Let's Talk About the Civs that WON'T Make It In Despite Popularity

[AtomicPhoton]

I'd love Scotland to be in it! Highland warriors, with leaders like Robert The Bruce or William Wallace. It'll never happen though...

I agree with EdCase that the English Empire should be British, unless Ireland, Wales and Scotland are in the game, which obviously wouldn't happen.

 

[Tavenier]

I'll defend that my home county, Brasil, should actually be in the game. It has to be considered that it has a major role in the whole history of south america (and culturally, in the whole world. Ask anyone who's not an hermit, in any place in the world who Pelé is, and then ask the same people to name a famous dutch or something....) and it is not, in anyways, represented by Incans/Maias/Aztec.

I think people do know Vincent van Gogh, Rembrandt, Erasmus or Willem van Oranje to name but a few. All more important then a football player. And Dutchman Johan Cruyff was chosen as best European football player...

And the Dutch invented stockmarkets, founded New York, discovered Australia en NZ, were part of the 6 original EU members, etc. And still I don't think that is enough to be part of the original 18 (or 21) civs. I do think it is enough to be in an add on.

Brazil is a great nation too. But not important enough (or not for long enough) to be included at the expense of say India or Arabia.

 

[climat]

I think Dutch deserves their official position for civs.
If Firaxis decided to include more civs than 18, I would suggest Dutch for one of them.

 

[JECTX]

It may just be me but I don't see much of an impact from Brazil outside of Latin American, which Civ has historically ignored. I don't see them ever putting Brazil in the game unless they change their thinking somehow.

 

[Kikaider]

I realise that, for Americans, 250 years is still longer than their entire country has been around, but when I say "historical", I mean older than one or two centuries ago.

There's also a reason why the +0 timezone is known as Greenwich Meantime

By that logic, why is the Persians in the game? Considering the leader heads are Cyrus and Darius; we can assume we're talking about the Achaemenid Empire; considering the Empire itself only lasted about 200 years. Sure, there is by definition of more than one "Persian Empire", but we can assume that one was the one in mind, you know, the one that got completely taken over by Alexander the Great.

 

[Arakhor]

I wasn't talking about the length of the empire in question. I was disputing that America was an historical civilisation by pointing out that history was considerably longer than 250 years.

After all, the Roman Empire only remained strong and unified for some 250 years, from Augustus' victory at Actium in 30 BC to roughly around the period of Septimus Severus in the 210s.

 

[EdCase]

I think people do know Vincent van Gogh, Rembrandt, Erasmus or Willem van Oranje to name but a few. All more important then a football player. And Dutchman Johan Cruyff was chosen as best European football player...

And the Dutch invented stockmarkets, founded New York, discovered Australia en NZ, were part of the 6 original EU members, etc. And still I don't think that is enough to be part of the original 18 (or 21) civs. I do think it is enough to be in an add on.

Brazil is a great nation too. But not important enough (or not for long enough) to be included at the expense of say India or Arabia.

You forgot to mention the Slave Trade. Non-PC ? Maybe, but the Dutch were the leading lights of the slave trade which greatly affected ALL western-european culture through time until the present.
Yes they were "game-changers" for that and other reasons.

Brazil...sorry much as I love football, not exactly a game-changing culture..no the bikini wax doesn't count.

Once again, nationalistic pride is wonderful. It doesn't mean your nation is automatically a region/world affecting civilization.
In fact most mentioned so far in this thread are the offspring of Imperialistic colonization of the western european powerhouses of the 17th-19th Century.
So why not just have Greece-->Rome-->Franks
___________________________ |--->British for western european hmmm ?

 

[Gedemo]

Maybe the Tupis for Amazonia, the Inuits for Polar circle, and the Polynesians for Pacific Ocean
More natives to discover, please!!!!

 

[holy king]

 

[climat]

No one mentioned Huns..?

 

[Wodan]

No one mentioned Huns..?

Either that, or you didn't read through the thread to find where Huns were mentioned.

 

[climat]

After posting, I noticed that OP mentioned it.

 

[Wodan]

After posting, I noticed that OP mentioned it.

There were some responses, too. A couple good posts from people had a lot of historical info. Mostly about the past 400 yrs or so, but there was indeed some about the Huns.

 

[jeffr23]

They represent the Native Americans, obviously. Civ can't discount an entire continent.

Well, except for Australia.

(And Antarctica, which often doesn't even exist on the maps, but there aren't any partisans of the glorious Penguin Civilization on these boards that I know of...)

(And, for that matter, South America: having one or two Central American precolombian civs doesn't actually count as that continent, really....)

 

[deanej]

I didn't know Peru (where the Inca ruled from) was in Central America.

 

[jeffr23]

I didn't know Peru (where the Inca ruled from) was in Central America.

Have the Inca been in every version, pre-expansion? I didn't think that they had, and this is a thread about the base game for V.

(Myself, I think they ought to give use the Inca and a Polynesian/Malay Civ even if only for the purpose of having a geographic balance to a map-of-earth/historical starting locations scenario, but doubt that they will.)

 

[deanej]

Oh, you wanted something from EVERY version of civ? Didn't get that. I thought this was a thread about which civs WON'T be in; there are dozens of other threads about which ones might be in.

 

[Dachs]

I wasn't talking about the length of the empire in question. I was disputing that America was an historical civilisation by pointing out that history was considerably longer than 250 years.

After all, the Roman Empire only remained strong and unified for some 250 years, from Augustus' victory at Actium in 30 BC to roughly around the period of Septimus Severus in the 210s.

History is considerably longer than 1,000 or 1,500 years, too. Greeks, Romans, Assyrians, Babylonians, Iranians, Chinese should be in, but the English are just too new on the block to merit mention. Frankly it's bending the knee to parvenu nationalists who're temporarily in a position of military power

 

[Lord Khorak]

I agree with EdCase that the English Empire should be British

I don't. That's pointless political correctness, when the reality of history is that England is, and always has been, the real power and driving force of the Union. The UK is a result of England conquering Wales and Ireland, and absorbing Scotland after it caused its own huge financial collapse.

Scotland and Wales eventually came to contribute to the significance of England, and in doing so become significant themselves.

 

[Arakhor]

Scotland has produced probably the most amount of inventors per capita than nearly any other country in the last 200 years, so it's a little disingenuous to suggest that they weren't significant beforehand.

Dachs, I'll assume that that was intended in humour, particularly with your choice of Iran instead of Persia!