Although this thread is specifically for DLC04, I think the DLCs after may bring us some Civs like Babylon, Zulu, Inca and Iroquois - essentially any significant previous civilization that doesn't already have a city-state representing it. Those like Portgual, Netherlands, Carthage, Sweden and Indonesia who already have city-states won't be re-instated until the first round of Expansions. Anyone else agree with that?
Although this thread is specifically for DLC04, I think the DLCs after may bring us some Civs like Babylon, Zulu, Inca and Iroquois - essentially any significant previous civilization that doesn't already have a city-state representing it. Those like Portgual, Netherlands, Carthage, Sweden and Indonesia who already have city-states won't be re-instated until the first round of Expansions. Anyone else agree with that?
Well, not necessarily. After all, Seul was a city-state in Civ 5, but that didn't stopped them from adding Korea as a DLC. On the other hand, if they can afford to present more debatable civs in the Deluxe version, like Australia and whatever is appearing in DLC04, they have to present civs that they are sure to sell for the fully payable DLC's for everyone. So wouldn't be very surprised to see as DLC, before any expansion, the Ottomans, the Inca, the Mongols, Byzantium or Babylon (or even Vietnam, since it is one of the most demanded civs, and a South-east Asia civ which even the casual players can identify, even if it is only for the Vietnam war in the 60's). Or they could even surprise us by targetting large markets like Italy, Canada, Argentina or Indonesia. However, after DLC04, I don't expect to see wild horses like the Zulus (that even though they're a tradition, not everyone agrees with they're inclusion), or some new civ which is not known to many (Ashanti, the Mapuche, Swahili, Zimbabwe, the Afghans, Armenia, the Apache or the Goths)*.
*Those civs I picked come from the most requested new civs poll, in the thread "Vote for your 3 civs you would most like to see : Final Results".
Well, not necessarily. After all, Seul was a city-state in Civ 5, but that didn't stopped them from adding Korea as a DLC. On the other hand, if they can afford to present more debatable civs in the Deluxe version, like Australia and whatever is appearing in DLC04, they have to present civs that they are sure to sell for the fully payable DLC's for everyone. So wouldn't be very surprised to see as DLC, before any expansion, the Ottomans, the Inca, the Mongols, Byzantium or Babylon (or even Vietnam, since it is one of the most demanded civs, and a South-east Asia civ which even the casual players can identify, even if it is only for the Vietnam war in the 60's). Or they could even surprise us by targetting large markets like Italy, Canada, Argentina or Indonesia. However, after DLC04, I don't expect to see wild horses like the Zulus (that even though they're a tradition, not everyone agrees with they're inclusion), or some new civ which is not known to many (Ashanti, the Mapuche, Swahili, Zimbabwe, the Afghans, Armenia, the Apache or the Goths)*.
*Those civs I picked come from the most requested new civs poll, in the thread "Vote for your 3 civs you would most like to see : Final Results".
Just picking one out here - to be fair I don't really see why Italy should be a civilization. It's not been a unity until late in the 19th century, before being a bunch of city-states that didn't have an in-name leader like Germany did with the HRE (when he wasn't more than "in name" of course), and after that it's not been a remarkable country anyways. I can only think of Mussolini's time, at least. Maybe you could make an argument for Victor Emmanuel though.
Oh? If Soeul was a city state in the base game of Civ5 and then a full Civ in DLC then it blows my theory out of the water...
But i can't imagine Korea not being in the game for long as their suzerain bonus is one of my worst which I avoid unless I'm desperate for the raw science yeild. So expect Korea and Lithuania (or equivalent, because os their same suizeran bonuses) to be full Civs.
Just picking one out here - to be fair I don't really see why Italy should be a civilization. It's not been a unity until late in the 19th century, before being a bunch of city-states that didn't have an in-name leader like Germany did with the HRE (when he wasn't more than "in name" of course), and after that it's not been a remarkable country anyways. I can only think of Mussolini's time, at least. Maybe you could make an argument for Victor Emmanuel though.
Yeah, although I'm not Italian I feel only two Civs can represent Italy well... Rome and Venice. With Venice being the most important one on the top of my list. *Is in Enrico Dandolo's costume looking like a fanboy*
Oh, my mistake. And I doubt Ayatollah Khomeini would be a good choice. But I prefer them to take a well known Persia leader representing Ancient Persia, like the one being rumored.
Hola, what could be an UA for Macedonian civ? Some previous poster suggested conquering bonus, what about naval/seafaring bonus? Dont know so much about it's history..
2K qa A was just updated. For those of you playing at home, the sequence of updates thus far has been c, a, b, a. The previous beta testing had a, b, c, d and a,b,c sequences. This is quite curious.
If they are planning a mid-late March release for DLC04, we should see daily qa updates begin this week.
2K qa A was just updated. For those of you playing at home, the sequence of updates thus far has been c, a, b, a. The previous beta testing had a, b, c, d and a,b,c sequences. This is quite curious.
Italian civilization is older than the nation itself though, I think. I for one would like to see them become a permanent addition to the civilization roster. They should be led by Cavour or Garibaldi, or possibly the pope or some leader of a city-state. I mean Italians have accomplished marvelous things (da Vinci, historical monuments, Renaissance etcetera). Countering that is Australia, which has uh...the Sydney Opera House (which wasn't even designed by an Australian), Kylie Minogue and Dami Im
I personally don't have a problem with a modern Italian civ. However, if the reason that there are no Italian city-states is to allow for some future civ from that region, Genoa fits the bill as it has been sighted in the game files.
Well, not necessarily. After all, Seul was a city-state in Civ 5, but that didn't stopped them from adding Korea as a DLC. On the other hand, if they can afford to present more debatable civs in the Deluxe version, like Australia and whatever is appearing in DLC04, they have to present civs that they are sure to sell for the fully payable DLC's for everyone. So wouldn't be very surprised to see as DLC, before any expansion, the Ottomans, the Inca, the Mongols, Byzantium or Babylon (or even Vietnam, since it is one of the most demanded civs, and a South-east Asia civ which even the casual players can identify, even if it is only for the Vietnam war in the 60's). Or they could even surprise us by targetting large markets like Italy, Canada, Argentina or Indonesia. However, after DLC04, I don't expect to see wild horses like the Zulus (that even though they're a tradition, not everyone agrees with they're inclusion), or some new civ which is not known to many (Ashanti, the Mapuche, Swahili, Zimbabwe, the Afghans, Armenia, the Apache or the Goths)*.
*Those civs I picked come from the most requested new civs poll, in the thread "Vote for your 3 civs you would most like to see : Final Results".
Oh? If Soeul was a city state in the base game of Civ5 and then a full Civ in DLC then it blows my theory out of the water...
But i can't imagine Korea not being in the game for long as their suzerain bonus is one of my worst which I avoid unless I'm desperate for the raw science yeild.
Regarding city states, these city states were all in vanilla, but were part of civilizations later on:
Copenhagen, Oslo & Seoul (DLC)
Dublin, Edinburgh, Helsinki, Stockholm & Vienna (Expansion 1)
Jakarta, Lisbon, Marrakech, Rio de Janeiro, Venice & Warsaw (Expansion 2)
Regarding city states, these city states were all in vanilla, but were part of civilizations later on:
Copenhagen, Oslo & Seoul (DLC)
Dublin, Edinburgh, Helsinki, Stockholm & Vienna (Expansion 1)
Jakarta, Lisbon, Marrakech, Rio de Janeiro, Venice & Warsaw (Expansion 2)
Some of those were not vanilla city-states, but rather introduced in DLCs and Expansions. Stockholm, for instance, was the replacement for Seoul, I believe.
Well now that Australia's in they can add any nation that is of similar age, like Canada, Argentina, Mexico.
Italian civilization is older than the nation itself though, I think. I for one would like to see them become a permanent addition to the civilization roster. They should be led by Cavour or Garibaldi, or possibly the pope or some leader of a city-state. I mean Italians have accomplished marvelous things (da Vinci, historical monuments, Renaissance etcetera). Countering that is Australia, which has uh...the Sydney Opera House (which wasn't even designed by an Australian), Kylie Minogue and Dami Im
My problem with Italy isn't that nothing came from there - heck, it's where the Renaissance started - but that Italy wasn't a unity. You have the Papal States (that's what it was called right, the land ruled by the Pope that covered mid Italy?), Sicily, Genoa, Venice, etc that were all independant entities. To be fair, quite a few of them have achieved more seperately than Italy has achieved after uniting.
Regarding city states, these city states were all in vanilla, but were part of civilizations later on:
Copenhagen, Oslo & Seoul (DLC)
Dublin, Edinburgh, Helsinki, Stockholm & Vienna (Expansion 1)
Jakarta, Lisbon, Marrakech, Rio de Janeiro, Venice & Warsaw (Expansion 2)
I'm not 100% sure as I only played a little bit of Civ5 before buying the expansions (started playing after the second expansion was released) but wasn't Amsterdam originally a city-state too?
My problem with Italy isn't that nothing came from there - heck, it's where the Renaissance started - but that Italy wasn't a unity. You have the Papal States (that's what it was called right, the land ruled by the Pope that covered mid Italy?), Sicily, Genoa, Venice, etc that were all independant entities. To be fair, quite a few of them have achieved more seperately than Italy has achieved after uniting.
I'm not 100% sure as I only played a little bit of Civ5 before buying the expansions (started playing after the second expansion was released) but wasn't Amsterdam originally a city-state too?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
