 |
|
Taranis
|
|
viking 20
inca 20
hebrew 15
dutch 15
koreans 20
polynesians 10
aksumite 20
byzantines 15
khmer 20
turks 5
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tigen
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by sachmo71
Why on earth not? |
From my point of view, we already have the Babylonians representing semitic civilizations (I believe this is what Firaxis indicates in their descriptions). The Hebrews could be said to be Babylonians with monotheism.
Anyway it's all arguable and relative but in my opinion it should be a higher priority to get underrepresented civs included such as more African, American, and Asian ones.
That said, I originally voted for Hebrews and Arabs but since then reconsidered them in light of the Babylonian civ. Judaism spawned Christianity and Islam, but Judaism itself has common roots in ancient Sumerian/Babylonian religion as can be seen from Biblical references.
Furthermore, Civ 3 doesn't model religions in a way that reflects the influence of the Hebrews. In real life the Hebrews themselves really didn't do much of anything (compare to Arabs) except write the old testament (which is kind of a wonder of the world), but the religious influence spread like crazy...but this influence didn't HELP the Hebrews at all (it turned others into fanatics like themselves). So it's not accurate to model this with cultural assimilation IMO.
Just my thoughts.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ranskaldan
|
 |
Beijing ~ Singapore ~ Toronto ~ All hail to the new Rome
Sep 2001
time: 00:15
|
|
quote:
From my point of view, we already have the Babylonians representing semitic civilizations (I believe this is what Firaxis indicates in their descriptions). The Hebrews could be said to be Babylonians with monotheism. |
I believe Firaxis meant that Babylonians represent all civilizations in that area, like Hittites, Sumerians, Assyrians, Akkadians, etc. Not Semites. AFAIK Hittites and Sumerians are not even Semitic.
Anyway it is really too great a stretch to have one civ represent all Semites. "Semitic" is a rough ethnic category. You might as well have the Greeks represent all Indo-Europeans (Indians, Romans, Persians, Celts, Slavs, Hittites and Germans)
Thus although I *might* accept to a certain degree that Babylonians represent Hebrews (since they are from the same region and same time), equating Babylonians with Arabs is just too great a stretch. The only link between the two is a distant linguistic and ethnic link broken 7000 years years. The Greeks, Romans and Celts share the same kind of distant link, but they aren't and shouldn't be lumped into one civ.
Thus I give 20 points to the Arabs. To me not including the Arabs is tantamount to not including the Romans, or Egyptians, or Chinese.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Saxman
|
|
London, Great Britain
Nov 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
For what it's worth:
Arabs 20
Celts 20
Vikings 20
Spanish 20
Hebrew 20
Portuguese 10
Mongols 10
Inca 10
Turks/Ottomans 10
Austro-Hungarians 10
I'm looking forward to this (theoretical?) pack a great deal, but as a Civ newbie, can anyone tell me how integrated it will be with other improvements? In other words, will the pack also include game balancing for existing units and text for wonders/advances, or will I have to try to mesh other mods with this one? An all-in-one would be very attractive to a lot of new players, IMHO.
Be seeing you,
Saxman
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wyz_sub10
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ranskaldan
I believe Firaxis meant that Babylonians represent all civilizations in that area, like Hittites, Sumerians, Assyrians, Akkadians, etc. Not Semites. AFAIK Hittites and Sumerians are not even Semitic.
Anyway it is really too great a stretch to have one civ represent all Semites. "Semitic" is a rough ethnic category. You might as well have the Greeks represent all Indo-Europeans (Indians, Romans, Persians, Celts, Slavs, Hittites and Germans) |
That was Firaxis' intention, as I have heard as well, but I agree that this is trying to cram too many cultures into one group.
That's why I would vote to add the Bantu in Africa and, upon further reflection of Solmyr's post, maybe another South American culture like the Chimu.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
wyz_sub10
|
|
What do people think of this modpack with an open slot?
I think the idea is to add civs (not replace them, right?) using the copy tool??
If so, why not leave a slot open for the end user to do whatever with.
I know the Canadians wont make it in, but I'm going to modify whatever to put them there anyway. This will be the case, I'm sure, for people wanting Australia or Ukraine, or some lesser known civilizations that they are particularly interested in.
In creating the Canadians, for instance, I would just copy the animation of an existing unit and modify it as I want. Leader animations are less important to me.
For the full-fledged new civs, however, I could see where all the details are more important because the computer would end up playing them quite often.
Thoughts?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Desert Journeyman
|
|
The Imperial Remnant
Jan 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
Cartheginians: 20
Ranking among the most popular "alternative" civilizations of the first game, and made into an "official" choice during the second incarnation, the Carthaginians deserve "a new round" here, if only as a direct rival to Rome. The inclusion of Carthage also precludes the need for a Phonecian civilization. About the most convincing problem I can see, however, is the "special unit", which obviously, would have been the imported war elephant. Because India already has these, a less well-known unit could be the Great Terime, Slinger or Numidian Horseman, a stronger or more versatile version of transport, infantry and cavalry, respectively. Carthage would rely, naturally, on a series of trade and seafaring bonuses.
Confederates: 20
Oft-overlooked in many games, the Confederacy is a viable option if only to outline how government might have been established. Basing their model on the early Articles of Confederation, the South possessed an extremely "loose" federal government, a factor which plauged them to no end when raising taxes, enacting levies, and passing any truly "national" or "blanket" legislation. I could envision the South with either the Blockade Runner or Irregular Cavalryman, both possessing greater-than-average movement. The South would, of course, be somewhat scaled-back in certain areas of administrative ability and technological aquesition, but would possess a rather impressive agricultural and merchantile bonus.
Khmer: 20
I assumed I was one of few supporting this "option", but the Khmer represent another sterotype of the "final block" needed to "close" the E. Asian civilizations. While many remember that region as being a morass of impassible jungle and "final" major flashpoint of the Cold War, it was once cradle of an impressive civilization to say the least. The Khmer would again rely on the elephant as one of its key units, possessing an advantage in terms of technologies having to do with early religion and philosophy or, more region-specific, construction.
Austro-Hungarians: 20
I'd add this if only for the "ambiance" of playing a struggling power whose imperial designs far exceeded its imperial ability. Austria-Hungary was never a major power beyond the European continent, and even then, fell variously under the sway of France and Germany. I can see how many might argue that Austria-Hungary has no true "right" to be ranked among the most important civilizations, but I contend that they would still be worth a try. I'm not quite sure how to deal with their advantages and disadvantages, especially in terms of technology, but they might have an "early" iron working technology. Their special unit would be the Hussar, a fast, light cavalryman.
Ottoman Turks: 20
Again, while "Turks" or "Arabs" might be the more "encompassing" selection in a stereotypical sense, the Ottomans inspire the underdog in all of us. Who can forget that famous charge by Peter O'Toole and his intrepid band of bedouin warriors? Not I. Again, Turkey was one of the most popular civilizations in the WWII scenario on Civ 2, especially for those who could not deal with much larger powers or preferred "starting small". The Turks would gain an advantage in philosophy and perhaps in terms of trade. Technology related to gun powder or iron (Damascus steel) might also be appropriate. The Turks would aquire either the Jannissary or Mameluke as their special unit.
Portugese: 20
South America has always beckoned, and Portugal, with various merchantile and move (exploration) bonuses, might be worth the taking. Their imperial tenure was commemorated in the fantastic novel "Shogun", and still remains alive today across much of Brazil. The Portugese are one of those easily-indentified civilizations whose contributions were clearly during the merchantile era and not long after. Of course, the galleon serves their purposes quite well.
Brazilians/Argentines: 20
How many of us remember the Falkland War? Okay, that was Argentina, I know, but I will say we can lump Brazil, Chile, and the Argentines togeather. I've always been fascinated by the region. Did you know that as late as 1889, Chile possessed a military of greater skill than the United States of America? Argentina ranked as possessing the sixth-highest gross domestic product on earth in 1939, and the entire region seemed to be emerging towards greater recognition and importance. Although the decline in world markets shortly after the war more or less "doomed" the developing area, it was a mecca for European immigration and at various times during the 20th century, the focus of intense warfare. The Brazilians would gain the Gaucho, Post-Dreadnaught, or Gunboat, representing, alternitavely, the high points in their colonial and pre-industrial histories.
Dutch: 20
Again, another "old favorite", the Dutch represent this sort of balance between territorial poverty and literal currency-based wealth. Taking this in stride, their colonial holdings once encompassed the E. Indies, W. Indies, Formosa, India, northern Brazil, and South Africa. The last is rather interesting as well, since as opposed to the frigate - which the Dutch seem likely to recieve -, we might also consider giving them the Boer or Franc Tireur, an early partisan unit. The Dutch would necessarily possess a rather advanced monetary system and perhaps some odd improvements over other civilizations when at sea. I do like the Boers, also, though I think they fit with the Dutch rather than out on their own.
Again, I stress that I'd sooner see a "custom civilization maker" like that of Alpha Centauri: SMAX along with new civilization than anything else. I think Alpha Centauri had a lot of good ideas in terms of modifiation. The "darkness" of the atmosphere and odd tendancy of the game to freeze, slow, or evolve to become much too complex really destroyed it, not the capabilities of the add-on software or patches.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Puritan
|
|
First time voting:
Spanish 20
Mongols 20
Arabs 20
Vikings 20
Hebrew/Israelis 20
Canadians 20
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alf115
|
|
France
Nov 2001
time: 06:15
|
|
Old Civer, new Apolytoner, first post :
Spanish : 20
Vikings : 20
Portuguese : 20
Dutch : 20
Turks/Ottomans : 20
Maya : 20
Mongols : 20
Inca : 20
And thanks to all of you mod makers. it makes this game even more enjoyable
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Olimpiusz
|
|
Alright guys, have fun counting them:
Spanish - 20
Arabs - 20
Celts - 20
Poles - 20
Slavs - 20
Inca - 20
Aksumite - 10
Mongols - 10
Vikings - 10
Portugese - 10
|
|
| |
|
|
|
S. Kroeze
|
 |
the Hague, the Netherlands, Old Europe
Dec 1999
time: 05:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by orange
Dear {insert random deity here}, please someone bump Byzantines out of the top 16. There is NO reason to have Greeks Romans and Byzantines in this game.
Personally I don't like the Polynesians either, but I'd prefer anything to the Byzantines. Same with Hebrew...should not be in the XP  |
Dear Orange,
I hope you still remember me! (we once discussed the Bolshevik revolution)
Why do you hold the Byzantine civilisation so much in contempt? I am rather surprised to find you airing such an ill-informed opinion! In the past your opinions used to make sense....
That someone doesn't acknowledge the importance of the Byzantine civilization is beyond my powers of comprehension. It shows he doesn't understand the denotation of the word 'civilization'.
The Byzantine empire lasted more than a thousand years(330-1453); do you know any other empire lasting so long? The empire was unified by
-one dominant religion: the Greek Orthodox Church, being its unique variety of Christianity
-one dominant language and literature, spoken by all members of the ruling elite; the literary language was an imitation of Classical Attic, the spoken language(Byzantine) differed as much from Classical Attic as Latin differs from Italian
-one unique style in architecture, painting and music every layman will immediately recognize; no one will ever confuse the Parthenon with the Hagia Sophia
-an ideology according to which the emperor was the representative of Christ on earth
Of course it is true that this civilization was a continuation of older civilizations, the Greek and Roman. But the old gods were forgotten and denied, while a foreign religion, originating from another world, was embraced as the unifying ideology dominating all aspects of human life. With it came many elements and ideas of Persian or Near Eastern origin.
And when such reasoning would be accepted there would be only about five civilizations in the entire history of mankind. Because the Roman civilization was a combination of Greek, Etruscan and Italic elements; the Classical Greek civilization was a combination of Dorian, Helladic, Egyptian and Mesopotamian elements; the Helladic civilization was triggered by the Minoans, while the Egyptian civilization was triggered by the Sumerians.
The influence of the Byzantine civilization and ideology can be traced to the present day. The Cold War could be described as a struggle between two ideologies: the Byzantine Orthodox, where the emperor rules supreme, and the Latin Catholic (maybe Protestant) where the individual is a lot more important. It also declares why during the Kosovo crisis the Russians and Greeks supported the Serbs.
Sincere regards,
S.Kroeze
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Selanne
|
|
Winnipeg, Canada
Nov 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
Spanish: 20
Incans: 20
Mongols: 20
Arabs: 20
Khmer: 10
Javanese: 10
Songhai: 10
Ethiopean: 10
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Thunderfire
|
|
Spanish +20
Inca +20
Koreans +20
Turks +20
Phoenicians +20
Arab +20
Poles +10
Swedes +10
Mongols +10
Israelites +10
|
|
| |
|
|
|
abbamouse
|
|
Incas 20
Turks 20
Byzantine 10
Aborigines 20
Eskimos/Aleuts 20
Mongols 5
Ethiopia/Abyssinia 20
Swedes 20
Arabs 20
Ukrainians 5
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Trifna
|
 |
of anchovies
Jul 2001
time: 13:15
|
|
Wanted to point out something: a lot, if not majority, of people are voting here without knowing the subject. They aren't necessarily historically correct, nor culturally correct or else since they do not know the debate nor the civilisations.
The consequence to this is that we have more partisanism, more divisions in civs (Maya, Inca, Turks, Arabs, Byzantines...). This is why I think that anyone who would like to use the poll afterwards should first think to make some cleaning a little, so he really see what works. (like for making a mod, puting the first 16 choices would be little silly in my personal opinion).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Cannager
|
|
Cincinnati, Ohio
Nov 2001
time: 00:15
|
|
hey yall, im a buddy of jdd2007
-Minnesota Vikings 20
ok, ok, jd, -Hebrews/Israelis 20
-Arabs 20
-Spanish 18
-Polynesians 20
-Scots 20
-Celts 20
-Native Americans 2
-Huns 20
|
|
| |
|
|
|
thinkingamer
|
|
SoutheastAsians (Thai/Vietnam) 20
Arabs 20
Spanish 20
Korean 20
Mongol 20
Autro-Hungarians 20
Turks-Ottomans 20
Ethiopians 10
Inca 10
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
15-11-2001 23:22
|