14-08-2001 19:25									#31
	Remove this text

I would hazard a guess that in part it could have to do with the new civilization attributes. With six attributes taken two at a time, there are only 15 different combinations of civ. attribs. available. With 16 civilizations, that means that two of them, the English and the Germans, will be different only in terms of their special unit, and when their golden age occurs. (I'm not counting any graphical aspects here as they don't directly affect gameplay in the manner I'm considering).

So, we already have a situation where two civs. will be less than totally unique. And while there will be a large variety of opinions as to what civs. will be best matched to what strategies, I suspect that the Germans and English will be subject to more direct comparisions than most.

So, if they put in 21 civs. there would be 12 civs that had the same attributes as another civ. and only partially different from at least one other civ.

Personally, knowing how ruthless gamers can be in expressing there opinions on such matters in a game, I suspect they may have been very wise in reducing the number of civs. and almost completely avoiding this issue altogether. Though, I could believe that reducing their graphical work load was another reason for this too.

	14-08-2001 20:11									#32
	Suffering from ads?

Actually, Germans and English are not the only identical civs, special abilities-wise.

There is no civilization that gets miliary/scientific combo, while both Aztec and Japanese are military/religious.

	16-08-2001 01:49									#33
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

I'm a bit disappointed in the number of civs and the way they will be used...I was dreming that I could play one civ and challange with other 15 or 20 or perhaps more...That would make Civilization a bit harder to play perhaps,but it would add variety and more colors to the world I'd try to dominate...Anyway,since this looks impossible lets come to the number of civs.Like someone said above,in a sequel of games you should improve almost everything in the newer game.But now we will have to play with fewer civs.Altough they are different from each other it still sounds a bit disappointing to me.I mean it will be sad not play or crush the other faithful civs like Monghols and Spanish or some others...

	19-08-2001 01:07									#34
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Hmmm.... You're right, Martinus. Not sure how I missed that when I was looking at the list of Civs and abilities.

Though, I do think my idea has some validity. To me it is going to be the Civ-specific abilities that will make the most difference in what civs I'll play on a regular basis. And I see no reason that more civs have to be there, if they aren't going to be that different.

Ok, maybe, I'll change my mind once I play the game and see how Golden Ages and the special units really affect my gameplay. But for right now, I'm more of the mind that more isn't necessarily better, and I'd rather see 16 civs done as best they can be than 21 or more that aren't.