Guess the New Civs

[AbsintheRed]

Tyre is already a city state, but apparently it's being switched from military to commercial.

Yep, I only meant that because Tyre is on the screenshots, Phoenicia is out as a new civ for GK
(they didn't "upgrade" Tyre the way they did with Seoul)

 

[AbsintheRed]

but as the Huns did not have a capital, Attila's Court is made up worth the game. That is my other slight problem with the Civ.

Actually they had some sort of capital, it was located in present day Hungary
Probably in Tápiószentmárton (modern Hungarian name), at least there were that palace I posted a few posts above
I found an english article too: http://culture.hu/main.php?folderID=1094&articleID=257302&ctag=articlelist&iid=1

Unfortunately we don't know how the Huns called the area, maybe it was something similar, maybe not
In our Hun mod for Civ IV, we called the capital Tapiomart

 

[dagriggstar]

Over at the screenshot analysis thread we are beginning to be certain of another civ:
It is yellow-orange in colour, think savannah. I lightened up the screenie and could more or less certainly identify two impi units with elongated shields, head dresses and all.

It must be the Zulu, no?

Could still be the Kongo Kingdom, though I doubt it.

Question: what would be wrong with the Huns being in the game? Wouldn't that just presumably offer the chance for some fairly unique gameplay? What would be lost by having them as one of the nine new civs?

Having a city called "Attila's Court" is a bit of a ... lets call it a trance breaker for me. I'm sure if the UA is interesting enough I'll mod it for some other civ to take advantage of.

I can think of plenty of horse based civs I'd prefer before the Huns (mostly, because the Huns have basically no cities).

 

[AbsintheRed]

Having a city called "Attila's Court" is a bit of a ... lets call it a trance breaker for me. I'm sure if the UA is interesting enough I'll mod it for some other civ to take advantage of.

I can think of plenty of horse based civs I'd prefer before the Huns (mostly, because the Huns have basically no cities).

Agreed
The lack of a proper Hunnic city list is certainly an issue

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Well at least they've pulled out all the stops in finding two original ideas for civs ...

 

[guczy]

Huns
Leader: Attila
Capital: N/A
Music Theme:
Unique Unit: Javelin Thrower. Replaces Sperman. Cost: 50. Strength: 8. Ranged Strength: 6. Range 2. Movement 3. Both melee and ranged unit.
Unique Unit2: Mounted Archery. Replaces Horseman. Cost: 80. Strength 10. Ranged Strength: 12. Movement 5. Has a Foreign Lands Bonus: Combat Bonus outside Friendly Territory (20).
Unique Ability: Scorched Earth. Units gain Double Experience from Combat. Also +25 Culture towards Social Policies from every Destroyed City and have unique ability to destroy Capital and City State cities, which gives +50 Culture to the Huns.

This would be ridiculously OP. The javelin thrower is basically a bowman with 3 movement, and the latter is already a unit that makes winning early really easy (just build 5-6 of em, take your starting warrior and curbstomp anyone). The mounted archer is even worse, a Keshik that comes with HBR is just unstoppable at that point of the game (especially with the foreign legion bonus). And due to the UA they will be at logistics + march in no time (combined with honor they would have a 3,5X XP gain). Winning with this civ would be easier than it was with the horsemen when the game launched.

 

[MadDjinn]

If the Huns are in (which I personally doubt), then a siege unit would make sense.

One of the things that made the Huns so terrifying compared to contemporary civs like the Goths was that the Huns were able to lay siege to (Roman) cities.

I'd agree with this.

but more generally -

I don't see how another 'horse+mostly mobile' 'civ' is a thing to cry about. It'd be hard to add any of the Steppe/plains civs (even with little 'settled' cities, they're still civs) if the Mongols were the only ones. That actually wipes out a lot of geographic area/history.

Adding more 'Longsword/gunpowder/rifle' civs would actually be 'worse' frankly. We've already got a lot of those.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Carthage's leader is Dido, Potential new civ "Huns" with city in Screenshot 1: Attila's court

Needless to say (from what I've said before), I'm extraordinarily disappointed with Dido. You have Theodra and Boudicca, you don't need Dido too. Plus, the other two were almost certainly real (while Dido, even if I'm being generous, is certainly uncorroborated except for by Roman fiction).

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I agree, but wasn't the Celts' Brennus from Civ IV fictional too, or at least semi-mythical?

 

[SpaceJesus]

Needless to say (from what I've said before), I'm extraordinarily disappointed with Dido. You have Theodra and Boudicca, you don't need Dido too. Plus, the other two were almost certainly real (while Dido, even if I'm being generous, is certainly uncorroborated except for by Roman fiction).

Didn't stop the Hanging Gardens from making it in, or the Fountain of Youth, El Dorado, etc.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Hanging Gardens is one of the Seven Wonders of the World. While Herodotus possibly made some things up, he's generally relied upon as a source. Dido was used as part of a propaganda piece for pro-Roman literature so Virgil doesn't have the same credibility. You won't really get any argument for Fountain of Youth or El Dorado except that, with the rarity code, I don't usually see them in the game. I've heard somebody make the argument that the quest to find them is real (although possibly not) and the game is simply simulating that quest (especially, since, in most games, you won't find them, just like real life). Either way, two wrongs don't make a right and a natural wonder is less significant than a leader of one of my favorite civs.

I feel the same way with Brennus. Also with Ragnar. I'd been advocating Boudicca for a long time partially to replace Brennus (I also suggested Vercingetorix, but Boudicca made more sense for gender inclusion). I suggested Cnut instead of Ragnar, but I'm thrilled with Harald. I've also been adamant that Gilgamesh should not be the Sumerian leader and that was at least their own legend instead of a Roman one. Basically, I feel that Civilization was moving in the right direction and abandoning semi-mythological leaders and that this is a step back.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I do agree with you, but I'm not gonna let it get me down. I'm interested to see how they will talk about her in the Civilopedia entry.

 

[Louis XXIV]

My guess is they'll quote extensively from the Aeneid. I'm not going to be overly upset, but it's still a letdown.

I think Theodora was a poor choice but she's at least a real choice. Likewise, if they had selected Cleopatra, I would have felt the same way.

I might start begging modders to see if they're interested in crafting an alternative. However, there's an added complication in that I'll need to see if I can find a male Phoenician speaker (actually, on that note, I wonder if they'll go with Punic, Berber, or Tunisian Arabic).

 

[SpaceJesus]

Dido has more historical sources than just the Aeneid. Going by additional sources, it is entirely possible given the time period that she was the first ruler of Carthage, albeit probably embellished in certain respects.

 

[Civciv5]

Theodora decided to give her husband house arrest and become empress regnant of the Byzantine Empire!

 

[Louis XXIV]

Dido has more historical sources than just the Aeneid. Going by additional sources, it is entirely possible given the time period that she was the first ruler of Carthage, albeit probably embellished in certain respects.

There's no Carthaginian stories, though, and I'm pretty sure they do have a documented foundation story. Are there any non-Roman sources? Greeks were enemies too, but that's at least a start.

 

[Villager720]

Pretty sure the units in the Great Prophet screen are no Impi. The icon looks Mayan, they look "lighter skinned", and there are no shields visible.

 

[SpaceJesus]

There's no Carthaginian stories, though, and I'm pretty sure they do have a documented foundation story. Are there any non-Roman sources? Greeks were enemies too, but that's at least a start.

You have Phoenician records, as well as the histories of the Greeks.

 

[CivOasis]

EDIT: whoops, wrong thread...

 

[Louis XXIV]

You have Phoenician records, as well as the histories of the Greeks.

I've done some research on this casually over the years, but I've never seen any indication of Phoenician records of Dido or Elissa. Can you provide a source for this?

The problem with the Roman account of the foundation of Carthage (the oxhide story) is that it basically played up every single Roman ethnic/racial stereotype of deceptive easterners. Mixed with that is the tragedy of Aeneas and Dido, which is also fairly insulting to Carthaginians.