Civs You'd Like to See

[Gaius Octavius]

*says the fundamentalist Christian nut job*

I'd say we have pretty good coverage of the globe, I can't decide.

I find that deeply offensive ("j/k" notwithstanding) especially since I am not a fundamentalist. Don't try to use deceptive ad hominem attacks just because you disagree with my choice.

If you must know I am referring to the ancient kingdom of Israel, not the modern nation that "fundamentalist nut jobs" support, as it would be great for players like me who enjoy the ancient era. It goes right along with Egypt, Hittites, Babylon, and other nearby powers.

 

[bioelectricclam]

So after reading Lastone's post and doing some research on my own, I'd like to change my mind - Poland does have a rich history and even though the European map is crowded on the Earth maps, I could see there being a place for Poland as a Civ in Civilization. Truthfully I just never was taught about Poland in school, mostly because the history books used in American highschools just sort of mention Poland during Hitler's era, and in college my specialty was East Asian history. Sorry for being ignorant.

Anyways, other than Poland I think that there are some other good candidates that people have brought up. It's fun to see other people's ideas about this, keep them coming!

 

[TheLastOne36]

So after reading Lastone's post and doing some research on my own, I'd like to change my mind - Poland does have a rich history and even though the European map is crowded on the Earth maps, I could see there being a place for Poland as a Civ in Civilization. Truthfully I just never was taught about Poland in school, mostly because the history books used in American highschools just sort of mention Poland during Hitler's era, and in college my specialty was East Asian history. Sorry for being ignorant.

Anyways, other than Poland I think that there are some other good candidates that people have brought up. It's fun to see other people's ideas about this, keep them coming!

one quote war diverted but i think gauis started another one >.<

IMO the kingdom of israel was to small. a broader "jew" civ would be a better idea.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

A broader "Jew" civ would be downright ridiculous - what would be its cities? Broader Jewish civ = Judaism in game.

Israel was important in its day, and it's a source of much world focus today, for better or for worse. Israelites/Hebrews revolted I don't know how many times and proved to be a thorn in the sides of the Roman and Greek empires. Of course, just being good at revolting is not sufficient to warrant inclusion... well, except for Boudica. But they were also significant regionally in religious practice, commerce, trade, and to a lesser extent the arts.

I'm certainly not going to get into a "quote war" over it, because there are many good choices and I just happen to like this one the best. I do, however, think they'd be better than Poland. Certainly better than the HRE.

 

[bioelectricclam]

Hmnmn I actually do support the idea of a Jewish empire of some sort...but think that Hebrew might be a better term for it than Israel just because Hebrew would include the Jewish diaspora as well as the Kingdom of Israel.

 

[dutchking]

Jewish Empire=LOL

And I'm glad to here you're not a fundamentalist nutjob GO, I always had faith in you.

 

[Wolfshanze]

A lot of these already exist as stand-alone add-ons to Civ4... CSA, Austria, Poland (and I think Hungary and Israel) have already been turned into mods.

Even in my own Wolfshanze Mod (see link below), I tossed-out the silly HRE in favor of adding-in a proper Austrian Civ (complete with it's own custom unit graphics and Leader Head).

I'll probably add Poland in a future update as well.

 

[braindrain]

i think if they can get away with holy roman empire, then there definately is room for polish-lithuanian empire... i'd really like to see that
i'd also like to see assyria and the hittites.
granted none of these would work in an earth map with all civs, but there is much much more to do in this game than play on an earth map.

i'd also like to see the native north american civ disbanded and have a few real american indian civilizations represented (they are not just insignificant tribes, they are civilizations!!!)

 

[Wolfshanze]

i'd also like to see assyria and the hittites.
granted none of these would work in an earth map with all civs, but there is much much more to do in this game than play on an earth map.

Actually Poland would fit-in to most of the Earth maps... there's usually room between Germany and Russia for this (considering how crowded other civs are, this isn't a problem)... it's certainly better then having both Sumeria and Babylon in the game... any Earth map that includes both is lying, because they both started in the same river valley!

 

[Snaker8]

Before responding to the following comments below, I would like to state I DO NOT WANT A FLAME WAR OR DEBATE. I am tired of those. I simply want to express my opinion as you have expressed yours. Let's not turn this into some useless locked topic.

I tossed-out the silly HRE

I really hate it when people generalize, and that is a pretty big one. The Holy Roman Empire was huge, and had a strong military. They had lots of political influence, as well. To Replace the HRE with Austria is silly. They are two completely different nations.
----
Now I agree it is a bit ironic in me saying this since I said myself Austria-Hungary, but you have to look at the facts, Austria was largest when it was Austria-Hungary. Also having Austria-Hungary could check off two different civs in one shot. Besides, if they have the Indians and Native Americans, who have been pulled all into one category of civilization, then they should have no problem with Austria-Hungary.
----
Moving on, not to offend anyone, but having a Jewish civilization just makes no sense, because then you could see a Taoist civ popping up, then a Buddhist civ, and you then realize that these religions can already be founded. However, I am all for a Israel civ, as Israel once did have an expansive civilization, and in today's world the Israelites have one of the best military of the Middle East (that I know of, correct me if I am wrong).
----
Also, if your civilizations get into the game, what leaders would you want to/expect to be with each new civilization? An example being I think they should have Tudhaliya and/or Hattusili II of the Hittites. What leaders would you want to see in any of the current civilizations? An example being I think they should add Erik the Red to the Vikings.

 

[Wolfshanze]

Before responding to the following comments below, I would like to state I DO NOT WANT A FLAME WAR OR DEBATE. I am tired of those. I simply want to express my opinion as you have expressed yours. Let's not turn this into some useless locked topic.


I really hate it when people generalize, and that is a pretty big one. The Holy Roman Empire was huge, and had a strong military. They had lots of political influence, as well. To Replace the HRE with Austria is silly. They are two completely different nations.

No offense taken, but I stand on my opinion... the HRE was never a "true" empire as it was more a collection of alliances then a true nation. The HRE has a closer kinship to NATO then it does to... say Germany.

NATO is a strong military force too, but that doesn't make it a nation.

Yes, there was a Holy Roman Emperor, but most of the states within had their own kings, their own governments, their own independance... it was much like a fancy form of Fuedalism, but it was never truely an Empire such as England or Rome... and a lot of "commands" from the HR Emperors went ignored by "member" states.

The HRE never consisted of a national or ethnic identity. It was a conglamoration of independant states, many of whome despised one another. While the Austrian Empire (and Austrian Hungarian Empire which followed) had many similar problems, it was a true nation under one ruler with a much stronger national identity (fractured though it was with ethnic problems).

I also don't stand alone on this... I don't think one person shed a tear in exchanging the HRE for the Austrian Empire... seems a lot of folks around here aren't too fond of the HRE being included over a lot of other truer nation's expense (Austria being one of them).

I'm sure if Civ4 BtS shipped with Austria instead of the HRE, there'd be a lot less folks talking about how Austria doesn't deserve to be there and the HRE should be.

 

[TheLastOne36]

I'm sure if Civ4 BtS shipped with Austria instead of Poland, there'd be a lot more folks talking about how Austria doesn't deserve to be there and Poland should be.

Fixed

Actually i'm fine with either Poland or Austria. for me it was one or the other when they were announcing the civs. but of course they put in the HRE instead...

 

[Snaker8]

This will be the LAST statement for this particular argument I will be making, because I do not want to clog up this topic. Let's try to move on from this, please... I apologize for any inconvenience I may have caused to others who wish to respond to the original post, please do and discuss your opinion of what civilizations should be added to future releases!
......

the HRE was never a "true" empire as it was more a collection of alliances then a true nation. The HRE has a closer kinship to NATO then it does to... say Germany.

NATO is a strong military force too, but that doesn't make it a nation.

You're missing my entire point. Austria is not HRE. Austria does not resembled HRE. Austria is a completely different culture than the HRE! I am not ignoring the fact that, yes, HRE was very fractured...but so was technically England at the time, in fact they had an entire war over this large fraction. The Japanese took many years until they united under one ruler, and even then many rules and legislations brought into place by the ruler were ignored or changed by the local rulers. Both those civilizations I just mentioned were fractured, but they were both added to CivIV. Also NATO is nothing even close to the HRE. NATO is an organization founded on alliances between different countries to act as a defense-based international military. HRE was a collection of gathered states brought together through partial representative bodies of government affiliated with the HRE Emperor, but to speak of it as an organization of alliances instead of an empire of states is ridiculous.

Yes, there was a Holy Roman Emperor, but most of the states within had their own kings, their own governments, their own independance... it was much like a fancy form of Fuedalism, but it was never truely an Empire such as England or Rome... and a lot of "commands" from the HR Emperors went ignored by "member" states.

England was feudal for a large amount of time, not a good example! Rome, true it was a proper empire. I do not disagree with the regional governments and their power, as I know HRE was very fractured, but you must look at it and realize that even later in years countries with regional governments have had disagreements over things. The HRE was not the best of an empire, and that is why it declined, but really should you discount it just for that? Considering it did survive as long as it did (from around 962–1806) If you did that with all civilizations, many would be discarded. A lot of commands, as said before, have been ignored by similar bodies of different nations such as Japan. Now I know the HRE is not necessarily the greatest example of a true empire, there aren't many which are, but the HRE was certainly not an organization like you said. Also note that the HRE is only used from the time Charlemagne ruled, and during that time it was more truly an empire. Different time periods of different civilizations have different situations: Russia used to control Kazakhstan, but now they don't. Canada used to be a colony, now it isn't. I guess what I mean to say is that you can't generalize an entire civilization from one distinct time. If that were the case, then Tibet couldn't be considered because China now controls it.

The HRE never consisted of a national or ethnic identity. It was a conglamoration of independant states, many of whome despised one another. While the Austrian Empire (and Austrian Hungarian Empire which followed) had many similar problems, it was a true nation under one ruler with a much stronger national identity (fractured though it was with ethnic problems).

That does not make HRE replaceable by Austria. You seem to be ignoring my primary problem: Austria is not HRE, was not, can not be the HRE. To add Austria and take away HRE is like adding Poland and taking away Mongolia, they are completely different! Also they did not despise one another for a large period of time, that is why they had the Reichstag to settle many things, and the electorates and other representing classes were representing all the different states. Since these electorates ruled in the Reichstag, I would be safe to say that since the HRE had a central body of legislative government, then logically whatever the body of government works for is the true ruling order, and in this case that is the Holy Roman Empire (HRE).

I also don't stand alone on this... I don't think one person shed a tear in exchanging the HRE for the Austrian Empire... seems a lot of folks around here aren't too fond of the HRE being included over a lot of other truer nation's expense (Austria being one of them).

Let's not get too political, now. Also, read response below.

I'm sure if Civ4 BtS shipped with Austria instead of the HRE, there'd be a lot less folks talking about how Austria doesn't deserve to be there and the HRE should be.

That is a matter of opinion and not a fact.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Jewish Empire=LOL

And I'm glad to here you're not a fundamentalist nutjob GO, I always had faith in you.

Well I am sorry if I came across as unnecessarily rude, but you can't just post comments like that and expect them to fly simply because you add a smiley to tone it down. As somebody once said, it's unfair to label people:

I don't want to be associated with a group of people I have nothing to do with. Don't label me.

And it's also unfair to the fundamentalists out there. Just because you see some nut on TV who claims that if you don't send in $20 to buy his "miracle water" bad things will happen to you, that doesn't mean they all act that way, any more than all Muslims are terrorists or all Jews are rich.

On topic, I am sorry to see that Gaius' (HRE) Law has once again been fulfilled... Anyway, Austria-Hungary would also make an excellent addition to the civs.

 

[Wolfshanze]

In a nutshell (to wrap-up)...

That is a matter of opinion and not a fact.

Same as your reasons why the HRE is a legitimate empire to include in Civ4 over the likes of Austria or Poland.

 

[OttoManD]

whooooeeee. getting heated in here. To get back to the original post, I think Phoenicia would be a good addition. It had huge influence over the Levant and Eastern Mediterranean sea in its day. There's a legitimate argument as to whether Carthage is sufficiently different than Phoenicia to include them both, but I think Phoenicia would be a better civ than Carthage if only one can be in the game.

Other than that separate the Mughals and the Indians!

 

[Iranon]

I think we've reached the point where there are some questionable entries as it is. I for one don't like Native America and the Holy Roman Empire at all.
The HRE shouldn't coexist with Germany in a game, and Native America was never a unified civ.

Generally, they excluded direct colonies of other civs... and made exceptions for America and Russia. I'm fine with that, because a game without either would be missing something.

Austria or Austria-Hungary would be a very rewarding civilization... Opera Houses and Hussars and some very recognisable leaders, a great selection of well-known pieces for diplomacy music etc. On the other hand... Germany, the HRE and Austria in the same game would feel even more wrong.

 

[ViterboKnight]

Although I'm Italian, I always though an Italian civilization shouldn't be included in the game; after all, it's been more an aggregation of lesser kingdoms and dukedoms during its history, than a civilization in itself.

However, there's a period when Italy became a great power.

I anticipate what I'll say:
I'M NOT TAKING ANY POLITICAL PART, but just reporting historical facts!

I'm talking of Mussolini's period. (and now, a lot of people either agree or disagree!! The eternal debate between fascism and communism!!).

The history says that during that period, Italy became a strong nation. It was a rigid dictatorship, featured by good economy, organization, infrastructure, new buildings (houses, monuments, quarters, etc), a strong naval army, and eventually the alliance with Hitler and the war.
(I tried to list both the good things and the bad ones).

This nation was a real civilization (in CIV terms!!), and therefore could rightfully be included in the game, with Mussolini as a leader; maybe, Imperialistic, and either Industrious or Aggressive.


--------------------------------------------------------------

Before finishing, I want to repeat: this DOESN'T want to be a praise to Mussolini.
I'm just looking for a way to see my nation included in the game!!
And could this thread NOT become a political argument!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------

Now, about leader traits.....
the remaining possibile combinations are few..... or better, there're no more, I've not checked!! (apart of Ind-Phi, of course!).
What about adding some more of them?
What about something like 'Agricultural'? It could increase food production in tiles with hooked up food resources. Leaders like Sitting Bull, Gilgamesh, or Hatchepsut could be agricultural.
Also, a 'seafaring' trait (increased food for hooked up fish resources) could be possible.
This way, space for new possible leaders will be created.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Although I'm Italian, I always though an Italian civilization shouldn't be included in the game; after all, it's been more an aggregation of lesser kingdoms and dukedoms during its history, than a civilization in itself.

However, there's a period when Italy became a great power.

I anticipate what I'll say:
I'M NOT TAKING ANY POLITICAL PART, but just reporting historical facts!

I'm talking of Mussolini's period. (and now, a lot of people either agree or disagree!! The eternal debate between fascism and communism!!).

The history says that during that period, Italy became a strong nation. It was a rigid dictatorship, featured by good economy, organization, infrastructure, new buildings (houses, monuments, quarters, etc), a strong naval army, and eventually the alliance with Hitler and the war.
(I tried to list both the good things and the bad ones).

This nation was a real civilization (in CIV terms!!), and therefore could rightfully be included in the game, with Mussolini as a leader; maybe, Imperialistic, and either Industrious or Aggressive.

Well, actually i'm not sure why Italy isn't a civ. I'm making a Euro-mod myself and i'm including Italy. The only cities that overlap are Rome and Ravenna. Rome can be "Rome" and "Roma" (i know both languages have "roma" but it's the only possible way) and exclude Ravenna. My UU is the Alpini soldiers and i have no clue what the UB is... I have Victor Emmanuel II as leader, he is Charismatic, Protective and his favorite civic is Nationhood. I also have Mussolini, He is Aggressive, Imperialistic his favorite civic is Police State. How do you like that?

 

[viljanen]

Well, actually i'm not sure why Italy isn't a civ. I'm making a Euro-mod myself and i'm including Italy. The only cities that overlap are Rome and Ravenna. Rome can be "Rome" and "Roma" (i know both languages have "roma" but it's the only possible way) and exclude Ravenna. My UU is the Alpini soldiers and i have no clue what the UB is... I have Victor Emmanuel II as leader, he is Charismatic, Protective and his favorite civic is Nationhood. I also have Mussolini, He is Aggressive, Imperialistic his favorite civic is Police State. How do you like that?

Well like I said earlier, most trait combos are already in use and both prot+char and agg+imp are there. It probably makes sense to have Italy in a mod but adding many extra civs to Civ IV with BTs isn't going to increase the variety of the game much. There's probably more room for some UU:s and UB:s but eventually new uniques will start resembling each other or will be strange niche units only useful in very specific situations.