10-10-2002 12:23									#1
	Firaxis: Ruler of the Jews Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Although Firaxis would never add a new civilization in a patch, if they did add the Hebrew their king should not be Solomon.
The biggest threat to Jewish culture past and present was idolatry. King Solomon built a giant Moloch statue in Gehenna. Moloch was a bull like god who accepted burning babies as sacrifices. Solomon may have built great structures but he helped usher in paganism and idolatry into Judaism. Thus he was helping to destroy what he protected.

A more suitable leader would be:
David, one of the Judges, or one of the Maccabee rulers who restored Jewish political and religious order.

If they had the govt choice theocrarcy than Ysreal (or Isreal (known as Jacob before his covanant with god) depend on what translation you take, either Palestinian, Greek,Latin, Aramaic, Babylonian, Egyptian, etc.) would be the best choice.

I would give them a Commercial (remember where taxes most likely come from?) and religious.

Reason: isreal is deffinatly not expansionist, im pretty sure they aren't scientific.
They would be industrious if not religious (the only reason they would be religious is if there is a theocracy option for government- remember how many times they were destroyed by go for their deviance from his laws)

	10-10-2002 13:41									#2
	Increase Your PM Length

For Civ3 and PtW Firaxis has chosen not greatest leaders but rather civ founders/unifiers.
Think about it: Joan d'Arc instead of Napoleon for the French, Osman instead of Suleyman the Magnificent for the Ottomans, Bismarck for he Germans and so on (except when there is an obvious choice, like Caesar or Hannibal).

If there will be a hebrew civ in a future expansion, I bet they will choose Moses to lead them.

	10-10-2002 16:41									#3
	Inflate your Upload Space

David should be the king.
commercial / religous.

and their UU should be "prophets"

	12-10-2002 15:24									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

Asking this question of a Jewish friend, the immediate response was Moses -- almost as if it were self-evident to her.

Moses then. Even if this whole post is wishful thinking.
;-)

	12-10-2002 19:26									#5
	Get a bigger avatar today!

moses was certainly an important figure, but should be a great leader, not the king. that position goes to david, the greatest of the hebrew monarchs.

	13-10-2002 00:58									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Tiberius For Civ3 and PtW Firaxis has chosen not greatest leaders but rather civ founders/unifiers. Think about it: Joan d'Arc instead of Napoleon for the French, Osman instead of Suleyman the Magnificent for the Ottomans, Bismarck for he Germans and so on (except when there is an obvious choice, like Caesar or Hannibal). If there will be a hebrew civ in a future expansion, I bet they will choose Moses to lead them.

Or, in the case of the Chinese civilization, civ destroyers.

The leader who sells is the one that gets in.

	13-10-2002 01:39									#7
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Well, here's what I think that they should do.

Israel/Israelites/Israelite
King David
Religious & Commercial
Capital City: Jerusalem
UU: Slinger, a fast, cheap archer that can be quickly produced and rushed into the field...2/1/2
Great leaders: Moses, Aaron, Saul, Solomon, Hezekiah, Maccabeus

I agree with Monsieur Sprucemoose that Solomon, for his late weaknesses in following the Jewish tradition and religion as he should have, shouldn't really be the leader. However, we've got a certain Chinese leader in the game who is also a downer...

	13-10-2002 03:06									#8
	Remove this text

It really should not be Moses because he really only enocuraged intsead of concour or bring together. I was very upset the the hebrews did not make it in ptw. It should be king David. But with the characterisitcs we should also remember the things they have invented for the military. Just look at their tanks

	13-10-2002 03:20									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I think Abraham should be the Leader. I am currently reading the Bible again and think that he as the founding father of the Hebrews should lead them.

Traits: Religious, Commercial
Capitol: Jerusalem.
UU: "Unscrupulus merchant" or "Traitor"
but seriously slinger is the best i can think off. They were not into the military arts much. Perhaps if Clerics from CTP were in Civ3......

	14-10-2002 10:32									#10
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by ranskaldan Or, in the case of the Chinese civilization, civ destroyers. The leader who sells is the one that gets in.

Like I said, they chosed nation founders when there wasn't an obvious choice. Is it my fault that Mao was the obvious choice for Firaxis?
The leader who sells? Like Joan d'Arc instead of Napoleon or Osman instead of Suleyman the Magnificent? I don't think so. Of course it is one of the most important reasons, but not the only one. I still think they tried to choose a civ founder/unifier (and Mao is a civ founder in a way: he founded modern China). I'm not saying I like him, on the contrary, but he was important.

As for the hebrews, they would be a nice addition to a future XP.

PS I think this thread belongs to the Civ3 - Civilizations forum.

	14-10-2002 12:16									#11
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

It would be kind of cool to call up Moses to trade Mil Tradition for Democracy...

	14-10-2002 12:17									#12
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

He would have to get Monotheism for free though...

	14-10-2002 12:46									#13
	Increase Your PM Length

Indeed. However, a civ starting directly with monotheism would be very wierd. Not wierder than the hebrews reseaching polytheism, though.

	14-10-2002 23:00									#14
	Re: Firaxis: Ruler of the Jews Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by sprucemoose3311 Although Firaxis would never add a new civilization in a patch, if they did add the Hebrew their king should not be Solomon. The biggest threat to Jewish culture past and present was idolatry. King Solomon built a giant Moloch statue in Gehenna. Moloch was a bull like god who accepted burning babies as sacrifices. Solomon may have built great structures but he helped usher in paganism and idolatry into Judaism. Thus he was helping to destroy what he protected.

that would be looking from a religious point of view. Idolatry is not an issue when it comes to Solomon if you were not a Jew eh? What only would matter would be whether if decline was due to Solomon's fault. Biblical text does not support any links other than that Solomon steered away from God thus God did not support him any longer which was blame for decline. This is not sufficient evidence for Non-Jews to point fingers at Solomon. However mood of Bible does indicate corruption, so if corruption was what brought Israelis down and it was due to Solomon's fault, then that would take away his credential as being a good leader.

EDIT: Aztecs often performed human sacrifice to their sun gods. Just because Solomon practiced religious practice outside of Judaism belief doesn't effect his status of having been a great leader that built israeli nation.

Mao is in as leader of china because he is probably the single most poweful figure in chinese history that changed China so much, whether he did more good or bad is another story to discuss.

	15-10-2002 04:11									#15
	Suffering from ads?

Kyle Broflovski!

	15-10-2002 06:53									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I would add my vote for King David...though I understand support for Moses as the founding Prophet of Judaism, the one person who welded together the lose confederation of tribes was David. (Saul, I suppose one could argue, did this first--but David made Israel a regional power. I would also like to see the Temple in Jerusalem as a wonder.

To those who don't like Solomon: I agree that he was largely responsible for the religious downfall of the nation, but Civ III is not just about religion. Under him the nation prospered economically and was largely respected by the surrounding nations. Sometimes messing with people's cultural traditions can actually help advance a nation--or at least not hurt it (consider Peter the Great's treatment of the Russian Orthodox Church.) Still, I would argue that David was more historically significant.

And FFIW, I'd prefer the name "Israel" to the "Jews." To me, "Jew" suggests a religion more than a nation; and Israel (as an ancient nation) was often only weak in following that religion. In fact, one could argue that Israel (especially the Northern Kingdom after the death of Solomon) was more pagan than Jewish until the first diaspora.

	15-10-2002 09:34									#17
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by History Guy Well, here's what I think that they should do. Israel/Israelites/Israelite King David Religious & Commercial Capital City: Jerusalem UU: Slinger, a fast, cheap archer that can be quickly produced and rushed into the field...2/1/2 Great leaders: Moses, Aaron, Saul, Solomon, Hezekiah, Maccabeus

Very astute choices. Thumbs up to the Civ traits and leader especially. You could actually have a ton of great leaders. How about Samson, my favorite? Good warrior until he lost his hair hehe.

EDIT: Perhaps the UU should be a Pharisee or Sadducee? Just kidding of course.

	15-10-2002 09:36									#18
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by bartdanr And FFIW, I'd prefer the name "Israel" to the "Jews." To me, "Jew" suggests a religion more than a nation; and Israel (as an ancient nation) was often only weak in following that religion.

I agree, especially after my posts and reading others' responses in the thread Oppositions to Arabs. People shouldn't be too upset with David being the leader. If they are, they need only look at Abu Bakr as an example of a religious figure as a leader of a Civ.

	17-10-2002 23:06									#19
	Tired of ads?

Well, we could consider the benefits of a "prophet" unit. What could he do?

He could be a diplomat. (warning other nations of impending travesty, etc.)

He has a divine intervention ability. (Elijah calling down fire from heaven, Joshua and the Walls of Jericho, etc.)

He could heal damaged units.

He could cause unrest or support for your Civ with others.

It would be really cool, but probably an unfair advantage.

Maybe in a mod-pack.

	19-10-2002 22:06									#20
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I have to say that a prophet is a little to religous. It could either be like a stone thrower or a modern day tank or something like that.

	21-10-2002 14:43									#21
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I think Solomon should be definitely a King of Hebrews - the ruler during the cultural heights of that civilization, as opposed to David, who was nothing more than a barbaric chieftain of a primitive tribe.

	22-10-2002 05:00									#22
	Full PM-box? Change here!

I wouldn't characterize David entirely this way (as the leader of a Barbaric Tribe). Remember, all of Solomon's domains were conquered by David--Solomon didn't add any territory to the Kingdom (and indeed lost Edom in a rebellion.) The glory of Solomon's temple might be cited, but David was responsible for gathering all the materials for it and designing it--Solomon did little more than assemble it according to David's wishes.

I think that it's arguable that the leader should be Solomon, but IMO David's significance outweighs Solomon's...though to be honest, what real difference would it make? It's easy enough to edit the name, and I don't think we know enough about David's or Solomon's apperance for it to matter on the leaderheads.

	24-10-2002 06:08									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Martinus I think Solomon should be definitely a King of Hebrews - the ruler during the cultural heights of that civilization, as opposed to David, who was nothing more than a barbaric chieftain of a primitive tribe.

You could say the same thing about Ghengis and that Viking guy whose name eludes me.

On the Hebrew UU, maybe a Levite, a warrior priest from the Old Testament, it could be a cheap swordsman.

	24-10-2002 14:22									#24
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Yeah, you are probably right - especially as Firaxis turns more towards nigh-mythical leaders and big conquerors, rather than peace-time great leaders.

So, while they won't choose Moses imho (as they didn't choose Muhammad for Arabs either), it will be probably David.

Still, I resent it when people say Solomon was a failure because he encouraged religious tolerance etc.

	24-10-2002 15:30									#25
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Martinus So, while they won't choose Moses imho (as they didn't choose Muhammad for Arabs either), it will be probably David.

I was told they didn't choose for Mohammed, because it would gravely insult the islam. (Who cares anyway, islam forbids to use images of people anyway...)

Firaxis didn't always choose warriors. Look at Ghandi (bad choiche, Osoka or something like that (I am not in the position to check his exact name) would be better or a Gupta ruler.)
Let's conclude by saying: Firaxis's casting often doesn't make sense.

	24-10-2002 15:50									#26
	Suffering from ads?

Why not just "David Ben Goerion" ?
I think rebuilding / refounding Israel in the 20th centurty is as much as a big achivement as what David did in those days.

	24-10-2002 15:58									#27
	Tired of ads?

I think he is a bit... shall we say... controversial...