"Raiding" civilizations expansion pack?

[PeterWimsey]

Everyone has noticed by now that neither the Mongols, the Zulus, nor the Vikings seem to be in CiV, despite their presence (esp. the Mongols and the Zulus) in previous versions. Given that these civs were militarily powerful civs that did not have an extensive network of cities, I wonder whether the first expansion pack will focus on - and have special rules for - these kind of "raiding" civilizations?

Other possible civs could include the Huns, the Magyars,...maybe the Scythians or the Parthians?

Of course it's too early to really speculate on the first expansion pack - but I am struck by the similarity of the excluded civs...

 

[_random_]

But you also have the Inca, Spain, and the Maya among prominent excluded Civs. None of them really fit the bill.

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

Yeah, but noticed *their* similarity Randomnerd? Spain, Mayan, Inca-all big players in the development of South America. I know, its a *stretch*, but I had to give it a shot ! Maybe the 1st expansion might be "Civ5: age of exploration" & the 2nd expansion might be "Civ5: Raiders"-its possible !

Aussie.

 

[_random_]

Fair enogh, but past Civs haven't themed themselve after the Civs included, and to do so could be restrictive of civs they might want to introduce. (Israel, Gran Columbia, or Srivijaya anyone?)

 

[Osama Bin Davis]

I can sort of see it, carthage also?

 

[Gedemo]

Maybe more a "conquest" expansion pack: Spain, Netherland and Portugal Vs Maya and Inca, Mongolia vs Korea,....

 

[GigaNerd]

Yeah, but noticed *their* similarity Randomnerd? Spain, Mayan, Inca-all big players in the development of South America. I know, its a *stretch*, but I had to give it a shot ! Maybe the 1st expansion might be "Civ5: age of exploration" & the 2nd expansion might be "Civ5: Raiders"-its possible !

Aussie.

"Age of Expansion" could sum it all up!

 

[Mango Elephant]

Did someone say that the expansions would have themes this isn't the first time someone mentioned a themed expansion.

 

[civ_king]

Warlord and BtS were themed

 

[Buccaneer]

One thing I had never understood is why a civer says that Mongols or Zulus are always agressive and warlike. In the many Civ4 games I have played, I have not noticed that. Sometimes they are somewhat aggressive (relatively speaking since I think the AI is weak for offensives), sometimes they do nothing and othertimes they get wiped out early on. The presence of a Civ on a map is nice eye candy, esp. the leader graphics, colors and UU, but I don't see any strategic difference among them (except for India's growth - if they are left alone).

 

[surv]

This would be great.

Just make it a 10$ DLC and we're cruising.

 

[Oishi]

Please don't make it a DLC. Almost all DLCs out there are crap. I'd rather opt in for an expansion pack, but with different scenarios.

If they're going to release civilization DLC packs (i.e. Korea pack, Mongol pack, etc.) then modding is more restricted than I thought.

 

[cccv]

Assuming there will be xpacs (the evidence I've seen so far suggests to me there won't), there are enough warlike and peaceful civs to have a good balance for each. I do think you have a point though, that one of the xpacs would focus on war, given that the vanilla is focused so heavily on diplomacy.

Given the conniption people are having on other forums regarding the lack of Spain, I think the first xpac definitely needs to include Spain and should be titled: "Now Shut Up."