what new civs ther might be.

[Vietcong]

what new civs do u think will be in the expansion pack??? i came up wit hthis list.. rember ther will be 8..

1. summer[we know for sher]
2.myans[this one too]
3.inca
4.austro-hungary
5.assyrains
6.israel[ancient israel]
7.byzantium
8.poland[thay used to be very stong in mid ages]
thes are just some ideas what thay might be

 

[Vietcong]

allso plz vote on the pole.. what do u think?? many ppl might say no becuss facist have done bad thigs like the killing of jews.. to thos ppl i remind u that the ppl who did that [the nazis] wher NOT facist but nasitnol socalist.. or nazis for short...

 

[Crowpocalyptic1]

Fascism and Communism are not wrong at all. These have been used throughout timewith NO problems, but when Hitler came along, with the Nazis (National Socialist Republic, if I remember correctly, which is actually an oxymoron) who WERE fascist, ruins the reputation of said government. It's not acceptable at all now, simply because of what Hitler did. But, Hitler was, indeed, a great leader. Don't get me wrong, I do not condone his actions, nor support them, but he was such a great speaker. He could convince you, though Magellen and others have proved otherwise, that the world is FLAT.

AGAIN, I don't support his actions, nor that of any government body or leader. I don't condone nor support Bush's actions either.

And when it comes to Communism, when it's TRUE Communism, which would NEVER happen, there's no possible way it COULD happen, would be the ultimate government, even though with TRUE Communism, there's a lack of government, similar to that of anarchy.

 

[John-LP]

Facism is a failed type of government, even moreso than a true Communist government. Facism is practiced in very few places and all of those places are toilets of the earth. So I don`t think Firaxis needs to waste time on such a useless idea. Besides, facism is more of a government policy, rather than a government type.

 

[warpstorm]

Considering the timeframe of the new scenarios in Conquests (mostly ancient from what's on the website), I doubt that Fascism would be included. More likely, the missing Theocracy since that was one of the common ones in that timeframe.

 

[maverick_mw]

"Facism is a failed type of government, even moreso than a true Communist government"

Thats not entirley true. A true communist state has never existed in the history of time.

By definition a communist state is "A scheme of equalizing the social conditions of life; specifically, a scheme which contemplates the abolition of inequalities in the possession of property, as by distributing all wealth equally to all, or by holding all wealth in common for the equal use and advantage of all."

A true communist state would not have a single leader directing resources and whatnot, instead a political party. Ultimatly any attempts at a communist state have led to a single dictator siezing power, and whilst claiming to support the communist ideal, has never actually achieved it.

Personally though, I think fascism should not be included as it isn't so much a government type than a way of thinking, as John-LP says. And on a game level, the differences from communism would not be different at all, considering we only have a few basic factors to take into consideration: hapiness(luxuries), science, money and military support.

They should bring back fundamentalism from Civ2 though.

And besides, what does this poll have to do with the thread topic, the names of the new Civs have already been released as far as I'm aware.

 

[amirsan]

ISRAEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They better put that civ in... BTW, it is one of the oldest civilizations in the world...

 

[Louis XXIV]

That's a socialist state, a Communist state is a state whose government is the Communist party.

I think Facism is very similar to Despotism or Communism, so I wouldn't include it.

BTW, the confirmed civs are:

Sumer (stated to be in the game, picture of Gilgamesh leaderhead)
Maya (Picture of Mayab Javelineer)
Inca (Picture of Incan Scout)
Hittites (Picture of Mursilis leaderhead)

 

[Benderino]

Why is Sumer in? Its just pre-Babylon.
Since Sumer is in, thus Italy should be in, because it is different from Rome, just as Sumer is different from Babylon.

my mistake, wrong place.

 

[Anti-EUA]

as for the poll, i would say include it.
as for the civs, the same vietcong said, but no byzantium, instead portugal or netherlands

 

[Yoda Power]

Originally posted by Benderino
Why is Sumer in? Its just pre-Babylon.
Since Sumer is in, thus Italy should be in, because it is different from Rome, just as Sumer is different from Babylon.

the Sumer caoital was´nt Babylon, the Italian capital is Rime if im not mistaken.

I think the other civs should(and might) be:

Khmer
Tibet
Polynesia
Portugal

 

[The Last Conformist]

FYI: The official name of Hitler's party was the "National-Socialist German Worker's Party". It's hardly an oxymoron - there's been plenty of nationalistically minded socialists - but it does suggest a rather more lefty profile than the thing actually had.

In-game, I do think it would be nice with a government representing modern non-socialist dictatorships. There's no reason it must be called "Fascism", however. Since that is for not entirely rational reasons more politically sensitive than is "Communism", why not simply call it "Dictatorship"? I imagine it would be a cross 'tween Republic and Monarchy; no WW, no or few free units, Republic-level corruption and no commerce bonus.

 

[John-LP]

the state of Socialism, in theory, is supposed to be the intermediate stage between Democracy (or whatever) and full-blown Communism. The middle stage of transition. However, what a truly Communist government is, is not:

"A scheme of equalizing the social conditions of life; specifically, a scheme which contemplates the abolition of inequalities in the possession of property, as by distributing all wealth equally to all, or by holding all wealth in common for the equal use and advantage of all."

Why? Because it is impossible. No two people will ever be equal and ever have an equal chance in the world. Also, the moment you get rid of leadership and government some Hitler or Stalin-like person is gonna step in and take over. Communism does`nt work.

 

[The Last Conformist]

I'd happily defend to distinction between Sumerian and Babylonian civilization, but as far as the game is concerned, the "Babylonian" civ is rather a "Mesopotamian" one, encompassing Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians (and Chaldees and various other less well-known groups). I'm highly curious what they're going to do for the Sumerian city list.

I hope the Khmers, or some other SE Asian civ, makes it into Conquests. But what I really hope for is Ethiopia.

 

[Louis XXIV]

What culture group would you put Ethipoia in?

 

[Yoda Power]

Originally posted by Louis XXIV
What culture group would you put Ethipoia in?

Middle east, thats what the zulus are in, and IMHO, thats the best choice.

 

[warpstorm]

I'm assuming that the Sumerians are in because there will be a 'Fertile Crescent' scenario that has a few of the Ancient Civs in the area of the Tigris and Euphrates, not because they are one of the best choices for a 'full game' of Civ.

Actually, there may be more new civs than just the 7 new Civs for the full game (not 8, because of limitations in the engine). For example, the Feudal Japan scenario could have over a dozen clans (read this as new Civs) just for it.

 

[Yoda Power]

Originally posted by warpstorm
Actually, there may be more new civs than just the 7 new Civs for the full game (not 8, because of limitations in the engine). For example, the Feudal Japan scenario could have over a dozen clans (read this as new Civs) just for it.

Firaxis said there was going to be 8 new civs.

 

[warpstorm]

And maybe the 8th civ (let's call them the (deleted-that'd be telling), for sake of argument) would have to be swapped in by hand if you want to play them. I remember discussions that the limit of 31 would be quite hard to remove because of some bit-field based coding.

 

[Yoda Power]

Originally posted by warpstorm
And maybe the 8th civ (let's call them the (deleted-that'd be telling), for sake of argument) would have to be swapped in by hand if you want to play them. I remember discussions that the limit of 31 would be quite hard to remove because of some bit-field based coding.

Maybe, but im still hoping for a new 48 civs limit.