Civ 5: Civilizations/Leaders Wanted!

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by Camikaze, Jul 26, 2011.

  1. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,925
    Thanks! Re: Majapahit, I respectfully disagree. My reasoning for going with Indonesia is as follows:

    1. Not many non-history initiates have heard of Majapahit. By contrast, Indonesia is very recognizable.
    2. There are plenty of other Indonesian empires that also deserve representation: Sailendra, Srivijaya, etc. "Indonesia" includes them where "Majapahit" is much more exculsive.
    3. A Majapahit city list would be difficult to implement, esp. since their capital city has proved so elusive to identify. By contrast, Indonesia could simply start with Jakarta.
    4. Going with more recognizable modern names is the general trend with Civ games. For example, we have "Korea" not "Choson," "India" not "Mughals," and "the Aztecs" not "Tenochca."

    Anyway, that's my reasoning.

    Good call on some of those wonders there. +1 to the Alhambra, Temple of Heaven, Leaning Tower of Pisa, Karnak, and a few of the others.
     
  2. Civciv5

    Civciv5 Grand Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,103
    Location:
    Nergenshuizen, Belgium
    Even if they have a chance to be in the game,if Firaxis does the regularly they will release The Mayans and maybe a Native American tribe in NA,example:Sioux.
    But they have never released any other South American civ other then the Inca,except in Civ4Col.Because they think the others are "not important".
    They will NOT release Brazil or any other modern nation,if they do that then the world is upside-down
     
  3. Pouakai

    Pouakai It belongs in a museum. Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Messages:
    7,164
    Location:
    Aotearoa
    As someone said earlier, they'd never included Songhai, Siam, Polynesia before.
     
  4. Civciv5

    Civciv5 Grand Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,103
    Location:
    Nergenshuizen, Belgium
    My point is that they will NOT release some South American civ as Huari and so.
    Because they are tribes not civilizations.And they have no great cities,did no great things,had no vast empire and were unadvanced in technology compared to the Inca,Maya and Aztec.
    Siam and Songhai were great empires and had great cities.
    Polynesia?That is an interesting culture and they built great monuments(moai statues),but never a vast empire but a large territory of islands,but they were never united.It's just an interesting culture.
    Maybe you can reason that Teotihuacan can be in for that reason(but it will not).
    But you can't reason that for Huari or Tiwanaku.
    Tiwanaku is already in the Inca city list!
     
  5. CivOasis

    CivOasis Ahuizotl

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,005
    Location:
    Sawaiki
    Clearly, you have no idea what you are talking about. Neglecting the implications of saying something isn't part of any civ, even, you are just plain wrong. The Huari Empire, as with Tiwanaku, were full blown civs, with sizable territories. They had many great cities (Tiwanaku itself), and were the major pre-Incan powers of the Andes. As for level of technology, they lived substantially earlier than the other civs you mentioned, and, frankly, where do you think the Incans got their early technology from?

    And these are united civs, with interesting cultures, great monuments and cities, and you're calling them tribes. Nevermind that Polynesia contains several independent civs, merged due to similar cultures (Hawai'i, Tonga, Rapa Nui, etc.). Frankly, the Maya were never united, either. Some were as great and influential as Siam and the Songhai, the only difference is time period.

    I can argue the Huari and Tiwanaku with almost identical reasons as I did (and still have unused) for Teotihuacan. As pointed out before, Honululu (Polynesia's capital, in-game) was in the American city-list prior to Polynesia's release, and CS's frequently get added and removed with DLC, so I hardly think the cities are going to stop new civs.
    As for Teotihuacan not getting in, Pouakai and I gave several very good examples of how the old civ-selecting rules got thrown out. If it weren't for the leak, most people never would have guessed the vast majority of the DLC. So, maybe Teotihuacan won't be represented, maybe it will. But the issue here is that I said Africa and the Americas needed more civs (in an appropriate thread), and that you said the vast majority of those continents, sparing roughly 4 new civs, did not deserve representation. Then, you proceeded to call my examples "tribes", which not only is not true, but had no place in this thread.
    Frankly, I don't expect the Huari or Tiwanaku to get in, but I still can express my interest in them, and they certainly have everything needed to be included,

    Responding to another poster who suggested Teotihuacan as a wonder, replacing Chichen Itza in a Mayan dlc:
    Could be a good idea, I don't think Chichen Itza would be removed from the wonder list, though. Paradoxical as it is, you can still build Macchu Picchu, even with the Incans in the game.
     
  6. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,925
    Oh, I wasn't asserting that they should replace Chichen Itza in Civ5. They've already done the work to include it. Rather, I was suggesting that Teotihuacan might be a better option for a wonder in the future, say Civ6.

    Who would be the leaders for those two?
     
  7. CivOasis

    CivOasis Ahuizotl

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,005
    Location:
    Sawaiki
    Well, to be honest, I myself do not know, but what I've seen seems to indicate that archaeologists at least know about Huari leaders (Oral tradition, perhaps?)
     
  8. Civciv5

    Civciv5 Grand Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,103
    Location:
    Nergenshuizen, Belgium
    Really,almost nothing remains of the Huari and that other,the only city they had was Tiwanaku and they had NO great monuments.
    You may suggest them as your dream as a DLC,that's ok.
    But I doubt that they will be ever released as DLC.
     
  9. CivOasis

    CivOasis Ahuizotl

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,005
    Location:
    Sawaiki
    Neither of them was a single city, so that goes out the window now.
    As for monument, they built some pretty impressive stuff (pyramids, terraces, etc.) up in the Andes, so that's also gone from your argument.
    And, yes, these two likely will not be DLC. But I can still suggest, them, which is what this thread is for.
    So, since you've long since made your points, both the accurate and the erroneous, please stop attacking my ideas, since they are in exactly the proper place, regardless of their odds of happening.
     
  10. TImithius

    TImithius Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2009
    Messages:
    92
    I don't really think that Mali is something you could hope for in Civ5, it is basically the same thing as Songhai, same cities, same units(Mandeleku Cavalry was part of Mali's armies), same resources, same religion and culture. All that is different in the capital and the leaders
     
  11. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,925
    That's something you may wish to look into. Civs cannot be implemented without a clear leader figure to represent them. That's what disqualifies the Olmecs, who might otherwise qualify for inclusion.

    Yes, they're basically the same civ. In Civ5, Firaxis simply chose to present a different aspect of the Malinese civilization by presenting us with Askia and the Songhai.
     
  12. Civciv5

    Civciv5 Grand Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,103
    Location:
    Nergenshuizen, Belgium
    The Incas did that to and does one of those "pyramids" still stands today?
     
  13. CivOasis

    CivOasis Ahuizotl

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,005
    Location:
    Sawaiki
    Yes, they do.
    A) That's where the Incans got it from.
    B) There are some much older monuments in the region, too (see Norte Chico and Caral-Supe, two of the earliest civilizations on the planet).
     
  14. Civciv5

    Civciv5 Grand Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,103
    Location:
    Nergenshuizen, Belgium
    And so we can discuss and discuss and discuss...
    I don't want an endless discussion.
    OK,we have a disagreement.And that's fine.
    Can we please discuss another topic?
     
  15. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,925
    Has anyone given any additional thought to the list I proposed on the previous page?
     
  16. Civciv5

    Civciv5 Grand Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,103
    Location:
    Nergenshuizen, Belgium
    How do you make a link to a previous post that is in the same thread?
    Has anybody read this:
    Khmer Empire
    Leader:Suryavarman II
    Capital:Angkor
    UU:Ballista Elephant replaces knight,Strength 22,+25% combat strenght when fighting in jungle
    UB:Khmer Temple Complex,replaces temple gives 5 culture per turn + 1 culture for every jungle in a city's radius
    Unique Ability:Spiritual Architecture,+25 production when building culture buildings
    Although I doubt that it will be released as DLC because the proximity of Siam.

    Srivijaya Empire
    Leader:Samaratungga
    Capital:palembang
    UU: Datu,replaces Swordsman Strength:12,can "claim" a tile once
    UB:Stupa/Candi,replaces monument gives 3 culture per turn
    Unique Ability:Monsoon Power each jungle gives an extra 1 production and 1 gold per turn
    (I posted it already in a previous post)
     
  17. CivOasis

    CivOasis Ahuizotl

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,005
    Location:
    Sawaiki
    Ethiopians
    Hittites
    Khmer
    Mayans
    Portuguese
    Sioux
    Bantu
    Assyrians
    Cherokee
    Congolese
    Indonesians
    Nubians
    Phoenicians
    Tibetans
    Vietnamese

    So, neglecting Civciv5's hypocrisy, here's my views:
    Phoenicia and Carthage is a bit redundant, so I pulled out Carthage.
    Same with Rome and Byzantium, IMO. I know it's been done before, but still.
    Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but the Minoans were more or less Greek?
    Sumer, as much as it deserves it, has too much overlap with Babylon.
    We really don't need any more European civs, I'll put my vote in for Portugal.
    Hebrews would be too controversial, but good idea.
    Again, may be wrong, but I don't think we know any Mississipian leaders.
    Personally, I don't want the Sioux, but they could easily be done.
    Could I suggest merging Zulu with one of my personal preferences, Swahili, as the Bantu?

    Great list, overall. Any ideas on how to do them?
     
  18. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,925
    Each of your points could merit a very detailed description, however as I'm somewhat time-limited at the moment I will just give brief answers for the time being. I'll come back for a more in-depth discussion later when I have more time.

    I used to think like that, but I came to the conclusion a while back that the two can exist comfortably side by side, with the Phoenicians representing the older sea-faring culture and the Carthaginians playing the role of the classical cosmopolitan, North African society that served as Rome's nemesis. I can give more detail later if you like.

    The difference between these two is even more marked. The pagan, classical Roman culture and the medieval Christian Byzantines were two very different animals, despite all the Byzantines' efforts to claim political lineage from Rome. Once again, this is a huge discussion that merits more time.

    Nope. They were the most ancient European civilization (in all likelihood the historical germ behind Atlantis) and did have a profound influence on early Mycenaean Greek culture, but they were definitely a separate group. Give them a wiki, or watch several of the fascinating documentaries that exist about them, and you'll see why I think they merit inclusion.

    The ancient near-eastern civilizations are often clumped together in the modern western viewpoint because they were all so very long ago.

    However, the relationship between the Sumerians and the Babylonians is analogous to that of the Greeks and the Romans. One group came first by a large margin (the Sumerians in ~5000 BC) and were then copied by a later group (the Babylonians in ~1800 BC) who took certain aspects of the original culture and modified them heavily, creating new ideas.

    The Sumerians and Babylonians were not even the same ethnic group, just like the Greeks and the Romans were different. No one suggests that the Greeks and the Romans should overlap, just because the latter were influenced by the former in some respects.

    I'm expecting that at some point, the Portuguese and the Dutch will come hand-in-hand again, just as they have in the past two games.


    The Hebrews ought not be considered so controversial; after all, they refer to the ancient culture, not the modern nation of Israel. Remember that Islam venerates the ancient Hebrew prophets and culture just as much as modern Christians and Jews do.

    Tuskaloosa.

    I'd much prefer multiple tribes be implemented over the old "Native America" from Civ4. Blech.

    The Zulus are a very popular mainstay. I'm confident that we'll be seeing Shaka again soon. As for the Bantu, they were such a wide-reaching culture that it would be difficult to narrow them down. Both the Congolese and the Zulus for example, which are on my list, are branches of the greater Bantu peoples. One might as well make the Indo-Europeans a civ, or the Semites--the Bantu are too broad.

    Yes. :) I will post in much greater detail as my schedule permits. For now, here's just one of my ideas fleshed out:

    The Moors
    Representing: al-Andalus, the Cordovan Caliphate, the Almohads, the Almoravids, the Berbers and Morocco.
    Leader: Yaqub al-Mansur or al-Mansur
    Capital: Marrakech
    UU: Urban Militia (replacing Longswordsmen)
    UB: Kasbah (replacing the Castle)
    UA: Patron of the Arts and Sciences
     
  19. Pouakai

    Pouakai It belongs in a museum. Moderator

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2010
    Messages:
    7,164
    Location:
    Aotearoa
    If you're going to have the Moors represent Morocco, I strongly reccomend the inclusion of the Black Guard. Also possibly a Medina UB?
     
  20. CivOasis

    CivOasis Ahuizotl

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,005
    Location:
    Sawaiki
    Ah, ok, so:
    As far as Sumer/Babylon overlap, I didn't mean cultures, I meant the cities available. Babylon's city list includes many that would go to Sumer.
    Carthage and Byzantium, I've heard many arguments for them before, I just wouldn't want them in a game, that's all.
    Sioux, I do not advocate a multi-civ Native American. I just did not want the Sioux, specifically (i.e., I have preferences for other groups). Similar with Zulu.
    Mississipian, did not know that.

    As to your idea: Nice, but I once saw an idea for Morocco seperately, that'd be my vote.
     

Share This Page