 |
|
Allod
|
|
Vienna, Austria
May 1999
time: 05:15
|
|
Mongols: 20
Spanish: 20
Austrians: 20
Turks: 20
Arabs: 20
Vikings: 15
Phoenicians: 10
Hebrew: 10
Dutch: 10
Celts: 5
Polynesians: 5
Inca: 5
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adm.Naismith
|
 |
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
time: 06:15
|
|
May be I should continue this using Private Mail... please any moderator let me know.
quote:
Originally posted by S. Kroeze
Dear Admiral,
Thank you for your kind words and moral support!
Are you sure the wings of the barbarians will be clipped?
It was my impression they will have more importance than in CivII, at least I hope so.
|
I'm sure of nothing, but my death, sometime in the future 
The way I used to see Sid's team Civ II barbarians and SMAC native lifeform, was more as a random or local event triggered nuisance.
They never used (to my eyes) some tactics about persistente attacks on weak borders, spoiling of cities, large pillaging of relevant, worthy target.
They didn't enslaved my people (bribing of non-military units), nor try to conquer my richest cities.
I suppose barbarians weren't really good at tech research, building city improvements and so on, but with the new opportunity of Civ III culture (merging own and conquered traits) I suppose a proper (in Civ game mean) Mongol Civilization can fit nicely.
Sadly we can't win with your correct "real civilization" approach, because games are selled by nationality, not civilizations.
I'm still sure that an easy feature to let you start with a "real civ", than switch (rename) to any appliable, derivate nation, at some relevant game event trigger, would be a realistic still best selling game... but I'm a dreamer
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adrien
|
|
Polynesians-20
Incas-20
Carthage-20
Dutch-10
Austria-Hungary-10
EDIT: this post brought to you by Frungy. The sport of kings!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
 |
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999
time: 06:15
|
|
Update: the list is now updated up to Cybergod (or rather, to my own changes below, presuming noone posted between the time that I wrote this and the time that I posted it).
111 (valid) votes have been casted and 16419 points given. By now the top 13 seems to be fairly fixed: some civs might still swap places within the top 13, but it's not likely that any new civs will still be able to enter it (not anytime soon anyway). Below the top 13 everything is still fairly open...
I couldn't help but notice that some people seem very reluctant to edit their vote (and very guilty when they do), as it means more work for me. Please don't be, I don't mind at all! It's generally less work to edit an existing vote than do add a new one and I enjoy doing it. In fact, I just edited my own vote as well (the votes of some other people plus a lot of time to read up on some civs while my computer was broken were the trigger for these changes):
Nubians -6 (to 0)
Ethiopians +6 (to 6)
(I already doubted between Nubia and Ethiopia when I posted my original vote and after some reading up on both civs' history I'm convinced that Nubia is but a mere shadow of Ethiopia as far as historic importance goes)
Olmec -6 (to 0)
Harappans +6 (to 6)
(I came to the conclusion that the Harappans were indeed a very important civ and definitely deserve a place in Civ, while we know virtually nothing about the Olmec: finding city names or leaders or whatever is practically impossible - believe me, I tried!)
PGM,
For the record, you have 119 points left.
Paiktis,
Thanks, I was still waiting for someone to make that joke  I usually don't care much for Eurovision but this (next?) year I'll be watching, at least to the voting part... 
Ancient,
By my count you gave 218 points, this is 58 points too many. I'm afraid I can't count your vote like this, please post a new list if you want your vote to count after all.
S. Kroeze,
Unfortunately there is no generally-accepted exact definition of the word 'civilization', so who can be regarded a civ and who can't will probably always remain a matter of debate (even by your definition I personally wouldn't view the Incas and the Mayas as seperate civs, while you and Adm.Naismith do). In any case, I couldn't agree more, this thread is a complete waste of time! However, people obviously care about the subject anyway or it would never have have gotten as big as it has.
Also, congratulations on being the 100th person to cast a valid vote!
Boca,
You have 60 points left, 10 of which are the consequence of voting for the Persians, who are already in Civ3.
Orioles3386,
For the record, you have 80 points left.
Laurentius,
For the record, you have 40 points left.
Adrien,
For the record, you have 80 points left.
Gramphos,
Thanks. Still working on that Program, have patience (I can only handle one great project at a time)
Keygen,
Let's first see if I find Civ3 worth buying... But if I do buy it, I will most certainly mod it as well (that would be the main reason for buying it in the first place). Good to know my work is appreciated in advance though
Cybergod,
Of course you can vote too. But as Gramphos said, you voted for the Goths twice, so I'm gonna have to ignore one of those votes. If I give the Goths 20 points on your behalf, you gave exactly 160 points, so I'll just do that (I think you intended it like this anyway).
Last edited by Locutus on 04-09-2001 at 18:14
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Adm.Naismith
|
|
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Locutus
S. Kroeze,
Unfortunately there is no generally-accepted exact definition of the word 'civilization', so who can be regarded a civ and who can't will probably always remain a matter of debate (even by your definition I personally wouldn't view the Incas and the Mayas as seperate civs, while you and Adm.Naismith do). In any case, I couldn't agree more, this thread is a complete waste of time! However, people obviously care about the subject anyway or it would never have have gotten as big as it has.
|
Of course this thread isn't a waste of time 
I understand that, because of Firaxis decision to mix two different concept of nations and civilizations the list must be as you are developing.
Is a good task and I think can help Firaxis Team (if they care ). Good work. 
Of course we should consider as Civ III added features require to complete the proposed Nations with Unique Units and Specials (militaristic, expansionist, ecc.), and to consider how balanced can work considering the Golden Age any Nation can get from its unique unit.
To keep the effort manageable we should limit this to the first 16 or 32 of the whole list, I suggest.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lockstep
|
 |
Vienna, Austria
Aug 2001
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Adm. Naismith
Is a good task and I think can help Firaxis Team (if they care). Good work. |
I second that. Looking at the overall ranking, both the 'top 8' and the 'top 16' civs would result in coherent expansion packs.
BTW, it´s interesting that the Celts, although included in Civ2, are only number 10.
quote:
Of course we should consider as Civ III added features require to complete the proposed Nations with Unique Units and Specials (militaristic, expansionist, ecc.), and to consider how balanced can work considering the Golden Age any Nation can get from its unique unit.
To keep the effort manageable we should limit this to the first 16 or 32 of the whole list, I suggest. |
I don´t think that Firaxis will provide more than 16 civs in an expansion pack. Given the current system of civ-specific abilities (15 possible combinations to choose 2 out of 6), even a total of 32 civs would mean that each combination is used more than twice on the average. I wouldn´t call that 'unique civs' anymore.
A possible solution would be to create additional civ-specific abilities. See http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...&threadid=25616 for the latest discussion on this subject.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Blaupanzer
|
 |
Fairfax, VA
Oct 2000
time: 00:15
|
|
I've already voted, but had a thought. If folks want to go with the original civs, what about the legendary ones, Atlantis, Mu, and Lem. Also, the Incan civ is said by archeologists to be built on the irrigation and fortification work of a previous civ. These are all "ancient," some older than 4000 BC. Who really built the original sphinx 10,000 years ago? Maybe for these civs, the player could get a head start, but all the cities would have only symbols for names. 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Marcus Agrippa
|
|
Hmm... let's see what we have so far:
1. Mongols- Built a huge empire, but didn't add a whole lot of culture to the world.
2. Spanish- Very important... the entire "Hispanic" world exists with its current culture because of Spain.
3. Arabs- Important... spread Islam from Spain to the Spice Islands.
4. Vikings- So-so... great explorers and conquerors, but rather minimal contributions to culture at large.
5. Inca- Not very important... the Incas never really had an effect on the world outside of the Andes region of S. America.
6. Turks/Ottomans- Important... the nemisis of Europe for years. I think they should just be the "Turks", since that would include both Seljuks and Ottomans.
7. Phoenicians/Carthaginians- An civ that influenced the Mediterranean and Rome... quite important
8. Maya- Important in their own region, influenced Aztecs, but not much else
9. Dutch- Almost as important as Spain...
10. Celts- Excellent early Europeans... could also include Irish and Scots
11. Hebrew/Israelis- Very important to the religious world, becoming base for Islam and Christianity, but not politically important
12. Portuguese- Very important, but could be bunched in with Spain
13. Ethiopians/Aksumites- In my opinion, the Ethiopians should replace the Zulus in the main pack... the Zulu kingdom only existed for a few generations during the 19th century, while Ethiopia was a great African civfrom Roman times onwards.
14. Polynesians- Nah... never really had a great influence.
15. Koreans- A fairly important civ that managed to remain indepedent from its huge neighbor China for hundreds of years
16. Byzantines- A very important civ that literally saved Europe from Islam during the dark ages... still, the Byzantines were culturally very Greek, and politically the Byzantine Empire was simply a continuation of the Roman Empire in the East. Therefore I don't think it needs a separate civ... it could be represented by Greece or Rome.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
dainbramaged13
|
|
Dumbass
Mar 2000
time: 00:15
|
|
EVERYONE THE SOUIX ARE MUCH MORE IMPORTANT THAN SOME OF TEH CIVS UP THERE IMO AND THEY WOULD PROVIDE MUCH MORE BALANCE IN NA ON A WORLD MAP!!!!!
also, locutus, on a related note, when you send this info to firaxis, if you do, dont just send the top 16 of course... send at least the top 32, if not the whole list. DOnt just send a link to the forum though, a good printed copy, or at least on attachement in spreadsheet form, if either is possible, would be good, either of which I would be willing to do if i had the time... I think the printed copy of 'the list' attachement was very essential for the inclusion of our ideas into the game, and if we want our input to count, we must do the same for this also.
just my $0.02
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Abendua Hogeitasei
|
|
My votes:
Spanish 20
Arabs 20
Turks 20
Portuguese 20
Inca 20
Maya 20
Vikings 20
Phoenicians 20
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lockstep
|
|
Vienna, Austria
Aug 2001
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Marcus Agrippa
14. Polynesians- Nah... never really had a great influence. |
I think that Australia and the southeast of Asia should be represented by at least one civ. I voted for the Polynesians because they settled the Pacific archipelagos 3000 years ago, having only canoes at their command. (Suggested reading: Jared Diamond, 'Guns, Germs and Steel', chapter 16.) Yeah, they never had a great influence on other civs, but this is also true for the Iroquois. (Note to Ribannah: I second the inclusion of the Iroquois in Civ3. )
quote:
16. Byzantines- A very important civ that literally saved Europe from Islam during the dark ages... still, the Byzantines were culturally very Greek, and politically the Byzantine Empire was simply a continuation of the Roman Empire in the East. Therefore I don't think it needs a separate civ... it could be represented by Greece or Rome. |
Technically, the Byzantines are an 'offspring'-civ, but a very important one. Let them be in Civ3 (that is, if an expansion pack includes 16 civs, which I doubt).
Otherwise, great post, Marcus Agrippa.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ml_4da3
|
|
Uppsala, Sweden
May 1999
time: 05:15
|
|
Vikings 20
Koreans 20
Swedes 20
Cubans 20
Annam/Vietnam 20
Mongol 20
Maya 20
Spannish 20
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ribannah
|
 |
The Netherlands, Embassy of the Iroquois Confederacy
Aug 2000
time: 06:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Locutus
... we know virtually nothing about the Olmec: finding city names or leaders or whatever is practically impossible - believe me, I tried!) |
Here are some Olmec kings:
Po Ngbe, Yo Pe, Ki, Kele
And yes, these names sound half Chinese, half African.
A few cities:
San Lorenzo, La Venta, Chalcatzigo, Tuxtla, Ahuelican, Tikal (of course the names aren't original)
There are indications that what remained of the Shang dynasty fled overseas and started (or overtook) a kingdom in South America around the same time (1200 BC) that Nubians may have landed on the continent and also had their influence on the Olmec culture (and racial characteristics). If they met, it would make sense that the Chinese and Nubians mixed and formed the ruling class together.
Edit: here's a map, hard to say how accurate
Last edited by Ribannah on 06-09-2001 at 01:44
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
26-08-2001 10:43
)) Or do you still have to find out what to do? 
Okay, if a german translation is available at a reasonable price, I´ll buy it.
|