Guess the New Civs

[ShahJahanII]

Looks like the Huns are confirmed:
http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/03/09/civilization-v-gods-kings-interview-with-lead-designer-ed-beach/

PCG: But there are a couple religious scenarios.

Beach: We have one that highlights the religion system and how to mod it. We have another one—the Celts and the Huns and the Byzantines—we’re introducing that set of three new civilizations and we decided that a fall of Rome scenario would be perfect. And then the third scenario we’re shipping with is an interesting departure. We actually have a steampunk Victorian-era science fiction scenario that’s an interesting departure from the usual historical fare.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Looks like the Huns are confirmed:
http://www.pcgamer.com/2012/03/09/civilization-v-gods-kings-interview-with-lead-designer-ed-beach/

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Bad news, very bad news
Now I have lost interest in GK...
They should have included Khazaria if they wanted a steppe-horse culture
The bigger problem is that this eliminates the chances of Hungary being included
If nothing else, the naming is too similar...
It would have been a much wiser decision to include Hungary as a full civ based on the Medieval scenario, instead of the Huns based on the Byzantine scenario

 

[Snoopaloop]

Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Bad news, very bad news
Now I have lost interest in GK...
They should have included Khazaria if they wanted a steppe-horse culture
The bigger problem is that this eliminates the chances of Hungary being included
If nothing else, the naming is too similar...
It would have been a much wiser decision to include Hungary as a full civ based on the Medieval scenario, instead of the Huns based on the Byzantine scenario

not bad at all to me.

 

[fat_tonle]

Maybe Firaxis was feeling that nostalgia from Age of Empires 2: Age of Kings. Huns probably had the best campaign in that. And since it is God's and Kings.... might as well throw in Attila the Hun and all that Tarken glory. Might as well give them the bonus for building/city attacks while you are at it.

 

[Glassmage]

I love it Huns! Mongol vs Hun who's the better horse barbarians???

 

[vonbach]

I love it Huns! Mongol vs Hun who's the better horse barbarians???

The problem is no one else does. Theres a reason why the mongols have the Keshik and thats it.
Its because the horse archer in any sort of open ground is basically going to own everyone.
If they are going to make the huns some high mobility archer force people are going to start
hating them real fast. I can only imagine this in multiplayer.

 

[fat_tonle]

Civs that play as pure barbarians are broken to begin with. Makes for one dimensional game play. How can you have CS diplomacy as Mongol if you kill more than two CS's and the rest of em perma-war you?? And if you don't kill them you don't utilize the ability to the fullest, unless you were going for domination from the get go. Not a bad idea but not flexible. It is a terrible UA in other words.

Sometimes you want that style of play. But now with two civs that essentially fall into that? Waste. Absolute waste.

 

[vonbach]

But now with two civs that essentially fall into that? Waste. Absolute waste.

Agreed. They might as well just named them the Mongols 2.

 

[fat_tonle]

The language should be fun.... since what... Historians can point out to about three words whatever dialect they used??? Hopefully they mean "Hi", "Bye" and "Die" so we can actually tell without reading the dialogue box. I guess they will throw some hybrid mix of Mongolian, Turkic, and whatever else they can dig up. Bulgarian, Hebrew, hell.... whatever sounds about right I guess.

 

[seasnake]

Hmmm, I wouldn't have guessed huns and I would still have preferred Khazars, but I'm okay with it. I enjoy Mongolia games and I think they'll go to some effort to make them truly different.

 

[cccv]

Huns are an odd choice, and probably not the best choice, but they don't ruin the game for me.

 

[vonbach]

The language should be fun.... since what... Historians can point out to about three words whatever dialect they used??? Hopefully they mean "Hi", "Bye" and "Die" so we can actually tell without reading the dialogue box. I guess they will throw some hybrid mix of Mongolian, Turkic, and whatever else they can dig up. Bulgarian, Hebrew, hell.... whatever sounds about right I guess.

Not even that. No one really knows anything about them other that what was written about them.
There isn't one unbiased source. They could have been 7' redheads or midgets with orange
skin like an oomplaloompa for all we know.

 

[seasnake]

Not even that. No one really knows anything about them other that what was written about them.
There isn't one unbiased source. They could have been 7' redheads or midgets with orange
skin like an oomplaloompa for all we know.

Okay, a 7 foot redhead with skin like an oompla loompa as Attila would be the most awesome leader ever. Hopefully he talks like the Swedish Chef as well...

 

[Dregor]

My god a lot of people must have purchased a Jump To Conclusion mat. How about waiting and seeing what they do with the Huns before claiming it's going to ruin the game?

 

[Civciv5]

I have lost interest in this expansion too.
They better chose Khazaria who have real city names.
But,there was a "Hunnic Empire",but how can a empire exist without cities?

 

[Koheleth]

The modern State of Israel is not to be confused with the Kingdom of Israel, a united monarchy that may or may not have existed in the southern Levant for a period of less than 100 years, some 3,000 years ago. As far as I know, the only evidence to support the existence of such a kingdom is found in the Hebrew Bible. I suppose you could make a case for the Kingdom of Israel being included as a playable Civ, but it will never happen. It's capital would have to be Jerusalem, which would be highly controversial, since present day East Jerusalem (i.e., Jerusalem proper) was illegally annexed by the modern State of Israel. It is internationally recognized as occupied Palestinian territory.

The united monarchy lasted about 100 years. But the Israelite kingdom lasted about 600 years, and was preceded by the the reign of the judges, which lasted several hundred years. Even after the Israelite kingdom fell, there was only a 70 year gap before Israelite exiles returned an established an autonomous principality under nominal Persian sovereignty. Eventually, Israel regained full independence under the Hasmonians, which lasted until the Roman era. End-to-end, ancient Israel as a discrete civilization lasted about 1200 years. That's much longer that most civilizations in the game.

[Note: eastern Jerusalem isn't internationally recognized as squat. It was supposed to be a UN protectorate in 1948; since that time, no binding resolution has ever transferred the territory's theoretical sovereignty to either Israel or the Palestinians. Israel annexed it, but to the world it's no man's land]

 

[turingmachine]

I don't really get all the Hun hate (besides, yes, the stupidly chosen 'Attila's Court' city name). Are people so mad at the inclusion of a civ that doesn't meet the standard idea of an empire?

The Huns had their own language, their own culture, introduced technological advancements into Europe regarding the compound bow, maintained diplomatic relations with surrounding powerful empires, had a sophisticated administration system, controlled a large amount of territory for a significant amount of time, and impacted world history with their conflict with Rome.

The steppe empires were important. Yes many didn't build cities (although most were to some degree only semi-nomadic), and because of this they don't fit the classic definition of what people think of in terms of an empire. So what? The only real annoyance is that they have to take some liberties to make them fit the gameplay mechanics, but I don't have a problem with them being represented. They weren't uncivilized despite not having cities.

 

[seasnake]

I don't really get all the Hun hate (besides, yes, the stupidly chose 'Attila's Court' city name). Are people so mad at the inclusion of a civ that doesn't meet the standard idea of an empire?

The Huns had their own language, their own culture, introduced technological advancements into Europe regarding the compound bow, maintained diplomatic relations with surrounding powerful empires, had a sophisticated administration system, controlled a large amount of territory for a significant amount of time, and impacted world history with their conflict in Rome.

The steppe empires were important. Yes many didn't build cities (although most were to some degree only semi-nomadic), and because of this they don't fit the classic definition of what people think of in terms of an empire. So what? The only real annoyance is that they have to take some liberties to make them fit the gameplay mechanics, but I don't have a problem with them being represented. They weren't uncivilized despite not having cities.

I mostly am disappointed because I feel Khazaria was a much more powerful, long lived empire that settled down into large cities near the black and caspian seas and practiced Tengriism and Judaism, so this expansion seemed perfect. Huns will be fun, I personally hope they have a very unique UA so they play different from Mongols, also I imagine they will have a composite longbow UU and a ranged horse unit as well.

 

[turingmachine]

I mostly am disappointed because I feel Khazaria was a much more powerful, long lived empire that settled down into large cities near the black and caspian seas and practiced Tengriism and Judaism, so this expansion seemed perfect. Huns will be fun, I personally hope they have a very unique UA so they play different from Mongols, also I imagine they will have a composite longbow UU and a ranged horse unit as well.

I agree the Khazars would have been cool and something new (hopefully they can still show up down the road as DLC or in a later expansion), but I don't understand the extreme reaction of the Huns completely ruining the game so I'm not going to buy it now.

The Huns have marketable appeal. Everyone knows the Huns. Maybe they'll help sell the game, which could extend support a little longer and let one more DLC civ slip in...

 

[Deggial]

I don't now whether or not these pictures are already taken into account (the thread is way to long for me to scan it in total) and I don't know whether or not the Huns can be called *confirmed* just because of this city name in the screen shot.

But what do you think about this pictures, taken out of an interview:

and with a better look on the guy to the right:

Here, we might have the cover art for G&K. The lady on the left (not the interviewer ) probably is Boudicca. But what about the guy on the right? Isn't this a Hun? IIRC, the cap is quite typical.

--

Edit: Oh well, while I prepared the images, this "news" was analyzed in a parallel thread. Too late to be the first...