There should be a total of 50 civs(or more) including the expansions for civ 5

[King Kalmah]

First, if you play a larger map and don't try conquering and eliminating everyone, there will be more than 3-5 civilizations left. But I don't get how it's "sad" that there's only a few civs left either, but whatever.

Second, how exactly is increasing the amount of available civilizations in the game going to change this? They could make 50 different civilizations, or they could make 130 like some people asked for, but that will only make more civilizations possible to be played in the game, it's not going to increase the amount of civilizations that are actually on the map or how many make it to the end game. So if there's 18 or 50 different available civilizations, either way you're going to end up with the same amount of civilizations at the end game. If you want to play a game that has 50 different civilizations on a single map, well, then go play EU because that isn't and never will be Civilization.

You don't want to start against 20 or 25 or even 30 oppenents?

Thats what I think the true question is....

not how many civs we want,but how many can be in the game....

If Civ started raising the starting number of civs the end game might be more like real life where world wars would be fought by groups of allies and not just one vs 4 or 5 enemies...

 

[bonafide11]

Do you know how slow the game would go if there were 30 civilizations on a single map? Do you know how big the maps would have to be? It'd have to be a completely different game. That wouldn't work in Civilization.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

Just because there's a bigger pool to choose from doesn't mean that there have to be more civs on a map.

And I played with 31 civs on a map in Civ III and it wasn't too bad.

 

[Roland Johansen]

In my view, after about 20 to 30 civs, adding another civilization adds very little gameplay to the game for a relatively large development cost. I'd much rather have interesting new features in an expansion pack than 8 more civilizations.

In my view, a huge map with many civilization produces an epic game and I like to play epic games. But I guess, I don't need more than 20-25 civs for the most epic games that my computer can handle. Any more doesn't really add a lot I guess.

 

[thungrim]

I can't help but think that even if there was 50 civilizations in the line up people would still be complaining.

"Civ should have at least 150 (if not more) Civ's at launch!"

Not to mention that they'd still miss out on various culturally identifiable people's and earn the wrath of armchair game designers everywhere.

Or to put it bluntly: Is anyone else bored to tears with all the talk about how many and which civs are in the game?

 

[nunor]

Or to put it bluntly: Is anyone else bored to tears with all the talk about how many and which civs are in the game?

If you don't like the "which civs are in the game" discussions, then you should be all for the 50 civs.

If there were 50 civs in the game, Poland and Canada would probably be included (well, maybe not Canada...) and you would see the end of the "Y ISNT [name of obscure nation] IN TEH GAME?!" threads. Most of them, at least.

I love the rant of such discussions; that's also one of the reasons I don't want to see 50 civs in the game.

 

[awesome]

Honestly, I think 50 itself is the perfect place to stop. It's a good maximum number for Civs.

same. well, maybe a few less than that. you could definitely get a bunch more unique civs in the game than they usually do, even with the unique ability and personality system of civ 5.
that and i like big maps and don't think i'd mind 49 opponents at a time.

 

[Gedemo]

More! ;-)

 

[Koning]

I think >50 will be too much. Users can mod civs like Canada, Lithuania or Tibet if they like. Though the live speech could be a problem..

Nevertheless, I'd be dissapointed if there will be only six new civs in the expansion pack. I think two Xpacks including 10 civs will be fine, that makes 38 Civ5 civs. Four more than Civ4 and you can cover all important civs and regions with it.

 

[eleazzaar]

Too many civilizations leads to empire colors that are too close. (If Civ V works like IV)
I hate having a world where half of my opponent civs are slightly different shades of green.

And i agree with the other posters: quality over quantity. it's more important to have interesting and well balanced civs than simply have a lot of them.

 

[CHEESE!]

even BTS started getting too many civs. Most of the minor ones I have no interest in playing, and rarely do they even come up with random opponents.

Who are these minor civs? Khmer were pretty damn powerful, and a SEA civ was necessary for diversity.

Zulu? Well... OK, but Shaka really needs to be in, being arguably as great a commander as Napoleon.

Native Americans? The name isn't everything. NA represents Sioux, which were pretty dominant and recognizable today. If Hiawatha was in () they would have Iroquois too, which were a real empire.

And who else? What minor civs???

 

[Rusty Edge]

For a game I like no more than 10 or 12 civs at a time.

With expansions, I figure between 24 and 36 civs is enough to keep it fresh & interesting without becoming nondescript annd unbalanced.

I would like to see a "Civbuilder", so that we could add & save our own custom civ into the mix.

 

[mattigus]

This game needs 50 civs, 300 technologies, and FREE CANDY.

 

[Craxymaxy]

I personally like playing games with lots of different civs and i personally find the less-known "minor" civilizations more interesting to play against because i don't necessarily know the exact personality of that leader (it also teaches me about lesser known leaders and cities).

50+ would be nice if it was done in a balanced and unique (at least by sub-region) way.

 

[Zhahz]

A civ is just a flavored container for stats - traits, techs, UUs, etc. There are only so many combinations of traits you can put together. Having extra civs just to have them is pretty much pointless.

Your average civ player (out of millions, most of whom don't visit this site, use mods, etc) want name recognition from their civs - basic world history 101 stuff, not every civ you can remotely justify or pull out of your hat.

Since the game is so easily modded there's no reason a player who wants obscure civs in their game can't create and/or add them, right? No real reason to bloat the core game with excessive data most people won't care about.

 

[-FC-Commando]

50 sounds great. Netherlands and Serbia are my favs.

 

[Fire Bringer]

50 civs would be nice, just make it more likely to get more important civs. We don't need more than 100 civs though.

 

[nyk45]

Actually, around 35 civs, like BtS, would be ideal. Nice variety, and it's hard to get a game without 'superpowers'. I'd have to say it's probably the best civ roster out of any strategy game.

If Civ V gets like 3 expansion packs, with 5 or 6 civilizations each, we're cool. Even if it doesn't, 18 is more than enough for the game to work perfectly.

 

[ilikepies]

I agree. I'd rather have lower number of distinct civs with meaningful differences than a long list only differentiated by their names and leaderheads.

Yes. Basically, anything that doesn't qualify as a great power shouldn't be in there.

 

[Jamuka]

SMAC only had 7 civs, which allowed them all to be very unique and interesting.