next expansion pack - what civs do you want?

[monkspider]

The only fan-made civ that is reasonably up to the quality of Firaxis is the excellent Polish mod. I like to see civs that don't use still jpgs that people downloaded off the net for the leaderhead and I imagine a great deal of others do as well.

[Raiche23]

ummm...lets see hear.

Austria-Hungary was one of the most powerful nations for like 200 years.

Poland was around for a while to, but they were invaded many times, weird how every single time they got their country back, only to lose it again........


To me Ithink Austia-Hungary was more of a civ then Poland.

[Tiberius]

To me Ithink Austia-Hungary was more of a civ then Poland.

Maybe in terms of power, but otherwise... Austrians and Hungarians are 2 different nations, bonded together by
their common history and friendship, but they are not really one civ (different nationality, different origins, different language, etc).

From the XIth to the XVIth century: Hungary a big Europen power (on the peek of their power, they ruled territories that are known today as: Slovakia, Bosnia, Croatia, Transsylvania-part of Romania, Vojvodina-part of Serbia, parts of Ukraina, etc); Austria a small kingdom
Pope Calixtus called Hungary "the shield of Chistianity" for defeating in 1456 the mighty Turkish army of Mehmet II at Belgrade and thus stopping the Turkish advance into Western Europe.

XVI-XVIII: Hungary now under Ottoman rule, increasingly important Austria. It was now their turn to stop the Ottomans (together with the Poles)

XVIII-XIX century: Hungary liberated from turkish occupation, but now under Austrian rule; Austria is now big and powerful

Following the Hungarian national revolution in 1848, when the Austrian and Russian millitary were able only together to suppres the revolution, the Austrians allowed more and more freedom to the Hungarians and in 1867 the Austria-Hungary monarhy was formed. It lasted only 50 years (until WW1) but for both nations it was kind of a "golden age".

About Poland: they were a big European power for centuries. I'm not an expert, but IIRC from the XIVth to
the XIXth century.

[Heresson]

Poland was never as powerful as France, germany, Rome, Spain, or Britain during their respective "golden ages".

Saying that Germany (until end of XVIII century) was stronger than Poland is silly. Poland was not as strong as Rome, or France even, but I dare to compare it to Britain and Spain in certain moments on Polish favour,
and anyway You must remember about one important thing: We were in very other region - You don't compare
African civs to Europeans, do You - we were stronger than Russia for most of our history, and were a dominant power in eastern Europe for several centuries
- Austria was pretty weak until XVIII ventury, and even then it wasn't all that strong, as every war has shown.
Anyway, Austria isn't Austria... It was a part of Germany
until XIX century - and only it makes Germans bearable as a civ.

[Amadan]

Hmm...

Inca/Maya -- S. America needs another civ.
Portugese and Dutch -- Both expansionist powerhouses
Thai -- Long history, and I just like them
Ethiopia / Mali -- with the addition (as has already been suggested) of an 'African' culture group.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by monkspider
Hey, I prefer Constantinople myself, but to each his own.
At least I'll take Byzantium over Istanbul any day.

Hehe agreed.

Originally posted by monkspider
And of course, you're right in regards to the Dutch being Commercial. But I just had to fit in Scientific somewhere, and there are already so many commercial civs in that list. Maybe Firaxis can give Dutch commercial and one of the other civs can arbitrarily given scientific.

This is one of the things I'm torn on. Should Civs be arbitrarily chosen to have a certain trait, or should the Civs have their "correct" traits? Game balance could possibly be affected if historical realism is applied, but then again, I'm a realist-lover. I dunno, I can see both sides of the argument.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by monkspider
Well I certainly can't argue your point about their being too many Euro civs. in fact, with PTW, there are *way* too many Euro civs. I really don't want to see the Dutch, Portugese AND Poles in the next XP. Given the huge number of Euros they added in PTW it's almost essential they only have one or two for game balance reasons. And that said, I think I would probably prefer the Dutch and Portugese out of the three.My point was simply that you shouldn't dismiss the Poles as a trite little civ like Brazil or Canada.

Yeah I agree that Europe is packed. And yeah I agree it would be a major PAIN on Earth maps. But it just so happens that a ton of history and culture arose from Europe, and IMHO we can't ignore that for the sake of those who choose not to play custom worlds. As long as the Dutch get included, I'll be happy with the european Civs as is.

[bigvic]

well, que sera sera, its been a great discussion so far. i'm just hoping ptw is a bit less of a beta version than the original (!), and am looking forward to it. one of the best parts of our little obsession here, is its mutability, thanks to a properly functioning editor. this is the strenght of the game, its scalability and personalizability. we all have our own takes in terms of historical interpretation and balance, and we all have the ability to test it out in the form of realtively easy modding. which i fully intend to continue experimenting on in ptw, and for which it appears ptw is made......

[nationalist]

Poland should definately be included. Western Europe may be crowded, but Eastern Europe is not. I'd pick Poland over the Dutch. I'd also add the Finns.

Add the Incas and Mayans, along with two African Civs, preferably Mali and Ethiopia. (I agree with the person who said that there should be an African ethnicity. Make the Zulus African instead of Middle-Eastern.)

Add the Byzantines and possibly the Khmer or some other southeast Asian civ. Include the Hebrews, but don't add any more Mid-East civs after that. The mid-East is more saturated than Western Europe. After these civs are included, then add the Portugese and the Dutch.

[-proletarian-]

This game doesn't need any more civs. It needs more units and features.

[nationalist]

Why not add both? Adding more civs will add more units. Perhaps a few new units could be tossed in (like a mounted unit between knights and calvalry) along with the new civ's special units. New features could also be added. Adding new civs would do nothing but enhance and enrich Civ 3.

[Novaya Havoc]

Bah -- no new civs.

The only ones I would even consider adding are Inca, Khmer, Srivijaya (Indonesian with super-distance one-unit unsinkable galley unit ;D -- this is actually just my own prefence, although the idea of their inclusion is bizarre and highly unlikely), Mali, and Ethiopia.

Canada? Why Canada? What has Canada done in terms of warfare? Culture? Sure it has an influence, but compared to places like Russia, the United States, England, Spain, and China how does Canada compare?

Brazil? What makes Brazil more of a candidate than, say, Argentina? At least Argentina has a recognizable "great leader" in Eva Peron, which wouldn't only balance out the "need" for SA civs, but also for female leaders.

I see the enthusiasm for additional civs, but come on. The amazing armies of "The Grand Duchy of Poland-Lithuania CRUSHES THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!"? More importantly, during the reign of Catherine II, her former lover and father of her soon-deceased daughter, Anna, was placed on the throne of Poland making it a subservient state to Russia.

I recognize that Poland has its own culture and history, but that can be said about every state everywhere. What can you tell me that Poland-Lithuania has done that is not only HIGHLY influential, but also fairly common knowledge?

The Russians have their size, their lavish expenditures, and their communism. The Chinese have an ancient empire, gunpowder, and was a main driving force in the exploration of the Europeans. England's colonies shaped much of the modern-day world and the language is becoming more and more used. Rome brought order to most of Europe, the Greeks and their philosophers brought new ideas to the world. America redefined Democracy and shaped the world as we know it today, whereas India was a center of culture.

Sure, you can argue the Iroquois, and you can argue some of the PTW civs like Korea, and Carthage. However, tossing in the "Jews," although the Jewish state and sphere of influence is miniscule compared to any other civ in-game, sounds silly. "The Jews" fighting Russia?

Poland tackling America?

Polynesia becoming the cultural envy of the world?

Limit the civs. There are very few that MUST be included, and much less than 7 -- especially from that list.

[bigvic]

Originally posted by Novaya Havoc
Bah -- no new civs.

The only ones I would even consider adding are Inca, Khmer, Srivijaya (Indonesian with super-distance one-unit unsinkable galley unit ;D -- this is actually just my own prefence, although the idea of their inclusion is bizarre and highly unlikely), Mali, and Ethiopia.

Canada? Why Canada? What has Canada done in terms of warfare? Culture? Sure it has an influence, but compared to places like Russia, the United States, England, Spain, and China how does Canada compare?

Brazil? What makes Brazil more of a candidate than, say, Argentina? At least Argentina has a recognizable "great leader" in Eva Peron, which wouldn't only balance out the "need" for SA civs, but also for female leaders.

I see the enthusiasm for additional civs, but come on. The amazing armies of "The Grand Duchy of Poland-Lithuania CRUSHES THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!"? More importantly, during the reign of Catherine II, her former lover and father of her soon-deceased daughter, Anna, was placed on the throne of Poland making it a subservient state to Russia.

I recognize that Poland has its own culture and history, but that can be said about every state everywhere. What can you tell me that Poland-Lithuania has done that is not only HIGHLY influential, but also fairly common knowledge?

The Russians have their size, their lavish expenditures, and their communism. The Chinese have an ancient empire, gunpowder, and was a main driving force in the exploration of the Europeans. England's colonies shaped much of the modern-day world and the language is becoming more and more used. Rome brought order to most of Europe, the Greeks and their philosophers brought new ideas to the world. America redefined Democracy and shaped the world as we know it today, whereas India was a center of culture.

Sure, you can argue the Iroquois, and you can argue some of the PTW civs like Korea, and Carthage. However, tossing in the "Jews," although the Jewish state and sphere of influence is miniscule compared to any other civ in-game, sounds silly. "The Jews" fighting Russia?

Poland tackling America?

Polynesia becoming the cultural envy of the world?

Limit the civs. There are very few that MUST be included, and much less than 7 -- especially from that list.

hmmm

[bigvic]

wow, anyone catch that? somehow i pasted a highly personal letter from the clipboard! managed to dit quick.

[aaglo]

Nice post you've got there bigvic. It's full of new ideas....