What additional civilizations would you like to see in Civilization V

[SnowKomodo]

I'd totally be for that. Vietnam and Khmer in one, with a medieval/early modern SE Asian scenario (or *sigh* a Vietnam War scenario if they think it'd sell better).

Honestly, if a Vietnam War scenario is what it takes to sell copies, then it's completely worth it. But I'm confident in the fanbase and exposure that we could have Khmer and Vietnam in a DLC without any such scenario and still be successful



Question: Non-Southeast Asians and/or those who have limited knowledge of Southeast Asia:

Would you buy a Khmer/Vietnam DLC combo pack?

 

[ldvhl]

What nine civs would you choose for a new expansion if you had to include at least one of each region?

Here are the regions

1.Eastern Europe
2.Himalayas (And surrounding areas, ie. Tibet)
3.Eurasian steppes
4.SE Asia
5.Americas (Native and/or Colonial)
6.Africa (Mainly central and east)

EDIT:Sorry for all the quizzing I just like to know peoples opinions... a lot.

1. Ukraine
2. Nepal? It seems to be either between Nepal or Bhutan, so I'd go Nepal.
3. Timurid Empire
4. I'd be happy with the Khmer, Pagan, or Vietnam
5. Tsalagi
6. Great Zimbabwe

+3 for the full 9: Merina, Muisca, and Powhatan.

 

[ldvhl]

Question: Non-Southeast Asians and/or those who have limited knowledge of Southeast Asia:

Would you buy a Khmer/Vietnam DLC combo pack?

At the drop of a hat.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Question: Non-Southeast Asians and/or those who have limited knowledge of Southeast Asia:

Would you buy a Khmer/Vietnam DLC combo pack?

If I cast aside my Vietnamese heritage and considered myself a true 100% born 'Murican (i.e. turn from Vietnamese-American to Vietnamese-American), I'd buy it.

What nine civs would you choose for a new expansion if you had to include at least one of each region?

Here are the regions

1.Eastern Europe
2.Himalayas (And surrounding areas, ie. Tibet)
3.Eurasian steppes
4.SE Asia
5.Americas (Native and/or Colonial)
6.Africa (Mainly central and east)

EDIT:Sorry for all the quizzing I just like to know peoples opinions... a lot.

Didn't see this. Would be interesting -

1. Hungary
2. Kushans or Uighurs
3. Timurids
4. Vietnam, of course
5. Some Mississippian civ and/or their descendants, including the Shawnee, Caddoans, etc.
6. Nubia or Swahili or Hausa

 

[Iklabain]

Agreed. These two would sell well I believe. If there is another expansion, I firmly believe both deserve to be included

Make it happen, devs! If there is no expansion, make a DLC combo pack!! "The Southeast Asian bundle: Vietnam and Khmer"

Yes!

 

[phaethon16]

I actually don't want the Timurids very much. They would be such a brutal civ, and we already have the Huns and the Mongols which fill that niche pretty well. It could be a silk-road civ, but that wouldn't feel authentic. The reason I want the Mughals is that they are Timurid in heritage, but were also very culture oriented, so they would be less militaristic. Besides, it's an attractive way to split up India and it would force the devs to at least partially rewrite India, which I know a TON of people want.

 

[Iklabain]

What nine civs would you choose for a new expansion if you had to include at least one of each region?

Here are the regions

1.Eastern Europe
2.Himalayas (And surrounding areas, ie. Tibet)
3.Eurasian steppes
4.SE Asia
5.Americas (Native and/or Colonial)
6.Africa (Mainly central and east)

EDIT:Sorry for all the quizzing I just like to know peoples opinions... a lot.

Here are my own nine.
1. Hungary (Stephen I) & Ukraine/Kievan Rus' (Yaroslav)
2. Tibet (Songstan Gampo)
3. Timurids (Timur)
4. Vietnam (Trung Sisters) & Khmer (Suryavarman)*
5. Inuit (Apaanugpak) & Argentina (Jose de san martin)
6. Nubia (Tiye)

* I might switch this one out for Kongo in the Africa slot.

 

[phaethon16]

If you're going to switch one out, switch Tibet. It's too bad, but Tibet really would be too controversial. I think it would be interesting to have a double leader screen for the Trung sisters, with one being the happy sister who would ask for Declarations of Friendship and trades, and the other denouncing you and declaring war. I like that list a lot, though some of the leaders could be switched, like Hungary has 3 other choices that would be equally good. (Though I like the idea of a saint as a leader.)

 

[Iklabain]

If you're going to switch one out, switch Tibet. It's too bad, but Tibet really would be too controversial. I think it would be interesting to have a double leader screen for the Trung sisters, with one being the happy sister who would ask for Declarations of Friendship and trades, and the other denouncing you and declaring war. I like that list a lot, though some of the leaders could be switched, like Hungary has 3 other choices that would be equally good. (Though I like the idea of a saint as a leader.)

I know. This was kinda my perfect world list.
Although.... couldn't they have a Tibet dlc?

 

[phaethon16]

I have no idea, but I wouldn't count on it. We might see Nepal, but it doesn't interest me nearly as much as Tibet, and I don't expect to see Nepal either.

 

[Iklabain]

I have no idea, but I wouldn't count on it. We might see Nepal, but it doesn't interest me nearly as much as Tibet, and I don't expect to see Nepal either.

But hey. We still have the other civs to speculate about!

 

[phaethon16]

But hey. We still have the other civs to speculate about!

True. What do people think about Mexico as a civ?

 

[Iklabain]

I think Mexico would be a good civ to have.
Filling that gap would be great but I wouldn't put them on the top nine most needed civs list.

 

[Nujabes]

The Civ world so far:

Spoiler :

Africa looks ridiculously empty here, even if we recognize that a lot of the empires were relatively small geographically because of the incredible heterogeneity of the continent. From Africa I want the Ashanti, led by Yaa Asantewaa, and the Kingdom of Kongo under Afonso I. Throw in Nubia led by Amanirenas for good measure, and to represent a more ancient empire.

Argentina fills out South America well, and I think they'd be a good inclusion, particularly under Eva Peron.

Vietnam led by Trung Trac, and Khmer under Suryavarman sounds good to me for Asia.

Europe is hilariously overcrowded, but I still think Hungary should included with Matthias Corvinus

For an indigenous peoples, the Inuit are still a civilization I'd love to see and Apanuugpak is all I've got for them.

And finally, an infamous group of warriors to round out the list, the Timurids under Timur.

 

[Iklabain]

The Civ world so far:

Spoiler :

Africa looks ridiculously empty here, even if we recognize that a lot of the empires were relatively small geographically because of the incredible heterogeneity of the continent. From Africa I want the Ashanti, led by Yaa Asantewaa, and the Kingdom of Kongo under Afonso I. Throw in Nubia led by Amanirenas for good measure, and to represent a more ancient empire.

Argentina fills out South America well, and I think they'd be a good inclusion, particularly under Eva Peron.

Vietnam led by Trung Trac, and Khmer under Suryavarman sounds good to me for Asia.

Europe is hilariously overcrowded, but I still think Hungary should included with Matthias Corvinus

For an indigenous peoples, the Inuit are still a civilization I'd love to see and Apanuugpak is all I've got for them.

And finally, an infamous group of warriors to round out the list, the Timurids under Timur.

That pretty much sums it up.

 

[phaethon16]

I would like the Inuit, so long as they don't completely revolve around snow, tundra, and ice. Also, who is this leader that's been mentioned several times? I looked him up and got nothing on him.

 

[SnowKomodo]

The Civ world so far:

Spoiler :

Africa looks ridiculously empty here, even if we recognize that a lot of the empires were relatively small geographically because of the incredible heterogeneity of the continent. From Africa I want the Ashanti, led by Yaa Asantewaa, and the Kingdom of Kongo under Afonso I. Throw in Nubia led by Amanirenas for good measure, and to represent a more ancient empire.

Argentina fills out South America well, and I think they'd be a good inclusion, particularly under Eva Peron.

Vietnam led by Trung Trac, and Khmer under Suryavarman sounds good to me for Asia.

Europe is hilariously overcrowded, but I still think Hungary should included with Matthias Corvinus

For an indigenous peoples, the Inuit are still a civilization I'd love to see and Apanuugpak is all I've got for them.

And finally, an infamous group of warriors to round out the list, the Timurids under Timur.

Not my list civ-for-civ, but this is something I can definitely get behind. Especially Trung Trac and Suryavarman

The map changed slightly by the way since:

Spoiler :

 

[cybrxkhan]

Africa looks ridiculously empty here, even if we recognize that a lot of the empires were relatively small geographically because of the incredible heterogeneity of the continent. From Africa I want the Ashanti, led by Yaa Asantewaa, and the Kingdom of Kongo under Afonso I. Throw in Nubia led by Amanirenas for good measure, and to represent a more ancient empire.

Argentina fills out South America well, and I think they'd be a good inclusion, particularly under Eva Peron.

Vietnam led by Trung Trac, and Khmer under Suryavarman sounds good to me for Asia.

Europe is hilariously overcrowded, but I still think Hungary should included with Matthias Corvinus

For an indigenous peoples, the Inuit are still a civilization I'd love to see and Apanuugpak is all I've got for them.

And finally, an infamous group of warriors to round out the list, the Timurids under Timur.

Personally like seancolorado I don't agree with everything (I feel like others should get in before the Inuit and I'm not too fond of Argentina), but a civ roster like that is also something I won't mind.

 

[phaethon16]

Personally like seancolorado I don't agree with everything (I feel like others should get in before the Inuit and I'm not too fond of Argentina), but a civ roster like that is also something I won't mind.

Purely out of curiosity, what American civs do people like better than Argentina and why? I've never heard a lot of people tell me why Argentina isn't very popular and I'm genuinely curious. Please note, I may have an aneurism if someone says Gran Colombia and only gives Simon Bolivar as a reason.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Purely out of curiosity, what American civs do people like better than Argentina and why? I've never heard a lot of people tell me why Argentina isn't very popular and I'm genuinely curious. Please note, I may have an aneurism if someone says Gran Colombia and only gives Simon Bolivar as a reason.

I prefer Mexico. Regardless of historical importance, which I think is a moot point, and ignoring land overlap with the Aztecs and Mayans (which doesn't really matter)Argentina's culture is probably one of the most European of all the Latin American countries - not least because of Argentina's policy of genocide more or less (I dunno if that's the right term) against the native peoples of Argentina during the 19th and into the 20th centuries. Mexico on the other hand, is much more interesting to me. I find its culture (and I don't mean the stereotypical sombrero hats) as well as its history very fascinating. I also think its historically underrated - I consider it a rising regional power in the 19th century that was cut short by a disastrous war with the US, and a country that, if things had been better, could have still done pretty well in the 20th century. That said, I just don't find Argentina appealing at all - that's all. I know you'll disagree strongly, but that's your opinion and mine's mine. After Brazil and Mexico though Argentina would probably be my choice, though a reluctant one.


And yes, I also think Bolivar should be in, whether you like it or not. But I know well your stance, so I won't try converting you on that one.