Sound argumentation.
It has as much truth to it as all the wild speculation.
Sound argumentation.
It has as much truth to it as all the wild speculation.
Another sound argument.
There have actually been some very solid arguments raised on most sides, and some arguments have actually developed quite nicely due to the arguments between the various sides. As things stand we have a pretty damn good idea what the remaining 4 civs are going to be:
6. Morocco - The seemingly accidental mention of them
7. A Native American Civ - As they planned to have the Pueblo, but couldn't
8. Italy or Venice - As Venice appears to have been replaced by Riga
The only one where there isn't some kind of solid speculation now is this last one. The most logical final option would be Indonesia however, particularly as it's been a fan favourite for a long time now. That said, it could be any number of Civs, including Vietnam or even Hungary, although I'd hope they'd pay East Asia (South East Asia included) some attention.
Well, the Venice replacement theory is entirely based on the premise that what's happened in the past will happen again. By that logic(and taken to an extreme, I admit) there'll be no east asian civ in this expansion as there was no east asian civ in the last expansion.
I agree that there's a well-established pattern of city-state replacement - I don't agree that this means that pattern has to continue. There's no reason to suggest that they can't do things differently in the future. That said, I do think you're probably right and that Venice has been replaced (and with my desire for a Venice civ, I sincerely hope it so).
In other words, you've established the pattern, but not the cause for the pattern.
In other words, you've established the pattern, but not the cause for the pattern.
Admittedly I dip in and out of these conversations too rarely to keep abreast of the discussions, however I'm glad to see you acknowledge the idea that Venice being replaced isn't 100% confirmed. I honestly felt you were saying it was previously. Probably just as much a mistake on my part.
As amusing as this would be the new civ list has likely been finalized for a long time now. Longer than we've known about Riga, at least.Menzies said:That said, if they've been reading the forum in the last couple of weeks, they might decide to use this as a way of screwing with us come the next play through.
Okay, let's look at the whole Riga/Venice thing the other way around: If Riga does not replace Venice, then we have a grand total of two city-states that share each other's type and color. No other CS in the game has an identical flavor with another city-state; they have been deliberately avoiding this sort of conflict. Is it really too hard to believe that the best explanation for a city-state to show up with the same color and type as a previously known city-state is that the old one is no longer a city-state?
As amusing as this would be the new civ list has likely been finalized for a long time now. Longer than we've known about Riga, at least.
They could still screw with us by deliberately omitting Ragusa and the Italian CSs, and Hanoi, and Jakarta, or whatever they want.As amusing as this would be the new civ list has likely been finalized for a long time now. Longer than we've known about Riga, at least.
They could still screw with us by deliberately omitting Ragusa and the Italian CSs, and Hanoi, and Jakarta, or whatever they want.
What if the pro-civ was the HRE?
It would be like a civ built with "puppet" cities (that you don't totally decide what they produce and very hard to manage)
They could still screw with us by deliberately omitting Ragusa and the Italian CSs, and Hanoi, and Jakarta, or whatever they want.
Not sure how to interpret the "pro-civ" comment, but the discussion made me thing of an off the wall possibility. What about creating a true "Republic". Venice is essentially a City State which cannot produce settlers, but instead can subsume other City States into its Civ. I could think of all kinds of gameplay challenges this would offer that might be considered "pro-civ".