How many Civs do you predict will be in the official XP and which civs will they be?

[Mr. Blaze]

yeah, Hannibal for the Carthagians, for sure..
Celts a lil harder.. maybe jus go with Cunobelin again..

[Elucidus]

Yeah I hope they add some nifty features to the editor. Of course this post is about new civs...Oops.

[Jethro83]

Originally posted by Miznia
Unless someone knows for sure otherwise, I predict that the XP will have no new civs at all.

But if there ARE... then I'm willing to bet that there will be no Celts or Carthaginians. Who could the leader be? I also strongly suspect no Arabs.

Hannibal is definitely the best choice as a Carthaginian ruler. I don't know about the Celts as I haven't studied into them.

NO ARABS?!

The Arabs are responsible for the recovery of much of the great knowledge of ancient Greece. If it weren't for them, we probably would've forgotten people like Aristotle. We would've forgotten how to build stable architecture, the modern concept of the hospital would've also been out.

Not to mention that their great empire within approx. 150 years of having started Islam managed to expand their empire as far west as Morocco, and as far east as India.

I think that if I were to get the Civ Editor as I described above, and Firaxis didn't add the Arabs already, I'd have to do it. With King Saladin as the ruler (he liberated the Holy Land from the barbarian Normans and Franks and won the second crusade against England).

The arabs could be Scientific, Expansionist; Religious, Expansionist; Religious, Scientific (though Babylon who would be in the same cultural group are also Religious, Scientific)

Their unique unit would be the Mameluke. It would replace the knight, wouldn't require horses and maybe have increased attack.

That's my thought anyway. Just a few ideas for a civ I'd add if it isn't in the XP (although the mameluke may be a problem unless they make it possible to edit graphics individually, as the mameluke would need a camel-rider graphic).

[Mikel]

I'm sure every civ has a glorious history.

http://www.ealaghol.demon.co.uk/celtenc/celtintr.htm

"Where the Romans make a desert they call it peace."

[Carver]

Originally posted by Miznia
Unless someone knows for sure otherwise, I predict that the XP will have no new civs at all.

I also strongly suspect no Arabs.

4. another sub-Saharan civ? Ethiopia?

Miznia

I'd be happy if you're right. More important than new civs are new options, new units and a real scenario editor.

There probably doesn't need to be a monolithic Arab civ, I think there's too much diversity within them. I'd rather have the Turks, or the Lybians - can you imagine joining an alliance with Qaddafi against America.

If there's one sub-Saharan civ it should have been Ethiopia, not the Zulu. Ethiopia has the longest history of any modern sub-Saharan state. There's the rock hewn churches of Lalibela, the oblisks (the tallest of which is still being "preserved" in Rome), the more than 1500 year old Amharic written language, the traditions of the Ethiopian Coptic Church, and the probable location of the Ark of the Covenant in northern Ethiopia.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Mr. Blaze
yeah, Hannibal for the Carthagians, for sure..
Celts a lil harder.. maybe jus go with Cunobelin again..

I think they could get away with having a woman leader like Boudicia. After all she waged a nearly successful war to throw the Romans out of England. Alternatively they could use Versotiox (spell?); the man whom Ceaser spent most of his time fighting in Gaul.

[Dinner]

You folks should go take a look at the Civ3-Civilizations forum. They've already had a vote about which civs should be included and they've come up with city names, main leader, great generals, UU, and civ traits for each of the winning civs. It makes for an interesting read anyway.
I had to laugh about Korean Apolytoners spamming their demands that Korea be included in the expansion pack though. Sure, Korea is a nice place and it has an interesting culture but so does 90% of the world. We're looking for the GREATEST, most important civilizations in the history of the world. Korea just doesn't follow into that category.

[Miznia]

I have heard of Hannibal, but what I'm thinking is... How could they depict him in such a way that would be appealing / understandable to people who don't know much about Carthaginians? That's why I don't think they would be an entertaining addition, and Firaxis won't use them.


And for the record, it's not that I WANT to see Ethiopians in the game... It's that I think they're a more likely choice than Mali, which is my preference. I close my eyes and picture western and central Africa littered with badass, rich, Sunni Mali cities. It's a more believable African superpower than the Zulus, anyway.

Miznia

[Miznia]

I had to laugh about Korean Apolytoners spamming their demands that Korea be included in the expansion pack though. Sure, Korea is a nice place and it has an interesting culture but so does 90% of the world. We're looking for the GREATEST, most important civilizations in the history of the world. Korea just doesn't follow into that category.

Ah! I forgot about Korea! You've just convinced me in the other direction. Scratch "Thai" from my guess list. Firaxis will eye Korea long before Thailand.

Although I did find the pro-Korea messages to be pretty grating, especially the "Korea should've been included instead of Japan" type, I think Korea easily fits in the next group of 8. China, Japan, Korea - they make a nice set. If necessary (for your conscience), just make Korea a "perfectionist" type civ in the Civ2 sense.

My "interesting leader" criterion doesn't work well with Korea, but it's no worse than with the Thai.

Miznia

[monkspider]

I have been doing some thinking about this, so scratch my original post. Naturally they will have to balance out the civs over the different cultural regions. (asia, middle-east, etc)

So what do you guys think about this? This is now assuming that they include ten civs, but it has to be either ten, or five, if they are to keep the different regions balanced. Call me an optimist, but there are too many civs they would leave out if they only went with five. It's possible they could do something like seven or eight, but that would be unbalancing to the different cultural regions which are already a little bit out of wack with all the Euro civs. Here's the list I have come up with

Euros
1.Spain
2. Celts/Dutch/Vikings/Portugese (tough call)

I'm guessing it will end up being Spain and the Vikings to represent Europe.

Mediterranean
1.Carthage (Phoenecia)
2. Turks

Middle-East
1.Arabs
2. Hebrews(Isrealites)/Ethiopians(Aksumites)

Most likely the Arabs and Hebrews, especially due to recent events.

Asia
1. Mongols
2. Koreans

Americas
1. Incans
2. Mayans


And there is a rough outline of the ten civs you should expect in the XP.

[Coracle]

I think anyone who pays money for an Expansion disk - while we still wait for Firaxis to finally get Civ III right - is a true sucker.

Hey Firaxis, you plan to try to sell us a lame Scenario disk, too? Is that why you left a scenario-builder out of Civ III?? No thanks.

[rpodos]

Do I have this right?

Galley sinks Coracle?

No wonder you've been having problems.

R

[Pyrodrew]

8?

8 new Civs??? After seeing the expectations of the original Civ3 release I would expect people not to be setting their hopes so high again.

Instead plan for 2 new Civs... and when 4 new Civs are available (total even 20) you can be happy.

Just pray the XP has MP & an Editor capable of making scenarios. Even that I would expect as a high expectation now tho.

The 4 New Civs are:

1.Vikings
2.Spanish
3.Mongols
4.*>insert Civ here which many people will say, "What the **** is that Civ doing in there?!"<*

[siredgar]

Well, just by comparing with Age of Empires 2 and Rise of Nations, we've already been ripped off by two civs. =) They each included 18 civs (albeit AoE2 w/ expansion pack). Also, Empire Earth has a whopping 21 civs! So, instead of eight civs, we should get at least 10 in the expansion pack. =P

If you look at my new thread that I just posted, you'll see that both of these games included the Koreans, Mayans, Mongols, Spanish, and Turks, while Civ 3 did not. I don't know if we really need the Mayans since we already have the Aztecs in there, so I'd probably replace that slot with the Incans.

Anyhow, if they were to have 10 civs in the expansion pack, I would have to say it should be something like this (in order of importance):

1. Spanish
2. Mongols
3. Koreans
4. Turks
5. Incans
6. Vikings
7. Portuguese
8. Dutch
9. Ethiopians
10. Khmer

[siredgar]

Originally posted by Oerdin
I had to laugh about Korean Apolytoners spamming their demands that Korea be included in the expansion pack though. Sure, Korea is a nice place and it has an interesting culture but so does 90% of the world. We're looking for the GREATEST, most important civilizations in the history of the world. Korea just doesn't follow into that category.

By most standards, Korea is one of the greatest civilizations in the world. The reason why most people don't know much about Korea is because its history is largely "hidden". This is because many of its most important documents and artifacts have been either destroyed by the Japanese or kept in museums or collections in Japan (and labeled "Japanese"). This is not intended to be "Japan-bashing", but it is indeed history.