What will the remaining 2 unknown civs be?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by JtheJackal
You have to consider that you can't repeat same civs that just have a different name. Like you wouldn't have the Indus and the indians civs. So wouldn't in a way the Babylonians and Persians be the ancient versions of the arabs?

Good thought, but wouldn't the Romans be the ancient version of the Spanish? The Vikings the ancient version of the Germans? Arguable? You bet. So would Babylon/Arab. Persia isn't even close since Perisans will strenuously object to being called Arabs.

[monkspider]

Good point Signa, The Arabs and Inca were in the Civ 2 text files. This gives them a historical precedent the other civs don't have. Plus I think it is much more likely the Turks will be grouped with the Arabs than vise-versa

[m0lok0plus]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/360/360642p1.html

spanish, mongols, gauls, ottomans, carthaginians, arabs...

[kring]

According to the article:

Firaxis told us a bit about two of them, the Mongols and the Spanish.

Other new civilizations include the Gauls, the Carthaginians, the Ottomans and the Arabs. We don't have any more details on those yet, but we wouldn't be surprised if the new units include berserkers and a new kind of war elephant.

[monkspider]

God bless you Kring
that means
1. Mongols
2. Spanish
3. Carthage
4. Celts (Gaul)
5. Vikings
6. Ottomans (Turks)
7. Arabs
8. Inca presumably

This means Korea IS part of the feudal Japan scenario and that the two mystery civs are the Ottomans and Arabs.
This is highly unexpected.
Why not the Hebrews?
Why not the Koreans?

DAMN YOU FIRAXIS, DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!

[Cesa]

Originally posted by kring
According to the article:

Firaxis told us a bit about two of them, the Mongols and the Spanish.

Other new civilizations include the Gauls, the Carthaginians, the Ottomans and the Arabs. We don't have any more details on those yet, but we wouldn't be surprised if the new units include berserkers and a new kind of war elephant.

What does this mean? Which are the 8 civs?

Vikings, Mongols, Spanish, Gauls, Carthaginians, Ottomans, Arabs and Celts. Is this correct? So we were wrong about the Koreans?

Edit: So Gaul=Celts? Sorry, I'm not very good at history, nor at english names for civilisations. So the 8th civ is either Inca or Korea? Or?

[monkspider]

Gauls are another name for Celts Cesa

[monkspider]

Let me take this moment to curse Firaxis for redundantly including both the Turks and Arabs.
DAMN YOU!!!! DAMN YOU FIRAXIS!!!!!!!

We will never stand for this!

[kring]

Originally posted by monkspider
God bless you Kring

Thank you for the blessing request. I was only reposting what someone else posted in another thread, I have spread the word to CivFanatics, 1BC, and CGN as well though.

[Mongoloid Cow]

From what I've gathered;

1) Mongols : Genghis Khan, UU:FOrgot name
2) Gauls : King Brennus
3) Koreans : UU:Hwacha
4) Ottoman Turks
5) Arabs (as well)
6) Spanish : Quueen Isabella, UU:Conquistador
7) Vikings : UU: Beserk
8) Carthage

[sgrig]

I think Koreans are still in, because there is no sign that Incas will be in, and if Gauls are in, then definitely they won't have Celts as well.

So I agree with Mongoloid's list.

[Deathwalker]

Whats wronge with having both the Turks and Arabs. I like both of them and would play as both. There not the same thing. Like the French and Gaul

[civman2000]

Incans are most likely that last spot...I wonder why the vikings weren't mentioned in the report....

[Miznia]

What's Miznia's opinion?

Happy with:
Koreans, Arabs, Spanish

Okay with:
Mongols, Vikings, Turks

Annoyed about:
Gauls, Carthaginians

We are sorely missing:
Incas and a sub-Saharan.


How can Gauls be a civ?! The only thing (I thought) I knew about them is that they were French precursors!

[civman2000]

celts would be a better name to use imo. Althoough they're the same culture, gauls are generally ONLY associated with the tribe in france and not all of the celtic tribes