Evidence for PTW Civs

Bisonbison · May 26, 2002, 18:10

This thread is just intended to put all the available evidence on the XP civs out there, so that we can sort it into easy piles.

I'm not particularly interested in debating the merits of any given XP civ. I have my own feelings on what should be in and what should be out, but that doesn't matter here. I don't want to hear that the Koreans are a better Civ than the Inca, I just want to know if one of them is going to make it. All we're trying to do is get a real, accurate list of what IS in.

In order to facilitate the organizing of evidence, let me suggest a little heirarchy of truth.

At the top level, there's a direct written or visual confirmation that a civ exists in the game. This evidence should be irrefutable. Firaxis has said that the Spanish and the Mongols are in. Therefore, the Spanish and the Mongols ARE IN. Similarly, another screenshot shows that the Carthaginians are a choice on the MP options screen. Thus, the Carthaginians are in.

At the second level we have very strong evidence, which practically guarantees that they're in. This is where previews from large gaming sites fit in. Thus when the preview from IGN says that "the Gauls... the Ottomans and the Arabs" are in, it's almost certain that they are.

The third level of evidence are screenshots, and these are where we're getting hugely confused. There are a lot of things to be gleaned from screenshots but only if you do it carefully. There are different interpretations available for some of the "evidence" used in other threads, so we have to be conservative in our assumptions.

Of course, you have to combine different levels of evidence when it's not certain, but that's how I think we should rate it.

So, without further ado, here's the current list of contenders, with an educated guess as to their chances:

SPANISH (100% IN)
Confirmed by Firaxis. End of discussion.
UU: Conquistador

MONGOLS (100% IN)
Confirmed by Firaxis. End of discussion.
UU: Keshik

CARTHAGINIANS (99% IN)
Visible in screenshot, listed in IGN preview . Leader name Hannibal visible in PTW video.

VIKINGS (95% IN)
Trondheim is visible as the capital of a civ in this screenshot, and it was the capitol of the Viking Civ in civ2. Probable UU Beserk spotted in screenshot.

ARABS (95% IN)
Listed in IGN preview.

OTTOMAN TURKS (95% IN)
Listed in IGN preview. Istanbul visible as a civ capitol in PTW video (~4:00).

GAUL/CELTS (95% IN)
listed in IGN preview . Leader name "Brennus" visible in screenshot.

**That gives us seven so far that are almost certainly in. The last is VERY unclear. People have made all sorts of guesses as to which civs will be included, but it is clear that Firaxis is NOT interested in any sort of real world map balancing, since 16 or so of the 24 potential civs are European/middle eastern. Because of this, I'm going to limit myself to actual evidence, not educated guessing**

KOREANS (<50% IN)
Not listed anywhere officially. Potential UU Hwacha seen in a unit-only screenshot, but there are several possible explanations: 1) It's an official civ, the hwacha is it's UU. 2) It's an official civ, the hwacha is just a new unit on the tech tree. 3) It's an official civ, but the hwacha is a unit specifically built for the medieval Japan scenario 4) It's not an official civ, and the hwacha is just a new unit on the tech tree. 5) It's not an official civ and the hwacha is a unit specifically built for the medieval Japan scenario. In short, there is no clear line of evidence that says that just because we've seen a Hwacha, Korea is in.

INCA (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

MAYA (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

MALI (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

POLYNESIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

SOUIX (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

JEWS/HEBREWS/ISRAELIS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

ETHEOPIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

AUSTRIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

POLISH (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

DUTCH (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

CANADIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

AUSTRALIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

ANYONE ELSE (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

edit: added screenshot link for berserker.
edit: learned to count
edit: added Australians, but there's no evidence of inclusion, so: <50%
edit: noted that Istanbul appears as civ capitol in PTW video.

Inverse Icarus · May 26, 2002, 18:31

arent the maya in the same area as the aztec (on a world map)? olmec too? all on the yucatan penninsula if i'm not mistaken.

Bisonbison · May 26, 2002, 18:36

I'm not saying that the Maya are or are not a separate civ, but they've been mentioned in past discussions, so I wanted to list them here. Honestly, if Firaxis decided that the Maya were interesting enough, they'd certainly put them in, just like they've put in so many middle-eastern and European civs.

I've tried to make the list so that my personal opinion has little impact. I just want to have a central list of all relevant hard evidence. And if someone had a screenshot that indicated that West Virginia was going to be a civ, I'd put it up.

sgrig · May 26, 2002, 19:51

Quote:

Originally posted by Bisonbison

SPANISH (100% IN)
Confirmed by Firaxis. End of discussion.
UU: Conquistador

MONGOLS (100% IN)
Confirmed by Firaxis. End of discussion.
UU: Keshik

CARTHAGINIANS (99% IN)
Visible in screenshot, listed in IGN preview . Leader name Hannibal visible in PTW video.

VIKINGS (95% IN)
Trondheim is visible as the capital of a civ in this screenshot, and it was the capital of the Viking Civ in civ2. Probable UU Beserk spotted in screenshot.

ARABS (95% IN)
Listed in IGN preview.

OTTOMAN TURKS (95% IN)
Listed in IGN preview.

GAUL/CELTS (95% IN)
listed in IGN preview . Leader name "Brennus" visible in screenshot.

**That gives us six so far that are almost certainly in. The rest are VERY unclear. People have made all sorts of guesses as to which civs will be included, but it is clear that Firaxis is NOT interested in any sort of real world map balancing, since 16 or so of the 24 potential civs are European/middle eastern. Because of this, I'm going to limit myself to actual evidence, not educated guessing**

I think this makes 7 definite civs...

Bisonbison · May 26, 2002, 19:56

Dear sweet Jesus. I never learned to count. Ha.

civman2000 · May 26, 2002, 23:24

Maya are yucatan, aztecs and olmecs are mexico (i think)

notyoueither · May 27, 2002, 02:11

Let me be the first (?) to point out that there is a very long time between now and October, or December, or (gads!) February.

The level of interest and speculation on boards like these must surely delight the designers. Actually, some of them may have the requisite sense of humour to seed misleading information. Observe the result. Chuckle. Repeat.

Never underestimate the fiendishness of the Sombrero!

I would say Spain and Monguls for sure. Vikings most probable... Sh*t, they've caught me too!

I'll believe it when I see them appear in the Civ of the Week.

sgrig · May 27, 2002, 05:43

On the first civ-selection screen on the video, it's just possible to make out that the last last civ in the list is Australians!! This might just a random name for the E3 demo, but I think this is a small bit of evidence that the Australians might be in!

The Eliminator · May 27, 2002, 15:05

I think its the Canadians.

nato · May 27, 2002, 15:41

Oh I just had a horrible idea ...

What if the mystery 8th civ is ... the Dinosaurs!

Darkworld Ark · May 27, 2002, 16:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Bisonbison
MAYA (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

MALI (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

POLYNESIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

SOUIX (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

JEWS/HEBREWS/ISRAELIS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

ETHEOPIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

AUSTRIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

POLISH (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

DUTCH (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

CANADIANS (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

ANYONE ELSE (<50% IN)
No evidence exists that they will be in the XP.

You should proboly lower these to <25%, since none of these have had a big enough effect on world history.

civman2000 · May 27, 2002, 16:43

Increase AUstrians, add australians at 60%. A slot in the civ choices screen in the video looks like "au..." (supposedly, I spent an hour downloading it and than with a minnute or two left my connection died

) and there is a lot of speculation that it might be either.

Spiffor · May 27, 2002, 18:27

Gosh I sure hope they aren't Austrians. Yet another Euro-Civ (which belongs to the German culture BTW), wheeeeeee.... More seriously, I don't think the player setup screen in the video means anything : it's worked so that Genghis and Isabella can be seen in their ancient - modern outfit. 4 eras * 2 leaders = 8 slots. And these 8 slots are the ones of the 8 new Civs.

Bisonbison · May 27, 2002, 22:00

I picked <50% percent because I think it gives a nice general sense of the odds. It's sort of a significant digits problem. Don't want to pretend that I could be as precise as 30% or 10%. Plus, with the circumstantial evidence for the Korean Civ, I felt that the odds they'd be included could fairly be pegged at about 25-50%, but when I thought about the Maya and the Inca and all the rest, I decided that for all we know, they're all as likely as Korea, given the lack of a South American civ.

So, as to not offend anyone, I peg all Civs with no real evidence at <50%.

Quote:

Originally posted by civman2000
Increase AUstrians, add australians at 60%. A slot in the civ choices screen in the video looks like "au..." (supposedly, I spent an hour downloading it and than with a minnute or two left my connection died

) and there is a lot of speculation that it might be either.

As for this, I've seen the video, but I certainly couldn't make out any of the text, and I'd have to see a convincing screenshot to up the odds.

As it is though, I'll add Australians to the list.

Mikhail · May 27, 2002, 22:22

Uber: Nope. Maya is further down, in Central America.

Aztec is central Mexico

Maya is the very sourthern tip of Mexico, as well as the countries of Guatemala, Belize, El Salvador and Honduras

They're actually further apart than the European civs, and the most logical way it would work on a world map is for Mexico to expand into North America, and Maya expanding to South America.

I think 95% is a little too high for simply IGN's word. Unless the word specifically comes from Firaxis, Firaxis can, and most likely will, change it as they feel fit.

The Eliminator · May 28, 2002, 00:28

aaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

It had better not be the dinosaurs!

I heard that the smart money is on Canada right now.

notyoueither · May 28, 2002, 01:08

Quote:

Originally posted by The Eliminator
I heard that the smart money is on Canada right now.

[DarthVaderVoice] The plan is on schedule. The cultural domination of America proceeds apace. [/DarthVaderVoice]

tomcat ha · May 28, 2002, 11:19

ottoman turks shoud be either scientific religous or military thingy and scientific
cause they thought that sience was important cause of their religion

KaiserIsak · May 28, 2002, 12:00

The olmecs are on the east coast of mexico. The zapotecs are on the south west coast and the pueblos in the north.

sgrig · May 28, 2002, 13:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Bisonbison

As for this, I've seen the video, but I certainly couldn't make out any of the text, and I'd have to see a convincing screenshot to up the odds.

As it is though, I'll add Australians to the list.

It's hard to make out any of the text, but if you focus on the screen and stare at it for a few seconds it is possible to make out the 'shape' of a word. So that last civ name certainly looks like it begins with an A, and is relatively long...

Australia and South America are currently the only two continents unrepresented in the Civ-series. At least South America is joined onto North & Central America, but Australia is on the edge of the world (if you are not Australian, that is!), so any other civ is a long way away from it. So it is quite possible that in PTW, Firaxis decided to rectify this, at the expense of the Incas, which everyone seemed to want.

sgrig · May 28, 2002, 13:50

Double post

civman2000 · May 28, 2002, 14:02

What else begins with A and something that might be mistaken for a "u"? Hmmm...

Bisonbison · May 28, 2002, 14:38

Quote:

Originally posted by sgrig

It's hard to make out any of the text, but if you focus on the screen and stare at it for a few seconds it is possible to make out the 'shape' of a word. So that last civ name certainly looks like it begins with an A, and is relatively long...

Could you tell us at what point in the video that happens? Like 1:35 in or 2:49?

Also, I noticed that Istanbul is visible as a civ capitol in the video, so I've added that to the Ottoman Turks entry.

KaiserIsak · May 29, 2002, 10:16

Great to hear that the ottomans probably will make it (=
Austia-hungary?
Arakans? But that is not so likely
Ak Koyunlu? Probably not
Adens?
Afghanistans?
Annans?
Aragons?
Algiers?
Albanians?
Armenians?
Ayyuthayans?
Armenia minors?
Ashantis?
Annans?
Athjes?
Astrakhans?

Ayyuthayans is possible, but i guess they would call it thai peoples or something like that.
Might be austria-hungary as well

civman2000 · May 29, 2002, 12:14

new analysis:
It most likely has around 6 or 7 letters. A closer look makes it look very much like it starts "Heb" for Hebrews...but you never know, it could still be Incans or Koreans.

civman2000 · May 29, 2002, 12:18

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...0&pagenumber=2
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...0&pagenumber=3

kring · May 29, 2002, 12:36

As has been several places, the unknown one may be undecided, they could still be playtesting/reading our posts before making a decision. Or not. It's a shame when you enlarge the image, it becomes unreadable.

Bisonbison · May 29, 2002, 14:15

Well, having looked at the images you guys are trying to decipher, I have to say this is the biggest waste of time I've seen in a while.

It's a blur. For all you know it could say "BlurryCiv"