Canada as a Civ?

[AriochIV]

Here's the litmus test: is there anyone here who's not Canadian who thinks Canada should be in Civilization?

Hint: Sid is from Canada and he didn't put it in.

 

[Thormodr]

Sigh, why is it that people can't even be bothered to wikipedia something before posting in a "Canada + Civ" thread.

It happens every time, and while most usually just prefer non-modern civs (I do as well), and the thread moves on, there's always someone who says:

"Canada is just the US-lite, right?" or something similar.
"It was just a colony, so didn't do anything, right?", or something similar.
"Canada didn't ever do anything military..."
"Let's mention that the only unique things about Canada would just be jokes!"

All are of course wrong, and basic wiki skills could at least show you that. Granted, since we have most of the comedians in north america (good ones) we've spent years messing with American(s) and their culture to the point where they don't even know better.

Just because Canada doesn't run around yelling about what we've done, doesn't mean we didn't do anything.

Good post. It's amazing how little some people know about Canada. I remember the same knee jerk reaction that happened before Civilization 5 came out. It became a bash Canada fest and some of the vitriol was highly insulting. I guess some things never change.

Canadians have a proud military history, have many important inventions/discoveries and are regularly regarded as one of the top countries in the world to live in.

 

[Thormodr]

Here's the litmus test: is there anyone here who's not Canadian who thinks Canada should be in Civilization?

Hint: Sid is from Canada and he didn't put it in.

Sid hasn't been very involved with the franchise since the original one.

 

[El Castellano]

I would not mind that civilizations such as Canada, Australia, Mexico or Argentina were added in DLC or expansions. As Spanish I like that Spain is in the game and to play with her, so I understand that people in these countries want to see them in the game and play with those civilizations.

Think that add postcolonial nations that does not mean they stop out the old civilizations. And if someone bothers you that they would be in his game by anything, you do not have to buy the DLC or can do a preselection of civilizations before start the game.

And as always, sorry for my level of English

 

[joncnunn]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions

 

[moysturfurmer]

Here's the litmus test: is there anyone here who's not Canadian who thinks Canada should be in Civilization?

Hint: Sid is from Canada and he didn't put it in.

I'm an American and I'd rather see Canada than Venice or The Huns.

I mean I wouldn't want them to be in vanilla, but if they've got 49 civs and need one more to round it out to 50, then yea why not?

I'm down to see just about any civ as long as they've got interesting mechanics.

 

[daft]

Canadians have a proud military history, have many important inventions/discoveries and are regularly regarded as one of the top countries in the world to live in.

I really think we have a shot at one of the inevitable CVI expansions!
Scores of players of the CIV series are from Canada, enough to check out the members of CIV Fanatics, plenty of Canadians here.
The nation is a cold-weather nation, could easily qualify on that aspect alone (bonus food from Tundra/Ice tiles/hexes).
Canadian inventions and great people are little known, but some of the invention are used around the world (without knowing they were invented by Canadians)
How famous are the traditional Canadian Mounties?
Canada, as a civ in CIVVI, would definitely feel unique and add flavour to the game (if made properly)
I believe both, Canada and Australia should be included in one of the coming iteration's expansion sets.
Definitely not vanilla civ, Canada is a worthy one, no doubt.

Look at Poland, how laughed off they were as a potential Civ prior to BNW, and then turned out to have a glorious history, excellent UU and UA, one of the better ones in the game.
Lack of knowledge can lead people/nations to rude and even aggressive behavior toward each other, but if properly educated, such people may become friends.
Knowledge = Appreciation.

 

[daft]

Civilization games are associated with history, so historic civs are more desired, in my opinion. Even USA is represented by older presidents, not Bill Clinton, Obama etc. I think it is not a coninsidence. Poland is not represented by Lech Walensa but by a medieval king etc. This is simply a LOT more attractive. It makes me want to play with such civs.

From what I remember, Firaxis only included your Poland in the last expansion of the 5th iteration.
Why have you got so much to say in this topic?

I truly appreciate Poland's unique additions to the overall flavour of Civilizations in the game, and without a doubt, Poland should be in, however, do you know Poland was made fun of prior to making it in the final expansion to the fifth game of the series?
Poland should have made it at least in a CIV expansion at the latest if you ask me, yet it didn't.

However, Germany, a nation that did not exist prior to the 19th century as a single entity has been in since CI. Didn't it used to be a bunch of separate states? Holy Roman Empire? Hey, but there it is.

Isn't it funny how, when playing as Greece you get to found Athens first and the Sparta? Don't you know those ancient Greek city states, historically, would rather fight each other than be part of same nation? Yet you got no complaints about that?

 

[nunor]

From what I remember, Firaxis only included your Poland in the last expansion of the 5th iteration.
Why have you got so much to say in this topic?

I truly appreciate Poland's unique additions to the overall flavour of Civilizations in the game, and without a doubt, Poland should be in, however, do you know Poland was made fun of prior to making it in the final expansion to the fifth game of the series?
Poland should have made it at least in a CIV expansion at the latest if you ask me, yet it didn't.

However, Germany, a nation that did not exist prior to the 19th century as a single entity has been in since CI. Didn't it used to be a bunch of separate states? Holy Roman Empire? Hey, but there it is.

Isn't it funny how, when playing as Greece you get to found Athens first and the Sparta? Don't you know those ancient Greek city states, historically, would rather fight each other than be part of same nation? Yet you got no complaints about that?

'Civilization' and 'empire/unified state/kingdom' are completely distinct concepts.

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

Personally and even do Canada is perhaps one of the more civilized countries in the world, they do not belong in the game. They are just to meh. And still has the English queen as head of state.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

I would say in terms of Cultural Distinctiveness (from the rest of the Anglosphere) and Impact, Canada is rather low on the list, but definitely above say Texas or Singapore

(I'd put Canada in the 40th - 80th civ range)

I think a large part of the question is how many civs people want... after a certain point they begin to blur, and unique and interesting gameplay gets lost.

Some people want ~200 civs with all sorts of uniquenesses, they want to play as Brittany and go to war with the Welsh, they want Athens, Sparta, Macedonia, And Greece.

Some people want ~20 civs that play drastically differently/or are limited to civs that have truly stood the test of time for at least that past couple thousand years.. no recent upstarts like England or Russia, or burnout failures like Babylon.

 

[Darth Tribble]

I'd say that Post Colonial civs have a place in civ since the inclusion of Brazil, yes, the US has always been there, but it was the exception.

I think Canada has a lot going against it, mainly sharing a lot of commonalities with the US, probably even Australia got a better shot at it due to its TSL.

That said, I think limiting shared language to 2 civs per language is ideal (if it has to be done)

-English speaking -America
-Portuguese speaking - Brazil
-Spanish speaking - Gran Colombia, Mexico, Argentina (take your pick)
-French speaking - Tahiti ?

We even got two German speaking in civ5

Mexico, by Civ standards is just really the Aztecs and Spain. If you want Mexico, play as the Aztecs or as Spain and conquer the Aztecs. Or make the Philippines a Civ.

For French, we could do Canada because of Quebec. Haiti or a French speaking African nation are also options. If were doing two civs per language, we could add Belgium since both Dutch and French are spoken there.

 

[ehecatzin]

Mexico, by Civ standards is just really the Aztecs and Spain. If you want Mexico, play as the Aztecs or as Spain and conquer the Aztecs. Or make the Philippines a Civ.

For French, we could do Canada because of Quebec. Haiti or a French speaking African nation are also options. If were doing two civs per language, we could add Belgium since both Dutch and French are spoken there.

Just want to clear this out, Mexico=Aztec is really not the case, at all. Newsflash, the Aztecs were crushed into oblivion in the 16th century. The comparison isn't really helpfull at all either, want to play Spain? play Rome and go conquer Carthage and some Celts.

Now if you want to argue that the geographical overlap can rule Mexico out you'd have a point, which I recon it's the main drawback against a Mexico civ.

My argument was based in the idea of 2 civs sharing language, which I agree, we don't have a statement from the devs saying its a rule if anything its just a pattern. So yeah, it could as well be possible Firaxis decides to go for Canada civ and not give us more non English post colonial civs, I think it would be a shame tho.

 

[Captain Fargle]

Canada has been requested a lot since Civ 5 came out so I wouldn't be suprised to see them included in one of the expansions in the "Poland Slot". Not replacing Poland in the roster but being the newcomer Civ that gets in over others because of fan demand.

Despite what some people say there's plenty of interesting unique things you can do with Canada, even if some of them are pretty stereotypical. For instance:

Unique Unit: Foresters Replaces Builders, no movement penalty from Rough Terrain. Can be used to turn Forest tiles that are not adjacent to a Luxury into Maple Orchards to give +1 copy of the Maple Syrup Luxury.

Stereotypical as hell sure but unique and certainly appropriate given that Canada produces something like 95% of the maple syrup in the world.

 

[Mobfire]

I don't think foresters should be uniques. If I were a designer, I would chose:
- UU: Mountie
- UB: Hockey Rink
- UU/UB: Something to do with early Canadian exploration (like a Voyageur, Coureur de Bois, Hudson's Bay Company) or with the anglo-french wars (The cannons/ships that were used)

 

[daft]

To prove, once again, the superiority of Canada over the overwhelming fan favourites: the Inuit, let me produce this short list in a question and answer form:

1. The fundamental aspect of the game called CIVILIZATION is the founding/building/constructing of CITIES, not villages or settlements, CITIES.
Question: Did these tribes ever found/build cities?
Answer: Inuit: NONE, never.
Canada: Lots, scores of cities.
Advantage Canada.

2.
Question: Did these tribes train/used in battles the GENERIC units available in the game?
Answers:
Inuit: Only perhaps a couple of the early-primitive ones.
Canada: Most of the modern era ones.
Advantage: Canada

3. Generic Buildings, did these tribes ever build/construct generic buildings available in the game?
Answer: Inuit: Perhaps a couple of the ancient era ones
Canada: Most of the modern era buildings, as well as those carrying through from earlier eras, like libraries, banks and universities.
Advantage: Canada

4. Technologies: Are these tribes/nations known to have acquired the knowledge of/applied/used any of the Techs available in the game?
Inuit: A very few, primitive ones
Canada: Most of the modern era ones
Advantage: Canada

5. Social Policies and Ideologies
Did these tribes ever conform to, live by, abide by, any of these available in the game?
Inuit: next to none
Canada: several of them
Advantage: Canada

6 Wonders:
Did these tribes build/construct/erect any of the Wonders (great or otherwise) available in the game?
Inuit: None
Canada: CN Tower

7. Which nation/tribe exists longer?
INUIT

8. Which nation/tribe offers more original play options in the game due to it's tribal characteristics?
INUIT

So, although the last two points were Inuit victories, Canada still has them beat 6 to 2.
Yet, I'm sure to see the Inuit in the game prior to my country, why?
"because they would be more fun"-that's the common explanation of it, reminds me of what Donald Trump (or George W. Bush) would say, and sure would vote for.

At least, the intelligent know which the right choice would be.

(now, that I've said the truth, I'm done posting in this thread)

 

[Varitok]

Well this thread exploded, It seems people can be so violently against Canada being put into the game. I was just saying that it would be fun and a great way to include a civ thats been left out and has a lot of unique things about them. I would love a diplomatic Canada civ.

 

[ehecatzin]

Well this thread exploded, It seems people can be so violently against Canada being put into the game. I was just saying that it would be fun and a great way to include a civ thats been left out and has a lot of unique things about them. I would love a diplomatic Canada civ.

Welcome to the "civ X should be in" discussions, it's always like that, if anything this one is light. Wait until they start announcing more civs.

 

[Varitok]

Welcome to the "civ X should be in" discussions, it's always like that, if anything this one is light. Wait until they start announcing more civs.

It's my first time posting here so I wasn't warned . Well, I'm still hoping for Canada as a civ and I stand by the fact that they have a lot to offer.

 

[darko82]

From what I remember, Firaxis only included your Poland in the last expansion of the 5th iteration.
Why have you got so much to say in this topic?

I truly appreciate Poland's unique additions to the overall flavour of Civilizations in the game, and without a doubt, Poland should be in, however, do you know Poland was made fun of prior to making it in the final expansion to the fifth game of the series?
Poland should have made it at least in a CIV expansion at the latest if you ask me, yet it didn't.

However, Germany, a nation that did not exist prior to the 19th century as a single entity has been in since CI. Didn't it used to be a bunch of separate states? Holy Roman Empire? Hey, but there it is.

Isn't it funny how, when playing as Greece you get to found Athens first and the Sparta? Don't you know those ancient Greek city states, historically, would rather fight each other than be part of same nation? Yet you got no complaints about that?

What can I say?

There is a lot of ignorance as far as Poland is concerned. I believe it is because many people in USA do not even know where Poland is actually situated, not to mention they know anything about Poland's history. Ask them if you cannot believe it.

What can I say?

Poland has been on the map for many centuries. In Europe it is one of the countries with rich history from medival times to modern WWII.

Germany is big because it played a major role in WWII; it attacked Poland; and Hitler caused one of the biggest wars in the history. Now because they robbed Poland in the 20th century; they are rich in the 21 century.

Do you think that developers of Civ 5 are real historians to know the history of every civ they consider to include? Especially because they cannot include every civ. I do not even understand why Poland has only appeared in a Civ 5 expansion. It was slaughtered for centuries, not only by Germany. Maybe that is why...

OK, give me the reasons why Canada should be in? USA is not enough?