Who is the Last Civ?

[IrishSamurai]

Maybe I'm completely talking out of my butt here, but I thought the Celts are the general ancestors of the Scots, Irish, Welsh, Cornish, Manx and Bretons? They're not really meant, I thought, to only represent ancestral Irishmen.

Well, the early Celts ranged from the British Isles to the Ukraine and Turkey. Today, the Six Nations (Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Brittany, Cornwall and the Isle of Man) are the true Celts. I have ancestors from four of those six, but i more closely identify with the Irish, which is why i referred to my Irish heritage. The Celts in the game are the closest i'll get to an Irish civ, which is why i lay claim to them.

That's what kind of rubs me the wrong away about the Civ series. It's always the Celts...never Ireland, Scotland or Wales. It's always Rome and never Italy. It's always the Aztecs and never Mexico. I would gladly see the Celts replaced with Ireland and/or Scotland at least once. I'd love to see more modern civs like Italy, Mexico, Poland, Canada and Australia. Not everyone agrees with me of course, and i'm not suggesting permanent replacements. I'd just like to see some new nations get a chance in the spotlight.

Of course, i'd also like to see every civilization in history represented in one game, but that remains a dream.

[Shiav]

If anything Poland should represent Ukraine and Lithuania. Not saying any of them should be in, but putting in Ukraine would make even more Polish people whine.

Putting in Lithuania would make them whine more

[JFD]

There's not a nation that could suprise us, I mean I think everyone has thrown out every civilization that has every existed.

Has anyone suggested the Teutonic Order as a civ? Far too close to Germany to be a real possibility, but it would be surprising, and would certaintly fit the scenario.

[Shiav]

Well, the early Celts ranged from the British Isles to the Ukraine and Turkey. Today, the Six Nations (Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Brittany, Cornwall and the Isle of Man) are the true Celts. I have ancestors from four of those six, but i more closely identify with the Irish, which is why i referred to my Irish heritage. The Celts in the game are the closest i'll get to an Irish civ, which is why i lay claim to them.

That's what kind of rubs me the wrong away about the Civ series. It's always the Celts...never Ireland, Scotland or Wales. It's always Rome and never Italy. It's always the Aztecs and never Mexico. I would gladly see the Celts replaced with Ireland and/or Scotland at least once. I'd love to see more modern civs like Italy, Mexico, Poland, Canada and Australia. Not everyone agrees with me of course, and i'm not suggesting permanent replacements. I'd just like to see some new nations get a chance in the spotlight.

Of course, i'd also like to see every civilization in history represented in one game, but that remains a dream.

Rome instead of Italy I completely understand. Rome is the undisputed classical fall back civ that has been in every game. Celts instead of Scotland I don't, as neither can claim complete hegemony over the title of "best in region". Mexico Aztec leans a bit closer to the Aztec, but I too would love modern civs.

Maybe that could be the next expansion. Canada, Australia, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Argentina, Pakistan, Colombia, Israel. Adds corporations, pollution/climate change, UN, a hugely expanded modern era, etc.

[PachaMinnie]

Has anyone suggested the Teutonic Order as a civ? Far too close to Germany to be a real possibility, but it would be surprising, and would certaintly fit the scenario.

Many people would argue the Teutonic Order where bad guys. Plus they where as you said Germans. It could be possible, but I would really hope not. Not to mention the Germans took the Iron Cross, that was their thing. To have the Teutonic Order they must be a UU. Because really, I couldn't count them as a Civilization. They where an order of people who protected Christian settlers settling in Eastern Europe.

Plus, do you really want to piss of the Polish even more? Poland whopped the Orders arse.

[IrishSamurai]

Rome instead of Italy I completely understand. Rome is the undisputed classical fall back civ that has been in every game. Celts instead of Scotland I don't, as neither can claim complete hegemony over the title of "best in region". Mexico Aztec leans a bit closer to the Aztec, but I too would love modern civs.

Maybe that could be the next expansion. Canada, Australia, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Argentina, Pakistan, Colombia, Israel. Adds corporations, pollution/climate change, UN, a hugely expanded modern era, etc.

I truly hope the series stays true to form and offers a second expansion. A focus on the modern/future eras, with more modern civs is something i'd buy.

On a slightly related note, has anyone played "Knights of Honor" by Paradox? I liked how if you conquered the right provinces, you could change your nation's name to Ireland, Scotland, England, Russia, etc. I think it would be kind of neat to do that in a Civ game. Say you play Rome long enough, or complete a quest like in Civ IV, and you're offered the option to change your civ's name to Italy. Purely optional, with minor cosmetic changes perhaps (modern flag maybe?), but it would add variety.

[Shiav]

I truly hope the series stays true to form and offers a second expansion. A focus on the modern/future eras, with more modern civs is something i'd buy.

On a slightly related note, has anyone played "Knights of Honor" by Paradox? I liked how if you conquered the right provinces, you could change your nation's name to Ireland, Scotland, England, Russia, etc. I think it would be kind of neat to do that in a Civ game. Say you play Rome long enough, or complete a quest like in Civ IV, and you're offered the option to change your civ's name to Italy. Purely optional, with minor cosmetic changes perhaps (modern flag maybe?), but it would add variety.

Or even the ability to change from ancient UX's to modern ones. I guess that throws a huge wrench in the game though, it might unbalance it. Rome is currently based around maximizing the time you have with ballistae and legions in order to get a huge empire to make the UA come into full force, if they could then transition that into a modern set of renaissance UX's (most likely culture and city state focused) it would be OP. No more OP than Japan i think, but still op

[JFD]

Many people would argue the Teutonic Order where bad guys. Plus they where as you said Germans. It could be possible, but I would really hope not. Not to mention the Germans took the Iron Cross, that was their thing. To have the Teutonic Order they must be a UU. Because really, I couldn't count them as a Civilization. They where an order of people who protected Christian settlers settling in Eastern Europe.

I'm not trying to suggest the Teutonic Order as an actual civ; just looking at Europe during the High Middle Ages, to see what might fit the theme of religious warfare. My money is still on Sweden, for what its worth. By the sounds of it Ed Beach designed the Denmark DLC, and I think that this approach to the Vikings puts Sweden as a real possibility, especially if he had always had a Renaissance scenario in mind. Sure, there's already a lot of Europeans as it stands, but that isn't reason enough for me to not support another.

[IrishSamurai]

Or even the ability to change from ancient UX's to modern ones. I guess that throws a huge wrench in the game though, it might unbalance it. Rome is currently based around maximizing the time you have with ballistae and legions in order to get a huge empire to make the UA come into full force, if they could then transition that into a modern set of renaissance UX's (most likely culture and city state focused) it would be OP. No more OP than Japan i think, but still op

Which is why i figured cosmetic changes would be best. New flags, colors, city names, etc. Maybe even leaderhead costume changes like in Civ III. Nothing that would unbalance the game.

[Radu]

Maybe a different leader for some Civs, giving a different UA, UB or UU. At least the most traditional Civs could have more than one leader.

[PachaMinnie]

Maybe a different leader for some Civs, giving a different UA, UB or UU. At least the most traditional Civs could have more than one leader.

The Zulu could, but then again adding Chete is up for debate. Does he deserve to replace Shaka? I dunno. I suppose he could.

As I have said before I would support a Swedish empire as long as they add Finland into the mix. Then for me, all of Europe would be complete and we could move on to Asia, Africa, and South America.

[IrishSamurai]

Maybe a different leader for some Civs, giving a different UA, UB or UU. At least the most traditional Civs could have more than one leader.

Yeah, i was thinking that too. Be nice to play America with Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Bush....yeah, i didn't type that with a straight face.

[Shiav]

Maybe a different leader for some Civs, giving a different UA, UB or UU. At least the most traditional Civs could have more than one leader.

Almost every civ could have a different leader representing a different period of their history. They could even be of a different gender than the current leader. Churchill, Lenin, Huang, Joan of Arc, etc

[Pouakai]

They tried one of every gender in Civ 2, we ended up with Elenor Roosevelt and Amaterasu

[Radu]

Almost every civ could have a different leader representing a different period of their history. They could even be of a different gender than the current leader. Churchill, Lenin, Huang, Joan of Arc, etc

I know, but I think it's unlikely they would do a 2nd leader for all Civs, so that's why I wouldn't mind if it was for just a few of them. But if they could for all of them, all the best.

PS: But not Lenin; put Stalin!! And Hitler for Germany (haha, would be great, but they would never do it)!

[Shiav]

They tried one of every gender in Civ 2, we ended up with Elenor Roosevelt and Amaterasu

I did say most it doesn't work when some civs aren't as progressive as others that was a pun, ahaha

Lenin is far better than Stalin. Zero controversy. Idolized the world over. All around awesome guy.

[JFD]

I did say most it doesn't work when some civs aren't as progressive as others that was a pun, ahaha

Lenin is far better than Stalin. Zero controversy. Idolized the world over. All around awesome guy.

Lol. I wouldn't say zero controversy. Still, less controversial than Washington, or Ghandi. For me at least...

[tfordp]

...There is a new movement of people who don't believe the Zulu belong anywhere near an expansion and in fact some people in these forums and the German forums have said they wouldn't buy an expansion if they were in.
...

Refusing to buy a potentially excellent, game-making expansion because the Zulu are in? Well that's just pathetic.

[JFD]

In fact it wouldn't make ANY sense to include the Zulu in the expansion. There is a new movement of people who don't believe the Zulu belong anywhere near an expansion and in fact some people in these forums and the German forums have said they wouldn't buy an expansion if they were in.

That's ridiculous. I don't think the Zulu for this expansion would be a good idea - it would be a disappointing end to the speculation, because it was half-expected anyway, and as far as gameplay goes, I don't feel the Zulu would add too much that the Huns didn't add. It doesn't matter to me that others might not think the Zulu constitute a "civilisation." I would rather a certain other civ, but if the Zulu did get in, at least then I'd be able to redeem my England in battles against them, by using them as allies to defeat the French.

[PachaMinnie]

In fact it wouldn't make ANY sense to include the Zulu in the expansion. There is a new movement of people who don't believe the Zulu belong anywhere near an expansion and in fact some people in these forums and the German forums have said they wouldn't buy an expansion if they were in.

This is 2012, not 2000, the Zulu are no longer liked by everyone because they were so irrelevant for a long time.

======

But if they were a DLC you could sell it to the remnants of people who still think they are worthy of a civ. Its a win win.

I know I am late to respond to this, but I shall anyway.

There are 3. reasons why the Zulu should be included whether or not a few people on the forums won't buy it.
1.] The Zulu Kingdom lasted from 1816-1887. Why do you think that's a reason? Because in that short time they, grew from a small unnoticeable tribe into a great empire, they changed South African History forever, They took on the British and gave them one of the worst defeats those red coats ever got.
2.] They are the only Civilization to most people from Africa that isn't already in the game that they will recongnize. Throw out other names all you want, they would never sell.
3.] They had 2 of South Africa's greatest leaders in their country in the short time they existed. They now make up a majority of South Africaners. Their language is an offiicial language with other 11 million speakers in S.A.. They are still alive and strong.

Find me a nation like that in Africa and I will hear your cries.

[SamBC]

If anything Poland should represent Ukraine and Lithuania. Not saying any of them should be in, but putting in Ukraine would make even more Polish people whine.

I suspect Poland including Ukraine would upset Ukrainians.

[PachaMinnie]

I suspect Poland including Ukraine would upset Ukrainians.

Who cares. Just kidding. Eh, They aren't whining yet. Plus I think Poland is a tad bit more deserving and known in the eyes of the public.

[Karule]

I suspect Poland including Ukraine would upset Ukrainians

You don't know the history.

Nation "Ukrainians" not exist at the time of Polish-Lithuania Empire. Precursos of ukrainian nation was Cossacks (Cossacks) and they loved Poland. Have you heard about Cossacks Khmelnytsky Uprising? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmelnytsky_Uprising
) They wasn't fighting with country and king, but with polish nobility. They loved country and king and they wept when the polish king died despite the war with polish rich nobility.

Ukrainians today love history of Polish-Lithuania Empire, it's their history, it was their country. Poles and Ukrainians call this country "Rzeczpospolita" - country of all nations.

[Radu]

Lenin is far better than Stalin. Zero controversy. Idolized the world over. All around awesome guy.

It's not a question of better or not... I just like playing as the guy with the big moustache.

[SamBC]

My understanding of more recent history was that Ukrainian people nowadays dislike anything dismissing them as a nation - which they certainly are now. After the USSR spent a while trying to erase their identity and so on.

[JFD]

It's not a question of better or not... I just like playing as the guy with the big moustache.

You might like Gustav Adolphus, if Sweden is the last civ. Come to think of it, do any of the leaders have facial hair? Other than the ancient ones, of course.

[PachaMinnie]

You might like Gustav Adolphus, if Sweden is the last civ. Come to think of it, do any of the leaders have facial hair? Other than the ancient ones, of course.

Otto Van Bismark has a killer mutton chop. [I think that's what it is called]

[JFD]

Otto Van Bismark has a killer mutton chop. [I think that's what it is called]

Mutton chops aren't without the sideburns. Franz Joseph would have been great for those, if only they'd chosen him for Austria. Wilhelm I had them too - I think he was German Emperor sometime whilst Bismarck was Chancellor. Askia, though, has facial hair.

[PachaMinnie]

Mutton chops aren't without the sideburns. Franz Joseph would have been great for those, if only they'd chosen him for Austria. Wilhelm I had them too - I think he was German Emperor sometime whilst Bismarck was Chancellor. Askia, though, has facial hair.

Here is something about Poland and facial hair Hope you enjoy. http://www.cracked.com/funny-200-poland/

[JFD]

Here is something about Poland and facial hair Hope you enjoy. http://www.cracked.com/funny-200-poland/

Awesome. And Peter the Great thought it would make Russia better if he forced everyone to be clean shaven - he should have learnt from the Poles. And I can't believe I forgot Suleiman - that's a beard, and a belly: the sign of a successful Monarch. I really hope to see Gustav, riding a white horse with his golden locks, speaking like the Swedish Chef... lol.

[Radu]

I would still love to play with Hitler and his funny moustache. What a joy would it be to hear him yelling in German as he declares war to my civ.

[steveg700]

I would still love to play with Hitler and his funny moustache. What a joy would it be to hear him yelling in German as he declares war to my civ.

WWII is definitely a scenario worth having.

[Shiav]

My understanding of more recent history was that Ukrainian people nowadays dislike anything dismissing them as a nation - which they certainly are now. After the USSR spent a while trying to erase their identity and so on.

Tried? Ha, please

But in all seriousness, Poland will not be with the Ukraine. Because Hussars are the Austrian UU Poland will likely not be in. If they are it will be with Lithuania.

Also, the Ukraine is ours. Leave them alone, don't talk to them and don't acknowledge them. If you lived in Europe any time in the past century you know why.

[Pouakai]

Shiav, where'd you hear Hussars? Or is it just speculation?

[Shiav]

Shiav, where'd you hear Hussars? Or is it just speculation?

I don't remember. Pacha, where did you hear Hussars?

It may be speculation. I heard a few people say it, thought it made more than enough sense and accepted it

[istry555]

Shiav, where'd you hear Hussars? Or is it just speculation?

Nothing official has been said. They were the Austrian UU in Civ III Conquests (in the sort of half-ass way Austria was present in that game), and it is a popular suggestion / conclusion especially if Austria in any way represents Asutria-Hungary (sort of how Denmark still has a Norwegian UU even if they are only called Denmark).

[PachaMinnie]

I don't remember. Pacha, where did you hear Hussars?

It may be speculation. I heard a few people say it, thought it made more than enough sense and accepted it

I heard it from some place I can't find any more. Damn shame to. I think it is more than speculation. It is somewhere around here if I dig.

Edit: Found it! It isn't credible but hell, most of the guesses are great. By the way, I never said Austria's unit WAS the Hussars I said it might be the Hussars or there is a very good chance it will be the Hussars. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ap...Civilization_V

[tfordp]

I would still love to play with Hitler and his funny moustache. What a joy would it be to hear him yelling in German as he declares war to my civ.

Eeeww. That thought just feels sort of dirty.

Because Hussars are the Austrian UU Poland will likely not be in.

Aw heck, and I was so looking forward to building the special Austrian submarine.

[Pouakai]

Edit: Found it! It isn't credible but hell, most of the guesses are great. By the way, I never said Austria's unit WAS the Hussars I said it might be the Hussars or there is a very good chance it will be the Hussars. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ap...Civilization_V

He edits the page as soon as he finds info, go back and he had a very different Austria - Yellow & Black, Charles somethingerrather and so forth.

[SamBC]

I met two people who grew up in the USSR in my old department (here in the UK)... I have no idea if either of them were pro-communist or pro-capitalist, but conversation brought out there views on the Soviet nationalist attitude - one decried the indoctrination of soviet education, the other moaned about "all these places that think they are countries, but they aren't, they're all Russian". I wonder if the latter is the product of what the former disliked.