 |
| |
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Snapcase
Aww, served well in Civ2, eh? As faceless, pointless, samey carbon copies of each other, that's how. I know! Let's double the number of species in StarCraft, I mean, sure it's perfectly balanced for three species, but six would give people more options so it doesn't matter if all the individuality and personality dissapears. Let's just change a jpg here and there and people probably will think they're completely different, tee hee. 
Guys, it's a Design Decision. If you don't like it, this is really not the place to complain, because it's already in. |
Starcraft!!! 
Obviously someone who completely misses the point of what civ is all about.
Im not as much concerned about civs becoming carbon copies of each other, as strategy games becoming carbon copies of each other. Why must Civ become like every garden variety RTS? Its not a clickfest about different species, its a serious game about the history of humanity - oh, what's the use.
LOTM
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
kittenOFchaos
|
 |
Halifax, Calderdale, England
May 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
4 the Dude...who slatted my arrogant and uncalled for (no-one called for this thread) post earlier on the spanish worthiness...
Uneducated...ha!
BUT honestly...the spanish only hit the conquest of empire in the 1500´s having only recently finished off the Moors (the only cultural sites of interest in Granada and MUCH of Andalusia!). They wiped out civilisations and replaced it with massive latifundos in Latin America...and it was pretty grime EVERYWHERE they went without exception.
Bringing christianity and pillage vs the 3 C´s of christianity, commerce and civilisation (of most western civs of the time) the spanish made ****ty places ****ter and none of these places appreciated Spain (no commonwealth heh) and generally escaped by revolt (Simon Bolivar).
What good did the wealth of spain bring...well it helped fund war to keep the holy roman empire and build a few more pointless cathedraels for the papacy but nothing tangible and worthy.
The empire was puny by the 1700s and dead in the 1800s after Boney invaded (Napoleon).
The 1900s Spain enjoyed losing all her empire short of some dust in north africa and then had a nice civil war followed by nationalist government and finally some democratic government.
Well, Richard Grenville is what I say to you! No papacy in civ3!
(only teasing ya...! go to montril...see the fun and games and culture is NOT about teasing bulls).
As for Halifax, we had the world´s first Jibbet first...the only remaining woolmarket (the Piece hall) MANY arts and crafts things (especially the WONDERFUL "Dean Clough") and Halifax only has the pride of the Wainhouse Tower and a town hall designed by the dude who designed the "houses of parliament" in London -the Palace of Westminster.
PLUS for culture who can deny the Colisseum of Halifax where mrs wet t-shirt can be had...or the multitude of classier clubs etc. IN combination with the Northern Broadside acting group playing alot in the cellars of Dean Clough PLÜS the Square Chapel venue for plays, music etc WE have plenty.
Go to Granada, look at the Moorish thing (and the amputees, there our tonnes)..got to Montril, commit suicide.
As for a third world...of course it exists, poverty vs wealth, health vs depridation etc.
The spanish would be nice in the game EXCEPT that their reign was not civilisation...it never brought that anywhere it went, it brought war, conquest and indoctrination to the one true faith...it destroyed more than it created...let is be a barbarian event like I hope the Mongols will be. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Waku
|
 |
Cádiz, Spain
Nov 2000
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
The spanish would be nice in the game EXCEPT that their reign was not civilisation...it never brought that anywhere it went, it brought war, conquest and indoctrination to the one true faith...it destroyed more than it created...let is be a barbarian event like I hope the Mongols will be. |
You forgot to mention Cyprus, Israel, Kuwait, Appartheid, Northern Ireland, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Chile, talivans, Kachemir,... where anglosaxon brought the seed of war.
Some "more civilizated" countries don't have a rate of 0 (zero) dead penalties/year. God bless America.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Harlan
|
|
Berkeley, CA, USA
Aug 2005
time: 21:15
|
|
This is a disturbing thread. I'm not ethnically Spanish, but I still hate to see some ignorant people knocking Spain's many accomplishments.
Does Spain deserve to have a spot in Civ3? Heck yeah. They only created the largest empire of all time. But in terms of "are they interesting" and would they add to the game, yes and yes.
The four biggest omissions IMHO are the Spanish, Arabs, Vikings and Mongols. Vikings aren't overwhelmingly historically important, but they more than make up for that with color. I'll bet anyone can easily think of special units for each of them.
Not so for some of the civs Civ3 decided to include. The Zulus? Please. I don't know what Snapcase was smoking when he said they "subjugated an area the size of Western Europe, with a population of millions". The modern country of South Africa is about twice the size of France, and Shaka Zulu only conquered a portion of that in his whopping 12 years of power.
My historical atlas shows at least 8 other sub-Saharan kingdoms in the 1820's that held as much or more land than Shaka did. The only thing the Zulus have going for them was nearby British and Dutch settlements to help record their events for posterity. And the only "interesting" thing that puts them above more deserving sub-Saharan civs like the Ethiopians is Shaka, a character that some people recall the name of. Of the many African empires that came and went in history, who knows how many other Shakas there were they we only dimly know of, if at all. If it weren't for the PC factor, the Zulus would be so gone (normally I'm a PC guy, but things like making Cleopatra black gives being "PC" a bad name).
The Bablyonians are another civ that shouldn't have made the first 16 cut. The Civ3 website admits they had to lump the Sumerians, Akkadians, Amorites, Hittites, Kassites, Assyrians, Arameans, and Chaldeans all together to give this civ enough significance. This is some kind of Frankenstein civ- the Hittites and some others in the above list have very little in common with the other groups - different languages, religions and so on. Do they have an immediately obvious military special unit? No. Terribly distinctive or well known? No.
But why do we argue about which civs should fit in the 16 limit, like dogs fighting over scraps? 16 is too small. The ONLY reason there aren't more is because Firaxis didn't want to do the work. As for playbalance, how much do you want to bet there will be an official expansion pack that somehow miraculously finds a way to balance in some new civs?
Unfortunately, it won't be easy for non-Firaxians to make new civs well - how does anyone propose the 3D units and leaders be made? And, as far as the screenshots show us, it looks like there is no room to pick from more than 16 civs at the start of the game, so if you add some, you have to take some out. I hope that isn't true, but that's how it looks.
Furthermore, chances are lots of different mods will pop up, and none will have the tons of hours behind them to have them properly playbalanced into the rest of the game.
I propose that people who care make a short list of "must add" civs and work together as a team to make one commonly accepted mod pack, done really well, rather than a bunch of mutually exclusive half-done ones. Not something I have time to spend on, but I know JB is the man if you want someone who knows the Spanish inside and out.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SITS
|
 |
of shreds and patches
Apr 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
In CIV3 there new big thing is about culture. If you look at how many countries speak Spanish then you will see that the Spanish had a major impact on culture in a number of countries. I might be wrong but doesn't Chinese have the most people speaking it? But how many countries and continents have it as their primary language? Probably the most civilising empire was the romans who kicked our ass through several tech's (to use Civ terms!)
Kitten - you mention the third world (or the developing nations if you like....) Britain was the major contributor to their current poverty. In fact I would say we have had a major influence in shaping the modern world. There are 54 nations in the Commonwealth.
He is a quote from here
What is the Commonwealth?
The Commonwealth is a voluntary association of more than 50 independent sovereign states, which provide support to each other, and work together toward international goals. The Commonwealth is described as a "family" of nations, originally linked together in the British Empire, and now building on their common heritage in language, culture and education, which enables them to work together in an atmosphere of greater trust and understanding than generally prevails among nations.
Bringing together some 1.7 billion people of many faiths, races, languages, traditions and levels of economic development, the Commonwealth represents almost one-third of the world’s population.
The modern Commonwealth emerged in 1949 when it was agreed that India could remain a member on becoming a republic (prior to that, members shared a common allegiance to the British Crown).* Its growth accelerated in the 1950s and 1960s with the independence of many new member countries in Africa, the Americas, Asia, the Caribbean, the Mediterranean and the Pacific. [*Today, 33 Commonwealth countries are republics, 16 have constitutional monarchies with HM Queen Elizabeth II as their Head of State, and five have national monarchies of their own.]
You say about the impact of the Spanish being negative what about us the British and our empire? How many of those 54 nations are rich and are classed as developed? Lets not forget the Crusades...
I personally don't think the exclusion of Spain as a Civ can be justified. Their impact on the world has been massive. Not all of it positive but name an empire that was wholly positive on their impact of others? By their very nature they 'Arrest the Development' of smaller nations by imposing their own beliefs on others for their 'own good.' That is how the world works. The winners write the history books. I believe every nation has something to be proud of and every place has it own uniqueness and history. And Spain, in a game about Civilisations, about culture, about building empires belong there.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jay Bee
|
 |
Valladolid, CA
Jan 1970
time: 06:15
|
|
Harlan,
Thanks for your support, man. It's the opinion of people who actually know, like you, Chris and others that I have just got to know in this thread that I was seeking when opened this thread. I am happy to see you around. But as you have noticed this is a lost cause. The big pile of ignorance, disinterest and bad manners displayed on this thread is definitely revealing that a major portion of Civ3 future users do not give a damn **** of whether Civ3 is or is not historically biased. Okay, that's fine with me now. I learned my lesson.
As for the future, if you are in as well, I am sure that making a patch that solves these and other potential problems will not be an impossible task to do.
One last time: this is not only about the Spanish being in or out, This is about the arbitrary way the designers picked the tribes. Of course, tribes ain't important, it's only a game, right? That was the lesson I've gotten. BS.
Oh, jsw, Waku and others, ignore kitten et al please. He is just trying to poke fun out of you. That, or his Spanish girlfriend dumped him and his hormones couldn't resist it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fiera
|
 |
Proud Member of the Spanish Gang
Mar 2000
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Harlan
But why do we argue about which civs should fit in the 16 limit, like dogs fighting over scraps? 16 is too small. The ONLY reason there aren't more is because Firaxis didn't want to do the work. As for playbalance, how much do you want to bet there will be an official expansion pack that somehow miraculously finds a way to balance in some new civs? |
This sums up perfectly my opinion on this matter.
Oh, and Jesús, I'm sorry that I hadn't showed on this thread before to bring you my support (which obviously you know you have), but I knew since the beginning it was, as you said, a lost cause.
Besides, I don't normally enjoy discussion with people that don't know what they're talking about, and make use of bad manners to hide their lack of knowledge. Sometimes the Apolyton forums are fun, sometimes not.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Wernazuma III
|
 |
Decolonize!
Aug 2000
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Bringing christianity and pillage vs the 3 C´s of christianity, commerce and civilisation (of most western civs of the time) the spanish made ****ty places ****ter and none of these places appreciated Spain (no commonwealth heh) and generally escaped by revolt (Simon Bolivar). |
those who escaped the english at that time didn't want a commonwealth either AFAIK. English just still were stronger by that time.
quote:
The spanish would be nice in the game EXCEPT that their reign was not civilisation...it never brought that anywhere it went, it brought war, conquest and indoctrination to the one true faith...it destroyed more than it created...let is be a barbarian event like I hope the Mongols will be. |
in the latino countries, there exists quite a degree of christian syncretism. mexican catholicism is quite different from european. granted, the treatment of the indios was horrible, especially in the caribic but in the 16th century, Spain had a bunch of fine humanists too (Las Casas, Motolinía, Quiroga in the Americas e.g.)
As if the english rule wasn't barbarian... They cared **** about the indians (just like the americans for a loong time), the boer wars weren't really heroic either. General Kitchener sent the skull of the dead Mahdi from Nubia to Queen Victoria as a drinking cup (OK, she was not amused) etc.
Barbarian acts lamentably were a standard tool of Civilizations until lately in history or even today.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
|
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Snapcase
Now look who is missing what games in general are all about. Go make your stupid perfect realism mods, LoTM, and don't bother those of us who go for great games no matter what the genre is. You may be a dry history buff who wants to play a game to simulate your intensely boring and repetitive dreams, fine. Don't foist your crap on the rest of us. Puh-lease.  |
What games are all about? I was playing historical strategy games 25 years, ago, snap. Were you? games can serve different purposes, and can be fun in different ways. Im sure Starcraft is a great game, and i dont begrudge those who like that kind of game. But do all games need to be the same? shouldnt their features depend on what they are about? Does chess need unique protagonists? Does monopoly? Im trying to get at what CIV is about, not what games in general are about. Im not trying to make civ like a grognard historically accurate game, just trying to keep those historical features that seem essential to CIv, in my opinion.
Im also sorry you find history dry. Its actually fascinating, loads of fun. And no, I dont have intensely boring or repetitive dreams.
And no Im not interested in "stupid mods" I am interested in historical scenarios, one of the most interesting aspects of Civ2. And im rapidly losing interest in playing a features turned off version of Civ3. If this cursing and anger and disdain for history is what the Civ3 community is becoming, I doubt there is a place for me in it.
LOTM
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alfonsus71
|
 |
Spain
May 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
I agree JayBee, Spanish civilization should appear in any small report about human history, Spain controlled more than 40% of world land (some could say is an small part) for 3 centuries (some could say is a short time), but most important: It was the first Nation-State of the world (with France and Britain, centuries befoer Germany); it was the only empire that has a purpose (Spanish empire was to expand catholicism in the name of God and the Pope, and many spanish missionaries were out and died only for their religious believes, can you find other examples of that in other empires among history?); spanish arts and literature are unparalel; and its language, culture and influence is present in more than 500 million people, in 5 continents. Only 1 other empire in history, the british, have had lands in the 5 continents.
About why Spain is out of the game, or why people in this forum had said such things like "they were not a civilization", "they were a menace to civilization", "they were plunderers",... I think that´s because the anglo-saxon world has been at war with Spain for a very long time, and they had developed such propaganda in that very long war that still today many english and americans are unable to recognize the greatness of Spain. Many people still thinks (see any pirates film) that corsairs (whose job was to stole, kill, rape, ....) were good guys, while their spanish victims were bad only for being spanish. The ominious film "Amistad" from Spielberg showed an spanish ship with slaves and showed Spain as an slavish state, when slavery was prohibited in Spain since the XV century, and colonial slavery only progressed due to local corruption and disobedience to peninsular spanish laws.
But most important of that. Many have said that spain have plunder many civs like incas, aztecs,... But that civs or tribes were converted to catholicism, they mixed with spanish people, and now they still survive, and their cultural legacy, and more important, their people still are alive. Where are the iroqueses, sioux, pueblo, apaches, seminolas, maories, ... and all the other civs and tribes that had the bad luck of having contact with the english colonizers?. Do yo know any case of an english man or woman married with a native?. NO, they were a racist empire, and their only purpose was to plunder, kill and stingish older civilizations to expoil their natural resources, they had no interest in religion, conversion or something so. But ironically they are seem as the good now, and spain, american indians and others are the bad, simply cause they won and we lost. Think about it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Simon Loverix
|
|
Tongeren, Belgium
Apr 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
Another good thing to say about the Spanish: They were very early to have a proto-parliament (the cortès), 1200 AD or something.
And empires have only one purpose: being the fattest, biggest and meanest around.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Marquis de Sodaq
|
 |
... no, a Marquis.
Jul 2000
time: 23:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alfonsus71
...they were a racist empire, and their only purpose was to plunder, kill and stingish older civilizations to expoil their natural resources |
While I agree with most of your post, this needs addressed. The Spanish were just as exploitative of colonies, just as destructive. In some ways, even more so. You seem to think spreading christianity was a good motive/incentive for the Spanish colonizers, something that made honourable the destruction of other cultures. With the express intention of destroying the subject peoples' religions and cultures, in order to replace them with a spanish one, they terrorized peoples, forced them to adopt spanish ways, destroyed artifacts, histories, religious items. They recorded these peoples' beliefs so that they could systematically destroy them! Spreading christianity seems innocuous or good to a christian, but the heathens were quite happy with their beliefs! Having another religion forced on your people is extremely offensive. As Waku mentioned, the americas produced a catholicism syncretous with indigenous religions - showing that those were very important to the people who kept them. They adopted the ways forced on them by the spanish, but did not let go of their own beliefs.
All the colonizing europeans were destructive and have much of their current wealth to thank on the colonies they plundered for centuries. The spanish were no exception.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ribannah
|
 |
The Netherlands, Embassy of the Iroquois Confederacy
Aug 2000
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alfonsus71
I agree JayBee, Spanish civilization should appear in any small report about human history, Spain controlled more than 40% of world land (some could say is an small part) for 3 centuries (some could say is a short time) |
Don't you think this is an itsy bitsy exaggerated? 
Like from 4% and 1 century?
quote:
It was the first Nation-State of the world |
What's that?
quote:
It was the only empire that has a purpose |
The Moors, who had to be defeated by the French for Spain to survive, had no similar purpose? Or the English, even today? The Soviet Union? The Romans?
Most empires imposed their religion on their conquests. If you look closely, however, that was never the real purpose. They all just wanted to get ever more powerful and wealthier.
quote:
spanish arts and literature are unparalel; |
So say many tribes. And most of these also contributed to science.
quote:
Only 1 other empire in history, the british, have had lands in the 5 continents. |
Spanish on the South Pole 
But if you mean Europe, Asia, Africa, the Americas and Oceania, then so had the Dutch, the French and the Portuguese.
quote:
The ominious film "Amistad" from Spielberg showed an spanish ship with slaves and showed Spain as an slavish state, when slavery was prohibited in Spain since the XV century, and colonial slavery only progressed due to local corruption and disobedience to peninsular spanish laws. |
Right. Spain was boss, you said?
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-08-2001 18:40
|