Guess the New Civs

[j51]

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

Then they should add them as the Franks/Frankish/Francia, not the HRE, as that didn't exist untill later anyway. As it stands there are already too many civs from NW Europe.

 

[vonbach]

As it stands there are already too many civs from NW Europe.

No such thing.

 

[Kimuyama]

No such thing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_western_europe

Edit:
Which would mean:
England
France
Germany
Denmark
The Netherlands
and The Celts

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_western_europe

Edit:
Which would mean:
England
France
Germany
Denmark
The Netherlands
and The Celts

His point is you can never have too many civs in a region, regardless of population of other regions. In theory all should be as densely populated as possible

 

[Cicero63]

You have to admit even though Europe has a lot of Civs already, Austria is very important culturally. Austria produced the greatest musicians in Europe and some great scientists. The political influence of the Hasburgs was amazizng. The Holy Roman Empire is a lame excuse not to have a seperate Austrian and Italian civ-it was a political entity not a civ

 

[Steamwerks]

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

Outside of a scenario?

 

[Gucumatz]

Outside of a scenario?

Eaxctly, a scenario sure. Beyond that no way when around the world there would be so many better choices and for Firaxis there are more well known civs too.

 

[Mango Elephant]

In theory all should be as densely populated as possible

Why? I can't imagine having 100+ civilizations because it would be very difficult to make them sufficiently different from one another.

His point is you can never have too many civs in a region, regardless of population of other regions.

I'm sure some people wouldn't mind having twenty European civilizations to one non-European civilization, but I wouldn't. I want diversity, and is Austria really so different from Germany that Austria's uniqueness warrants it a spot in the game, a game with only one civ in South America and one Sub-Saharan African civ? I may not be an expert on Austrian history and culture, but I'll be bold and state Austria isn't that unique and interesting and I pledge to God that I don't care if the world ends before I have a chance to play Austria in some computer game.

 

[Cicero63]

Austria is quite different than Germany, similar but different. It had a great effect on Europe and the Middle East for hundreds of years. The German Civ only represents the country Germany, not the German Speaking areas.

 

[Mango Elephant]

Austria is quite different than Germany, similar but different. It had a great effect on Europe and the Middle East for hundreds of years.

Enlighten me on both aspects, please, and be very specific.

 

[billb]

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...

As I read somewhere a long time ago - The Holy Roman Empire was neither Holy, Roman, nor an Empire.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Why? I can't imagine having 100+ civilizations because it would be very difficult to make them sufficiently different from one another.



I'm sure some people wouldn't mind having twenty European civilizations to one non-European civilization, but I wouldn't. I want diversity, and is Austria really so different from Germany that Austria's uniqueness warrants it a spot in the game, a game with only one civ in South America and one Sub-Saharan African civ? I may not be an expert on Austrian history and culture, but I'll be bold and state Austria isn't that unique and interesting and I pledge to God that I don't care if the world ends before I have a chance to play Austria in some computer game.

If you'd decided to read the second line as well you would have realised how unnecessary this post was. I advocated as many civs as possible in every region. Lack of balance isn't justification enough to say we should have less civs was my argument.

Also there are easily 100+ very different civs of europe that have been very well documented in history, just in the AD as well. The middle east has even more.

 

[Mango Elephant]

If you'd decided to read the second line as well you would have realised how unnecessary this post was.

Excuse me? Did you not read the first line of my post? Because I quoted just that line you're talking about. I read it. And then I addressed its main problem.

I advocated as many civs as possible in every region. Lack of balance isn't justification enough to say we should have less civs was my argument.

Oh, believe me, I know exactly what you advocated because I actually read your post, even though you insist on saying that I did not. And to take matters further, I know why you advocated what you did. Read all my post this time, especially the next paragraph, and I shall explain to you why I think it's a bad idea.

Also there are easily 100+ very different civs of europe that have been very well documented in history, just in the AD as well. The middle east has even more.

Oh, I know. I look at maps, I know how diverse this world is. But what I'm saying is if we included all those civs, it would take A LOT of time to design them all, and even then we couldn't design them all sufficiently because their abilities and characteristics would have to overlap. Read the thread regarding the Arabs; The Arabs have already had their abilities and their niches replaced, and here we don't even have thirty civs yet! If we had more than a hundred, how could we make them all unique? None of them would be! And furthermore, as a lesser issue, it would be hard and time consuming to memorize all the Unique Abilities, Unique Units, and Unique Buildings/Improvements that each civ has. Don't feel like memorizing? Well, then you'd have to constantly reference the Civilopedia (sp?), and Lord knows if that's not time consuming I'll eat a goat.

 

[The_J]

Moderator Action: Keep cool please.

 

[evanschrader]

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.

What was your idea on the UU for the Mississippi?

 

[Grapa]

Austria is the only other European civ besides Portugal that I would bother including.

It would be nice to see Ethiopia and the Sumerians again as well. Maybe the Mughal Empire, although I wonder if that would just fit in with India.

 

[theadder]

Austria is the only other European civ besides Portugal that I would bother including.

It would be nice to see Ethiopia and the Sumerians again as well. Maybe the Mughal Empire, although I wonder if that would just fit in with India.

Probably no Mughals; the Indians even have the Mughal Fort after all.

Pity though.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Excuse me? Did you not read the first line of my post? Because I quoted just that line you're talking about. I read it. And then I addressed its main problem.



Oh, believe me, I know exactly what you advocated because I actually read your post, even though you insist on saying that I did not. And to take matters further, I know why you advocated what you did. Read all my post this time, especially the next paragraph, and I shall explain to you why I think it's a bad idea.



Oh, I know. I look at maps, I know how diverse this world is. But what I'm saying is if we included all those civs, it would take A LOT of time to design them all, and even then we couldn't design them all sufficiently because their abilities and characteristics would have to overlap. Read the thread regarding the Arabs; The Arabs have already had their abilities and their niches replaced, and here we don't even have thirty civs yet! If we had more than a hundred, how could we make them all unique? None of them would be! And furthermore, as a lesser issue, it would be hard and time consuming to memorize all the Unique Abilities, Unique Units, and Unique Buildings/Improvements that each civ has. Don't feel like memorizing? Well, then you'd have to constantly reference the Civilopedia (sp?), and Lord k
nows if that's not time consuming I'll eat a goat.

Firstly i'd like to apologise, i didn't mean to provoke you. I was merely trying to show that you missed my point, i'll explain in more detail.

His point is you can never have too many civs in a region, regardless of population of other regions.
^ What you quoted

In theory all should be as densely populated as possible
^ What you missed

I know you mentioned it with regard to lack of distinction, but it fundamentally relates to the first article and your whole second point is arguing precisely what i summed up in this phrase. Just trying to show this is a moot point, we're essentially arguing the same thing. I don't think Europe should be represented more than it deserves, but unfortunately other areas are less well recorded, so they can't truly be represented as well.

The Arabs have not had their niche replaced or their abilities, they may not have the best comparable abilities, but they come together to form its niche. This is what i argue in that thread, they are not outdated at all if their played in their niche.

As for making them unique, Lets be conservative and say each unit or building can have 3 significantly different variations. There will be over 100 units and 60 buildings in the expansion, that means potential for over 300 unique units and 180 unique buildings. Then there is the potential for more unique improvements, but lets call that just 20 since we only have a handful right now. That's already 500 unique options, enough for 250 significantly different in game civs.
Having 34 currently, i don't think uniqueness is therefore a problem. I don't know if you've been to Europe, but if you do you will see that there is easily enough differentiation to cater to one of these 250 combination options without looking identical to other civs.

Lack of memory capacity should never be used to determine how many civs should be in this game, otherwise we'd already be beyond capacity for some. There is a great deal of variation in humanity, amongst consumers and civilisations, at the end of the day they are only gunna be so different when using only 2 unique objects, but that means they can be as unique as any other civ already in game, and some of them have used their 2 objects very cleverly to build a niche with their ability.

 

[That nerdy kid]

Austria is the only other European civ besides Portugal that I would bother including.

No Poland?

 

[Louis XXIV]

What was your idea on the UU for the Mississippi?

Falcon Warrior (hence the similarity to the Aztec Jaguar warrior). I suppose it could be called the Birdman instead, although I'd just start thinking of Our Lady Peace.

The only historically documented battles were a siege against De Soto where they used Archers (I think the Spanish described them as Longbows), but I don't think the Falcon imagery is associated with Archers, so these might be a bit exclusive and I'm not sure the name for the Archers.