Being part-Balkan myself means I have known where Serbia is for a long time. Serbia's only real contribution to history has been WWI. But that led directly to WWII. Which led directly to the Cold War. And so on. Serrbia shouldn't be judged on some kind of 'impact level'; it should be judged on it alongside other factors (which I won't go into). I wouldn't mind the Slavs; to me they are just as interesting as Polynesia is to other Civers. But they would cause a further imbalance to European Civs.
New Civilizations
- Thread starter Corey
- Start date
Latvian "Hound"
Chieftain
American wiev they even don't notice how maybe some civ is valuable. But they're just jugging from seen comercial about this country. For example, if Tibet wouldn't have that kind commercial with budaism americans won't know who they are or where they are. That goes to all countrys that isn't very big and not connected with US.
Furius
Prince
I don't think that is totally true, Latvian Hound. I mean it is true that your average American dosen't know where New Zealand is for example, but does your average Chinese or Latvian? And if they do most likely they think New Zealand is either part of Australia or identical to it. I suspect it has something to do with being at the ends of the Earth, in a similar vein I couldn't tell you much about Siberia.
But from the producers point of view they have to make money, and they aren't going to make much if their potential customer walks up inspects the box and discovers that it features 24 civs that they have never heard of and 3 they vaguely remember but can't place. In the opposite of course, many Korean buyers might be more likely to buy the game if they noticed that it featured Korea. So at least some of the slots have to go to the countries the bought the most copies of Civ III and its expansions. So after they have the well known and well liked ones down (Rome, Egypt, Persia, etcetera) they put in the countries the buy the most copies (America, Korea, Germany, etcetera) notice there is quite a bit of overlap, China is not only well known but presumably buys quite a few copies as could be true of Russia, England, and so on.
But from the producers point of view they have to make money, and they aren't going to make much if their potential customer walks up inspects the box and discovers that it features 24 civs that they have never heard of and 3 they vaguely remember but can't place. In the opposite of course, many Korean buyers might be more likely to buy the game if they noticed that it featured Korea. So at least some of the slots have to go to the countries the bought the most copies of Civ III and its expansions. So after they have the well known and well liked ones down (Rome, Egypt, Persia, etcetera) they put in the countries the buy the most copies (America, Korea, Germany, etcetera) notice there is quite a bit of overlap, China is not only well known but presumably buys quite a few copies as could be true of Russia, England, and so on.
The main reason I would NOT make a civ called "Baltics" is because they were never at any time a unified nation with a central government. Lots of tribes with a common culture and a semi-peaceful relationship perhaps, but no single capital. Not forgetting that the three nations known as Baltic today would probably be upset to be lumped together as a unified whole. It would be the England vs Britain issue all over again, except more so as none of them ever conquered the others.
Latvian "Hound"
Chieftain
Furius said:
80% does know.
And as for being upset that the Baltic would be putted as one civ. Your not right. Latvians and Liethuanians are proud that they are Balts, atleast biggest half.
And do you remember game called Ghost Reacon in this game was one level in Latvia territory. And evrey Latvian was happy that somevone remembers about them. Even in national news were sayd that in Ghost Reacon one level is at Latvia. And about 1/2 of all people who had PC bought this game just for that.
QuoVadisNation
keeping your angel alive
The thought of a Herbew Superpower (in a certain game) is kind of werid because of the religious element. Or even, the thought of destorying the herbew nation alone is kind of werid. It's far too controversial to even use, no matter how aluring it sounds on paper.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,455
Funny how everyone keeps dreaming of all their favourite cultures going into the game -
But you all know it is not going to happen!
But you all know it is not going to happen!
QuoVadisNation
keeping your angel alive
Curt, thats a little narrow-sided. I would see great marketable success to introducing a fan bases home country into the game. There should be limits though of course, like say
.Kuwait.
Furius
Prince
Why can't Kuwait be a civ? I mean it has oil and it caused the first Gulf War sort-of.
Yes, true, but that doesn't make it that important. Think about countries/nations/empires that people have heard of, those are the ones that should be in Civ. (i.e. Roman Empire, Greek Empire, United States, France...)
Kuwait could also be considered as 'Arab'. The Arabs probably includes most of the middle east (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait etc.)
Kuwait could also be considered as 'Arab'. The Arabs probably includes most of the middle east (Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Kuwait etc.)
searcheagle
Emperor
Well, to be blunt, there is Civ created the main, (dare I say Important civs?) and if you want more, then create them! That's why they are there! And if you don't want to creat them, find premade on the web. CFC prolly has them. I don't know, I don't download senerios or custom units, etc.
Can we please stop with this talk of new civs? It really has gone overboard. We could have a new civ: College students:
College students have had an important impact on all aspects of life and therefore should be included as a civ.
Traits: expansionist (waist lines), industrious (devotion to avoiding work)
Perferred Government: Anarchy
Shunned Gov: Profs
UU: Football teams (6.6.1)
Build Preferences: Nothing
That's about as ridiculus as this new civ idea sounds.
Can we please stop with this talk of new civs? It really has gone overboard. We could have a new civ: College students:
College students have had an important impact on all aspects of life and therefore should be included as a civ.
Traits: expansionist (waist lines), industrious (devotion to avoiding work)
Perferred Government: Anarchy
Shunned Gov: Profs
UU: Football teams (6.6.1)
Build Preferences: Nothing
That's about as ridiculus as this new civ idea sounds.
QuoVadisNation
keeping your angel alive
New Civilization: Strong Badia
Traits: Commercialism (It's a website), Military
Preferred Governement: Despotism
Shunned Governement: Fuedal
UU: Strong Mad
Build Preferences: Offensive Land Units
Traits: Commercialism (It's a website), Military
Preferred Governement: Despotism
Shunned Governement: Fuedal
UU: Strong Mad
Build Preferences: Offensive Land Units
Mongoloid Cow
Great Khan
Hey, it's been a while since I've gone to Homestar Runner and that. Thanks for reminding me, QuoVadisNation.
Strato
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2004
- Messages
- 163
Australia deserves a mention. There is a distinct Australian culture, (including accent) and has played a big role in the prior wars; there was the the Boer war, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam and both the Gulf Wars of the early 90's and present. There is also a rich history included. About the only hard part would be coming up with some recognisable city names, but then, there are names from other Civ's that I personally don't recognise anyway, so it wouldn't be an issue.
Being the powerhouse in South East Asia, yeah, I reckon it would deserve a mention. As for unique units, well one that would come to mind is something like an infantry that is able to treat all terrain as roaded.
However, I'm a little bemused to see people think the Australian aborigine should be included. As culturally significant as they are, they had no distinct 'civilization' but were really just pockets of different tribes that weren't any sort of recognised nation.
Being the powerhouse in South East Asia, yeah, I reckon it would deserve a mention. As for unique units, well one that would come to mind is something like an infantry that is able to treat all terrain as roaded.
However, I'm a little bemused to see people think the Australian aborigine should be included. As culturally significant as they are, they had no distinct 'civilization' but were really just pockets of different tribes that weren't any sort of recognised nation.
Furius
Prince
No, actually city names for Australia aren't that difficult, it is a big place and if you just take the capitals first (Sydney, Brisbane, etcetera) and go down through population it works out quite well, really.
However I do have opposition, I suspect this infantry replacement would end up being called ANZAC Infantry right? Well I don't think that Australia has exclusive right to that name. Also, I don't think that Australia is the Powerhouse of SE Asia, having been to Malaysia and Thailand which are truly powering.
But moreover Australia spent most of its history being a territory of the British Empire. True we have America in Civ III but they have been independant for 300 years and become pre-eminant power over the world whereas Australia has been independant for 63 years or so and has not become pre-eminant power anywhere except Australia.
However I do have opposition, I suspect this infantry replacement would end up being called ANZAC Infantry right? Well I don't think that Australia has exclusive right to that name. Also, I don't think that Australia is the Powerhouse of SE Asia, having been to Malaysia and Thailand which are truly powering.
But moreover Australia spent most of its history being a territory of the British Empire. True we have America in Civ III but they have been independant for 300 years and become pre-eminant power over the world whereas Australia has been independant for 63 years or so and has not become pre-eminant power anywhere except Australia.
Similar threads
