Brave New World's 9 new Civs

There's a lot more historic figures that are like Hercules (Heracles) & Gilgamesh. There's Hammurabi, Achilles, Alexander the Great, Winston Churchill etc

 

I think the problem with the Inuit on top of that is they don't have the superhuman achievement of the Pacific expansion (which places them in a unique category), they don't have the impressive building projects like the Moai statues, and they didn't have the bureaucracy of Hawaii or the quasi-Empire of Tonga.

In other words, they have the same problems of Polynesia without as many advantages. The advantages are that they would be unique in playstyle, which is quite good.

 

All true indeed.

 

I agree with a bunch of your points, but I'm not sure why you make such a distinction ("superhuman"?) between Pacific expansion and Arctic expansion. I'm not sure the latter isn't more difficult, especially in terms of general lifestyle.

 

I think the difference is plenty survive in adverse conditions (look at the Bushmen) and plenty crossed from Asia to North America with the Inuit. The Polynesians invented technology unknown to the rest of the world to reach areas impossible without this technology. Crossing the Bering Strait simply involved walking

 

It's a lil' dismissive to describe it like that, I think, especially since you ignore the rigors of actually surviving there, which is what I said in my previous post. Maybe I'm missing some meaning from the first part of that first sentence.

 

Well cultural policies aren't actually changed fundamentally in the expansion, only the benefits of culture. Poland's ability is about generating cultural policies not culture. And that isn't really a feature i would say shows off new mechanics (i believe they used the term mechanics) It may show off the new exploration and aesthetics trees, but so does playing with any civ surely? I understand Poland can't feasibly be included in G&K with a hope of balance, but the fact is it COULD be included. That shows how little it has to do with new mechanics.

Assyria on the other hand, cannot be added to G&K. It's change may at least seem small for now (who knows how it will play out, it could be the equivalent of the mayan pyramid), but it is a new mechanic. What's more, being the earliest building with a great works slot it is a complete showcase for it.

Brazil's been very in demand i know, but they are aren't going to add civs noone wants just for mechanics, so it's a bit of a moot point. All the civs revealed thus far have been on the popular end of the scale. Mechanics are what differentiate them.

I think it's 100% clear that the Zulu are one of the fan favourite civs.

I also think its 100% clear that Brazil and Portugal are mechanics civs.

Poland i am 90% confident of being a fan fav civ, having no explicitly new mechanics and being the most popular european civ yet to be added.

Assyria, being the 11th most popular and having a new mechanic in its library, seems to me to be a mechanics civ. I imagine a lot of people would be a bit miffed at including it over other favs like indonesia, the sioux and co if it is classed as a fan fav

 

The rigors of surviving there is impressive, but it's also impressive that the Bushmen survive in the Kalahari Desert. Both are inhospitable. So I said they're analogous to the Bushmen there.

 

I'd love to play as Haiti but Port-au-Prince at least needs to be a city-state

 

what would Haiti's UU be?

 

my knowledge of Haitian history is recent and well, insufficient. it'd have to be renaissance or later obviously, and a generic rifleman doesn't sound too appealing. prehaps workers that can defend themselves? I'm not sure if that is possible, being how they can be in the same tile as combat units

 

Which war are you talking about? I sure hope it isn't the Cisplatine war, because Brazil totally destroyed Argentinian navy and army, but didn't have the resources to invade Argentina, leading to a merely favourable result in the negotiation.

I'm not even going into the deserving part. People deify Bolívar. He's a folk hero. That's the reason why he should be in (deified by his own peoples, admired throughout the world). And how is Bolívar like Dido? Are you saying he didn't exist?

He is seen a great epic superhero. Tell me a single person that has two countries named after them.

Churchill? Bolívar is like a megazord of ten Churchills.

I think cultured would be the best option. I'm saying some harsh things, but I would love to see Argentina in-game. As a civ or with Buenos Aires as city-state.

 

why do you say that Colombia only lasted 10 years? What would be included in the game, as always, is the civ at its greatest extent. Gran Colombia was the greatest extent of what can be considered modern day colombia, venezuela, panama, and ecuador.

would you include the Ottoman Empire or Turkey? You include the Ottoman Empire, because that was at its biggest extent (not the best example, because the Ottoman Empire... lasted a long time. I hope you know what I mean)

and again, the main justification is Bolivar. Do you think the Huns are in the game because of their culture and history, or maybe because of the name cemented into everyone's minds, Attila?

 

Haitian Militia

 

I've sen tons of arguments about civilizations that will be added because of scenarios, but that hasn't been the case in the past. with G&K, only one civ was added truly because of the scenarios (Ned. was a favorite, Spain was already n the game.) im sort of thinking out of the box, i guess, but why not Iceland/Norway? they were a major economic powerhouse from the 1990ish to 2005. also, this could bring in a naval UU that focuses on exploration in the early game, and a geothermal generator as the UB, bringing in mass production if there i t a mountain/volcanic wonder in our territory. thoughts?

 

perhaps, maybe call it a civilian militia, revolutionary fighter or something

give it slightly less combat strength, but give it 3 moves, woodsman upgrade, ability to withdraw (forgot what its called, slingers do it, evasion or something)

 

I don't mean to put down the idea, but with only four slots left I am hoping for more unique cultures, ones like Indonesia and Morocco that really need to be in civ. we already have two scandanavian civs I wouldn't count on norway anytime soon

edit: also I think the ingame denmark encompasses norway

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_named_after_people

Columbus is more prominent: Gran Colombia, Colombia, Columbia, etc.

Bolivar is relatively unknown outside of Latin America; whereas Columbus is known universally (except maybe a few places.) Washington appears several times in the U.S. The point is every nation gives their founders or famous leaders a certain grandeur, but that certainly does not make them on a scale of mythic, supernatural beings. That's ludicrous.

Despite that, a Gran Columbia civ would be interesting. It won't happen in BNW though. They have a mod if your interested.

 

you mean that if theres a city state it means that will be a civ of that cs?

 

Admittedly Haiti would be an interesting civ - Charismatic leaders, interesting history and existence, unique culture, possible new gameplay, etc.

Certainly not a bad choice imo, but I don't think it will get in