Guess the New Civs

[The_J]

Nope, he means the mississippian culture, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mississippian_culture .

 

[evanschrader]

So do you guys have any ideas on Mississippi leaders?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

They were pretty much wiped out by the time Europeans started exploring the interior. Some of the last remaining villages were visited by DeSoto though. Maybe check out his diary for more info.

 

[Louis XXIV]

The best example is Tuskaloosa, whom De Soto encountered. He was an important leader of a Mississippian tribe, although his relative importance compared to past leaders is obviously unknown.

ETA: I won't address the Mound Builders were Europeans theory. Not only has this theory been denounced as erroneous, it's generally considered to have been a product of a more racist time that simply refused to accept North American tribes were capable of making achievements on their own.

 

[evanschrader]

The best example is Tuskaloosa, whom De Soto encountered. He was an important leader of a Mississippian tribe, although his relative importance compared to past leaders is obviously unknown.

ETA: I won't address the Mound Builders were Europeans theory. Not only has this theory been denounced as erroneous, it's generally considered to have been a product of a more racist time that simply refused to accept North American tribes were capable of making achievements on their own.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Basically, the Mississippians either collapsed due to small pox or slightly before. Either way, Europeans didn't get to see them at their height. In fact, if it weren't for early Spanish expeditions, we probably wouldn't have any information at all.

ETA: Tuskaloosa would probably speak Choctaw or Creek. After that things get a bit tricky. While I have some ideas for a Unique Unit, it'll seem a bit repetitive with the Aztecs. Then there would obviously be something with mounds and I'm out of ideas after that.

 

[Pouakai]

I reckon a Mound UI which adds faith and maybe gold for a certain number of turns (50 / 100) before becoming a hill tile?

 

[Gucumatz]

Ah you mean the indian invaders that killed all the original inhabitants.

Ugh one thing that truly does annoy me, not giving native peoples credit where credit is due. Perhaps I am misunderstanding this, but you are sounding like another conspiricist who can't wrap his/her head around the fact native peoples were even "Capable" of building architecture like this or that.

That whole pseudo-science movement just sickens me (also perhaps because I am half Kaqchikel and I just have to laugh when people call people like my ancestors "Aliens, lost tribes, Celts, etc.", simply ridiculous).

 

[AbsintheRed]

If your talking about the mound builders those were a Celtic people. The Celts built the same
type of mounds. I used to play on them as a kid they were all over the eastern USA.

Ah you mean the indian invaders that killed all the original inhabitants.

Uhmm.. wow.. just wow... you can't be serious, you really beleive this?

 

[ShahJahanII]

If your talking about the mound builders those were a Celtic people. The Celts built the same
type of mounds. I used to play on them as a kid they were all over the eastern USA.

Ah you mean the indian invaders that killed all the original inhabitants.

Ludicrous.
That is about as accurate as saying all pyramid-building cultures were Egyptian.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Maybe they should represent the mighty troll civilisation instead

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Please cease the trolling in this thread.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Louis XXIV]

I'm going to move this conversation from the News thread per Camikaze's suggestion. I suppose it's technically off topic and should be in the history forum, but it strikes me as a small digression and not really worth it's own thread. So, with apologies to Arioch for the abrupt change in thread, here goes (a few back posts for those following along):

Spoiler The rest of the conversation :

BTW, I wonder how they're spelling Boudica's name. Others have spelled it like I just did, which is the now accepted version. But this seems to use the traditional spelling of Boadicea back before they realized this technically wasn't accurate.

Yeah, I have seen many version of her name; Boudica, Boudicca, Boadicea, Boudicea... I think I like Boudicea most, but the proper Boudica also sounds nice in my ears.

Well, Boudicea exists because some medieval monk wrote an "e" where there should have been a "c" while copying Tacitus (I suppose it could have just been an ink smudge. Either way, it's one of the bigger typos in history). Tacitus wrote "Boudicca" originally.

It's hard to declare what is the "correct" English spelling of a foreign name from a pre-literate culture.

Considering our sources are Roman, is it really fair to call them a pre-literate culture? Also, the Iceni were literate and there are records of their rulers preserved in coins (although, since Boudicca was the wife of Prasutagus, she never had the opportunity to mint her own coins because the rebellion happened shortly after his death).

Do you know of any Celtic systems of writing that history has missed, or are you merely being argumentative?

Here is the link that talks about Iceni coins. By this point in history, their leaders minted coins with their names (or abbreviations of their names) on them.

For example, archaeologists have discovered coins from the reign of Boudicca's husband, Prasutagus, which say: SUB RI PRASTO ESICO FECIT, which means "Under Prasto, Escio made me." Yes, it's in Latin, but the point remains that there are written records by rulers of the Iceni. This is why I said it wasn't fair to call them pre-literate.

Also, some have speculated that the Celtic alphabet dates back to the 1st century BC, although, imo, I don't tend to think this is true.

Anyway, my only point here is the actual sources tell us her name was Boudicca. I'm hoping, even if the French version called her Boudicée, that won't translate to Boadicea because that's just a typo.

 

[Mango Elephant]

What I would like to happen -

Tibet
China divided into the Tang and Han civilizations (instead of Han maybe Song, the only reason Tang is in there is because of Wu)
Portugal
Ethiopia/Axum

 

[Cicero63]

A though just occured to me. Due to the adding of the "Great War" era and units wouldn't it be logical to think that some new "Great War" Era Civ would be a possibility. The only otherr major force in WWI that hasn't already been added as a civ is the Austrians. Maybe I am getting myself a little hopeful but they could be added as a DLC after the expansion

 

[vonbach]

You might see Austria-Hungary as either in a scenario or hopefully as a Civ.
Though I think I'd like the Holy Roman Empire better.

 

[Bowsling]

You might see Austria-Hungary as either in a scenario or hopefully as a Civ.
Though I think I'd like the Holy Roman Empire better.

Meh. I'd prefer the Condefedation of the Rhine, myself.

 

[vonbach]

I want to enlighten the heathen with Charlemagne.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

You might see Austria-Hungary as either in a scenario or hopefully as a Civ.
Though I think I'd like the Holy Roman Empire better.

The Holy Roman Empire is very difficult to really classify as a civilisation. There are Germanic people, Frank people, Danish people, Dutch people, Italian people, Polish people etc under the various princely states and kingdoms of their region. All these are then shoved together under the title 'Holy Roman Empire' with little real authority in the term. It doesn't really make sense as a civilisation...

But then judging by what this game has described as civilisation elsewhere i suppose it would fit right in...

 

[vonbach]

I think Austria Hungary is more likely honestly. But I still want to play as Charlemagne.