 |
|  |
 |
|
Yahweh Sabaoth
|
 |
The Heavens
Dec 2002 time: 05:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by panag
hi ,
, not militaristic , they are definatly not , ....
commercial they are , ......
have a nice day |
Um, to you, militaristic they are... they've been modernizing and beefing up their navy for the last 10 years, in an attempt to project their power in the South Region, and their talk, at least, is often warlike.
Then again, hey, any of you Australia experts feel free to criticize us... I'm just going off of what I've read in the news... I haven't read much about the history of Australia.
Although "militaristic" is the best fit for a bunch of former prisoners, wouldn't you say? 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
panag
|
 |
MY WORDS ARE BACKED WITH BIO-CHEMICAL WEAPONS
Oct 2000 time: 07:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
Um, to you, militaristic they are... they've been modernizing and beefing up their navy for the last 10 years, in an attempt to project their power in the South Region, and their talk, at least, is often warlike.
Then again, hey, any of you Australia experts feel free to criticize us... I'm just going off of what I've read in the news... I haven't read much about the history of Australia.
Although "militaristic" is the best fit for a bunch of former prisoners, wouldn't you say? |
hi ,
they really dont fit the profile , .....
as for the aus navy , well huh , they are still small , very small they have a large area and simpl dont have all the ships they realy need , they dont even have tank divisions , ...... so no a far cry from "militaristic" , .....
have a nice day
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Yahweh Sabaoth
|
 |
The Heavens
Dec 2002 time: 05:22
|
|
Sparkle... your ideas for new Civs cover a lot of ground, but I disagree with some of them for various reasons:
Normans: yes, these WERE "vikings". They are represented in the game by the "Scandanavians" and "English". Norman civilization outside of the context of England is not that compelling, though it was a swell invasion (Thanks, William!)
Between Portugal and Brazil, take Brazil. It's a huge country with the potential to be a superpower (not anytime soon, of course) and it would add another "Amer-Indian" civ. A winner!
Maya or Inca? Sure! But how about the Sioux? Just for old times' sake?
The Byzantines WERE powerful indeed, but their power or cultural contributions never rivaled Rome's... they were the "leftovers" from the Roman empire and their main contribution to the world was to provide a buffer between the Black Sea, Southeast Europe, and expanding Islam. Lots of good intrigue in Byzantium, but worth a whole Civ?
Eskimos or Inuit would be awesome! "Kayaker" as a UU?
Cuba!!! Their UU could be the cigar or the Son band! (I'm joking, of course. No offense meant to any Cubans around here)
I have to disagree with Slavs. They're just too diverse to lump into one group. After all, the English, French, Germans and Spanish are really just a cross-breed of "Scandanavians" and "Germans" anyways... why should they get their own Civs while Poland and Serbia are lumped together?
ISRAEL!!! ADD IT DAMMIT!!!

|
|
|  |
 |
|
Yahweh Sabaoth
|
 |
The Heavens
Dec 2002 time: 05:22
|
|
Sparkle
Well, maybe I'm just warm on the Slavs. I find the nations of Serbia, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bosnia, Greece, Lithuania, etc., too distinct to just lump into one group... especially if Incas and Maya are to be separate from Aztecs! I mean, after all, we do have a good deal more recorded history of Serbia, Hungary, et al, than we do of the Mayas, Incas, or Aztecs.
As for the Normans, true, they have had a very important role in history, but their rule in Northern France was less significant than their rule in Italy, which you correctly point out they unified (more or less), and in Britain, which they conquered, laying the foundation of "modern Britain".
But since we already have England, and we have the Romans, the most I could see would be a modern "Italian" Civ seperate of the Romans.
Perhaps a Papal State? That would be cool...
As for them being from Scandanavia, they are related to the scandanavians they swept from the North into Europe c. 900 AD (that era). I see the Normans as a passing phase, albeit an important passing phase.
Don't get me wrong though: I'd love to see a William I, Roger I, or what-his-name... "The Weasel" who caused so much trouble for Byzantium...
you got good ideas, though, keep 'em coming...
Has anyone given any thought to new African civs? I would like to see:
Yoruba
Ethiopia
Nubia
Mali
Sigilmasa
Almoravids
and best of all
BERBERS! For pete's sake! Great horsemen!
|
|
|  |
 |
|
sabrewolf

|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002 time: 06:22
|
|
nubian and ethiopean have been proposed a few times.
however your definition of "slavs" is amusing ... hungarians, the baltic states (estonia, latvia, lithuania), greece and romania aren't slavs at all. some of them might have been under the control of the soviet union for a long period, but slavs? ....
but you're still right that another slavic civ beside the russians would be good. and you're right, that there are a lot of slavic countries (serbia, bosnia-hercegovina, croatia, slovenia, slovakia, czech republic, poland, bulgaria, ukraine, white russia (belarus), moldavia and some other smaller former-soviet countries i forgot in this list)
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Yahweh Sabaoth
|
 |
The Heavens
Dec 2002 time: 05:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by sabrewolf
nubian and ethiopean have been proposed a few times.
however your definition of "slavs" is amusing ... hungarians, the baltic states (estonia, latvia, lithuania), greece and romania aren't slavs at all. some of them might have been under the control of the soviet union for a long period, but slavs? ....
but you're still right that another slavic civ beside the russians would be good. and you're right, that there are a lot of slavic countries (serbia, bosnia-hercegovina, croatia, slovenia, slovakia, czech republic, poland, bulgaria, ukraine, white russia (belarus), moldavia and some other smaller former-soviet countries i forgot in this list) |
Hate to break the news to you, but Greece is overwhelmingly slavic. The slavic migration to Greece occurred in the mid 2nd millenium. As for the Baltic states, yes, I suppose those are mixed Slavic-Germanic. And as for Romania, I plead ignorance: I have always assumed as they are surrounded by Slavs that the Romanians are themselves slavic.
But as for the "Greeks" the ancient Greeks that are depicted in Civ have gone the way of... well... the ancient Romans! I.e., they have assimilated utterly. Thus, while Greece is distinct from Russia, it has perhaps more in common with Russia ETHNICALLY than it does with Italy... which was certainly not the case in the ancient world.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
sabrewolf

|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002 time: 06:22
|
|
no, sorry, bosnians are slavic, it's just that a part of them (approx. 40%, >50% before the war) are muslims.
and definetly not arabic. if something, then ottoman (turks)...
not every muslim country is arab. in fact many aren't (iran, pakistan, afghanistan, indonesia, malaysia(?), philipines, some smaller caucasian republics, etc.)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
sabrewolf

|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002 time: 06:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
Hate to break the news to you, but Greece is overwhelmingly slavic. The slavic migration to Greece occurred in the mid 2nd millenium. As for the Baltic states, yes, I suppose those are mixed Slavic-Germanic. And as for Romania, I plead ignorance: I have always assumed as they are surrounded by Slavs that the Romanians are themselves slavic.
But as for the "Greeks" the ancient Greeks that are depicted in Civ have gone the way of... well... the ancient Romans! I.e., they have assimilated utterly. Thus, while Greece is distinct from Russia, it has perhaps more in common with Russia ETHNICALLY than it does with Italy... which was certainly not the case in the ancient world. |
ok, sorry, my fault... maybe...
to me, the greeks are an own civ, because they've had thousands of years of own culture. i don't call the arabs israelis, only because they are both semitic.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
sabrewolf

|
 |
turicum, helvetistan
Jun 2002 time: 06:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Yahweh Sabaoth
Hey, now, waitaminute! How are the French and Spanish "Italic"? And what's with "Iranian"? Iran is a relatively new concept in a land thousands of years old, with many, many overlapping ethnicities, including persian, turkic, arabic, etc. And how about "Albanian"?
Still, it's a cool map. It gets "Germanic" and "Celtic" mostly right. |
we cross-posted
italic languages could also be called romanic.
iranian is persian
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22. Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|