 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
|
quote: [SIZE=1][SIZE]Good point. In fact, I don't know much about the American Civil War but I understand that many of the generals that fought each other in that war were in fact close friends before and even during the war and there was no division between north and south until that very war. |
Many of the later Civil War General did fight in the Mexican War and therefore knew each other
quote: Thank you for your excellent explanations on Indians, that clarifies a lot. It does indeed seem unlikely that the Iroquois would rely heavily on horses in the woods. That gives us two small but not unimportant clues that the Native American Civ isn't the Iroquois, the round houses behind the leader and the horse unit, while all other clues indicate that they are. Since 2 Native American Civs seems unlikely (at least to me), no matter what the Civ is, it's not gonna make much sense. I guess Firaxis' artists were at least partially lead by prejudices and cliches rather than by pure facts (unless I'm missing something).
There are two clues that this Native American civ in fact isn't the Iroquois: the houses behind the leader picture are small and round rather than long and square and the unit is a horseman while the Iroquois lived in woods and didn't rely heavily on horses. |
The picture of the Indian brave is Iroquois because of the Mohawk hair cut. Plains Indian did not cut their hair for the most part that I'm aware of.
[QUOTE]CONFEDERATES. As referred to in a Swedish article, a Great Military Leader in Civ 3 could be Stonewall Jackson. Apolytoner Arator argued that this leader is impossible to be in the same civ as Lincoln (=100% confirmed leader of the Americans). Other Apolytoners disagree though, arguing that he's more likely to be an American.[/QUOTE
A. Lincoln asked R.E. Lee to become Commanding General of the U.S. Army a few weeks before South Carolina succeeded from the Union.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
me_irate
|
|
I have a fealing that the mongol leader ghangis khan is in fact the barb leader. as was atilla in ctp2. I believe that the mongols did little to add to civ, and lasted only as long as thier leader.(after his death his empire crumbled and the remenants were not even a close resemblance to the empire he controlled.) so with this reasoning i think khan is a barb leader and with this civ removed, we will recieve a much more deserving one in thier place.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
The new updated IGN report is stating 16 Civs, twice.
Locutus: Without Unique Units how long would it take to add a Civ? And then with one Unique Unit how long would it take to add a Civ? The reason that I ask that question is, they (Firaxis) could wait until a week or so before going Gold to determine how many Civs they will have in the game.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
tniem
|
|
Hope College
Apr 2000 time: 00:14
|
|
quote: Originally posted by joseph1944
The new updated IGN report is stating 16 Civs, twice.
Locutus: Without Unique Units how long would it take to add a Civ? And then with one Unique Unit how long would it take to add a Civ? The reason that I ask that question is, they (Firaxis) could wait until a week or so before going Gold to determine how many Civs they will have in the game. |
I would have to believe it would take minutes to add a civ without unique elements. With unique elements though it will take at least a month to make sure the new civ balances with all the rest of them. So it would seem that the Firaxis team probably has their 16 civs that they have been working with making sure that giving the Romans an ancient unit doesn't allow them to win early and also to make sure the U.S. F-15 does not guarantee victory.
So, I don't think with unique civs Firaxis can wait to decide who is in the game.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pilfur
|
|
First let me say that I am Canadian, and I consider my country to be the best place in the world to live.
But a civilization III empire based on Canada?! Um, no. It is just silly. Canada was never a world military power, nor will it ever be. Its just a peaceful little ex-colony of england. It has no long history reaching back to ancient, or even medieval times (same for the Americans but they at least have had some big wars), and doesn't really have a great historic leader. Who will Canada's leader be? Pearson? Trudeau? And then who is the hero of Canada? Joseph Brant? Unique unit to Canada? Geese that poop on you? I don't think Canada will make the cut.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
 |
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999 time: 06:14
|
|
Pot 'n kettle, Eli, pot 'n kettle...
paiktis,
You have a point there.
What? So you're temporary departure was just an elaborate trick to get me to take over the moderatorship of this thread? You sneaky bastard! 
I guess you're right about the Greeks. But what about the Russians then? I don't recall Firaxis ever confirming that the MiG would be their Unique Unit, did I overlook something here then?
joseph,
Thanks for all the info, that's very useful. I'll add it to the summary.
Adding a civ without unique elements would still take at the very least a few days: you'd have to do research to find a suitable leader and a proper list with city names (Activision really screwed up in this area with the CtP series but I don't think Firaxis will make the same mistake) and get everything past your lawyers and QA people. With unique elements it would take even longer, as it need thorough testing, playbalancing and the design of lots of new art. Not only would it be time-consuming to add a new civ, it would also be expensive so it's not likely Firaxis will do it.
Designing software is an incredibly complex process and as much work as possible is done well before the actual coding starts. When the actual coding starts all kinds of other issues come up and you'll want to be able to focus on those issues rather than on (at that point) unimportant details that could have been taken care off much earlier. Determining which civs will be in is one of those things that can very well be done early on in the process, so it's most likely that Firaxis has indeed done this early on. Unless there are some serious problems with existing civs (I can't think of anything that could cause this myself), Firaxis will go with whatever civs they decided to put in months ago.
me_irate,
Contrary to what seems to be common believe, the Mongol empire did *not* fall apart after Kahn. It was divided among his four sons (and IIRC later reunited under one leader again but I'm not sure about that) but continued to exist as a single empire for at least another century. It wasn't until the Ming dynasty overthrew the Mongol rule in China and an almost simultaneous change of power in Persia that the Mongol empire really fell apart (I'm not good with dates as far as Asian history goes but check Britannica.com if you need them). Until then the Mongols controlled the largest empire the world has ever known, reason enough to treat them as a seperate civ rather than as barbarians.
Pilfur,
quote: I consider my country to be the best place in the world to live |
Doesn't everybody? Of his own country that is 
Canada may seem unlikely but evidence is evidence so we have to consider the possibility. I think it's unlikely too but as said a dozen times before, this thread not about "should be" or "shouldn't be" but about facts.
So far, based on our evidence, we know that:
Edit: For your convenience I indicated the changes in red (hope I didn't overlook anything though)
100% CONFIRMED. These civs ARE in CIV 3:
1. AMERICANS - Leader (100% confirmed), city names, Unique Unit (F15)
2. GERMANS - Unique Unit (Panzer). Multiple text references
3. CHINESE - Leader (100% confirmed)
4. ROMANS - Leader, city name (capital), unique unit (Legion)
5. FRENCH - Leader (100% confirmed), dialogue window of the French (Unique Unit: Musketeer?)
6. RUSSIANS - Unique Unit (MiG)
7. ZULUS - Unique Unit (Impi)
8. ENGLISH - Leader (100% confirmed)
9. EGYPTIANS - Leader (100% pharaoh ), definite text reference
10. INDIANS - Leader (100% confirmed)
11. MONGOLS (90%)- or JAPANESE?(10%) Leader * (see civ 18, Japanese)
12. IROQUOIS - Leader (100% Native American), city names, text references Unique Unit (75% Native American Unique Unit - 25% Military Leader) ** (see below)
** There are two clues that this Native American civ in fact isn't the Iroquois: the houses behind the leader picture are small and round rather than long and square and the unit is a horseman while the Iroquois lived in woods and didn't rely heavily on horses. All other clues (text references, hair cut, city names) point to Iroquois.
HIGH PROPABILITY. This civ is almost certaintly in:
13. GREEKS - City name (capital), possible Unique Unit (Hoplites), text reference.
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 (which means they could be in or not):
14. PERSIANS - City names (capital)
15. SPANISH - City name: Salamanca (which historically was once a Roman city)
16. BABYLONIANS - City name
17. AZTECS - City names
SUGGESTIONS BASED ON CLUES (weak clues but we report them):
18. JAPANESE (open for debate plz see the samurai(?) unit at http://viewer.fgnonline.com/fgn_med...ttp%3A%2F%2Fwww .fgnonline.com%2Fmedia%2Fpc%2Fnews%2Funits.jpg
* Also see http://www.infogrames-expo.com/screens/civ05b.jpg Gheghis Chan of the Mongols or a Japanese leader? (All votes except one say Ghengis).
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 and was even asked by Lincoln to serve as Commanding General under him only weeks before South Carolina succeeded from the Union.
--------------------------------------------------------
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
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.
-------------------------CIV FACTS-----------------------
+ Firaxis said the made NO official announcement regarding the number of civs that may or may not be included in the game.
+ In a Gamespot article its says that civs will be 16.
+ An israeli site says that civs will be 16
+ In an IGN preview it says that there will be 16 civs.
--------------------------POINTERS-------------------------
The city names in the screen shots can be from an extra city names list or could have been arbitrarily written be members of Firaxis. So city names in screenshots doesn't guarantee that a civ will be in. Examples: Kerplakistan & Huntsville, possibly others.
Last edited by Locutus on 27-05-2001 at 21:07
|
|
|  |
 |
|
bagdar
|
 |
Turkey
Jan 2001 time: 07:14
|
|
quote: Originally posted by paiktis22
If the Turks are in (which I hope they will be although I am increasingly worried about having olny 16 civs) which leader would you like?
It might be Ataturk but if the Ottomans are in I'd say Suleiman the Magnificent. |
I always say that I prefer the Civ II set, but if they decide to include us as a civ; either Ataturk, Mehmet II or Suleiman would be the best choice. I guess CTP had Osman I, who was only the chieftain of the tribe which grew up into the Ottoman Empire, so that wasn't a good choice. On the other hand, what would be the special unit for the Turks? The Janissaries seem to be the best choice, but what kind of a standard-unit transformation would that be? Mad-kind-of-musketeer-horseman-swordsman-cannoneer-who-would-not-stop-revolting-until-it-screws-up-the-empire? Well, anyway, nobody seems to be excited about the Turks in Civ anyway, as the poll also showed , even I'm not excited!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
Serapis,
Like you after following the research for so long I am very close to be convinced that we will only have 16 civs. Don't forget that the disclaimer of Firaxis about the number of civs was made in a thread that discussed the number of civs that will be playing SIMULTANIOUSLY in the game.
It cannot be substantiated but my instinct tells me we will have 16.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
Would someone tell how to use this scanner that I have to upload message to this forum?
Last edited by on 28-05-2001 at 11:06
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Geoff the Medio
|
|
First off, let me say I don't really know what I'm talking about.
That said,
For military power, I'm sure I've heard somewhere that Canada had the 3rd largest naval fleet in the world after WWII. Canada was involved in both world wars, the boer war and either korea, veitnam or both. (I could research this stuff, but it's not really worth the effort for this...) These are, I think, all the "big wars" the US has been involved in recently (no the Gulf War doesn't count, IMHO).
The WWII Corvette (naval destroyer/escort) could possibly be a special unit.
Trudeau or Sir John A MacDonald could be possible leaders.
Gen. Isaac Brock or Gen. Wolfe could be heros.
Lastly, perhaps Canadians could be included as a selling-point? I imagine a few people could be persuaded that way...
quote: Originally posted by Pilfur
First let me say that I am Canadian, and I consider my country to be the best place in the world to live.
But a civilization III empire based on Canada?! Um, no. It is just silly. Canada was never a world military power, nor will it ever be. Its just a peaceful little ex-colony of england. It has no long history reaching back to ancient, or even medieval times (same for the Americans but they at least have had some big wars), and doesn't really have a great historic leader. Who will Canada's leader be? Pearson? Trudeau? And then who is the hero of Canada? Joseph Brant? Unique unit to Canada? Geese that poop on you? I don't think Canada will make the cut. |
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Geoff the Medio
|
|
I never said Canada *should* be included. I just said it could be, and I disagreed with the statements
quote: Canada was never a world military power |
and
(Canada)quote: doesn't really have a great historic leader. |
and suggested a few semi-reasonable options for leader, unit etc.
I do however think Austria, or some variation thereof, should be included due to perceived historical importance (of mine anyway).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
Lincoln was elected President on Nov. 6, 1860. Took office on March 4, 1861. Several states said that if Lincoln was elected they would leave the Union, and they did leave the Union. The Civil War started on April 12, 1861.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
SerapisIV
|
 |
Hartford, CT, USA
Feb 2001 time: 00:14
|
|
quote: Originally posted by paiktis22
Serapis,
Like you after following the research for so long I am very close to be convinced that we will only have 16 civs. Don't forget that the disclaimer of Firaxis about the number of civs was made in a thread that discussed the number of civs that will be playing SIMULTANIOUSLY in the game.
It cannot be substantiated but my instinct tells me we will have 16. |
I really hope for more simultaneous civs, but all the previews point to a conservative iteration of Civ, with that in mind, I figure they'll stick close to 7, maybe 8 simultaneous civs, with 16 to choose from. And as you point out, the Firaxis post claimed that no announcement was made with regards to simultaneous civs, no denial of the inclusion of only 16 civs was made, but we can always hope for more 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|