Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
Would it be fair to the people who bought PTW?
E3: Firaxis Announced 2nd Civ3 Expansion!
- Thread starter Thunderfall
- Start date
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
Actually it would. It has to do with who actually paid for the product or not.
I'm wondering who will be the leader of the sumerians...
In the original sumerian period (Uruk and Early Dynastic) there was rather small city-states, not empires. Only with Sargon of Akkad do we see the first empire. After this we have the Neo-sumerians, the Ur III dynasty, but thats neo...
So maybe Gilgamesh, although he is very mythic, but he is very well known.
Here are some guesses that are problably quite unrealistic because no-one ever heard of them: Ut-napishtim (the sumerian Noah), Enmebaragesi, Enmerkar, Lugalzagesi, Mesalim....
Well problably not. I think Gilgamesh, or they will cheat and put a later king, like Ur-nammu or Naram-Sin from Ur III.
Any thoughts?
In the original sumerian period (Uruk and Early Dynastic) there was rather small city-states, not empires. Only with Sargon of Akkad do we see the first empire. After this we have the Neo-sumerians, the Ur III dynasty, but thats neo...
So maybe Gilgamesh, although he is very mythic, but he is very well known.
Here are some guesses that are problably quite unrealistic because no-one ever heard of them: Ut-napishtim (the sumerian Noah), Enmebaragesi, Enmerkar, Lugalzagesi, Mesalim....
Well problably not. I think Gilgamesh, or they will cheat and put a later king, like Ur-nammu or Naram-Sin from Ur III.
Any thoughts?
oldmanrupert
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14
Just with regards to the Aboriginal Australia debate, I'd like to say that it's good to see intelligent debate about the pros and cons of a civilization being included or not. For my part, to assume them to not have been is a civilization is wrong, you don't have to farm to be race of people, they were a group of people with a spirituality and identity of their own. Primitive, yes. Worthy of inclusion, after considering this dabate, probably not. A civilization, definately.
All that aside, considering the fact that there is a push for Israel to be included, and the Koreans and Americans currently, rightly, are. Lets have the Australians involved, no mucking around (yes, I'm Australian), just the Australian nation as a civ for CivConquests. I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this, as I've noticed there's a few Oz forum members.
I've got a few ideas about UU, leader, and traits, does anyone care to have a crack at defining our identity as a nation?
Or, alternativly, tell me I've got a crap idea! :0
All that aside, considering the fact that there is a push for Israel to be included, and the Koreans and Americans currently, rightly, are. Lets have the Australians involved, no mucking around (yes, I'm Australian), just the Australian nation as a civ for CivConquests. I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this, as I've noticed there's a few Oz forum members.
I've got a few ideas about UU, leader, and traits, does anyone care to have a crack at defining our identity as a nation?
Or, alternativly, tell me I've got a crap idea! :0
Deathwalker
Warlord
I wonder what a UU would be for Australia 
hough for the Aboriginal I think it would have to be a replacment to the Warrior
hough for the Aboriginal I think it would have to be a replacment to the Warrior
oldmanrupert
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14
Attributes: Industrious and Scientific
UU: Anzac or Digger
Leader: John Curtin (Wartime Saviour) or Henry Parkes (Architect of the Nation)
(Historians will tell you it is either of these two men who have created the country we enjoy today)
Capital: Sydney, sorry those of you from Canberra, but Canberra was settled first, and the parliament first sat in Melbourne, so Canberra will have to wait until city number four or five.
Apolagies to those of you who don't care about our Australian Civ, but I think we've got a good case for inclusion!
UU: Anzac or Digger
Leader: John Curtin (Wartime Saviour) or Henry Parkes (Architect of the Nation)
(Historians will tell you it is either of these two men who have created the country we enjoy today)
Capital: Sydney, sorry those of you from Canberra, but Canberra was settled first, and the parliament first sat in Melbourne, so Canberra will have to wait until city number four or five.
Apolagies to those of you who don't care about our Australian Civ, but I think we've got a good case for inclusion!
oldmanrupert
Chieftain
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14
Sorry, that should say, Sydney was settled first
Mark Young
Formerly Sir Eric
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,799
How about the digger? or Australian light infantry to replace medieval infantry?
We could have the Sydney opera house as a wonder.
Weary Dunlop as a leader.
Leader could be either Sir Alfred Deakin. Sir Robert Menzies and even (hold your breath) John Howard.
I dont think that the Aborigines had different types of fighters so a UU would be named from European Australia.
oldmanrupert got any others?
We could have the Sydney opera house as a wonder.
Weary Dunlop as a leader.
Leader could be either Sir Alfred Deakin. Sir Robert Menzies and even (hold your breath) John Howard.
I dont think that the Aborigines had different types of fighters so a UU would be named from European Australia.
oldmanrupert got any others?
Mark Young
Formerly Sir Eric
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2003
- Messages
- 1,799
Just read your last posted, we must of posted the same time.
Good choice for a capital, Maybe this means that we can buy fireworks again.
I prefer your choice of Henry Parkes as leader but I dont think that he is well known outside of Aus, or even inside.
We could also have the f-111 as modern UU or a catarmaran instead of transport?
Or on a more sillier note how about Graham kennedy throwing cream pies to replace the warrior?
Good choice for a capital, Maybe this means that we can buy fireworks again.
I prefer your choice of Henry Parkes as leader but I dont think that he is well known outside of Aus, or even inside.
We could also have the f-111 as modern UU or a catarmaran instead of transport?
Or on a more sillier note how about Graham kennedy throwing cream pies to replace the warrior?
All this debate about what civs should be included is all fine and dandy. . .but to be honest, I don't care. Just gimme the XP already! Man. . .it's going to be a long six months.
Don't get me wrong, people, you all have good arguments, for or against whatever civ.
Keep in mind, too, that while the civ you're backing may not show up, that doesn't mean you can't add them into the game via the editor. Not that I'm any good at animations or anything, but it's a pretty straightforward process.
In any event, it's been interesting to read what y'all have said. I hope some of them do work out. (*nudge* *nudge* firaxis)
Don't get me wrong, people, you all have good arguments, for or against whatever civ.
Keep in mind, too, that while the civ you're backing may not show up, that doesn't mean you can't add them into the game via the editor. Not that I'm any good at animations or anything, but it's a pretty straightforward process.
In any event, it's been interesting to read what y'all have said. I hope some of them do work out. (*nudge* *nudge* firaxis)
ltccone
Prince
I don't want to disparage Australia, but I don't think that they are distinctive enough to be in Civ3. They are are relatively new nation and like Canada, and a colony of Britain for a long time.
I think these civs are better candidates:
1) Israel (Ancient) - This civ was around for a couple of thousand years before being destroyed by the Romans.
2) Austria - Hapsburg Austria controlled central Europe and parts of Italy for over 200 years.
3) Khmer - This civ controlled Indo-China for 900 years.
4) Mali - Their Empire ruled western sub-Saharan Africa for 400 years. It would be great to have another African civ.
5) Scotland - Scotland has a distinct culture from England. Wouldn't a Highland Warrior UU rock?
Edit: The Polynesians would also make a good civ. They settled on just about every habitable island in the Pacific over several thousand years...
ltccone
Prince
Civ 3 Conquests mentions multiplayer. But I don't think you will get the PTW civs or be able to do multiplayer w/o PTW...
smcSoon
or maybe later.
Mmmm. Australia has been inhabited since well before 6000BC.
Australian culture is arguably as different from England as Scotlands is. The MCG is even a revered colloseum (the Melbourne Cricket Ground).
Personally I don't think either Scotland or Australia are particularly suitable for inclusion!
Cynically to some, games publishers can release unfinished products on the populace and get away with it as a patch is always just around the corner (notably, the farce with Frontiers) but there is an upside.
For a game of Civ3s magnitude, to expect them to release a fully balanced game with no exploits first off is showing a general lack of sensible thought processes. As people (as in the punters who bought the game, you, me, everyone else here) push the game to its limits, it will break or fold back on itself. These problems can be identified and corrected and a new patch released, which constantly improves on the game, even when there are some elements of a patch which some people dislike or disagree should have been included; these people are generally in the minority, a very small minority.
I'd rather have a slightly unbalanced game released and which can be fixed and improved upon over time, than a "balanced" game released and then never touched again.
ltccone
Prince
Australia has indeed been inhabited for a long time. But because the original Aboriginal inhabitants never made it past the stone age, they don't qualify for as a civ3 civ. It was only after the arrival of British Colonists, with their sheep and grain, that Australia could be considered "civilized."
I disagree because when the people are beta testing some might not have PTW and they are supposed to play with every civ (PTW civs and the new civs) to see how balanced they are in the new game.
I am pretty sure the game will include everything that PTW had otherwise it would not be very fair for most people.
