{The List} Civilizations

[Brent]

I like to play as and against civs that are part of my heritage, in civ2 and civ3 that would be America, England, Germany, and Scandinavia. It would be nice to be able to play Swiss, separate Norwegians, Swedes and Danes, possibly Angles, Saxons, Goths and Jutes, and Israelites. There are also other obscure civs I like to play as and against, such as Native American ones. Why force us to use the editor?

[Kuciwalker]

Because in implementing a system like you are proposing, you lose an enormous amount of the strategic depth of the game. Why bother putting in fifty redundant civs?

[POTUS]

Have 50 slightly different civs, say that they have different special units, but the same traits, or visa versa.

[Fosse]

More Civs are one thing that everybody always asks for... except skywalker.

Frankly, if there are dozens and dozens of Civs, then I'm not concerned if some are just like others. I can pick a group of Civs out for their strategic pros and cons, and then select among that group for less tangible reasons.

I remember in CtP 1 (never played 2) that having lots of Civs was nice, but at the same time they had a lot of lame civs, in my opinion.

What I would like to see in Civ 4 are a greater spread of Civ traits and their effects (even degrees... a little agricultural or a lot?), and a huge number of Civs that I think are "cool" and "deserve" to be in. Any ancient Civilization that we know about should be in, no matter how minor they wound up being. Those Civs deserve a place long before America, anyhow.



We are, of course, begging the question of whether or not traits and unique units will be in, but being that those were an overall popular addition I would expect them back.

[Kuciwalker]

More Civs are one thing that everybody always asks for... except skywalker.

I'd love more civs... if they were distinct and not just complete clones of other civs. Unfortunately, C3C is coming close to the limit for that, so more civs isn't really POSSIBLE without sacrificing strategy.

[Sandman]

I couldn't care less about UUs or civ traits. Utterly meaningless fluff, IMO. So long as they give you an option to switch them off.

I don't care about 200+ civs either. Hell, I wouldn't mind it if it was only ancient civs. But I suppose we'll see Irish, Venetian, South African, Jamaican, Burgundian, Quebecois, Jacobite, Ukrainian, Omani, Pakistani, Taiwanese, Californian and Glaswegian civs. Goody.

[Tassadar500]

Originally posted by Sandman
I couldn't care less about UUs or civ traits. Utterly meaningless fluff, IMO. So long as they give you an option to switch them off.

I don't care about 200+ civs either. Hell, I wouldn't mind it if it was only ancient civs. But I suppose we'll see Irish, Venetian, South African, Jamaican, Burgundian, Quebecois, Jacobite, Ukrainian, Omani, Pakistani, Taiwanese, Californian and Glaswegian civs. Goody.

[DarkCloud]

um civii leader: this is the official civilizations thread...

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=103821

I'll be glad to sum up your ideas in it- but your choice of a {The List} marker misleads people to think that this is the official thread- could you please NOT start any threads with that title... that title is for OFFICIAL threads... thanks

If you want to sign up for a threadmastership, you have to sign up in Asmodean's thread about the List Organization.

Thank you