want to fill the entire world map with civs ,but really you can't compare Siam or Polynesia to such giants like Persia, Spain or even Scandinavia. While were at it a large part of Polynesia is still a French Colony. So South-East Asia will most likely get a representation in an Expansion Pack.

At it's peak, The Siamese Empire was larger than the HRE. Going further back Austronesia covered half the globe in three parts, Formosa (Taiwan), Malay peninsula and Oceania. Austronesia stretched from Madagascar to Easter Island. Ignoring South-East Asia in favour of an already over-represented Europe and Middle East would be extremely disappointing.

And so what if parts of Polynesia are still a French colony. Songhai is part of French territory too, but it's in Civ. The Aztecs are now part of Mexico, but they're in. You've made an irrelevant argument.