Guess the New Civs

[GenjiKhan]

I say reply!

It's not too much,but it's always good to check grammar mistakes . Sometimes,it's hard to understand with them .

 

[fuzzatron717]

It's not too much,but it's always good to check grammar mistakes . Sometimes,it's hard to understand with them .

it's ment to be like that it expresses my false anger and mad icon

 

[Mad Man]

Israel is a city state. a.k.a Jerusalem

I stand corrected, it was kind of a long shot anyways like Tibet it would probably be considered too controversial.

The outrage if they included one of those fantasy civs would be insane, and I would be equally angry as everyone else about one of them being included even though I usually don't get mad about any civs they decide to include, as long as they have a historical basis.

So that's the reason why such civs would be better if confined in a marvellous world of Civ5 Mods . Personally,I think they would just launch these kind of Civ when ALL of the REAL CIVILIZATIONS are represented in Civ series .

I, for one, would agree. Non-real civs should remain in the world of modders.

I think you guys should open your minds a bit, I mean if you think about it it's not that much of a stretch. It's not like they never used mythical people or units for a civ in the past. Also elves and merfolk have been extra civs in civ 2

 

[CivOasis]

Well, I didn't buy a fantasy/rpg/whatever you want to call it game. While I have no problem with the modders, I would be dissapointed if Firaxis added those to Civilization.

 

[HardRocker]

Well, I didn't buy a fantasy/rpg/whatever you want to call it game. While I have no problem with the modders, I would be dissapointed if Firaxis added those to Civilization.

I was joking when I said I wanted a Star Wars civ earlier. Yes, that would be amazing to have a functional Star Wars mod, but as a mod, not as normal in game. Completely kills immersion. That, and I like to try to recreate history when I play my games, and with a fantasy civ, well that changes history quite a bit, doesn't it?

 

[blackcatatonic]

I was joking when I said I wanted a Star Wars civ earlier. Yes, that would be amazing to have a functional Star Wars mod, but as a mod, not as normal in game. Completely kills immersion. That, and I like to try to recreate history when I play my games, and with a fantasy civ, well that changes history quite a bit, doesn't it?

This. Civ is fundamentally about history. I love fantasy as a genre, but it doesn't belong in the vanilla version of the game, especially not when there are so many other real Civs out there worthy of inclusion which won't be added in the expansion.

I don't mind fantasy mods - I've got A Mod of Ice and Fire among others - but in my experience elements of the whole game need to be changed to make it work. You can't have elves fighting Ethiopia, for example.

 

[Grubnessul]

Main question is IMO not geographical spreading or what continent is in need of more representation, but what civs are romanticized enough to make people think "Yea, I'd conquer the world as you!" That's the problem with most sub-Sahara African civs and even more for South-American civ. They need some characteristic or appeal that makes their UA and UUs interesting. Moreover, the civ needs to add something to the game. The Zulu's seem a likely candidate due their history in the civ series, but are another war-civ. Same goes for Poland, which could add some very nice units (Polish lancers or Winged Hussars), but we have enough unique cavalry units already. The number of trade civs is low; we had Arabia, which is joined by the Netherlands. Mali could make a return? Maybe it can become a trade/city state focused civ.

Brazil or Grand Colombia make little sense IMO as they are very new states, not really civilizations. (Yea, same goes for America, but hey, the game is made there and it forms half of the audience)

 

[theadder]

Main question is IMO not geographical spreading or what continent is in need of more representation, but what civs are romanticized enough to make people think "Yea, I'd conquer the world as you!" That's the problem with most sub-Sahara African civs and even more for South-American civ. They need some characteristic or appeal that makes their UA and UUs interesting. Moreover, the civ needs to add something to the game. The Zulu's seem a likely candidate due their history in the civ series, but are another war-civ. Same goes for Poland, which could add some very nice units (Polish lancers or Winged Hussars), but we have enough unique cavalry units already. The number of trade civs is low; we had Arabia, which is joined by the Netherlands. Mali could make a return? Maybe it can become a trade/city state focused civ.

Brazil or Grand Colombia make little sense IMO as they are very new states, not really civilizations. (Yea, same goes for America, but hey, the game is made there and it forms half of the audience)

The fact that they have effectively removed what was the "economic victory" condition for the game suggests that they may not be so amenable to new civilisations that benefit from increased gold. It is very hard to say, but the Netherlands doesn't seem to have a +gold modifier at all, but rather deals with trade-able goods.

The problem that follows is that I cannot easily think of more unique abilities that might work well with the trade-able luxuries or other goods. I am not arguing that gold is not useful now, but it is considerably less useful from my point of view now that it is not possible to bribe the city states as reliably. I wonder if this kills off the idea of a new civilisation with something resembling the stock exchange from Civ IV. They seem to prefer to tinker with the resource system instead and I wonder if the possibilities for that may be depleted or at least tired.

 

[awesome]

I think you guys should open your minds a bit, I mean if you think about it it's not that much of a stretch. It's not like they never used mythical people or units for a civ in the past. Also elves and merfolk have been extra civs in civ 2

it's not about having a closed mind. it's just not that type of game. there can be a mod or scenario where that stuff happens, but it just doesn't make any sense to have that stuff in the normal game.

Brazil or Grand Colombia make little sense IMO as they are very new states, not really civilizations. (Yea, same goes for America, but hey, the game is made there and it forms half of the audience)

america's different, though. its rise to power, influence on the world, and the fact that it's differentiated itself are the real reasons why it's there and why it counts as a civilization.

 

[GenjiKhan]

Brazil or Grand Colombia make little sense IMO as they are very new states, not really civilizations. (Yea, same goes for America, but hey, the game is made there and it forms half of the audience)

The concept of Civilization is very vague and I don't see any reason about why Brazil and Gran Colombia shouldn't be consider Civilizations .

 

[Ribannah]

america's different, though. its rise to power, influence on the world, and the fact that it's differentiated itself are the real reasons why it's there and why it counts as a civilization.

The same applies to Brazil. They're just a bit later to rise to global power. On a scale of 6000 years, that difference is small.

 

[Pouakai]

But the role in which America has played in recent world history (World Wars, Cold War, Space programs etc.) far surpasses that of Brazil

 

[ferretbacon]

I agree. Brazil just isn't on par with the United States. It's also not as iconic (which I believe is the main criteria considered when they add a new civilization).

Niche history buffs may disagree and spout endless, perhaps even fair, arguments on why Brazil deserves inclusion. In the end though, it doesn't have a chance.

 

[Ribannah]

But the role in which America has played in recent world history (World Wars, Cold War, Space programs etc.) far surpasses that of Brazil

Brazil is well ahead of the USA when it comes to social reform and alternative energy though. Social policy is now as much a part of Civ as is warfare, while there is just the one space program late in the game.

But Brazil need not to match the USA. This is an expansion.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I think that if Firaxis wants to symbolize Latin American culture in a civ, Brazil would be an iconic example while still retaining its own unique identity. Brazil is a regional military power and the leading economy in S. America. IIRC their GDP just surpassed the UK for the 6th largest economy. The question would be, does Firaxis want to put a Latin American civ in the game?

 

[Fabiano79]

Of course Brazil is not a clear choice like USA. But, you cant say it doesnt have a chance. Brazil was a civ on Civ Call to Power 2...

I think we will see Brazil on CiV later, not as the 9th civ of G&K. The last civ must have some kind of "wow" factor to the fan base, and Brazil is far from this. My guess still is good old Shaka.

This is a nice article about the recent rise to power of Brazil:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...esident-rousseff-obama-washington?INTCMP=SRCH

The second most powerful person in the western hemisphere arrived in Washington on Monday. But the most powerful one spent most of the day rolling Easter eggs on the South Lawn.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Is America the only civilization that is technically a colony? I don't think there are any other nations that started out as colonies is there?

 

[Kimuyama]

Is America the only civilization that is technically a colony? I don't think there are any other nations that started out as colonies is there?

Carthage, France, Spain and England

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Carthage was a Phoenician colony.

 

[Fabiano79]

Is America the only civilization that is technically a colony? I don't think there are any other nations that started out as colonies is there?

That depends, carthage was a colony of Phoenicia. And most European civs were provincies of Rome. But Rome was kind of a setlement of Etruscans...soo, everything depends of the concept of colony you want to use.