What will the remaining 2 unknown civs be?

[KaiserIsak]

Actually there is alot more differences between the babylonians, the arabs, the turks, the egyptians and the persians then it is between almost all of europe. These five civs are from five completly different ethnic and language groups. The persians are more related to the british then to any of these (british and persians and most of europe is in the indo-european branch).
The arabs are in the semittic group with the hebrews. The babylonians are in the akkadian group with the assyrians. The egyptians are in the afro-asian group with some other north africans and the turks are more related to the mongol (actually the mongols counts under the turk group).
An both the russians, the french, the romans, the british, the greeks, the americans, the vikings, the spanish and the germans are togheter with the persians in the indo-european group.
Offcourse, this is only ethnic and language, and culture may be more different. The arabs and the turks are similar because they have the same religion, but thats where the similarities end.

[Lucilla]

I work in a Dutch company with maybe 60% foreigners from all over the world (myself included). A lot of my collaegues are from Australia. So far every one of them was overwhelmed by the cultural differences that we have on such a small continent like Europe (and that despite the fact that they are all very well educated and knew that before they came here).

Just visit London, Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Rome, Amsterdam, Stockholm, Madrid, etc., etc. (sorry, can't list them all) and you will not only get different languages but also completely different lifestyles, attitudes, opinions, social and political conflicts, and so on.

For the same reason I would never mix up Canadians with US, Indonesians with Malayans, Arabs and Turks, etc.

Europeans share in big parts a common history, but still have kept their characteristics over the centuries.

[Mikhail]

I'm jewish as well, but not hebrew.

skywalker: Yes, Byzantium was part of Roman culture in the beginning, but Byzantium was an economic and militaristic power house for over 1000 years after Rome fell. I think that's enough time for a culture to become it's own (look at the US). It was actually more influenced by Middle Eastern culture than European.

As for accomplishments, there's a thing called the Hagia Sophia, and Byzantium is more or less single-handedly responsible for spreading Christianity to it's now 1 billion followers. (the mongols, they killed a bunch of people, and held on to some land for a while)

Byzantium is one of the most important civilizations in the history of the world (i'd say almost as important as Rome itself), and definately the middle ages. Constantinople was the most populous city in the world even into the late industrial ages.

Anyway, I'd say it's a helluva lot more different from Rome than France is from Germany. Or even Great Britain is from America.

Confederacy? You mean the original 13 colonies' confederacy? Or the Second American Revolution one?

(actually, an American Revolution scenario would be very cool of firaxis to include, especially if it were on a world map, where Mother Russia and the like could interfere )

[monkspider]

mikhail, check out the "unlocking the secrets of the civ select screen" for new hope for the Hebrews inclusion

[Panag]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Quote:

Turks with the Arabs. Yes, both are different from the Arabs. But are they any more different than Austria-Hungary is from Germany, or Canada from Britain?

They are as different as England is from Germany. Would you take out Germany because England and Germany are so similar?

hi ,

why not , .........;

now ; would it be possible to change the nations , ......and put a pic (face) on a nation that you want , .............

firaxis say's ; "no comment" , .........

have a nice day

[KaiserIsak]

Still, all of europe belongs to the indo-european group. And this is science, and its proved. They´re there along with persia.
Offcourse there are differences between us, i just dont think you can use the so-called similarity to reject all the middle-eastern civs.
The middle-east have in many ways been the centre of the world for most of its history, and naturally, this region have gotten influenced by so many parts that there have developed tons of different cultures on this small "continent". People have travelled here with so many different backgrounds. Both the persians and the babylonians are travellers that have expelled the older peoples (medes and sumerians). The turks come from the steppes of central asia, and are completly different.
Europe have been on the western side, with their back against the sea, and they are naturally more similar.

[KaiserIsak]

I would agree that the byzantines are more different from the romans then france is from germany, and even france is from the us.
But there is also great differences from modern china, china in ad800 and china in 200bc. I feel the byzantine culture is the culture that rome developed into. Like old china developed into new china.
And remember that we do already have greece as well.

[Mongoloid Cow]

Achievements:

Egypt - worlds first civilisation, powerhouse for millenia, first partly conquered by Hyksos, fought back, conquered, prospered, got conquered, kept own identity

China - kept own identity since the Han dynasty China and before, invented gunpowder, compasses, uniformed ingots, developed fancy and good looking writing

Greece - invented many social concepts such as democracy and the hippocratic oath, conquered by macedonia, fought back, settled far and wide, traded, made maps, stole alphabet which became base language for all european writing

Rome - conquered largest empire in ancient age, altered greek alphabet to be base of all west euro languages, invented social concepts, got conquered

Mongols - in reign of a few kings conquered china, middle east and russia to conquere largest empire EVER, survived in many dynasties for centuries

Arabs - invented numbers (them being 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 0), great astronomers, traders, scientists, conquerers, etc, etc

Hebrews - invented a book full of phrases and their contradictions on the same page WOW! WHAT AN ACHIEVEMENT

[Miznia]

KaiserIsak: Note that Semitic languages are also Afro-Asian This unites Arabs and Egyptians (and Hebrews and Babylonians) to some extent.

I don't want Hebrews because their land area was too small. How could I deal with the sight of Hebrew cities all over the mideast? Tel-Aviv thousands of miles from Jerusalem, or some such? ...It's the same reason I don't want Cubans or Irish or Scots in the game (CTP inclusions...).

Though I WOULD like Assyrians... More than Hebrews or Hyksos. I would make them very dark blue.

Miznia

[civman2000]

Never knew it was called afro-asian, but it is true that the arabs, babaylonians, and egyptians were/are also semitic

[kring]

I miss the other original Civs. The ones from the Board Game, by Avalon Hill. The basis for the computer games.

[Miznia]

What civs were those? Were they all mideastern?

[Mikhail]

Mongoloid Cow: Actually, I think the British empire while it was it's biggest was larger than the Mongol Empire. I remember reading something similar. I'll look it up.

Here we go:

1. The British Empire: 14,157,000 sq. miles

2. Mongol Empire: 12,800,000 sq. mi.

3. Soviet Union: 9,883,591 sq. mi. (NOTE: entire communist world was 13,889,000 million sq mi, the only reason I don't have them as #2 is to not give the opportunity for a "That was the Eastern Bloc too, not just the Western Bloc" whine)

(not going to give sq. mi. ratings for the rest. I hate copying out of books)

4. Spanish Colonial Empire
5. Russian Federation
6. Fascist Axis
7. The Caliphate
8. French Colonial Empire
9. Chinese Empire
10. Portuguese Colonial Empire
11. Dominion of Canada
12. United States of America
13. United States of Brazil
14. Australia
15. Empire of Persia
16. Seljuk Empire
17. Roman Empire
18. Ottoman Empire
19. Macedonian Empire
20. Timur's Empire
21. Mughal Empire
22. Selucid Empire
23. Argentine Empire
24. Republic of Kazakhstan
25. The Ghaznavid Empire

KaiserIsak: True, we DO have the Greeks, but the Byzantines are so much cooler The armies of Constantinople... Just wouldn't be the same if it were Ottoman controlled.

BTW, does anyone know what the Arab civ is based on? Mesopotamia perhaps?

[Miznia]

Mikhail, what do you mean? The Arabs "started" in the Arabian peninsula... Although if Baghdad is their capital, that's Mesopotamia, I'm pretty sure...

[Mongoloid Cow]

Thing is Mikhail no one is actually sure of how big the Mongol Empire was, although under Kublai Khan thy know they had China, Tibet, Korea, Siberia, Russia, Persia, Central Asia and a chunk of the middle east, so they expected the Mongols to be the largest, although the British might have been larger.

And I would expect the Arabs to have the capital at Mecca or Medina.

[sgrig]

Originally posted by Mikhail
Mongoloid Cow: Actually, I think the British empire while it was it's biggest was larger than the Mongol Empire. I remember reading something similar. I'll look it up.

Here we go:

1. The British Empire: 14,157,000 sq. miles

2. Mongol Empire: 12,800,000 sq. mi.

3. Soviet Union: 9,883,591 sq. mi. (NOTE: entire communist world was 13,889,000 million sq mi, the only reason I don't have them as #2 is to not give the opportunity for a "That was the Eastern Bloc too, not just the Western Bloc" whine)

...

BTW, does anyone know what the Arab civ is based on? Mesopotamia perhaps?

Wow! Where did you get this information from? I always wanted to know what the largest empires were! Also, the Russian Empire in the end of 19th century was surely bigger than the Soviet Union, since it also contained parts of Poland, Finland and before 1867, Alaska as well! So I think it should be listed separately.

As far as I know the Mongol Empire is considered to be history's greatest continious land empire, whereas the British Empire was made up of pieces spread all over the world.

The starting place for Arabs will depend on the leader chosen for Arabs - if it's Mohammed, then the starting place will be Mecca, if it's somebody like Harun ar-Rashid, then the starting place will be Baghdad.

[KaiserIsak]

I think russia only conquered central asia in the end of the 19th century, so that may be the reason for them to be bigger under the soviet union. After the second world war, bessarabia, russian baltikum and a few other territories were incorporated, that may have made them bigger.

The problem with starting point at mekkah or medinah is the very dry and civvise bad terrain there. They definatly need a few plains then.

I dont agree with you mikhail, i think the armies of constantinople should be moslem (=

I have never heard that the egypts are semittic, i have only heard afro-asian (but it may be bad luck). I know for sure that babylonians are in the akkadian group, but that may be a branch of the semittic group.

I miss the byzantium empire, the inca empire (must have been bigger then argentina) and the mameluk empire on it biggest. Maybe the golden horde, the ilkhanat and djagatai should be there as well.

[Mikhail]

Sgrig:

http://www.hostkingdom.net/earthrul.html

(and btw, that's about the ONLY site I could find for the topic)

that's accurate as far as I can tell (with descriptions of each empire too)

They have the Soviet Union listed above the Mongol Empire, which is true only if you combine the Eastern AND Soviet Blocs.

Mongoloid Cow: Good point Though, if you want to get technical, at one point the Mongol Empire ceased to be an 'Empire'. The Khanates were pretty independent, and went to war with each other, remember.

As for the Arabs, I DO hope they put them in Baghdad. If that 'culture evolution' thing that's been suggestion ever comes into play, they can evolve into Iraq

[Miznia]

I know for sure that babylonians are in the akkadian group, but that may be a branch of the semittic group.

Yeah, that seems to be the case.

[sgrig]

Spasibo, Mikhail!

KaiserIsak - actually Bessarabia, and the Baltic states were part of the Russian Empire, but got independence after the Russian Revolution (Bessarabia joined with Romania), but then Stalin returned all this lands to USSR in 1940. You are right about Central Asia - it was fully conquered only by 1881, ie 14 years after sale of Alaska.

Concerning Constantinople: of course the Ottoman armies conquered a large part of the world, but the Byzantine culture was unique and surely deserves inclusion into Civ3. Actually at one point in the 6th AD, under General Belisarius, the Byzantines returned a large part of the former Roman Empire, including Northern Africa and Italy.

Concerning Arabs: Giving the Arabs Baghdad as starting location would make it impossible to play on the world map with both Babylonians and Arabs, because Babylon was located right next to where Baghdad is. This is correct historically, because Arabs never coexisted with Babylonians, but in game terms it will reduce the number of possibilities.

Anyway, the Middle East is going to be over-populated with civs - Egyptians, Arabs, Babylonians, Ottomans, Persians, so it might not be feasible to play with all these civs on the world map.

[SeferKoheleth]

Originally posted by KaiserIsak

The biggest archievement from the hebrews,is the bible, the koran and the tora, which have had a great impact. You say that this impact is positive, but i would not be to sure about that.

I think it's positive... but positive or negative, it is a tremendous achievement, probably one of the most important in world history--- religion literally shaped the history of Europe and the Middle East for centuries.

And it's hardly the only achievement-- think commerce and science!

[SIZE=1] If i were to decide which civs to be included, i would rather let the hyksos (a tribe from todays israel) into the game then the hebrews. That is because they were the first to conquer the greatest civ ever, the mother civ of all of us here in west in many ways, the egyptian empire. That is remarkable.

I don't know what history you're reading, but the Hyksos are totally unrelated from the Hebrews, except to the extent that they were both semetic.

[SIZE=1]
Just one more thing, everyone who dont agree with jews are not anti-semittic. That should be perfectly simple to understand.
I dont support israels action against palestina, but that is not because i am anti-semittic (if i were, then i should not support the semittic palestinian either).

Read my words... I didn't say "anti-Semetic," I said "Jew-hater." There's a difference. It's quite clear that Europe loves non-Jewish Semites. I won't address this further, because it's off-topic-- but everything I've read in the European and Arab press shows me exactly where their feelings lie.... and concern for the "palestinians" doesn't enter the equation (has ANYONE ever criticized Jordon for slaughtering 30000 of them in ONE month, or attacked Syria for its TOTAL occupation of Lebanon-- for example)

[SeferKoheleth]

Originally posted by Mongoloid Cow
Arabs - invented numbers (them being 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 0), great astronomers, traders, scientists, conquerers, etc, etc

Hebrews - invented a book full of phrases and their contradictions on the same page WOW! WHAT AN ACHIEVEMENT

Incorrect. The Indians invented the so-called "Arabic" number system. The Arabs merely spread numbers to Europe, still a quite significant accomplishment.

As for your comment about the Hebrews....
a) Do you discount the impact of religion on world history?
b) They did a lot more... for example, much of middle age commerce depended on Jewish merchants and money-lenders, in both the Arabian and European worlds

[Spiffor]

As a "Civ" in Civilizations series means a strange mix of a specific culture and of a nation, I don't think the Hebrews should be in. Sure, they had their independance under King David and others (don't know well my biblical history). Sure, the Jews have a country for 50 years.
But most of their achievments -which are great in terms of economy, science, religion and literature- were done when they were scattered around the world, NOT when they were in their country. Plus, many many Jews felt integrated in their country (when it wasn't antisemitic) and considered their country as an important part of their identity : the Jewish / Hebrew identity had to deal with the country identity, and there are many more differences between an Ashkenazi and a Cefarhade (sp?) than between an Ashkenazi and a Hungrian.
So I definitely don't think the Hebrews count as a Civ, even if their culture is admirable.

[Panag]

hi ,

guys , keep it to the topic , .........


also there is room enough in the OT for political stuff , ......;


and as far as the numbers , .......the Jews had them first , .....


have a nice day

[Imp. Montezuma]

Afro-asiatic language family tree

http://www.ethnologue.com/show_famil...siatic&subid=2

[KaiserIsak]

Thank you montezuma.

SeferKoheleth--> I did not say the hyksos were related to the hebrews, i said they were from the same territory.
And i agree that both Jordan, Syria and many other should be tod to stop. But i dont know so much about this. I know for fact very much about the situation in Israel, and i dont support the israeli governement in anything. I am actually active in the local palestinia solidarity organization here in norway. And it is not because i am a jew hater. i feel terribly sorry when i read about second world war and anything terrible that have always happend to the jews, but its past, and its done. And it cant be redone. Its terrible that a people that have sufered so much is doing this moral suicide right now against the palestines.
It was´nt the hebrews that shaped the world only because they invented judaism and that developed into christianity and islam. Muhammed and Constantin could have used ANY religion, it probably would´nt matter. He could only re-shape it a little, and then it would fit.
I agree that religion have had a great impact, but my opinion is that that impact is mostly to legitimate that someone is ruling, and someone is being rules. All religions are like that. Judaism is not different because it is monotheistic.

Srig--> I know they "restored" the roman empire for a while (even conquering the coast of spain), and i know they were culturally unique for its time and so on. But what i said, was that i look upon the byzantine culture and state as a more "modern" roman.
There is also differences between communist china and han china, but they are one civ.
The byzantines and the romans should be as well. (offcourse the byzantines should be included if there were more civs to include, far before the koreans and the hebrews). But now, the turks (not the ottomans, the turks are much more general, and will cover great empires like the dellhi sultanate, the selsjuk empire, the ottoman empire and the mameluk empire). But they should have their starting location in anatolia, as the ottoman empire is the most known and maybe important.

[KaiserIsak]

Thanks again montezuma, great to clear thing up a bit.
My previous info about the languages in middle east come from a visit in the british museum earlier this year. I read very much about the middle east, but it was´nt mentioned that the akkadian were semittic. Now i know. thanks

[SeferKoheleth]

Originally posted by KaiserIsak
SeferKoheleth--> I did not say the hyksos were related to the hebrews, i said they were from the same territory.
And i agree that both Jordan, Syria and many other should be tod to stop. But i dont know so much about this. I know for fact very much about the situation in Israel, and i dont support the israeli governement in anything. I am actually active in the local palestinia solidarity organization here in norway. And it is not because i am a jew hater. i feel terribly sorry when i read about second world war and anything terrible that have always happend to the jews, but its past, and its done. And it cant be redone. Its terrible that a people that have sufered so much is doing this moral suicide right now against the palestines.
It was´nt the hebrews that shaped the world only because they invented judaism and that developed into christianity and islam. Muhammed and Constantin could have used ANY religion, it probably would´nt matter. He could only re-shape it a little, and then it would fit.

This will be my last post on the subject, because it's off-topic and probably ticking people off, but I can't let all that stand.

Hyksos-- no one really knows where they came from, only that they invaded and conquered Egypt. There's no evidence they came from Canaan.

Typical Norwegians (well, Euros in general).... you know "very much"-- what exactly does the media in Norway tell you? Do they tell you that Arafat was offered 97% of the West Bank-- and refused? Do they tell you that Palestinian media and Palestinian schools teach nothing but a culture of death and Jew-hatred (go to www.memri.org for translations of Arab media)? Do they tell you that Arafat's OWN organization-- the Fatah-- have organized dozens of suicide bombings? How Arafat talks peace in English and terror in Arabic?

Do they tell you that Arab terrorists attack from civilian neighborhoods, using children as human shields?

Do they spread the LIE of a "massacre" at Jenin (in reality 56 Palestinians died, only 3 of them civilians)?

Do they tell you of the 700,000 Jews kicked out of Arab countries in 1948? Do they tell you about the destruction of every synagouge in so-called "Arab" Eastern Jerusalem (where prior to 1948, 50000 Jews lived with hundreds of synagouges)?

Do they tell you how the Arab countries treated Palestinian refugees-- to ensure that unlike the Jews kicked out of Arab countries (who are now wealthy, productive citizens)--- they imprisioned them in camps, denied them rights, and occasionally slaughtered them-- to keep them poor, desperate, and a weapon against Israel?

What would you do if the people next door are intent on nothing but your destruction? If suicide bombers appeared non-stop at your cities. If they rejected EVERY offer of peace, and refused to present ANY of their own (other then the destruction of Israel either through violence or by importing 4 million so-called refugees)?

Israel has suffered the % equivilant of a 9-11 every MONTH for two years. To respond to 9-11, the US carpet bombed Afganistan and killed 6000 people-- including 1000s of civilians who got in the way. To respond to Palestinian terror, Israel has taken every availiable means to avoid civilian deaths-- in fact, Jordan has killed more Palestinians in ONE month (September 1970) than Israelis have in 55 years.

Or maybe you don't mind Jews as victims, and love to feel sorry for them when they die..... but hate it when they dare to protect themselves. Sorry, I'd call that Jew-hatred anyday.

[KaiserIsak]

I dont give a **** about arafat. First of all he is not choosed in an election, and that does not give him the right to speak and act for all the palestinians. But Israel is a modern, democratic state who have their leaders elected by the people. There is mayor difference here. Israel elects killers, the palestinians just get them. Arafat may have big support now, but that is only because he is, after all, their only hope.
And about that peace offer. Nothing less then 100% is unacceptable. Should Israel be rewarded for occuping a country for 40 years?

I do not back of suicide bombers, but face it, the mayority of the palestinians are not suicide bombers, and now the israelis are treating them all like they are. And they have been treating them that way since the creation of israel.
Does not anyone tell you about how the peoples who used to live in todays israel were knocked out by the jewish immigrant when Israel where founded? They are still refugees.

And by the way, why should the norwegian newspaper tell me thing that is less true than what your israeli tell you? I can not see a purpose for them lying to me, but i definatly can see a purpose of the israeli journalists being liers.

I agree that very much is uncertain in this case, but the news in norway definatly is not supporitng one of the sides. They used to be VERY easy on it when israel acted before, its just the last two years their attitude have changed. I believe that is because Israel have been even worse after the last election.

By the way, does anyone tell you that palestinians dont have primary rights in Israel, and that Israel is proclaimed (in difference with every other modern country) one state, one people and one religion. Does not leave very much space for the palestinians, does it?

[Mikhail]

Zdravstvoy!

Sgrig: Agreed about Byzantium.

About the Arabs: it's got to be clear at this point that Firaxis is not basing their choice to a world map scenario. Either way though, I'm not sure about placing the Arab capital in the Muslim holy city. That would probably be disaproved of, considering what happens to cities in Civ 3. Non-muslims aren't even allowed inside the city. (I've actually been there. there's a sign on the fork in the road, in Arabic and English: Muslims may take this road, Non-muslims MUST take this one). Personally, I'm tired of being politically correct, but Firaxis has gone out of their way to be thus far.

Sefer: I'm Jewish. But I don't particularly like Israel. Or Palestine for that matter. Though I do like the Ukraine and Mother Russia. They smell good.

There's sort of a big difference between disliking ISRAELIS, and disliking JEWISH PEOPLE IN GENERAL.

Anyway, my final two choices have been narrowed down to:

1. Thailand/Siam (SE Asia is not represented at all, and it SHOULD be. It's very distinct from the rest of Asia)

2. Byzantium (for all the reasons discussed in this thread and others)