The Iroquois Debate: Lets clean up the mess we've created.

[orange]

Boris - I'm not familiar with the Iroquois Salamanca...is it in upstate NY? Out near Buffalo?

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by orange
monkspider and Ribannah - then why don't we see the Aboriginies in the game? That would certainly add to cultural diversity, and it would also put a civ in Australia.

Cuz they would be way too powerful with their unique unit, the Dreamweaver.
But I'm thinking that by the time the game finally hits Australia, there should already be so many expansion packs around that both the Aborigines and the Australians (UU: Tasmanian Devil ) can all be played.

Salamanca is indeed south of Buffalo.

[orange]

Originally posted by Ribannah


Cuz they would be way too powerful with their unique unit, the Dreamweaver.
But I'm thinking that by the time the game finally hits Australia, there should already be so many expansion packs around that both the Aborigines and the Australians (UU: Tasmanian Devil ) can all be played.

Salamanca is indeed south of Buffalo.

Rib - I can say with some confidence that no one on this message board finds you funny.

If you have nothing of substance to say in a debate thread, don't say anything. It only makes you look weak because you can't even rebut a simple point that is made, especially on a topic that you're supposedly pretty knowledgeable about.

On a kinder note: Thanks for the info about Salamanca.

[Boris Godunov]

Boris - I'm not familiar with the Iroquois Salamanca...is it in upstate NY? Out near Buffalo?

Salamanca is about 100 miles due south of Buffalo, and is perhaps one of most beautiful parts of the Eastern seaboard.

A lot of people don't realize that "Upstate New York" refers to any part of New York that isn't New York City or Long Island. So even though Salamanca is near the southern state border with PA, it is considered upstate.

Cheers.

PS--Newark, eh? My parents live in Salisbury, Maryland. So I'm also an Eastern Shore boy (but am originally from Tennessee, actually)

[orange]

I understand what Upstate NY means. I had a vague idea that it was out in the western part of the state, which is why I asked Upstate NY and Near Buffalo.

Newark is where I go to Uni. I'm originally from South Eastern PA.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by orange
I understand what Upstate NY means.

Yeah, but I doubt most people from other lands do, was clarifying for them.

[Ribannah]

Sorry Orange, I didn't think your question was serious!

The Aboriginals aren't in the game because Firaxis thought they had not enough to offer.
But maybe you intended to ask why I didn't make propaganda for them. The reason is simple: AFAIK they didn't advance human civilization as much as others. But I'm not very 'knowledgeable' with regard to the Aboriginals so maybe I am wrong.
In Locutus' thread I gave points to the Australians to be in the next 16.

[orange]

Originally posted by Ribannah
The reason is simple: AFAIK they didn't advance human civilization as much as others.

Neither did the Iroquois as compared to any number of Civs that weren't included! Don't you get it??

[Ribannah]

Orange, I understand you perfectly, I just don't agree with you about the Iroquois. I thought I had made that reasonably clear already, but in case you need a friendly reminder:

LOVE HIAWATHA!! LOVE HIAWATHA!!

[orange]

Originally posted by Ribannah
Orange, I understand you perfectly, I just don't agree with you about the Iroquois. I thought I had made that reasonably clear already, but in case you need a friendly reminder:

LOVE HIAWATHA!! LOVE HIAWATHA!!

You're making it clear that your opinion is that they should be included in the game. I am trying to figure out why you hold such an opinion.

Someone raises a point, you throw bull **** answers back in our faces. We make analogies that are supposed to make you think, and you dismiss them with...

LOVE HIAWATHA!! LOVE HIAWATHA!!

Now, make a point, or drop the case. It's ok to simply state "I think the Iroquois will bring diversity to the game" and end it there, but you've been trying to argue for why they deserve to be included. So if that's the case, argue. Don't give me bull ****. I don't have time for it and neither does anyone else here.

[monkspider]

Orange-
I find, for various reasons, the Native American civilization is as worthy of being in the top 16 as any. Your example regarding the Aborogine takes our arguements for the cultural diversity of the Native Americans a bit too far. While Native Americans are certainly more in for their cultural uniqueness more than anything (IMHO), they did make some contributions to things such as farming, government, art, and so forth. Certainly much more so than the Aborigines, while at the same time offering the same cultural diversity. Also, the Iroqouis are representing a much larger group than the aborigines. From the Nomadic Great Plains, to the unique housing styles employed by Native Americans of the Southwest, to the relatively advanced forms of self-government and farming that the Northeastern Native Americans offered. This is a very large group of people. I can respect your opinion on the Spanish and so forth being more deserving, it is a matter of taste. But the Native American peoples are as deserving of representation in the game as any, and given the relative similarities between the Spanish and other European groups, as well as the Arabs living on through the Babylonians, Persians and Egyptians, it is my honest opinion that Firaxis made the best choice.

Afterall, LOVE HIAWATHA!! , No?

[orange]

Originally posted by monkspider
Orange-
I find, for various reasons, the Native American civilization is as worthy of being in the top 16 as any. Your example regarding the Aborogine takes our arguements for the cultural diversity of the Native Americans a bit too far. While Native Americans are certainly more in for their cultural uniqueness more than anything (IMHO), they did make some contributions to things such as farming, government, art, and so forth. Certainly much more so than the Aborigines, while at the same time offering the same cultural diversity. Also, the Iroqouis are representing a much larger group than the aborigines. From the Nomadic Great Plains, to the unique housing styles employed by Native Americans of the Southwest, to the relatively advanced forms of self-government and farming that the Northeastern Native Americans offered. This is a very large group of people. I can respect your opinion on the Spanish and so forth being more deserving, it is a matter of taste. But the Native American peoples are as deserving of representation in the game as any, and given the relative similarities between the Spanish and other European groups, as well as the Arabs living on through the Babylonians, Persians and Egyptians, it is my honest opinion that Firaxis made the best choice.

Afterall, LOVE HIAWATHA!! , No?

Now, why can't you say that Ribannah? That I can not only relate to, but even somewhat agree with!

Your posts need something called "substance"

[Dr. Nick]

Fireaxis should release a game with infinite civs.

[orange]

I'm sure Rib could come up with an infinite number of PC civs to throw in Not the Spanish though

LOVE HIAWATHA!! LOVE HIAWATHA!!

[Dr. Nick]

Or the Incas!

LOVE RIBANNAH BANANA! LOVE RIBANNAH BANANA!

[Jay Bee]

[Roman]

I would not even call Iroquis a civilization* - more like a bunch of tribes, so for me there is no question: Iroquis should not have been included.

As for the Arabs though...

*I am not trying to insult anyone or sound condescending. But one cannot have a civilization without cities, writing (more advanced than the drawings on skins...), etc. This does not mean that Iroquis were in any way inferior to other peoples, merely that they should not be in a game that is all about civilization.

[monkspider]

read my previous post Roman

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by orange
Now, why can't you say that Ribannah? That I can not only relate to, but even somewhat agree with!

Your posts need something called "substance"

I HAVE said that on numerous occasions (well, not exactly that, since I don't count the Iroquois as representing the plains and pueblo tribes), but then I was called an idiot for my ridiculous claims that the Iroquois had a government, or farming, or art, etcetera, and that instead they were cannibalistic nomads.
Like Roman just did, only far worse and with a lot of abuse. And most of all without substance. Me: here is a link to the Iroquois constitution. They: your links stink and so do you. Me: here is a list of Iroquois villages. They: you are an idiot to claim they built houses. Me: here is an overview of the land they controlled. They: that is completely absurd, they were little more than chimpansees. Me: these are the criteria I would use to select civlizations. They:
we hate you because you don't put the Spanish in. And so on.
I even gave points for the Spanish to be in the expansion pack, at first.

But this is not just happening to me, the same respectless barbarism is happening all over the boards and it's getting worse by the day.

[Dr. Nick]

[ruckus9]

I'm reminded of something I've heard that applies to this in a way. When asked if it was fair that white people couldn't tell jokes about blacks nowadays without being condemned for being racist, Steve Harvey a black comedian said something along the lines of (in a sarcastic voice)Wow, I get to tell jokes about how poor my people are and the experiences related to that and white people can't. That was how I paraphrased it because I forgot the exact words.

I can't tell you how much I agree with that. Can you see how absurd it is? That Europeans have made African-americans the way they are and now some are upset because they get a moment in the spotlight. Let them have it, for Christ's sake! And let the Iroquois get their moment in the spotlight. Is it really such a big deal to a bunch of adults (I'm assuming) to let the Iroquois be in the game?

Everyone in the world's brain has already been crammed to the brim with the accomplishments of the "winners" or "the most influential"; the Spanish have their numerous history books and their government to foster respect for their heritage, for example. The Iroquois and the Native Americans they represent don't. Who knows? Maybe the game will compel others to learn about the history of the Native Americans and see beyond the cowboy stereotypes. Let's appreciate the diversity of cultures for once and not worry about the "most influential" or the "winners." I know they are the ones that history put almost all their attention on on but that's a pretty limited view of human history in my mind.

[Jay Bee]

Couple of familiar sentences to accompany the situation described three posts above this:


"As you sow winds, be ready to reap storms"


"Be careful how you quarrel with the Spanish*. Although you may do them much harm, yet assuredly you will all be destroyed and rooted off the earth if you do"

(*English in the original-- interestingly, this one was pronounced by a Native North American chieftain)

[Boris Godunov]

[SIZE=1]

That Europeans have made African-americans the way they are and now some are upset because they get a moment in the spotlight. Let them have it, for Christ's sake!

I don't recall this thread saying anything about African-Americans. However, I don't recall anyone using the reasoning here that you are ascribing to those of us who disagree with Iroquois inclusion in the game.

For me, "letting them have" a spot in the game, as if it is meant as some sort of balm for past wrongs done them, is condescending. I would much rather see such wrongs addressed in real life rather than a computer game. There is a reason I give money to the UNCF, and it isn't because I feel "conquerer's guilt," it's because I think it's a worthy cause.

As for Civ3, I think the Iroquois were an advanced primitive tribe, but not a "civilization" as such. I would rather see the game dispassionately consider influence and impact on the world than commit meaningless "social justice."

Cheers.

[ruckus9]

I guess my meaning got distorted. My point was that this is just a game and having the Iroquois in it is not that big of a deal to me. The analogy was that being able to tell jokes about yourself is not such a big deal either. The thing that ties them together is that people make a big deal out of a trivial decision when they have already gotten so much in the past already. I didn't intend to defend African Americans, I was merely using that incident as an analogy to this problem. Admittedly I rambled, but that was pretty much the main idea. In reference to the "conqueror's guilt" that wasn't my intention at all, but I've seen alot of racism and that view tends to get mixed up in my thinking. But we're all free to express our opinions here, right?

I would rather see the game dispassionately consider influence and impact on the world than commit meaningless "social justice."

As for the "social justice" I clearly stated that I would rather have more distinct cultures and not base my view entirely on modern influences and impact since this is not a history game. If Civs were based entirely on "influence" and "impact" then yes the Iroquois would be out in favor of the Spanish or Arabs. But it isn't all about that, is it? Why else would Firaxis have the Iroquois or Zulus in? I would say that cultural distinction is mixed into the criteria of a civilization being in the game.

[orange]

Originally posted by Ribannah
I HAVE said that on numerous occasions (well, not exactly that, since I don't count the Iroquois as representing the plains and pueblo tribes), but then I was called an idiot for my ridiculous claims that the Iroquois had a government, or farming, or art, etcetera, and that instead they were cannibalistic nomads.
Like Roman just did, only far worse and with a lot of abuse. And most of all without substance. Me: here is a link to the Iroquois constitution. They: your links stink and so do you. Me: here is a list of Iroquois villages. They: you are an idiot to claim they built houses. Me: here is an overview of the land they controlled. They: that is completely absurd, they were little more than chimpansees. Me: these are the criteria I would use to select civlizations. They:
we hate you because you don't put the Spanish in. And so on.
I even gave points for the Spanish to be in the expansion pack, at first.

But this is not just happening to me, the same respectless barbarism is happening all over the boards and it's getting worse by the day.

I just started revisiting the CivIII boards as of two weeks ago, and got into the Iroquois debate last week. I can't speak of what has happened in the past.

What I do know, is you're the same person who back up the Iroquois by saying that they had knowledge of Metallurgy, Navigation, Astronomy, Monotheism, Theology, etc. etc. etc. and claiming them to have had signifigant impact on world history. To both claims, myself and others have yelled a resounding and uncontested "FALSE!"

ruckus - would you yell if the Iroquois were in the game over the Americans? I'm guessing you would, because you'd like to play as the Americans and you think the Americans are by far more deserving than the Iroquois...correct? Then it's not a "moment in the spotlight" for the Iroquois anymore, it's just plain wrong...for a civ as unworthy as the Iroquois when compared to the Americans being in the game when the Americans are not...correct?

Now, think of how our Hispanic friends feel.

[Myrddin]

In my view a civilisation must qualify by the amount of time it has existed; perhaps the Iroquois have a better claim to be be in Civ III than the Americans

[orange]

And when do you define when the Iroquois civilization began and ended?

[St Leo]

The Aboriginals aren't in the game because Firaxis thought they had not enough to offer.

The Maori are, definetly, not less important than the Iroquois.


I tend to fall into the camp that sees the Arabs living on in Civ 3 through the various Fertile Valley Civs and Egypt.

sarcasm(){

Why are the English and French in the game? After all, the French are basically a branch of the Frankish German Empire and the English are nothing more than German Barbarians running around in Albion.

}

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by ruckus9
The Spanish have their numerous history books and their government to foster respect for their heritage, for example. The Iroquois and the Native Americans they represent don't.

Actually, the Iroquois have their history books (and they are active on the WWW, too), but outside their own community few people are willing to read and prefer to cherish their ignorance.

As to the duration of the Iroquois as a civilization: it took a while for the nomadic bands that had come from Asia and stayed in the north to cluster into tribes, I think the earliest date you could give them for surfacing as a civilization would be around 1300 AD. The Iroquois nation (which is not the same) started in 1570 and fell apart in several steps. Whether a claim can be made for an Iroquois civilization to still exist today, depends on the definition.

St Leo, I don't know much about the Maori. Could you tell us something about them?

[orange]

Originally posted by Ribannah
1570 and fell apart in several steps. Whether a claim can be made for an Iroquois civilization to still exist today, depends on the definition.

The same length of time as the Americans...if not less...considering the Iroquois were non existant as an independent self governing group of people by 1800.