06-10-2001 02:37									#31
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS There weren't any Americans in America until they were exported from Europe, either, but you can still start a game of Civ III as the Americans... We wanted the Iroquois to be representative of all the indigenous tribes of North America. When you play the Iroquois, Sitting Bull, Red Cloud, and Tecumseh are some of the potential great leaders who may appear, even though none of them were Iroquois. This is not accidental, it's the best compromise. Dan

Dan,

First, think ya do great work.

However, I would like to get your perspective on why no Islamic culture was included or ever has been included in Civ? No Ottomans or Arabs. Doesn't this strike you as being an egregious omission, considering there are 4 Western-Christian civs alone? (English, French, German, Americans) And 2 Sinic cultures, Japan and China? Why were they excluded?

Cheers.

	06-10-2001 02:40									#32
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

HisMajestyBOB:
Well I do. But I Civ gives me more control.

I don't ask for it to be really historicly accurate but I want at least some of this. And one of the Civ3 new additions is making each civ more coresponding to its own history and they really have a big mistake in this point.

	06-10-2001 02:41									#33
	Remove this text

Or the Iroquois just trade for horses (if they can't steal them as they did in reality) from the Europeans.

David.

I mean the plains tribes, not the Iroquois. Problem with lumping all Native Peoples into one unrepresentative tribe.

	06-10-2001 02:55									#34
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Dan, First, think ya do great work. However, I would like to get your perspective on why no Islamic culture was included or ever has been included in Civ? No Ottomans or Arabs. Doesn't this strike you as being an egregious omission, considering there are 4 Western-Christian civs alone? (English, French, German, Americans) And 2 Sinic cultures, Japan and China? Why were they excluded? Cheers.

I really couldn't tell you, to be honest, because I don't know. I would suspect that it comes down to trying to select Civs that have good "name recognition" and that balance out others in geocultural terms (i.e., what part of the world the Civ is from, what time period the Civ was dominant in, etc.)

The one thing I have learned is that you can't please everyone, and no matter which civs had made it into the game, there would still be a few angry people who feel that "their Civ" had been slighted.



Dan

	06-10-2001 03:10									#35
	Come on folks... Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

...someone posted a satire about playing an extremely historically accurate version of Civ 3 (and about how it would be the same game repeated every time because, well, it was historically accurate!). Everyone raved and cheered the post. Now we have complaints about an Iroquois on a horse because it isn't historically accurate. If every civ were entirely historically accurate then gameplay would suffer vastly and some civs would have dramatic advantages over others. The only way to rectify such a problem would be to equal out units to compensate. For instance, if the Egyptians and Chinese would have great advantages with their UUs and compensation would have to be made on behalf of the other civs, then you would have to give those other UUs qualities that were not historically accurate (like giving foot units the movement rate of horses, as but one example). You cannot claim to realize the error of a game with a completely historically accurate engine and gameplay, but then decry the bastardized historic realism of an Iroquois on a horse (or a Roman legion being a ripped-off copy of the Greek phallanx). If we want a purely historic Iroquois civ then they cannot possess firearms before the 1800's and must find the unnatural resource of Dutch traders in order to "manufacture" them.

And, Boris, wouldn't the Persians be considered an Arabic people?

	06-10-2001 03:15									#36
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

Ironic, isn't it, civcop? (thanks for mentioning my thread again).

Dan, why are you taking to the time answer fools in this thread? Shouldn't there be better ways to spend your time?

	06-10-2001 03:28									#37
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

civcop
We are talking on a very major issue of historicaly correctness. What if we put Egyptians in Australia. Who cares? We don't want it to be historicly correct. Yes offcourse some play random but many people like it to see the basic historic accuracy.

	06-10-2001 03:28									#38
	Re: Come on folks... Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: [SIZE=1] And, Boris, wouldn't the Persians be considered an Arabic people?

Nope, they are not. They are a Iranic people. Notice that Iran and Arabia are in two different geographic spots.

While the Iranians of today are Islamic, the Persian representation in the game is the old Archaemid Persia, under Xerxes. The people of the Persian Empire then and the people of Iran today have in much in common with each other as the ancient Egyptians and modern-day residents of Egypt have: none except that they happen to have occupied the same space.

I would just like to have gotten some acknowledment to the enormous impact on the world and history that Islamic culture has had. I think the enduring legacy of the Ottoman Turks make them an appropriate choice for one of the 16 civs.

I mean, in Civ I, when you won and were compared to other great leaders, who was the highest? Sulayman the Wise, a Turkish ruler...but no Turks in the game?

	06-10-2001 03:30									#39
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by HisMajestyBOB Maybe we could say that its a what if horses never died out in N. America? Jeez, if you want a game that is very historical, get EU (well worth your money )

Horses didn't die off in America. Horses were never in America to start with.

quote: This is true, but resources appear on the map when its corresponding technology has been discovered.

I think people would notice horses, even without horseriding technology!

	06-10-2001 03:37									#40
	Full PM-box? Change here!

oh posted in wrong topic

Last edited by kolpo on 06-10-2001 at 03:43

	06-10-2001 03:55									#41
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Big Crunch Horses didn't die off in America. Horses were never in America to start with.

Check out
http://www.pbs.org/wildhorses/wh_origin/wh_origin.html

"The very first horses evolved on the North American continent over 55 million years ago. Over millions of years they roamed the grasslands slowly extending their range to most of the continents on earth"

quote: quote: This is true, but resources appear on the map when its corresponding technology has been discovered. I think people would notice horses, even without horseriding technology!

This may be true, but we're dealing with an abstraction of reality that works in the framework of the game.


Dan

	06-10-2001 04:00									#42
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS This may be true, but we're dealing with an abstraction of reality that works in the framework of the game.

Fun gameplay over realism. Thank god.

	06-10-2001 04:15									#43
	Tired of ads?

quote: The very first horses evolved on the North American continent over 55 million years ago

I stand corrected! I thought they were an old world exclusive.

quote: This may be true, but we're dealing with an abstraction of reality that works in the framework of the game.

Fair enough. Gameplay is more important than strict adherence to facts. Where possible I would like to have things accurate though. I was more interested in knowing how the horse resources would be distributed.

Are resources going to be geographically accurate. Eg Saudi oil, South African diamonds etc..

	06-10-2001 05:14									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS We wanted the Iroquois to be representative of all the indigenous tribes of North America. When you play the Iroquois, Sitting Bull, Red Cloud, and Tecumseh are some of the potential great leaders who may appear, even though none of them were Iroquois. This is not accidental, it's the best compromise. Dan

gee, then why not call them "native americans"?

	06-10-2001 05:27									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

why only ONE screenshot a week? thats kind of weak IMHO

	06-10-2001 05:29									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by d_dudy gee, then why not call them "native americans"?

given the way they are going to be played...i fully agree that they should be called "native american" instead of a specific tribe. i mean, SOME of the tribes formed alliances against the Europeans during their arrival and during the developement, too.

	06-10-2001 05:52									#47
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Nemo given the way they are going to be played...i fully agree that they should be called "native american" instead of a specific tribe. i mean, SOME of the tribes formed alliances against the Europeans during their arrival and during the developement, too.

Its probably becouse it would be ahistorical and people would be critisizing it much like they are now critisizing the horse thing. Sure YOU may not but ALOT of people would, it would be like calling Zulus "South African unorganized tribes" or the Aztecs "central to south American tribes".

Also, they most likely made there UU a horse becouse so many people use warrior-uniques and they needed some early unit good at attack. This worries me becouse I like the world map and I dont want all my games to start with "Iroquoise destroy Americans!"...

	06-10-2001 06:02									#48
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by splangy Its probably becouse it would be ahistorical and people would be critisizing it much like they are now critisizing the horse thing. Sure YOU may not but ALOT of people would, it would be like calling Zulus "South African unorganized tribes" or the Aztecs "central to south American tribes".

True...we complain about everything...no matter what decision they make. but, hey, what are fans for

i just like playing devils advocate.

	06-10-2001 09:40									#49
	Put an end to popups!

Everybody watch Dan squirm...

	06-10-2001 10:13									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Although I strictly oppose the inclusion of the Iroquois or any other native american tribe, in this point I have to "break a lance" for the general idea. In those centuries since the import of horses, they had become an extremely powerful factor in the indian warfare and life in general, so it's OK that they have a mounted UU.
But why in 3 devils names did FIRAXIS choose the Iroquois if they wanted to have a typical plains tribe?????????

	06-10-2001 10:21									#51
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by splangy Its probably becouse it would be ahistorical and people would be critisizing it much like they are now critisizing the horse thing. Sure YOU may not but ALOT of people would, it would be like calling Zulus "South African unorganized tribes" or the Aztecs "central to south American tribes".

And to begin with critizising: There is a fundamental difference between Zulus and Iroquois on one side and Aztecs on the other: Aztecs were a real urban society with a centralized state, infrastructure and administration. They knew codified writing etc.: So don't call them tribe

	06-10-2001 10:42									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Dan, don't let anyone give you a hard time about the game. The true CIV fan knows where to draw the line between 'REALITY' and 'PC GAME'.

	06-10-2001 10:44									#53
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Anunikoba Dan, don't let anyone give you a hard time about the game. The true CIV fan knows where to draw the line between 'REALITY' and 'PC GAME'.

He is right, if it was all real life, then the game wouldn't be as fun!!!

	06-10-2001 11:04									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS ..there would still be a few angry people who feel that "their Civ" had been slighted. Dan

Where are the FINNS? This game suuuuuucks!

But hey, really, it's stupid enough to have Americans as a civilization anyway, so stop whining about some damn Iroquis (I think I mispelled it..). If you care so much about how historically accurate this game is, why are you not whining/laughing 'cause Americans are in? At least I have laughed since the Civilization I, because it is and it always have been the most ridicilous thing in any Civilization. It's sad to see Firaxis still hasn't got the balls to leave Americans out. Thank God there are those good editors so we can make/remove any civilization(s) we want to? Right?

	06-10-2001 11:15									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS I really couldn't tell you, to be honest, because I don't know. I would suspect that it comes down to trying to select Civs that have good "name recognition" and that balance out others in geocultural terms (i.e., what part of the world the Civ is from, what time period the Civ was dominant in, etc.) The one thing I have learned is that you can't please everyone, and no matter which civs had made it into the game, there would still be a few angry people who feel that "their Civ" had been slighted. Dan

Thanks, Dan, your response is appreciated.

If that's the case (name recognition), I am a little disappointed in those who made the choice, but can say I understand. I can only feel that it is somehow feeding into a stereotypical dismissal of Islamic culture as a significant force out of prejudice and ignorance.

I for one would most likely not PLAY the Turks, but would like to match wits against them. I'm a predominantly German civer!

Cheers.

	06-10-2001 14:47									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...&threadid=28439