deleted civs

[Altauria]

If someone has already brought this up, I'm sorry. I was just wondering if anyone else was disappointed by the omissions of some of the civs.....from civ.2. I was thinking there was going to be additions and I was shocked when I read the list. I mean, the most shocking of which was the deletion of the Spanish! I mean, we all know they didn't have any historical importance in world history, right?...PPFFFF. I especially don't understand that omission. I think and addition of the Ottomans would have been important. I'll just leave it at that because I don't feel like giving a history lesson. I guess I understand more of the omissions of the celts, vikings, and mongols.....only for reasons that they were more of a scattered tribe nations than "empires" as we know it. But the Spanish??? C'mon! After all, at one time they were the most powerful nation in the world. They could've replaced the Iroquois, or even the Zulu. As far as the Zulus are concerned, I don't see how they were at all influential in the global realm, other than the game developers trying to be politically correct. In that case, they should have left in the Mongols. Or added the Incas (being they were far more advanced than even the Aztecs were) and the ancient cultures from Burma and Indonesia.

[Seeker]

In all fairness, with only limited time and resources there were only so many Civs that could make it in with all the graphical bells and whistles like faces, not all the Civs we had in Civ 2.

Personally, since you can change the names, titles, etc (or will be able to when the Scenario Editor comes out) I just wish that more time had been spent on gameplay issues than graphical fluff.

[Altauria]

I figured that would be my answer :-). But I just think that a couple civs were just way to important to comprimise.

[Kolyana]

It's a great candidate for an expansion pack or two (no Cynicism there).