The 65-Civ Mod!

Red Door

Man of Mayhem
Joined
May 29, 2005
Messages
12,665
Location
USA #1
In Ideas and Suggestions for Civ 4 in July or so, us CivFanatics had a huge discussion on Civ with 65 civilizations in it.
Now here comes the mod with the civs in it:
Heres a preliminary list(Changes will be made):
18 Firaxis ones
Sumeria
Israel
Maya
Canada
Carib
Scythia
Bulgaria
Songhai
Vikings
Scotland
Celts
Khmer
Carthrage
Ethiopia
Vietnam
Korea
Aboriginies
Austria
Ottomans
Portugal
Zululand
Minoa
Argentina
Brazil
Netherlands
Belgium
Kazhaks
Touaregs
Pakistan
Siam
Polynesians
Byzantine
Hawaii
Syria
Tibet
Finland
Sioux
Congo
Iroqouis
Inuits
Turks
Navajo
Mexico
Sweden
Poland
Australia
New Zealand

OPEN SLOTS:0


First Change:Turks replaced with Austrians
Second Change:Took out Soviet Union(will replace one leader with Soviet)
Third Change:Quebec gone,Macedonia gone, Gauls gone, Abyssinia gone,Mexico In, Turks back In.
Fourth Change:Holy Roman Empire gone, Assyria gone, Bulgaria In
Fifth Change:Sweden In, Armenia/Scythia(Need to Decide) In, Celts In, Madagascar gone, Maori In, Touaregs replace generic Berbers,Navajo In, Switzerland Gone, Kazhaks In, Tupis Gone.
Sixth Change:Khmer In, Huns Gone, Tibet In, Ukirane gone, South Africa combined with Zululand,Songhai In, Babylon combined with Sumeria
Seventh Change:Byzantines In, Micronesians Gone
Eigth Change:Malacca In, Vietnam Gone
Ninth Change: Vietnam In, Malacca Gone

It's Not Released Yet!!!
 
There's alot there I disagree with.. how about this.. you put a poll up containing those extra civs... and people can vote for their favourite.

Then do a second poll, a third etc etc and that way we'll find out in order of popularity what civs go in.

Grab say, another 18 to begin with.. then go through a process of looking at the others (the others that didn't get voted in), changing a few, removing a few and then doing another few polls....
 
Well, some I would want to look into further.. but heres an attempt..

Yes
Sumerians
Israelites
Mayans
Assyrians
Babylonians
Scandinavians (Vikings)
Celts (Scots/Welsh/Irish)
Carthaginians
Vietnamese
Koreans
Ottomans
Portuguese
Swiss
Canadians (Aussies & Canadians do have their own identity... and by saying 'oh Aussies are Brits & Canadians are French & Brits', well.. Brits are Anglos, Saxons & Celts!)
Australians
Dutch (Netherlands)
Polish

My own additions
Austrians

No
The Turks, no way, considering WW1 was the transition from the Ottoman Empire to Turkey, and the name Turkey originated from the Allies calling the Ottomans Turkeys or Turks because of the red hats they wore into battle.

Holy Roman Empire - Nope.
Soviet Union - They're Russian, basically
Finland - Scandinavian.. plus if you add Finland, why not add Sweden, Norway & Denmark?
Quebec - Canada...

Unsure about
Argentina & Brazil - Well we do have the Spanish & Portuguese
Belgium - Hmm....
Macedonia - Perhaps... or maybe Slavs? (Includes Yugoslavia, Croatia, etc)

And I'll get to these later...
South Africa
Carib
Abbysinia
Gauls
Huns
Ethiopia
Aboriginies
Minoa
Tupis
Berber
Pakistan
Siam
Polynesians
Micronesians
Hawaii
Syria
Ukraine
Sioux
Congo
Iroqouis
Inuits
Madagascar
 
About Soviet Union, I think its different from Russia. Yeah your right Turks are probably out. Why not Holy Roman Empire? Whats wrong with them? Austria will replace Turks. As of Finland, they're different from Vikings. I personally really want Argentina, Brazil, and Belgium in. As of Macedonians, I'm split 50-50.
 
*Gasp* You put in Brazil and Argentina, and you forgot Mexico how does that happen?
 
okay, i might put a soviet leader in and take out a russian one.
As of Mexico, I do not think they qualify as a civ yet.
 
Great_Scott said:
The Turks, no way, considering WW1 was the transition from the Ottoman Empire to Turkey, and the name Turkey originated from the Allies calling the Ottomans Turkeys or Turks because of the red hats they wore into battle.

Wrong. Totally wrong.

The term "Turk" has been used for centuries. The Turks themselves used the term to define their ethnicity (Turkmen, Turkoman, etc.).

It's not a European term.

The term Turkey, however, was first used to describe Anatolia by the Italians (Venetians to be exact), as they had extensive trading relations with the Ottomans back then. However, Ottoman = Turkish, Arab, Slavic, Armenian, what not, but the Turks as being the rulers.

The red hats you're talking about are called fez (fes in Turkish) and they were imported from Northern Africa, mostly from the Tunisian area, into the Turkish culture.

And during WWI, the Ottoman infantry (heavily consisting of Turks this time, although there were Arab regiments) did NOT wear the fez. They wore something else, a different hat, and it was NOT red.

The last time the red hats were used in military by infantry was towards the end of the 19th century. The beginning of the 20th century does NOT have ANY Turkish infantry wearing the fez.


Please don't promote false information about Turks, the Turkish nation, Turkey, and Turkish history. As a Turk, it's making me sad to see everyone with completely false information about the Turks, considering how people claiming they know something state the complete opposite of each other.

Turk = Anatolian Turk, Turkoman, Uzbek, Uigur, Kazak, Tartar, Khirgiz, Azerbaijani... Even in around 500 A.D. the Turkish states in Central Asia had the name Turk in them sometimes (Kokturk, or Gokturk, etc.)

The term has been used for centuries, and the name Turkey to the modern state was chosen from a term that had derived from Europe. Otherwise Ataturk would've called it Turkistan, but he didn't want the -stan suffix as it would render the country "just like any other". He wanted originality, so he chose Turkiye, which derives from "la Turchia", meaning "the land of the Turks".
 
I would include..

Poland representing the Northern Slavs.. Poland was one of the more powerful nations during the middle ages.

Bulgaria representing the Southern Slavs..

Russia representing the Eastern slavs...

.....while on the subject of Russia.. i would look into Kazakstan.. or something that describes the people that live around the caucus in russia.. they're kinda mongol looking.
 
Yes, I being Mexican found your coment about mexico rather offensive.
Posted by AlCosta15:As of Mexico, I do not think they qualify as a civ yet.
 
great idea, the only problen I see, is that there are a lot alot of repeats.
 
Caucasus , then you should include Chechnya =p

Curious , what is the point of this mod? WWII mod, or what?
 
Why mexico? You have Atzecs allready?

About USSR (Soviet Union) i actually live in a country what was former state on Soviet Union. It was and is mostly Russia. It was same big as tzar's Russia before communists revolution. Stalin, Hruzciov, Breznev they were only red tzars nothing else. So the communist leader is only nessesary who favors communism.

About Finland, they are definately not scandinavians, they are different racial orign "soome-ugry" like we call it in estonian (we estonians are the same racial orign) Hungaryans are too "soome-ugry". Scandinavians are germanic, gothic nations. Scandinavian countries are - Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Island
 
The list ain't extremely bad, but there are huge overlapings. Why Macedonian and Minoan if there are Greeks? It would make sense in an ancient only mod (like TAM) where one could have even more Greekish cultures (Mycenean, Athenian, Spartan, Syracusean, Ionian - depending on era and/or focus) but in a generic mod it's an overkill. It's like putting Ottomans, Turkmens and Turks as separate civs. BTW Turks should be in - not as Ottomans, but as Turks since this is their ethnic name anyway. Ethiopian and Abyssinia is another "too much". French and Franks and Germans and HRE are two more.

Wouldn't you like to define a focus of the mod, first? I mean, what era? What consists a (worthy to include) Civilization? Want balance for an equal spread all over the map? Want different civs by era (that would be an interesting mod, btw) or doesn't mind overlapping civs?
 
Top Bottom