Most Popular Excluded Civ?

[Ribannah]

Tormund, you forgot to divide by 2 (#1+#4 is the same as #4+#1).

For more variety we could use a seventh trait: Agriculture.
This would allow for 21 different combinations of 2 traits.

 

[cegman]

Originally posted by Tormund


Simple combinatorics tells us that not EVERY combination is used. To use every combination of the 6 traits you would need 30 civilizations.

actually you need 15 because if you put it like this

S = scientific
C= commercial
I= industrious
E= expansionistic
M= militaristic
R= religous

RC
RS
RE
RM
RI
IS
IC
IE
IM
MC
ME
MS
SC
SE
EC

I think that is all the combinations

 

[JoseM]

yeah only 15 civs are needed to make all the combinations...

 

[JoseM]

Originally posted by Tormund


Simple combinatorics tells us that not EVERY combination is used. To use every combination of the 6 traits you would need 30 civilizations.

I would have thought that adding civilizations would have been a pretty trivial thing. In fact if anything I consider it to be more of a marketing ploy to be adding civs to the expansion pack.

wrong, u need only 15 civs to make all the combinations... check the posts above this.

You also can see that the only civs that repeat their combinations are the Japanese and Aztecs, with Militaristic and Religious both.

 

[Grey Fox]

The formula for counting that out is like this:

n = # of choices
p = # of items you want to choose at once
total choices = n! / [ p! (n-p)! ]

! means factorial. and it is (n)*(n-1)*(n-2)*(n-3) until n=1.

It can be found on a scientific calculator (don't know which button though), but on the WINDOWS calculator in Scientific Mode, it's called "n!".

So if every civ would get 3 of the 6 traits there would only be 20 Unique civs, which is pretty good. But 4 of the 24 Civs would have the same traits as other civs.

 

[BuddhaBubba]

Originally posted by slashing

I'm afraid that, in game terms, Israel, Vikings, Mongols - all have to rate as barbarians. Sorry guys, nothing personal.

Not that it's personal, or to start a flamewar, but I just have to correct this obvious misunderstatement (apologies if I'm getting your true meaning wrong)

I can't believe you would say that Israel is considered a barbarian tribe! As a cultural group they have made contributions to some of the greatest and biggest empires (Rome, Greece, Germany, France, America, etc.) Not only have great minds originated from there (Einstein, Oppenheim (atom bomb), Freud, etc.) but they control hollywood and most of the media culture today. They are definitely a tribe that could have been a great empire (just check out their conquests of the BC) but turned into a more nomadic, cultural empire that has added a great amount to human evolution overall. What, are we going to start staying that Hitler killed 6 millions barbarians!!! C'mon people, I can't believe you didn't catch this...

To end with...a quote by Mark Twain:
"If the statistics are right, the Jews constitute but one quarter of one percent of the human race. It suggests a nebulous dim puff of stardust lost in the blaze of the Milky Way. Properly, the Jew ought hardly to be heard of; but he is heard of, has always been heard of. He is as prominent on the planet as any other people, and his importance is extravagantly out of proportion to the smallness of his bulk.

His contributions to the world’s list of great names in literature, science, art, music, finance, medicine and abstruse learning are very out of proportion to the weakness of his numbers. He has made a marvelous fight in this world in all ages, and has done it with his hands tied behind him. He could be vain of himself and be excused for it. The Egyptians, The Babylonians, and The Persians rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor; then faded to dream-stuff and passed away; The Greeks and The Romans followed and made a vast noise, and they are gone; other peoples have sprung up and held their torch high for a time but it burned out, and they sit in the twilight now, or have vanished.

The Jew saw them all, survived them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal but the Jew; All other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his Immortality?"

Mark Twain in Harpers Magazine, September, 1897

 

[Pangur Bán]

Buddha Bubba is right, Israel would be one of the last civs one would call barbarians.

These excluded civs will need leaders and UUs, here are my ideas:


The Spanish (Religious, Militaristic) - Philip II for leader and the conquistador for UU (LB)

The Arabs (Religious, Expansionist)- The Prophet Mohammed seems the obvious choice, but no leaderhead could be published without causing serious offence to Muslims, as Islam forbids images of the prophet. So Saladin or someone else would have to be the leader and the Mameluke as UU

The Turks (Religious, Expansionist) - Sulieman the Magnificent for the leader and the Janissaries for the UU

The Celts (Religious, Industrious) - This is a difficult one, because it has to be decided whether or not these Celts are continental or insular. If contininental, i.e. centring on the Gauls and Galatians, the leader should probably be Vercingetorix or one of the 2 Brennae and the UU Gallic Cavalry. If insular, i.e. centring on the British Isles, the leader should probably be Kenneth mac Alpin, Brian Boru or Boudicca.

The Mongols (Militaristic, Expansionist) - Genghis Khan for leader and their nomadic horsemen (What do you call them?) for the UU

The Hittites (Industrious, Religious)- Supiluliumas II for leader and and some kind of heavy infantry for UU?

The Assyrians (Militaristic, Industrious)- Asshurbanipal or Tiglath Pileser III for leader and some kind of chariot archer (do they have another name?) for UU

The Phoenicians or Carthaginians (Commercial, Industrious) - No doubt, Hannibal for leader and the Numidian cavalry or the quinquereme for the UU

The Dutch (Commercial, Scientific)- William of Orange for leader? And some kind of improved worker for UU

The Portuguese (Commercial, Expansionist)- Henry the Navigator for leader and a Caravella for the UU (LB)

The Jews (Israel) (Religious, Scientific) - Moses or David for leader and Zealots for the UU (high defensive capabilities)

The Scots (Scientific, Industrious)- Robert the Bruce for leader and the Highlander for UU

The Aborigines (Religious, ?)- God knows- any ideas anyone?

The Inca (Industrious, Expansionist)- As above!

The Khmer - As above!

The Tibetans - As above!

The Polynesians - don't have a clue - some kind of boat that can cross oceans in ancient times

A Scandinavian civ (for a pan-Scandinavian civ: Militaristic, Scientific) - the leader or UU would vary according to what branch (i.e. the Vikings, the Swedes, the Danes), but if all branches were included in one Pan-Scandinavian civ, Gustavus Adolphus or Cnut could be king and the longboat could be their UU

Another Sub-Saharan or a Pan-Sub-Saharan African civ (Pos. Expansionist, Religious) - I'm sure that leaders and UUs vary depending upon whether the new civ is Ghana, Nubia, Mali, etc or an Ethiopian (used in the classical sense, referring not only to Abyssinia but to the whole of "Black Africa") civ.





These are only suggestions. It obviously wouldn't take much to improve this list. I'm sure there are loads of people who disagree with my suggestions and who could give suggestions for the Incan, Khmer, Aborigine and Polynesian leaders and UUs. The more the list here is improved the better future mods could be!

 

[Graeme the mad]

errmm - arabic Islamic empire as large as the roman and longer lasting than the mongols and founded a religion - has to be arabs

 

[Sixchan]

The Scots - Robert the Bruce for leader and the Highlander for UU

I'm not sure about this.

No doubt Robert was a good fighter, but an honourable Scot? Nah. The King before him was imprisoned, but did Bruce bother to help? Nope. He didn't help Wallace in the slightest. Brucey never fought for anyone but himself, in his successful attempt to become a king.

I'd have Alexander III as the leader, as he was the first king of what is now Scotland, by uniting all the lands under him.


As for the Highlander, would that be a Swordsman, Rifleman or Infantryman? All would be suitable, but I would go with the Scottish Schiltrom, which is a group of Pikemen stuck into a ball, and has better defense than the average Pikeman.

 

[Vinc]

Mongols!

 

[allhailIndia]

Turks need to be in the Expansion they ought to have Suleiman as the LEader and Jannisary (last info a very good mesketman ??) as UU. Their characteristics will be militaristic and expansionist or Culturalist of a new attrib is made

 

[ChrTh]

I think I support the Polynesians the most, because unless most of the other choices (Mongols, Vikes, etc.) they haven't been in Civ before...and two, it'd be nice to have a second civ with a naval UU (although the Vikings could as well)

The polynesian UU should replace the galley and it should have 1) an extra mp 2) won't flounder in seas (although 50% it could in Oceans)...they should definitely be expansionist...

As for the Civ Abilities, I think the best bet is to add another ability. That way you get 21 unique combos (only 3 repeats--and the 3 repeats should have late game UUs). The question is, do you change the existing Civs' abilities, or are you forced to add new Civs that use your new Civ ability?

 

[Kushanis]

Mongols all the way, let me give an example of there history..

Conquer
Conquer
Conquer
Conquer
Conquer

Brings out the Warmonger in all of us

 

[kurt]

They should put Mayans in the game. They were great civilization. They also could put Vikings, Turks and Spanish.

 

[God]

As a cultural group they have made contributions to some of the greatest and biggest empires (Rome, Greece, Germany, France, America, etc.) Not only have great minds originated from there (Einstein, Oppenheim (atom bomb), Freud, etc.) but they control hollywood and most of the media culture today.

Well thats only European empires and European thinkers. You should have put "have made contributions to some of the greatest and bigget European empires..."

Anyway, I think the Turks, the Arabs, the Mongols, the Vikings, the Spanish and the Celts should be in the game.

I can't see any other civ as being 'fun' to play as. This goes for civs such as Canada, Israel, Khymer, Netherlands etc. I'm sure they have made some signifigance to the world, but I can't rank them up there with the others nor I can I see myself playing any of them.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Originally posted by Sixchan I'm not sure about this.

No doubt Robert was a good fighter, but an honourable Scot? Nah. The King before him was imprisoned, but did Bruce bother to help? Nope. He didn't help Wallace in the slightest. Brucey never fought for anyone but himself, in his successful attempt to become a king.

I'd have Alexander III as the leader, as he was the first king of what is now Scotland, by uniting all the lands under him.


As for the Highlander, would that be a Swordsman, Rifleman or Infantryman? All would be suitable, but I would go with the Scottish Schiltrom, which is a group of Pikemen stuck into a ball, and has better defense than the average Pikeman.

The schiltrom is far too similar to other units like the pikeman and the Macedonian phalanx. Besides, it was only really effective during the Wars of Independence, whereas the Highlander was effective for centuries, and during its golden age between the time of Gustavus Adolphus and the battle of Culloden was the most effective pound and charge units in Europe. Added to this is the fact that it represents the glamorous side of Scottish history and the Celtic side of Scottish history. It is also more famous and more appealing to gamers. Other possible UUs like the schiltrom and the Reiver do not possess the same excitement or merit.

With regards to Alexander III as king, I don't think that he should even be a great leader (Largs aside). I don't see how the claim that he was the first king to rule what is now Scotland can be substantiated. Just speaking territorially, he did not rule the Northern Isles, and in terms of his royal power had very little real control over the Highlands and Borders.
Robert the Bruce on the other hand is an epic character who inspired epic poetry. He was a political genius who not only won his claim to the throne but also defeated the English decisively at the same time. Quite frankly, his moral credentials are irrelevant, he was not living in a Disney cartoon: he was a medieval king. Anyway, he did help Wallace for a time, and the implication that he was totally selfish could never be properly justified because of the lack of evidence regarding his day-to-day motives.

In choosing a king, Robert the Bruce would be first, Kenneth mac Alpin 2nd, Malcolm II 3rd, James IV 4th, David I 5th and THEN Alexander III. This though is only my opinion.

 

[silverhawk_civ]

If there was a Jewish Empire, I think the Special unit should be a tank unit. (If anyone knows a good name for this UU it would be helpful). It should be Religious and something else (don't know what yet!)

 

[BuddhaBubba]

Originally posted by God

Well thats only European empires and European thinkers. You should have put "have made contributions to some of the greatest and bigget European empires..."

you're perfectly right, mr. god, and I thank you for the clarification...

but I have seen some asian jews in my time...I guess once we're all the same race it won't matter...hmmm...that gets me thinking...what if there was a way to merge nations? Say, if you were extremely powerful or just always friendly to another nation...they would merge with you and you would become a hybrid nation with hybrid characteristics...just an idea...

 

[Pangur Bán]

Some of the most important Arab thinkers, such as Maimonides (Moses ben Maimon), were Jews

 

[Parsifal]

Aborigines? Khmer? Tibetans? - I thought the inclusion of failure civ8ilizations like the Zulu, Iroquois and Aztecs was bad enough. Is this game Civilization 3 or Savagization 3. Yeh, I've heard all this garbage about "balance" and "how history could have been". Cummon man, extend that to its logical conclusion and none of the civilizations in the game would be included. Yuv gotta have only the best civs or yuv gotta have real balance like:

W.Europe: the Romans and the Germans
E.Europe: Russians and Greeks
M.East: Egypt and Babylonians
C.East: India and Persia
F.East: China and Japan
Africa: Ethiopia And Zulu
Americas: Inca and Aztecs
Australasia: Polynesians and Aborigines

There, that's 16 and that's "balance". But we all know that it is the superiority and fame of a civ that counts, so there should be no Iroquois nor any of the silly "civilizations" on the poll. So the civs should be:

Mesopotamia
Egypt
Persia
India
China
Rome
Greece
Germany
Italy
Spain
England
Russia
Arabs
Mongols
America
Japan


...and maybe for the expansion pack

Turks
Hebrews
Portuguese
French
Scandinavians
Scots
Dutch
Byzantines

If anyone thinks the Canadians or Australians should be included I'll possibly die laughing.... . They should be included along with the Irish in the English civ, because they are now essentially English. And PLEASE don't give me all the silly arguments based on statehood and dead languages.


Some ideas for UUs:

Aborigines: either a cannibal or something which can take away the land of other civs by exploiting their guilt

Americans: some kind of UU that will wipe out the indigenous inhabitants of a country but campaign against imperialism without anyone noticing the hypocrisy

Arabs: a UU which makes up religions to spread their culture

China: a UU that kills rare animals on the verge of extinction

Egyptians: a dumb American documentary maker

French: An effeminate charlatan who makes people think their culture is great without actually doing any thing of merit

Scots: a drunken scrooge who can hoard money for the civ

Sorry, all light-hearted.