 |
|  |
 |
|
monkspider
|
 |
banned
Aug 2001 time: 23:18
|
|
|
|
19-03-2002 07:38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1
|  |
|
How many Civs do you predict will be in the official XP and which civs will they be?
|
Got spare money?
|
|
Here's the question I pose to the Apolyton community, how many new civilizations do you think will appear in a new expansion pack, and which civilizations do you predict that they will be?
Here's my educated guess:
I predict 8 new civs, since it would bring the number up to a nice even 24, and 8 is half of the number of civs that appeared in the original game, so it is a nice number in that regard as well.
The eight civs will be
1. Spanish (due to appearing in Civ 2)
2. Mongols (due to appearing in Civ 2)
3. Celts (due to appearing in Civ 2, even though they seemed like a trivial Civ to include, IMHO)
4. Carthage/Phoenecia (due to appearing in Civ 2)
5. Vikings (due to appearing in Civ 2)
6. Arabs (due to appearing in Civ 2 text files)
7. Incans (due to appearing in Civ 2 text files)
8. Turks/Mayans/Portugese/Hebrews/Dutch
The last spot is a tough call. I think all four civs have a feasible chance of being in the game.
Turks-Extremely important, but could be considered to be too similar to the arabs.
Mayans- A very unique, distinct civ, but could be left out because of the Inca already being included.
Portugese-Certainly very prominent throughout history, but could be left out, for better or worse, due to Spain's inclusion
Hebrews- Very unique, but not as large an impact on history as some of the others mentioned.
Dutch-A great European Civ, but the fact that it's another European civ could be held against it.
I would wager that the last civ is either the Turks or Hebrews. The Turks due to their importance in history and the Hebrews due to their uniqueness and marketability (imagine an animated King David!).
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mr. Blaze
|
|
Great White North.. eh
Mar 2002 time: 00:18
|
|
hmm.. i think there will be 8 new 1's also
and the previous pic's make sense to me..
my predictions-
1) Spanish, very important, in civ2
2) Vikings, civ 2
3) Carthagians, civ 2
4) Mongols, civ 2
5) Turks, quite important
6) Celts, civ 2
last 2 r hard for me to decide
7) i) Canadians.. but they r close to iroquois and americans.. really close (on maps) ii) Arabs, i might bet on this
8) i) Australians, kinda doubt it ii) Dutch, i think this one shuld be in.
many others could be 7 or 8.. and i am prolly missin some.. oh well..
thats wut i think 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jethro83
|
|
Newcastle, Australia
Mar 2002 time: 15:18
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Thrawn05
I think Firaxis should have one or two blank "template" civs instead. This way, we can add our own civ to the game, without having to overwrite anyother civ, not to mention having to live with that's face (i know you can edit it, but I don't feel like it) |
"template" civs?
I think that it would be a better idea to simply have an editor that you can use to create your own civs with their own units and leader portraits. The number of civs you can create should then be limitless, however in game, only 16 should be accessible (maybe that limit should be bumped up on the larger maps). The 'template', however would be a good starting point in creating your civ leaders. But then there'd only need to be one which will come up as soon as the editor opens, or you select New from the file menu.
Also, you should be able to create new cultural groups so that your custom civs fit in somewhere outside of European, Mediterranean, Middle-Eastern and American cultural groups (eg. If I wanted to create Australian and Aboriginal civilizations, I could have an "Australian" cultural group created). This ability would also make fantasy mods much easier to come up with, as you could have a cultural group for each race (separate groups for human, elvish, orc/goblin and undead kingdoms, etc.)
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Mikel
|
|
Scotland
Apr 1999 time: 05:18
|
|
Well I think you may well be right but I hope not. Your justification for these civ's appearing in Civ2 is probably in line with Firaxis plans (i.e. rehash some old ideas). Personally I would rather see a series of themed expansions that include more than a few new civ's. What about Civ III : Imperialism? It could include some of the guys on your list like Spain, Apache, and Incans, but I really hope they give us new features that complement the existing game. How about the possibility of part of your Civ rebelling ( maybe one of the new civ's could then be a generic rebelious civ that takes it's name from the civ it broke away from?) perhaps with the introduction of a "rebellious sentiment" in each city that replaces the "corruption increasing with distance from capital" model for controlling the expansion of empires? Perhaps this would encourage the use of colonies to reach essential resources (would any empire throw around settlers as they do now if it increases the risk of a large number of their cities rebelling to form a new civ?). Why not design the new UU's to take advantage of the redisigned game.
So I hope for only a few new civ's, around 4 say, that are all in some way related.
And what do you mean the Celts where unimportant? Who do you think those Roman legions did all that fighting against?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Thrawn05
|
 |
All Your Posts Are Belong To Ming
Dec 2001 time: 00:18
|
|
quote: Originally posted by LordAzreal
"template" civs?
I think that it would be a better idea to simply have an editor that you can use to create your own civs with their own units and leader portraits. The number of civs you can create should then be limitless, however in game, only 16 should be accessible (maybe that limit should be bumped up on the larger maps). The 'template', however would be a good starting point in creating your civ leaders. But then there'd only need to be one which will come up as soon as the editor opens, or you select New from the file menu.
Also, you should be able to create new cultural groups so that your custom civs fit in somewhere outside of European, Mediterranean, Middle-Eastern and American cultural groups (eg. If I wanted to create Australian and Aboriginal civilizations, I could have an "Australian" cultural group created). This ability would also make fantasy mods much easier to come up with, as you could have a cultural group for each race (separate groups for human, elvish, orc/goblin and undead kingdoms, etc.) |
True, but I'm sure you know how programmers are (hell, I'm becoming one), we always look for the quick fix answer. Have a limitless number of civs might require some rewriting of the code (heaven forbid! ), not to mention drawing the bitmaps to accommodate the new system. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
rockhpi
|
|
Michigan
Mar 2002 time: 05:18
|
|
SMAC managed to have limitless (or at least room for lots) new factions...they just added to the pool. It's one of my biggest gripes with Civ3.
RockHPI
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Mr. Blaze
|
|
Great White North.. eh
Mar 2002 time: 00:18
|
|
yeah, Hannibal for the Carthagians, for sure..
Celts a lil harder.. maybe jus go with Cunobelin again..
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Elucidus
|
|
Yeah I hope they add some nifty features to the editor. Of course this post is about new civs...Oops.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jethro83
|
|
Newcastle, Australia
Mar 2002 time: 15:18
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Miznia
Unless someone knows for sure otherwise, I predict that the XP will have no new civs at all.
But if there ARE... then I'm willing to bet that there will be no Celts or Carthaginians. Who could the leader be? I also strongly suspect no Arabs.
|
Hannibal is definitely the best choice as a Carthaginian ruler. I don't know about the Celts as I haven't studied into them.
NO ARABS?!
The Arabs are responsible for the recovery of much of the great knowledge of ancient Greece. If it weren't for them, we probably would've forgotten people like Aristotle. We would've forgotten how to build stable architecture, the modern concept of the hospital would've also been out.
Not to mention that their great empire within approx. 150 years of having started Islam managed to expand their empire as far west as Morocco, and as far east as India.
I think that if I were to get the Civ Editor as I described above, and Firaxis didn't add the Arabs already, I'd have to do it. With King Saladin as the ruler (he liberated the Holy Land from the barbarian Normans and Franks and won the second crusade against England).
The arabs could be Scientific, Expansionist; Religious, Expansionist; Religious, Scientific (though Babylon who would be in the same cultural group are also Religious, Scientific)
Their unique unit would be the Mameluke. It would replace the knight, wouldn't require horses and maybe have increased attack.
That's my thought anyway. Just a few ideas for a civ I'd add if it isn't in the XP (although the mameluke may be a problem unless they make it possible to edit graphics individually, as the mameluke would need a camel-rider graphic).
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Carver
|
 |
reprocessing plutonium, Yongbyon, NK
Jan 2002 time: 23:18
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Miznia
Unless someone knows for sure otherwise, I predict that the XP will have no new civs at all.
I also strongly suspect no Arabs.
4. another sub-Saharan civ? Ethiopia?
Miznia |
I'd be happy if you're right. More important than new civs are new options, new units and a real scenario editor.
There probably doesn't need to be a monolithic Arab civ, I think there's too much diversity within them. I'd rather have the Turks, or the Lybians - can you imagine joining an alliance with Qaddafi against America.
If there's one sub-Saharan civ it should have been Ethiopia, not the Zulu. Ethiopia has the longest history of any modern sub-Saharan state. There's the rock hewn churches of Lalibela, the oblisks (the tallest of which is still being "preserved" in Rome), the more than 1500 year old Amharic written language, the traditions of the Ethiopian Coptic Church, and the probable location of the Ark of the Covenant in northern Ethiopia.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
rpodos
|
|
Do I have this right?
Galley sinks Coracle?
No wonder you've been having problems.
R
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
8 new Civs??? After seeing the expectations of the original Civ3 release I would expect people not to be setting their hopes so high again.
Instead plan for 2 new Civs... and when 4 new Civs are available (total even 20) you can be happy.
Just pray the XP has MP & an Editor capable of making scenarios. Even that I would expect as a high expectation now tho.
The 4 New Civs are:
1.Vikings
2.Spanish
3.Mongols
4.*>insert Civ here which many people will say, "What the **** is that Civ doing in there?!"<*
|
|
|  |
 |
|
siredgar
|
 |
New York, NY
Nov 2001 time: 00:18
|
|
Well, just by comparing with Age of Empires 2 and Rise of Nations, we've already been ripped off by two civs. =) They each included 18 civs (albeit AoE2 w/ expansion pack). Also, Empire Earth has a whopping 21 civs! So, instead of eight civs, we should get at least 10 in the expansion pack. =P
If you look at my new thread that I just posted, you'll see that both of these games included the Koreans, Mayans, Mongols, Spanish, and Turks, while Civ 3 did not. I don't know if we really need the Mayans since we already have the Aztecs in there, so I'd probably replace that slot with the Incans.
Anyhow, if they were to have 10 civs in the expansion pack, I would have to say it should be something like this (in order of importance):
1. Spanish
2. Mongols
3. Koreans
4. Turks
5. Incans
6. Vikings
7. Portuguese
8. Dutch
9. Ethiopians
10. Khmer
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18. Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|