Who should the 18th Civ be?

[bob rulz]

Well br, with so many comments on Scandinavia I can't refrain myself from answering.



Arguably Scandinavia is more a civilisation in it's own right than all those post-roman countries in the game like France, Germany, England etc (don't get me wrong though, I do want them in the game as well).

Scandinavia has been suffering from internal powerstruggles that's true, but so has Germany and Greece for example, and apart from the fact that it was completely united for some time, having the same language, culture and traditions to me qualifies as being a civilisation.

When Firaxis renames the Japanese empire to the Samurai Empire and the English/British to the Redcoats, the Zulus to the Impis etc, then I will agree to having the Viking Empire and not Scandinavia.
If Firaxis for some rason wants to single out the viking era from the rest of Scandinavias history (wich they wouldn't do to most other civs) then IMO they can elaborate the citylist (as in Civ4).

But you're missing the key point here.

Scandinavia has NEVER been a united political entity. Germany, Greece, Japan, China, etc, have obviously been divided at points in history, but they also at several points in history and currently have been united political entities as well, and when they are united is when they always reach the peak of their power.

Greece is more complicated, as they were generally only united when either fending off the Persians, or when united by Alexander the Great (which is a status that didn't last very long), and then of course within the last hundred-odd years, but their cultural legacy is too great to ignore. On the other hand, Alexander the Great's empire is generally what is being referred to in Civilization, and it was by far the largest empire of its time.

Scandinavia on the other hand has always been divided between Norway, Denmark, and Sweden or some combination thereof. Even in the days of the Vikings, tension existed between the different regions and they could hardly be called politically united.

 

[Ingvina Freyr]

If your key point is being a united political entity at some point then the fact that Scandinavia was completely united in the Kalmar Union between 1397-1521 should suffice.

 

[The_J]

It's easy to be carried-away or mislead by all the hints and clues that can be found in articles and previews. Aztec warrior artwork alone doesn't necessarily confirm the Aztecs. I remember the civ4 artfiles included images of scrapped leaders such as Richard Lionheart for example. I bet that among the so called "confirmed 17" civs there are some that will appear first in the expansions, and I would be very much surprised if Spain and Persia were not both in from start.

The new screenshots from IGN show the aztec warrior ingame, and i also think, a magazine has confirmed them now (in the new infos from weplayciv.com).

 

[Huayna Capac357]

My voting love goes Persia->Spain->Ethiopia->Sumer/Babylon. Go Persia!

I agree. We're all rooting for you Persia

 

[Zenon_pt]

That last news of the Italian magazine, said the Imortal (Persia!!!) and the Siam Elephants (India ?!?).

So the 18th is Persia!

 

[The_J]

Siam Elephants (India ?!?).

Most people here think, that the Siam Elephants are for Siam...

 

[cybrxkhan]

Of course it's still from only one magazine, so we can't exactly 100% be sure.

 

[TheDervish]

Of course it's still from only one magazine, so we can't exactly 100% be sure.

Persians were apparently mentioned in a Dutch magazine doing an article on Civ V.

The Italian writers insist they are correct.

 

[Magma]

If your key point is being a united political entity at some point then the fact that Scandinavia was completely united in the Kalmar Union between 1397-1521 should suffice.

That and Canute the Great ruled most of Scandinavia too.