Civ 5: Civilizations/Leaders Wanted!

[CivOasis]

For America,only Maya and maybe another Native tribe are worth to add.
For Africa,Carthage,Kongo,Ethiopia and Nubia are worth to be added.
The civ must be historically "important" to be added.

Are you kidding me?
For starters, I wouldn't call Carthage worthy (I've gone into this before, though, so I won't digress too much here).

For the Americas, many large-scale, advanced civilizations lived there before the Europeans showed up. And most of Europe's success in colonizing came from disease and native alliances, to boot.

I may not know as much about Africa's history, but I know many early civilizations existed there, as well.

Besides, I also would think some former colonies could qualify, as well (Brazil and South Africa are mentioned relatively frequently, and I personally think Brazil would be cool).

I'd be careful about what you call a "tribe" (the Zapotec, for example, were not a "tribe", they were a civilization), and where you go with "historically important". Just because they weren't important to Europe, doesn't make them unsignificant.

 

[Civciv5]

Brazil and South Africa are mentioned relatively frequently, and I personally think Brazil would be cool

Firaxis NEVER releases modern nations (Australia,Mexico,Canada,Taiwan,South Africa...)
If there will be a Brazil DLC,then it would be over ... a lot of years...

large-scale, advanced

Maybe Aztec and Inca may qualify,but those are the only.

 

[CivOasis]

Firaxis NEVER releases modern nations (Australia,Mexico,Canada,Taiwan,South Africa...)
If there will be a Brazil DLC,then it would be over ... a lot of years...

They do: The United States, and several countries have modern (not era) UUs. Firaxis never released the Pacific before Polynesia, and never did DLC or 1UPT before, either, so that gets thrown out the window.
Looking at the ideas:
I'd like Australia, mentioned South Africa above.
Mexico has the same capital as the Aztecs, so no,
Taiwan? Isn't that controversial in China?
Canada... what would their UU, UA be? (If you can find some, then yes, go Canada!)

Maybe Aztec and Inca may qualify,but those are the only.

Immediately when Europe showed up, I would argue for more (Zapotec, as you mentioned, the Maya, etc.)

Before that, there are plenty of clear choices, some arguably more impressive (when you look at time frame): The Empire of Teotihuacan, the Huari, Tiwanaka (admittedly, rhe last two are probably a no-go, but Teotihuacan would be good).

 

[That nerdy kid]

you see, America only made it on the list for a few reasons:
1. the game is made in America
2. USA is most powerful former colony in the world.
3. USA has slapped the Europeans in their faces throughout its history.
4. USA is most technologically advanced former colony in the world
5. USA has contributed an incalculable amount to scientific and cultural knowledge.

these allow Firaxis to get over the whole paradox thing for one civ. but Brazil and Australia will not make it. South Africa might, because the Bantu living there had iron weapons when the Europeans invaded.

 

[CivOasis]

A lot of nations have done number three on that list... My point was that his reasons were invalid. I don't think that invalidates Brazil, though, there's a lot of interesting history for that. To be honest, I'd doubt Australia, I just thought it would be cool.
My point is that the medieval American nations weren't the only options on those continents.

 

[Civciv5]

The United States of America are an exception,but South Africa is too modern (founded in 1961).
They never include modern (1800-present) nations,they include modern UU's.

The Empire of Teotihuacan, the Huari, Tiwanaka

Firaxis only releases nations were the "avarage" people have ever heard of,not nations that nobody knows of and they must be "historical important enough".
The nations that you named did nothing important or great,did they?

 

[CivOasis]

The United States of America are an exception,but South Africa is too modern (founded in 1961).
They never include modern (1800-present) nations,they include modern UU's.

Firaxis only releases nations were the "avarage" people have ever heard of,not nations that nobody knows of and they must be "historical important enough".
The nations that you named did nothing important or great,did they?

Average people have heard of all three of those (esp. Teotihuacan, its up there with Pompeii for fame), and its not infrequently you see Tiwanaku or the Huari in a newspaper article.
No offense, but I think Carthage, the Celts', and Belgium's accomplishment are less widely known than Teotihuacan's. I didn't even know Belgium was a colonial power, until I came across this thread, and all I knew of Carthage was that it was a former Phoenician colony that got destroyed by Rome.

Anyways, this a "civs wanted" thread, not a "civ prediction" thread.
Well, maybe its both, but you should get my point.

 

[Civciv5]

I'm an avarage human and I have NEVER heard of "Huari" and "Tiwanaka".
I have heard of "Tiwanaku" tough.
And there can't be a "The Empire of Teotihuacan" because there is already an Aztec Empire and they occupy the same space and "Teotihuacan" is in their city list.

 

[Pouakai]

Honolulu was on the American city list, and yet

 

[CivOasis]

Tiwanaka was a typo.
And the Aztec city list contains about five civilizations' cities. Most are closely related, but I haven't the foggiest idea why Teotihuacan is on there, they didn't occupy the same time or region, or have the same culture. It's beyond me why the devs put that city on the list.

As noted above, the Aztecs and Teotihuacan do not occupy the same region, and, well... they have almost nothing in common.

 

[That nerdy kid]

Teotihuacan is on their because many people use the Aztecs as Mexico, and Teotihuacan was a major city. however, i would much rather have the Maya than any other empire besides maybe Pueblo, Apache, or Mississippian.

Teotihuacán ("teh-oh-tee-wa-KHAN") is an ancient sacred site located 30 miles northeast of Mexico City, Mexico.

(quote from http://www.sacred-destinations.com/mexico/teotihuacan)

Thus, it seems that the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was close to the city of Teotihuacan, which contradicts many people on this thread's comments. Teotihuacan is much less known than the Celts, Carthaginians, and well ... um lets just ignore Belgium. everyone knows a little about the Celts, and everyone knows a little about the Carthaginians. Not many people know about Teotihuacan, no matter what you may know about it.

 

[Lexicus]

I think Phoenicia would be a good addition.

Israel would be cool but probably too politically charged.

I don't think Carthage is insignificant, though Carthage and Phoenicia would be redundant.

More African civs would also be welcome (Bantu? Nubians?)

Another Native American group would be cool,too. I heard Zapotec, and that would be an interesting idea. I was thinking the other night I'd like to see something like Civ 4s Native America, with a plains-Indian aesthetic and a mounted archer UU.

 

[CivOasis]

Teotihuacan is on their because many people use the Aztecs as Mexico, and Teotihuacan was a major city. however, i would much rather have the Maya than any other empire besides maybe Pueblo, Apache, or Mississippian.

Teotihuacán ("teh-oh-tee-wa-KHAN") is an ancient sacred site located 30 miles northeast of Mexico City, Mexico.

(quote from http://www.sacred-destinations.com/mexico/teotihuacan)

Thus, it seems that the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan was close to the city of Teotihuacan, which contradicts many people on this thread's comments. Teotihuacan is much less known than the Celts, Carthaginians, and well ... um lets just ignore Belgium. everyone knows a little about the Celts, and everyone knows a little about the Carthaginians. Not many people know about Teotihuacan, no matter what you may know about it.

... You talked about significance to history (and I question the importance of that, anyways), yet you suggest the Pueblo and Apache (the Mississipian aren't possible, no known leaders). Honestly, there are many far more notable African and American civs.

If people want to use the Aztecs as Mexico, fine, but that doesn't invalidate other civs from the region. That's a personal choice, not the dev's design. The Aztecs invalidate Mexico as a civ, because they share a capital, but they aren't the same.

And seriously, how much do most people honestly know about Carthage? That it got its but kicked by Rome.
How about the Celts? Basically, that they were in Ireland and the UK.

Teotihuacan is at least equally as well known as (and arguably more significant) than these civs, so it deserves mention, too.

 

[CivOasis]

I think Phoenicia would be a good addition.

Israel would be cool but probably too politically charged.

I don't think Carthage is insignificant, though Carthage and Phoenicia would be redundant.

More African civs would also be welcome (Bantu? Nubians?)

Another Native American group would be cool,too. I heard Zapotec, and that would be an interesting idea. I was thinking the other night I'd like to see something like Civ 4s Native America, with a plains-Indian aesthetic and a mounted archer UU.

No "official" versions, but a very good Nubian, and several pre-columbian American, civs exist as mods (Optik's ANAC). Obviously, the limits of modding means that they somewhat overlap with existing civs, but, still, go take a look. That's honestly where I got the Zapotec idea from.

 

[That nerdy kid]

... You talked about significance to history (and I question the importance of that, anyways), yet you suggest the Pueblo and Apache (the Mississipian aren't possible, no known leaders). Honestly, there are many far more notable African and American civs.

If people want to use the Aztecs as Mexico, fine, but that doesn't invalidate other civs from the region. That's a personal choice, not the dev's design. The Aztecs invalidate Mexico as a civ, because they share a capital, but they aren't the same.

And seriously, how much do most people honestly know about Carthage? That it got its but kicked by Rome.
How about the Celts? Basically, that they were in Ireland and the UK.

Teotihuacan is at least equally as well known as (and arguably more significant) than these civs, so it deserves mention, too.

I am sorry, but we live in a world where most people can't find Iran on a map. i think Carthage and the Celts are much more well known than the Teotihuacanos, and we know more about them. Name 2 unique units and a UA for Teotihuacan that are based on known fact.

 

[Pouakai]

I am sorry, but we live in a world where most people can't find Iran on a map. i think Carthage and the Celts are much more well known than the Teotihuacanos, and we know more about them. Name 2 unique units and a UA for Teotihuacan that are based on known fact.

Most people in my Geography class don't know what the 'boot shaped country' is, let alone where it is. But that is beside the point, as these people are not the ones that will be playing civilization. These people that you are using to support your case would not know where half the empires featured were centered. But they don't play civ, so they don't matter.

 

[Civciv5]

If you want a "Teotihuacan Civilization" name more then 15 city names that are NOT in the Aztec City List.
Maybe they can bring it in as a city-state but not as an empire.
If it would be an empire then it would be smallest empire in the game.
And can you name a leader,UU,UA,UB?
Civilizations must cover a quite large territory,to be in the game.
No "Modern nations".
No "Unknown nations".
No "tiny nations".
No "not important" nations.
No "nations that cover the same space or are too close together".

 

[Pouakai]

No "Modern nations".
No "Unknown nations".
No "tiny nations".
No "not important" nations.
No "nations that cover the same space or are too close together".

I agree
Songhai
Iroquois
Not important - matter of opinion
Ottomans, Arabia, Babylon, Persia, Egypt, Greece, Rome, France, Germany, Spain,

 

[Civciv5]

Songhai
Iroquois

What I meant was "historical importance",they did play a significant role in history.

 

[CivOasis]

So, for area comarison:

The Aztec Empire

The Teotihuacan Empire, among others.

Clearly, Teotihuacan's empire covered much more territory. Cities shouldn't be a problem.

Possible leaders:

Siyaj K'ak' was a general who overthrew many Mayan kings, puppeted the kingdoms, and became overlord to many Mayan states. I've suggested him before for the Mayans, but he'd do well as leader of his own people, too.

Jatz'om K'uh (Atlatl Cauac) was a powerful king from the same time period. His children, in fact, were the kings that S'iyaj K'ak' installed into the Mayan puppet states. We don't know much about him, but, we don't know much about Ramkhaemang, either, so that's not really an issue. There is info out there about some of his rule, so he would be far from impossible.

A UA? Something regarding puppeted or occupied cities would be excellent, they were kind of known for it. 1/2 (3/4) unhappines from puppeting cities, perhaps?

UU: Well, atlatls were a big deal in the region, they could be used as an archer replacement. The Incans have slingers, so a more generic UU is hardly a problem, and that was just the idea that came to mind.

UI: Temple complex. Why not? They were known as pyramid builders, I could see it as an improvement only buildable in jungle tiles. There are certainly a lot of other alternatives, too.

As for historical importance, they strongly influenced many other civilizations in the region, especially the Mayans, and the Aztecs knew about them, despite having first arrived several centuries after the collapse of the empire.