Civs included. Just the facts madam 2.

[Bereta_Eder]

OMG, I've been away so long (damn Off topic forum!!) that I now feel overwelmed with all the new info in this thread. I used to have all the info in my head!

Great work Locutus!

Alexander the Great looks constipated in the photo snap.

Gramphos,
It was the capital (Athens), and it was building a unit «Hoplites» which as I explained was a 100% greek name reference. The decisive factor for inclusion in the high propability section was the unit, in my opinion.

The reason for my post is this:

Do we or do we not have hard evidence about the number of Civ being 16?

During some of my previous visits here I saw a lot of people claiming that it's 16. I asked for confirmation but I didn't get a satisfactory answer.

Do we have any new clues about this?

[me_irate]

I believe that the mongol/japanese leader is actualy a mongol leader ghangas khan. But i don't believe they are a civ, but more the face for the barbarians in the game. Perhaps if they are about to enter a city with no one in it, he apears and says he wont sack city for 400 gold or somthing. if you reject, he attacks.

[TechWins]

Do we or do we not have hard evidence about the number of Civ being 16?

If you mean 16 civs in all- I'm about 99% sure of yes
If you mean 16 civs playable in a game- I would say that it's all based on a preview (which aren't very reliable)

[Immortal Wombat]

WHERE ARE THE BRITISH?

Ah, there they are, right in the list which I read four times

*Buries head in sand and cowers in shame*

Thanks for pointing out my foolishness Henrik . I have no objections with English rather than British. What have the Welsh ever done

[Henrik]

We know one that Elizabeth is one of the leaders.
I think the tribe will be called the english rather than the brittish though.

[Gramphos]

Locutus and Paiktis,
I think I was a little to excited about that preview when I wrote my post, and I now think that Locutus made the right decision in adding them to the clue section.

Originally posted by paiktis22
Do we or do we not have hard evidence about the number of Civ being 16?

During some of my previous visits here I saw a lot of people claiming that it's 16. I asked for confirmation but I didn't get a satisfactory answer.

Do we have any new clues about this?

In the last Preview (I think) was it said that Civ III will come with 16 civs and that all civs should be able to be in one single game. That is one more review that tells it is 16. Anyway, the may have been informed about that the number of civs in a game shall be 16, and taken the number 16 civs in the game from an earlier preview. Therefor I say that it's still uncertain.

[Locutus]

Paiktis,

Thanks. One the number of civs issue: there have been an overwhelming number of (more or less) independent reports that the total number of civs will be 16, so even though Firaxis hasn't confirmed anything yet, it's very likely indeed that 16 is the correct number (methinks about 90% certain).

How many civs can play in a single game is much less obvious: some previews say 7, others 8, IIRC 1 said 9, 1 said 16 and others didn't say anything about this issue at all. These contradictions combined with the fact that Firaxis hasn't made an official statement on the issue suggests to me that it may not yet have been determined. If this is true than it's quite likely that the number is not hardcoded and thus doesn't really matter, since we should be able to increase it ourselves once we get the game (by editing a textfile or something like that). But of course, that's still speculation.

Me_irate,
Why are you so obsessed with the idea that Mongols are Barbarians? There are no clue whatsoever that support your theory, it's mere speculation. Just because the Chinese thought of the Mongols as barbarians you think they are? The Greeks thought the Persians, the Romans and the Egyptians to be barbarians, the Romans too thought every non-Roman (except for the Greeks) was a barbarian. Just about every major civilization saw other major civilizations as barbarians, why do you think the Mongols are so special?

A more practical argument against your view is the fact that in the first E3 movie that came out a messagebox is clearly visible that says something along the lines of 'you have disturbed a horde of Numidian Warriors'. Numidia was a small kingdom in North Africa and the Numidians were at times the enemies of the Carthagians and the Romans. They had nothing at all to do with the Mongols yet they are used in the game as Barbarians.

We currently know too little about the issue to draw any conclusions about the exact role of the Barbarians in Civ3 but it seems very unlikely to me that Mongols <=> Barbarians.


So far, based on our evidence, we know that:

100% CONFIRMED. These civs ARE in CIV 3:

1. AMERICANS - Leader (Abraham Lincoln; 100% confirmed), city names, Unique Unit (F15)
2. GERMANS - Unique Unit (Panzer). Multiple text references, video reference
3. CHINESE - Leader (Mao Zedong; 100% confirmed)
4. ROMANS - Leader (C. Julius Ceasar, city name (capital), unique unit (Legion), video reference
5. FRENCH - Leader (Joan of Arc(?); 100% confirmed), dialogue window of the French (Unique Unit: Musketeer?)
6. RUSSIANS - Unique Unit (MiG)
7. ZULUS - Unique Unit (Impi)
8. ENGLISH - Leader (Elisabeth I; 100% confirmed)
9. EGYPTIANS - Leader (100% pharaoh, does anyone know who this is?), definite text reference
10. INDIANS - Leader (Mahatma Ghandi; 100% confirmed)
11. MONGOLS (90%)- or JAPANESE?(10%) Leader * (see civ 18, Japanese)
12. IROQUOIS - Leader (100% Native American, any ideas on who? Hiawatha?), city names, text references Unique Unit (75% Native American Unique Unit - 25% Military Leader) ** (see below)
13. GREEKS - Leader (Alexander the Great; City name (capital), possible Unique Unit (Hoplites) *** (see below), text referenc, video reference.

** There are two clues that this Native American civ in fact isn't the Iroquois: the houses behind the leader picture are small and round rather than long and square and the unit is a horseman while the Iroquois lived in woods and didn't rely heavily on horses. All other clues (text references, hair cut, city names) point to Iroquois.
*** In the screenshot Athens is building Hoplites. In greek «OPLITES» means "men-at-arms". This word is still in use today in Greece and it still means the same thing as it did in Ancient Greece.


EVIDENCE ABOUT OTHER CIVS (which means they could be in or not):

14. PERSIANS - City names (capital)
15. SPANISH - City name: Salamanca (which historically was once a Roman city)
16. BABYLONIANS - City name
17. AZTECS - City names


SUGGESTIONS BASED ON CLUES (weak clues but we report them):

18. JAPANESE (open for debate plz see the samurai(?) unit at http://viewer.fgnonline.com/fgn_medi...tp%3A%2F%2Fwww .fgnonline.com%2Fmedia%2Fpc%2Fnews%2Funits.jpg
* Also see http://www.infogrames-expo.com/screens/civ05b.jpg Gheghis Chan of the Mongols or a Japanese leader? (All votes except one say Ghengis).

19. VIKINGS (?) Very weak clues. See above mention URL for the boat: Viking Longboat?

20. ISRAELIS. Apolytoner Eli has pointed out that according to a israeli site, Israel is in.

21. CANADIANS. City name (Montreal). The city name is NOT on the map, but on a civ 3 window.

22. CONFEDERATES. As refered to in a swedish article, a Great Military Leader in Civ 3 could be Stonewell Jackson. Apolytoner Arator argued that this leader is impossible to be in the same civ as Lincoln (=100% confirmed leader of the Americans). Many other Apolytoners disagree though, arguing that he's more likely to be an American, among other reasons because (as joseph1944 pointed out) he served for the American Army before joinging the Confederates and was even asked by Lincoln to serve as Commanding General under him only weeks before South Carolina succeeded from the Union.

23. PHOENICIANS. Based on a single text reference in a preview.


--------------------------------------------------------
The evidence is categorized as such:

Leader= We have a picture of the leader of the corresponting civ.
Unique Unit= We know that the particular unique unit belongs to the corresponding civ
Text reference= The civ has been mentioned by Firaxis in their web site or in interviews by their CEO
Video reference= The civ was seen in Firaxis demo movie from E3.
City names= The names of cities that clearly belong to the corresponding civ are included in scrrenshots of the game
All other clues= All other clues are reported next to the civ name.

-------------------------CIV FACTS-----------------------

+ Firaxis said the made NO official announcement regarding the number of civs that may or may not be included in the game.
+ In a Gamespot article its says that civs will be 16.
+ An israeli site says that civs will be 16
+ In an IGN preview it says that there will be 16 civs.
+ By now, many other sources have also claimed that the total number of civs in Civ3 will be 16.

--------------------------POINTERS-------------------------

The city names in the screen shots can be from an extra city names list or could have been arbitrarily written be members of Firaxis. So city names in screenshots doesn't guarantee that a civ will be in. Examples: Kerplakistan & Huntsville, possibly others.

[joseph1944]

Could we please change one small detail: Stonewall Jackson did served in the U.S. Army prior to the Civil War, however it was Gen. Robert E. Lee who was asked to become the Commanding General of U.S. Army Forces just prior to start of the fighting between the North and South.

[Bereta_Eder]

Locutus,
Ok then. Since Firaxis made no definit statement then I think we should leave it exactly as you have it written on the end of the list.

[ancient]

Iroqois are not 100% confirmed!!
No where near it! Its 100% confirmed a Native American tribe but I bet you its the Aztecs will be included before the Iroqois.
Kick the Iroquois off the list.
And I bet you Japan will be included at least because it will be the largest buyer of civ3 not in europe or america..
Mongolls are not barbarians, the were very cultured and civil it would be a shame if they were used as a figure head for barbarians.

[Locutus]

joseph,
Whatever, it's not like the Confederates are really gonna get their own civ. I'll change it in the next update though.

paiktis,
Glad you agree. Why on earth do you have such a humungous sig BTW? You don't seriously think anyone will read that, do you?

ancient,
About the issue of the Iroquois and the Aztec, they are most probably both in (#12 & #17), but Aztec *instead* of Iroquois, I don't think so. 1) The Native American leader doesn't look the slightest bit like an Aztec 2) Aztecs didn't live in forests 3) Aztecs didn't have citynames like Onnontare, Oka or Gewauga 4) Aztecs didn't ride horses, like the Native American Unique Unit/Great Leader.

Native Americans in this discussion (and most other places that I've seen it used too) refers to the North-American Native Indian tribes like the Sioux, Iroqouis, Apaches, etc. That's tribes that live in present-day USA & Canada. Middle & South American civs like Aztecs, Mayans and Incans are not part of this group but seen as separate civs. The two Aztec citynames suggest that the Aztecs are in the game as well, but as their own civ next to the Iroquois.

On the Japan issue: I don't think the Firaxis historians will be too impressed by marketing strategies but care more for historic accuracy, but even if this was the case, this still wouldn't count as evidence. We need hard facts in this thread, not wild speculations or shrewd deductions.

[Martinus]

Iroqois are not 100% confirmed!!

See this Firaxis site - the Iroquis are expressly mentioned:

www.firaxis.com/civ3/gameupdate.cfm?updatenum=2

It says: "Want to offer a Peace Treaty to the Iroquois, but only if they will pay 5 gold per turn? Just make the demand."

As for the Mongol/Japanese leader face, from the look of it I do not think it is either.
He looks like a Chinese (but we already have Mao). Genghis Khan should be dressed in a Mongol rather than Chinese style (it is true that they conquered China and adopted much of its culture, but still...) and should have some tents (yurts) behind him.

I do not think however it is a Japanese leader either. Although there was no mention about them, my guess would be Korean (or Firaxis has screw-up their history research on this one).

Martinus

[Bereta_Eder]

Locutus,
I was reading Homer's Odyssey and I became a little bit too.. enthusiastic with it . Then I searched the net for some info and I stumbled upon some english text of this epic and I couldn't resist! The admins erased by intorelable sig very fast!

I think we are counting the days untill we have written confirmation from Firaxis about the 16 civs. On the other hand it isn't in their best interest to make it clear to us now (they let us hope!) so we can be waiting untill the day civ 3 shows up in the selves


Martinus,

About the Iroquois.

Thank you for your pointer.

This reference about the Iroquois has been discovered long ago and is included either in this thread or the previous one. There was a debate about it and wether we could take it at face value since it was in the very first updates of the civ 3 site when a lot of things were still undecided. This goes to say that this reference may have been used just as an example. I agree with you that the Native Indians are propably the Iroquois but since we cannot be 100% sure we have stated our (that means the Apolyoners') concerns.

About the Leader,
Thank you for your input. As I have found out there might be some historical difference between what we know and what Firaxis has found out or has chosen to implement - historically speaking. For example if I was shown the pic of Alexander the Great that Firaxis made I'd say it is not him and that it is propably Ceasar. And that is because according to the sources Alexander always had long hair ( a well known characteristic of his). Maybe in a period of his life he hadn't or Firaxis screwd up on the design of Alexander. (it's not that tragic).

About the leader I think from what you say you also conclude he is more likely to be Genghis Khan (despite the irregularities or loose ends of the environment and the uniform)?

[Kestrel]

One minor point.

If we are deducing which Civs will be included based on the various published screenshots,

and if reports are true that 12 scenarios are likely to be included with Civ3,

Mightn't some of the civs / city-names we see not be part of the standard Civ3 offering but rather a screenshot from one or another Civ3 Scenario which might have a different set of civs ?

Therefore until an announcement is made by Firaxis it may be difficult to dteremine which Civs are in Standard Civ & which are out unless we KNOW which screenshots definitely pertain to the Standard Civ3 offering rather than possibly to a scenario.

Just a thought.

[Bereta_Eder]

Kestrel,

That's a good point but why would civ senarios use other civilizations? Normally they use the civs that are included in the «regular» game.

In my opinion new civs that are not included in the game civ 3 will only come with an add on to civ 3 that is still very distant to the future and may never come out.