Merits of inclusion of historical civs in civ

[Chris 62]

In another thread I started I noticed a comment about the German civilization not being worthy of inclusion in the game. I think that their history is important enough to warrent inclusion. As for who doesn't belong, my first cut would be the celts. They were quite numerous, but rather lackluster in historical terms. The souix would be next,and behind the celts only because they represent the only native americans in the game. The zulus are questionable also, in that their empire(such as it was) only lasted for about 50 years. What does the membership think?

[Smokey tha nuke man]

get rid of:celts,
add:a new sheild color(black, perhaps) with the phonecians, sumarians, and portugese, and stick the canadians or the mexicans somewhere(if we're going to have the americans, why not the canadians/mexicans?)
replace:aztecs w/ mayans

that's about all the changes i would make.

[Prometeus]

Why Celts? Take a look on my website...

[RollinThunda]

yeah why get rid of the celts, there my faveoit civ to play as, i seem to do bettter when i play as them, there good luck for me, probely has something to do with the extra seteler i most always get.

[zyxpsilon]

Since, one can choose who to play against from a list of seven active adversaries... i rather like the diversity of choices we get if we select the ai opponents.
As per "historical" context it is another story; in fact, in 4000 BC there was no >Russians< (for example) but Egyptians were certainly actives adding a coat of wax on THE Kheop's pyramid!!

Who am i to question the design choices of great game programmers?

What only matters is that i can go back into "rules.txt"... make them all "1,1,-1"... and crush their cities one by one with a fleet of Bombers.

Sure, Romans >HAD< to deal with the Celts and others in the real history books. Greeks, too.

[Bereta_Eder]

I think it's also a question of commercial success and target groups.

You MUST have romans or egyptians or greeks in order for the game (named civilization of all things!) to be «catchy».

Plus the game goes on untill the future (like the greeks before during and after the Byzantine -known also as the Eastern Roman Empire - )so you CANNOT leave out people like the americans or the germans or the russians or the english (really why not british?) because you would lower the level of involvement of huge markets and because they play big roles in the world and have big achievements too even if later in history. And civ begins with colossus and goes on to the statue of liberty so things patch up in a way in the end.

Now why the Celts and not, say, the Phoeniceans or the Assyrians or whatever? Maybe because Celts are known to more people than the last two? But this is only a guess.
[This message has been edited by paiktis22 (edited January 19, 2001).]
[This message has been edited by paiktis22 (edited January 19, 2001).]

[Exile]

I have never been able to understand the inclusion of either the Aztecs or the Zulus as civilizations in the game.

I like the idea of Assyrians.

Where are the Turks? Talk about impact on history.

Salutations,
Exile

------------------
Lost in America
"a freaking mastermind." --Stefu
"or a very good liar." --Stefu

[Gatekeeper]

Cpoulos, et al.:

Why remove civilizations?! I say *ADD* civilizations while keeping the original roster. I am hoping Civ III will do something along those lines.

CYBERAmazon

[Chris 62]

quote: Originally posted by Prometeus on 01-19-2001 05:49 PM Why Celts? Take a look on my website...

I'd be happy to check out your site, but were is it? As for why the celts, these people were a VERY loose confederation that lived in northern and central europe. Their druids, or priests did not believe in the written word(feeling it weakend the mind), and as such have few written records. In fact most of what is known of them comes from roman sources, that mostly mention what pests they were to rome. Brave to a fault, their tactics in battle were to stand side by side, screem alot and charge emass at roman formations. Did you know that the gauls are really celts? This disjointed people were swept aside by one wave of barbarians after another till they were no more. And that's why I would dump them, but it's just my opinion.

[Builder]

I dont understand why the Hebrews appeared only in CTP...

[Anodyne]

Get rid of: AMERICANS!! If something's unrealistic, THEY are! I've already deleted them. Also the Sioux and Zulus, as they were really loose and didn't really build cities.

Add:
Phoenicians, Indus-culture (well, this is difficult, since there's not much knowledge left of them, and they're almost the same as Indians), Arabs, Incas, Mayans, Khmer(also not very much knowledge left on these, either), Sumerians(well, they later became Babylonians...), Assyrians

Well, I wouldn't delete the Celts. Although they were loose organization, they still controlled half the Europe, and the Romans really had a hard time beating them, and never throughoutly conquered whole Britain. I think they're far more realistic than the French or Germans.
As I've told before, I have myself edited the rules and city.txt, and deleted: Americans, Spanish(well, they're ok, but I just had to make room for one more civ), Sioux, Zulus.
And added: Incas, Mayans, Arabs, Assyrians.
So, there are 3 civs in America, which is good, and the game seems more realistic otherwise, too. If you wish I'll post the leader names and cities for added civs (well, there already exists those for Arabs and Incas).

And oh, yes, about the Phoenicians: Carthago was actually a colony of theirs, so basically Carthaginians are the same thing. Their starting place is just "really" in Libanon(next to Israel in north).

I also like the idea of adding the Hebrews. It's just too small map for them, with Babylonians, Arabs, Assyrians and Egyptians around. And phoenicians, too...

Oh yeah, I'd also like the Turks. Well, perhaps I'll create the city lists, leaders etc... for the civs I mentioned. We'll just need to get a MUCH bigger map.

[Bereta_Eder]

quote: Originally posted by cpoulos on 01-20-2001 06:26 AM I'd be happy to check out your site, but were is it?

Cpoulos click on «profile» then «homepage» of Promitheas. Some cool celts senarios! and more

[Paul]

You can save one click: just click on the homepage icon above a person's post.

[Jay Bee]

quote: Originally posted by Ade on 01-20-2001 09:42 AM and deleted: Americans, Spanish(well, they're ok, but I just had to make room for one more civ),

..and to make room for one more civ, you went on to delete one of the three countries that most contributed to shape the world the way we know it today. Congrats. Your decision really shocked me. I mean, if you deleted the Spanish because you don't like bullfights or because your Spanish girlfriend dumped you, etc, I would understand it. But, deleting the Spanish just because you need room for another civ makes no sense at all.

There are about 600 hundred million people that have Spanish as their mother tongue (this is more than than native English speakers); 27 countries that have Spanish as their official language (I believe there are not so many that have English as an official language), Spain ranks first in properties recognized by the UNESCO as World Heritage Sites... perhaps you might want to reconsider your decision :-)

[This message has been edited by Jay Bee (edited January 20, 2001).]

[Anodyne]

Yeah, you do make a point, but I want my civ-games to concentrate more on the antique times, and Spain did become big only after the Arabs were driven out of there (Before that it was conquered by the Romans, Celts, Carthaginians, etc...), and that was around year 1200, if I remember correctly.
So, it was a hard decision, indeed, and I might still some day change it back, perhaps deleting the Germans, English or French. But at the moment it suits my campaigns fine.

[Chris 62]

for jay bee: If you could pick the seven most importanr civs (in the game or not), what would they be?

[Anodyne]

Ok, the question wasn't for me, but I still want to answer it. Please forgive me
my 7 would be:
Romans
Babylonians
Persians
Chinese
Japanese
Arabs/Greeks/Egyptians
Celts/Vikings

[Chris 62]

I should have said anybody who wanted answer could. Also, my civs would be:[list=1][*]Greece(The western world owes everything to us!)[*]China(invented more things then anyone)[*]Rome(longest continual government in history.Before someone says that's eygpt, I said continuous.Egypt had breaks and gaps in it's history).[*]Sumerian(civilization began with them)[*]Eygpt(most lasting manmade objects in the world).[*]American(most inovative society in human history)[*]Spain(Jay bee is right. spain's effect on the two americas is larger then any other influence).[/list=a]


[This message has been edited by cpoulos (edited March 10, 2001).]

[Jay Bee]

I would pick those civs that at their prime became 'world' masters (of course, 'world' being used in relative terms):
Persians
Greeks
Romans
Spanish
French
British
Americans

[Bereta_Eder]

Tough question. Bah, I'll give it a shot

1. Greeks. Founded so many new ideas and concepts that the european and later to a lesser degree american world (I don't like the term western) would be unrecognisable if not for those achievements. With Alexander and the unification of macedonia, attika, ipirus, peloponese and the agean communities into an unprecedented all greek military machine, the conquest of persia was truly awe - inspiring and forged one of the biggest empires in the world. Though I wished Alexander would have chosen to go west but that's another story Plus Alexander's moto of equality between greeks and «barbarians» inside its empire was unprecedented.

2. Romans. Perhaps the name that comes to everyone's mind when talking about empires. Democracy was a mocqeury in Rome but still the longlivity of it is bewildering. Rome was itself «captured» intellectually by hellenistic culture but had none of the inherent disabilites of true athenian style democracy. Forged Europe into a whole and gave it its first «unified character». Made civilizations based on greco-roman principles that later became autonomous communities and later nations. Latin is the basis nearly all «western» languages, roman roots can even today be found in the judicial system etc etc. Perhaps THE empire when it comes to strength and longlevity.

3. France. Yeah, came untill the scene much later BUT: French revolution. Humanistic principles, respect to human descency and equality no matter how flawed at their initial french concption became the basis of modern democracy.

4. Israel. Where did we get the idea that god was only one huh?! Plus their culture that became the principles of christianity was SO MUCH different from what was known in rome and greece. Austerity, enduring the suffering waiting for the after life, denying the body of pleasures in order to obey rules of morality and the word of god etc etc.
Try saying that to Dionysos! or any of the greek or roman hedonistic characters!

5. China. In the Past but also Today. Ideas so different from anything in Europe that overwhelm the mind. Capale of treatening whoever the hell it pleases.

6. USA. Sheer power. May be the only country that «nationality» does not constitute an obstacle. Has huge democratic flaws and humanistic errors but in that sense is more democratic than any other.

7. Russia or more precisily USSR. The only country to «produce» the first «communist» community and showing the world that a viable (as was seen at the time) alternative to capitalism existed. Managed to become a superpower in just 70 years. Gave ALL of its citizens social welfare altough at the huge cost of the loss of much of their freedom.

Still trying to put in one list the importance of ancient civs and modern ones certainlty is an injustice to many more others.

[Bereta_Eder]

In any case, I think Civ 2 is poorer without the israelis, the austro-hungarians and others that had an impact (as Exile put it) to history.

i.e. Who else but the ottoman turks managed to make the whole of Europe shiver and fear of being occupied and make europeans join together to stop them at Vienna?

Also Persia is in it but Iran - Irak is not!!!
One more example of the «problem» of mixing old civs with new ones.

PLus the inclusion of the Sioux is a joke. Where were their cities? Or does civ has nothing to do with cities
[This message has been edited by paiktis22 (edited January 20, 2001).]

[Exile]

Does Jay (J) Bee (B) stand for Jesus Balsinde'?

Just asking,
Exile

------------------
Lost in America
"a freaking mastermind." --Stefu
"or a very good liar." --Stefu

[ruoxiaohai]

quote: Originally posted by cpoulos on 01-20-2001 04:40 PM3.Rome(longest continual government in history.Before someone says that's eygpt, I said continuous.Egypt had breaks and gaps in its history).

Well, let's start off here: I agree with most of your points. I would, however, question the thing about the Sumarians, because I'm not enirely sure what type of people would leave the Messopotamian area just to go to Asia/China. So, would that be the Western civilizations and cultures that spawned from these people? I'm not sure. Clarification would be nice.
Anyway, I'm sorry but what do you mean by continuous? Do you mean without a revolution, because China is the country with the longest operational government. True, there were many revolutions, but I mean, if you ignore those revolutions, it's the country that's been longest with government. (They also got conquered by the Mongols after I think the Song dynasty, but even before that I think they were going for quite a long time.)
Dazed and confused

[Smokey tha nuke man]

the seven most important civs in history are, in my opinon,:

1. the sumarians. they started civilization, invented the wheel, and had the first writting.
2.babylonians, under hammurabi, invented the worlds first written code of laws and punishment, and was the first empire.
3(tie). romans-aqueducts, republic, colum, language, civilizing europe, etc.
3(tie). greeks. direct democracy, the trieme, upset persian power, great myths.
5.chinese-gunpowder, bunch of other stuff.and smartest midgets.
6.USA-NUKES !!!!!! modern democracy, breking old monarchies, seperation of church and state, blah blah blah. AND NUKES
7.post-roman europe- as a whole, no one european country contributed much more than another after the fall of the roman empire. colonization of america was due to the british, spanish, french, portugese, and the netherlands. advances were pretty much the same from one tto another, so i group them all in one classification.



------------------
"our words are backed by nuclear weapons"
"oh, yeah. well, our nukes are backed by 100%money back guarantee, so there."

[Chris 62]

[quote]Originally posted by paiktis22 on 01-20-2001 11:14 AM
Cpoulos click on «profile» then «homepage» of Promitheas. Some cool celts senarios! and more

Being still new here I didn't know that! Thank for the help!

[Chris 62]

For Ruoxiaohai: I wanted to keep my comments short, but since your confused, i'll elaborate: For China the major periods are Eastern Zhou 771-256 bc, Warring states 403-221 bc, Qin 221-206 bc, Earlier Han 206 bc-ad 8, Later Han 25-220 ad, Period of North-South disunion 220-589(that's the break)ad, Northern Wei 386-535 ad, Sui 589-618 ad, Tang 618-907 ad, Northern Song with Liao empire(Qidan) on north border 960-1125 ad, Southern Song with Jin empire(Ruzhen) in North China(the second break) 1127-1279 ad, Yuan(mongols, the third break) 1279-1368 ad, Ming 1368-1644 ad, Qing(Manchus, the forth and final break) 1644-1912 ad. For Rome I am not counting the period of the monarchy or the republic, but the empire only. It begins with Octavian(not Ceasar, but his nephew we call agustus) in 27 bc and is continuios to 1453 ad, when Mehmet II of the turks finally takes constantinople. The Byzantines called themselves roman(though they spoke greek, not latin). It is only historians who call it the Byzantine empire. I hope this clears things up for you.

[Chris 62]

Hey smokey! Nuke em' all and lot god sort them out!

[Zeevico]

Firaxis would have to create some EXTREMELY HUGE maps to fit in all those civs, (probably to the scale of britain being the size of half of world mp is now), and even then you couldn't fit all those civs in. No wait, i've thought of something: Most of these civs were destroyed by another close by civ and both of these civs had only a few real cities. so these three city civs would fight it out for quite a while in the middle east, and by the AD's there should only be one or two of these civs left over, and maybe a third small one. ie. the hebrews with say 10 cities and two bigger civs ie. the arabs with 15 and the turks with 18. I think this would be pretty accurate, because it represents a small civ taking over another small civ etc etc.

[Smokey tha nuke man]

Ade, sounds like a good idea. make for some intresting scenarios.

[Chris 62]

[invented the alphabet and writing, greeks learned them from the Phoenicians . Surely, the Greek civilization (and Roman, for that matter), for example, wouldn't have been possible without the Phoenicians. Sorry, but your facts are faulty. Greek civilization's roots go back to it's three antecendent groups: The Thracians, the Illyrians, and the Mycenaens,all three of witch predate Phonicean culture. The greeks and Phonenians were actually rivals, as far as colonizing the mediterainian world. Some scholars now believe that the Phoneceans were the decendents of Minoan culture(That may have been destroyed by a volcano on Thera(modern island of santorini) and the survivors may have been the sea people, those mysterious invaders of the anciet world).
oh, btw, I think the oldest nation without breaks in the history might be Iran(Persia) or Iraq, at least Persia has been as it is for over 2000 years (No breaks after Alexander the Great, if I remember correctly). Again not quite. After Alexander, there was first his generals Selucids, then come the parthians, who were overthrone by the Sassanid dynasty during the 3rd century AD, Who would fall first to Islam, then become the Khwarizm Empire, witch was crushed in one the most decisive defeats in human history by the mongol armys of Ghengis Khan(The Khwarizms were said to have fielded an army of 200,000! men, yet were beaten by a mongol army of less than 50,000. Next come the Ottomans, so you see, Persia does not qualify in the longevity department. The Romans wern't founded by the Phoneceans, either, but by now you get my drift. Like your comments on civs though.


[This message has been edited by cpoulos (edited January 21, 2001).]