 |
| |
|
|
Dom Pedro II
|
 |
The College of New Jersey
Nov 1999
time: 05:21
|
|
Hannibal was a general for Carthage...
and personally, I find the bickering over who should be leader ridiculous. People say, NO! JOAN CAN'T BE LEADER OF FRANCE BECAUSE SHE NEVER WAS.......
It's a game, and furthermore, each time you play its on a completely fictional world with wars that never happened with civilizations that never encountered each other due to differences in time, space, or both. Therefore, the leaders and civs could be completely fictional, and it will still be exactly the same...
BUT if the Firaxians said somewhere that Hannibal was "king" of Carthage, then that is wrong. It should be altered, but only if they were using it in an historical capacity and not in a Civilization 3 capacity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The_Aussie_Lurker
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
May 2001
time: 05:21
|
|
Actually Carthage, like Rome, was a republic which had a senate largely made up of merchants! Hannibal was their most respected and successful general, in much the same way that Joan of Arc is one of France's most respected military commanders! So I don't really see the problem with making him the "Leader" of the Carthaganians! I mean, they could hardly have a "Senate" leaderhead, could they?
Oh and, just for the record, if the Carthaginian senate had not been such a bunch of procrastinating wimps, Phonecian might have been the base of every European language today!! Basically, almost all of Rome's army was destroyed during Hannibal's campaign, but he needed reinforcements in order to move onto Rome itself, reinforcements he never got!! Then Rome, having learnt from it's previous mistakes, went on the counterattack, crushed Carthage underfoot, and went on to conquer most of the known world!!!
Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
kring
|
 |
Wichita,KS,USA
Dec 2001
time: 23:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dom Pedro II
Hannibal was a general for Carthage...
and personally, I find the bickering over who should be leader ridiculous. People say, NO! JOAN CAN'T BE LEADER OF FRANCE BECAUSE SHE NEVER WAS.......
It's a game, and furthermore, each time you play its on a completely fictional world with wars that never happened with civilizations that never encountered each other due to differences in time, space, or both. Therefore, the leaders and civs could be completely fictional, and it will still be exactly the same...
BUT if the Firaxians said somewhere that Hannibal was "king" of Carthage, then that is wrong. It should be altered, but only if they were using it in an historical capacity and not in a Civilization 3 capacity. |
I agree 100%; it is rare to find someone that makes this point.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Hoznog
|
|
Well, the Hannibal was royalty. His family owned a vast section on current Spain (Cartagena is the modern Carthago Novo aka New Carthage) over which they ruled with as much power and sovereignty as other monarchs. Besides who else could you choose to lead the Cathaginians, Pliny the Obscure? The next two most recognized names attached to Carthage are Scipio Africanus and Cato, but both are Romans known for destroying it...
"Carthago dilende est!"
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sava
|
 |
GO GO GO!
Mar 2001
time: 23:21
|
|
It doesn't surprise me one bit. The historical inaccuracies date back to Civ I. Thebes, the Egyptian capital, is a Greek City. Sumer, part of the Babylonian Civ, was around almost a thousand years before Babylon. And don't even get me started on Roman and Greek cities. Syracuse, for instance, was originally founded by the Greeks, yet in all of the Civ games, is a Roman city. And speaking of Greeks, Alexander the Great looks more like Julius Caesar in Civ III. Civ I got it right with that blonde hair.
It's a game, people. I say, enjoy it for what it is. I am glad Civ isn't completely accurate like Europa Universalis 2.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Iron Chancellor
|
|
I know, I know. Its only a game, and all...
But you think they would have named him "General" or something of that sort.
I like to play as great leaders who led their countries to greatness (my main problem with Joan). I also like for their titles to be correct. Who would call Mao Tse-Tung the "King" of the Chinese. Or Lincoln "Emperor" of the Americans. Oh well. I like the game enough to let it slide.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
hzm
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker
Actually Carthage, like Rome, was a republic which had a senate largely made up of merchants! Hannibal was their most respected and successful general, in much the same way that Joan of Arc is one of France's most respected military commanders! So I don't really see the problem with making him the "Leader" of the Carthaganians! I mean, they could hardly have a "Senate" leaderhead, could they?
Oh and, just for the record, if the Carthaginian senate had not been such a bunch of procrastinating wimps, Phonecian might have been the base of every European language today!! Basically, almost all of Rome's army was destroyed during Hannibal's campaign, but he needed reinforcements in order to move onto Rome itself, reinforcements he never got!! Then Rome, having learnt from it's previous mistakes, went on the counterattack, crushed Carthage underfoot, and went on to conquer most of the known world!!!
Yours,
The_Aussie_Lurker. |
Roman came from Greek and Greek came from Phoenician. (Simplified? Yes. But there it is.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MattHiggs
|
|
Dido is a singer, and not a very good one.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
dunk
|
 |
Philadelphia, PA
Mar 2002
time: 00:21
|
|
Rant begins...
Uh oh, another horrible mistake. Oh my goodness. How can we play this game? My goodness. (Frets about). I think the world may come to an end because a GAME has Hannibal as leader of the Carthaginians. Wait, aren't you going to complain that the Carthaginians were actually Phoenicain? Well? Oh my goodness. You mean to say that Sumer was around before Babylon? Oh my!!! IIRC, all of the "Babylonian" cities were pretty independant city-states. So were the Greek cities. Athens fought Sparta in a war!!!!! Oh my goodness, is this Civ II or what? Whatever shall we do? (Hyperventilates). That means that Civ is (gasps) wrong. Oh my, send it back, burn it!!!!! Burn it!!
Ok, my ranting is over.
Mao is called "King" of the Chinese because if you are in a monarchy, well, you have a KING, don't you?
Threads like this one are why I no longer look at the "Civilizations" forum. I get all flustered and grouchy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BigRed515
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sava
Markos, that was my point. The Egyptian Thebes was Greek influenced. Had the Greeks not gone to Egypt, that city would not have been named "Thebes". |
Umm...the Egyptian Thebes became the capital of Egypt about 2134 BC, while the Greek Thebes was founded approx 1000 BC. I don't think the Greeks had any inflence over the naming of the Egyptian Thebes.
In any case, change the leaderheads and city name files if you don't like them. There's an editor for the latter and a community for the former.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JtheJackal
|
|
I thought Thebes was founded in 4000 BC with a road to some furs built shortly after???? Now I'm confused. I guess ever since the Aztecs leveled the city in 1554 records before that became sparse.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BigRed515
|
|
You forgot about the eternal cattle herd a year's walk from the city limits...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Luis G.
|
 |
Mexico City
Jul 2002
time: 23:21
|
|
Well, if we go for historical accuracy, most of the cities from the Aztec city list were actually enemies of the Aztecs (Tlaxcala, Azcapotzalco) or cities that were destroyed long before the founding of the Aztec empire (Teotihuacan, Tula), and the title wasn't king, it was "Tlatoani", and it's not Montezuma, is Moctezuma or Moctecuzhoma, and actually, there were TWO Moctezumas.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Iron Chancellor
|
|
Well, benefit of the doubt for the Montezumas. "Montezuma" is the Anglization of the Spanish version of "Moctezuma." But, Firaxis assumes that the public for the most part knows squat about ancient Mesoamerican cultures (which it does), so its easy to see why they would do such. Also, it allows them to cover more civilizations without actually making them all great powers (playable civs).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
sabrewolf
|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002
time: 06:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Luis G.
Well, if we go for historical accuracy, most of the cities from the Aztec city list were actually enemies of the Aztecs (Tlaxcala, Azcapotzalco) or cities that were destroyed long before the founding of the Aztec empire (Teotihuacan, Tula), and the title wasn't king, it was "Tlatoani", and it's not Montezuma, is Moctezuma or Moctecuzhoma, and actually, there were TWO Moctezumas. |
most is anglifized in civ3, which is a real shame.
other wrong written leader names, here correct(er):
jeanne d'arc
mao zedong (wrong too, but nearer)
iulius caesar
katarina (the great)
not to speak about all the cities. is too much expected to have "köln" instead of "cologne" or "münchen" instead of "munich"?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
24-07-2002 03:42
)
|