Pool on XP Civs... - Page 2

Dom Pedro II · May 3, 2002, 13:08

Well, this thread is really more of just speculation of what we expect the programmers to put in as opposed to which we'd like to personally see.

I do know that I'll take just about anybody because I've grown quite tired of the same 16 civilizations. I don't want to be able to play 24 civs on one map... 16 is certainly enough, but I would like to be a little more surprised and not just be exploring and suddenly see a green border and go "Uh! There's the Greeks!" I want a little diversity so that it can really be just about anybody in any given game. The combinations will make it more interesting. Besides, seeing the same friggin' leaders' faces staring back at me gets tedious as well. A rotation will be good enough for me.

dunk · May 3, 2002, 13:25

My wish is that we can add in as many civs as we would like. I would add in any I see here and probably make my own. The reason I don't add new ones now is because I would have to replace one of the current civs.

dunk · May 3, 2002, 13:26

Oh, I think the new civs will make the list look almost identical to Civ II. But, the Inca will be in there.

ahenobarb · May 3, 2002, 13:43

My guesses for civ in the XP are:

definite:

Spanish
Viking
Carthaginians (Phoenicians)
Mongols
Celts

edging in:
Incas
Turks
Koreans

---------------------------------
XP=Expansion Pack

Eroberer=Your a bore

Random Passerby · May 3, 2002, 15:29

As to my thoughts on actual civs to make it in, I think the favorite is definitely the Mongols. They've got the history, they've got the name-brand recognition, and they fill a good spot on the map.

Second up is a bit of a toss-up, but my gut feeling is the Incas. South America is completely unrepresented, they're well known, and they do have some historical significance.

After that things get a bit sketchier. Vikings are probably in; everybody knows about the Vikings, they're culturally distinct, and they have reasonable map placement as well. The Arabs and the Turks are also promising candidates; they're culturally and geographically distinct [as compared to existing civs; they do overlap a little between each other culturally], as well as widely recognized. It's a bit iffy if they'll both make it in--the Mideast is getting a bit crowded here, but hey, it is one of the cradles of civilization.

Beyond those, it's pretty much anything goes--it depends on whether the design team decides to emphasize more influential civilizations with mass appeal, or goes for more unique, exotic cultures in an attempt to diversify the map. Europe is already massively crowded, so it's probably unlikely that the expansion will be very Euro-centric; even given the fact that the game will probably still only support 16 players (which would mean that in a random game you'd rarely end up with all the European civs in play, crowding for territory), that's a bit too crowded for comfort. The Vikings have some unique territory to crash on, but if all the European candidates getting bandied about were put in, you'd end up with twelve civs of two cities when the game actually played out. Spain remains a definite possibility, but after that I'd be surprised if any more continental European civs were put in--I'd say Vikings, Spain, and one other absolute tops for European civs.

I definitely wouldn't count out "space filler" civs, however. The very fact that the Iroquois were put in shows that the designers aren't against the idea--and although they have a history with the Civ series, I do remember quite a few people complaining about the Zulu as well.

Miznia · May 3, 2002, 15:56

I'm going to propose that Firaxis will not simply use the Civ2 list. I think there will be no Carthaginians (culture groups be damned), Celts, or (especially) Sioux.

my guesses
1. Spanish (imagine if there's no Spanish...?!)
2. Incas
3. Mongols (sigh)
4. Vikings (ick)
5. Ethiopians or Nubians (yuck either way; Firaxis, if you're reading this please just rename your Menelek head to "Sundiata" and change the city names to Mali ones)
6. Koreans (danger from the Mongols' introduction, but I'm praying)
7. Arabs or Turks, probably Turks (I'd prefer Arabs, but not at the expense of admitting Hebrews)
8. Brazil looks awfully empty... But I don't really know. This is what I see so far, ignoring Brazil:

Euro: Eng Fre Ger Rus VIK
Med: Rom Gk Egy SPA (TUR?)
MEast: Bab Per Zul ETH TUR/ARAB
Asi: Chi Jap Ind MON KOR
Ame: Ame Iro Azt INC

Here's a question: What civs are you praying Firaxis WON'T include, but think they will...?

Groovus · May 3, 2002, 18:27

Some different ideas here, but I'll start with the most likely:

Norse (Vikings) - won't buy the expansion without them. For UU I'd prefer berserkers over longboats, make the berserkers 4/1/1 iron units, if longboats, make them galley based and give them a +1 range and the ability to attack coastal cities. They should be expansionist and commercial (they were traders, settlers and farmers moreso than warriors despite what the movies would have you believe).

Mongols - UU mounted archers (not sure what the stats would be).

Ottoman Turks - UU Jannisary (elite cavalry units). How you can leave out an empire/nation that began in the 1200's and is still around today is beyond me. These could quailfy as either Arab or Asian.

Iberian (Spain/Portugal): Lots of possibilities here.

After these it's more up in the air. Some ideas -

I like the Mayans or even Toltecs moreso than the Incas - the former were much more scientifically advanced. They'd be a good counter balance to the psychotic Aztecs.

Ayyubid/Saracen - these are the Arabs most people are talking about. Give them Camel Cavalry.

Korean

And now for some crazy ideas:

Apache or Sioux

Pygmies

Austria (you know the whole Habsburg empire)

Siam/Thailand

Assyria/Hittite

Phonecia/Carthage

Totally out of the blue:
Wallachian - how fun would it be to get to play Vlad Dracul, now that truly would be an evil empire.

Swiss (totally peaceful/cultural victory only - can only sign mutual protection pacts and so on).

Some ideas for civ attributes follow from some of these:
Pacifist - increased cultural benefits, perhaps some UN benefits?
Nomadic - cheaper settlers but more stringent population growth requirements?
Hunter/Gatherer - greater bonuses from bonus resource squares, more expensive irrigation

I like the ideas about Agricultural and Sea Faring also

Some suggested civs we don't really need:
Byzantium - this is essentially Rome
Celts - no offense, but it's just not a very compelling civ, we may as well throw the Angles, Jutes and Picts in as well in that case

Imran Siddiqui · May 4, 2002, 05:44

Quote:

possibly one of the West African empires such as Ghana or Mali.

I said Mali

And I doubt that the Koreans will be in. ESPECIALLY since the Mongols will probably be a shoo-in. Consider they are adding scenarios, so probably a world map with correct starting positions (one can hope). You'll have Mongols, Chinese, Japanese... what would you need (or place) the Koreans in there for?

Lethargic · May 4, 2002, 10:09

Celts leader: Ted Kennedy

Dom Pedro II · May 4, 2002, 13:02

How about this for a civilization quality? Isolationist... I haven't got the slightest idea what sort of benefits isolationist would give...

Insigna · May 4, 2002, 15:02

The Folowing civs are crap and should not be included: Inca, Carthage, Korea, Siam, Apache or Sioux, Ethiopians or Nubians. How can anyone put civs like the Inca before the Mongols or Turks!

Hoot · May 4, 2002, 16:51

The fact that the game didn't have Spain to start still baffles me. I've always thought that any XP would start with Spain, the Vikings, the Mongols, and the Celts from Civ 2 and add Arabs and either the Incas or Mayans. I doubt we'll see the Sioux or Carthaginians this time, but I don't really care whats added, just glad we'll have some more variety.

Signa · May 4, 2002, 17:36

Arabs
Leader: Sultan Saladin
Capital: Mecca
UU: Mamuluk [5.3.2]
Replaces: Knight
Traits: Religious & Commerical
Start With: Ceremonial Burial, Bronze Working

Carthagians
Leader: King? Hannibal
Capital: Carthage
UU: War Galley [2.1.3]
Replaces: Galley
Traits: Commerical & Militaristic
Start With: Alphabet, Warrior Code

Celtics
Leader: Queen Bordicea
Capital: Cartiff
UU: Woad Warrior [2.1.1]
Replaces: Warrior
Traits: Industrious & Militaristic
Start With: Masonry, The Wheel

Hewbrews
Leader: King David
Capital: Jerusalem
UU: Zealot [3.2.2]
Replaces: Swordsman
Traits: Industrious & Religious
Start With: Ceremonial Burial, Masonry

Incans
Leader: Unknown
Capital: Cuzco
UU: Sun Knight [2.2.2]
Replaces: Horseman
Traits: Scientific & Religious
Start With: Ceremonial Burial, Bronze Working

Mongols
Leader: Genghis Khan
Capital: Karathoum
UU: Horse Archer [4.3.3]
Replaces: Knight
Traits: Militaristic & Expansionist
Start With: Pottery, Warrior Code

Spanish
Leader: Queen Isabella
Capital: Madrid
UU: Tercio [5.6.1]
Replaces: Rifleman
Traits: Religious & Expansionist
Start With: Ceremonial Burial, Masonry

Vikings
Leader: Canute
Capital: Oslo
UU: Longboat +Ocean Travel
Replaces: Caravel
Traits: Commerical & Expansionist
Start With: Alphabet, Pottery

Taxidopolis · May 4, 2002, 17:55

Quote:

Here's a question: What civs are you praying Firaxis WON'T include, but think they will...?

The Celts.
It's about time the modern myth of a single 'Celtic' civilization was put to rest.

Zoid · May 4, 2002, 18:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Eroberer

I have to disagree with you on every point. While Windows has become pretty ubiquitous, single industry towns have failed before, and I can't fathom the fate of an entire civilization built around any one industry, even if it's MS Windows.

You think that´s so funny that you have to post it in two threads?

Zoid · May 4, 2002, 18:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Eroberer

Not trying to be funny, jackass. I just see all these "Apolytoners" in the Civ3 General forum being misled, and it makes me want to puke.

I can just imagine one of you retards started XP = expansion pack and the rest followed because their small existence pales in comparison to text on internet bulliten boards.

My, my aren´t we testy today... Do you think Microsoft owns the copyright to the letters X and P? It´s pretty obvious IMO what it´s aimed at here. Jeez, get a grip dude

Zoid · May 4, 2002, 18:34

To post on-topic I´d say:

Mongols
Spain
Carthage
Celts
Turks
Arabs
Dutch
Inca/Maya

You have 4 old ones that where in Civ2 and you have 4 new ones that could be interesting. But I see a problem separating them in terms of playability. The difference between some of the civs we already have is insignificant, and now they will come up with ethnic characteristics for 8 new civs...

Lucilla · May 4, 2002, 18:37

Kamrat X, I think the best way to deal with that kind of spam is just to ignore it. I guess, he will bore himself to death after some time. That's my XPerience, at least.

ScreamingViking · May 4, 2002, 18:38

To be honest, sea and air specialty units are boring as hell. They should get rid of the F15 and the ManOWar.

Guaranteed Civs should be: Mongols (mounted archer/hordesman, Ghengis Khan), Vikings (berserker, Canute/Beowulf), Incans (Sun Warrior), and Spaniards (Conquistadors, Isabella).

Possibles are: Arabs/Turks, Israelis (not Hebrews), Carthage, Malian, Celts, Koreans.

Ones I'd like to see: Canadians (Peacekeeper UU), Polynesian, Dutch/Afrikaaner, Chinook (totem warrior), Thai, Mayans, or Australians. All have a snowballs chance in hell.

Zoid · May 4, 2002, 18:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Lucilla
Kamrat X, I think the best way to deal with that kind of spam is just to ignore it. I guess, he will bore himself to death after some time. That's my XPerience, at least.

My XPerience is that these Youreabores tend to bore other people to death long before he bores themselves to death

If he whines too much we can always hope some mod will XPell him...

Oh, no now I opened the flood gates for a wave of XP-jokes...

Sid1 · May 4, 2002, 19:48

For starters, I do not find sea faring aspects of the game/units boring as was mentioned earlier in this thread. I enjoy lots of diversity in other civs and the interactions with them. I like the idea of some 'evil' civs to demonise and play against--and occasionally to experience for myself--a bit like Chairman Yang and The Human Hive in SMAC.

Anyway, the majors that you've all already mentioned may be there (Vikings [UU of 'Berserker'?], Mongols, Ethiopians, Mayans, etc.). Here are my 'preferred' alternatives:-

Inuit (or some other aboriginal/native society) with a special unit of 'Shaman' who acts as a quasi-leader. This civ would have some kind of inter-linked settlements--like Barbarians--as opposed to cities.

Atlantis: spiritual-based society with ocean-going galleys.

Phoenicians: sea-going galleys and special unit of 'Trader' who bypasses early restrictions on establishing trade [perhaps with similar stats to an Explorer].

Celts: UU of 'Female Warrior' with ability to restrict HP loss from Warrior/Archer/Spearman units nearby.

Another 'alternative'--each civ has two UUs. One for the early, or 'establishment' period of a civilisation, the other for the later 'modern' era. Something along the lines of 'spec ops' or SAS trops; + [additionally] a diplomat unit which can ease/enhance negotiations after the establishment of the United Nations.

Finally, I will be most interested to see how a post-Brian Reynolds/Tim Train Firaxis deals with a similar project to the SMAC/SMAX updates of the late 1990s.

Jaguar · May 4, 2002, 22:23

Asia group: China, India, Japan Mongols
Middle East: Zulu, Persia, Babylon, Turks and Arabs
European: Russia, Germany, England, France, and Spain
North American: Aztecs, Americans, Iroquois, Mayans and Inca (Tupi? Apache?)
Mediterranean: Egypt, Greece, Rome, and Carthage

That leaves room for one surprise. I don't think the Vikings will get the pick because that would overcrowd the cultural group and Spain is more important. It would have to be mediterranean or Asian. I think Asia.

BTW who were the Khmer?

Jaguar · May 4, 2002, 22:28

An idea: THe turks could become mediterranean and leave room for the Jews. Or the Spanish could be mediterranean and let the vikings in

civman2000 · May 4, 2002, 22:57

Signa: great suggestions, except arent the spanish and viking UUs a bit strong (+3 attack??, +1 attack AND ocean movement???)

siredgar · May 4, 2002, 22:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
And I doubt that the Koreans will be in. ESPECIALLY since the Mongols will probably be a shoo-in. Consider they are adding scenarios, so probably a world map with correct starting positions (one can hope). You'll have Mongols, Chinese, Japanese... what would you need (or place) the Koreans in there for?

I try to focus making comments on people's statements rather than hurling personal attacks. But I've noticed all of your comments are so insanely idiotic and based on a complete lack of knowledge of geography and history that you are officially on ignore.

Mikhail · May 5, 2002, 00:25

My final bet:

Asia (5): China, India, Japan, Mongols, Koreans

Middle East (5): Zulu, Egypt, Persia, Babylon, Turks

European (5): Russia, Germany, England, France, Spain

North American (5): Aztecs, Americans, Iroquois, Inca, Mayan

Mediterranean (4): Greece, Rome, Carthage, Byzantium

Athens and Constantinople would be awfully close on a world map (hope someone creates a large Eurasia map after the XP comes out), but really, all of Europe will be. Germany/France/Spain will probably only have 3 cities each in the beginning. Byzantines would have to expand south before Egypt expands East.

Anyways, this brings all cultures minus Mediterranean to 5 civs. Mediterranean is practically overlapping as it is.

My reasons:

Mongols: Not really a civilization, they build and innovated nothing, but fan favorites

Koreans: Advanced Civ, Civ players in Korea

Turks: Ottoman Empire. Crusades. Period.

Spain: Erm...should have been in at the start.

Inca/Mayan: Are the most important Central-South American civs. American culture is hurting with 3 civs.

Carthage: It's Sid Meier. Sid Meier includes Carthage.

Byzantium: Lasted 1129 years. That should qualify it by Sid's standards. Civ is a what-if game. And 'had the turks not taken Constantinople and destroyed what remained of Byzantium' is a pretty big what-if. Besides, if the Turks are included, Byzantium is a shoo-in. Someones gotta keep the evil Turks in line

And I don't like Byzantine being included with Rome, since it outlasted the fall of Rome by over 800 years.

Most important of all tho: Mikhail wants to play as Emperor Constantine and rule the Byzantines.

As someone else said, I don't think they'll include Celts or Vikings, as it would unbalance the game's culture for Europe. And Spain is more important.

Jag: Jew is a religion, not a civilization

. Israel/Judea would be civilizations, but I really doubt they'd inlcude it during all this controversy. Sides. Byzantines would get the pleasure of controlling the Holy Land

Sid1 · May 5, 2002, 06:58

The Khmer thrived as an empire in Indo-China from 9th-14th centuries. Their capital was at Angkor. Today most Cambodians are Khmer people.

Miznia · May 5, 2002, 09:24

Quote:

Mikhail wrote:
Byzantium: Lasted 1129 years. That should qualify it by Sid's standards. Civ is a what-if game. And 'had the turks not taken Constantinople and destroyed what remained of Byzantium' is a pretty big what-if. Besides, if the Turks are included, Byzantium is a shoo-in. Someones gotta keep the evil Turks in line And I don't like Byzantine being included with Rome, since it outlasted the fall of Rome by over 800 years.

Eh... I think if Firaxis includes Byzantium, they're not going to use Turks. The Turks weren't cool until they had Istanbul, isn't that right? And anyway, what would the Turkish capital then be?

Quote:

Jaguar Warrior wrote:
North American: ... (Tupi? Apache?)

I sure hope not! I don't think either even had cities, or were united!

Quote:

ScreamingViking wrote:
Israelis (not Hebrews),

Why?! Isn't the claim to their merit based on their cultural significance? How could modern Israelis cut it?

civman2000 · May 5, 2002, 09:39

there will be no byzantium because it is too roman (not saying i agree with that but that's what firaxis will say). Turks could be modern (leader=Ataturk) or Ottoman (leader=Suleiman (sp?) the Magnificent OR Mohammed II the Great). Capital is probably Istabul, maybe Ankara.

Dom Pedro II · May 5, 2002, 13:35

Isreal is the noun for the country, Hebrew is the adjective for the people.