1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Brainstorm possible Civs'!

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Menzies, Aug 18, 2007.

  1. Arlborn

    Arlborn Legendary Noob

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,939
    Sorry if it sounds like flaming, but I had to ask! What about this Washington in your avatar? :crazyeye:
     
  2. Archaelicos

    Archaelicos Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    I did suggest (I think) a separate Spartan civilization, because Spartan hegemony over the Peloponessian was remarkable, and the Spartan way of life was so unique among all the other Greek poleis. Beyond sharing a cultural legacy and Pantheon, the Spartans were unlike any other culture in Greece.

    But Macedonia, as you suggest, posits a stronger case as a distinct Civ.

    On an unrelated note, somebody suggested iron working as an early tech for the Hittites. I actually think it'd be neat to have a Hebrew civilization that started with Masonry. I don't think this would be exceptionally overpowered, especially if they still had to research Mining before they could make use of it. They could perhaps start with Fishing, too, and maybe balance out Masonry with a modest UU/UB.
     
  3. quarq

    quarq Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    11
    One thing that have bothered me since CIV 1 is the fact that they have Americans as a civilization... (i mean they are ancestors of england and france, and have been around 300 years.)

    So the question is, what is an civilization ? Any country that have been around ? Or is it the group of people with common language groups and origin ?

    I mean the germanic people for an example are England and Germany... and other nordic countries. I mean why do Romans excist and not Italy ? (or any of the former countries that formed Italy, Genoa, Venice, Sicily, Milano...)

    Or does it even bother anyone that English is a mix of Celts, Saxons (germanic people), Vikings (danish and norwegians).

    I think its confusing to even rate civilization... but compared to other nations and people groups... what is America ? Its an offspring of European people... not a civilization. This leads to one further thing... how many countries developed a steam clad unit for naval battles ? ... Yes right... the North and South... yes its such a hostorical unit, how many was there ? Two of them in the hole worlds history ?

    Considering this game is developed in America... i dont blame them, but it destroys the realism in the hole idea.

    Yes, i name one civilization... The Holy Roman Empire (its as likely as the byzantines... they do have the same origin ;) )

    /:king:
     
  4. Archaelicos

    Archaelicos Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    I think the game provides "civilizations" differently for different eras. "America" is arguably far more identifiable of a "civilization" than is Greece as represented in the game. Alexander was Macedonian, for example. Pericles led Athens in a war against Sparta but died in the first few years of a war that would drag on for decades after. Sparta and Athens were FAR more distinct from each other than are, say, Roosevelt's America and Churchill's England. Yet America and England get different Civs but ancient Greece is amalgamated under a single banner whose leader isn't even Greek.

    For the modern era, we define a 'Civ' as a nationality. 1000 years ago we defined it by a geopolitical Empire. 2000 years ago a loose affiliation of human phenotypes is good enough.
     
  5. Antilogic

    Antilogic --

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2006
    Messages:
    15,602
    I may have been confusing threads about the elephants, but I know there was a suggestion to break off the Spartans (look for them being bizarre). That's a no-no, as far as I'm concerned. Macedon and Greece...that's a harder choice. With more leaders (and more traits, by inference), then it's a maybe. In any case, I think Carthage is one of the better-designed Civs in the game, in terms of Hannibal's traits and the mercenary UU...it gives a good feel for Carthage.


    @Archaelicos: Your progression of defining civilizations is quite good...although I may argue with you on the millennial divisions. :)

    @quarq: The progression of naval units leading from the Age of Sail to the modern navies is quite poor. Several countries used variations of ironclads or armed steamships (screw frigates, for example)...and then those evolved into armored cruisers, which became modern cruisers, and there were dreadnoughts, etc. All of this is unrepresented, and instead we have a single ironclad unit inbetween frigates/ships of the line and destroyers. I won't complain too much about that here, though. I don't understand what you mean about the HRE...they are in BtS. Could you explain what you are saying?

    @Arlborn: I have a Washington avatar because I have great respect for the man, not because I support/do not support his inclusion or America's inclusion into the game. My opinion of which Civs should be in the game are independent of my avatar selection. I may have played Washington once in the game.
     
  6. Archaelicos

    Archaelicos Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    @Archaelicos: Your progression of defining civilizations is quite good...although I may argue with you on the millennial divisions. :)

    Well ... I agree, I just kinda threw up some loose numbers without thinking all that much about it. The nation-state is a relatively recent phenomenon. I'd say it only really came into its own following WW1 but it's existed (obviously) since the 18th century in some form.

    Anyway ... the point is that the definition of "civilization" is a moving target. Was the Persian Empire a civilization or a gestalt of hundreds of them? What about the Roman Empire? For that matter, Russia/Soviet Union? "The Arabs"? Germany? Japan? Within each of these you can break down into smaller and smaller units. It's hard to say at what point you run into a sufficiently unique grouping to achieve "Civ" status. I actually would NOT advocate all that strongly for a "Sparta" as distinct from "Greece" but I might advocate for a Macedonia along those lines.

    It's a combination of ethnic distinction, geographical hegemony, and historical contribution and knowledge. By any reasonable standard, the Phoenecians were an influential civilization but they've never made an appearance in Civ. The Hebrews/Jews have been the source of major and serious historical movement, are a distinctly identifiable culture, and yet they've never been included. India is a highly fractured nation of provinces with languages so disparate that Indians from different parts of the nation have to speak English to understand each other.

    It's like art and porn, I guess. You can't define it, but you know it when you see it. We instinctively know that Sparta doesn't really qualify, but Macedonia might.
     
  7. Arlborn

    Arlborn Legendary Noob

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,939
    I understand! My wallpaper is Boudica atm, even though I don't like her inclusion after reading about her!


    But do you support Americans in? In truth? I do. And any pos-colonial country which has enough influence nowadays. So I wouldn't mind also at least one modern South-American country, but ah well.
     
  8. Archaelicos

    Archaelicos Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    ¡Brasíl!

    Mexico and Panama are candidates. Not sure on UU or UB though. Panama ... some play on the Panama Canal? Provides tons of trade?

    I think a Pacific Island culture might be fun, really.
     
  9. Swedishguy

    Swedishguy Deity

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2006
    Messages:
    7,257
    Location:
    Eskilstuna, Sweden IQ: N/A
    The Micronesian Federation would be pretty sweet.
     
  10. quarq

    quarq Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    11
    @quarq: The progression of naval units leading from the Age of Sail to the modern navies is quite poor. Several countries used variations of ironclads or armed steamships (screw frigates, for example)...and then those evolved into armored cruisers, which became modern cruisers, and there were dreadnoughts, etc. All of this is unrepresented, and instead we have a single ironclad unit inbetween frigates/ships of the line and destroyers. I won't complain too much about that here, though. I don't understand what you mean about the HRE...they are in BtS. Could you explain what you are saying?

    I ment that Byzantines and The Holy Roman Empire is remenants of the Roman Empire... which divided into east and west Roman. Its ironical to bring civilizations that belongs in the same culture/people tree into the game. I think they should have civilizations choosed with the right time they formed. If you stard at 4000 BC then Egypt, Persia, Aztecs, Zulu...

    The Americans will the show up during the renaissance age... England, France during the dark ages... and so forth.

    It was wrong to bring up the thing about the ironclad unit here (my first time ever to write about CIV in any forum, so i have had the issue since CIV 1).
    Its just that i havent heard any famous battle taking place with ironclads in it... if any have any tip of where i can find historical documents or books to this subject ? (the steam engine it had, and the heavy weight of the "ship" made it quite useless in navies and world threat, it was not until the development of and engine that such ships/vessels could be usefull... therfore i think the ironclad is obsolete, as goes for the famous artillery unit "big bertha" which was a train artillery... try to deploy that in the far east ;) )
     
  11. Rupert123

    Rupert123 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2007
    Messages:
    4
    The great futur nation of

    Québec

    Leader: René Lévesque : Char/Protec

    UU: Coureur des Bois = Explorer with a gun! + can attack

    UB: Poutine stand = +1 :yuck: to any cities with trade routes
    +3 trades routes
     
  12. BYC

    BYC Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    206
    My general idea that a civilization is a collection of people who identified themselves and cooperated for a long enough period of time to achieved something of note. The best of those civs are worthy of inclusion in this game.

    It's vague, but the definition for it has to be or else there would never be a limit to who is included or not.

    People have to realize as time passes, our world and timeline shortens. If people can argue the US should not be included due solely to length of existance, then others can claim other civs as illegimate for the same reasons. 10 years in present day isn't the same as 10 years back human first discovered fire. 10 years isn't even the same as just the last century, as mankind entered an age where it advanced itself exponentially. The world is fast, and it'll just get faster. It's not inconceivable that in the future, a nation gets so powerful to be included in Civ the game, but it only lasted perhaps 50 years due to how big the impact was.
     
  13. quarq

    quarq Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    11
    I just read wikipedias term of civilization... and its indeed complex. There have been so many civilzations throughout the history, many that have been forgotten.

    But the game civilization have one meaning that have maintained since CIV 1, lead a civilization and stand the test of time... now considering the start at 4000 BC, many current civs that can be choosen should be greyed out.

    So my idea is that the civ you start can and will switch name during the time it develops... maybe during every revolution.
    And there should always be a chanse of civilwars during a revolution, meaning that the great nation might fall apart and split up into new civilizations (AI controlled)... and get new names.

    Would be cool to see Roman switch civics and during the revolution the pressure of the people split the nation apart... and formed Byzantines, The Holy Roman Empire... and minor civs like Genoa, Venice, Sicily... and so on.

    There should really be a patch to this. (If i remember right... when i played CIV 1 and conquered a vast nations capital, there was a chance that the nation devided. Its sad that idea is gone nowdays... )
     
  14. Arlborn

    Arlborn Legendary Noob

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    1,939
    There IS something like that. Try Rhye's mod, which is included in BTS but can be downloads also, somewhere in this forum, for vanilla and warlords.
     
  15. quarq

    quarq Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    11
    Ok thanks... i sure will try the mods out !!
     
  16. Archaelicos

    Archaelicos Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    It's so difficult to say when a given "civilization" came into being. Was America born in 1776? Or were the colonists sufficiently distinct in a cultural and ethnic sense from Great Britain as to be considered its own civilization before that?

    And what of Great Britain? When did it really become England? After the Battle of Hastings? One minute Harold is alive and the next there's an arrow in the back of his skull and viola, England? Does being "English" have to include Norman influences? Scandanavian? Celtic? Or should we start with the Angles and Saxons? Perhaps there should be a Saxon civilization? But all the tribes that comprise the "English" ethnicity were originally Germanic, so should there not be a separate Germany and England until ... when?

    What about the South American nations, which are primarily composed of mezclas? What of the Irish, who in modern days have a strong Spanish influence? What of Spain and its Muslim heritage?

    In my opinion, there's no principled way to say one thing is a Civ and another is not. America is rather clearly a civilization in any meaningful sense. As I said: art and porn. You know it when you see it, even if you can't define it.
     
  17. quarq

    quarq Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    11
    Yes i agree, that was exactly my point... its hard to determine what is a civ and not. But this game starts at 4000 bc and america was not even near of beeing born then.

    As i said before, the time choosen to play should choose what country/civ to play.

    And they should really include rise and fall of civs... ( cant dl the mod spoken of above in the threads yet ).

    But dont you agree that its sad to bring modern countries/civs into the start of the game. I mean native american tribes (many differents) should really take americas place... to be conquered by europeans, then revolt and form a new civ. Thats the way... the history way. :king:
     
  18. Archaelicos

    Archaelicos Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2007
    Messages:
    148
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    I don't quite agree with that last. I think that's too much slavish devotion to the history of earth. I mean, when I'm playing an individual leader who rules a Civ for 6,000 years on a pangaea that doesn't resemble earth at all, I see no reason to insist that "America" can't exist until after 1776.

    The "rise and fall" of Civs is precisely why you're playing. I prefer to make the other Civs fall. :)
     
  19. quarq

    quarq Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    11
    Well after having beating the AI numberous times at same level... i find it quite booring trying it with handicap, just to make a good fight. I have never liked cheating in any form, instead i try different approaches to the goal... or just relax and imagine the hole scene.

    So if we shouldnt have any real earth history here then it doesnt matter what tribe to pick... and hmm what about all wonders ? Just make some wonders up... you get the point. The hole game value lies in the real world/earths history.

    About the americans, well as i said before. Since CIV 1... i got boored about their ignorance, and they claim quite a chunk out of the worlds history.
     
  20. Dutch Canuck

    Dutch Canuck Khan of Flatlanders

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    334
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    I lived for many years in Montreal so the UB idea is quite funny to me! Seriously, a good UB could be a Seigniorial Manor replacing the Courthouse and awarding both a small commerce bonus and the ability to assign one specialist as a priest.

    Courer des Bois (a "woods runner" we could call in English a "Ranger"!) is actually a really interesting idea for a UU. It would compete against the Spanish Conquistador of the same era; it could have Strength 8 and be able to attack with that value, Move 2 (same privileges as Explorer), and a cost of 80 to build. Est-ce-que c'est bon comme ca?/Is it good like that? :lol: :)
     

Share This Page