 |
|
Sabre2th
|
|
I didn't say anything about a lack of female leadership, I'm just saying that it is extremely unlikely that this portrait is of an American leader, mostly because of the style. It is certainly possible, and even resembles America's victorian era, but it doesn't fit with the rest of it. I also think that Firaxis most likely only included one animated leader per civ, which means the slot is already taken by Abe Lincoln.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sabre2th
|
|
quote: Originally posted by kassiopeia
Hillary Clinton |
Bleh.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
 |
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999 time: 06:14
|
|
I don't have much time tonight, so all I'll do is post the summary and say that if Firaxis really put in 2 or even more leaders per civ (which I personally think is very unlikely), I think that's just plain stupid. In that case it would have been much better to reduce the number of leaders per civ to 1 and add more civs instead. The amount of work remains roughly the same, the added value for the game is greatly increased IMHO.
So far, based on our evidence, we know that (no changes):
100% CONFIRMED. These civs ARE in CIV 3:
1. AMERICANS - Leader (Abraham Lincoln; 100% confirmed), city names (capital), Unique Unit (F15) -> Light blue
2. GERMANS - Leader? (Catherine the Great, Maria Theresa or someone else?), Unique Unit (Panzer), city names (capital), multiple text references, video reference -> Dark blue
3. CHINESE - Leader (Mao Zedong; 100% confirmed), city names -> Light blue
4. ROMANS - Leader (C. Julius Ceasar), city name (capital), Unique Unit (Legion), video reference -> Red
5. FRENCH - Leader (Joan of Arc(?); 100% confirmed), city names (capital), dialogue window of the French (Unique Unit: Musketeer?) -> Pink
6. RUSSIANS - Leader? (Catherine the Great, Maria Theresa or someone else?), Unique Unit (MiG), city names -> Grey
7. ZULUS - Unique Unit (Impi), city names -> Yellow
8. ENGLISH - Leader (Elisabeth I; 100% confirmed), (Unique Unit: Man-at-Arms?)
9. EGYPTIANS - Leader (100% pharaoh, does anyone know who this is?), definite text reference, city names (capital) -> Yellow
10. INDIANS - Leader (Mahatma Ghandi; 100% confirmed)
11. JAPANESE (95%) - Leader (Tokugawa Ieyasu - Hat and characters on collar are Japanese), possible Unique Unit (Samurai) (see 17)
12. IROQUOIS - Leader (Hiawatha; 100% confirmed), city names, text references, Unique Unit (75% Unique Unit - 25% Military Leader) -> Grey
13. GREEKS - Leader (Alexander the Great, city names (capital), possible Unique Unit (Hoplite), text reference, video reference -> Green
EVIDENCE ABOUT OTHER CIVS (which means they could be in or not):
14. PERSIANS - City names (capital) -> Brown?
15. BABYLONIANS - City name -> Red
16. AZTECS - City names -> Pink
17. MONGOLS (5%) - There's a small chance Firaxis made some mistakes with the Leader; if so, it is a Mongol rather than a Japanese Leader (see 11)
SUGGESTIONS BASED ON CLUES (weak clues but we report them):
18. SPANISH - City name: Salamanca, but it was once a Roman city and there's also an Iroquois city with that name.
19. VIKINGS (?) Very weak clues. See above mention URL for the boat: Viking Longboat?
20. ISRAELIS. Apolytoner Eli has pointed out that according to a israeli site, Israel is in.
21. CANADIANS. City name (Montreal). The city name is NOT on the map, but on a civ 3 window.
22. CONFEDERATES. As refered to in a swedish article, a Great Military Leader in Civ 3 could be Stonewell Jackson. Apolytoner Arator argued that this leader is impossible to be in the same civ as Lincoln (=100% confirmed leader of the Americans). Many other Apolytoners disagree though, arguing that he's more likely to be an American, among other reasons because (as joseph1944 pointed out) he served for the American Army before joinging the Confederates.
23. PHOENICIANS. Based on a single text reference in a preview.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The evidence is categorized as such:
Leader= We have a picture of the leader of the corresponting civ.
Unique Unit= We know that the particular unique unit belongs to the corresponding civ
Text reference= The civ has been mentioned by Firaxis in their web site or in interviews by their CEO
Video reference= The civ was seen in Firaxis demo movie from E3.
City names= The names of cities that clearly belong to the corresponding civ are included in scrrenshots of the game
All other clues= All other clues are reported next to the civ name.
-> Color= Indicates in which color(s) the civ has been seen in in-game screenshots.
-------------------------FACTS & POINTERS-----------------------
* Firaxis officially stated that the number of civs that is playable per game will officially be 8. However, it will be possible to increase this number to 16 through the editing tools. Firaxis made no official statement on the total number of civs that will be included in the game but this aforementioned statement and the fact that all previews agree on this issue make it very likely that this number will be 16.
* Based on this info and all available screenshots it can be concluded that the Civs are very likely to be tied to color. There appear to be 8 colors in the game, with 2 civs tied to each color. Note that none of this is official.
* The city names in the screenshots can be from an extra city names list or could have been arbitrarily written be members of Firaxis. So city names in screenshots don't guarantee that a civ will be in. Examples: Kerplakistan and Huntsville, possibly others.
* Another problem could be scenarios. Though city names alone are not enough evidence to include a civ on the 100% certain list and scenario-specific graphics are not likely to be made public until the game is in late beta (if they even exist at all), it's quite possible that some of the evidence we used in this list is based on scenario specific information and not be valid for the regular game.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jsw363
|
|
I've been doing some research on the Spanish.
First, the city of Salamanca was known as Salamantica under Roman rule, so I don't think that this shouldn't be counted against them. It is unlikely Fireaxis would include this minor provincial city or use the modern name for a Roman city when there is a perfectly good Roman one.
Secondly, I confirmed earlier reports that Salamanca is an Iroquois city. (I admit, I was a bit skeptical) and have indluded the link below....
http://wnyrails.railfan.net/sal_home.htm
Salamanca is located within the land of the Seneca Indian Reservation and until the early 1860s its only inhabitants were Indians. When the Erie built its line though here, there was but a single water tank representing "civilization." Salamanca was originally named "Bucktooth", after the crooked teeth of an old Indian who provided fish to the early settlers. The names was changed to Salamanca in honor of the Sig. Don Jose de Salamanca, the Marquis of Salamanca Spain and an early investor in the Atlantic & Great Western Railway which had its eastern terminus in Salamanca.
Finally, I don't think that this portrait could be Isabella of Castille. She lived from 1451-1501 and would not have been dressed in this victorian garb. Compare that picture to the one below.
So as much as I would like to see the Spanish, it still seems unlikely at this point.
Attachment: isabella 2.jpg
This has been downloaded 86 time(s).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jsw363
|
|
They didn't animate the leader (the alleged Catherine/ Maria Theresa/ Victoria) as far as we know, so they didn't invest that much effort into the portrait. While the animation might take quite a while, a portrait shouldn't have been that hard to pull together.
I agree, I think that the portrait is Victoria, and Fireaxis changed thier minds later because perhaps Victoria is a bit unPC for this day and age.
So I don't think that this picture alone can provide any information about whether or not any civs are included. Until there's more info (hopefully on the website) guess we'll have to wait and see.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jsw363
|
|
All indications point to Elizabeth since she's the leader who's animated. It would be much less likely that they would dump a leader after animation. As for the alleged Victoria, all we have is a portrait, so as I said above it's much more likely that Fireaxis dumped her since they had less time invested. Also Elizabeth appears in more recent previews/ reviews and the other portrait is many months old.
All of that is contingent of course on the fact that the picture in question is in fact Victoria. While I think that it looks most like Victoria (more than Catherine or Maria Theresa), I don't think that we can safely assume that. Obviously anyone who has more information or who can make out the figure should contribute.
I for one would like some art history major/ European historian to clarify the issue, but I don't think that it's possible. All this stuff about multiple leaders, multiple female leaders is pure speculation and should be disregarded. I think that we should drop this for now and focus on some other civs.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000 time: 06:14
|
|
I never knew Deutschland befindet sich in the USA.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lung
|
 |
of my princess Anastasia!
Mar 1999 time: 15:14
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Admiral PJ
The spanish must be in.. |
Absolutely. If Firaxis are even considering excluding the Spanish, then they are an absolute joke!! The Iroquios is bad enough, being included purely in order to be politically correct. However, the Confederates being included would be even more ridiculous.
Why doesn't Firaxis make each of the U.S. states a civ, and include the English as a token gesture so they can still sell the game in the U.K.? Go the whole hog, Firaxis! Make Civ3 a complete farce!! I mean, what's the point of having a civ game if facts are considered to be so bothersome?? If it's so important to have these so-called civs in, then they should have more civs! But if they're going to restrict the civs to 16, then they must restrict the civs to civs which had a profound bearing on human history. The very thought of including civs for no other reason than for commercial gain is absurd!!
If the Iroquios must be in (and they will be), the Zulus can make way for them, as their empire was flaky in terms of world impact, at least compared to the other civs. Considering that they're considering excluding the Mongols and Vikings, surely the Zulus are on shaky ground!!
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14. Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|