APOLYTON EXTRACIVS PACK.

[ranskaldan]

Ok, i think this thread can be un-topped now...

Wernazuma III, can you start a new thread that is devoted to nothing but keeping track of all the properties (leader, UU, abilities, city list etc.) of all the civs? We can still have the separate threads on each civ going on all over the place, but we need a centralized location where everything is.

[LoD]

Again, sad to hear you are leaving Locutus.
As for the guys that are making the graphics for the Polish civ - sincerely I don't know, I'll ask them once they produce a unit prototype.
As for the legal issue - I honestly hope this thread (by myself) will lead to the clarification of the matter.

[alskdj80]

Hey, this idea sounds really great! It's quite clear that Firaxis really didn't do their homework (from 2nd grade, I believe someone said?, lol) on any of the civs... or the world map, for that matter... besides, the number of civs available really isn't cutting it...

Adding new civs will really balance the game, and add a greater sense of realism there. Also, er... while you guys are at it... could you fix the existing civs? I mean, some of the info is really inaccurate or inappropriate, such as the great leaders, the choice of rulers, cities, etc.

Can you guys make an ancient leader for the Chinese? One of the Dynastic Emperors of China maybe

The exact question I wanted to ask, hehe. I mean, Mao was a terrible ruler, and it really doesn't do China justice.

I'm pretty sure someone must have mentioned Napoleon? (I haven't actually read the entire post, sorry) Well, I sort of miss him... kinda makes me lose incentive to play as French... sorry Joan of Arc, but its the truth...

For the info on the civs, it's probably always best to listen to the people that have actually lived or are from the place. I always trust locals more than foreigners on local info. Even if the foreigner is a certified expert, I don't believe that the locals will be any less knowing on their own subject. So, ignore everyone except the locals, it's the only fair way... damn... I guess my request on Napoleon won't be put in then... *sigh*, LOL.

But, anyways, I was serious about the locals, because I've seen too many posts from pretentious foreigners on another nation, when in actual fact, they know nothing on the country. But, I guess we're all culprit to that to a certain degree... I'll admit to it. Like Napoleon... he's easily the most important French ruler I know, but any French person may say that he isn't (I dunno). So, definitely listen the French on that argument.

[Gromit]

I had a thought on the issue of the whole 'playerrs choose thier own civs' thing. In may spare time (when not playing civ games), I also play FIFA soccer games. The best U.K. site has a 'TV station selection' mod, which enables you to choose the graphics for the in-match score, popup display (and a few other things) before you load the game. If someone could adapt this principle to a 'civ chooser' I think that would be a good thing.

Just a thought anyhow.
Here is a link:-

Soccergaming.co.uk

Oh, and don't listen to grizzly.

[Wetherell]

Hey, I'd like to help!

I would love to help with the development of the animations of the leaders, all I would really need though is the software to do it. Any sugestions....I love a chalange. I've got skills in computers and think I could tackle this beast. I just need a little guidence.

Sugestions for what leader head to start with?

Oh btw if anyone has already voluntiered to help with this aspect ok then, I just couldn't read all of the input already posted on the thread.

Anyway give me some input, and I'll be happy to help....

Wetherell

[Olle Wiman]

Vikings here, there everywhere.

To whoever makes the "Viking" extra-civ:
Have not bought CivIII yet. Will get it in
some weeks...

But, please do not copy/paste from CivII.
There are errors there

Example: Viking Republic Leader is LAGMAN
(Yep, such a title does exist. Ruling
style was more Republic-lookalike than
despotism).

City list needs a re-make... Another
female (default) leader?

Special unit: Of COURSE Dragon-Ship.
An ancient unit which can sail "beyond
Horizon" (Vikings landed in Now Foundlan
in A.D. 1002, a "few" years before
Columbus).

I could be of some assistance (but I can
not make any graphics). Post an e-mail
to sm6hcj@seaside.se

Rgrds, O

[Signa]

Civilizations Opinion

I'm a avide militarly historian and would like to add a dozen or so civilizations that I think should be in...

Lets start by anilization of the current ones...

Americans
Abe Lincoln: F-15E Strike Eagle: Ex/In: Washington
The choice of Abe Lincoln as the leader was probaly the best. However, Washington, FDR, and maybe even JFK (joke) are breathing down his neck. The F-15E is OK as the UU. A improved Riflemen called the "Minutemen" to pay tribute to the miltas of the revolutionary war would be my choice (gotta love "The Patriot"), but any modern units could work (Abrams, Rangers, F-22, B-2) would work. The Expanionist trait is very well picked. The Industrious one as well. Should they be in, yes. They've owned the since WWII and have a very distinct culture. They are young, but deserve a ticket in CivIII.

Aztecs
Montozuma II: Jaugar Warrior: Re/Mi: Tenochtitlan
The Aztecs were put in the game simply as a placeholder and their fame due to their loss to Cortez. The leader choice is good considering Monty is the only Aztec leader the general public is knowlegable to. The Jaguar Warrior should be the Eagle Warrior considering the "chief god" of the Aztecs was an eagle. The traits are also we picked. Do they deserve to be in? The Spanish would of been better, but we can make do.

Babylonians
Hammubri: Bowman: Re/Sc: Babylon
The Babylonians are a good choice to represent all of the Mesopatamin cultures through ancient history (Assyrians, Sumerians). The Bowman is a good but not great idea for a UU. I personally prefer a "Siege Tower" replacement for the Catapult (drawing off the Assyrian love of siege warfare). Hammubri is one of many good leaders for this civilization, but I would prefer Nebacanzzer (him and his gardens kicked off the golden age. The traits are good for a culture victory, but a little unrealistic (Mi/Ex would be more historical) but it works.

Chinese
Mao Tse-Tung: Rider: Mi/In: Beijing
China is more than deserving to be in the mix. With 6000 years of culture and history, they are probly the most deserving. The traits are a little off, China should be a Scientific civilization over Militaristic. The UU of the Rider is absolutly bogus, a "Fire Machine" (name sucks) an improved cannon would be my choice. Using Mao as the leader of the civilization is a good bet. This is one of the tricker civilizations and some mistakes where made.

Egyptians
Cleopatra: War Chariot: Re/In: Thebes
The region around the Nile is one of the most disputed in history, no less than 10 empires have controlled it. But from time to time it has been independant, so it gets in and rightfully so. The War Chariot, however useless in the actual game, is the perfect UU for the Egyptians. The traits are fairly well defined, but I would ditch the Industrious for Commerical. Cleopatra as a leader is a gut call. Besides being histories greatest slut, she only managed to get the wrath of the Romans (specifically, Ocativin/Augustus). Ramases or Kufu would be better.

English
Elizabeth I: Man of War: Co/Ex: London
Another one of those automatic berth nations. The traits are very soild (but if needed Industious could be used). Elizabeth is probably the best for leader, but Victoria and Henry VII (love the war of the roses) are good too. The Man of War is a great UU from a historical prespecive, but should be way thoughened up to show it's once domination of the seas. However, the Longbowman was only used by one civilization in history alot. If the Man of War is cut, then a improved regular Longbowmen (perhaps a Welsh Archer) could be used.

French
Joan 'D Arc: Musketeer: Co/In: Paris
If it wasn't for the witch of a 13 year old girl the French and English nations would be one. I like Napoleon either way. Charlemagne is also kinda there, but would probaly be classified as a German. The Musketeer is a joke for a UU in the game, but the historical premise on it are good. A Trebucet would be more historical and in the game might perform better. Choosing traits for France is hard, so pick your favorites. Commerical/Industrious is the best combo in the game and the French get it. Darn.

Germans
Bismark: Panzer: Mi/Sc: Berlin
I know for the sake of politcal corectness Hitler was not made leader of this civilization, but from a historical perspective he deserves it. The Panzer was a powerful Tank, and is a good UU. The Militaristic trait is good, but Scientific is a little sketchy. I'd rather see Industrious (modern Germany) or Religious (the Christians in the Holy Roman Empire, and the Nazis in the Third Reich).

Greeks
Alexander: Hoplite: Co/Sc: Athens
The Hoplite ties with the Legionairy for "Most Historical UU" and is perfect for the domestically oriented player, considering you are basically immune to assault till Knights exist. The traits are good, if not great. Alexander for the leader might or might not be good, add in that he was Macedonian. Percilus or King Leonidus each would be good. Probaly Percilus due to his peaceful nature.

Indians
Ghandi: War Elephant: Co/Re: Delhi
Using Ghandi as the leader is cool, but his policies of "non-violent resistence" I still love. The traits are rather well concieved. The War Elephant is interesting. In the game only bad luck (no horses or iron) really make them truelly useful, and i'd rather see the War Elephant return as a normal unit in the game. India has been a important force in the game, and should be included.

Iriquois
Hiawathia: Mounted Warrior: Ex/Re: Grand River
The Iriquois were probaly the most powerful group of Native American tribes ever (which shows how weak they really were). Despite this, they should be in. The expansionist quality is off it's mark, considering once the 5/6 tribes banded together they didn't make much war. The religious is good, but they were avide buisnessmen with the Europeans and so the commerical trait seems more well suited. The Mounted Warrior is just plain old crap, a Brave would be perfect however.

Japanese
Tokugawa: Samauri: Mi/Re: Tokyo
The Japanese are sometimes classified with the Chinese from their oriental cultures, but that is false. Japan has made it's own name for itself. It's UU, the Samuari, is a historical and powerful. The traits are good, but Industrial might fit in better than religious. Tokugawa is a good leader, overall they did a nice job trowing together this one.

Romans
Ceasar: Legionairy: Mi/Co: Rome
"Hail Ceaser" indeed. This is one of the coolest and another really well made civilization. The traits are perfect for a war mongor, and the Legionairy has a good mix of both offenive strenght and defensive power. Of course the use of Julius Galius Ceasar is perfect for this popular Civilization III civilization.

Russians
Catherine: Cossack: Ex/Sc: Moscow
Personally, i've always hated Catherine. She wasn't even a Russian (we all know she was Prussian). Joseph Stalin or VI Lenin would much better represent the Russian/Soviet empires. If spies where still units, then the obvious thing would be a KGB agent but thats not in the cards. The Cossack sucks in the game but if it was to be given a boost in attack or movement it would rock. The traits are well fit.

Persians
Xerxes: Immortal: In/Sc: Persepolis
Using Xerxes the Idiot for the leader here makes no sense. All he managed to do was waste 70,000 soilders fighting Hoplites. Either Darius or Cyrus should lead the Persians. The Immortal UU is just perfect. The traits I don't excatly like. The one thing the Persian empire was know for was size! Expansionist all the way baby. Another thing is their location and road system. Both of which point to a Commerical attribute.

Zulus
Shaka: Impi: Mi/Ex: Zimbabwe
Even thought Africa is unrepresented in the game, Zulus fits in well. Shaka is absolutly blood-thirsty in ever way, the more power to him. The Impi is a good UU from a historical and game perspective, and the traits fit right into them. Overall, another perfect match for the character of this civilization.

Now on to the new ones....

Aksumites
???: ???: ???: ???
Africa needs more say in the game. Aksum or perhaps Nubia are good candiates.

Arabs
Saladin: Camel Warrior: Re/Co: Mecca
Representing the origonal Arabs, Sejicks, and Ottomans. Saladin sounds good for a leader. Religious off of their Islamic faith and Commerical if you know Muslim culture.

Byzantines
Justantin: Cataract: ???: Constantinople
Justantin was the greatest Byzantine emperor, no doubt here. Plus there infamious knight units, the Cataracts, and traits I have no clue

Carthagians
Hannibal: War Galley: Mi/Co: Carthage
Hannibal is good, but maybe Dido for a leader. Indian already stole the Elephant, so they get the War Galley following their Phoecian roots. The traits fall into place.

Celtics
Arthur: Beserker: ???: ???
He may be legendary, but King Arthur is just to good to pass up. The Woad covered warriors shall be represented in the Beserker.

Hewbrews
???: Zealot: Re/??: Jerusalem (perhaps...)
David, Solomon, or any other leader is good. A Zealot swordsmen or something fits the Religious trait. The other trait is up in the air. I haven't spent enought time on them for a capitol.

Incans
???: ???: ???: Cuzco
The first only South American civilization in the game. Besides that, i'm blank.

Khmerians
???: ???: ???: Khmer
Somebody needs to hold down Polynesia for all of us.

Macedonians
Alexander: Companions: Mi/Ex: Pella
This one is the icing on my cake. The Greeks and Macedonians were differnt. Alexander is the obvious leader, and his companion calvary (improved horsemen) the UU. The traits are obvious, and so is the title.

Mayans
???: Jaguar Warrior: Sc/?: ???
Must be scientific, and trades the Eagle Warrior with the Aztecs for the Jaguar warrior.

Mongols
Genghis Khan: Mounted Archer: Mi/Ex: Khartoum
The great Genghis Khan leads these guys. With their tradmark Mounted Archers and the mean attitude in their attributes, these should definatly be in there.

Sioux
Sitting Bull: Mounted Warrior: Mi/Re: Little Bighorn
The great plains native americans are well represented with the Sioux. They get the Mounted Warrior instead, nothing out of the ordinary.

Spanish
Phillip II: Tercio: Ex/?: Madrid
Another old Civilization II civilization, nothing out of the ordinary except the inproved Musketman/Riflemen in the Tercio.

Vikings
???: Longboat: Mi/Re: ???
"Going aviking?" Grab a longboat, a sword, and a attitude and you get the good old Vikings.

Lets review...

Aksumites
Americans
Arabs
Aztecs
Babylonians
Byzantines
Carthagians
Celtics
Chinese
Egyptians
English
French
Germans
Greeks
Hewbrews
Incas
Indians
Iriquios
Japanese
Khmerians
Macedonians
Mayans
Mongols
Persians
Romans
Russians
Sioux
Spanish
Vikings
Zulus

30 in all...

[Ribannah]

Re: Civilizations Opinion

Originally posted by Signa
Iriquois
Hiawathia: Mounted Warrior: Ex/Re: Grand River
The Iriquois were probaly the most powerful group of Native American tribes ever (which shows how weak they really were). Despite this, they should be in. The expansionist quality is off it's mark, considering once the 5/6 tribes banded together they didn't make much war. The religious is good, but they were avide buisnessmen with the Europeans and so the commerical trait seems more well suited. The Mounted Warrior is just plain old crap, a Brave would be perfect however.

They are called Iroquois (French version of the Algonquin name of Iroqu for the People of the Longhouse), not Iriquois, thank you.

http://www.tolatsga.org/iro.html

The military strength of the Iroquois in their Golden Age surpassed anything that the Europeans could muster on their continent; they were lord and master in the region.
Expansionist, which is not the same as militaristic, is not off the mark because, while being small in numbers, they created a large empire. But it's true that commercial would fit them just as well. Their special unit should IMHO be a musketman that uses all squares as road.

30 in all...

Which leaves room for the Dutch.

[Signa]

Ok So It Is Iroquois

Sorry about the numerous typos above. The point about expansionist being able to work is correct, but i would prefer militaristic non the less.

I did leave 2 slots open, most likley to be filled by the Dutch (which were a puppet of Spain for a good while, but eventually they became indepentant and colonized a large amount of territory, and today have great culture and economic infulences, so they should be in). The other one is a ? mark to me, but the Koreans look good, Polynesia, Maori, Aborigonal, and maybe even Atlantian .

PS Im making my own amatuer XP, and will be nothing to the Aployton version, but will still be somewhat interesting and have a few new things to offer.

[squeeze truck]

Re: Ok So It Is Iroquois

Originally posted by Signa
Koreans look good, Polynesia, Maori, Aborigonal, and maybe even Atlantian .

Atlantians (Religious, Militaristic)

Leader: Jeff Foxworthy / Ted Turner
Capital: Atlanta
Special Unit: Monster-truck mounted rifleman (with Stars n' Bars on the hood) A/D/M: 8/6/3

[Gromit]

Re: Re: Ok So It Is Iroquois

Originally posted by squeeze truck


Atlantians (Religious, Militaristic)

Leader: Jeff Foxworthy / Ted Turner
Capital: Atlanta
Special Unit: Monster-truck mounted rifleman (with Stars n' Bars on the hood) A/D/M: 8/6/3

That IS a joke... right?

[squeeze truck]

Re: Re: Re: Ok So It Is Iroquois

Originally posted by Gromit


That IS a joke... right?

Mmmmmmmmmmaybe.

[Aqualung]

Well, this is all very interesting. Be nice to see once it gets done. Problem is, with only 16 slots on the player selection screen, how could YOU play one? I'm assuming that picking them for AI opponents would be easy, you've got that drop down menu. But how could you redo the whole screen to fit in another 16 civs for the player to pick?

As far as previous comments on Civs:

Americans: Expansionist works well, but I think Commercial fits better for our capitalist nature. THAT'S what fueled our expansion.

Inca: Religious would be mandatory. And then either Militaristic or Expansionist. Scientific? They didn't even have the wheel!
Atahualpa, like Montezuma, would be the obvious choice, simply because he's the only Emperor (actually, his title was Inca, it's like Pharoah, the "god-king") any European ever met. Manco Capac was the first Inca, who founded the empire.

[LoD]

Originally posted by Aqualung
Well, this is all very interesting. Be nice to see once it gets done. Problem is, with only 16 slots on the player selection screen, how could YOU play one? I'm assuming that picking them for AI opponents would be easy, you've got that drop down menu. But how could you redo the whole screen to fit in another 16 civs for the player to pick?

One word - Civ3CopyTool .

[Graeme the mad]

I really think that the vikings should be replaced by the norweigans or something - it's sort of like having bolsheviks for russia (not a perfect analogy but you get the idea) - the SU can be the longboat though

I badly think a civ has been overlooked that is very important - Austria-hungary/ the hapsburgs. They were one of the major powers in Europe for about 900 years and the top power in Europe for a large time. I suggest taking the Khmer out and replacing them with the Austro-Hungarian, no suggestion on what the SU should be.
I know its late in the day but seriously consider this would you, just look at European history Austro-Hungary was very powerful and influential