Civs included. Just the facts madam.

[Bereta_Eder]

Thank you Serapis,

You were very precise. So, all we know was that these words (minor civs) were found in a preview. Period.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Actually no... Serapis is wrong.

Minor Civs being in the game was the FIRST Civ3 announcement made by Jeff Morris on Apolyton. So it is more than some preview...

[Eli]

There is a typo in the announcment.

Dan cant spell "Israelis".

[me_irate]

[quote]Originally posted by paiktis22 on 05-19-2001 12:45 PM

EVIDENCE ABOUT OTHER CIVS

PERSIANS - City names (capitol)
SPANISH - City name: Salamanca (which historically was once a Roman city)
BABYLONIANS - City name
AZTECS - City names

I personally believe that to have 16 civs both persians and babylonians wont be in the game. while i consider them both more important than the germans, mongols and indians. babylon and persia controlled much the same area. if you mean persian city was the capital, that would most likely mean that my babylonians are left out. but they were in civ 1 with much less civs while the persians were not. and they contributed much more than the useless persians did. so i am hoping that they babylonians will infact remain in civ3.

[me_irate]

I just thought of something. the mongols, one leader empire fell apart after his death. i think this civ might be the barb civ. so that would give us the right amount. the mogols i would hardly call them a civ, but the category of barb they fit much better. so this would get rid of one civ that is "confirmed".

other civs that shouldn't be in the game.

the germans. historys losers. they were the most powerful for a short period of time. lost a war, became powerful again, than lost again. i put carthagains ahead of this civ. and the panzer (unique unit) might just be a early or light versian of the tank. also i believe the game is two europe oriented even more so after the spanish will most likely be in. maybe the spanish could be the moors. both spain and arab in one.

the indians. of the 4 river civs this is the easiest to dismiss. the babylonians and summerians have a better claim to civ than these people.

zulus. why are they in again? they were fairly advanced, but had no contact with other civs to my knowledge. they should be in but not at the expense of arab and some other improtant civs.

[ElmoTheElk]

What about this pic? http://www.infogrames-expo.com/screens/civ05b.jpg
This sure is Japanese to me!

So i'd say Japanese ARE IN.

Elmo
[This message has been edited by ElmoTheElk (edited May 19, 2001).]

[SerapisIV]

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui on 05-19-2001 02:13 PM Actually no... Serapis is wrong. Minor Civs being in the game was the FIRST Civ3 announcement made by Jeff Morris on Apolyton. So it is more than some preview...

I stand corrected, but I know for sure that in the past couple months there's been no mention of minor civs since. Maybe someone at E3 will get some info

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, I was just stating facts. I don't want you to feel I was being harsh in any way by saying you were wrong.

Just that Jeff Morris said it as the first thing. I remember that because I was against Minor Civs in the game .

[LoD]

me_irate:

quote: the germans. historys losers. they were the most powerful for a short period of time. lost a war, became powerful again, than lost again. i put carthagains ahead of this civ.

I think that's not a very good argument. Throughout the course of history, each civilization had its ups and downs. Using your argument, but with application to another era, I could advocate the apperance of Poles among the first 16, since we were a very significant power in Europe in the 15th-17th century period. Hell, we were the first to conquer Moscow. So, why shouldn't we be added?

IMHO, the most important criteria to consider when judging whether a civ should be in the basic is not the "power level", but to what exctent has a given culture changed the world, or altered the course of global history.
BTW, that's why I'm not very pleased to see that Firaxis has fallen into the PC (not "Personal Computer" ) trap and added a large number of American Indian civs. Also, the Firaxians are tailoring the set for customers - no offense for the Americans, but what is the significance of USA, relative to the entire history of humanity?

LoD
[This message has been edited by LoD (edited May 19, 2001).]

[bagdar]

what do you mean the Greeks are 'high probability'??? I won't buy the game if there's no Greeks, it's unimaginable. Better revise that news item.

Besides, I'm always in favor of the original Civ set (Civ I-II)and nothing more. Babylonians have to be in, so are the Celts, they founded half of Europe, and are the ancestors of most European nations, they should have been there in the first game!!! (No more civs please, recall the CTP silliness...)

[Bereta_Eder]

DanQ,
Thanks for putting this thread to the CIV III page. Never thought I'd see my nickname there This thread was made possible because of the interest the research and input of my fellow Apolytoners that have contributed and whom I thank very much. All credits go to them.

Imran,
Thank you very much for your correction. Minor Civs, I'm afraid, will open a whole new ballgame. Strange that we haven't heard anything about them after the comment of Jeff though....

me_irate
LoD,
Guys the discussion of which civs SHOULD be included has been done and done and done again and again. In this thread I would like to ask you to state game facts (such as screenshots with leaders, units, city names etc etc). Argumenets are good; if they are about the evidence we have about the game.

bagdar,
Thank you very much for your strong support of the greek civ Although I don't know if this is because you like our civ or you like to kick our butt in CIV III (joking )

ElmoThe Elk,
This leader has been identified by many Apolytoners and me as Genghis Chan (sp?) of the Mongols. (notice the symbols on his tunic). He was the one leader we had to have new discussion about. If you still believe that he is a japenese leader the list should change.

Everybody,

I realise that after so many posts it's hard to follow. But there have been answers to some of your comments in previous threads. Firaxis has SPECIFFICALLY stated that it has NOT given ANY official announcement about the number of the civs that will be included. Gamespot and an israeli site have said that there will be 16 civs.

Also after Imran's clarification we know that Firaxis has said that there will be minor civs in the game. (what that may be, how would it be implemented etc is uknown). Since then there is no new info about minor civs.


So, so far and based on our evidence, we know:

100% CONFIRMED. These civs ARE in CIV 3.

AMERICANS - Leader (100% confirmed), city names, unique unit (F15)
GERMANS - Unique unit (Panzer). Multiple text references
CHINESE - Leader (100% confirmed)
ROMANS - Leader, city name (capital), unique unit (Legion)
FRENCH - Leader (100% confirmed), dialogue window of the french
RUSSIANS - Unique Unit (Mig)
ZULUS - Unique Unit (Impi)
ENGLISH - Leader (100% confirmed)
EGYPTIANS - Leader (100% pharaoh ), definite text reference
INDIANS - Leader (100% confirmed)
MONGOLS - or JAPANESE? Leader ** (see bottom of page)
IROQUOIS - Leader (100% indian), city names, text references


HIGH PROPABILITY. This civ is almost certaintly in

GREEKS - City name (capital), possible unique unit (Hoplites*).

*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

PERSIANS - City names (capitol)
SPANISH - City name: Salamanca (which historically was once a Roman city)
BABYLONIANS - City name
AZTECS - City names

SUGGESTIONS BASED ON CLUES

JAPANESE (open for debate plz see the samurai(?) unit at http://viewer.fgnonline.com/fgn_media.jsp?media=http%3A%2F%2Fwww .fgnonline.com%2Fmedia%2Fpc%2Fnews%2Funits.jpg

Also see http://www.infogrames-expo.com/screens/civ05b.jpg
Apolytoner ElmoTheElk thinks he is not the Mongol Leader Chengis Chan but a japanese leader. All other Apolytoners that have participated have said it's the Mongol Leader.


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

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


[This message has been edited by paiktis22 (edited May 19, 2001).]

[Ralf]

Well, one thing is for sure:

Whatever Civ is in or not, in this first wave of 16 civs, Firaxis are bound to include even more Civs in upcoming scenario addon-packs. So I dont worry about the Vikings for example - sooner or later they gonna add them, and other good left-over civs as well.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited May 19, 2001).]

[Bereta_Eder]

Ralf,
After the announcement of Firaxis, there is no evidence that the civs will be 16.

Even if we don't have add-ons (which I think we will have) I guess we could customize a lot too.

[Blueinept]

The lone Candian shakes his head, Damn no more invading my American neighbors. I was hoping there would be a special Mountie unit! * GRIN * or at least a dog sled! Poor Trudeau probably rolling over in his grave.

[Geography Dan]

16 civs- does that mean 16 at one time or a total of 16 to choose from? cause civ2 had 21 to choose from, so only 16 would be even less. i'm hoping the 16 refers to civs in a game, not civs to choose from.