Brainstorm possible Civs'!

[Saim]

Y'know, we should have a Mesopotamian Civ for Sumerians, Hittites, Akkadians, Babylonians and Assyrians. They were quite alike and were conquered by the same people.
So..
Civ: Mesopotamia
Leaders: Gilgamesh, Hammurabi
UB: Irrigation Channels? (used by all to control Tigris/Euphrates floods)
UU: Mesopotamian Spearmen; replaces Spearmen; starts with Medic I, +2 experience if created in city with State Religion

Just a thought.

How about no?

Just a thought.

Seriously though, why not have a Western European, East Asian, etc. civs as well? Why stop there? We could have Eurasian, African, Pacific Islander and Native American civs! In fact, let's just have a WORLD civ!

Akkadia, Babylonia, Assyria and Sumer are all significant enough on their own.

How about the Moors under Abd-ar-Rahman?

Yes. I'vve been suggesting the Moors for a while now. Although it would make no sense to have a Moorish civ and then have Saladin as an Arabian leader (both the Moors and Islamic Egypt where non-Caliphal important Arab states; incorporating one into Arabia but not the other makes no sense whatsoever).

Both Babylon and Sumeria are separate Civs, and I don't mind that so much. If anything, I would rename the HRE "Austria" and add a Habsburg to rule them, like Charles V. Leave the Carthaginians alone, though--don't change their UU. The elephants were not nearly as effective in battle as Hannibal's light cavalry, and the most famous light cavalry of the day were the Numidians. For the Romans, I would suggest either a republican-era leader like Sulla or a late Imperial leader like Constantine, Trajan, or Hadrian. I'm going to ignore that "British Empire" civ...why do that? The British Empire is essentially England and her various possessions, not to mention all the leaders mentioned (except Pitt) are from the Victorian Era, already represented by Queen Victoria of England.

How about these stats for a Hittite Empire? I intentionally selected an unused trait combo and tried to pick a balanced set of abilities.

Hittites, Capital: Hattusa
Leader: Mursili I or II (Charismatic, Creative)
UU: Scythed Chariot (Chariot that causes collateral damage)
UB: ...

For the UB, I have a few ideas. One would be an enhanced forge, that provides +2 or +3 production with Iron, to reflect the Hittite use of the resource. Another would be some kind of early ground-based trading post (replacing Markets, maybe?), giving them +50% commerce from overland trade routes. The third idea is a barracks/stable that gives them +10% military unit production, another currently unused benefit for a UB.

Regarding the Numidian Cavalry, the reason Carthage should not get them as a UU is because they are A) Numidians and B) used by many others, including the Romans.

 

[FoxURA]

I wonder how much longer we will get before someone gets back onto cartoon civs again

 

[Swedishguy]

Swedishguy Empire
Leader: Swedishguy (Phi, Imp)
UU: Random Persian, replaces chariot, moves like a gunship, requires Knubbism.
UB: Cornflakes Factory, replaces granary, +50% production with corn.

 

[Antilogic]

I pretty sure that's why they haven't gotten in the Expansions yet. Sid and Soren just couldn't think of something. And, a forge sucks until a Recycling Plant is built. I am a possesed Anti-Pollution Crusader.

I always build forges and factories ASAP. I might not take the big plunge with the industrial parks or power plants, but the early -1 health is not hard to counteract.

@Saim: The Numidians are not in the game except as a Carthaginian UU, so I don't see why that is such a problem. The reason why it is appropriate for Carthage to have a mercenary UU like the Numidians is because a large portion of the Carthaginian army was comprised of mercenaries. Yes, you are correct that the Romans eventually bribed the Numidians away from the Carthaginian camp, but I don't feel that is persuasive enough to throw out a historically effective UU in exchange for the elephant UU (many of those elephants died crossing the Alps, and the ones that fought against Scipio were virtually ineffective due to his tactics).

 

[vengeance1000]

Romania Empire (not sure if this is already one)
Leader : Vlad Dracula ( or Vlad the impaler) for those of you who don't know he is the guy Dracula is based off
UU: Need some tips on the name, but a replacement for the spearmen used to put people on pikes
UB: Torture chamber "replaces jail -75% war wariness"


He is very interesting, if you've never heard of him, I really recommend looking him up! Had a lot of interest conquest and history!

 

[Airefuego]

I put in for Vlad with his vampire UU and a crypt UB a page or two back... glad Vlad has some support!

You don't want to be one of his citizens though...

 

[GuitarHero]

I think I might have already suggested this, but why don't we rename the Natives the Sioux?
Same Stats, but with another leader.
Crazy Horse
Agressive,Diplomatic.

 

[Antilogic]

Diplomatic isn't a trait in the game. Are you sure you aren't mixing threads?

 

[GuitarHero]

I'm using reverse Psycology on Sid & Soren. If they think it's in the game, when they check in on the production of the new Expansion, they'll get pissed that it's not in there and get it in. So sshhhh!

Iroquois
Hiawatha (Exp/Dip)
UU: Rider: Replaces Horse Archer, 5 3 Gets defensive bonuses on hills.
UB:Trail: Replaces Colosseum, +1 +1 +1


Hehehehehe..........

 

[Antilogic]

I don't care for it all that much...has limited utility in multiplayer. Not that I play multiplayer, but I would rather invent traits that have utility for everyone.

Why a Rider UU for the Iroquois? They aren't exactly iconic horsemen. Although a colosseum UB that provides extra trade and food would be a little strong, in my most humble opinion.

 

[GuitarHero]

The Trail is to make up for the terrible Rider. It really sucks.

 

[Gooblah]

Remind me what the traits of a Diplomatic Leader are? I haven't been playing those leaders much.
@Samel

Fine. But still, maybe just Sumer and Babylon and Hittites. The problem with the Hittites is that they were the first Civ to actually effectively use Iron Working, so that should be a starting tech, even though that would make them super-powered....

 

[GuitarHero]

Go to the "Bring Back The Scientific Trait" Thread. It has the answers.

 

[FitzRoySomerset]

You think that is bad, I heard that some Americans think we in Canada:
1- Do not have gas stations
2- Live in Igloos and drive around on snowmobiles

Simply amazing. It is well known that dog sleds are the preferred mode of transport.

How about the Moors under Abd-ar-Rahman

This sounds capital. I don't know enough of them to suggest a UB or UU, but perhaps the Alhambra should be included as a Wonder.

 

[Antilogic]

The Trail is to make up for the terrible Rider. It really sucks.

Although penalized in strength, a 3 move unit would be ridiculous. If they got enhanced retreating abilities, I would tone down the UB. I'm curious why you didn't go for a tomahawk-wielder or some other kind of northeastern Indian style unit and instead went for a horseman.

@Gooblah: Sumeria and Babylon are already in the game. Check out BtS, if you haven't already, and you can play as Gilgamesh and Hammurabi. I am suggesting the Hittites because that was one of my top picks that didn't make it into BtS (they went with the ******** HRE and "Native American Empire" over Austria and the Hittites).

 

[Archaelicos]

Some of these may be repeats and are arguably not "Civilizations" but are ethnicities or cultures, but be that as it may ...

The Hebrews
Australians
Canadians
Irish (I knew, we have the Celts, but ...)
Brazilians
Mexicans (modern, not Meso-American)
Belgium (think of it! Never declare war on anybody!)
Finland (Pidan Suomesta! And one of only 2 non Indo-European languages.)
South Africa
Syrians (Ancient)
Anatolia (ancient Turkey)
Sparta could be its own civilization, it was so bizarre.
An argument could be made for Ancient Syracuse/Sicily too.
Poland
Czech Republic
Etruscans
Prussia
Macedonia (impermissibly mixed with Greece in Civ!)
The Hapsburg Empire
Lithuania
Transylvania
Nigeria
Madagascar
Hawaiian Kingdom

 

[Antilogic]

Of that list, I would only second a "Jewish" civ--call them Hebrews, Israel, Judah, whatever. I'm not a fan of adding post-colonial states, so I'm ruling out many listed above. Belgium is a bit of an oddity on that list...usually the calls are for Poland. Adding Prussia would be foolish: just rename the current Germany Prussia, and you have your Civ. A Habsburg Empire would also be needlessly redundant because for centuries, the Habsburg Empire was the HRE. Ancient Anatolia is also quite vague...what about the Hittites, as I mentioned earlier in this thread?

For the Greeks, I would not split up the poleis into separate Civs (Sparta separate from Athens and the rest, etc.). We just have to accept there is no real way in a game to represent the disunited Greek poleis in the Classical Age, and accept that somehow, some way, they all act as a single civilization.

 

[Archaelicos]

I'd go for the Hittites. I think the Hebrews are a glaring omission, they were an influential ancient culture and one of the few that survives with minimal modernizations in some form.

What about the Phoenecians?

 

[Saim]

I always build forges and factories ASAP. I might not take the big plunge with the industrial parks or power plants, but the early -1 health is not hard to counteract.

@Saim: The Numidians are not in the game except as a Carthaginian UU, so I don't see why that is such a problem. The reason why it is appropriate for Carthage to have a mercenary UU like the Numidians is because a large portion of the Carthaginian army was comprised of mercenaries. Yes, you are correct that the Romans eventually bribed the Numidians away from the Carthaginian camp, but I don't feel that is persuasive enough to throw out a historically effective UU in exchange for the elephant UU (many of those elephants died crossing the Alps, and the ones that fought against Scipio were virtually ineffective due to his tactics).

I never said anything about elephants.

Remind me what the traits of a Diplomatic Leader are? I haven't been playing those leaders much.
@Samel

Fine. But still, maybe just Sumer and Babylon and Hittites. The problem with the Hittites is that they were the first Civ to actually effectively use Iron Working, so that should be a starting tech, even though that would make them super-powered....

The USSR was the first nation to use Communism, is that it's starting tech?

Of that list, I would only second a "Jewish" civ--call them Hebrews, Israel, Judah, whatever. I'm not a fan of adding post-colonial states, so I'm ruling out many listed above. Belgium is a bit of an oddity on that list...usually the calls are for Poland. Adding Prussia would be foolish: just rename the current Germany Prussia, and you have your Civ. A Habsburg Empire would also be needlessly redundant because for centuries, the Habsburg Empire was the HRE. Ancient Anatolia is also quite vague...what about the Hittites, as I mentioned earlier in this thread?

For the Greeks, I would not split up the poleis into separate Civs (Sparta separate from Athens and the rest, etc.). We just have to accept there is no real way in a game to represent the disunited Greek poleis in the Classical Age, and accept that somehow, some way, they all act as a single civilization.

The poster your responding to did not say that the Greeks should be split up; rather, he said that Macedonia (not Greek, but was assimilated into Greece) to be separated from Greece.

 

[Edosan]

I would like to see a Polynesian Civ.

Details:

Leader: Maui (possibly a mythical figure but meh, so is Gilgamesh)
UU: Outrigger Canoe (galley with a possibility of surviving ocean voyage)
UB: Unsure yet, could be a Pa, but then you could probably have a seperate Maori civilisation.

And for that matter a Melanesian and Micronesian Civ.

I think this would be a good addition.