This game needs Sumer!

[tempshemps]

I have come to the conclusion that this game needs the Sumerian civilization. I am always hearing about them on the History channel and other programs, and want them in for this reason, and because they are so interesting.

That aside, wasn't Sumer also the first Civilization to discover writing? How could they not be in?

Unique building suggestion: Ziggurat.
Unique Ability: First to Writing (provides great scientist on discovery of writing)

I believe they are already in the Wonders of the Ancient World DLC. Why not make them a playable Civilization in the rest of the game as well?

[Magic_Hotdog]

Babylon already took its place.

[Akinaba]

I'm allready tired of that vote threads for somones favourite (or not favourite) civiliztions so I voted no.

Obviously, the more nev Civs -- the better but, man, develepoers does not strech.

[luciferkid]

They had their chance when they released the WOTAW dlc . I guess someone from 2k Games could explain to you why they weren't released as a Separate civilization .

[zephyrtr]

Sumeria and the Hittites they must've decided wouldn't have not stood out against the rest of the crowd, it seems. Phalanx wasn't all that interesting, honestly. Hittites ability was, essentially, Russia's. Sumeria's ability would've been the same as Babylon's, or been about rivers like in the DLC, which was kinda boring.

Personally, I REALLY liked the war chariot -- mostly because I hate the chariot archer so much and War Chariot gets it done -- but it seems like we wont be getting these Civs. Too many early-game civs, perhaps, and just not distinct enough.

[Jazzterisk]

I voted no. More is not always better. There is a limit to how many Civs can be implemented while still keeping it balanced, making sure that Civ is interesting, and not redundant.

I think with the addition of the new Civs in the expansion and possibly a 3 more as DLC that will be it and I'm fine with that.

[istry555]

The game needs more ancient Mesopotamian representation, period, be it Sumer, Akkad, Assyria, etc. The region is under-represented considering it's importance, and actually has no base game representation (only Babylonia which is DLC). Sumer is also a two time legacy civ, and has earned its place in the game both as part of the franchise and historically due to its significance.

Babylon already took its place.

Hasn't stopped both Babylon and Sumer being in the same civ game in the past, so it's not a case of replacement like Mali-Songhai. Plus, they are actually really distinct, and, as I already said, Sumer has been in two previous civ games. That makes it tied with Portugal as the most frequent legacy civ still missing (only behind the Zulu).

Hittites ability was, essentially, Russia's. Sumeria's ability would've been the same as Babylon's, or been about rivers like in the DLC, which was kinda boring.

If they were ever actually implemented, they presumably wouldn't have those abilities. It's clear that the developers just got lazy as they were scenario civs and just copy pasted established abiliteis with new names. If they were developed as real civs, they developers would no doubt get creative and work to give them unique abilities. Sumer could have easily had an agricultural, food, growth focus (for example, UA: Cradle of Civilization, cities start with 2 pop or civ starts with knowledge of irrigation or starts with knowedlge of pottery and granaries or extra food from farm resources, or something like that etc.). Hittites also could have easily had a diplomatic and religious focus (UA: Land of a Thousand Gods, faith from trade routes or less of a diplomatic hit from different religions or ability to use the founder beliefs of other civs, or something like that etc.). Both of those examples are closer historically to the civs than what was implemented in the scenario.

I'm allready tired of that vote threads for somones favourite (or not favourite) civiliztions so I voted no.

Obviously, the more nev Civs -- the better but, man, develepoers does not strech.

Well, that's unfair. Skewing the poll simply because you're tired of taking polls. And Sumer actually deserves to be in the game historically, unlike a lot of the random fan favorite civs people suggest.

They had their chance when they released the WOTAW dlc . I guess someone from 2k Games could explain to you why they weren't released as a Separate civilization .

Yeah, I wonder this too. It's a weird DLC pack as it effects the base game unlike other DLC packs, but is also somewhat light. Adding Sumer and the wonders as a double pack of sorts would have been great.

[ddesart]

I would like to see Assyria in the game before Sumer...I like Gilgamesh, I mean, who doesn't, but we've seen them before in Civ 4...I would like to see one of the ancient world powers finally included, that's all.

[istry555]

If Sumer is off limits because of the Wonders scenario, as many people are arguing, then an appropriate compromise would be to add Akkad. Not that Sumer and Akkad are interchangeable by any means (and Sumer is arguably more important), but one can easily make the argument that there's no need to add Sumer if the Akkadian Empire is in and vice-versa due to the interplay between the two empires. Assyria is also a great choice, although I don't feel Assyria and Sumer/Akkad really represent the same types of Empires so there is room for both. Regardless, I still stand by the idea that ancient Mesopotamia should have more representation.

[Joketa]

Sumeria and the Hittites they must've decided wouldn't have not stood out against the rest of the crowd, it seems. Phalanx wasn't all that interesting, honestly. Hittites ability was, essentially, Russia's. Sumeria's ability would've been the same as Babylon's, or been about rivers like in the DLC, which was kinda boring.

Personally, I REALLY liked the war chariot -- mostly because I hate the chariot archer so much and War Chariot gets it done -- but it seems like we wont be getting these Civs. Too many early-game civs, perhaps, and just not distinct enough.

Yeah, they couldn't put those civs in as they were represented in the scenario. Too boring. The War Chariot is awesome, though. In fact, it's a little too awesome as for some reason spearmen don't get any bonus against them. I bowled over spearmen like they were warriors.

[steveg700]

While I think the inclusion of the Huns as a civ was pretty dumb, it does provide a mechanism for including more Mesopotamian civ's besides Babylon. They can just draw from a common list.

I don't care that much about Sumeria, but it would be a great way to bring Assyria in.

[Tahitian Moon]

Personally I don't want more civs whose golden era was in the ancient times, I kind of like when Uniques can be built little bit later or are scattered to different eras, like America's units.

[steveg700]

Good point. We are actually short on unique modern-era units.

[Black Gate of Mordor]

Good point. We are actually short on unique modern-era units.

Whilst it's true, most people object to it because most games are usually decided before the modern era comes around. Unless those units are really powerful, than they're not going to change anything.

[SamBC]

Whilst it's true, most people object to it because most games are usually decided before the modern era comes around. Unless those units are really powerful, than they're not going to change anything.

And if they are really powerful, people object as they're "OP"

[zephyrtr]

Yeah, like the B-17 is really nasty, and they're having us build planes earlier so the Zero will actually be a useful unit. The Panzer's real fast and strong and the Foreign Legion gets a huge bonus on offensive campaigns. I think those are the only late game units there are. They seem to be heavily redoing England so its possible they'll be getting a Mark IV tank instead of one of their current units?

I had a proposal to the devs that they take unique units from the scenarios (War Chariot, Huscarl, Privateer...) and let military city-states gift them to you during appropriate eras. I just thought that would make allying with them more worthwhile, if they were giving you superior military units as opposed to ... wait for it ... anti tanks. Ugh, no anti tanks, PLEASE!

[JFD]

Are they heavily redoing England? I haven't heard of anything new since it was said that the extra spy had been removed (granted not specifically about England, but I'd imagine it was). I doubt England would be changing unique units. Longbowman are likely to become very popular, with the changes to the marksman line, and the Ship of the Line due to the increase in use of navies.

As for the Sumer, I wouldn't say the game needed it. Any and every important civ would be a good addition, but at the end of the day too many civs which play well only in one era quickly become less enjoyable than other civs which could benefit from multiple and later eras.

[zephyrtr]

The only things we seem to be sure of is that England's and Songhai's UA are being reworked. England is getting a 6th spy, which is kind of a big bonus -- not sure if any of their Naval movement bonus will remain. Songhai... not sure how much they're doing with them. Their embarkation defense wasn't HUGE so, I'm not sure exactly how gutted they will be.

[Black Gate of Mordor]

They seem to be heavily redoing England so its possible they'll be getting a Mark IV tank instead of one of their current units?

According to AriochIV's Analyst page, the Land Ship is based on the Mark IV tank. So I don't think so.

I'd really like to know who the last civ is, and what changes they're making to the existing civs.

[JFD]

The only things we seem to be sure of is that England's and Songhai's UA are being reworked. England is getting a 6th spy, which is kind of a big bonus -- not sure if any of their Naval movement bonus will remain.

I'm not so sure that England is getting an extra spy anymore:

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showth...y#post11399846

They may still change England's UA, though.

[steveg700]

Whilst it's true, most people object to it because most games are usually decided before the modern era comes around. Unless those units are really powerful, than they're not going to change anything.

Well, adjusting the AI is the only thing that fixes that. Civ's need to work together to deal with warmongers and expansionists, not rush in and try to grab scraps off the victims de jour.

[brxbrx]

I have come to the conclusion that this game needs the Sumerian civilization. I am always hearing about them on the History channel and other programs, and want them in for this reason, and because they are so interesting.

Ancient Sumeria ought to be included, but I would suggest you stop watching the history channel. It is pop science valuing sensationalism over fact, and is far more likely to misinform you with its gross oversimplifications than it is to teach you anything meaningful.

Babylon already took its place.

Babylon and Sumeria were different entities, occupying different eras, with different cultures and achievements. You may as well conflate the Celts with France, or the American civ with the Iroquois.

[Shiav]

Ancient Sumeria ought to be included, but I would suggest you stop watching the history channel. It is pop science valuing sensationalism over fact, and is far more likely to misinform you with its gross oversimplifications than it is to teach you anything meaningful.

^ True story. Also, where've you been brxbx?

[brxbrx]

where've you been brxbx?

*Don't say "In your mother's bedroom"*
*Don't say "In your mother's bedroom"*
*Don't say "In your mother's bedroom"*


Actually, shortly after the announcement of Gods and Kings, the information and speculation about it turned into too much for me to keep track of, so I moved on to occasionally lurking as opposed to actually posting.

[tejon]

I've been calling it "The Hitlery Channel" for years...

[Shiav]

I've been calling it "The Hitlery Channel" for years...

I found it strange when a discussion of Hannibal went Godwin's Law. Then the next show discussed a lunar colony and went the same way

[wingednosering]

Not sure where I come down on Sumer. Babylon does sort of cover the time period (I know they're a little later) and the region is already oversaturated (Persia, Arabia, Ottomans, Babylon, Greece at one point, etc).

Sumer and Hittites were already featured (in a less-than-stellar mod kind of way) in the WotW scenario, which would provide complications if they ever got made into a full-blown civ.

On the other hand, Sumer is awesome (as is Gilgamesh, their assumed leader) and invented the Wheel, the earliest writing (under debate right now), and basic mathematics. Obviously many civilizations also invented those, but they were the first (that we know of) for all three.

Assyria might be a better option, as others have mentioned.

And yes, history television just keeps getting worse. It's all about books and wikipedia :P.