Brave New World's 9 new Civs

[Imalich]

In Africa the two I would mostly like to see would be Kongo and Zimbabwe/Mutapa
But really, I still think the zulu are the biggest probability.

If there were the Italians and they were given a Renaissance-era focus, I would think one of their UUs would be the Condottieri and their UB would be something artsy or culture related, perhaps a Piazza?

Renaissance Italy?
Well, not very creative, but not hard to come up with ideas

UA: Something related to the new great works mechanic.
UU: Condottieri: Replaces some ground troop, cheaper to buy with money? Makes money when killing? (Something like that, or both)
UB: Officina: Replaces Workshop, +2 culture. This city gets +50% production when building culture buildings.

(just to point out, these are rough ideas. I didn't give much thought to balance when proposing them)


EDIT: Sorry for the off-topic. Just saw it was off the point of the discussion.

 

[Inhalaattori]

I was disgusted by the ethnocentrism present in this thread, especially concerning North American Indian civs.

People give them far less credit than they actually deserve.

No. Totally opposite is true. People give them too much credit, probably because they lived in the area of modern United States.

There is big list of Native Civs in Central- and South-America that deserve it much more. North-America was not nearly as developed as other parts of America. Iroquois for example were really primitive and small nation compared to Central- and South-American Native civs. Also many African civs deserve to be in the game much more than Natives of North-America.

Im not totally against having North-American Native civs, but they are just "what if" civs. I find it problematic that these Nations usually really didnt even have cities. Many Central- American and South-American civs had big cities, developed agriculture and big armies.

 

[turingmachine]

Sumerians and Hittites are already in Civ 5 Scenarios with UUs and UBs. I doubt they will be added "directly". However, since the files for them already exist, once modders come I don't see why they can't be tacked on as additional civs after the fact.

Once modders come? Check the workshop. Mod civs of Sumer and Hittetes based on the DLC scenario were some of the first made and have been available for a long time.

 

[turingmachine]

I had a relovation whilst playing GnK. The wonder we see in Warsaw in the BNW screen is the statue of zues, the color of the other new civ is the same as th Hittites in the ancient wonder scenario, featuring said statue. I think this may be a hint saying sumer and the Hittites may be two of the new civs. PS I am typint on a tablet. Please exuse any grammqr and spelling errors.

Actually it's not the same color as the Hitties.

 

[shocky27]

1. Poland
2. Assyria/Hitties/Sumer (whatever of these, prolly Assyria)

3. Portugal
4. Zulu

5. Majaphit/Indonesia
6. Brazil
7. Sioux/Cherokee/Comanche
8. Belgium
9. Kongo

I think I will be right on most of these, maybe substitute Belgium or Kongo for a darkhorse like Khazars, Hungary or Vietnam

 

[Gucumatz]

Once modders come? Check the workshop. Mod civs of Sumer and Hittetes based on the DLC scenario were some of the first made and have been available for a long time.

Apologies, when I download mods its normally sporadically and wonders - So well there you have it!

 

[Dregor]

nm ><

 

[Veras]

I'll put my money on the following civs:

1-Poland, of course, although I really hoped that it would be more under the Polish-Lithuanian Commomwealth style (great military, political and cultural goals)
2-Assyrians, I'll trust this almost unanimous guess. But it would be great to have something like a Kingdom of Israel-Judah (I know very little about ancient History, but couldn't this siege unit maybe belong to Israel or Judah?)
3-Portugal, for being too great to be forgotten all this time and, of course, the trade routes and Africa scenario
4-Empire of Brazil under D. Pedro II - probably one of our few unanimous leader -
The Brazilian empire (1822-1889) was a rare case of political stability and territorial unity in Latin America during the 19th century, with a considerable number of military victories over its neighbours (actually, with the exception of the Cisplatine War, Brazil has been victorious in every war it has participated, consolidating a regional leadership). And, of course, there is tourism. But I've seen that Brazil is a commom guess around here.
5-Probably two african civs, one of them being the Zulus (I don't know much about Africa so I have no idea what other civilization could fit)
6-The Apache or the Sioux
7-The Majapahit Empire would be a great asian exponent, in addition to the representation of Indonesia
8-I read most of the discussion over an Italian civ or even one of the Renaissance Republics, like Florence or Venice, but I remain with the hypothesis of the Republic of Venice as a strong candidate. Venice had a very important role as one of the main economic centers of medieval Europe and also relevant in Mediterranean, in the Ottoman Empire (there's a long list of wars between them), and in others Eastern civs

9-Well, this extra guess (in case of just one african civ) is most based in the lack of other relevant civilizations in my mind. So, maybe the Khmer Empire or the Bulgarian Empire.

(Sorry for a not-so-good-English)

 

[Veras]

Another possible leader for Brazil could be Getulio Vargas, I don't know. I really really want to see the Brazilian EMPIRE, and he's more controversial than D. Pedro II, but could fill the lack of 20th century leaders.

(I also thought in D. Pedro I. It would be awesome, since he has a more intense background, but due the fact that he abdicate the brazilian throne and was also a portuguese monarch, it's unlikely)

 

[mposyncckh]

I want some more eastern European civs because counting Poland there is two, the other being Russia(Culturally I kind of count Byzantium but i digress). You could have Bulgaria and possibly Yugoslavia. I know it is a more modern civ that isn't around any more but it combines so many Balkan nations so it could represent an area that doesn't really have anything.

 

[JanghanHong]

Another possible leader for Brazil could be Getulio Vargas, I don't know. I really really want to see the Brazilian EMPIRE, and he's more controversial than D. Pedro II, but could fill the lack of 20th century leaders.

(I also thought in D. Pedro I. It would be awesome, since he has a more intense background, but due the fact that he abdicate the brazilian throne and was also a portuguese monarch, it's unlikely)

I'd laugh if you had the same Pedro for both Portugal and Brazil, and the hypothetical war between the two is really the mental breakdown of poor schizophrenic Pedro


Vote Pedro, btw

 

[GenjiKhan]

Another possible leader for Brazil could be Getulio Vargas, I don't know. I really really want to see the Brazilian EMPIRE, and he's more controversial than D. Pedro II, but could fill the lack of 20th century leaders.

(I also thought in D. Pedro I. It would be awesome, since he has a more intense background, but due the fact that he abdicate the brazilian throne and was also a portuguese monarch, it's unlikely)

I think that the choice of capital for Brazil is harder to guess than the choice of leader,because the best choice of leader is D. Pedro II,without any doubt . There can be either Brasilia(current capital) or Rio de Janeiro(former capital) . Brasilia has the problem of not existing during the reign of Pedro II,while Rio de Janeiro has the problem of making Brasilia non capital city,which is quite weird .

 

[Pouakai]

I'd laugh if you had the same Pedro for both Portugal and Brazil, and the hypothetical war between the two is really the mental breakdown of poor schizophrenic Pedro


Vote Pedro, btw

Pedro has declared war on Pedro!

Pedro has denounced Pedro!

 

[mposyncckh]

I think that the choice of capital for Brazil is harder to guess than the choice of leader,because the best choice of leader is D. Pedro II,without any doubt . There can be either Brasilia(current capital) or Rio de Janeiro(former capital) . Brasilia has the problem of not existing during the reign of Pedro II,while Rio de Janeiro has the problem of making Brasilia non capital city,which is quite weird .

There are many capitol cities that were not the capital when the leader was in power. Beijing was not the capital of china during Wu Zutain, Loyang was if I am not mistaken. The capitol of Russia was St. Petersburg during Catherine the Great's reign. Krakow was Poland's Capital during Casimir the Great, etc. That would not be a problem

 

[Imalich]

There are many capitol cities that were not the capital when the leader was in power. Beijing was not the capital of china during Wu Zutain, Loyang was if I am not mistaken. The capitol of Russia was St. Petersburg during Catherine the Great's reign. Krakow was Poland's Capital during Casimir the Great, etc. That would not be a problem

Agreed. It would be quite simple to solve. But the irony is that Brasilia didn't even EXIST during the empire. It dates back to the fifties... Not that I think 2k would really mind that, of course.

 

[mposyncckh]

Agreed. It would be quite simple to solve. But the irony is that Brasilia didn't even EXIST during the empire. It dates back to the fifties... Not that I think 2k would really mind that, of course.

I don't that would really matter. That with the leader UA and Us could just represent what is Brazil as a whole. Capital Contemporary and Everything else different Brazilian time frames.

 

[Veras]

I'd laugh if you had the same Pedro for both Portugal and Brazil, and the hypothetical war between the two is really the mental breakdown of poor schizophrenic Pedro


Vote Pedro, btw

Funny thing is that Pedro I had to declare war on his own father for the independence of Brazil, just to succeed him as the king of Portugal and Brazil after his death.

It's a really interesting story, sad thing that is little known out of the lusophone countries

 

[Veras]

I think that the choice of capital for Brazil is harder to guess than the choice of leader,because the best choice of leader is D. Pedro II,without any doubt . There can be either Brasilia(current capital) or Rio de Janeiro(former capital) . Brasilia has the problem of not existing during the reign of Pedro II,while Rio de Janeiro has the problem of making Brasilia non capital city,which is quite weird .

Well, I think there isn't much to think about. Brasilia is the capital for less than 70 years, and still has very little impact in the History of Brazil as a whole. Rio de Janeiro was the capital for almost 200 years, from 1763 to 1962, and even after the building of Brasilia it remained a very important political, cultural and economical point for the country.

There is also the fact that both Pedro II (and the first too) and Getulio Vargas ruled from Rio de Janeiro, so for me is the perfect and obvious choice (unless you want it to be Salvador, the capital during colonial times).

 

[Veras]

Since Brazil is the current topic here, I think a possible UA could be related with agriculture (maybe if we have Coffe, Tobacco as luxury resources -or even rubber as strategic resources-) and/or exports of these resources.

That, or something related to 'huehue'.

 

[Securion]

Wish-list;

Hungary, Israel, Kievan Rus, Majapahit, Maurya and Novgorod.