I want a canadian civ :(

That was a tiny group of people. Furthermore it ended almost 40 years and since then everyone is unanimous that Quebec's political issues will be resolved peacefully. This includes former FLQ supporters.

I was going to make the same argument, but then if you think about it militants in most separatist situations are in the vast minority.
 
Hmmm... Americans must be special then. Plenty of militant separatists in 1775 and an even higher percentage in 1860.
 
I've always wanted to play as William Wallace... F-R-E-E-D-O-M!!! Spike TV already established that he would crush Shaka Zulu!

Actually I like the idea of a Canadian Civ. In fact, Firaxis could probably add 20-30 more leaders, including some more modern ones, as part of an expansion pack. Even if they don't want to deal with balancing issues of the game, they could simply sell the leaderheads, use the existing UU and UBs (call them something different), and allow users to replace existing civs with the new ones. This would be a way for Firaxis to make some easy money.

I would add Reagan, Kennedy, Gorbachev, Thatcher, Saddam, Arafat, some Canadian dudes (they get +2H for their health care ;-)) and, heck throw in Dan Quayle. He deserves some props after all the abuse he's taken from Firaxis.
 
Hmmm... Americans must be special then. Plenty of militant separatists in 1775 and an even higher percentage in 1860.

But what's the percentage of those who took up arms compared to those who stayed at home but were nonetheless separatist by mindset? Even during wartime the majority doesn't fight.
 
I almost never play the American Empire either, though it isn't because of some weird aversion to Americans. It's because something about American cave-men working on Stonehenge seriously takes me out of the spirit of the game. It's sort of like having an X-Files marathon, and then during one episode, Bullwinkle flies in on a pterodactyl.

That said, I *ADORE* it when I speak to George Washington in Diplomacy -- his music is amazing.

With UBs and UUs, in addition to traits, I honestly feel as though a crack team of developers could account for every (or almost every) nation on Earth, and still make every leader a unique experience - even if, every so often, a UB, UU, or trait was similar to another culture's.

But then, I also don't think its very important to include everyone.

My people (The Swiss) were not represented in the game, and they could easily have been Financial and Charismatic, with a special bank UB that increased foreign trade and a special rifleman with increased defense in hills. But this adds very little to the overall experience, and since the game is so moddable, I imagine that the developers INTENDED for us to add the civs that we felt were missing.
 
I have no problem with the US being in the game. No it's not that old, but the modern period is just as valid an epoch as the medieval and ancient ones. The US has pioneered things like the automoboble, mass-production, the internet, and other things too numerous to mention, has been the world's number one power for nearly 70 years (having been a significant world power for nearly 200), got a man on the moon, and so on. To deny its historical worthiness to be in the game is just really not thinking properly. And to the people who think the USA being around in the Bronze Age is so bizarre, please enumerate the number of other Civ 4 civilizations that were around then let alone in 4000 BC. Egypt, Sumer, you could make arguments based on ethnic continuity for a few others (e.g. the Chinese), but not very many. In fact, more civilizations in this game were already gone by the Iron Age than came into existence after 1600.
 
But what's the percentage of those who took up arms compared to those who stayed at home but were nonetheless separatist by mindset?
Among young white males in the South? I would think it was close to 100%.
Even during wartime the majority doesn't fight.
Try telling that to a man in Ghenghis Khan's Mongolia.
 
Top Bottom