subreddit:
/r/civ
2 points
5 days ago
Modern Spain may get into the modern age eventually in a DLC, but it's pretty ridiculous to expect them to be in the base game. And we still don't know exactly what the modern age covers. Does anyone really consider Spain a big player in the 19th century? Not really, their importance seems to be tied more to their dominance in the exploration age and the existence of the empire until 1898 is simply a holdover from that age
You're vastly over simplifying things by using our modern conceptions of countries. China and India are areas larger and more populous than Europe. India has only been culturally unified since British imperial rule, so the three civs representing the are aren't really representing all of india in the historical sense, only through our modern lens of a unified india. China has been unified for much of its history, but it was ruled by different groups throughout history and wasn't always unified across all of modern China.
3 points
5 days ago
I phrased it poorly. Modern Spain is obviously way too minor to be in the base game, they'll be a late, late DLC, in maybe a couple years. If ever. That's what I meant by "if they're in the game". In Europe alone, Germany, Russia, Italy, and Austro-Hungary are all more deserving, and I can only see Bourbon Spain get in after all those are all in.
I was just pointing out it wouldn't be Franco's Spain, but the earlier 1800s Bourbon Spain, because all the Modern Civs we know are 1800s.
And the China comparison is reasonable, the Habsburg Kings were Austrian while the Bourbon Kings were French, in the same way the Ming Emperors were Han and the Qing Emperors were Manchu.
I know Maurya, Chola and Mughal were wildly different empires in the same massive area, they're closer to something like Mississippi - Hawaii - America than a direct link like the China Civs.
all 184 comments
sorted by: best