Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Willowmound, Feb 28, 2011.
crushing my self-esteem fun for ya?
March DLC Notes - stop - ETA to be confirmed - stop - this month seems to have 31 days in total - stop - please acknowledge before 5:00PM/EST today - stop - Best regards. - from 2KGreg eMailed answer to Firaxis devs on Sunday early afternoon.
Source to be verified. Stop.
I don't think they could rule the world, I don't think they have any wonders credited to them, and I don't think they advanced us in any way.
They were practically Neolithic.
they were advanced in their own way. christ, they colonized most of the pacific!
Do the Iroquoi have any wonders attributed to them? Did the Siamese advance us in any way? Could India rule the world?
Now that's settled, I suggest you stop badmouthing Polynesia, unless you want half a dozen men with Taiaha and massive clubs having a "talk" with you
Also, are the Moai not counted as wonders?
Apaches would have swooped over the best Cavalries of the White Men in the Arizona desert if only to save Buffalos from extinction if it weren't for Aztecs being too far south to match the multi-front invasion by at least 3 European countries.
Totem *IS* a more of a Wonder than a symbol.
Cuz, to them Nature was God.
Cool, we get a blue civ accented with green (or something like that), and more unique units, buildings and traits. Who cares whom they represent in real life. Simply more variety in a game is good.
I think they're wondrous.
Although, this new addition greatly obfuscates Firaxis' criteria for including new civs. That's something I've grilled 2kgreg about many a time (and is good part of the reason for my current ban).
Is asking whether your neighbors can be included as a civ really trolling?
Why are you asking Greg? He doesn't even work for Firaxis. That's just being needlessly antagonistic.
I think there are three criteria:
1. Historic Achievement
2. Geographic or Cultural Diversity
3. The Uniqueness of the Playing Experience
It's a balancing of all three factors. Certainly 2 and 3 are strong cases for Polynesians and I think there is at least some case made for the first point, when you consider the Austronesian expansion and the Moai Statues (with the Tonga Empire getting some points for being a fairly unique empire, even if empire might be a bit of an imprecise term in their case).
I was askin greg to ask firaxis
I assumed he'd take it in the same stride as my other post
to which he played along and answered
I think the coffee post is far more collegial and gives him an opportunity to make a joke (it also didn't require him to ask Firaxis). Criteria for Civs have always been nebulous and the tone you used with the neighbor thing isn't close to the same tone.
Now I don't think you should have been banned, but I don't think it's reasonable to expect an answer considering it's basically a judgment call on the part of Firaxis and has been ever since PTW.
oh that was just a single infraction leading to the ban.
sounds like too much effort for too little funny
This, you gotta see to believe it!
This sounds like a really good scenario and a unique civilization that is Oceanic is one of the best things the Civ V team is doing for the seriers. To bad there are so many ignorent people who only want european civs in the game.
Apparently every gaming news outlet has been butchering this announcement to hell. From what I can tell from the Destructoid article,the moai statues are only wonders in the scenario, while they're the unique building/improvement in the main game.
Hopefully that makes a bit more sense.
Firaxis is going for more obscure civs and leaders in general for Civ V. The brought in Siam and Oda Nobunaga, not to mention Askia of Songhai. They're hoping that people will read up on history's less well-known characters and nations. Why not add Polynesia? They were a very strong group of people (more a group of unassociated tribes, but we have Greece, right?), and did things that Europeans could only dream of at the time they did them.
Also, going back to the "fail civs" post, the Inca invented zero, a vital compenent in mathematics, and the Celts were never conquered- not even by the British or the Romans. Only Germany shares this distinction, and even they lost a war.
Oh, the bickering.. it's honestly just silly.
The 'civs' included in the game have never even had to be coherent entities under a single individual or assembly's rule - there have always been examples of what could be better defined as ethnic groups present: witness the celts, the greece, the native americans, etc. Under that definition of includable civ - a culturally unified ethnic group, the polynesians are fine. If you picture the leader as a kind of unifying spirit instead of a literal immortal monarch, it's even easier to swallow.
They're a fascinating culture. With it looks like a very flavorful, unique in-game feel. And cheapish, to boot, as DLC. Good!
Friday the 3rd... of June.
One of the most interesting expansions in human history imo. Hopefully some will start in that area, when playing them.
Gladly looking forward to a Maori/peninsula-game at marathon and the soldiers look really cool btw.
PS.: Just have a problem here with this "embarking thing". The most important progresses in technology were made with boats for some thousand years, but there won't be any boats. Also the decision tree that lead to canibalism won't most probably be simulated, and so I'll still get no chance to eat the rich.
Separate names with a comma.