12-07-2005 11:22									#31
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: The Koori weren't a civillization because they didn't build cities

That's exaclty the thinking that the English used to justify taking the land from the Koori people without any thought of negotiation or compensation. Actually the term was "terra nullius". If this thread is about Civilisation the game, then yes the Koori people are not a suitable candidate, but as noted above

quote: Well, we´re discussing various real life civs and not the game as such

using this narrow-minded notion of civilisation is not really appropriate. Recently this view was overturned by the Australian courts anyway (not that it makes much difference now). I'd say the ability to significantly alter the landscape of a country for your benefit (fire stick farming) while doing so in a sustainable way (recently shown to be much longer than 40,000 years) is an unequalled achievement by any other group of people.

Maybe the best and fairest yardstick of a civilisation is the mean and standard deviation of the happiness of the total population. So cities and wealth can make you happy but not neccessarily, and if some of your people are happy but many are not it does not reflect well on your whole society. Of course measuring this is not easy. I'd like to think the Vikings would actually win here, looting and pillagin is fun, especially if your religion actively encourages it . Though I think in reality for every Valhallan bound berserker there were a lot of slaves and peasants so overall the Vikings probably do poorly.

	13-07-2005 16:28									#32
	Suffering from ads?

I´m not saying the Kooris aren´t a civilization and should be wiped off the face off the planet or treated like a part of the plant- and animal life (like they were in Oz until quite recently). I´m just saying that if they disappeared after a time no one would even know they´d existed... IMO a great civ leaves something to history in form of buildings, concepts of philosophy or has in other ways a major impact on the shaping of human history. And the Kooris, for all their spiritual beliefs and closeness to nature doesn´t do this.

	14-07-2005 01:56									#33
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Dr Zoidberg I´m not saying the Kooris aren´t a civilization and should be wiped off the face off the planet or treated like a part of the plant- and animal life (like they were in Oz until quite recently). I´m just saying that if they disappeared after a time no one would even know they´d existed... IMO a great civ leaves something to history in form of buildings, concepts of philosophy or has in other ways a major impact on the shaping of human history. And the Kooris, for all their spiritual beliefs and closeness to nature doesn´t do this.

I dare you to stand in front of Ayres Rock, or Corrobaree Rock, or any other of a million places where the Aboringines drew their art.

Their art depicts how they used the land, their philosopies in life, and the Dreamtime.

They DID leave a lasting impression of their way of life, spiritual beliefs, and culture on the world. Any good Australian who's visited these sites knows this, and fully respects it.

Dale

	14-07-2005 02:37									#34
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Well, there is that I suppose... Those drawings are quite impressive. Much like the bronze age rock drawings in Sweden.

	22-07-2005 21:24									#35
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

If we're talking about how one should select civs for a game, then there are 2 goals to strive for: (1) diversity in selection and (2) a civ that captures the imagination.
If a civ isn't captivating, you won't play it, and if all the civs are too similar, then the game has less replay value.

In that context, the Mongols and Aztecs are great choices because they present such vivid alternatives to the rise of European culture.

That also makes some of the more successful real-world cultures poor Civ game choices. Consider Poland: 1000 years old, great art, contributions to science, with a hand in most of the great tipping points in European history. But their role is as Europe's median, lacking the authoritarian or revolutionary streaks that make Russia, Germany, France, and England compelling game choices.
Call it inoffensiveness or principled lack of greatness, it's what keeps Korea, Thailand, and derivative civs like Argentina, Byzantium, and The Ottoman from being good Civ game choices, too.

	23-07-2005 02:03									#36
	Suffering from ads?

True. We wouldn´t want to have the CTP crap all over again.

That said it would actually be interesting to see what a Koorie civ could do in the game and what the specific civ traits would be.