Guess the New Civs

[PhilBowles]

Yes, but that doesn't change the analysis when trying to guess civs that will actually be included (rather than civs we just wish were included).

Well, they're pretty much done with the European roster, and the new civs include two more European civs (Netherlands and Celts), one more Classical civ (Carthage) and the Near East Byzantines, as well as the Huns who are best-known for the inroads they made into Europe. The Maya are the only so far spoiled Civ without a European bias. My guess would be that they'd try to represent Asia and Africa among the missing civs, with one each (Carthage being geographically North African notwithstanding).

 

[Louis XXIV]

I hope you're right.

 

[PhilBowles]

I hope you're right.

It also occurs that, if the 'missing' civs were well-known (like most European or Classical civs), they would probably already have been among those previewed.

 

[ehecatzin]

Im really liking the idea of Gran Colombia and Brazil as civs.

North America has the USA (a modern civ) alongside with Iroquois, Aztecs (and hopefully Sioux). Having the reverse, two modern civs, Gran Colombia and Brazil along with Incas sounds good.

South America is seriously under represented, and as mentioned before, even if Gran Colombia was shortly lived, many south American countries are related to it and the legacy of Simon Bolivar...and really, Bolivar in a Civ game would be awesome.

If they dont make it to the game, I think both Brazil and Gran Colombia would make for good DLC.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Gran Colombia's short-lived status is a serious problem for their inclusion. Likewise, they weren't a world power (among the known world). While I'm sympathetic to the inclusion of South American civs, modern states run into that second problem.

 

[Gucumatz]

Gran Colombia's short-lived status is a serious problem for their inclusion. Likewise, they weren't a world power (among the known world). While I'm sympathetic to the inclusion of South American civs, modern states run into that second problem.

Yea I have to agree. All of the South American possibilities have some problems (doesn't mean I don't want them in).

I like the suggestion of pulling a Denmark and making a "Colombia" to include a lot of peoples/history instead of Gran Colombia.

Brazil still needs more influence in this world, but I think has a decent shot

The Chachapoya are fairly unknown by a lot of people sadly.

The Tupi, Mapuche, etc. are both unknown and arguably not as important as the other three.

 

[Pouakai]

Were Polynesia a world power? Was Alexander the Great's Greece long-lived?

 

[GenjiKhan]

Yea I have to agree. All of the South American possibilities have some problems (doesn't mean I don't want them in).

I like the suggestion of pulling a Denmark and making a "Colombia" to include a lot of peoples/history instead of Gran Colombia.

Brazil still needs more influence in this world, but I think has a decent shot

Lacking World Influence isn't the real problem . I think one of the main problems with inserting Brazil for a DLC post-expansion would be the lack of scenarios . The closest thing to a scenario you can insert them,if the devs decided to sell them as a DLC is the Paraguayan War. But if Brazil came to be one of the 3 last remaining civs,they can be inserted in Victorian Scenario,to fill the huge space of Eastern South America,which is the main reason I think they'd be one of last 3 remaining Civs . For the last 2 Civilizations,I'd suppose it'll be 2 Sub-Saharan Civ or 1 Sub-Saharan Civ and a Southern Asia Civ .

 

[PhilBowles]

Gran Colombia's short-lived status is a serious problem for their inclusion. Likewise, they weren't a world power (among the known world). While I'm sympathetic to the inclusion of South American civs, modern states run into that second problem.

The key thing going for the idea is the leader - it does make a lot of sense for Bolivar to be in the game as South America's representative.

Yea I have to agree. All of the South American possibilities have some problems (doesn't mean I don't want them in).

I like the suggestion of pulling a Denmark and making a "Colombia" to include a lot of peoples/history instead of Gran Colombia.

Brazil still needs more influence in this world, but I think has a decent shot

The Chachapoya are fairly unknown by a lot of people sadly.

The Tupi, Mapuche, etc. are both unknown and arguably not as important as the other three.

We've had the discussion over predecessor/successor states - and while I hope the Khmer make it in, Asia is at least moderately well-represented already. Having a second Peruvian civ, particularly one like the Chachapoyas who basically map onto the territory later claimed by the Inca, in an otherwise empty continent would be odd, as would having two for Mali and nowhere else for Africa. I'm also not sure what you'd add for them - mountain mummies?

Were Polynesia a world power? Was Alexander the Great's Greece long-lived?

Alexander is the leader of 'Greece' in the game, but it's not "his" Greece. Sparta was never under Alexander's rule (he even styled himself "King of all the Greeks except the Spartans"), yet that's the Greek second city in the game.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Were Polynesia a world power? Was Alexander the Great's Greece long-lived?

I added "among the known world" for a reason. They also had coverage of a substantial portion of the globe, which counts for a reason.

Alexander's Empire was short-lived, but the Greek civilization is substantially older. Alexander built off of what was there before.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Is there a way to get the developers to use Celtic names for the Celtic city list? It just puts me off to see a mixture of Celtic, English and French names, when a fully Celtic one is possible if you ask guys (like me) knowledgable in such things.

 

[seasnake]

The thing is this: when it comes to guessing the new civs likely and wanted are two different things. Objectively, I'd say likely are returning favorites with some geographic balance.

I had originally guessed Khazars, Ethiopia, Zulu and Sioux. But the choice of Huns over Khazars, while silly, has been revealed. In a game with a religious importance and given that Africa is underrepresented by far, Ethiopia is probably the most likely.

Zulu doesn't fit the theme as well, however they are a favorite and on 2kgames radar at least a bit (the april fools I think may have had one or two actual reveals slipped in).

 

[Liex]

We are always pointing out that Brazil inclusion makes sense since they need to fill up the Eastern Southern America region for the Victorian Scenario, but, unless they announced otherwise, I don’t think the scenario setting is going to cover the whole World. I’d say it’s going to be set in the Northern Hemisphere (or Western Northern Hemisphere, or Tropic of Cancer northward), so they’re free to ignore Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Central/Southern Africa and other empty regions.

About the inclusion of modern States, I used to think that, to be included, a civ should match some prerequisites like being a world power (military and political), influential (economic, technologic and culturally), long-lived (and well-aged), famous (and even romanticized), having a great leader and a comprehensive list of cities. But that was me being impractical, since the series offer so many counterexamples. I’m sure they have these parameters in mind (they’re not going to include, let’s say, the Tupi), but I can’t see why Australia, Brazil and “Gran Colombia” inclusion is so unlikely.

 

[PhilBowles]

Is there a way to get the developers to use Celtic names for the Celtic city list? It just puts me off to see a mixture of Celtic, English and French names, when a fully Celtic one is possible if you ask guys (like me) knowledgable in such things.

They couldn't do it for the Khmer in Civ 4 (modern archaeological names for Khmer sites, including both the original Khmer capital and the current name for the site as separate cities). I haven't noticed any French names in the Celtic cities I've seen. I've just registered the fact that they'll need a replacement name for Edinburgh (and since that's unaccountably back as a civ rather than a city-state, Carthage is out).

The thing is this: when it comes to guessing the new civs likely and wanted are two different things. Objectively, I'd say likely are returning favorites with some geographic balance.

I had originally guessed Khazars, Ethiopia, Zulu and Sioux. But the choice of Huns over Khazars, while silly, has been revealed. In a game with a religious importance and given that Africa is underrepresented by far, Ethiopia is probably the most likely.

We've already got several returning favourites (Netherlands, Maya), one or two returning couldn't-care-less like the Celts, and one new non-civ masquerading as a civ (Huns). I still maintain that the only significantly-sized area of the globe without Civ representation is Indonesia - surely it's at least as deserving as Polynesia. Yes, I think it likely they'll try to represent every continent (or at least region, "The Americas" likely counting as a single region). That would also give them an excuse to insert new architecture graphics which didn't make it into the main game, and in an expansion whose new graphics would otherwise be limited to a couple of dozen unit icons and the leaderheads, that could be seen as a draw. I think we'll probably see at least one additional Civ that's been in past games, but hope for at least one more that's all-new to the series.

On a slight tangent, what about city-states people would like to see? With more CS types and possibly CS-specific resources (like Tyre's jewellery), they may be trying to give the CSes individual personalities - there's no need to add many more numerically since the existing ones can't all fit into one game (I think there are more than 18?). It bothers me slightly that so many of the CSes aren't really CSes but are capitals of nations not represented in the game, while some genuine CSes are absent. Examples:

Zanzibar (commercial, unique resource: slaves?. Starting location tends to favour access to spices/ivory)
Crete (religious or cultured, representing the Minoans)
Troy (militaristic)
Syracuse (militaristic. More likely to gift siege weapons/Great Engineers than other units or GPs?)

Zulu doesn't fit the theme as well, however they are a favorite and on 2kgames radar at least a bit (the april fools I think may have had one or two actual reveals slipped in).

I thought that turned out to have actually been invented by CivFanatics staff, not to be a 2K April Fool's? If so, I wouldn't expect them to have foreknowledge of what's in or out beyond what's already been revealed.

And I'll say it again: the details we've been given so far are to generate interest and publicity. If the Zulus were in, chances are they'd have been top of the list for an early preview along with the Maya and the Netherlands - after all, who's ever asked for a Hun civilization? Does anyone much care about having the Celts as a civ?

 

[CivOasis]

There's only 1 country in Sub-Saharan Africa (most of the continent) and one in South America (which is vastly different from its northern counterpart).
Nevermind that Asia, while better-represented, is quite large and diverse itself.

EDIT:
And there actually have been several calls for a Celtic civ.

 

[ehecatzin]

About city states, I would include a few mesoamerican ones, the area was filled with them after all.

Teotihuacan-(Commercial) Unique resource Jade
Tlaxcala- (Militaristic)
Tula- (Religous)


I dont get it why both Teotihuacan and Tlaxcala are in the Aztec city list, Teotihuacan wasnt even around when the Aztecs migrated, and Tlaxcala was esentially their archnemesis.

Anyway, Teotihuacan at its height had a massive empire controling trade routes all the way to central america, I think they fit the commercial CS type. their resourse is jade, after all, jade was precious in mesoamerica.

Tlaxcala gets the militaristic trait, even if the Aztecs were strangling them for decades, when the Spanish arrived they proved to be decisive in defeating the Aztecs.

Tula, the Toltecs were the empire the Aztecs were trying to emulate, and claimed to be heirs from. The toltecs were very militaristic, controlling central Mexico and several Mayan cities, their influence can be seen for example in Chichen Itza, they expanded their religion like no other mesoamerican civ before them, while the feathered snake can be atributed to Toetihuacan, its later form, Quetzalcoatl (the God King) is Toltec, the Aztecs adopted much of their religion as did the Mayans in the form of Kukulcan. I think they are the best candidate for religous mesoamerican CS.

 

[CivOasis]

About city states, I would include a few mesoamerican ones, the area was filled with them after all.

Teotihuacan-(Commercial) Unique resource Jade
Tlaxcala- (Militaristic)
Tula- (Religous)


I dont get it why both Teotihuacan and Tlaxcala are in the Aztec city list, Teotihuacan wasnt even around when the Aztecs migrated, and Tlaxcala was esentially their archnemesis.

Anyway, Teotihuacan at its height had a massive empire controling trade routes all the way to central america, I think they fit the commercial CS type. their resourse is jade, after all, jade was precious in mesoamerica.

Tlaxcala gets the militaristic trait, even if the Aztecs were strangling them for decades, when the Spanish arrived they proved to be decisive in defeating the Aztecs.

Tula, the Toltecs were the empire the Aztecs were trying to emulate, and claimed to be heirs from. The toltecs were very militaristic, controlling central Mexico and several Mayan cities, their influence can be seen for example in Chichen Itza, they expanded their religion like no other mesoamerican civ before them, while the feathered snake can be atributed to Toetihuacan, its later form, Quetzalcoatl (the God King) is Toltec, the Aztecs adopted much of their religion as did the Mayans in the form of Kukulcan. I think they are the best candidate for religous mesoamerican CS.

Well, even the Aztecs tried to emulate Teotihuacan's empire, which was the largest of any Mexican Pre-Columbian empire.
You'll also notice some other pre-Aztec cities in that list, and the P'urhepecha, who weren't even similar to the Aztecs. I never got it, seeing as it wouldn't be hard to make an Aztec-only city list.

 

[ehecatzin]

I know, playing Aztecs I always have to rename my cities, but Tlaxcala is the worst offender... Its like giving Carthage to Rome as third city.

 

[Gucumatz]

About city states, I would include a few mesoamerican ones, the area was filled with them after all.

Teotihuacan-(Commercial) Unique resource Jade
Tlaxcala- (Militaristic)
Tula- (Religous)


I dont get it why both Teotihuacan and Tlaxcala are in the Aztec city list, Teotihuacan wasnt even around when the Aztecs migrated, and Tlaxcala was esentially their archnemesis.

Anyway, Teotihuacan at its height had a massive empire controling trade routes all the way to central america, I think they fit the commercial CS type. their resourse is jade, after all, jade was precious in mesoamerica.

Tlaxcala gets the militaristic trait, even if the Aztecs were strangling them for decades, when the Spanish arrived they proved to be decisive in defeating the Aztecs.

Tula, the Toltecs were the empire the Aztecs were trying to emulate, and claimed to be heirs from. The toltecs were very militaristic, controlling central Mexico and several Mayan cities, their influence can be seen for example in Chichen Itza, they expanded their religion like no other mesoamerican civ before them, while the feathered snake can be atributed to Toetihuacan, its later form, Quetzalcoatl (the God King) is Toltec, the Aztecs adopted much of their religion as did the Mayans in the form of Kukulcan. I think they are the best candidate for religous mesoamerican CS.

Nice choices.

Tula/Tollan (or any of its many names) and its supposed history is one of my favorite pieces of history in the era.

In the Popol Vuh (Basically the Maya Equivalent of the Bible) its name is cited as being where the Maya got language and gifts from the gods. After years of travel on the sea supposedly the Maya arrived at Tula.

Supposedly my ancestors (The Kaqchikel) came from a different lineage and stole fire from the Maya and had a different god and pantheon than the rest of the Maya. But according to the Popol Vuh after Tula we eventually became more "Maya-esique".

Well away from my tangent; I would love to have Tula as a Religious City State.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Is there a way to get the developers to use Celtic names for the Celtic city list? It just puts me off to see a mixture of Celtic, English and French names, when a fully Celtic one is possible if you ask guys (like me) knowledgable in such things.

Most city lists use English translations for cities whenever possible. For example, the capital of Rome isn't Roma.