New Civs Update from IGN - Page 3

Switch · May 25, 2002, 02:25

I would like to see how they could place both the hisorical starting points on a map for both the Romans and the Carths.
I think they should drop the Carths, and with Europe as crowded as it is, maybe drop the Gaul (Celts).

They definitely need another African and SA civ, though. Just too much empty land.....Icans and Ethiopians would probably be best, IMHO.

player1 · May 25, 2002, 02:43

Drop Carth?

They ARE African Civ.
(north African)

Switch · May 25, 2002, 02:46

Aren't they a Roman area civ?

Well, if they're African, then more power to 'em!

Timber_wolf899 · May 25, 2002, 05:04

Personally i'd like to see byzantium. Perhaps the UU could be some sort of advanced defensive unit.

just my two copper coins
tw

notyoueither · May 25, 2002, 05:38

Marla's map. Rome where it should be, of course

Greece in the Peloponnese, Egypt and Carthage in their rightful places. Add Persia or Babylon, Russia, India, China, Mongolia, Japan, Zulu, America, Aztecs, Inca, Iroquois, Throw the Germans in Australia and you have a great 16 player game.

Eli · May 25, 2002, 07:17

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
You're not going to play MP or WWII Eli?

I will play of course. But they're not going to get my money.

Stuie · May 25, 2002, 07:51

Quote:

Originally posted by MarkG
for now, the sets are two, as mentioned in the official announcement
http://www.firaxis.com/company_showr...?releasenum=35

beyond that, this is not the place for any trolling....

Never thought I'd be jumping to JT's defense, but com'on Mark! This whole thread is speculation of what's in/what's not based on unofficial reports from E3. And yes, the possibility of a Dinosaur set was among the unofficial things mentioned in E3 coverage.

If we can't discuss dinos, we shouldn't be discussing any civilizations beyond the two "officially announced" and featured civs: Spain and the Mongols. Let's all restrict ourselves to these two from now on.

civman2000 · May 25, 2002, 08:58

I agree with stuie

Mikel · May 25, 2002, 09:01

The Gauls and the Celts are probably the same civ. We are assuming the Celts will be in only because of one of the leaders, when he could be the Gaul leader.

SpencerH · May 25, 2002, 09:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Jay Bee

They actually do. "Gaul" is Latin for "Celt". History narrowed the meaning to make it refer only to the Celts living in what is today France. So, all Gauls are Celts, but not all Celts are Gauls (unless, of course, you only speak Latin).

Interesting comment.

alva · May 25, 2002, 13:20

great!!, asterix as a GL for the Gauls

):

maybe Obelix as the UU and the magic potion as a new
resource( or would that be too much

)

great scenario though!!

Capt Dizle · May 25, 2002, 14:06

Thanks to Stuie for his objective comment.

SpencerH · May 25, 2002, 14:49

There is a dinosaur in the Ptw video that someone taped at E3 in Japan (?)

Capt Dizle · May 25, 2002, 15:02

Hmm..someone tell me if this image displays..

Jon Shafer · May 25, 2002, 15:04

I did not just see that...

SpencerH · May 25, 2002, 15:41

It doesnt mean they'll make it to the xp, but it does mean they're on the table for discussion. If not here, then elsewhere.

Stuie · May 25, 2002, 16:34

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Hmm..someone tell me if this image displays..

This one's even better, as the dino is in the unit box:

SpencerH · May 25, 2002, 16:37

New tech - eugenics

unit- tyranosaur

kring · May 25, 2002, 16:42

In one of the numerous E3 interviews, mention was made of a "possible" dinosaur scenario.

I have to leave for now or I would track it down.

civman2000 · May 25, 2002, 17:00

where is that from

????

SpencerH · May 25, 2002, 17:16

you mean the movie?

notyoueither · May 25, 2002, 18:38

I don't think Mark said 'don't discuss dinos'.

I think he said this is not the place for any trolling....

MarkG · May 25, 2002, 18:48

Quote:

Originally posted by notyoueither
I don't think Mark said 'don't discuss dinos'.

I think he said this is not the place for any trolling....

i said what he said i said

SpencerH · May 25, 2002, 19:38

But if he said what you said he said, then he said it, or....

To hell with mongols, I want to attack other players cities with hordes of nuclear tyranosaurs!

jsw363 · May 25, 2002, 22:23

On the Gaul/ Celt question. I believe that Julius Caesar said it best.
"Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt Belgae, aliam Aquitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua Celtae, nostra Galli appellantur."

"All Gaul is divided into three parts, one of which the Belgae inhabit, the Aquitani another, those who in their own language are called Celts, in our Gauls, the third."

I would think that it's probably more appropriate to call these peoples Celts, since that is what they call themselves in Celtic (or Gaelic.) But then again they do use the anglicized name Japan instead of Nippon, so who knows how it will end up...

JtheJackal · May 25, 2002, 23:03

Korea in?

Well not that im spiting everyone who says they aren't, the supposed Korean UU was seen in the video along with other unique units. Makes you think.

SeferKoheleth · May 25, 2002, 23:35

Quote:

Originally posted by Eli

Ok then... Firaxis should reduce their estimated profits by 40$.

My take is that Firaxis caved into European and Arab Jew-hating. There's really no excuse to exclude the Hebrews and include the Gauls (hello, more worthless French??).

Let's face it.... we may have designed the moral and religious customs of 3 billion people, played an unreplaceable role in the development of Middle Age commerce, and contribited immensely to the development of science and technology.... but we're not well-liked.

I'm not buying the expansion now either.

SeferKoheleth · May 25, 2002, 23:37

On the other hand, I'm very glad to see the inclusion of BOTH the Ottomans and Arabs. For those who think they're the same... read your history!!!

The Ottomans were NOT Arabs-- they were Turks, and they dominated the Middle East for centuries, as the Arabs did. They are both quite worthwhile for inclusion.

The list should have been

Arabs
Ottomans
Hebrews
Incas
Mongols
Vikings
Ethiopians
Spanish

Panag · May 26, 2002, 13:14

Quote:

Originally posted by SeferKoheleth
On the other hand, I'm very glad to see the inclusion of BOTH the Ottomans and Arabs. For those who think they're the same... read your history!!!

The Ottomans were NOT Arabs-- they were Turks, and they dominated the Middle East for centuries, as the Arabs did. They are both quite worthwhile for inclusion.

The list should have been

Arabs
Ottomans
Hebrews
Incas
Mongols
Vikings
Ethiopians
Spanish

hi ,

maybe with a full editor we , as the player's shall be able to change that , ....

have a nice day