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

Brave New World's 9 new Civs

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Art Grin, Mar 15, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Sonereal

    Sonereal ♫We got the guillotine♫ Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Messages:
    14,798
    There is a penalty for shrinkage. No one argued that. I argued that once you're on top, there is really nothing stopping you. In every Paradox game, there is stuff you have to worry about that uniquely exists on the top, and Crusader Kings is the best example of that. The only possible drawback is unhappiness and social policies, but even those can be overcome by sheer scale.

    Hopefully, BNW will fix this by increasing interdepency, something that does not exist in Civilization V on a meaningful level.
     
  2. tmt393

    tmt393 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 28, 2013
    Messages:
    12
    Location:
    United States
    I think Civ V is definitely due for a Native American civ. The Sioux have already been used in previous games so I would put my money on them. Although, so have the Apache.
     
  3. Merciorum

    Merciorum Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Messages:
    539
    Location:
    Regnum Britannie
    Every time someone says that Byzantium=Greece, a little more of me dies inside. They were a fusion of Roman structure and tradition with the Greek language and a mostly Greek populace, and a culture which was a mix of Greek and Roman. They were very definitely a civ in their own right, even if they were technically Roman right until the very end, and would always consider themselves thus.
     
  4. otaman1

    otaman1 Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    2,697
    Saying Greece is Byzantium is like saying Greece is Ottoman ... Byzantiums spoke Greek, and partially Latin but were not Greeks. They were (correct me if I'm wrong) Romans. Like the Ottomans, they are Turks not Greeks. They did not speak Greek but Turkish (though very little Turk descendants spoke Greek) and Arabic? I'm not sure about that one
     
  5. Art Grin

    Art Grin Emperor

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2008
    Messages:
    1,744
    Location:
    Germany
    Not really.
    The Byzantines were Greeks pretending to be Romans.
     
  6. Xandinho

    Xandinho Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,619
    Location:
    Westeros of Brazil
    I would love to see the Toltecs game
    although they have not built a civilization large enough to have many cities to be included in the game
     
  7. Merciorum

    Merciorum Prince

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2013
    Messages:
    539
    Location:
    Regnum Britannie
    They were Romans. They were the direct continuation of the Roman state.
     
  8. The Almighty dF

    The Almighty dF Pharaoh

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    2,252
    Location:
    dFland
    Pretty much sums them up. They were one civ (Greeks) wearing the skin of another civ (Romans). Presumably while listening to Goodbye Horses and asking "Would you sack me? I'd sack me."

    Joking aside though, they're still culturally different enough due to this odd hybrid culture they had going on, and they still had their own quirks that didn't really come from Greek -or- Roman culture.
     
  9. fuzzatron717

    fuzzatron717 Holy Warrior

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,024
    Location:
    Canada, eh
    Art Grin is right they were Greek but they were also Bulgarian, Serbian and Armenian the Latin people were stuck in what's now Italy. Even the emperors were Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians, and Armenians.
     
  10. Melo-Franco

    Melo-Franco Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2007
    Messages:
    130
    Location:
    BR
    I'm glad Menzies has not enough decision-making power to implement his follies (I hope so).
     
  11. cybrxkhan

    cybrxkhan Asian Xwedodah

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2006
    Messages:
    9,687
    Location:
    The Universe
    The Byzantines have every right to be a civ, in my opinion - they are neither the classical Rome or Greece as represented in-game. The issue is not so much them, in my opinion, it's the Eurocentrism. If we have the Byzantines, then why shouldn't India be at least split between the north and the south? Heck, why shouldn't we have Nepal, Bengal, the Kushans, Mughals, etc. instead of the India blob, for instance? Stuff like that. That is why I would see the hesitancy for having the Bbyzantines as a civ.
     
  12. DonStamos

    DonStamos Mobster Inc©

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2002
    Messages:
    820
    Location:
    United States
    I'd love to see India and China done a whole lot better than they have been, but I'm betting they're just blobbed together because the average American (the main market) has no idea what Vijayanagara or Xi'an meant, who Ashoka, Qianlong, Shihuangdi, the Mughals, the Rajputs, etc are, or even that India and China weren't united for the longest time.
     
  13. Gali

    Gali Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2011
    Messages:
    537
    Why can people not understand that the Byzantines, an empire that lasted a 1000 years with a unique culture deserves to be in. Also Byzantium is not European. Their heartland was Anatolia and they had holdings in Africa, Europe and Asia. They lost most of Greece for 200 years because it wasn't important to them. The Balkans became important because it was a heartland safe from their biggest threat, the Turks. Go read Anna Comnenus' description of the Crusaders to see how European they were. They viewed the crusaders as boorish barbarians and aliens, and felt greater kinship with the Turks.

    The Roman civ represents the Republic and the height of the Empire. Byzantium is different culturally, religiously, militarily and politically from that civ. Same for the Greeks. They represent classical Hellenistic civilization that was conquered by the Romans. The Byzantines looked back to that time but were very different. This is not HRE and Austria or Mali and Songhai where the second state is clearly a continuation of the first and maintains the same general structure. As for the Ottomans if they overlap with the Byzantines than either Rome is in or pretty much all of Europe is out. The Ottomans were different religiously, militarily, ethnically, politically and culturally than the Byzantines.

    As for the desire to spread other civs out that becomes a question of limited resources.
     
  14. DiogenesK9

    DiogenesK9 Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2013
    Messages:
    103
    Very true about Byzantium, in fact, for much of its history, most of the army and aristocracy was Armenian. Armenians even ruled the empire at its height, though they're called the Macedonian Dynasty for some reason (though i may be late to the conversation, I didn't want to miss the opportunity to share that. I think this may be the first time its been relevant to bring up since I learned that in school).
     
  15. Gucumatz

    Gucumatz JS, secretly Rod Serling

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2011
    Messages:
    6,181
    Not true at all, their Empire spread from Mexico to the Maya world conquering and establishing famous cities like Mayapan. Remember, the Toltecs are the home of Quetzalcoatl/Kukulcan/Topiltzin/Gukumatz the God/King that created the largest Empire in Mesoamerican history and sailed east promising to return to his people one day [And although the Aztecs mistook Cortez as Quetzalcoatl, Topiltzin is far from the only possible leader for the Toltecs either]

    Toltec city list:

    Capital: Tula


    Mayapan
    Xochicalco
    Calixtlahuaca
    Malinalco
    Chapultepec
    Tepozitlan
    Tetzmoliuhuacan
    Tzintzuntzan
    Hueyapan
    Mazatepec
    Atlacomulco
    Chichen Itza
    Itztepetl
    Cuauhnáhuac
    Cuernavaca
    Zacatollan
    Teul
    Petatlan
    Tamuin
    Teayo
    Xocotitlan
    Quemada
    Atazta
    Tetela
    Balankanche
    Apatzinga
    Cacaxtla
    Tzinapecuaro
    Xiuhquilpan
    Tollantzinco

    Etc...

    There are plenty of Toltec sites around, 0 problem with a city list
     
  16. DiogenesK9

    DiogenesK9 Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2013
    Messages:
    103
    I may be misunderstanding you, but are you saying the Byzantines were Turks?? Cause the Byzantines are kind of the opposite of the Turks.
     
  17. fuzzatron717

    fuzzatron717 Holy Warrior

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,024
    Location:
    Canada, eh
    How dare you sir accuse such things against the Byzantines. As a honorary Byzantiphile I know my Byzantine history the people were primarily Greek, Armenian, Serbs, and Bulgars they were not Turks. Turks came from the east such as central asia and from western Siberia. They came with Seljuk's and various different groups from the east they started settling in Anatolia in between 1250-1350 Ad. They only became known when the Muslims were revolting against the Christians. The Turks were not always there they were Balkan peoples plus the Armenians.
     
  18. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,212
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    This post is just so full of errors...
    My favourite one:
    "This is not HRE and Austria or Mali and Songhai where the second state is clearly a continuation of the first and maintains the same general structure."
    Wrong on so many levels...
    Byzantium is somewhat the continuation of Rome, that was the main point of some of the posts previously yours. HRE and Austria are totally different structures, and Austria is by no means continuation of the other. Mali and Songhai are 2 completely separate states/nations, which were at some point of their history dominated most territory of the other. Not really different than France and Germany for example
     
  19. j51

    j51 Blue Star Cadet

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,041
    Location:
    Ping Island
    Remember in almost all historical migrations the genetic stock remains almost completely the same and the majority of people simply adopt the language, faith, and culture of the new occupiers.

    Edit: Culture is a very mutable property and the people occupying the same political entity or geographic space would have little in common with those 1000, even 500 years before. There is never a clear dividing lines for these things. These arguments will just go in circles.
     
  20. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,212
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    The dominant culture in Anatolia was greek (or as a mixture of greek-roman, as others pointed out), up until the Seljuk invasions started in 1077.
    The cultural structure of Anatolia slowly shifted to Turkish in the upcoming centuries, that's why the Ottoman's had such an easy job a couple centuries later
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page