Guess the New Civs

[Androrc the Orc]

Brazil was a civ on Civ: Call to Power. If I remember right:

Leader: Getulio Vargas
UU: Dragoes da Indenpendencia (replaces cavalry)
UB: dont remember if this game had UB.

Did CtP have UUs? I recall it not having them. Or was that CtP2? It's been so long...

About your ideas, I like having the Bandeirante as UU, but I'm not so sure about the Football Stadium - since other countries have football stadiums as well it wouldn't be "unique". Perhaps use the Dragões da Independência that you mentioned from CtP as 2nd UU?

 

[Louis XXIV]

What language did the Carthage units in Civ IV speak? I noticed there are YouTube videos in ancient Phoenician language, maybe they'll use that tongue for this expack.

I was told the units spoke Berber. Of course, the Numidians did speak a Berber language, so that makes sense. Unfortunately, that's not helpful for Hannibal.

 

[nokmirt]

You can't add "Native Americans",because the Iroquois ARE Native Americans.
Sioux would be the most likely.

Well yes I put that down just because thats what they were called in CiIV. Not because I thought they should be named that. So no they would not be called Native Americans. They would be the name of a tribe. Thats pretty obvious though.

 

[nokmirt]

They pretty much choose civilizations based off of recognition, most likely for marketing purposes. They do have occasional "obscure" civilizations like the Songhai or Siam - I did not know those existed until Civ 5 - but they were usually a great civilization. The Goths...how many people know about them? My bet is not many.

LOL! I do hope your wrong about that. My god any basic knowledge of history should include the Goths.

 

[Manifold]

They will never have Russia AND the soviet union. It would be like having England AND the united kingdom.

... or Rom+Greece AND Byzanz; or Germany AND Holy Roman Empire; or Celts AND France...so way again not Russia AND the soviet union? At the moment the Russian Civ has no elements from the SU. The SU can also have some different citiy-names like Leningrad, Stalingrad, Baku, Gorky, Sverdlovsk, Stalino ...

Despite how cool it would be, I seriously doubt that they will ever implement the USSR.

cross your fingers! it matches so good to the new espionage things

Gran Colombia only lasted 12 years, even the United Provinces of Central America lasted longer.

Alexander´s empire and the mongolian empire did not exist very long too. IMO Bolívar is a great representant for the question what would be if...

 

[hoplitejoe]

Alexander´s empire and the mongolian empire did not exist very long too. IMO Bolívar is a great representant for the question what would be if...

The mongols lasted 162 years I also think the Greeks are in due to there Academic achievements rather than the empire Alexander built.

 

[Androrc the Orc]

... or Rom+Greece AND Byzanz; or Germany AND Holy Roman Empire; or Celts AND France...so way again not Russia AND the soviet union? At the moment the Russian Civ has no elements from the SU. The SU can also have some different citiy-names like Leningrad, Stalingrad, Baku, Gorky, Sverdlovsk, Stalino ...

France is a Latin country, not a Celtic one... despite what nationalist ideology may say.

Anyhow, to answer your question: there is no Soviet culture, which is one of the basis for having a civilization. The Byzantines had their own distinct culture from ancient Greece. About the Holy Roman Empire, that was a mistake on their part.

 

[fat_tonle]

It is a football superpower, which would tie neatly with a new "football victory"

Anyhow yes, it is not a superpower but it is still a large market. You may think it doesn't make sense to add them before Portugal, but Carthaginians have been added a plethora of times without the Phoenicians being there at all.

Then you may as well start adding Mexico. Australia, and God knows who else. It's a mess.

Maybe if we get a future scenario, you can account for these civs. But they shouldn't have classical representations because they weren't the significant players in history.

 

[ShahJahanII]

But they shouldn't have classical representations because they weren't the significant players in history.

Thank you.
Honestly, let's be realistic:
Modern Nations will not make it into the game.

Not to say you can't propose them, or that they shouldn't be in.
However, there is a thread for suggesting new civs stickied in the "Idea's and Suggestions" category.

 

[CivOasis]

Thank you.
Honestly, let's be realistic:
Modern Nations will not make it into the game.

Not to say you can't propose them, or that they shouldn't be in.
However, there is a thread for suggesting new civs stickied in the "Idea's and Suggestions" category.

You could use colonial themes of many of these nations, and, taking that part of there history and culture, extend it backwards another few hundred years. This would put them on par with the ages of some represented nations.

Not to mention, if you go with time in existence, some "modern" nations do surpass some of the civs on the existing list.

Anyways, if we're linking to other threads, we've got a mod dedicated to adding civs that didn't quite make it in (see signature).

 

[ShahJahanII]

You could use colonial themes of many of these nations, and, taking that part of there history and culture, extend it backwards another few hundred years. This would put them on par with the ages of some represented nations.

Not to mention, if you go with time in existence, some "modern" nations do surpass some of the civs on the existing list.

Anyways, if we're linking to other threads, we've got a mod dedicated to adding civs that didn't quite make it in (see signature).

Yes, they would make a great mod, but the devs wouldn't put them in.

Doh! *facepalm* I totally forgot about the modern civs.
Yes, do post there if you are interested.
We have some beautiful art by sukritact.
Credit to Pouakai, CivOasis and the others as well.

 

[Androrc the Orc]

Yes, they would make a great mod, but the devs wouldn't put them in.

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure.

 

[ShahJahanII]

Oh, I wouldn't be so sure.

I am.
But you are entitled to your opinion.

 

[Androrc the Orc]

I am.
But you are entitled to your opinion.

So what I say is an opinion, but what you say is a fact?

The thing is, if they don't include Australia or Brazil, it will most probably be because they feel neither had enough impact historically. Not because they are modern.

 

[ShahJahanII]

So what I say is an opinion, but what you say is a fact?

No, that is not at all what I meant.
Sorry if it seemed a bit rude or sarcastic.

The thing is, if they don't include Australia or Brazil, it will most probably be because they feel neither had enough impact historically. Not because they are modern.

Yes, I'd never take a civ out just because it is modern. Thing is, most "modern" civs (aside from America) haven't had a huge historical impact.

Again, I apologize if what I said came out wrong.

 

[Bechhold]

Some of these guesses could easily be added by just adding additional leaders to certain Civilizations.

 

[Androrc the Orc]

I apologize as well if I sounded rude.

It is true they never had a large impact, but considering this is an expansion (and one that adds more civs than any other expansion in the Civ series has, IIRC) it will already add "non-essential" civs, and considering Brazil is growing significantly economically, possibly making it more of a marketing sense to have it (both due to Brazilian buyers and due to increased interest in the country), I think it has some kind of shot even if slim, specially considering almost all of the traditional civilizations have been added through DLC or confirmed to be in the expansion and that they added Cristo Redentor to the base game, showing some sort of increased interest in the country. Although, the fact that Portugal won't be in the expansion makes it rather doubtful that Brazil would be in - as it would be rather strange if they chose to add Brazil but not Portugal, specially since the latter can represent the first in some form, and had a much more significant impact on world history.

If I had to bet, I'd say the Hittites, Sumerians and Zulu would be in.

 

[ShahJahanII]

I apologize as well if I sounded rude.

It is true they never had a large impact, but considering this is an expansion (and one that adds more civs than any other expansion in the Civ series has, IIRC) it will already add "non-essential" civs, and considering Brazil is growing significantly economically, possibly making it more of a marketing sense to have it (both due to Brazilian buyers and due to increased interest in the country), I think it has some kind of shot even if slim, specially considering almost all of the traditional civilizations have been added through DLC or confirmed to be in the expansion and that they added Cristo Redentor to the base game, showing some sort of increased interest in the country. Although, the fact that Portugal won't be in the expansion makes it rather doubtful that Brazil would be in - as it would be rather strange if they chose to add Brazil but not Portugal, specially since the latter can represent the first in some form, and had a much more significant impact on world history.

If I had to bet, I'd say the Hittites, Sumerians and Zulu would be in.

Good guesses.
I normally don't like Sumeria being in at the same time as Babylon.
Same reason I don't like the Holy Roman Empire being in at the same time as Germany.
Hittites would be awesome though. There are some great suggestions for them at the link in my signature for suggesting new civs.

 

[Arlborn]

I still say it would be a good move to add later a DLC with both Portugal and Brazil. Maybe even with a small scenario centering on both of them.

 

[Grapa]

The other 4, I think

1. Austria (Austria-Hungary) - One more European civ, and it's the only other major European empire that hasn't been represented

2. Sumeria - Oldest civ, would be weird not to include them

3. Ethiopia - Another really old, influential civilization

4. Moors - Another Arabian civilization