Brave New World's 9 new Civs

[Moraiwe]

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

No, he means that if a cs is confirmed, and that city would be integral to a particular civ, than that civ is confirmed as not being in. For example, if we see Zurich as a cs, then we can confirm that Switzerland is not a civ.

 

[king Oosterveld]

i believe one of the prerequisites for being legendary/mythincal would be being a legend or a myth..
just saying. hew was a good liberator/ruler, but comparing Bolivar to Hercules? something isn't adding up...

 

[Luziadus]

I am from Argentina and i still cannot believe how supportive of the Argentine Civ Phanteon16 is . But he is right in that Argentina is far more than "soccer lovers". And Argentina sure beat Brazil in the 1820s war (it was really just Buenos Aires against the Empire), only to lose everything in the negotiation table...

I still think that maybe is true that Argentina is too young and not that important to be included as a civ. But i think it can be reallisticaly represented in other ways:

- Buenos Aires as a Millitaristic or Commercial City-State.
- Jose de San Martín as a Great General.
- Guillermo Brown as a Great Admiral.
- Jorge Luis Borges as a Great Writer, with "The Aleph" as his Great Work.
- Diego Maradona as a Great Artist , "The Hand of God" as his Great Work (a joke that one, but he IS an Artist in some form).

With that, i would be happy.

they want woman, and the only woma I think is Evita.

 

[phaethon16]

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.

What I'm saying is that you're comparing him to some mythological people, and the only other equivalent in civ is Dido, and you've seen how popular she is. So, please don't use that logic. He has one country named after him, and Hugo Chavez only named Venezuela (partly) after him for political reasons. Lastly, don't you dare compare Bolivar to Churchill, because very few people in history can compare to the indomitable toughness of Churchill. If you want to compare him to anyone, a good comparison is George Washington. They are both known for the same thing, because let's face it, the thirteen colonies were just as factitious at first as South America. They were both generals/liberators, but the difference is that Washington helped create a lasting political system afterwards, and didn't become a dictator, like Bolivar. Thank you for saying you'd like Argentina too. I don't dislike Bolivar, I actually admire him too, because he did accomplish a lot. But I don't think he alone warrants a Colombian civ.

To address somebody else, I refer to Gran Colombia's lifespan of 10 years instead of Colombia's lifespan of 200 and counting for two reasons. One, Colombia itself is certainly not important enough to be a civ, and it never evolved the way other South American countries like Brazil and Argentina did. Secondly, Bolivar doesn't represent Colombia, because Colombia has fluctuated a lot in the past 200 years, so Bolivar doesn't represent what Colombia is now. Likewise, I wouldn't want San Martin as an Argentinian leader, because he doesn't represent the modern, most important part of Argentinian history, I'd want Eva Peron.

Finally, the Huns were included not solely because of Attila, but because the Huns indirectly ended the Roman empire's power and launched Europe into the Middle Ages. They had a huge impact on the world in that way.

 

[Kerath]

I registered just to answer this topic.

About Italy: as someone already said multiple times, pre-1861 Italy was a cosmos of states, duchies, counties, etc. I can't really see something like post-1861 Italy ingame, as this would imply Rome as capitol and multiple CS would be redundant (not that some of them already are, they could just "fix" this by PRGing only CS not linked to in-play civs).

I place my bet on one of the main "partial" states composing Italy: Savoy (Turin, Corsica, Sardinia), Kingdom of Sicily (Naples, Palermo, Sardinia - they're less far away from Africa for scenarios too), Venice (itself, Zagreb, Iraklion and some of the balcanic coastal cities). I tend to exclude Florence: their land was too little to be implied as a civ (like Switzerland for example) and Lorenzo was already "spent" in the intro video of GK (yeah, that's Florence).

About the other civs: except the already known ones (Poland, Portugal, Zulu, Brazil, Assyria) and adding one of the italian-flavoured, I place my bet on Inuit (interesting choice IMO) as the only new American civ, plus an Asian (Vijayanagara or Indonesia) and another African one (maybe South Africa with Mandela? ).

 

[phaethon16]

If Nelson Mandela would be South Africa's leader, let's hope that we don't get a South African civ for a long time if you know what I mean.

 

[God of Kings]

Shaka is already being represented for that region.

 

[Moraiwe]

I registered just to answer this topic.

About Italy: as someone already said multiple times, pre-1861 Italy was a cosmos of states, duchies, counties, etc. I can't really see something like post-1861 Italy ingame, as this would imply Rome as capitol and multiple CS would be redundant (not that some of them already are, they could just "fix" this by PRGing only CS not linked to in-play civs).

I place my bet on one of the main "partial" states composing Italy: Savoy (Turin, Corsica, Sardinia), Kingdom of Sicily (Naples, Palermo, Sardinia - they're less far away from Africa for scenarios too), Venice (itself, Zagreb, Iraklion and some of the balcanic coastal cities). I tend to exclude Florence: their land was too little to be implied as a civ (like Switzerland for example) and Lorenzo was already "spent" in the intro video of GK (yeah, that's Florence).

About the other civs: except the already known ones (Poland, Portugal, Zulu, Brazil, Assyria) and adding one of the italian-flavoured, I place my bet on Inuit (interesting choice IMO) as the only new American civ, plus an Asian (Vijayanagara or Indonesia) and another African one (maybe South Africa with Mandela? ).

Welcome - glad to hear another voice. You've made a bit of an error in that Zagreb was never under Venetian control. Perhaps you meant Split?

 

[otaman1]

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?

If Norway is in then Denmarks' city list will need to be revamped. Same thing goes for Sweden - Finland & Siam - Burma

 

[Louis XXIV]

Shaka is already being represented for that region.

Once could argue that Rome represents the region that includes France, Spain, Portugal, Carthage, Greece, Byzantium, Celts, England, Ottomans, Babylon, and Egypt (and Persia takes the rest of the region). One could, but one doesn't. I don't think South Africa will be in. I think it's quite far down on the list. But it's clearly separate from the Zulu with very little overlap.

 

[Kerath]

Yeah, I obviously meant Split. Sorry for that.

Well, about the African civ, let's analyze: we have Egypt, Carthago (mediterranean Africa is cleared, except Mauritania and a bit of Morocco), Ethopia and Songhai, then the Zulu. Empty zones (please correct me if I'm wrong) are almost all of the western coast and south-eastern, Madagascar included. Congo IMO is a little redundant with Shaka, so if it isn't SA maybe Zimbabwe or Masai, but I really can't find a notable leader for the latter choice (the former too, but that's my ignorance).

 

[Louis XXIV]

Firaxis has never based their decisions on who fills up a real world map. The Byzantines, Ottomans, Persians, Assyrians, Romans, Arabs, and Greeks will attest to that.

 

[otaman1]

Yeah, I obviously meant Split. Sorry for that.

Well, about the African civ, let's analyze: we have Egypt, Carthago (mediterranean Africa is cleared, except Mauritania and a bit of Morocco), Ethopia and Songhai, then the Zulu. Empty zones (please correct me if I'm wrong) are almost all of the western coast and south-eastern, Madagascar included. Congo IMO is a little redundant with Shaka, so if it isn't SA maybe Zimbabwe or Masai, but I really can't find a notable leader for the latter choice (the former too, but that's my ignorance).

Mbanza Kongo is Kongo & Zanzibar in Swahili. Or do CS not count?

 

[Kerath]

Firaxis has never based their decisions on who fills up a real world map. The Byzantines, Ottomans, Persians, Assyrians, Romans, Arabs, and Greeks will attest to that.

We're talking about less-known civs to the standardized gamer, as those African ones are IMO. I challenge you to find someone who didn't heard even once just ONE of those civs you mentioned, maybe excluding Assyria (who will come up only in the upcoming exp).

Mbanza Kongo is Kongo & Zanzibar in Swahili. Or do CS not count?

Nope, I was talking about playable civs.

 

[Germnoble]

I think we need a thread to keep track of the new civs and their UU,UA,UB, etc.

1.Poland

• Leader: Casimir III
• UA: Solidarity: Free social policy upon entering an era
• UU: Winged Hussar: Can break enemy formations(pushes units back), replaces lancer.
• UB: Ducal Stables: Extra experience for cavalry units, +1 and from pastures.

2. Assyria

• Leader: Ashurbanipal
  [*]UA: Treasures of Ninevah: Steal an enemy technology when taking a city. Can be used only once per city.
• UU: Siege Tower: 1 hex attack range and supports units attacking cities,replaces catapult.
• UB: Royal Library: bonus and XP for military units, as long as the Great Work slot is filled.

3. Brazil

• Leader: Pedro II
• UA: Carnival: double Tourism and Great Artist generation rate during a .
• UU: Pracinhas: Based on the Brazilian Expeditionary Force during WW2. Infantry replacement, generates points for after victory
• UI: Brazilwood Camp: Build on jungle tiles, generates extra and, after the research acoustics,

4. Portugal

• Leader: Maria I
• UA: Mare Clausum: Double the amount of for having diverse sets of resources from trade routes.
• UU: Nau: Has ability to trade with , earning and XP through trade, and replaces Caravel.
• UI: Feitoria : Build inside borders, regardless of relationship. Gives you any luxury owned by , double quantity if allied.

5. Zulu

• Leader: Shaka
• UA: 50% reduced maintenance cost for melee units and +25% bonus experience for all units.
• UU: Impi: Performs ranged attack before entering melee, pikeman replacement.
• UB: Ikanda: Barracks replacement which provides new upgrades, like bonus to flanking & vs. gunpowder units.

6.
7.
8.
9.

New City-States: Ur(Maritime), Sofia(Militaristic), Riga(Maritime), Bratislava(Cultural), Panama City(Maritime), Mbanza Kongo(militaristic)

List will be updated as we get more news.
Also, start the mad speculations!

I feel like that should be part of the core game. When you conquer a civ you should get a free tech.

 

[phaethon16]

For the Africa scenario, couldn't they make a few scenario only options? I can't imagine them including more African civs then Morocco and the Zulu, but doesn't Africa need to be filled in a little more? What suggestions do people have for scenario only civs?

 

[God of Kings]

Perhaps Ethiopia can make a comeback as a scenario-only civ (while it requires G&K just to be able to play Ethiopia outside the scenario short of modding)

 

[Nujabes]

For the Africa scenario, couldn't they make a few scenario only options? I can't imagine them including more African civs then Morocco and the Zulu, but doesn't Africa need to be filled in a little more? What suggestions do people have for scenario only civs?

Ashanti, Dahomey, Merina, Algeria, Buganda. I'd rather they be actual civs (particularly the first two) but they make sense for the scenario as well, and some of those kingdoms still exist.

 

[alpha2117]

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

There are fan favs and fan faves though. With Assyria it seems mechanically to be pretty much a variant of Babylon (with more offensive design choices rather than Babylons defensive ones). I dont see any new mechanic really. What I think is it's a fan fave for those who love ancient classical civs - individually people may have preferred a Sumeria or Hittie or Phoenicia inclusion but that part of the fanbase has been given at least one of those types of civs in the game.

We may have already seen the 3 fan civs if that is the case or there may still be one to be revealed if the Zulu are considered a scenario related addition rather than a fan push. Poland doesn't seem to have any new mechanics so I agree they are fan fave, I think Assyria is as well but Zulu is possibly both a fan fave and important in the scramble scenario so it's hard to classify it.

 

[otaman1]

Perhaps Ethiopia can make a comeback as a scenario-only civ (while it requires G&K just to be able to play Ethiopia outside the scenario short of modding)

How will Ethiopia be for those with G&K and without it? I wouldn't want Ethiopia to be included in the expansion. Adding Spain in G&K was a big mistake IMO. I had to pay 40 dollars for a fricken civ that I already had