Only two civs remain...

[The Navy Seal]

Poland too.

 

[Zenon_pt]

Byzantium where? where did you see them??? BTW the same for Sumeria!
Pericles ?!? I can't remember him as warrior!!! Are u sure?
OK I see them (Justinian and Gilgamesh)!

 

[Solo4114]

Not to be too practical here, but playing as the Polynesians on any Earth map would be a HUGE drag, mostly due to the fact that their cities would pretty much take up an entire one-square island, and many of their islands aren't even big enough to represent on even a huge earth map. As such, I'd say they wouldn't make a great civ to add. Not because they lacked a legitimate culture, didn't accomplish great things, etc., but more because of the gameplay considerations.

 

[Angst]

Not to be too practical here, but playing as the Polynesians on any Earth map would be a HUGE drag, mostly due to the fact that their cities would pretty much take up an entire one-square island, and many of their islands aren't even big enough to represent on even a huge earth map. As such, I'd say they wouldn't make a great civ to add. Not because they lacked a legitimate culture, didn't accomplish great things, etc., but more because of the gameplay considerations.

I agree. But there is also weird conditions in Europe. The Celts are historically overlapping with the Romans, English, French and Germans, and in Earth map there aren't that much room in Europe. Still it would be irritating to maintain that city style (With huge distance upkeep, Food-producing cities with no Production or Commerce).

 

[TheLastOne36]

That i agree on but i don't play those maps.

 

[PW90]

I bet there will be Ethiopia/Abessinia and the Hittites.

But maybe and hopefully they include Poland or Austria, with which I can identify myself better than with the Hittites.

Ethiopia/Abessinia is a great choice anyway.

A southeastasian civ (hopefully Khmer) is surely in, due to the screenshot with the bowmen on the elephants.

 

[Orko The Great]

Mussolini and Garibaldi were certainly not Roman.

I think he meant that italys capital is rome and romes capital is rome so it's impossible in the terms of the first cities of each civ

 

[TheArchduke]

I don't like the idea of Austrians- it is, after all, just a German state that never joined the Empire. I'm not to keen on using nation-states as Civs anyway- I prefer the idea of civilizations being a little more abstract, like the Greek or Celtic civs- but Austria doesn't even have it's own language. It's historical importance does lend some weight to it's inclusion, but it's particular history also seems to emphasise this nation-state situation.

If America can be in, Austria can be in, too imo. I know America kicked around a lot of people in the 20th century, but so did Austria in the 16th and 17th.

 

[Phoenix1595]

What I don't get is why the are including the Hittites again. I thought the inclusion of the Hittites and Sumerians in Civ3 was unnecessary-- they did not add any value to my game, and I felt overwhelmed by the overlapping Middle Eastern civs. I feel the same about it now. Did anyone ever play them in Civ3? Will anyone play them in Civ4? If so, fine, let's put them in, but if not, let's put in a civ that will see more playtime.

I would like to think that the game developers would consider playability and lasting appeal when considering the addition of a civ. I know my friends here on this board love to argue about the historical/cultural significance of so-and-so civ until they are blue on the face, but the crux of the matter is that a civ should be included to enhance the game's entertainment and playability, not just to be painstakingly "historically accurate."

 

[TheLastOne36]

What I don't get is why the are including the Hittites again. I thought the inclusion of the Hittites and Sumerians in Civ3 was unnecessary-- they did not add any value to my game, and I felt overwhelmed by the overlapping Middle Eastern civs. I feel the same about it now. Did anyone ever play them in Civ3? Will anyone play them in Civ4? If so, fine, let's put them in, but if not, let's put in a civ that will see more playtime.

I would like to think that the game developers would consider playability and lasting appeal when considering the addition of a civ. I know my friends here on this board love to argue about the historical/cultural significance of so-and-so civ until they are blue on the face, but the crux of the matter is that a civ should be included to enhance the game's entertainment and playability, not just to be painstakingly "historically accurate."

Which civ would you add then? instead of Sumeria and Hittites?

 

[LightSpectra]

I think he meant that italys capital is rome and romes capital is rome so it's impossible in the terms of the first cities of each civ

That's a minor issue. Call Rome by its Latin name for the Romans and just "Rome" for Italy.

 

[Tronicoz]

I agree on the many European Civs. But I disagree on left alone with the Vikings.

besides the Vikings are just united as the Native Americans and Celts. So bring some nothern country in. And yes then you should go for Sweden (the biggest of them all.

i agree, sweden did hugr stuff. fought against france, russia, german, poland, norway. but mostly denmark. they have also declared war on england but neither sweden or england were sending any soildiers.

 

[NYHunter]

Scientist That Lives In Antartica civ nor Chicago ain't as important as the Polynesians. When I said rewrite history it's not: Suddently a goat-praising people in Switzerland found a gold mine and became very rich and conquered France and Germany. There has to be a balance between rewriting history, historical importance and geographical representation.

Well, it's nice to see that you have some standards then.

And I agree with that last line. Although, at this point, it is clear that we are just always going to disagree over Polynesia.

 

[Parmandur]

That's a poor comparison- the Zulus were important because they were a particular tribe which dominated a certain region. The "Polynesians" were no such thing, and the term is merely an arbitrary western term used to refer to anyone from a specific region. The reason that "Polynesians" dominated their region is because anyone there was, by definition, "Polynesian"- how could they not dominate the region?
Of course, neither group were all that important in the grand scheme of things- the Zulus are only in the game to provide more cultural variation, and because people have heard of them- but the Zulus were at least a single tribe which did at one point control a unified nation. "Polynesian" is a largely geographical term forced upon those people by the west. There isn't, nor has there ever been, a unifying culture as the Celts had, let alone the kind of statehood held by the Romans or Chinese.

Actually, the Polynesians are descended from one cultural group, which Jared Diamond uses in "Guns, Germs, and Steel" as a microcosm of how a monolithic society changes to adapt to it's environment. Not that this means they should be added as a civ, but they are one people group, linguistically and culturally.

 

[dutchking]

I want Austria!

 

[chaz1356]

They should add Sealand

 

[snipperrabbit!!]

And Brunei in the meantime.

 

[TheLastOne36]

And Brunei in the meantime.

100 % agreed , They should've been in from the start!

 

[knigh+]

Why do people insist on a modern Turkish civ? If the Hittites and a modern turkish civ are included, then much of the region's history would be in the game-- Hittites, Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Byzantines, Ottomans, and modern Turkey. I dunno-- what would a modern Turkish civ contribute to the game that these previous civs haven't? Besides, Istanbul is already in the game in its various incarnations at least three or four times now. Let's leave this one alone. There are far more regions and cultures in the world that need representation, and only a few slots left to fill...

I agree one civ for Turkey is enough, but it should have been called Turks, not Ottomans. Then it would have included both OE and modern Turkey. Just like having Chinese civ, rather than just Tang Dynasty. Sometimes I think the history research for civ games are done by a bunch of drunken chipmunks.

 

[RockTheCazbah87]

Hittites I reckon will be in there... Poland maybe? Polynesia would be cool =] have crazy men in face paint...