If a Civilization is featuring as a City State...

[sumit1207]

It's not like a lot of time has even been invested in a particular city-state. They change Seoul to Malacca and game play would not change one bit.

 

[silentknight111]

...then does that mean it is not featuring as a full Civilization in upcoming expansions?

I think "City-States" are just based off the fact that throughout history there have been many "major" cities that basically stood on their own. Some may have been completely independent, other may have been a part of a country that would have been insignificant without it. For civ's purposes, they are all independent.

Maybe it's a stretch, but that's how I thought of it when I heard it.

 

[t0mme]

Well Venice, Genoa, and Florence is in, while you can still play as Rome or against.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but those cities weren't actually big, important cities in Roman times. They became important city states in the medieval and especially Renaissance times, so it makes sense to treat them seperately from Rome. Also, Rome does not equal medieval, Renaissance or modern day Italy.

 

[Magma]

Copenhagen and Stockholm as citystates? That's a bit silly. They were merely the capitol cities of two much greater nations.

 

[Xen]

I think 'city state' is a term interchangeable with 'regional power' - most of the Cities on the list were capitols of important regional powers.

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but those cities weren't actually big, important cities in Roman times. They became important city states in the medieval and especially Renaissance times, so it makes sense to treat them seperately from Rome. Also, Rome does not equal medieval, Renaissance or modern day Italy.

Ok explain this: When you play as or against Rome in during the Medieval, or Renaissance era, would it still make sense to you to treat Rome's cities like Florence, Genoa, and Venice as entirely different cities than the City-State version of them?

 

[Louis XXIV]

Venice wasn't a Roman city. I'm not sure if Genua and Florentina are going to be on the list of Roman cities. Even if they are, there are other doubled cities in the game (Massilia and Marseilles, for example).

Odds are they won't keep the city-state if a city on the list has the same name or represents the period. That being said, there are plenty of other city-states they could replace them with, so I'm not worried about that.

Out of that list, I imagine Seoul is the most likely to get a city later. But I did notice the absence of Carthage, which suggests that they were trying not to include a city-state that will later become a civ.

 

[Niptium]

Well Venice, Genoa, and Florence is in, while you can still play as Rome or against.

Venice wasn't even founded when the Roman empire crumbled...

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

Venice wasn't a Roman city. I'm not sure if Genua and Florentina are going to be on the list of Roman cities. Even if they are, there are other doubled cities in the game (Massilia and Marseilles, for example).

Odds are they won't keep the city-state if a city on the list has the same name or represents the period. That being said, there are plenty of other city-states they could replace them with, so I'm not worried about that.

Out of that list, I imagine Seoul is the most likely to get a city later. But I did notice the absence of Carthage, which suggests that they were trying not to include a city-state that will later become a civ.

If Venice wasn't a Roman city, then what was it? Byzantine Empire, or some would say "Eastern Roman Empire"?

 

[j51]

It is an Italian, or some would say Venetian, city!!! It didn't exist during the empire.

 

[Louis XXIV]

It was officially part of the Eastern Empire but de facto independent. Eventually, the need of the Byzantines for naval support led to Venice becoming de jure independent. Venice had their own territory and empire. It was independent of both the eastern empire and the de jure western empire (aka, Germany). Milan, Florence, etc. never had this distinction, for what it's worth.

We don't even know if Constantinople is a Roman city yet. If it isn't, it's far too premature to assume that Rome represents the Eastern half after the collapse of the west (I personally would rather it represent the church and the Papal states if it were to represent anything, since that actually has Rome in it). Of course, if Constantinople is a city, it adds an extra irony to this debate, since Istanbul is there as well (the distinction, of course, is that they have different names and represent different time periods - same with Florentina, which might be Roman, but represents a different time period and has a different name than the Medieval/Renaissance City-State/Duchy of Florence).

 

[Thoughtful Thug]

It was officially part of the Eastern Empire but de facto independent. Eventually, the need of the Byzantines for naval support led to Venice becoming de jure independent. Venice had their own territory and empire. It was independent of both the eastern empire and the de jure western empire (aka, Germany). Milan, Florence, etc. never had this distinction, for what it's worth.

We don't even know if Constantinople is a Roman city yet. If it isn't, it's far too premature to assume that Rome represents the Eastern half after the collapse of the west (I personally would rather it represent the church and the Papal states if it were to represent anything, since that actually has Rome in it). Of course, if Constantinople is a city, it adds an extra irony to this debate, since Istanbul is there as well (the distinction, of course, is that they have different names and represent different time periods - same with Florentina, which might be Roman, but represents a different time period and has a different name than the Medieval/Renaissance City-State/Duchy of Florence).

Which beg the question that maybe City-States should only appear during certain era in the game?

It is an Italian, or some would say Venetian, city!!! It didn't exist during the empire.

Which empire?

 

[Thormodr]

From Wikipedia:

Origins

While there are no historical records that deal directly with the obscure and peripheral[7] origins of Venice, tradition and the available evidence have led several historians to agree that the original population of Venice consisted of refugees from Roman cities such as Padua, Aquileia, Altino and Concordia (modern Portogruaro) and from the undefended countryside, who were fleeing successive waves of Germanic invasions and Huns.[8] Some late Roman sources reveal the existence of fishermen on the islands in the original marshy lagoons. They were referred to as incolae lacunae ("lagoon dwellers"). The traditional founding is identified with the dedication of the first church, that of San Jacopo at the islet of Rialto (Rivoalto, "High Shore"), given a conventional date of 421.[9]

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

Technically, Venice was a Roman city. If you take the traditional founding date of 421 to be accurate. The Roman Empire (at least the Western Roman Empire) was crumbling at the time but it was still more or less intact.

However, there is no problem in making it a city state as it did not rise to prominence until much, much later.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Which beg the question that maybe City-States should only appear during certain era in the game?

If that were the case, the same would apply to half the civs too.

BTW, I did a quick check and noticed there are no city states representing Spain, Carthage, Ethiopia, Inca, Sumeria, Netherlands, Portugal, or the Mongols. Mongols weren't really city-folk and Spain clearly is too large to keep in check with a city. The Dutch and Portuguese could easily fit this category as well.

The absence of Carthage and especially Ur doesn't reflect well for Korea being added later, but it still isn't a difficult change. There are clearly other cultured or Asian cities that could replace it (although a cultured Asian city that wasn't taken is harder. I assume China has Hong Kong in the game?).

 

[Centurio]

Venice wasn't a Roman city. I'm not sure if Genua and Florentina are going to be on the list of Roman cities. Even if they are, there are other doubled cities in the game (Massilia and Marseilles, for example).

Odds are they won't keep the city-state if a city on the list has the same name or represents the period. That being said, there are plenty of other city-states they could replace them with, so I'm not worried about that.

Out of that list, I imagine Seoul is the most likely to get a city later. But I did notice the absence of Carthage, which suggests that they were trying not to include a city-state that will later become a civ.

Venice was founded during the invasions of Atilla the Hun as a refugee city. It was in a good position far enough away from the borders to be safe for fleeing peasants. On the other hand, Florence was founded by Caesar as a home for veterans of his Gallic Wars.


EDIT: Looks like I was beaten to the punch.

Anyways, I think that there is no problem with regional powers in Civilization 5 being replaced with full fledged Civilizations in expansions. Many of the powers in the game seem to be well represented by city states (like Scotland) whereas others deserve to be playable eventually (maybe the Finns can be represented as part of the Vikings?)