I love all the European civs in CIV3, however I wish to lobby to have one empire/civ added!! the Polish

Along pretty much the same latitude of European countries we have England, France, Germany, Scandinavia and then Russia. Wedged in between is Poland and it has always been left out. I think Poland has a very prominent history in Europe and many allied countries have been part of the kingdom in the Surrounding area. The Polish are a very old civilization and have much prominence in Europe's history.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/84/Poland_First_To_Fight.jpg

Pre-Modern War era of World War 2, the Polish have a big history in medieval European war. Helping their surrounding neighbours and hosting a commonwealth.

Defending Europe against the Turks, Ottomans empire.
Winning many battles against aggressors such as the Swedes and Germanic Crusades in the west. Poland's great size can be thanked for her protectors and honourable battles.

Poland's strong units have been her elite Cavalry and Hussars in the olden era.
During the modern era many skilled fighter pilot battalions were used to dogfight victoriously with the British against German fighters.

Much historical info can be found on the net. One of which was a main feature today;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislaw_Koniecpolski

Nice way to put it "Aint never goin happen" at least in the core retail game, however in one of the expansions possibly. If it bugs you that much its not there, mod it in.

The Polish and the Austrians should both be in there.

Ah well, we don't want to crowd it with TOO many European civs to start off do we? ;)

The Polish (and one southern balcan civ, not that Poland is a northern one) should definately be included. But not in the core game, sorry. They are in fight with Portugal, Netherlands and the Vikings for the European civs of the first expansion, but I hope they'll make it, since the others we already had... :)

mitsho

They are not of the 18 civ. In the different 18 civ lists, there are not enough space to put Spain, even if we know Spain is one of those. I saw some without Germany (also seen on screenshots), without France, without Aztecs/Maya/Inca (none of those), without Persia, I think Poland can't be in release version. Altough, I'd like to see it in the following expansions. I'd like a game with 50 civ, but it is not probable.

I guess we'll just have to wait for the modders to make all these missing Civs.

I wonder what the civ-limit is on each map... I hope they allow for a lot more, especially in multi-player.

ok i support this, just dont ask for germany to be removed!

Personally, and no offense either, I don't really see the Polish as a major player in the history of the world. I don't just mean currently either.

But someone brought it up already-

Austro-Hungarians are important.
Serb(ian)s also are very important. I'm kinda clumping all of Yugoslavia here into this.

Althrough, there are already way too many European powers in contrast with the rest of the world... How about the Songhai? And what about another Native civ: Sioux or Anasazi? Also the Aboriginies: we need an Australian civ. :p

Poland was the first European nation to stop the Mongols, the first to fight in ww2, and at times ruled the largest empire in continental Europe. Of course there are other European nations more worthy of inclusion, but Poland is certainly at least a second-tier nation in Europe. The cossack should properly be Poland's uu, and Russia should get the T-34 instead.

I think Poland's UU should be the Polish Hussar, as that was the famed unit when Poland led the coalition that defeated the Ottomans at the gates of Vienna. The Poles were also the first to blunt the Tartar advance prior to and in conjunction with the Mongols and also (with the Lithuanians) defeated the Teutonic knights at the battle of Tannenberg/Grunwald (sp?). Although a great civ, I don't see them as being one of the first 18 civs to be released in the new civ.

ok i support this, just dont ask for germany to be removed!

Maybe Germany should be changed to Prussia!

Originally Posted by Luthor_Saxburg
ok i support this, just dont ask for germany to be removed!

And why the hell that? We should reduce a wonderful productive culture to a part of her that existed for 200 years and is generaly regarded as warmongering, anal (as in type A personality), Burocratic and paticularly offensive Smelling bunch of backland Hicks?
That would be like reducing Great Britain to England, tell me one scottsman who would aprove of that.

But I do have nothing against Poland, paticularly cause that part of history is most often forgoten, but mind this: Don't let different civs go the way of CTP, and remember that Europe is already WAY crouded.
Cheers

While I would love to see Polan included, it ain't gonna happen in the first installment and I doubt it will come in an expansion pact. We have just too many European civs and none of the original ones (England, France, Rome/Italy, Germany, Russia, Greece/Macadonia) should be excluded to make room.

Poland was the first European nation to stop the Mongols

When? Shouldn't that read "...who tried to stop" ;)?
The only "Western" Civ that really defeated them would be the Mameluks.

But, I do consider Poland a good candidate. They were a major power for some centuries (and you cannot say anything better about Netherlands or Portugal either). And even if they didn't stop the Mongols, they still stopped the Ottomans on one crucial occasion...

They should have the Polish. The Poles have provided a great deal to the history of Europe.

They could have some form of cavalry unit for a UU.

I believe the Polish and the Hungarians staved off the Mongol Invasion of Europe long enough for Temujin (Ghengis Khan, Great King) to die of old age, and then they lost their unifying factor. In my belief that is.

In an ideal world, we'd be able to have room for all the civilizations that people want in Civ4. However, since Firaxis only has limited time/money/resources/personnel/etc, I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that Poland won't be included. Don't take this as a sign that Poland isn't a worthy candidate to be included; rather, the problem is that we could easily come up with dozens of civilizations that could be placed in the game, all of which could make a legitimate case. When push comes to shove, Firaxis is going to choose the more recognizable civs (France, Germany, etc.) or geographical respresentations (Mali) for inclusion. Sorry to any Poles out there.

But let's just clear one thing up:

Poland was the first European nation to stop the Mongols

I'm with Doc, this is simply not true. Every European army that stood and fought the Mongols was horribly slaughtered, from Kiev to Budapest. When a combined Polish/German army fought the Mongols at Liegnitz in 1241, they fared no better. The ONLY invasions that the Mongols failed to carry out successfully during their height in the 13th century were against Japan (1281) and Egypt (1284). The death of Ogodei (not Temujin, better known as Genghis Khan) in 1241 is the only thing that saved Europe from a thorough sacking.

National governments often like to play up a heroic past for their country (we certainly do in the United States!) but the facts do not always back that up. :)

<sounds of Germany, Austria, and Russia slurping up Poland in CIV 4>

... :D

If Poland is in then Turkey and Hungarians should be there as well...

The cossack should properly be Poland's uu, and Russia should get the T-34 instead.
Cossaques originate from the Mongols and Russia was the first (or rather Muscovy) to make them serve someone other than Mongols. After the whole Cossaque thing spread further, but Russia always remained the key cossaque "power". Hussars are a good Polish UU.

I'm with Doc, this is simply not true. Every European army that stood and fought the Mongols was horribly slaughtered, from Kiev to Budapest. When a combined Polish/German army fought the Mongols at Liegnitz in 1241, they fared no better. The ONLY invasions that the Mongols failed to carry out successfully during their height in the 13th century were against Japan (1281) and Egypt (1284). The death of Ogodei (not Temujin, better known as Genghis Khan) in 1241 is the only thing that saved Europe from a thorough sacking.


thier was extensive discussion fo thsi exact topic soem time ago in the history sub forum of thsi website, and the over all conclusion puts the traditional assumption that the Mongols woudl have bowled over western europe on its head

1)unlike the rest of the world, Western europe had a highlly militarized society; in the area od Tuscany, thier are several Hundred Castles; this may not seem important at firs,t but bear in mind, the majority of western europe was similerlly fortified

2)fortifacatiosn are important because even in relitivlly empty eastern euopre, devoid compared to the west of any major fortifacations, it took the mongols months to Subdue a handful of Polish castles, from which reisistence to the Mongols was lead from; unlike the fortresses of the far east, which were centerd on towns, and towns being in area convient for large scale congragations of people (and armies), and ar easilly traveld to, and ironically, broken off fromt he rest of the world, castles were pure military installations, chosen exclusivlly for both thier strategic placement to command the surroundign countryside, and to be the maximum defensive strong point in that area

3)these two factors are quite important; if the mongols had ever launched a campaign agianst western europe. in a fashion similer to the resistence agianst the Turks, one could expect co-operations amoungst the powers to defeat them; however, more pressinglly, any attack on western europe woudl have to go agianst Hundreds of castles in the region, and all of them woudl have to be subdued why dop they have to be subdued? if they arnt, it leads handilly to the mongolians being massivlly outflanked, and more pressinglly, thier supply and re-inforcment routes being totally cut off; niether of which can occure for a successful military campaign to be conducted, and using the conquest of poland as an example, its takes a huge amount of time, effort, blood, sweat and tears ot subdue even a handful of them, spread over broad areas, and this is only in empty eastern europe; westner europe by contrast, is highlly militarized, filled with defensive positions where ever a lord happend to occupy an area; and considerign thatt all of europe was divdid into fuedal kingdoms (wit the notable exception of Venice, and a few other Italian republics, all of which still contained castles for thier strategic purposes anyway) this meant westenr euopre in its enititry; thiers no way the Mongols could have won; thier power base was simply to far away to get reinforcments in a timelly manner, the conquests in europe, unlike many areas, were actvilly unstable, and the simple fact that the hard conquest of eastenr european foprtresses woudl increse 10 fold in number, and in difficulty, as each castle was of a different design, thier were so many europeans coudl use as strategic strong holds, and reserves, and to top it off, western europe had a far better infastructure inwhich to finance wars, and thier basic supply was of a better quality then that in whgich eastern europe could muster.

thiers no way the mongols coudl have sacked all, most, or a goo dportian of westnern europe; its likelly thier nose woudl be too bloody to contiue after trying to lay siege to Germany and austria, and if not turned back thier, the even more fortified areas of Northern Italy and France certinally would

I tend to agree here; see, the Huns, Awars or Magyars were all beaten by Western Europe after initial success. And, once the Mongols faced the equally militarized Mameluks, they indeed got stuck.
Still, the Polish/Silesian forces for sure didn't suffice to in any way 'stop' the Mongols.
And anything else is a 'what if' scenario.