Civ V Civilizations Roster

[mitsho]

I think, city states will probably be famous cities per se or cities that represent/come from small states. But I also think they will stay away a bit from (too many?) cities that will belong to an expansion civ. Meaning cities like Pergamon, Hattusha (if no hittites), Samarkand, Ashur, Milet, Pella (or other that may be Greek), Santiago, Prague, Krakow, Belgrade, Zurich, Bruxelles, Dublin, Toronto, Montreal, Buenos Aires, Vienna, Melbourne, you get the idea, like the Barbarians, and a bit temporary based ;-)

 

[permaximum]

I think the roster will be so close to this list. Only a few civs may be replaced with another.

Americans
Arabs
Aztecs
Chinese
Egyptians
English
French
Germans
Greeks
Indians
Japanese
Mongols
Persians
Romans
Russians
Spanish
Turks
Vikings

Civ 4 vanilla roster except incas and malians replaced with turks and vikings. Close to perfect except vikings could be replaced with another civ.

Edit: Zulu is probably in instead of Mongols or Arabs. IMO Zulu should take the place of Vikings. But it won't happen.

 

[cybrxkhan]

^I geneerally agree with that except for the fact that there will have to be one African civ for political correctness. And even though I generally really hate political correctness, I think having one African civ is a right thing to do.

 

[BuckyRea]

... I think not having the jewish civilization is stupid, since one of the most influential [top 3 for certain] persons in history was a jew, namely Jesus of Nazareth.

Besides the problem of asking for saleability issues in some countries--Civ is a business after all--the Jewish civilization just didn't have that big of an impact on history. Certainly Jesus was influential (but I'd argue he's much less influential than Paul of Tarsus) but the impact of his religion was a boon to European nations, not to Israel, which continued to be a European colony (Rome, then Byzantium) almost right up to the moment it became an Arab colony.

Heck, even Canada is more influential than Israel!

And I also think that any old civilization that was better at something then we are today should be in. Like the Mayans, wich had a calendar that is actually more accurate then the one we use today. By the way, this actually points out that astronomy is placed way too late in the tech tree, very much an eurocentric thing.

That's an excellent point. Hopefully a realistic, flexible tech tree--one with multiple ascension paths--would be a fun feature. Most players know to just dig in and crank out as much science as you can is the smartest strategy. In real history, there is often a "social cost" to be paid (in prosperity or public happiness) when new technology comes along and takes a man's work away from him. Make some techs come with some pain.

 

[Shiggs713]

You'd have to be out of your mind if you think Israel is going to be in the initial release of civ5. I'd be shocked to even see it in an expansion. Though I think it will certainly be created fairly soon by the civ5 mod community. Same deal with Canada.

I'd have to totally agree with permaximum's list. Viks are in the trailer, so I'd bet they're in

edit: well actually I might trade Inca for Turks, but thats it.

 

[EMT]

I wish I could trade the Vikings for Inca But, we don't always get what we want. I'ma be incredibly angry if the Inca aren't in the first expansion.......

 

[permaximum]

I forgot to include an african civ. You're right and i agree that there should be one african civ. It's probably Zulu. Zulu instead of Vikings would make the list perfect but we've seen Vikings in the trailer. So i assume Zulu will have it's place instead of Arabs or Mongols or Persians. Persians have the cultural advantage, Arabs have the religious advantage and Mongols have Ghengis Khan advantage. But i think the right choice would be eliminating Mongols. Still i'm not so sure. Meier might choose Mongols instead of Arabs.

 

[zehcoutinho]

Isn't Egypt african? I guess you mean a black civ.

 

[Dragonflow]

Well if they have to add an African civ, then the Mongolians will probably be replaced with them. Persia and Arabia will most likely be kept in. Also IIRC the Incas weren't in Vanilla Civ3 either so I don't see a problem with them being replaced by Vikings.

 

[aarocks]

i actually think maya is more likely to be included over the incas... considering when ciV is released it will be about 2 years away from their supposed "end of the world" date on their calendar, more ignorant people will know maya before inca

 

[say1988]

Or they save Maya for an x-pack coming out fall 2012

 

[Duuk]

Sorry if this has been said before, I stopped reading around page 12 when the thread degenerated into a flamewar about Alexander and Mali.

With the advent of DLC and microtransactions, one thing I wouldn't mind seeing is Civ5 with a "base" 18 civs and then smaller "Region Packs" being fully written and released by Firaxis. Imagine an $8 expansion consisting solely of specific regional nations. So long as Civ5 is even more modular than Civ4, it doesn't represent an issue (simply download and drop in). Only issue might be multiplayer, but even then it's more of a "This host requires you to have the Native American Region Pack to join".

Imagine it...

European Region Pack: Poland, Hungary, Austria, Portugal, Netherlands
Americas Region Pack: Inca, Maya, Iroquois, Brazil, Mexico
Asian Region Pack: Khmer, Dai-Viet, Manchu, ??, ??
Ancient Empires Pack: (Missing Civs from Vanilla), Judea

Then the ACTUAL xpacs can focus more on gameplay changes (like they did for Civ4) rather than just shiny new civs.

 

[EMT]

.......You know Mexico City and Tenochtitlan are one and the same, right?

 

[LastLegionare]

So far what I've seen
-Egypt (Pyrimid and possible one of the screenshots)
-Japan (Samurai's attacking a castle)
-Vikings (Berserkers on longboats)
-Turkish (say1988 cleared this one up, thought it was Byzantine.)
-America (leaderhead screenshot)
-Germany (leaderhead screenshot)
-Aztec (A Jaguar was on the front of some webpage.)

So, 7 are already revealed or suggested. 11 more.

Say1998 said:

Or they save Maya for an x-pack coming out fall 2012

I would laugh hysterically! Great insight.

 

[say1988]

The city was Turkish, not Byzantine.

 

[permaximum]

I think Sid sees Egyptians as a Middle East civilization and probably that's why there has been always one african civ other than egyptians in vanilla versions. So either Mongols or Arabs will not make it but there are already 9 european civs (if we count Russians and Turks). In light of this i think Vikings should not be in vanilla instead of Arabs or Mongols.

 

[mrsako]

What should be done is something as follows...

Release 18 Civilizations that span through time and geography. Then, the expansions should either focus on a time era -or- a geographical area. Example... expansion 1 is either "Ancient Civilizations" or "Civilization: South America"

OR... if they go to something like the PS3 system... make it so that you download individual extra civilizations for like $1.00. That would actually work well.

There's a lot of different ways you can market the game, and figuring out how to do it best is what the company wants. Now... what would make it all easier is just to release a game with all 300+ civilizations that have gone through time and geography, but that probably won't happen.

I just hope the game can be modded in the same fashion as Civ4. And then we'll see something like Fall From Heaven III.

 

[Mathalamus]

never charge for DLC.

 

[kivanc]

Now that we've seen the trailer, I think this is what the civ list will be (unfortunately. I do not endorse this, I just think it is likely)

Yep. I think most guys agree on this matter especially after the trailer.
The list will be more or less like what we wrote and only a few picks are unclear. I believe firaxis would choose between those unclear ones according to their sales strategy.
I made my list according to the traielr but later I thought that, appearanc of civs in any poster or trailer still doesn't mean they will get place in vanilla. As they will sure get place in EPs, so there is no problem with their apperance on trailer. If we see Vikings are out in vanilla and ask how this can happen inspite of the trailer, firaxis would just say "wait for the xp".
I also believe leaving some popular civs to EPs will be a good marketing strategy. (I hope nobody from Firaxis sees this comment )
For example, some civs (mongols, zulus, babylon, sumer, carthage etc.) have always been a core element of the saga although it would not have an effect on the sales as much as any european nation. so having mongols and zulus in vanilla and adding Vikings and Spanish in the XP could be a reasonable marketing.

Well, that's just a guess. As I'm not in games industry, I do't know how much what I've written makes sense about marketing. SO is it a risk or a good choice to leave a few of the popular civs to EPs? I think addition of popular civs in EP could have an effect on sales as much as good changes made in the gameplay. Hardcore civfans should give importance to changes of gameplay much but for beginners, a popular civ might be more attractive. That seems all about marketing as far as i see.

 

[Tee Kay]

.......You know Mexico City and Tenochtitlan are one and the same, right?

So are Byzantium/Constantinople/Istanbul, Lutetia/Paris, Burdigala/Bordeaux, Massilia/Marseilles, Edo/Tokyo, Merw/Merv, etc.