C3C Civilizations?

[G-Force Junkie]

There should be some civ covering Australia...

Anyway, the ancient Israelis would be nice, so would a central African civ and a SE Asia civ also to spread the civs around the globe. But the Sumerians seem awkward since their starting location (probably with the city of Ur) would be only a square or two away from the Babylonians starting position on a world map, but I guess another unusual issue is the Ottomans have Istanbul and the English having London while the Romans have Byzantium and Londonium. Oh well.

 

[JoeM]

Nope there shouldn't.

The Aborigines were/aren't a civilization, nor would there culture be carried forward in a Civ sense, how could you develop Markets and Economics in a society where possession holds no meaning? The current inhabitants of Oz are European colonists, and as yet have not developed their own civilization.

The same goes for Brazil, in terms of Civ it's a part of portuguese progression, though the nation is completely seperate. (Though the tyhough of a special "Carioca" unit does bring a smile )

I favour the ancient Civ's, which if they had survived could have brought about a different dominant civilization, as per the Byzantines.

No offense intended in this post guys

 

[Mongrel]

OKay..

We're only looking for 4 more, so I think Polynesia, Siam, and Abyssinia would help to flesh out a world map nicely.

Portugal or the Netherlands would help to flesh out a map of Europe nicely. But for the last civ, I'd choose the Souix. I think Native Americans were significant and culturally distinct enough to be represented by more than one tribe. Also, IIRC, the Iroquois were culturally and technologically quite different from tribes in the American West.

 

[Esckey]

The current inhabitants of Oz are European colonists, and as yet have not developed their own civilization.

Same goes for America. I don't see what the problem is here. If Native Americans can be added surly the natives of Oz can be added. We have no clue how far they might of advanced if Europeans had stayed away.

 

[Mark Young]

Originally posted by JoeM
Nope there shouldn't.

The Aborigines were/aren't a civilization, nor would there culture be carried forward in a Civ sense, how could you develop Markets and Economics in a society where possession holds no meaning? The current inhabitants of Oz are European colonists, and as yet have not developed their own civilization.

The same goes for Brazil, in terms of Civ it's a part of portuguese progression, though the nation is completely seperate. (Though the tyhough of a special "Carioca" unit does bring a smile )

I favour the ancient Civ's, which if they had survived could have brought about a different dominant civilization, as per the Byzantines.

No offense intended in this post guys

No offense taken but I totaly disagree with your opinion about the Aborigines
While it's true they didn't have markets, cathedrals,temples or economics as we understand them, to say that they aren't worthy of inclusion in civ3:C because they didn't evolve as much as the europeans or whomever is a little ignorant of what the Aborigines are.
They have a strong culture, unique military units, they traded with the first white people to come here (long before Cook). Sacred places of significant cultural importance. etc.

I like what Eskey said and let me add that EVERY single civ in the game has attributes that they never had in real life.

 

[Xen]

I think the Roman attribute cover the real Roman civ nicelly- Militarist, as we all know of the grand legion, and the importance the army had in politics, and commercial, as Rome did engage in extensive trade with Nubia, Scandinavia,China, and Arabia- for the products of gold, amber, silk, and incense, although I feel it would be better to replace the commercial trait with industrius, after all, the auqiducts didnt just sprout out of the ground over night, the same with colliseums, libraries, and roads

 

[Peebo]

definitely something like Ghana or Ethiopia should be in it to round things out diversely

 

[Sarevok]

Speaking of rome's attributes, I think they should be industrious as well. because while they were rich, they were better known for their buildings and construction. The saying "all roads lead to Rome" was very true and the aqueducts and contlessother buildings they made is a legacy they have left to this day. Why they chose commerce instead is understandable, but besides industrious? thats beyond me.

 

[Jove]

I urge everyone to not purchase the expansion until the producers can truthfully claim that the AI has been significantly improved. So, SteveAtari, Yes or No, is it?

 

[klazlo]

Originally posted by Mobilize
Australia, Austria-Hungary, Canada, and whatnot shouldn't be added since they were never really that power or signifigant, except Austria-Hungary because of their involvements in both world wars and the Hapsburg Dynasty which was one of the most powerful dynastys ever.

FYI: Austria-Hungary ceased to exist after WWI. This country btw is less significant from a historic standpoint than Hungary alone. Austria-Hungary is for those who think history has started around 1800...
Putting Austria-Hungary in would be an offense for every Hungarian civ fans, though I don't think Firaxis cares about this.

 

[Sarevok]

austria hungary wasnt in WW2, they collapsed at the end of WW1. although i would like to see austria hungary, i dont think they will be in because of the theme of this expansion.

 

[Lynx]

I predict Netherlands and Portugal will be in. they kinda need to be.

 

[Peebo]

some other ideas, though probably not as big civs as some others, would be:
polish
phoenicians
IndoEuropeans (ancesters of nearly all modern cultures from europe to india, werent very defined or advanced, so not likely they will be put in)
irish
Isreal

thats about all else i can think of right now
the netherlands = holland = dutch, right? i think they have a chance of being in it as well

 

[Andropov]

Polynesians, Siamese, Cubans, Berber, Slavs, Indonesia possibly...

 

[Andropov]

I disagree, I think Austria-Hungary certainly has a place (or at least Austria). After all, they helped stop the Turkish advance in Europe and the Habsburg's were no doubt a powerfull ruling family for many many years.

I agree with netherlands and Belgium...should Sweden be a civ separate from Scandinavia?

 

[Peebo]

cubans, nah
berbers and slavs, sure
at one time Austria-Hungary was a pretty big empire in europe, they fought in WWI so they probably have a good UU but i wouldnt know, so thats still a possibility.

 

[Knight_Bond007]

Please.....the Byzanthines and the LatinAmericans!


also it will be interesting the huns......

 

[nebuchadnezzar]

Originally posted by Sir Eric
@ nebuchadnezzar
Seeing that your are from there, what UU and wonders do you think that the hittites should have?
I think Muwatallis ll for leader, and maybe some sort of iron works as a city improvement unique to the hittites and a improved swordsmen as the UU.

ya, i'm from Hittite Land
as i said, Hittite unique unit should be a chariot, in a way powerful than that of Egyptians..
Mursilis is a good choice for leader, that is what firaxis did..
a unique city improvement is not good.. but, maybe they can start where iron is abundant..
forget about hittites..

 

[nebuchadnezzar]

the civ that i really want to see is the huns.. under the leadership of Attila.. the great king..

 

[Cossack 14]

Why did they want Sumer in the game? they go hand in hand with the Babylonians, its like the Franks and France.I think the other four will be: Austrailans( Aboriginies), Thai or Indonesian, Nigerian or Ethiopean, Polish or Hungarian.