Guess the New Civs

Androrc the Orc said:
1. Zulu
2. Sumeria
3. Hittites
4. Ethiopia
5. Austria
6. Assyria
7. Sioux
8. Poland
9. Hungary
10. Brazil
11. Khmer
12. Mali
13. Phoenicia
Click to expand...

There are literally dozens of good recommendations for new civilizations in this thread, including Androrc's above list, nearly all of which would make for fun and exciting new games. However, I strongly suggest that any further expansions or downloadable content to CIV5 should consider one or more relatively new entities and do so for regions of the world with significant territorial coverage gaps. In prior posts I’ve separately mentioned most of my preferred civilizations, but decided it might be helpful for the discussion to assemble the following combined wish list organized by region:

(1) North America: Anasazi (Ancient Pueblo), or Mississippian
(2) South America: Brazil
(3) Europe: Austrian Empire, or Austro-Hungarian Empire, or Minoan
(4) Africa: South Africa, or Zulu
(5) Middle East: Israel (modern state), or Israel (ancient state)
(6) Asia: Indus River Civilization (Harappan)
(7) Oceania: Australia, or Indonesia
 
Jean Parisot said:
I would be absolutely ecstatic if they made MALTA one of the new CS :D

A military CS would probably suit it best considering it endured two of the most awful sieges in history.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd love Malta. Plus, you have the Knights Hospitaller time period.

Here's my thought. Add Malta as a military city-state. Change Tyre to a maritime one (as it should be). Maybe change another maritime to mercantile to make up for it (or Tyre can be mercantile).
 
I have criticism of the Inuit's inclusion (essentially, if the Polynesians are just above the threshold, the Inuit are well below it). It's not a knock against them. They show humanity's tremendous ability to adapt and survive in the harshest of conditions. However, those conditions cut precisely against establishing the type of civilization represented in this game.

Nevertheless, I support modding in all sorts of peoples, so I'll go comment on that thread and see if I can give any feedback. :)
 
I'd like to see primitive civilizations represented better by barbarians. Sort of like how they developed into rogue city states in Civ IV. Maybe give them unique resources and units to make exploration and colonization of their lands worth while. You don't really negotiate with them or do missions for them but you can buy them out with gold or something if you don't outright kill them. Think it would be a good representation for native people in largely unexplored lands in the mid game.
 
I'd like to see primitive civilizations represented better by barbarians. Sort of like how they developed into rogue city states in Civ IV. Maybe give them unique resources and units to make exploration and colonization of their lands worth while. You don't really negotiate with them or do missions for them but you can buy them out with gold or something if you don't outright kill them. Think it would be a good representation for native people in largely unexplored lands in the mid game.
Click to expand...

This isn't at all that bad of an idea.
 
Actually, in a way, I'd suggest the opposite. Similar end goal: Beef up barbarians, but I'd like to return the Horde to Barbarian Horde. That means barbarian migrations and large barbarian surges. I'd also like them to have their own cavalry units rather than just spears, warriors, and archers. I don't like having them settle cities because that seems to blur things too much.
 
Barbarian uprisings should return.

But similar to the revolutions mods in Civ IV, I don't feel the number of CS's should be fixed at the start of the game. Maybe encampments can spawn settlers after 10 or so turns (quick pace) and become a CS. And peace would be blocked until you discover writing, which you certainly will by the time they settle.

I believe you should be able to raze CS's as well (if you can't already, I forget). Liberation should not be an option unless the CS has developed to a certain point. Like until a certain tech or era is reached.
 
I miss the Barb cities from IV, but I'm ok with not having them. The city-states have somewhat filled the gap. It annoys me how much AI civs get riled up when you start taking C-Ss, even when they aren't allied with anyone.
 
fat_tonle said:
Barbarian uprisings should return.
Click to expand...
Let your unhappiness drop below 20 and voila:
attachment.php
 
WillBill said:
Yes. The Zulu empire will represent Africa which i think needs more representation. If you think about representation North America already had US and Iroquois and in my opinion its good enough.
Click to expand...

I agree that Africa needs more representation--just not with Zulu. I'd actually say that (if you're talking Geographically) North America, South America, and Africa ALL need something.
 
Zulu would be the 4th civ in Africa: Songhai, Egypt, Carthage..

Compared with only two from North America, I'm not surprised a lot of people share the opinion that another native American civ wouldn't hurt. Personally I'd like to see a tribe from the southwest like the Navajo or Apache, there aren't many good desert civs.

There may be some bias involved given the number of players in North America vs. Africa, but Africa is not that badly represented IMO.

I'd like to have both ideally.
 
SammyKhalifa said:
I agree that Africa needs more representation--just not with Zulu. I'd actually say that (if you're talking Geographically) North America, South America, and Africa ALL need something.
Click to expand...

Indeed. May i suggest South America, Africa and North America (in that order)? :lol:

cheers!
 
I think that when people say they want more African civs, they actually want Sub-Saharan civs. Completely understandable. It's a big area and the Songhai are quite close to being a Super-Saharan civ.

I'd still like to see a North American tribal civ as well. Navajo, Apache, Pueblo, or Comanche.
 
chazzycat said:
Zulu would be the 4th civ in Africa: Songhai, Egypt, Carthage..

Compared with only two from North America, I'm not surprised a lot of people share the opinion that another native American civ wouldn't hurt. Personally I'd like to see a tribe from the southwest like the Navajo or Apache, there aren't many good desert civs.

There may be some bias involved given the number of players in North America vs. Africa, but Africa is not that badly represented IMO.

I'd like to have both ideally.
Click to expand...

Sub-Saharan Africa, though. In my mind (at least) Egypt and Carthage are more Mediterranean than African. Ethiopians or Nubians would be cool.

I would like another NA civ, but I haven't heard one yet that I really like too much. The suggestions all sound like they're trying much too hard. For SA, Brazil might work for a modern age Civ. Ancient might be possible.
 
WillBill said:
Indeed. May i suggest South America, Africa and North America (in that order)? :lol:

cheers!
Click to expand...

Best to worst in each region:

South America: 1. Chachapoya (arguably the most important Pre-Colombian civ to be neglected with a good city list, culture, language, and leaders. Huge cities, huge impact, and its a shame that the most people know of them is from Indiana Jones), 2. Brazil, 3. Gran Colombia, 4. Tupi, or maybe 5. Nazca for a Desert Civ

Africa: 1. Ethiopia, 2. Kongo, 3. Moors/Morocco, 4. Zulu, 5. Zimbabwe, 6. Benin

US + Canada: (Since it seems we are excluding Central America), 1. Pueblo/Anasazi, 2. Comanche, 3. Inuit, 4. Cherokee, 5. Navajo, 6. Sioux 7. Seminole, 8. Illinois 9. Tuscarora (and re-editing info from Iroquois)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Smegger213
Is it me, or is the AI just dumb a lot of the time
Replies
7
Views
2K
Naokaukodem
Naokaukodem
T
[BNW] Wonders of the Ancient World
Replies
3
Views
767
Tharkon
T
A
Magic wand
Replies
0
Views
426
AlanH11
A
mattwho
Matt's Civs: Ireland
Replies
0
Views
273
mattwho
mattwho
B
Civ 5 is disappointing
Replies
5
Views
4K
Bonyduck Campersang
Bonyduck Campersang
Back
Top Bottom