Civs that MUST be added

[bonafide11]

I go back and forth with the Zulu. Apparently they actually do have a "Civilization" of sorts that separates them from the barbarians in the game, but they're also synonymous with fighting and losing to the British. The Bantu migration is one of the more dramatic elements in history and the Zulu were the greatest empire to come out of that. In the end, I think they'll be useful to add.

They're also quite distinct from Songhai. Songhai was a Saharan Afroasiatic civ. The Zulu are true Bantu, subsaharan African. They're the only Civ I can see being added from subsaharan Africa, anyway (Moors are similar to Songhai ethnically, Carthage was Middle Eastern, Ethiopia is its own thing).

I'm not saying the Songhai are similar to the Zulu in history, but in the game, Zulu has always been a militaristic Civ, and now the Songhai are as well. If, besides Egypt, there are only two other African civs, I'd rather them not have a militaristic bias in the game. That's why I said it was nice in Civ IV: Mali's focus was gold, Zulu's was military, then Ethiopia was culture and expansion. They had three diverse African civilizations from different geographic regions. With the Songhai being in the same geographic region as Mali, they likely won't add Mali, which leaves Zulu or Ethiopia (or someone else). I doubt it will be Ethiopia, so it'd more likely the Zulu, who gameplay wise, would be similar to the Songhai.

 

[marioflag]

If 2K will release every new DLC with a pack of 2 civilizations, the best candidates are Carthage/Celts for an "Enemies of Rome" DLC, or Netherlands/Portugal for a "Colonial Power" DLC.

There is no better assortment for a 2 civilizations pack, unless 2K is going to release Sumeria and Korea together.

From the list of the city states in game i would certainly exclude the following civilizations for the next DLC releases:

Austria-Hungary - Budapest, Vienna
Poland - Warsaw
Korea - Seoul
Vikings - Dublin.

Sumeria, Israel would be a nice ancient middle eastern pack, Ethiopia and Zulu instead a nice African pack but probably they are lower priority than Carthage/Celts or Netherlands/Portugal

 

[KeldorKatarn]

Vikings - Dublin

Uhh... huh?

 

[Louis XXIV]

I dont say Babylon shout not be in there, in fact i really like them too, but i think its also a lot about "what if that and that civ didnt go extinct?". i mean those civs who really deserve it.

Its not like the Sumerians didnt invent anything btw. They made up some things too (at the very least writing - which eventually ended in the latin alphabet) and they were one of the very first to build cities!! I ve read somewhere that the Sumerian language was used until 100 bc in scientific and religious writings - thats 2000 years after they disappeared!! i mean thats about the same weight as latin has in europe nowadays. Now i want to have someone argument that Siam or Songhai (or even Russia/ Mongolia) deserve a place in ciV more than the Sumerians do.

Geographic considerations aren't bad considerations (and the Mongols do have the largest land empire in history with Russia close up there if you think about it). Sumeria should be there and I expect they will be, but I'm not surprised they aren't right away (they've never been in since the beginning in any Civ game and, unless I'm not mistaken, Civ3 was the first game they were added).

But, yeah, invention of the Wheel, writing (although cuneiform did not lead to the Latin script except maybe it inspired Phoenicians to make their own), etc are nothing to laugh at. And yeah, the use of their language continued long after the collapse of their civilization through religion. Sort of how Rome lived on through the Catholic church (with its continued use of Latin), Sumeria lived through the Mesopotamian religion. The culture that was Sumeria lasted for many, many centuries after they were conquered by Babylon, Assyria, and others and the ruling population of their cities were no long Sumerian. Can you tell I love mesopotamian civs (even if I agree they shouldn't have been added right away)?

EDIT: KeldorKatarn, Dublin was technically founded by Vikings. It's not why it's in the game and probably wouldn't be a Viking city should they add them, but it is a nice little bit of trivia.

 

[Morningcalm]

Hebrews would be awesome, and as a huge cultural and religious influence in world history I think the only reason they haven't been included in Civ before is because of the controversial politics of Israel etc. They should just include the ancient Hebrews imo.

Sumeria should be added later, certainly with the ziggurat and vulture, etc. Hittites and Assyrians also need to be added in, both were ancient world empires.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Sumeria is really hard to figure out as far as UU goes. Civ3 made up an Enkidu Warrior, loosely based on a demigod from their Epic tale. Civ4 went with Vulture, which isn't the name of any actual unit, but the name of the stella that depicts a Sumerian battle scene. Interestingly enough, the Sumerians also invented the Phalanx (which was popularized by Greece with Hoplite warfare). I'm kinda partial to an Onager Chariot as a UU, but I'm not sure there's room for three Chariot UUs (if they add the Hittites, that would be four).

Provided they haven't gotten Morgan Sheppard to already record the intro (and found someone to speak Sumerian and say the name of the leader), my hope is that they do not have Gilgamesh this time and go with Ur-Nammu or Shulgi. In other words, make a greater effort for people who are more likely than not to have existed.

 

[Rohili]

I would actually like to see more modern nations in the game, like Australia, Israel, Indonesia, Brazil, South Africa, etc. I don't know who made up the rule that only relatively old societies count as civilizations - so what if a nation has only been around for a hundred years? That doesn't preclude it from being a civilization. After all, "civilization" is defined as:

An advanced state of human society, in which a high level of culture, science, industry, and government has been reached.​

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/civilization

I see nothing in that definition which states that a country must have started in the ancient ages to qualify as a "civilization".

For the same reason, I am incredulous whenever people suggest that the US shouldn't be in the game. Total rubbish. I think the game would be extremely remiss if it excluded such an important country with a distinct culture and identity. And mind you, I am not American myself, so I'm not saying this out of some misplaced sense of patriotism.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Oh, I think modern Civs deserve consideration, the trick is to make sure they've already accomplished things that will put them in the same sentence as previous Civs. I'm not sure who currently fits that criteria that also doesn't have ties to an older civ. I do think Israel (as a combination of both old and new) would make a great Civ if done right, Brazil has potential, but I don't think it's hit that point just yet in order to be considered.

 

[Rohili]

Oh, I think modern Civs deserve consideration, the trick is to make sure they've already accomplished things that will put them in the same sentence as previous Civs. I'm not sure who currently fits that criteria that also doesn't have ties to an older civ.

I don't see why we should rule out civs that have ties to older civs. If that were the case, we would only have one civ in the game, since every human can be traced back to a common ancestor.

As long as a nation has developed a culture and identity of its own, it should qualify as a civilization in its own right.

 

[Morningcalm]

Sumerian Onager chariots would be nice, but yeah, if Assyrians or Hittites were added too, that's an awful lot of chariot units. And the base chariot unit sucks so much that having a vaguely OP UU for any of them would be nice. I'm hoping at least one of the 3 ancients will make it in. They are all very worthy, though I would love to see Gilgamesh most as a leader (as I know his story more than I know the stories of Assyrian/Hittite kings).

Pretty sure Korea will eventually be included. Irresistible civ, if only because the ancient and modern Koreas are both fascinating and feature much bloodshed, art, letters, and international negotiations (sometimes at the end of a hwacha gunpowder-powered arrow). Plus, it's very easy to get fluent Korean speakers (hopefully native, not Korean-Ams, as generally they have a noticeable, if slight, accent).

Great Zimbabwe, Zulus, Ethiopia and Yoruba would be great African civ choices, and I'm hoping this Civ will add more African civs in, as they are all worthy. On 2K forums they're suggesting the Majahapit (Southeast Asian naval civ) and Polynesians, both of which I also warm to, for variety's sake and because those regions of the world aren't really well represented in Civ (wait--they haven't been represented at all, except as barb city titles in Civ 4).

 

[Skwink]

Celtica. Sacked Rome, invented green. Nuff said.

 

[Rohili]

On 2K forums they're suggesting the Majahapit (Southeast Asian naval civ) and Polynesians, both of which I also warm to, for variety's sake and because those regions of the world aren't really well represented in Civ (wait--they haven't been represented at all, except as barb city titles in Civ 4).

I think you meant Majapahit, and SE Asia is represented by Siam (though I do agree that it needs more representation - while small, it is a region that punches above its own weight).

 

[AfterShafter]

I know it would be far from first in line and heavily contested even if it was in the running, but, I always wanted to see a Vatican civ... It has been around a long time, are hugely influential, and are a distinct country from Italy. Give me some Pope power

So yeah, not a must, but it's a secret hope of mine...

 

[Willowmound]

Vikings - Dublin.

Uhh... huh?

That is true, Dublin was founded by Norwegian Vikings.

 

[Itfan]

1. Northmens (from viking with berserk to swedish empire)
2. Spain (it is absurd that there isn't in the base game)
3. Ethiopia
4. carthage

Byzantine empire? No. Roman empire was divided from Teodosio. After, the west fallen in 476, the east in 1204. East roman empire, this was the name until the end, because that was the continuous of the roman empire. Byzanthin empire was a derogatory nickname. The Empire was known to its inhabitants as the Roman Empire. It 's the continuation of the Roman Empire, of its civilization.

 

[SHaW1986]

ok... here it goes... the arguments for sumeria are great. Sumer was the first civilization that our current civilization knows of (whether it was the first or not who knows, how about Atlantis?lol) A hebrew civ ought to be included if for no other reason it has been sooo controversial and such a big part of the "news" for millenia. portugal and the netherlands ought to be included because of their role in the european expansion and exploration. unfortunately i feel that europe, especially now with spain, is overrepresented and over populated, unless you play on a europe only map. the norse played a huge part in the middle ages, terrorizing all northern european civilizations, but thats what the barbarians are for, right? well why not expand the barbarian idea and have bands of distinct barbarians, it would be good for both early and later games, al qaida anyone? anyway i think the norse should be in, just throwing ideas out there. africa needs more civs! egypt and songhai always seem to run away with games, at least regionally in my games(i like playing with babylon so its plain to see for me) aethiopia and zulu ought to be in there. america really doesnt have alot of civs you can put in there, mayans should be in there, they were a classical idea of a civilization and were gifted scientfically. olmecs, maybe. last but certainly not least... australia/polynesia. who would represent them? im not really sure, there are ideas for polynesian civs but can you name 10 cities? and australia is too modern and not influential enough, aborigines, did they even found cities? regardless, that area of the world is so poorly represented a civ needs to be put in there.

 

[Leif Roar]

In the category of "What if", I'd like to see both the Kingdom of Hawaii and the Kalmar union (the latter mostly because Queen Margrete I who was one seriously tough ol' gal.)

 

[shanodin]

I miss Ethiopia from civIV. They were my faves, along with the Khmer.

I'd like to see them and the Celts, and maybe some kind of Australian Aboriginie (sorry, can't spell that) civ, though I'm not sure what kind of ruler the Aussies would have.

 

[Tanthil]

Adding hebrew civ is almost like adding Adi H. as leader of Germany , but imo hebrew should be added even 'politically correct common sense' saing otherwise

 

[Willowmound]

Adding hebrew civ is almost like adding Adi H. as leader of Germany , but imo hebrew should be added even 'politically correct common sense' saing otherwise

They could add both, as a double-pack DLC with a WW2 scenario.

What, too soon? Probably.