 |
|
d_dudy
|
|
the spanish should be in first, think of how many people have some spanish descent in them......
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Christantine The Great
|
|
Massachusetts
Jun 2000 time: 00:15
|
|
Nah, there are already enough Middle Eastern civs. Same with the Spanish (of course with the bigger map...nah, still no).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
d_dudy
|
|
you just don't play with the french or romans
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Anun Ik Oba
|
 |
Grace of God
Sep 1999 time: 00:15
|
|
I think the reason that a lot of civs didn't get selected, and why others did, was because Firaxis wanted to mix things up a bit by including civs that were different from each other. Tough decisisions that had to be made to cut some of the other major civs, but that's how it all panned out.
Also another thing to consider is the civ leaders. Who would you pick to represent the Arabs or the Spanish? The leaders for the civs that are included in the game are quite well known: Cleopatra, Ceasar (Julius, Augustus- which Ceasar is in the game btw?), Lincoln, Gandhi....
Ok, so I am defending Firaxis. But they had 16 civs to work with, and they had to choose which would be in, and which would be candidates for an XP.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
The celts are the most glaring omission. The were a big influence in the dark ages.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Steve Clark
|
 |
Colorado Springs, CO
Oct 1999 time: 22:15
|
|
quote: Originally posted by monkspider
There may be a lot of disagreement over what civ should be included, but a fact that virtually all apolytoners would agree on is that at LEAST the Mongols, Spanish, Vikings, and Arabs deserved to be in the game. The only disagreement would come over which would take higher priority over the other, as one could make a very solid case for all four. . |
Why is this even an issue? Just wait a little while and you'll probably see 100+ civs available to put into the 16 slots. Makes everything discussed here completely moot, imo.
For example, one of my very favorite Civ2 game I played included the Egyptians, Hittites, Assyrians, Minoans, Babylonians, Persians (and someone else), plus the barbarians disguised as Libyan raiders. You understand what I'm getting at?
Now in Civ3, whether these new ones include those fancy 3D leaders is irrelevant, imo. As far as civ attributes, those should not be in the regular game, only in scenarios.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15. Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|