You're not going to be seeing Israel, you'll be seeing Palestine instead...
Two civs I'd like to see are the Hittites and the Scythians, but I know they have no chance of getting in
id vote for Palestine and
Which Civ do you want in Civ V?
- Thread starter nzk13
- Start date
id vote for Palestine and
Kenny B
Chieftain
Anyone remember learning about the Goths? They are barbarian like, but they did have a government and a monarch. They put a big beating on the Holy Roman Empire.
I also think Vietnam, Canada, and Poland should be in it.
I also think Vietnam, Canada, and Poland should be in it.
The Almighty dF
Pharaoh
Goths and Vietnam? Maybe. I'd kinda doubt Vietnam, they'd probably stick to the Khmer, as they'd also probably make a generic celt/barbarian civ in place of Goths as well.
Canada and Poland? Kinda doubt for similar reasons (well, as far as Poland is concerned.) Instead of adding Poland, they'll probably keep a USSR leader for Russia.
How is that an instead of? Poland wasn't part of the USSR, and the argument for its inclusion isn't based on its status within the last few centuries but its status as a Renaissance power.
Adder
Chieftain
Either Austria or the Holy Roman Empire.
I think the house of Habsburg needs to be represented in civ5. Perhaps through Spain?
I think the house of Habsburg needs to be represented in civ5. Perhaps through Spain?
The Almighty dF
Pharaoh
Poland -was- under heavy Soviet influence, and I figure the Eastern Block (so this also probably means Czech, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Albania seem unlikely too) nations are represented already (to Firaxis, at least) by having a USSR leader for Russia, and I kinda doubt Renaissance-Poland would find its way into Civ5, except maybe as the Surprise Civ (kinda like Civ4's Mali, which came completely out of left field.)
Keep in mind, I'm not saying Poland isn't worthy or anything. Just going by the standards that Firaxis seems to have in terms of civs. Normally they go for the "Oh yeah, that civ that did x, y, and z" type civs. Hence why we don't have, say... Italy, the Huns ("You mean like, Atilla?"), or really any African civs beyond Mali, Zulu, Egypt, and Ethiopia, or any modern South American civs.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for adding Poland. Personally, I kinda just want as many civs as possible, as long as they all get equal treatment (I'm tired of some civs coming across as... half-assed. I'm looking at you, "Native America". You and your totem pole, ******** AI, and even worse city names.) I just kinda doubt they'd make the cut for the same reason why Firaxis prefers going for the huge encompassing civs (Holy Roman Empire) rather than the noteworthy countries that were part of those civs (or grouped in with those civs.)
As a friend put it, "Taiwan and Tibet are China, the Franks are the HRE, and everyone in the middle east is Sala-freaking-din."
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
If that were the case, it could be done through Spain or Germany with Charles V. But no dynasty is that special ... Charles V or anyone else should get in on their own merits.
Soundwαvє ▼
Warlord
Tupi/Guarani is a native Brazilian tribe...
I thought the Guarani where more centered in Paraguay? But did the Tupi actually have cities? I remember reading that missionaries saw the Tupi commit cannibalism and baptized it out of them. Now, I'm not saying it's something to be cherished, but it does make them unique, but there's a reason almost all civilizations 'looked down' on cannibalism. I'm fairly sure they lived in tribes. I don't really think they're deserving. Although if we're looking for another South American civilization that isn't right next to the Inca Empire, then the Guarani get my vote over the Mapuche.
Kenny B
Chieftain
I alson believe the hittits should be in civ 5. I think they have a chance. I think there have native america, they where alot of hassal for the USA, even know the indians are casuing the us trouble.
They will probably combine all the indian tribes, like apache, sioux, navajo, iroqouis, and etc
They will probably combine all the indian tribes, like apache, sioux, navajo, iroqouis, and etc
Soundwαvє ▼
Warlord
They were all along the Brazil, Paraguay, Bolivia, etc... But when the portugueses invaded Brazil and killed, converted and slaved the Tupis they only remain more in Paraguay.
Tupis have some sub tribes and one of those is the Tupi-Guarani or just Guarani and Guaranis had several sub tribes, each one similar but with a different language and customs and most of them isn't cannibals maybe a small subtribe, but not the major tribe Guarani.
And they had settlements with more than 1000, but just a few and most even don't consider that a city, just a group of houses in the jungle.
Tupis have some sub tribes and one of those is the Tupi-Guarani or just Guarani and Guaranis had several sub tribes, each one similar but with a different language and customs and most of them isn't cannibals maybe a small subtribe, but not the major tribe Guarani.
And they had settlements with more than 1000, but just a few and most even don't consider that a city, just a group of houses in the jungle.
Even though I'm a Finn, it would be great to see Sweden in the game. Sweden was quite a player in European history until they self-destructed their armies and the Swedish empire spanned large tracts of land. Gustav Vasa would be a nice leader to play (holding his nice rapier in hand, naturally).
Also, naturally, Vikings could easily be combined with the Swedes (but no horned helmets, please). A raider unit for ancient times, hakkapeliitta for the later unit. Strengths in trade/commerce and one of whatever suitable options Civ5 will offer and you have a nice civilization to play.
Also, naturally, Vikings could easily be combined with the Swedes (but no horned helmets, please). A raider unit for ancient times, hakkapeliitta for the later unit. Strengths in trade/commerce and one of whatever suitable options Civ5 will offer and you have a nice civilization to play.
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
It's another reason why we need leader-dependent (rather than civ-dependent) city-lists. You'll never ever get Sweden as a civ while the Scandinavians are there, and neither should you; but adding Gustavus Adolphus as another leader of the Scandinavians, with a different city-list, could work.
Mad Man
Your lord and master
I had over 68 picks
, I should consolidate my picks a bit but I've already decided to keep the Americas as is. So what should get cut to keep the list a healthy 50?
Pan_Mieczyslaw
Chieftain
There is no common Czech-Polish-Russian-Romanian-Bulgarian Civ, Soviet influence's been lasting for about 45 years. Most of those nations had had their own states for about X centuries before... Looking at them only from XXth cent. point of view is not suitable for wide historical perspective game, isn't it?
However I can imagine Slavic Civ (so there would be common ethnic roots- Slavic tribes) with Croatian, Czech, Polish, Serbian, Ukrainian and Russian cities, and few - not only Soviet
leaders. Present situation, enforces stereotype that "From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic" is only Russia...Well, every Civ V player would like to play as historical leader of his home country, and crush its neighbours
, however that seem to be wishful thinking...
Dragonflow
Emperor
I don't think that a Slavic civ would make it. The Slavic nations don't really like each other and if such a civ is included there would be some controversy. There would be a lot of crying from people all over Eastern-Europe especially from the South-Slavs, Croatians and Serbs. I'm not saying that Russians, Ukrainians and Poles wouldn't be angry for being together but they didn't fight a war less than 15 years ago. Better keep it greater Russia (Russia, Belarus and Ukraine) and add some Slavic civilization in an Expansion pack.
Pangur Bán
Deconstructed
I don't think that a Slavic civ would make it. The Slavic nations don't really like each other and if such a civ is included there would be some controversy. There would be a lot of crying from people all over Eastern-Europe especially from the South-Slavs, Croatians and Serbs. I'm not saying that Russians, Ukrainians and Poles wouldn't be angry for being together but they didn't fight a war less than 15 years ago. Better keep it greater Russia (Russia, Belarus and Ukraine) and add some Slavic civilization in an Expansion pack.
The Slavs though are not just some linguistic abstraction. They were once one people, and spoke the same language (right up into the 12th century). I think the pre-conversion Slavs would be a viable civ, though not a very high priority one. Possibly people might prefer early Slavic states like Great Moravia, the Slavic predecessor to the Kingdom of Hungary. Though I think Hungary itself or Poland are bigger priorities.
RABicle
Chieftain
This is the first I've heard the Dutch colonising Australia...
(You're thinking South Africa)
