Sixty Five Civilizations

[Turner]

Moderator Action: Himalia - warned for language.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Robi D]

There's nothing wrong with having a lot of different civs. Any civ that has impacted dominated their region or world at some stage in history should be eligable for inclusion in the game. However a lot on the list haven't, like the swiss, what have they ever done except be netural. What would their special unit be, the swiss banker perhaps, who would have the ability hide away your money in numbered accounts and give high interst returns on it!

 

[Atrebates]

Civilization is about "What if".
What if history had gone differently?
What if Sub-Saharan Africans or Native Americans had been more advanced, instead of Europeans?
What if the Cold War had been between the Cherokees and the Khazars, or the Ashanti and the Maori?

IMO this is correct in broad terms, and so there should be representitive powers for each geographical area, but there is only so much one game can take. Who wants to play a game where you have not heard of some of the powers you oppose?(even if this is the fault of personal ignorance)

Also (and this is just within my area of expertise) there is a lot of repeats on the list, the Picts were originally a Scottish tribe that that were ousted by the Irish 'Scots' tribe. The Celts are argueably the source of most northern European nations.
My point? National history is intertwined, IMO (and this is on other threads and perhaps best not debated here) civs should evolve from being a 'primitive' tribe early on in the game to the more familiar nations.

Sorry if this repeats on earlier posts but I have only read part of the total thread, most of which was b****ing about Quebec vs Canada arrgh

 

[Atrebates]

Swahili is a langauge....are there a people who call themselves the Swahili? I need a case built for these two

Okay then here goes, as far as I am aware Swahilis would best be described as an individual tribe, or possibly a grouping for larger regional locale of tribes. The language is spoken by natives of Swaziland, Tanzinia and probably other nearby nations. The language Swahili is also called Kiswahili, in checking the spellings I have just seen a link to the Bantu who made the grade for Rise of Nations so perhaps they are a subset of the Bantu.

My knowledge of African history is pretty weak so I cannot say how worthy they actually are as a nation, but I imagine they made little overall difference probably equatable in influence to the Masai

 

[Kurioku]

Uh? Alot of those are repeated under differnet names, for instance
Turks-Ottamans-->The Turks were the main portion of the Ottaman Empire
Swedes-Norse---> Norseman are basically another name for Swedes
Goths-Germany-Swiss-->The Goths were a Germanic tribe and the Swiss are in the same spot as the Goths.
As for the list in whole the game is meant to have that any civs in the core game, it wouldnt be out for another year if it did. Most of the civs with the game focus on General global historical signifigance

I think he was going for the whole reincarnation aspect of respnwed civs. Though this idea does show pormise, it is in implementation that this idea needs work.
Something like respanwed civs are more enraged, supplimenting the aesthetic of being changed or conquored. Perhaps looking back at the histories of these nations and whether their change was from force of let's say good or bad, like the a respawn nation that barely surrvied civil war might have a furious charachteristic, as a nation the revolted to a new ie america from britain may be more I don't know, rejoiceful and positive from triumph. Hopefully you get the point. Ofcourse it might only make sense to start with the root civs, then when uprisings and revolts occur, the new civ would be the next offspring in line. This might aid in the reality of the whole offspring idea.




one more thing, the leaders would obviosly be the patriachs of the change, for the offsprung civs.(ofcourse an option of just typing in a name the player chooses. Or picking from an implied bank of recognizable names to each civ that generates a set class of attitudes and charachteristics.

 

[I am the Future]

A list that long is stupid and pointless Most of those civs were bit players in history

 

[zjl56]

I think if anything the list should be narrowed down a few. Since many are very similar cultures and inhabited the same region
Like the different English subcultures should be under the same banner, same goes for many of the other small tribes.

 

[Atrebates]

A list that long is stupid and pointless Most of those civs were bit players in history

Only to your point of view, if history had been slightly different then those civs would be very memorable, many probably had effects people are (generally) unaware of.

The list is worthy even if it just questions the insular view most have to world history. Some are quite obviously of greater worth in how we view things, but don't disregard others

 

[Kurioku]

Only to your point of view, if history had been slightly different then those civs would be very memorable, many probably had effects people are (generally) unaware of.

The list is worthy even if it just questions the insular view most have to world history. Some are quite obviously of greater worth in how we view things, but don't disregard others

Quite true, that charachter needs to open up his god damn mind a little bit.

Moderator Action: Warned for flaming.
-Civrules
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Himalia]

Due to the actual limitaions on the amount you can ever have in one game with mods i use i find using multiple maps for differnent regiosn of the world works vey well. I like the alternate history sort kinda stuff with that you cad add just about anyone you want just by playing out whatever area or sceanrio in world history you like. Hey i use well over 100 nations like that (not in one game of course) some of which would probably raise an eyebrow of two just to mention a few Lemuria, Rama and the Aroi Sun Kingdom.

 

[K-HAN]

too many of those are the ALMOST same. No one needs the turks AND the ottomans.

We need ottomans and turks!!Who are you? tell me something about U.S. history before 1500 AD.There isn't history as long as ours.Turks are begining of history..Don't talk like that in forum.

 

[Himalia]

I dont think any disrespect was ment by that its more a case of shaving the list. Some civilizations simply wont be on there that does not mean that they arnt worthy. As for the amount of time a civilization has been around for is not the only way in which it is judged.

 

[wolf_brother]

Eighty-Four Civs! Good Lord!
Could you even imagine trying to come-up with balanced unique units for each of them? And any map in which all of them were playing would completely filled within twenty turns or so. Probably about half of them would be exterminated within the first hundred turns.

Well, that would reflect history pretty well...

And just because this cracks me up...

Here's the bottom line on the Canada dispute:
Anything IMPORTANT that Canada has done, America has done better and/or more often. I dare you to prove me wrong.

NOT having a civil war.

pwnt

 

[angryllama]

How about Lesotho?

Surely we can't forget about South Africa's tiny landlocked cousin!

 

[Belcarius]

OK, I can see the problem here. Many people are strongly attached to a certain little nation and they would all like to see said nation put into Civ 4. The problem with this is, there are too many of these nations, and why would they put them in when only a small minority would actually use them?

The solution: Allow players to create their own civs. This should be an option that can be done outside the editor, so you're not tied to using that Civ in only the map it was created for. (You can already do it in way... but this could be expanded somewhat) Maybe when you select the Civs in the game startup screen, there could be 5 or so 'custom' options, and then you could choose their name, leader's names, leader's artwork, city names, cultural grouping (as in buildings, citizens etc), banner, traits and whatever else you like. This would give all those modders something to really look forward to.

It would be a rock solid waste of time for the dev team to put every single Civ that ever existed into the game, but through this method they could really allow you to play your favourite nations.

 

[Smokey_Monkey]

If you put the Scots in then you gotta have the Welsh too.

 

[Superkrest]

wow i thought after the canada dispute was over that this would all fissle out..what i cant understand is why people cant understand why some civs will just never make it in the game

 

[Afgnwrlrd]

California with berkley hippies as our UU.

 

[Himalia]

California with berkley hippies as our UU.

Sounds intresting , so what sort of attributes would they have ? any special abilities ?

 

[ahm]

We need ottomans and turks!!Who are you? tell me something about U.S. history before 1500 AD.There isn't history as long as ours.Turks are begining of history..Don't talk like that in forum.

K-HAN