Civ 5: Civilizations/Leaders Wanted!

[Truronian]

I only think that's true if you add in the pre-colonial histories of Brazil, Canada and Australia. At which point they aren't really 'modern civs'. Or maybe you just mean that the turns in early game span hundreds of years while late game is few years, so you spend more turns there?

That is what I mean.

Brazil (for example) has been around for fourish G&K eras (Industrial -> Information) while civs like Egypt barely managed two.

 

[Glassmage]

soooo.... a great civ must be one that survive through the ages and not their accomplishments?

 

[Peacemongerer]

Zulu sound like an obvious choice for an African civ since they were in previous civs anyway. The Kongo would be my next choice for an African civ.

I'm thinking maybe add 1 or 2 more native american civilizations plus the Zulu and Kongo. My suggestions would be the Souix, Cherokee or maybe Inuits possibly.

If there's gonna have to be another European civ, I'd have to go Portugal. They've been in previous civs and they have a wide range of possible UAs and UUs/UBs to choose from.

 

[PhilBowles]

AFRICA (No sub-saharan civs):

Sorry to bring this up again, but I've mentioned it several times and the "No sub-Saharan civs" claim is just annoying for its lack of geographical precision. Both Mali and Ethiopia are sub-Saharan, the latter fully so, the former all but the north. The Songhai Civilopedia text explicitly describes them as a sub-Saharan civilization. Granted, what's probably meant is that there are no civs below the African forest belt (an area which doesn't have a single catchy name to describe it), or from Africa below the Equator, but sub-Saharan Africa has better representation than, say, South America or Southeast Asia.

[*]Congo- will represent equatorial Africa. A civ with a lot of jungle benefits. Could be represented an ancient kingdom?

Why ancient? It was medieval in tech level and social development, and was at its height during the Renaissance.

[*]Uganda- could be a modern civ represented by Idi Amin?

As charismatic a figure as Idi Amin was (albeit in all the wrong ways), and despite the apparent selection of some Civ V civs to showcase particular leaders rather than the nations they represent (Gustavus Adolphus - great Civ leader choice. Sweden - less great civ choice), I don't see a reason to add Uganda as a civ.

[*]Bantu- Could be blanketed to represent subsaraha without preference to nationality?

I'm not a fan of either tribal civs or conglomerate ethnic group civs (Huns excepted for the leader choice and gameplay style).

I still feel there's unjust neglect in 'African civ' threads for the Merina; Africa as a continent at least has numerous civs, if mostly concentrated north of the Equator, Madagascar presents an entire large island without a civ to represent it.

CENTRAL AMERICA (no representation of the Carribbean island peoples):

• Cuba- My god, Cuba would be awesome. With Che as it's leader (though I know he wasn't their leader in real life), they could gain additional benefits upon adapting ORDER in the SP tree?

• 
  
  Idi Amin, Ernesto Guevara - am I detecting a theme in leader choices here? Quite aside from the inappropriateness of the leader choice (discussed in detail - off-topic - in another thread), Havana would work very well as a city-state, but there's nothing to justify Cuba as a civ.
  
  

  [*]Arawaks/Taino?- A tribal civ with no reference to countries?
  [*]Haiti- Could be interesting with L'overture as leader. Maybe additional happiness from plantations?

  
  These have originality to commend them, but not obviously anything else. How about the Huetar while we're about it, representing pre-Columbian Costa Rica? Guayabo as a city-state anyway.
  
  In terms of map logistics, if your concern is to get representation on true start Earth maps, Central America is a rather small area and the Caribbean islands much more so. Practically, the Maya need room to expand south, and were well-represented in northern Central America although they have a Mexican capital - the second city is Guatemalan and Caracol (Belize) is in the city list, at least; I believe several Honduran Mayan sites are as well.
  
  

  SOUTH AMERICA (only incas. No other CIVS)
  

  • Gran Columbia- could be good with Bolivar as a revolutionary. Maybe they gain additional influence after liberating City States?

  • 
    
    Rather poor bonus. Bolivar, like Gustavus, deserves to be in Civ, but people better-acquainted with post-colonial South America have argued to death giving reasons Gran Columbia is a terrible civ choice.
    
    

    [*]Brazil- Could also kinda make up for Portugal being missing

    
    Why not just add Portugal? Yes, it's another European civ, but if you're justifying a civ's inclusion on the basis that it represents Portugal, it plainly makes more sense just to add Portugal regardless of the geographic bias.
    
    

    [*]Argentina/Chile/Peru could be interesting?

    
    Could it? Why more interesting than anywhere else?
    
    

    [*]Amazonia- Another good Jungle Civ?

    
    Another civ-that-isn't? Is the game short of "jungle civs"?
    
    

    
    AUSTRALIA (no representation besides perhaps the Polynesians):
    

    • Australia- might be good as a modern civ with benefits to mining?
    • Aborigines- Could be an early CIV with peaceful benefits toward hunting/gathering?

    
    The former isn't warranted, the latter - again - isn't a civ. Though possibly something interesting could be done with the Aborigines relating to religion and/or trade (since they did trade over a wide area)?
    
    Asia is missing, I notice. True, Asia as a continent has large representation, but as with Africa this is mostly concentrated in a particular area - namely the far east (with the exception of India). Southern Asia is entirely neglected except for Siam (and even then the Sukothai Kingdom represented was north of the Malay Peninsula), although island Southeast Asia occupies a substantial portion of the Earth's surface and contains a number of its largest islands - it's a larger area than Australia, which you consider should have some representation, but just as empty in Civ. Central Asia is also absent.
    
    My first pick of a civ to add to cover a new region would be the Majapahit (Indonesia). I'd also add the Khmer to occupy the "bulge" of Indochina - not a big missing area, but larger than Central America (which likewise has no Civ specifically representing it, but one from an adjacent territory with a marginal occurrence in the area). There are civs from Burma and Vietnam (no, not modern Vietnam) that I think would make interesting additions, but neither fills a gap of particular significance if the Khmer are added.

 

[Truronian]

soooo.... a great civ must be one that survive through the ages and not their accomplishments?

Both, IMO. Hence a country like Brazil rather than somewhere like Monaco.

 

[tekkonkinkreet]

I agree that Haiti is an interesting option - but they seem like an Ethopian style Civ, able to take on much larger empires (France, UK, Spain).

Canada seems a tad silly, but now that they have a wonder in the game... why not?

 

[Liex]

True... I guess CIV has already done this by lumping many tribes into 'tribal civs', such as the Polynesians and Native Americans in civ IV. As a Brazilian, would you rather see Brazil as a Civ, or the Tupi?

I guess most Brazilians would rather Brazil over the Tupi simply because we relate better to the former than the latter. It's like the Tupi (and other natives) tells only 1/3 of the story.

Also, Brazilians and people from elsewhere know more about Brazil than about the Tupi, and that counts a lot. Some may not want Brazil included for specific reasons (too recent, not a global power and some other arguments we often hear, which have their merits and flaws), but a lot of people never even heard of the Tupi.

And in fact Brazil has more recorded history and potential unique features than the Tupi or any other local indigenous people. Surely the Tupi could be designed as an original and cool-to-play-with civilization, but I fear they'd probably end up with some boring UA like "+X food, production, whatever from Jungle tiles" and a random "Jungle Warrior" or "Archer" as UU...

Another possibility is to mix them, giving Brazil an indigenous UU, for instance. But I really don't see that happening. On the other hand, giving Brazil a Sambodrome UB (or any other kind of Carnival feature) would be a nice way to depict the country's cultural synthesis, including not only the Indigenous heritage, but also the African and European.

 

[tonberry]

Something I’d like to say about the choice of civ. No matter how many argument one can make for the inclusion of any civ, many seem to forget that Civilization is a game and that fun and variety can trump any arguments you can make.

Take the Inuit for example. They aren’t a very influencial civilizations and I would be hard-pressed to name a leader for them. Yet, their inclusion would be cool. A civ that would thrive in snow and tundra, with dog sled as chariot replacement and a unique improvement related to fish. It would be different and interesting.

 

[Kwami]

Asia is missing, I notice. True, Asia as a continent has large representation, but as with Africa this is mostly concentrated in a particular area - namely the far east (with the exception of India). Southern Asia is entirely neglected except for Siam (and even then the Sukothai Kingdom represented was north of the Malay Peninsula), although island Southeast Asia occupies a substantial portion of the Earth's surface and contains a number of its largest islands - it's a larger area than Australia, which you consider should have some representation, but just as empty in Civ. Central Asia is also absent.

My first pick of a civ to add to cover a new region would be the Majapahit (Indonesia). I'd also add the Khmer to occupy the "bulge" of Indochina - not a big missing area, but larger than Central America (which likewise has no Civ specifically representing it, but one from an adjacent territory with a marginal occurrence in the area). There are civs from Burma and Vietnam that I think would make interesting additions, but neither fills a gap of particular significance if the Khmer are added.

What are you talking about? Asia has tons of representation from all over the continent.

The Ottomans
Persia
Arabia
India
Russia
China
Mongolia
Japan
Korea
Siam

These civilizations are not all clustered into the far east. What part of central Asia do you think is missing? The rest of the Arab countries or the former Soviet countries? Would new civs representing those areas be different enough from existing ones?

I'm with you on the islands lacking representation. I guess the Majapahit is fine.

EDIT: Fixed the quote tag. It was broken because the post that I quoted was broken. Thanks, hobbsyoyo.

 

[Petiscator]

True... I guess CIV has already done this by lumping many tribes into 'tribal civs', such as the Polynesians and Native Americans in civ IV. As a Brazilian, would you rather see Brazil as a Civ, or the Tupi?

As Brazil. While most of you guys don't consider them as a civilization (partially, I agree), it is my own country and I would love to see them represented at the monarchy fase (as Dom Pedro II). The Tupis only cover the natives, leaving our consolidated country out.

 

[Petiscator]

(making another post because I didn't read the whole tread ><)

While I would love to see Brazil (and not, say, Tupi) in game, I feel like Portugal deverves a lot more. We came from them, they were the first national monarchy of the whole europe (IIRC), made awesome navigation discoveries and I really preffer them rather than seeing my country represented as a bunch of naked women dancing, or "sambando". Using anything mildly related to soccer for Brazil is offensive for me. Same for carnival.

For that and other reasons, I would like to see an empire-aged Brazil, with Dom Pedro II, Bandeirantes and maybe the Casas de Fundiçao (before the empire, Brazil had these to make sure people would pay the taxes, as a lot of people weren't paying). Using a modern Brazil is not really adequate... I don't know, it feels weird to see them side by side with Egypt or England.

Finally, I wouldn't like to mix tupi's units and brazilian units. I don't know, it should be focused, you either make a true native civ or a true brazilian civ, not mix them over and say "hey you guys, lets play with this native or brazilian civ, I don't know which!". It would be nice to se the Majapahit, Zulu OR Congo, Portugal, Poland and Canada in game, but if they ever appear, why not putting Brazil as well?

 

[Byrsa Suffet]

Wow! There’s some extreme passive-aggressive Canada bashing going on in this thread. As I actually am a Canadian I feel the need to intervene on my nation’s behalf (with good humour of course, and without being too political with my colleagues south of the 49th). I would certainly have thought that even a superficial understanding of Canadian heritage and culture would have yielded better suggestions, so here are a couple of my own (with a—hopefully—informative explanation):

UU: RCMP; replaces cavalry, has no movement penalty on forests or hills and adds +1 when garrisoned in a city.

The RCMP were originally formed to provide law and order across the Northwest Territories (then most of Western Canada) and the Yukon as well as keeping American Whiskey traders off our land (see Manifest Destiny)

UU: Canadian Light Infantry; replaces GW Infantry, has +1 Strength and +25% bonus when attacking from or to a hill.

During the later years of WWI, the Canadian Infantry were known as the premier shock troops of the allies (entente) and were sent to battlegrounds where British and French troops had failed to make ground, most notaby Vimy Ridge


UA: “Land of Untold Riches;” Tundra tiles provide an additional +1, improved Uranium and Oil resources provide double yield. (This one may be a little overpowered).

Canada has large cities and permanent settlements well north of what most might consider ‘hospitable’ and with countless resource developments occurring in every corner of the country Canada is the number 1 producer of uranium used for atomic energy generation in world, and has the second largest known oil reserves in the world, behind Saudi Arabia (whether or not you agree with oil sands extraction or not).


Flag-waving aside, my personal preference vis-à-vis Civilizations is for older, more ancient ones (original peoples), and Canada, Australia, Brazil, Argentina, etc. don’t fit that bill. That said I also find it pretty hokey that America is a playable Civilization, considering like the others, they’re a former colony in the context of other Civilizations (England, Netherlands, Spain, even Sweden originally colonized PA).

Personally, I’d like to see as DLC the Phoenicians, though they are well represented as City-States, considering their ancient interactions with Greece, Rome, and Babylon; the Sumerians, the founders of agriculture and the first cities, eventually succumbing to Babylon; and even Israel/Judah, also represented as a City-State, but formed a major faction in the ancient near east, though there are obvious political limitations to including Israel. Even the Etruscans could be fun?

Anyway, those are my two cents, eh!

 

[Tavenier]

The PolyCast guys and gals briefly touched on this in a past episode. The basic conclusion they made was that allowing this kind of mix and match (be it with civs, leader traits, whatever) is extraordinarily difficult to balance and lends itself to OP match ups and match ups no one will use. Not that the idea itself is bad, but decent execution of it is nigh impossible.

Maybe the master of orion way. Give every civ 10 points to spend on enhancements, And get some more points for getting negatives, like -10 percent growth gives you another 2 points to spend.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

@Kwami's last post
Something is going on with your quote there. It shows up as attributed to El Caballerion when PhilBowles actually wrote it. I think you mistyped or something, hope it wasn't intentional.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Maybe the master of orion way. Give every civ 10 points to spend on enhancements, And get some more points for getting negatives, like -10 percent growth gives you another 2 points to spend.

I don't know anything about Master of Orion, but I'm pretty sure they singled that out in PolyCast as a bad example of this kind of mix and match mechanic. Not 100% sure, have to go back and relisten.

 

[Kwami]

Wow! There’s some extreme passive-aggressive Canada bashing going on in this thread. As I actually am a Canadian I feel the need to intervene on my nation’s behalf (with good humour of course, and without being too political with my colleagues south of the 49th). I would certainly have thought that even a superficial understanding of Canadian heritage and culture would have yielded better suggestions, so here are a couple of my own (with a—hopefully—informative explanation):

UU: RCMP; replaces cavalry, has no movement penalty on forests or hills and adds +1 when garrisoned in a city.

The RCMP were originally formed to provide law and order across the Northwest Territories (then most of Western Canada) and the Yukon as well as keeping American Whiskey traders off our land (see Manifest Destiny)

OK, you can have Canada if it comes with Mounties. But your UB has to be igloos! Or maybe hockey rinks...

 

[Byrsa Suffet]

I can't deny igloos and hockey rinks crossed my mind, though including igloos might be a bit culturally insensative up here.

 

[Kwami]

I can't deny igloos and hockey rinks crossed my mind, though including igloos might be a bit culturally insensative up here.

Yeah, but fortunately, Firaxis is down here. Besides, they could just say that it's a tribute to some of the native tribes!

 

[hobbsyoyo]

You have mounties to stop our manifest destiny? Don't you know that all your bases are belong to us?

 

[Liex]

(making another post because I didn't read the whole tread ><)

While I would love to see Brazil (and not, say, Tupi) in game, I feel like Portugal deverves a lot more. We came from them, they were the first national monarchy of the whole europe (IIRC), made awesome navigation discoveries and I really preffer them rather than seeing my country represented as a bunch of naked women dancing, or "sambando". Using anything mildly related to soccer for Brazil is offensive for me. Same for carnival.

For that and other reasons, I would like to see an empire-aged Brazil, with Dom Pedro II, Bandeirantes and maybe the Casas de Fundiçao (before the empire, Brazil had these to make sure people would pay the taxes, as a lot of people weren't paying). Using a modern Brazil is not really adequate... I don't know, it feels weird to see them side by side with Egypt or England.

I'd like to see the Imperial Brazil as well. Big fan of Dom Pedro II, and by its final decades the county was living its Golden Age. But I don't think the Republican Brazil would be that weird; it'd only need a XX century leader, Getúlio Vargas for instance, who was contemporary of Haile Selassie I.

About the Sambodrome, I comprehend your negative view on it (believe me, I do hate that whole Carnival week), but I guess it doesn't really matter to the game. We can't deny it's a central element of our culture, and to say it's only about naked woman dancing is an unfair oversimplification. Also, it's an Brazilian "unique feature" that stands out internationally and could be easily adapted for the game's purposes. (Here are some suggestions I wrote sometime ago)

About Portugal, I'm sure we'll see them soon or later, regardless of everything.