Brave New World's 9 new Civs

[ales_]

I don't have any post Middle Age civs on my list

Dutch?

 

[fat_tonle]

Yep, I already mentioned this in one of my earlier posts



I don't have any post Middle Age civs on my list

Then why have Middle Age civs? Why not cut it off at Ancient civs? Most other mainstream civs descended from some ancient civ. Greeks from Minoans. Carthage from Phoenicia. You would have to can all the modern European civs and limit it to ancient era civs. If the argument is so, we can't have civs that can directly or indirectly be traced to a predeccessor.

 

[wigwam]

I'd like to see, at some point, a Civ-like game that strips it way down: just China, India, Persia, Arabia, one Mesopotamian civ (Akkad or Sumeria), Egypt, either Greece or Rome, one Mexican civ (Olmecs?), one African civ (Nubia or Ethiopia), and one European tribal group (Celts/Slavs/Germans/Turks). Ten civs, and if you fudge things a little, they and their cultural successors cover pretty much the whole world (obvious exceptions: the Inca and their neighbors, parts of southern and western Africa).

I don't want an actual Civilization game to do that—I like them how they are—but a Civ-ish game with more of an emphasis on emergent culture and design (as opposed to pre-baked UAs etc.) would be super cool.

 

[Merciorum]

Maybe the Hypercube is a nomad civ... would work with the Sioux...

Ah, probably not.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I'd like to see, at some point, a Civ-like game that strips it way down: just China, India, Persia, Arabia, one Mesopotamian civ (Akkad or Sumeria), Egypt, either Greece or Rome, one Mexican civ (Olmecs?), one African civ (Nubia or Ethiopia), and one European tribal group (Celts/Slavs/Germans/Turks). Ten civs, and if you fudge things a little, they and their cultural successors cover pretty much the whole world (obvious exceptions: the Inca and their neighbors, parts of southern and western Africa).

I don't want an actual Civilization game to do that—I like them how they are—but a Civ-ish game with more of an emphasis on emergent culture and design (as opposed to pre-baked UAs etc.) would be super cool.

It'd be nice if somebody would came up with a nice Civilization that is an actual simulation rather than a strategy. So you could see a nation evolve slowly, picking up benefits based on how you played them out. So for example you could see India split up, or Mesopatamia splitting up into several areas, then become a nation etc. etc.

But that has no place in an actual Sid's Civ game... oh, here we go again going off topic.

Back to topic.

8. Pueblo
9. Venice

 

[seancolorado]

They already said they scrapped Pueblo. People shouldn't be guessing them

 

[Gucumatz]

Never said that, only Popey was scrapped for sure.

 

[otaman1]

It'd be nice if somebody would came up with a nice Civilization that is an actual simulation rather than a strategy. So you could see a nation evolve slowly, picking up benefits based on how you played them out. So for example you could see India split up, or Mesopatamia splitting up into several areas, then become a nation etc. etc.

Isn't that kinda like those Paradox games?

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Isn't that kinda like those Paradox games?

I don't think there is a single Paradox game that spans from Ancient to Space Age/Informatin Era? Is there? Besides, those games are way too complicated for me

 

[otaman1]

I don't think there is a single Paradox game that spans from Ancient to Space Age/Informatin Era? Is there? Besides, those games are way too complicated for me

Nope. I have Victoria II. After 3 minutes of playing as England, I quit.

 

[Rob (R8XFT)]

I now think that the last two civs will be the Pueblo and Venice. Venice has been covered in plenty of other threads; I've gone back and watched the session where the Pueblo were mentioned and Dennis specifically said, "that's one time where we had to turn round and not include a leader in the game." They had built in a unique ability where they got a bonus for settling next to a mountain...which would include caves with ancient drawings in...I think they've just changed their leader to a less controversial one.

 

[Sonereal]

I don't think there is a single Paradox game that spans from Ancient to Space Age/Informatin Era? Is there?

There's a good reason why there isn't. No one would play it.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I now think that the last two civs will be the Pueblo and Venice. Venice has been covered in plenty of other threads; I've gone back and watched the session where the Pueblo were mentioned and Dennis specifically said, "that's one time where we had to turn round and not include a leader in the game." They had built in a unique ability where they got a bonus for settling next to a mountain...which would include caves with ancient drawings in...I think they've just changed their leader to a less controversial one.

I hope you are right, not to mention there is a direct connection with Pueblo (as well as Pope) and the Brave New World (which is indirectly based on the book of the same name)

 

[Liex]

There's a good reason why there isn't. No one would play it.

Oh, I would for sure.

 

[Sonereal]

Oh, I would for sure.

There already exists converters that allow players, if they choose, to go from EU3 to the end of HoI3 I believe. The problem is the same problem that exists in Civilization games.

The game is already over long before then. Either you're clearly dominant, or bored out of your gourd and want to start a new game. Paradox doesn't bother with a civilization simulation the same reason Spore shouldn't exist.

The time period covered in CK2 would play far better than the period in a CivSim. Same with EU3, V2, HoI3, and prolly EvW once it comes out. Why bother with a Spore-esque simplified simulation that you're trying to sell as TripleA when players willingly accept a broad view of history using simple, but working, hammers, food, beakers, and commerce? Look how CivV BNW boasts about a trade system still decidedly less complex than ones that exist in most Paradox games.

 

[ehecatzin]

I now think that the last two civs will be the Pueblo and Venice. Venice has been covered in plenty of other threads; I've gone back and watched the session where the Pueblo were mentioned and Dennis specifically said, "that's one time where we had to turn round and not include a leader in the game." They had built in a unique ability where they got a bonus for settling next to a mountain...which would include caves with ancient drawings in...I think they've just changed their leader to a less controversial one.

Now here's a question, if we knew nothing about the inclusion of the Pueblo, and their UA about working mountain tiles and spionage, how much would they fit the "bombshell" or "hypercube" civ they have been talking about?

There's a chance that It has been the Pueblo (sans Popé) all along. Being able to build a UI on mountain also qualifies for a civ that would play like no other civ in the game.

 

[Liex]

The problem is the same problem that exists in Civilization games.

The game is already over long before then. Either you're clearly dominant, or bored out of your gourd and want to start a new game.

This is mostly true in Civilization (let's hope BNW improves it), but I never found myself in such a situation in CK2. Its scale and complexity makes you struggle to maintain your accomplishments, or else everything falls apart.

 

[pedropavani]

I don't think there is a single Paradox game that spans from Ancient to Space Age/Informatin Era? Is there? Besides, those games are way too complicated for me

Well, it is impossible or silly to try to make a realistic historic simulator that spam from ancient to space age or information era.

 

[Sonereal]

This is mostly true in Civilization (let's hope BNW improves it), but I never found myself in such a situation in CK2. Its scale and complexity makes you struggle to maintain your accomplishments, or else everything falls apart.

That's what make the game enjoyable and CK2 one of the best received of the Paradox games. Bringing the discussion back to Civilization, that is why the Revolutions mod for CivIV was extremely popular as well as the stability mechanic for RFC. Maintaining an empire should be difficult, but rewarding. In Civilization, maintaining an empire is an economy of scale that gets easier as you go, not harder. There aren't a whole lot of internal problems to worry about like there is in Crusader Kings 2 or other Paradox games.

Even starvation in Civilization V is heavily underplayed given what that did to many civilizations. In CivV, starvation is even a good thing since there isn't a real penalty and your city is shrinking, meaning more happiness. I'm not saying that Civilization V BNW should turn into Civilization Kings, but there needs to be more to worry about at the top.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

That's what make the game enjoyable and CK2 one of the best received of the Paradox games. Bringing the discussion back to Civilization, that is why the Revolutions mod for CivIV was extremely popular as well as the stability mechanic for RFC. Maintaining an empire should be difficult, but rewarding. In Civilization, maintaining an empire is an economy of scale that gets easier as you go, not harder. There aren't a whole lot of internal problems to worry about like there is in Crusader Kings 2 or other Paradox games.

Even starvation in Civilization V is heavily underplayed given what that did to many civilizations. In CivV, starvation is even a good thing since there isn't a real penalty and your city is shrinking, meaning more happiness. I'm not saying that Civilization V BNW should turn into Civilization Kings, but there needs to be more to worry about at the top.

Yay for off topic discussion..

Btw seriously, ther IS penalty for shrinkage, you lose beakers, meaning less beakers, meaning longer research times, meaning a good chance that you begin to be outtech by AI/other players.