Which Civs are In?

[Brent]

You have to at least admit that Christianity and the Bible are influential, even if you don't call them important. Maybe the Hebrews can be a Non Player Civ.

[Solver]

My point exactly. And I don't think there will be non player civs... good thing, too. If they make a civ, why not have it playable?

[Brent]

I agree, and I feel the same way about the civs in the Conquest scenarios in Civ3.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Brent
Much of the world today is very aware of the Hebrew nation and their religion has mucgh greater influence on the modern world than that of the Vikings, Celts or Olmecs.

There are 14 million Jews today, on a population of 5 billion. There's not all that important. Half of the world's population (China, East Asia, Africa) probably never even heard of Judaism. Sikhism has almost twice as many followers as Judaism (and I can assure you that throughout much of Asia (minus the ME) its presence it much more dominant and visible than Judaism), but I don't see anyone arguing for the Punjab to be included as a civ.

And that's just today, when the impact of Judaism is (ironically mostly thanks to the Nazis) more important than ever before. Over the course of the past 5000 years, the influence of African, Meso-American and indigenous European religions by far outway that of that tiny Jewish population.

Again, Judaism as a religion was important (but then really only because it's the basis of two other religions, not even in its own right), but the Hebrew as a civilization wasn't.

Besides, it's existing religions that are in Civ4, so Hebrews have to be in if Judaism is in - otherwise it would be sort of stupid.

It would only be stupid if religions are directly tied to a nation, but there's no reason why it should be. That would in fact only create problems as India and China would have numerous religions while many European nations would have to share the same one.

[Solver]

A civilization is as important as its achievements are. So if Judaism is important, Hebrews are. And while indeed Asia was and is not too related to Christianity and Judaism, it was largely religious events that shaped the development of Europe. The Crusades, the conquest of South America and settling of North America to a degree, it all depends on that, largely. We can argue about whether or not Europe influences rest of the world, but most players of this game will anyway be European or American, not Asian or African - therefore, they come from areas that were more heavily influenced by Judaism than Sikkhism.

BTW, in highschools here, teaching of both literature and history of culture starts with the Hebrew civilization .

I'm not saying civs will be directly tied to religions... probably they will not be. But I'm saying that for each religion, there should be a civ included that we do, in the real world, associate with that religion.

[Brent]

Well, at least most of China and East Asia have heard of Christianity, and most of Africa is more than aware of Islam and probably more aware of Christianity than China and East Asia are. I certainly wouldn't complain about a Punjab civ, even with only 19 slots. But isn't it largely considered part of the Indian realm?

I agree with Locutus about India, China, and Europe.

[Switch]

One thing we all have to remember, importance of religions and nations aside, is that Firaxis is a business. Businesses need to make money. Seeing as Firaxis is a NA company, they will make most of their money from NA. What does that mean? The majority of the nations and religions will be those at least fairly well known to the general NA public. How many North Americans gamers know about Sihkism (sorry about my spelling if I got it wrong)? Now, how many know about Judaism? Chances are, a lot more NA's will know about Judaism than Sihkism, or any generally non-western religion for that matter. And common knowledge is probably going to be at least the starting point for most of their lists.

[Xorbon]

It's good to see they're starting off with 19 civs rather than 16 like they did with vanilla Civ 3.

That said, they'd better not do what they did when Civ 3 first came out and leave out the Mongols! The Mongols had better be in the next game!

[Brent]

Assuming there will be two expansions that each add new civs as a significant feature, how many do you think each will have? 10? 15? MKaybe they'd even surprise us and give us a library expansion with 30 to 200 civs. Can you tell I care about predesigned civs?

I'd like it if the game includes dozens of realworld religions, including Sikhism and a few different denominations of Christianity.

The Mongols can be barbarians for all I care. But I would be disappointed if the Scandinavians were included as barbarians.

[TechWins]

Re: Which Civs are In?

I'd assume the Civs will be:

England
France
Germany
Russia
Roman
Greece
Egypt
Zulu
Babylon
China
India
USA
Native American (Cherokee would be a nice switch)
Aztec
Mongols
Spain
Japan
Vikings
Persia

If the Civs in italics are considered the obvious choices, then I think the other 5 are most likely in.

~The Mongols were one of the most dominant forces in history ruling a good part of the world, plus they have a good commerical feel Genghis Khan.

~Spain was an extremely dominant country the greater part of the "Modern age". In fact, it was Spain who initiated the world into the "Modern age". The Spanish are too influential on the world's history not to be included.

~Japan has a history as a country dating all the way back to the turn of the first millenia (c.e.). Not to mention, Japan has a little too big of a gaming market not to include them apart of the game. Japan is almost in no part of question of being included.

~The Vikings are too popular of a choice to leave out. Not to mention, being playing a big role in European history, which is obviously favored or Eastern or Native American history in the Civ series.

~Persia helps satisfy the need for a Middle Eastern country, and they are probably the most recognizable nation over history. I see them being a preferred choice over Arabia or the Ottomans, personally.

[Brent]

I agree regarding Japan's gaming market. I think Scandinavia is also well represented among players of this particular type of game. I would personally say Arabia deserves to be in more than Persia.

[Xorbon]

I'd like to see the Arabs. They've had a huge impact on the middle east and north Africa for the past millenium. But the problem is, who do you remove to make room for them?

If it was up to me, I'd kick out the Zulu in favour of the Arabs. The problem then? You'd be left with just one African tribe (the Egyptians). To fix that, remove native Americans to make way for the Ethiopians. BUT then you'd only have two American civs, so...


In any case, hopefully most of the overlooked tribes will make it back in an expansion.

[Brent]

The Arabs could always replace Greece or Babylon. Ethiopia, Ghana, Mali, Songhay, or Kongo could replace Zulu. Maybe we should start by dividing slots among the continents/ regions, either equally, by land area, by current population, by current power, or by how long they've been in contact with the cradle of civilization, or a combination. By continents equally, I would start by dividing into Old and New World, maybe 10 for old, 9 for New. 5 for North America, 4 for South America. Three for Europe, three for Africa, four for Asia. Two for the middle east, two for the far east. Russia, Germany, England, Egypt, Kongo, Mali, Israel, Arabs, India, China. Inuit, USA, Aztec, Maya, Iroquois, Inca, Guarani, Brazil, ???

[TechWins]

I agree regarding Japan's gaming market. I think Scandinavia is also well represented among players of this particular type of game. I would personally say Arabia deserves to be in more than Persia.

Arabia may deserve to be in more than Persia, but I think Persia will be the included Civ over them. Then again my bias based on the history of Persian and Greek wars may be the reason for that.

If it was up to me, I'd kick out the Zulu in favour of the Arabs. The problem then? You'd be left with just one African tribe (the Egyptians). To fix that, remove native Americans to make way for the Ethiopians. BUT then you'd only have two American civs, so...

It's a rather tough decision on who should be included in the game, because obviously to most people there should be more than 19 or even 31 Civs included with the game.

I would say the Americans belong more to the European/Western world than the North/South American world; therefore, there has to be at least 2 (Aztec and North American) included with the game. I think the Mayans and Incans are very well deserving too and maybe moreso than the Aztecs, but of course Aztec nation has more of an appeal than the other two. It's all about the appeal, IMO, for who will be chosen.

[Brent]

I'd rather have Maya than Aztec.