Which New Civs should be in CIV V

[Argetnyx]

But purple is universally associated with Rome (or so I was aware); it is the colour of royalty and the Emperors. Red, OTOH, is undeniably associated with Russia, Japan and England. That has been the colour of those empires, whereas red is merely loosely associated with Rome, less so than purple.

I'm tired of repeating myself. :suicide:

 

[Truronian]

Venice
Israel/Hebrews
Poland
Brazil

Would be my choices.

 

[Camikaze]

I'm tired of repeating myself. :suicide:

I think I found the main reason for confusion. The purple of Rome was 'Tyrian Purple', which looks remarkably like maroon.

Spoiler :

And yes, whilst Roman soldiers often wore red, those that became emperor were said to 'don the purple', due to the purple robes worn.

 

[steviejay]

There hasn't been a thread like this since Civ 3 where I haven't said it so I'll say it again,

Scotland

 

[Camikaze]

I think England covers that sufficiently...
j/k

 

[Dumanios]

The civs that should be in.
USA
Maya
Egypt
Carthage
Arabia
Babylon
Sumeria
Israel
Turkey
Persia
India
China
Japan
Mongolia
Russia
Scandinavia
Germany
Greece
Rome
France
Spain
Portugal
Holland
Britain

 

[Churchill's Hat]

My picks for new civs in Civ V (eliminating the HRE and Native America):
Austria
Poland
Sweden
Vietnam
Brazil
Iroquois
Sioux

Also, I would replace England with the UK, change the flag, and redo the city list to make more Industrial Era cities and include cities in Wales and Scotland.

On another subject...

The Danish Empire is just as eligible (if not more) as a civilization as many of the civs in the game.

Let's take the French as an example. The French Empire under Napoleon didn't last as long as the Danish Empire did, and what about the Germans? The closest they ever came to a true German Empire was under Hitler (unless you count the Holy Roman Empire, which was really just as French as it was German).

If you are going to add Mali, Zululand, Germany, France, Celts etc., then Denmark should have its place too. Not only was it the only noticable Nordic Empire, it is also the world's oldest kingdom.

Here's the thing: with Mali and Zululand, they are representing regions that go otherwise unrepresented. The Celts controlled much of Europe at certain points. Germany was a world power for 75 years (and Prussia a European power long before that), and France was a world power for over 300 years. Denmark never achieved much power outside of northern Europe, and the Normans weren't loyal to the Danish king (also, the Danes only ruled half of England). Yes, there is an argument to put Denmark in, but Denmark isn't as eligible as the 32 civs in Civ IV.

Finally-- the Holy Roman Empire was only as much French as it was German under Charlemagne.

 

[steviejay]

I think England covers that sufficiently...
j/k

that's fighting talk

Don't understand why it's England and not 'Britain' but there you go

 

[Camikaze]

It probably is just to make the distinction between England & Scotland & Wales (& N.Ireland). After all, it was the English monarchs to invaded those places and took them over, when they had their own ruling systems.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Scandinavia (not vikings)
Poland
Austria

Nothing more needs to be in Europe afterwards.

 

[Camikaze]

Wouldn't you think Poland-Lithuania would be more appropriate than just Poland? And perhaps Sweden instead of Scandinavia?

 

[Truronian]

Venice was a major European power for a millenium. I'd say it is the most pressing addition in Europe.

 

[steviejay]

It probably is just to make the distinction between England & Scotland & Wales (& N.Ireland). After all, it was the English monarchs to invaded those places and took them over, when they had their own ruling systems.

on fear of starting a debate, they did invade us, but they took over nothing. Scotland and England joined in 1707 as part of a Political Unification. Just personally think that Britain would sound better than England as after the union was when Britain really started to become the Empire it was.

To use the same argument, in Civ there's Greeks, even though at the time they were about, it was seperate City states, Sparta, Athens, Argos, Corinth etc

 

[Camikaze]

Britain refers to the physical land, however. It would be like calling Spain the Iberian Empire, or India the Sub-Continental Empire. England refers to the entity itself, however. The United Kingdom would be the only other option, but that would exclude the possibilities of having leaders before 1707, such as Elizabeth (or it would be like having Julius Caesar of Italy). Perhaps a good compromise would be 'England' and the 'British Empire' being used as the common and expanded civ names respectively.

 

[nutnut]

Britain refers to the physical land, however. It would be like calling Spain the Iberian Empire, or India the Sub-Continental Empire. England refers to the entity itself, however. The United Kingdom would be the only other option, but that would exclude the possibilities of having leaders before 1707, such as Elizabeth (or it would be like having Julius Caesar of Italy). Perhaps a good compromise would be 'England' and the 'British Empire' being used as the common and expanded civ names respectively.

If it was the United Kingdom then it wouldn't have any monarchs before 1804 or something. before that it was simply Great Britain and Ireland.

 

[Yared]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminology_of_the_British_Isles

 

[TheLastOne36]

Wouldn't you think Poland-Lithuania would be more appropriate than just Poland? And perhaps Sweden instead of Scandinavia?

No, cause Lithuania was nothing. It was more of a title than anything. Poles were vast vast majority in Lithuania, and the lithuanians probably didn't number more than 100,000 till the industrial age. Poland was the bigger brother by far.

And Scandinavia can include Denmark and the Vikings, so Scandinavia is better than Sweden.

 

[Silv Something]

Only in Civ3 the default Roman color is red. In Civ2, it is white. I don't remember the Civ1 color schemes, but I do remember that red is the Barbarian color there.

As to the question - get rid of the irrelevant weak trash like Rome, Egypt or China and replace it with deserving, mighty and significant civilizations like Liechtenstein, Free City of Danzig, Nepal, Bhutan and Barbados.

And add Andorra!

 

[Camikaze]

And Scandinavia can include Denmark and the Vikings, so Scandinavia is better than Sweden.

I don't think it is a good idea, though, to be making up civilizations that never existed in order to cast a blanket over a wide group. Just like Native Americans and Celts. It would be better to have a specific group represented than a general geographical area.

 

[Joecoolyo]

I don't think it is a good idea, though, to be making up civilizations that never existed in order to cast a blanket over a wide group. Just like Native Americans and Celts. It would be better to have a specific group represented than a general geographical area.

Agreed