New civ linked to new resource

[Gucumatz]

Turquoise is still rather vague IMHO. I wouldn't link it to any civ in particular.

Perhaps, but its certainly linked with the Americas (Mesoamerica/Southwest US) than with Europe/Asia

 

[Human Crouton]

..and kangaroos? really?

I know. For pages and pages people have actually been non-jokingly mentioning kangaroos as a resource, and nobody has stepped in to stop them.

 

[Menzies]

I know. For pages and pages people have actually been non-jokingly mentioning kangaroos as a resource, and nobody has stepped in to stop them.

Kangaroos are a resource. Good meat, environmentally friendly and well... tourism.

I don't know of anyone who has suggested them in a context other than "if they announced Kangaroos as a resource, Australia would be in". It's more an example of something ridiculously obvious than something that seems like a realistic option.

 

[Martinus]

They said the resource is going to be luxury - so kangaroos are unlikely.

 

[Gucumatz]

Where did we hear luxury?

 

[PhilBowles]

Jade is found in a lot more locations than just Guatemala and Burma. Hearing that it was included alone, without being told "it'll give it away" would never lead me to think that Burma were included either.

"jade" colloquially, but jade outside Guatemala and Burma is nephrite rather than jadeite, and it's jadeite that's most-associated with trade goods and artefacts.

I suspect, however, that this would be the case for nearly any resource you name, other than some very specific manufactured goods. It's only because we've been given the hint that we'd associate any resource with any civ at all. Bison? They just wanted a new trapping bonus resource. Yes, we associate them with the Sioux, but lots of resources already in the game are ones we'd associate with particular civs, without any one-to-one relation (spices? must be Indonesia. Dyes? Phoenicia's the best-known empire built on dye trading, particularly since the graphic is purple). Seals? There aren't any early-game resources on ice.

Maybe it's just that the civ name, or a name associated with that civ, is in the resource name (such as "Venetian Glass"=Venice, "Wedgwood ceramics"=Britain, "Madagascar vanilla"=Merina etc.) rather than that there's any particular association between a civ and a resource in the abstract.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Concerning Jade, I have never ever associated jade with Burma - in fact I didn't even know they were known for Jade - and have instead associated it with China and the Mayans.

Anyhow PhilBowles brings up a point - the resource name could have a very blatant name in it. It's possible - we have UU and UB names that have obvious names in them.

 

[Gedemo]

Cloves come from indonesia, Majapahit could be this civ

 

[Menzies]

"jade" colloquially, but jade outside Guatemala and Belize is nephrite rather than jadeite, and it's jadeite that's most-associated with trade goods and artefacts.

I suspect, however, that this would be the case for nearly any resource you name, other than some very specific manufactured goods. It's only because we've been given the hint that we'd associate any resource with any civ at all. Bison? They just wanted a new trapping bonus resource. Yes, we associate them with the Sioux, but lots of resources already in the game are ones we'd associate with particular civs, without any one-to-one relation (spices? must be Indonesia. Dyes? Phoenicia's the best-known empire built on dye trading, particularly since the graphic is purple). Seals? There aren't any early-game resources on ice.

Maybe it's just that the civ name, or a name associated with that civ, is in the resource name (such as "Venetian Glass"=Venice, "Wedgwood ceramics"=Britain, "Madagascar vanilla"=Merina etc.) rather than that there's any particular association between a civ and a resource in the abstract.

This is the exact reason I brought up Kangaroos for Australia or Maple for Canada. It's that level of the resource just screaming that particular culture.

Again, as mentioned earlier, it might be that a specific civilization produces a special resource as a UA or from a UB, and that by revealing the resource they'd have to reveal that, and in some ways I now hope it's that as it would avoid anything silly, but we'll see.

 

[PhilBowles]

Concerning Jade, I have never ever associated jade with Burma - in fact I didn't even know they were known for Jade - and have instead associated it with China and the Mayans.

Chinese jade is obtained from Burma. It's a major resource for the Burmese to this day - I read an article in Geographical years ago about the slave labour the junta employed to mine it, because it was the major if not the only export not only to China, but for which there was black market demand in the West. I don't know whether Guatemala is still a major source, or only was historically.

This is the exact reason I brought up Kangaroos for Australia or Maple for Canada. It's that level of the resource just screaming that particular culture.

I'm not even convinced that would do it. Kangaroo, like bison, would be an odd choice but could still have been selected from a desire to add geographical diversity to the resource types in the game. Simply, without being told that there's a resource linked to a civ in the first place, I don't think there would be any particular expectation that the identity of a new resource would have anything to say about the identity of a civ. The only exception I can think of would be something like the tulips planned for G&K - if someone had leaked tulips as a resource prior to learning the Dutch were involved, there would be little doubt that the Netherlands would be a civ. But that's a farmed resource, not something naturally occurring in the landscape.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Chinese jade is obtained from Burma. It's a major resource for the Burmese to this day - I read an article in Geographical years ago about the slave labour the junta employed to mine it, because it was the major if not the only export not only to China, but for which there was black market demand in the West. I don't know whether Guatemala is still a major source, or only was historically.

The Mayans were known for jade carvings and the like - one of the most famous Mayan artifacts, a death mask, is made of jade.

I actually didn't know most Chinese jade came from Burma. I assume that's how it was historically then as well, even going as far back as neolithic times? (as jade artifacts have been found as early as then in China, even in the northern regions of China, so I find it interesting that that jade from all the way up there came from Burma)

 

[Gucumatz]

Chinese jade is obtained from Burma. It's a major resource for the Burmese to this day - I read an article in Geographical years ago about the slave labour the junta employed to mine it, because it was the major if not the only export not only to China, but for which there was black market demand in the West. I don't know whether Guatemala is still a major source, or only was historically.



I'm not even convinced that would do it. Kangaroo, like bison, would be an odd choice but could still have been selected from a desire to add geographical diversity to the resource types in the game. Simply, without being told that there's a resource linked to a civ in the first place, I don't think there would be any particular expectation that the identity of a new resource would have anything to say about the identity of a civ. The only exception I can think of would be something like the tulips planned for G&K - if someone had leaked tulips as a resource prior to learning the Dutch were involved, there would be little doubt that the Netherlands would be a civ. But that's a farmed resource, not something naturally occurring in the landscape.

Most of the Jade mines in Guatemala have been lost to history. Don't think that Guatemala is a major jade producer anymore [although one day may be again]

 

[PhilBowles]

The Mayans were known for jade carvings and the like - one of the most famous Mayan artifacts, a death mask, is made of jade.

I actually didn't know most Chinese jade came from Burma. I assume that's how it was historically then as well, even going as far back as neolithic times? (as jade artifacts have been found as early as then in China, even in the northern regions of China, so I find it interesting that that jade from all the way up there came from Burma)

As far as I know, yes; there isn't any indication I know of that historical jadeite deposits were found outside Burma in East Asia (also the specific source of minerals can be identified through spectroscopy). Trade routes were extensive in Neolithic times - there are I think European Neolithic artefacts of Asian origin as well, while Australia's natives traded through much of the continent.

 

[Nujabes]

I'm not even convinced that would do it. Kangaroo, like bison, would be an odd choice but could still have been selected from a desire to add geographical diversity to the resource types in the game. Simply, without being told that there's a resource linked to a civ in the first place, I don't think there would be any particular expectation that the identity of a new resource would have anything to say about the identity of a civ. .

Maybe I'm misreading, are you really arguing that if the Firaxis folks had said "There's one new resource: Bison," that people on this board wouldn't immediately and drastically raise their expectations that the Sioux would appear? Kangaroos are obviously not going to be the choice, but they scream way more than geographical diversity, especially since they are so isolated to one particular area and not particularly desired by the rest of the world. We know the level of digging that goes on here, and I'm pretty sure that there do exist resources that would have been a pretty clear indication, especially since we know they'll be the sole new resource.

 

[PhilBowles]

Maybe I'm misreading, are you really arguing that if the Firaxis folks had said "There's one new resource: Bison," that people on this board wouldn't immediately and drastically raise their expectations that the Sioux would appear? Kangaroos are obviously not going to be the choice, but they scream way more than geographical diversity, especially since they are so isolated to one particular area and not particularly desired by the rest of the world. We know the level of digging that goes on here, and I'm pretty sure that there do exist resources that would have been a pretty clear indication, especially since we know they'll be the sole new resource.

People will raise expectations for all sorts of reasons, but it wouldn't be anything close to the 'giveaway' we've been teased with. If they did reveal bison, and it turned out that the Sioux aren't in the expansion, it wouldn't be an especially surprising decision. It was an important resource for a large number of North American cultures, not merely the Sioux, as well as to European settlers. If they wanted to reflect geographical diversity by showcasing a resource important to one geographical area, bison wouldn't be any more of a giveaway that there's an associated civ coming than maize or manioc, or than rice to reflect an Asian staple.

 

[Nujabes]

People will raise expectations for all sorts of reasons, but it wouldn't be anything close to the 'giveaway' we've been teased with. If they did reveal bison, and it turned out that the Sioux aren't in the expansion, it wouldn't be an especially surprising decision. It was an important resource for a large number of North American cultures, not merely the Sioux, as well as to European settlers. If they wanted to reflect geographical diversity by showcasing a resource important to one geographical area, bison wouldn't be any more of a giveaway that there's an associated civ coming than maize or manioc, or than rice to reflect an Asian staple.

I see what you're saying, but I guess we just have to agree to disagree. I would have thought the Sioux, and I think a lot of the board would have as well. Lots of Native American tribes used it, but none are so popularly and deeply associated with it as the Sioux in my mind. Geographical diversity isn't a good excuse for selecting Bison alone out of all of the other resources that could be chosen, and if they told us that Bison were the only new resource and then we DIDN'T get the Sioux, it would seem like a weird tease.

As you put it, there is no resource that could have been such a giveaway, and obviously Shirk felt differently or he would have felt comfortable enough to do the reveal. It might not be the Sioux, but I think when the resource is revealed, it'll be something pretty obvious.

 

[Martinus]

This is a completely wild speculation but if the "pro" civ mentioned in the German article is also the resource civ, then Inuit (with an ability to farm tundra/ice) and seals would make sense.

That or they meant Italians as a "pro" civ in a historical sense.

 

[sukritact]

This is a completely wild speculation but if the "pro" civ mentioned in the German article is also the resource civ, then Inuit (with an ability to farm tundra/ice) and seals would make sense.

That or they meant Italians as a "pro" civ in a historical sense.

Mind enlightening me on what is meant by the "pro" civ? I don't remember reading about a "pro" civ...

 

[Menzies]

This is a completely wild speculation but if the "pro" civ mentioned in the German article is also the resource civ, then Inuit (with an ability to farm tundra/ice) and seals would make sense.

That or they meant Italians as a "pro" civ in a historical sense.

Do you have a link to the article?

 

[Dragonflow]

Mind enlightening me on what is meant by the "pro" civ? I don't remember reading about a "pro" civ...

Do you have a link to the article?

http://www.gamersglobal.de/angetestet/civ-5-brave-new-world?page=0,0

The "pro-civ" is what the journalist called one of the four remaining civs. Nobody really know what he meant and so people speculate.
My opinion is that he or Firaxis just liked the civ a lot or that it's a "pro" in a certain area and therefore got called "pro-civ".