Guess Them Eight New Civs

Originally posted by calgacus
If it is true that 4 civs have already been decided :(


1) The Scots
2) Aboriginal Australia
3) Israel
4) Mali/ Khmer - not sure

Actually, all 8 civs are decided, but we only know about 4 currently.



Originally posted by Louis XXIV

Especially when you consider that most people won't play a Lithuanian Civ based on Historical value.

Many Civvers I know don't choose a civ based on Historical value, but on other things, usually the two civ traits and/or the UU. These factors play a big part in many people's decisions when choosing a civ. As to Historical value, the Sumerians and Hittites aren't that high on many Civvers list either.

Eastern Europe is underrepresented in Civ 3, as is North America, Southern Asia, Africa, Oceania/Polynesia, and South America (the Incans and Mayans in C3C will improve this situation); Western Europe and the Middle East (more so after C3C) are overrepresented.

It is hoped that a more even world representation will happen with C3C, but many people that the same thing about PtW when it first announced before the 8 civs were known.

Originally posted by Vrylakas


Ultimately, it really is pointless to argue over which new Civs should be added because it's all customizable. I've already added Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, etc. to mine. [/B]

Good point.
 
Well , the Scots have built great monuments and have had a golden age unmatched by all but one or two European nations. The Scottish state didn't achieve much as an independent state on a world wide basis, but was one of Europe's most important nations in the period between the 14th and 17th centuries. And the Scots achieved much world wide in partnership with he southern neighbours.

If the Dutch and Poles are candidates, then the Scots should walk into Civ3: Conquest :goodjob:
 
Originally posted by calgacus
If it is true that 4 civs have already been decided :(


1) The Scots
2) Aboriginal Australia
3) Israel
4) Mali/ Khmer - not sure

i agree that the scots should be in (im not just saying this because im a scot) im just thinking that an amazing scenartio could be made of the wars between scotland and england when william wallace and rober bruce were around

P.S. we also played a huge role in WWII creating more ships in clyde docks than any other nation. we are also one of the leading countries in the world for research in disease and genetics so we are important. we would make for perfect scenarios against the english and the vikings. which means you only need to add in 1 civ (us) to make these scnearios,whereas with inca and maya you need to add in two
 
Confirmed Civs:
1) Maya
2) Inca
3) Hitties
4) Sumeria

Possible Others:
- Australia (Aboriginal or not, maybe both).

- Canada (and/or other North American civ)

- Byzantium (Popular, alternative to Rome, Greece and the Ottomans)

- Smonething in Eastern Europe to stop Russia from having all the space on the world map.
 
In my very humble opinion the idea of including Australia or Canada is just plain ridiculous. Countries like Belgium, Afghanistan or even Ukraine would be much more interesting.

Like I said before both the Dutch and the Portuguese has to be included and that is also my guess, along with an African civ and a South East Asian one it would make a great addition to an already great game.
 
Originally posted by Raggamuffin
In my very humble opinion the idea of including Australia or Canada is just plain ridiculous. Countries like Belgium, Afghanistan or even Ukraine would be much more interesting.

Like I said before both the Dutch and the Portuguese has to be included and that is also my guess, along with an African civ and a South East Asian one it would make a great addition to an already great game.

I am saying they are POSSIBILITIES, not nesscesarily ones I want but your choices would crowd a world map.
 
I have followed this thread with a lot of interest, especially when people want their nations in and bash on other woul-be-in nations (such as the Dutch, the Poles, or other stuff).

It might be because I am a modder (and maybe because my own civ -the French- that I don't play very often with actually - are in) but my interest in knowing with Civs are in is different from most.
Basically, if I want one civ I just add it with the tons of units, leaderheads, city lists that are available in the creation forum.

I think these new civs are important generally (without modding) for:
- they can bring some knwoledge of distant (time and geography) civilizations
- it shows the interest/ the moves towards in some cases of Firaxis
- it can make the world map more realistic (not everybody in Europe and nobody in South America or South-Esast Asia)
- it can bring more variety in styles, units (UU mostly here) then different gaming styles.
- they are not historically too weird, America being on the borderline except for the recent period, Canada and Australia being definitely out.

For modding : they are interesting in that they are done professionally so it is less of a bother to use them in scenarios. I am especially interested in leaderheads and UU filling niches that have not been covered and that can be used for other people/other civs.
For instance my interest in getting an Israel Civ is not strong (they were/are important but the area is more than crowded and as a country-civ they did not exist that long) but if they have a slinger UU I am most interested because we don't have any slinger yet. If it is a Merkava tank, Uthajazz made a beautiful one already.

For these reasons and with no offense meant to anybody my personal wishes would go to :

Songhai (maybe a camel unit) or Nubia, Ethiopia could be interesting, forcing the Arabs to go down along the Eastern coast of Africa (which created the Swahili civilization in real life).

Siam (Thailand) or Khmer (Cambodia).
A Malay group tribe (Malay, Filipinos or Indonesians).
Israel if they have the slinger.

Since the new civs will be probably used in the provided scenarios but that we know only two of the scenarios it is difficult to guess.
WWII (likely) could include Poland if it is only in Europe but since they will probably use the Japanese kit, it is unlikely except if there are 2 WWII scenarios (Europe + Pacific).
Mesopotamia or Egypt/Hittite scenarios could include Nubians, Israel and Sumer.
The conquest of the new world could include Sioux (North) or Tupi, Arawaks or Caraibs (South).

Once agains sorry for those countries that have been strong powers such as Portugal and the Dutch (mostly under Burgundy then Spain control during their Golden Age) or the Polish-Lithuanian so large in the Middle-Ages but we need new stuff more than to overcrowd a definitely packed place.

For those interested, there is a very good Polish mod with leaderhead and UU (winged hussar I think in the creation forum).
 
Amazing what people will convince themselves of when they want their country added to the list of civs. Scots? lol, oh yes a real powerhouse of a country, they built the...sheep wall?...or no, how about their powerful fleet...hmm nuthin there either...
Lithuania? what? Are u guys reading the same world history books that i have?
I want a single celled organism that divided to be a civ because that is my "nationalism" rearing up. Hope they call it the," I have a sense of awarness that is not dependent on abstract boundries and my identity doesn't need to be bolstered by the accomplishment of those i want to be associated with to make me feel good Civ"
Good luck to those who want their country included tho, it is understandable. However, delusional reasoning is not the best way to convinve (urself or others). How about, "I am in Cananda and i bought this game and it would be cool if Canada was a Civ."
 
Originally posted by troytheface
Amazing what people will convince themselves of when they want their country added to the list of civs. Scots? lol, oh yes a real powerhouse of a country, they built the...sheep wall?...or no, how about their powerful fleet...hmm nuthin there either...

If you want an answer to that ridiculous post, repost it

The Scots Should be Added to Civ3 in the New XP?

But I'm not taking your monumental ignorance too seriously at the moment :lol:
 
Some candidates fr the East (way to the East :))...

1) The Tibetans - their probable ancestors, the Chiang and Di tribes, as recorded in Chinese histories, had been around since even before a recognizable China had been around. In the 7-9th centuries, they expanded aggressively, fighting against the Tang dynasty of China, from hitting Chinese outposts in Central Asia all the way to raiding the province of Sichuan far to the east. Later on, they're also the religious figurehead of the Mongols (fr maybe the 17th century onwards). And Tibet is still around today, sort of.

2) The Uighurs - the most civilised of the Turkic tribes. They were the paramount power in Mongolia, until driven out to Xinjiang in the 9th century, where they settled down into civilised life. They maintained their steppe credentials, and were a great civilising influence on the steppe world. The Mongols even used their script as the basis of their own writing system. Still around today, as a part of modern China.

3) The Sogdians of Central Asia. Don't know much about them, except they're great traders on the Silk Road. Central Asia was once the world's premiere international land trade route, in the form of the Silk Road. Many cities and great centers in this region.

4) The Vietnamese - after freeing themselves fr Imperial China in the 3rd century AD, they'd expanded southwards. A hardy people, who'd fought off the native Chams, drove the Khmers back towards Cambodia, struggled with the Thais over their common borderlands and over Cambodia. More importantly, they'd fought (and won) against the Chinese, French, Japanese and Americans within this century alone. A hardy people.

5) Thailand - there'd always been a series of Thai kingdom since the first one was reliably recorded to be set up in Dali, in what's today Yunnan, China. They fought/migrated their way down to modern Thailand. Always been independent, when all other countries around them fell to the European powers. Arch enemies of the Burmese.

6) The Burmese - arch enemies of the Thais, they'd long established kingdoms in present-day Burma. Had survived invasions by the Mongols, Manchus and occasionally Chinese.

7) The Javanese - their Majapahit kingdom once ruled almost the entire modern Indonesia, plus Singapore and W Malaysia in the 13th century. Today, the heartland and motor of modern Indonesia, one of the more populous nations in the world.
 
Originally posted by calgacus
Burmese, Vietnamese, they're all the same in these parts ;)

You are definitely right, it is not like if they were really different and numerous.
Whereas the Scots must me at least between 5 and 10 millions !!:king: ;)

XIII has nice ideas:

Tibet as a buffer between China and India, Burmese, Ouigours in estern central Asia (Ottomans should start in Western Central Asia BTW, not in modern Turkey) to limit Chinese and Russian expansion. Sogdian would be an interesting place but it is not really a civ.
Vietnam was too much linked to Chinese history and the country's shape is a bit of a problem. What's more their identity as Viets is quite recent. So I would discard them (really no offense meant, Vietnamese girls are delicious).

XIII, ni shi XinJiaPo Zhongghu ren ma ?
 
Originally posted by LouLong
You are definitely right, it is not like if they were really different and numerous.
Whereas the Scots must me at least between 5 and 10 millions !!:king: ;)
He's just trying to get back at me for saying "to me, the Scots and the English are all the same"... :p :crazyeye: Nice try.

Vietnam was too much linked to Chinese history and the country's shape is a bit of a problem. What's more their identity as Viets is quite recent. So I would discard them (really no offense meant, Vietnamese girls are delicious).
Not really - they're 2000 thousand years old at least. And before, they had existed in the form of the Yue peoples, who controlled the entire coast up till the mouth of the Yangzi. The Chinese name for Vietnam, "Yue Nan', simply means Southern Yue.

XIII, ni shi XinJiaPo Zhongghu ren ma ?
Bu shi. Si Malaixiya huazu. Ni ne? :)
 
Originally posted by XIII
He's just trying to get back at me for saying "to me, the Scots and the English are all the same"... :p :crazyeye: Nice try.

I don't want to get into this argument; I admire much about the Far-East and I don't want to put down these peoples, which obviously wouldn't be much of a challenge. I urge you guys not to force me to do so. :)
 
Originally posted by Deathwalker
The four I want to see most are:

Hungarions/Huns/Magyars
Miya/Incas
Isreal/Hebrew
Thai

Well Maya and Inca are already confirmed so you will see them (the other two confirmed civs are the Sumerians and the Hitties)
 
My geusses are the
Inca
Maya
Hebrew
Berber
Byzantines
Polynesiean
Huns
and last but not least...
The MARTIANS how could you have a game called conquests without martians in it. the only problem is they would have to be a barbarian type civ or something because they would have to have all UU and be in the modern ages because of there origon from Mars.
so if not the martians which is probally a long shot
Poland
 
i just had an idea you know the dinobarb scenerio from PTW well in conquests they could make a martian barbarian scenario instead of making them a civ
 
Back
Top Bottom