Expansion Pack Civs

[Gangerolf]

Why only 8?

[Zoid]

Yeah, I want an expansion with 32 civs

[Gangerolf]

I still can't believe they omitted the Zulus

[LordShiva]

I'm still waiting for your son to come and tell me the answer.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg


Neither are you

It's difficult not to sometimes.

[Willem]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
Why only 8?

It's traditional, 8 has always been the typical number released with an XP. And it is the number that Firaxis was asking for when they ran their poll.

[Zoid]

Originally posted by Willem


It's difficult not to sometimes.

I could never be a serious beta tester, I can´t resist the urge to gloat

[TimeTraveler]

In the expansion pack, I could probably expect to see many of the civs that couldn't get into Civ4 original, but made it to the other civs.

...although they may be joined by a few new ones like Israel and Sumeria.

[JackRudd]

Sumeria were in Civ3 Conquests. They were Agricultural/Scientific, with Enkidu Warriors instead of Warriors.

[Cyclotron]

Africa definitely needs more civilizations, but not being a good scholar of African history I won't presume to guess what those should be.

I can't believe there's no civ in the fertile crescent right now - my choice would be Babylon (over Sumeria). I'd count the Assyrians out for the same reason, that they're too close on a world map to Babylon, but I would include the Hittites, as well as the Phonecians.

I wouldn't put the Israelis in because of the Phonecian presence on the same general area of land on a world map. In case you didn't notice, that's a big criteria for me (). I know it may not be a popular view to exclude Israel in favor of Phonecia, but I think when viewed objectively Phonecia has to win out - Israel was an important local power both in ancient times and, arguably, today, but in its heyday Phonecia was a naval and mercantile superpower, capable of exerting power and wealth across the Mediterranean and beyond. This, of course, would make it silly to include Carthage, as they are just an offshoot of Phonecia that happened to survive longer than the home country.

Turks would be out because of the inclusion of the Hittites, as would Byzantines, who are really just Romans (or maybe Greeks) anyway.

Europe is crowded enough without new Civs; I'd keep out the Dutch and the Portuguese for that reason, though Scandinavia is probably open enough to include the Vikings/Norse.

Koreans definitely deserve a place, as does some Indochinese civ - I'd take the Khmer.

America could use a few more; I would add the Mayans and the Iriquois.

Which brings me to:
- Hittites
- Babylonians
- Phonecians
- Norse
- Koreans
- Khmer
- Mayans
- Iroquois
- Some African Civ

But that's 9, so I have to ditch one - I'm not sure which. Sorry for not following the rules.

[TimeTraveler]

Originally posted by JackRudd
Sumeria were in Civ3 Conquests. They were Agricultural/Scientific, with Enkidu Warriors instead of Warriors.

Now there's a detail to which I wasn't paying enough attention until now.

[Alexander I]

Well, it looks like the top 10 choices right now are:

Babylonians
Norsemen
Dutch
Carthaginians/Phoenicians
Zulus
Koreans
Mayans
Celts
Ottoman Turks
Byzantines

I would anticipate that Firaxis will choose 8 of these, ans, based on previous expansions, I would say:

Babylonians
Carthaginians
Koreans
Mayans
Ottoman Turks
Dutch
Norsemen or Celts
Zulus (by popular demand)

If they still decide against the Zulus (as with vanilla Civ4,) then I would expect a different African civ, probably Bantu or Ethiopia.

[monolith94]

You can't have a whore of babylon without babylonians. I mean, come on, Babylon is essential!

[Demiurge2332]

I am a bit surprised by the lack of Asian civs on the poll?

Other than Korea, Thailand, and Khmer you dont have any others? You would think they had no history over there? Believe it or not they had just as much history as in Europe. You have Indonesia, Malay states, Vietnam, Tibet, Burma. You really dont just have China and Japan. SE asia has a great history esp. Thailand, but you look on the poll and 3 votes? Wow. I guess most here have not looked very closely at history outside of Europe/America/Middle east? I really hope that Korea and Thailand make it in. I think the former will and latter wont. I would put Thailand above Khmer just becouse of its " lasting power"- 800 years old, NEVER coloinized. It was Thailand the played a major part in ending the Khmer and eventually took over all of Cambodia and most of SE Asia. Thailand remains a major player in Asia (1 of the "5 tigers" in Asian economies) and is the Main player in SE Asia. Vietnam, Thailand, Burma, Malay states, would be great for a SE asia scenario! But I doubt my love of SE asia is shared so I guess I should just be happy with Korea..

Sorry but I am just sick of only seeing old dead Mid east/ European/ and American (tribes) being reprisented over some of the most interesting sociaties of the world in Asia.

[_BuRjaCi_]

Korea just deserves to be in as does Babylon and Chartage. And Chartage is more than just an offshot of the Phonecians ( in that case in Civ trems the Americains are just an offshot of the British and they are an offshot of the Germans- or germanic tribes), they where a colonial and maritime superpower,with cultural influence across the mediteranian log after the Phonecians lost their indipendence, if history had gone a little different they might have created their grand empire insted of the Romans.