Civs included. Just the facts madam.

[Adm.Naismith]

quote: Originally posted by paiktis22 on 05-20-2001 08:39 PM SUGGESTIONS BASED ON CLUES (weak clues but we report them) 22. CONFEDERATES. As reffered to in a swedish article, a Great Military Leader in Civ 3 could be Stonewell Jackson. Apolytoner Arator pointed out that this leader is impossible to be in the same civ as Lincoln (=100% confirmed leader of the Americans).

I politely disagree: seems to me Arator is confusing Civ Main Leader with Military Leader.

We know that Lincoln is showed from Firaxis as a Civ Leader, and we also know some Military Leader (and may be some not military, too) will be included after some winning battle, to add special effect: building and commanding Armies, acting as War Academy in a city...

Stonewll Jackson will probably be one of the available Military Leader as, may be, Patton and Montgomery, Wellington, Francis Drake, Napoleon (he seems losting the France leading to Joanne D'Arc), Rommel... for others countries.

We already know from start how silly is Lincoln leading Americans from 4000 B.C. (I mean, he was an old important president, but not so old
What's the point having Patton commanding troops under Lincoln? Military Leaders are only named icons to add feel of history with lot of abuse to proper timeline. Confederate can't be in just for the clue of Stonewell name, IMHO.

[Harel]

Just a litte note... game magazines have a tendency to be in-accurate. Just today I read Gamespy E3 report about MOO3 that their are only 16 races to pick from, when I know for a fact (hell, I designed some) there are 32.
I would say that don't assume anything you didn't hear directly from Firaxis, especially things like Vgames (hi Eli) or Gamespot.

About Israelies being included... if it is only 16 civs, then their is no proper cause to include little ol' us... but if there is more, then sure! Why not.

About the arguements about whatever to include the Confedration... I still don't see why we have the AMERICANS. They are no more a distinictive culture then I am a jar of jam. Not only that they are very new (only 400 years), they have no real cultural idendity, but one composed from immigrants. We might as well include Australia, for that matter.

[Bereta_Eder]

Slax,
I don't claim monopoly on the truth. I make mistakes like any other man (isn't that a song )
The scrutiny of fellow Apolytoners helps to correct any mistakes.
Now that Firaxis could create a leader (and all its emotions etc) and then take that civ out of the game, I'd say it's a long shot. Why would they do it?

Adm. Naismith,
These were my thoughts as well. Still, Stonewell was quoted as a possible military leader in a article by a swedish magazine. I proposed that he may be the military leader of the Americans. But Arator is adamant that this man cannot be under the leadership of Lincoln (civ leader).
Now what you say it's true: will there be the SAME military leaders for all civs or different ones for different civs? This is a very good point. And I think I must include it in the next update.

Harel,
Thank you for your comment. I fear this as well. That is why I have put the revelant info where there is a text from articles. I agree that only Firaxis statements can hold up with any certainty.

[Gangerolf]

I really don't understand why the ZULUS have been included in every single Civ game. I suspect they've been chosen because of political and geographical reasons instead of historical accomplishments. If there should be an African civ, I'd rather go for the Ethiopians, the only African nation that never got colonized.

The Iroqouis?! Better than the Sioux, but still....

I demand that these be included (they are to important to be let out):
- Incas
- Arabs
- Vikings
- Spanish
- Aztecs/Mayans

Just my humble opinion...

[Grumbold]

All this arguement and not one of you have yet questioned where the most obvious civilisations are. Civ wouldn't be civ without the Orcs, Elves, Goblins, Dwarves and Hobbits. C'mon!

More seriously, the Celts have a far better right to be in as a Civ than most of the countries they evolved into later.

[LoD]

Arator:

a) the lifespan of a civ is not the sole criterion for consideration - for example the Polish civilization is over a milienium old (from 966 AD) and yet it is not added.
What are the main achievements of the Confederates, in relation to global conditions? How did they shape the course of history?


b) Firaxis laughs at the face of political correctness? Heh. Look at the faces of the seven original SMAC faction leaders and try to say that again .

c) Here, I have to second Stefu (rather amusing post by the way ). This would be an outrage for us Europeans to see 2 slots taken but what we consider one civilization. Besides, like I said, "Americans" and "Confederates" overlap each other, marketing wise. Againm, tt would be more sensible to use that extra slot for a different, high-importance (read - "high sales potential" ) nation.

LoD
[This message has been edited by LoD (edited May 21, 2001).]

[Guest]

quote: Originally posted by LoD on 05-21-2001 01:29 PM Arator: Here, I have to second Stefu (rather amusing post by the way ). This would be an outrage for us Europeans to see 2 slots taken but what we consider one civilization. Besides, like I said, "Americans" and "Confederates" overlap each other, marketing wise. Againm, tt would be more sensible to use that extra slot for a different, high-importance (read - "high sales potential" ) nation. LoD

There is a solution to all of these squablings over civs which FIRAXIS simply MUST do and that is this: Allow us to ADD custom civs to the built in civs already provided. Give us the means to do so, and make it such that custom civs are savable, equally choosable, and as multiplayable as the built in civs. Then we could all have and play with as many unique civs as we like, regardless of which ones FIRAXIS actually builds in!

How many civers agree with me that this sort of feature is a MUST?

[Ghost:Rosenkrantz]

Hi, it's a funny thing my ancestors are being paid their proper respect.
Odin and Tor from whom we all derive, could be very proud when CIV3 is to be released here in the "Land of the thousand houses".

The Vikings wasn't really a civilisation, but more like many small
Earl-ruled settlements enganged together in plundering and enslaving Scots, Walisians and Englishmen.
No "great leaders" , no centralized government , but highly developed culture and religion. Later research also prove they made excellent longboats, though.

That doesn't neccesarily indicate they have put Vikings into play in CIV3.
We have all seen hordes of German elephants, and the proud English(AI) samurai attacking your capital all by himself.
So a Zulu-Vikingship embarked by a couple of elite Ninjas wouldn't be too much of a surprise.

[Arator]

Originally posted by ancient on 05-20-2001 08:59 PM
now how to deal with the civ specific unit deal? and if yyour playing multiplayer your leader will still look the same..

The Civ Specific Unit shouldn't be too hard to deal with. You could approach it one of two ways:

a) allow the builder of the custom civ to select one of the standard units as his "Civ Specific Unit", remame it accordingly, and tweak it's atributes within game specified limits (so that gameplay balance is uneffected). The graphic for the unit would remain the standard unit graphic, but perhaps one could also custimize a new graphic and save it using the promised scenario editors.

b) not allow Civ Specific Units in Custom Civs.

Of these two approaches, I would prefer (a).

The harder problem would be what to do about the leader shown in the leader screen. It seems that facial reactions are a key feedback mechanism on the diplomacy screen, and so a special animated graphic is needed. Obviously, creating this animated graphic is beyond the abilities of most civ customizers. So, I would suggest that for custom civs, allow one to input a simple gif file of your leader and then compensate for the lack of facial expression by adding a sliding leader mood bar to the diplomacy screen for any custom civ, just under the pic, to provide for leader feedback during negotiations with a custom civ.

In this way, players would be free to add custom civs to the built in civs and have them play just like the built in civs. Wouldn't that be great?

[Bereta_Eder]

can't access the last 6 posts. WTF?

[bagdar]

nice lists you have, but think of a game on the earth map, how are you going to distribute them evenly? How many civs will be allowed in a single game? What's the point if the Arabs, Babylonians, Egyptians and Persians all pop up on the same game, destroy each other away in the first few turns, and you get to play with 4 civs instead of 7? That was often the european case in CivII. How about the design? Will designers work THAT accurately to reflect differences between and Arab city and a Persian? If we have the Turks, they'll design us like the Moorish, I can predict that!!! In Civ II we had the Indians with the Chinese city graphic, and it just didn't feel right. Civ III has animated leader graphics (exactly as I dreamed of them!!!), so it won't be as easy a task as the CTP leader pics. CTP would have cost ten times more if we had animated leaders for that many civs...

----CIV II LIST AND NOTHING MORE----

[Gramphos]

Since DanQ put this site up in the news the quality oft the discussion of this page has dropped from facts only to wild speculations and whishes. This is a facts only thread, if you want to have a wild speculation thread or a whish civs thread, just create them, but don't drag this thread down to that level.

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Arator
In this way, players would be free to add custom civs to the built in civs and have them play just like the built in civs. Wouldn't that be great?

Firaxis already assured us that game and Civ will be largely customizable, and when picture of units/leader are 3D modelled in standard game, they will be accepted as flat Gif (or similar format) as well.
Relax!

[C. Gerhardt]

Just wandering?

If there can only be 7 civs + barb. in a game and the total civs to choose from is 16, then how many colors are in the game?

16 divided by 7 = 2,2857

Just name all the civs you like to be added in CivIII so the Firaxians can make a definate list!!!