hi everyone
i want to say that when i looked at the nations that existed in civ 4 i realized that turks didint exist in the list. mali is in the list, inca is inthe list, spain is in the list and turks are not. in my opinion, this is absolutely ridicalous. turks formed the second long lived empire after the romans and 150 milion turks live troughout the world. what do you think about this??

An expansionciv?!

Some important civs are missing still like the Vikings but many of our missing civs will be in the expansion probably so we will see them in later :)

The Turks need to recognise Greek Cyprus to get in anywhere these days.

Shaka better be there overwise his ***kicking on civ IV will have to be delayed :(

This may be a fine time to get more creative with expansions...someone on here mentioned the idea of having a barbarian tribes expansion pack- i thought that clever-
a good way to get the Vikings, the Mongols the Celts (are the celts the same as the Gauls? or better asked- are the Gauls celtic?) the Huns the Goths ect. in the game and allow for a different way to play - ie no cities- u hafta take them or settle in enemy territory.
But as to the intial question- (which i think has been asked before) i agree- the Turks were more significant than many others included. In so far as Cyprus- that little island has been divided for quite some time now...its like ireland- the stronger country holds onto a chunk of it because ...it's stronger i suppose...

Why the Kurds are not in the CIV4 anyway?! :P

Come on, stop these stupid topics! If you want your civ in the game, send Firaxis a letter with an unbiased story of your nation and hope they include it in expansion! Ask them why they dont included it, etc, etc, make a good letter!

If you want to make this topic worth reading, please tell us about your nation, do not spam the forum!

Let's face it, the Turks are a minor civ, and always will be.

Let's face it, the Turks are a minor civ, and always will be.

you have made my day with that one. The Turks on Civ III (ottomans people!) were an incredible play for me. They assisted in my triumph of Emperor and i hope will help me along to deity in a couple of weeks.

My opinion is the Turks have never been a minor civ and never will be. quite the opposite to your opinion.

Facts about this 'Minor' civ
The Ottoman Empire (Turks) were an imperial power centered around the borders of the Mediterranean Sea that existed from 1281 (or 1299) to 1923(!). It was one of the largest empires of all times, and, at the height of its power, it included Anatolia, the Middle East, parts of North Africa, and much of south-eastern Europe(!).

May i ask who captured the city of Constantinople, the Byzantine Capital....Turks. Now i berlieve Modern Istanbul.

surly the above is enough to get into the game, but i believe 100% it will be in the Civ Series as it was Civ III

(are the celts the same as the Gauls? or better asked- are the Gauls celtic?)

Yes, Gauls are what the Romans called the Celts of what is now France. The Celts at their height spanned modern-day France, Spain, Switzerland, Austria, almost to the Black Sea. And of course the British Isles. The size of their "empire" almost rivals the later Roman one, though decentralised as they were you could hardly call it an empire. Anyone upset the Celts aren't in?

The ottomans didnt get into Civ3 until an expansion, the same will probably be true for Civ4.

Well there's Mongolia, and considering that the Gokturks, Ghuzz and Tunarian Turks all came from Mongolian tribes you have to consider their significance. The Gokturks are the invaders that caused China to build the Great Wall of China.

I say recognize the Republic of Cyprus and we can speak of adding the Turks on October 3rd. hehe

Well, that's probably the mistake of civIV. The Turks are a great 'European nation' (seige of Vienna, they are about to join the EU, major player in WWI, etc. - they're not european, but played in the same club), as well as a vital part of the islamic world (e.g. if you study at university islamic studies you have to learn Arab, Persian or Turkish - the first two civs are in the game, the turks not). Big mistake, but it's too late to change it now for civIV 'vanilla'.

m

Turks (or Ottomans) should have been a shoe-in for the vanilla version, hopefully we will see them in an expansion.

IMO I'd like to see the expansions have a geographical focus, the first up could possibly be a Near East expansion to include Turks, Sumerians, Phoenician/Carthaginians, and a few others.

(are the celts the same as the Gauls? or better asked- are the Gauls celtic?)

Yes, Celts are a name for a cultural phenomena extending over the whole of Europe, from Ireland to the Danube, before and during the Roman era. It would be mistaken to assume it's a racial or political denomination though, at least in that broad sense (Celtic Britons and Irish might be very interrelated, but they wouldn't be related to the Keltoi north of Greece from whence the name comes). It simply refers to a common culture shared by all the pre-Roman peoples of Europe, similar religious beliefs, art, warfare, dress, and so on.

Yes, Celts are a name for a cultural phenomena extending over the whole of Europe, from Ireland to the Danube, before and during the Roman era. It would be mistaken to assume it's a racial or political denomination though, at least in that broad sense (Celtic Britons and Irish might be very interrelated, but they wouldn't be related to the Keltoi north of Greece from whence the name comes). It simply refers to a common culture shared by all the pre-Roman peoples of Europe, similar religious beliefs, art, warfare, dress, and so on.


The Celts were a racial group, that moved into Europe at IIRC around 1200BC. Yes, as they moved in they mingled with the various indigenous people, they grew different, but at first they were basically the same. And they weren't all of Europe. They were from Switzerland, Germany(prior to German tribes emmigrating from their native lands in Scandinavia and pushing the Celts out) France, Northern Italy(Po Valley, Alps), Britain, Scotland, and Ireland, and parts of the Balkans after invasions which eventually left them in Thrace and Asia Minor.

This is the only way they can sell an expansion pack. Simply put, Firaxis needs more money.

Why the Kurds are not in the CIV4 anyway?! :P

Come on, stop these stupid topics! If you want your civ in the game, send Firaxis a letter with an unbiased story of your nation and hope they include it in expansion! Ask them why they dont included it, etc, etc, make a good letter!

If you want to make this topic worth reading, please tell us about your nation, do not spam the forum! Does anyone here need to learn anything about the Turks that they already not know? As if you don't know who they are... ;)

U think turkey should be in, I think Denmark should be in... and Afghans prolly think they should be in... dough! Stupid question. There will be 18 civs and I am sry to say - Turkey is simply not among the top 18...

U think turkey should be in, I think Denmark should be in... and Afghans prolly think they should be in... dough! Stupid question. There will be 18 civs and I am sry to say - Turkey is simply not among the top 18...According to which time period you made a top 18 list? Or is this an overall world Civilization Top 18? If so, maybe you'd reconsider the list given the most influential events in world history were triggered and/or influenced by the Turks.

A- Crusaders

B- End of Middle Ages

C- Bolshevik Revolution

I hope that Denmark is in an x-pack, since they werent in any of the civ games...
Infact if there are at least 35 civs in the final x-pack there can be a danish and a swedish civ.

I hope that Denmark is in an x-pack, since they werent in any of the civ games...
Infact if there are at least 35 civs in the final x-pack there can be a danish and a swedish civ.Is an x-pack already announced?

Is an x-pack already announced?

Will the sun rise tomorrow? If Civ4 sells well, which it doubtlessly will, then there will be an x-pack.

I hope that Denmark is in an x-pack, since they werent in any of the civ games...
Infact if there are at least 35 civs in the final x-pack there can be a danish and a swedish civ.

I DEMAND NORWAY!

The thing is, a lot of the factions people are wanting in are very minor, mainly only affecting the immediate region they live in at best. If I were to make a list of the top factions of the world, I'd say the Turks would be a major player in world history, as they along with their Mongol friends had a major effect on many parts of the world, Europe in particular.

I think that they were regarded as less important than the mongols, and somewhat similar, and so there would have been no need for two basically similar civs in the top 18. + the mongols are more known globally and were more of a threat at some time. That said:
a) there was an identical thread about turks less that a month ago here, and since that died out i dont see why a new one has to be around
b) since civ4 vanilla will not have turks it is pointless to start a discussion about their inclusion now.
c) what person X feels the most important civs are isnt important, and neither is an agreement between person X1 and X2. For someone from Denmark Denmark can easily be vastly more important than a turkish civ, and vica versa. (Also i would like to see the gold-nosed Tycho Brakhe in the game ;) )
d) we dont live in the 13th or 14th or 15th century. What a country is today does not change by what it was in the past.
e) you arent something better due to your country, and neither are you becomming something better due to your country when you are talking to someone from a different country. You are partly formed in complex ways by your environment, but you are not something more important for any foreigner than you are for some countryman of yours who happens to be of the same intellectual level of that foreigner.

Denmark? Denmark was at its most powerful at the tail end of the Viking era imo, when it was dominating the English. But it's only a little regional power even so. Turkey is major, they collapsed Byzantine, without doubt the most advanced state in medieval Europe, and went on to found the Ottoman Empire which was a major global power at its height.

Denmark and all the other little powers with some claim to historical fame can be covered in mods (or, better yet if the modding community gets really organized, in a set of themed expansions released as mods or add-ons right here on CFC. Dare to dream!)

Personally I think the best solution to all the little countries thing, is to have thematic mods or expansions that focus on different areas or epochs. Denmark would certainly be a major feature of a mod that focussed on Western Europe in the early medieval/late Dark Ages period.

the mongols collapsed china, does that mean that they can seriously be compared to china as an important civ? My point was that of the two the developers chose the mongols, and not the turks, which probably wasnt a bad choice either since the mongols had an effect in both europe and china.


later edit: nevermind, it is pointless.

I think that they were regarded as less important than the mongols, and somewhat similar, and so there would have been no need for two basically similar civs in the top 18. + the mongols are more known globally and were more of a threat at some time.

The rest of your quote is partially reasonable, although I would have to object to it too, but I am not in the mood to do this. just quickly the above statement is just plain wrong.
Ok, Turks and Mongols are in away similar. As similar as France and England or Germany. These three civs are practically the same culture, same scripture (latin alphabet), closely related languages and a good share of shared common history.
Besides this, the Turks have additionally the islamic aspect something the Mongols do not have. Thus said, they differ more from the mongols than the French or German do from the English. thus, according to your argumentation, we should take one of the three out and put the Turks in for them.

I know there is no sense to talk of this regarding civIV vanilla, but that is just a statement of HISTORY!

m

Or we could take it one step closer and say Romans and Greeks are the same culture, since they had same gods Zeus/Jupiter, Apollon, Artemis/Diana, Aphrodite/Venus etc. :) Most leaders known as Mongols were actually Turkish (like Timur) on the other hand. I was just trying to question the concept that these 18 initial civs were picked which is obviously not healthy or objective. As i mentioned above, Turks were the ones to trigger major events that shaped World history today:
Crusaders and End of Middle Ages as well as many other minor events that effected local geography. I could give you more specific examples if you feel curious about it. How many of the other 18 that was included had such a great influence?

If Ottomans (or turks) aren't in the expansion, i'll personally led an army to destroy Firaxis (joking). But please made the Turks Industrious and Religious (or Expansionist) and replace Spehi with Janissaries. The ottomans once ruled half of Europe, North Africa, middle east and central asia and they deserved a mention.

I also want Scandinavians in too. And the Iroquios (or another native americans) and the Zulus (or Kongo) and also either the Kushans, Polynesia, or South East Asians. If these demands aren't met, I won't buy civ5. This is not a threat. It's a promise.

The rest of your quote is partially reasonable, although I would have to object to it too, but I am not in the mood to do this. just quickly the above statement is just plain wrong.
Ok, Turks and Mongols are in away similar. As similar as France and England or Germany. These three civs are practically the same culture, same scripture (latin alphabet), closely related languages and a good share of shared common history.
Besides this, the Turks have additionally the islamic aspect something the Mongols do not have. Thus said, they differ more from the mongols than the French or German do from the English. thus, according to your argumentation, we should take one of the three out and put the Turks in for them.

I know there is no sense to talk of this regarding civIV vanilla, but that is just a statement of HISTORY!

m

i wrote "somewhat similar" for a reason.

Well, like the Anglos, Gauls, Celts, Vandals and Franks of Western Europe, the Seljuks of the Middle East distinguished themselves from the Tunarian Turks during the Arab Jihad of Persia.

Western Europe had the Christian wars between each others Churches, Bishops, and separatists. Out of this we got: Protestantism, Anglican, Lutherism and Roman Catholism all breaking away from the original One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.

The Seljuk Turks moved into areas of Northern Iraq and Anatolia and settled their during the Byzantine Roman times. Like the Byzantine Romans themselves, the Seljuks formed groups that rebelled against the Empire. Even Romans supported Seljuks in Anatolia, for the hope of creating less conservative, non-Theological laws. When the Arab Jihad successfully laid claim to the Byzantine cities of Alexandria, Amorium, Caesarea (Jerusalem), Philadelphia (Amman), Antiochia (Antioch), Seluecia (Baghdad), and so on, the Islamic Jihad offered assistance to the Seljuks. The first Seljuk revolts, like the first attacks from the Arabs on Alexandria were very unsuccessful. Only pillage and complete distruction brought about the environmental instability, for the various regions to fall to the Jihadist expansion.

Seljuks for most of their history were completely culturally identical to the Tunarian Turks of Central Asia (primarily: Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan). Both the Mongol and Gokturk rulers gave birth to the Turkish identity here in Central Asia (as it is first recorded). Seljuk Kings assisted the Jihadist movement for land, gold, and military protection and alliance. This lead to their victories in Anatolia, and lead to the battles in Persia against the Nestorian Christian Persians. Before Jihad, Nestorians were gaining power under the Syrian Orthodox Church at Antioch. Nestorians established a cultural capital at Nisibis (between Mosul and Tabriz).

In Persia, the Nestorians received aid from the Pagan Mongols, the Tunarian Turks and the Chinese against the Arabs. The Arabs almost faced defeat until they drafted the Seljuk Turks to assist them in Persia, in where Seljuks faced their past and brothers the Tunarians and Mongols. The Jihad smoothered all cultural growth in Nestorian Christianity and the prodominate religion in Persia at the time, Zoroastrianism.

Out of the 4 kingdoms in Seljuk Anatolia, Osman took advantage of the bickering between the kingdoms and conquered Anatolia thus grouping the Seljuks under one identity, the Ottomans. The Byzantine Romans saw these kingdoms under their empire as a strong threat, as they had now suffered military defeats in Anatolia to them. The Slavs had also gone so far as revolting as farmers and capturing Thessalonica in the region Macedonia.

The Byzantine Roman two strongest allies were the kingdoms of Venice and Genoa. Venica collaborated with the Norman Franks in Southern Italy, after the Normans seized Magna Graecia from the Byzantine Roman Empire. In the first attempt to capture Epiros at Dyrrachium, the Norman Franks continually failed. But when the Slavs took Thessalonica, the Byzantine Empire was divided in half. The Byzantine Romans that took Macedonia back, governed separately from the entire Empire. The Normans, Venetians, and Spaniards took Peloponessos and renamed it Morea. The Normans promised Venice safe passage for another assault on Epiros, and in this conflict the Byzantine Romans exposed the Venetians cooperation with the Normans. The Empire was split into Kingdoms, and left the Empire weak and exposed.

Greeks now only governed Epiros, Constantinople, Nicea and Pontus. The Greeks had temporarily captured the Kingdom of Thessalonica back from the Slavs, but it only lasted until the 4th Crusade.

Venetians remained in the Principality of Morea, the Duchacy of the Archipelagos (including Crete and Limnos), renamed Euboea as Negroponte and created the Kingdom of Cyprus.

Only the Empire of Nicea and the Despotate of Epiros had the military might to sustain the Byzantine Empire. And when the Empire of Constantinople trusted the alliance of the Norman Franks and Venetians against the Seljuk Turks in Anatolia, the Normans sacked Constantinople and left all of the Byzantine Empire in dissarray. Even after Constantinople was restored to the Greeks, the Seljuk Turks under Osman did not waste a minute. Acting like the British Empire, they saw the division and mistrust between the Empire/Kingdoms.

The Byzantine Empire was at a Civil War between groups catagorizied as the Latins and the Greeks. The Greeks hired mercenaries from the Catalan Grand Company (the Spanish) to fight the Latins (Norman Franks, Venetians). The Palaiologos (Greek) family restored the Byzantine Empire, in a weak state and Osman lead the Ottomans to Bursa and captured it. The Byzantine Empire and Ottoman Empire remained this way exposed to each other for 20 years of reorganizing and regrouping.

During these 20 years, Greeks and European Christians living in the first Ottoman Empire were organised as the "New Troops" of the Ottoman Armies. In Greek, Yeni Tscheri or in Latin, Janissaries were introduced to the Ottoman lines. Janissaries were a forced conscription averaging perhaps 1,000 young Christian boys per year, converted to the Islamic faith and subjected to rigorous training, but their benefits were also substantial.

The Ottomans heard that the Byzantine Emperor Andronikos III died in 1341, leaving only 9 year old John V Palaiologos to the throne. The cheif minister, John Kantakuzenos proclaimed himself Emperor from Adrianople, Thrace. Adrianople and Constantinople faced another civil war in Thrace. Kantakuzenos gave his daughter Theodora to Sultan Orkhan for alliance. This alliance prompter the Ottomans to cross the Hellespont and for the Serbian Czar Stephen Dushan to claim himself Emperor of the Serbs, Greeks, Albanians, and Bulgarians. He invaded and captured Macedonia from the Greeks, then Epiros fell.

Orkhan declared Kantakuzenos as the ruler of Byzantium, and joined an alliance with Venice, Genoa and the Latins.

1358 Orkan died.

1361, his son Murad declared Jihad, holy war, against the Byzantine infidels and captured Adrianople. Jihad faced the Crusades against the Serbians and Normans in Macedonia, Thessaly. After Murad's death, his son Bayezid I "the Thunderbolt" lost a major battle in the Kosovo plains against the Serbians. But turned to cut Constantinople off from the West, when John V's son Manuel took the throne. Bayezid took Morea and transported 30,000 Greeks into Asia and settled Turkomen and Tartar colonies on what was now Yunanistan.

Out of the Mongol and Tartar conquests of Central Asia, Armenia (Byzantine Empire) and Mesopotamia from the Arabs. Timur the Lame (aka Tamerlane), was not Islamic, he took Baghdad with the Mongols and turned to Ottoman Anatolia to face Bayezid. The two Empires fought in 1402 and Bayezid lost to Tamerlane near Angora (Byzantine: Ancyra). Timur looked no farther west. And Bayezid's son, Mehmed II, was determined to strengthen the Ottoman name. A frail, Crusade battered, and cut off from the West Constantinople was Mehmed II's first mission. As his father failed against Timur, he needed to show that the Ottomans would not fall like the Byzantines. Emperor Constantine XI Palaiologos went against the will of his people and turned to the Pope of Rome. On December 12, 1452 a special ceremony was held in Hagia Sophia to commemorate a reunification between the Churches. 1,700 Genoese troops were sent to Constantinople to defend it from Mehmed II's ambitions. The Turks attacked for 53 days, at the Byzantine double walls that surrounded the city all the way around into the depths of the Bosporus. And on May 29, 1453 the Turks infultrated the walls outnumbering the guards 10:1 and sacked and pillaged the city. Mehmed II ordered all Greek cities to be sacked if they tried to defend themselves from Ottoman rule. The seize of Constantinople for the Ottomans meant the Greeks were now subserviant to them Turks. Only Iannina, Epiros surrendered to Mehmed II. All other territories were captured. And the Knights of St. John in Rhodes lost to the Turks, yet the Sultan arrived and stopped the pillage of the island.

In 1489, the armies of Selim II invaded Venetian governed Cyprus. The Greek and Venetian defenders were slaughtered for punishment for their resistance.

As I am still researching the Ottoman expansion and defeat of the Byzantine Empire, I can realize and agree with historian statements that there would have not been any satisfaction if the Ottomans did not conquer the Byzantine Empire, as the Norman Franks, Venetians and other Latin groups conspired their own claims to Greek land.

I posted this history lesson, which is basically a paraphrased excerpt from books I have, to introduce the Ottomans. I think people post on here saying they want a Civ on the game yet dont have the insight to these Civs. I hope it was fun and interesting to read. :)

Or we could take it one step closer and say Romans and Greeks are the same culture, since they had same gods Zeus/Jupiter, Apollon, Artemis/Diana, Aphrodite/Venus etc.

this is false; the similarities, as they say, are only skin deep, and thier are substantial differences between the two religions. and culturally, the two ar emiles apart, unified by a common shared bond of artisitc values, and the philosophical mastry fo the greeks (which to be noted, is hared by be all civlization fo the west and near east, turks included once they settled down)

this is false; the similarities, as they say, are only skin deep, and thier are substantial differences between the two religions. and culturally, the two ar emiles apart, unified by a common shared bond of artisitc values, and the philosophical mastry fo the greeks (which to be noted, is hared by be all civlization fo the west and near east, turks included once they settled down)Of course there are certain differences, but my point was to underline similarities so as to point out how Turks should not be assumed included in the game under the Mongol umbrella. Turks (as in Western Oghuz nations like Seljuks, Memeluks, Ottomans, Safavids) and Mongols have way less in common than Romans and Greeks had.

Speaking of, this way or another, Turks will be included in the upcoming expansions, but i hope they don't name the civ Ottomans again. Ottomans are just one dynasty and it's not a nation. It would be as absurd as having Romanovs or Habsburgs as a nation. Ottomans and Habsburgs have nearly the same age about 650 years and simultaneous rule and rivalry in Europe. Habsburgs did everything within their power to destroy Ottomans but in the end they lost their throne a few years earlier. Turkey, Spain, Austria and Netherlands still survive today though, that's the good news... :)

And what do you think of the UU? Something new or classical? Janissaries and Spahis are already done. Horse Archers have also been overexposed. Ghazi units or Akindji (Akinci) horsemen are rather less known, but these two are kind of irregulars.
Levend is a fresh concept not seen in games before. Levends are the Ottoman equivalent for the marines. They were very useful in both naval and land battles as well as sieges. Equipped with no armor, light swords and pistols they were excellent seamen and formidable shock troops.

I think this may up my history grade for my GCSE's more than school will :) I'm actualy enjoying rteading this history, there must be something wrong with me :crazyeye: :nuke:

I think this may up my history grade for my GCSE's more than school will :) I'm actualy enjoying rteading this history, there must be something wrong with me :crazyeye: :nuke: Lol, that's how we all started getting addicted... :D

I should write history books huh? haha

Yes, Gauls are what the Romans called the Celts of what is now France. The Celts at their height spanned modern-day France, Spain, Switzerland, Austria, almost to the Black Sea. And of course the British Isles. The size of their "empire" almost rivals the later Roman one, though decentralised as they were you could hardly call it an empire.
They controlled Northern Italy too

The Gauls underwent genocide by the hands of the Roman Empire. When Rome pillaged this region the reports and documented data on this genocide is said to be the worst wide-spread genocide ever committed.

I was shocked that Turkey was not included in the game, but it's important to remember that Firaxis is going by Fun Factor and not level of historical importance. I'm sure they'll be among the first to the expansion pack.

A- Crusaders

B- End of Middle Ages

C- Bolshevik Revolution
I would not call the Crusades even one of the top 10 world events, but maybe it is my ignorance, what is so important about the crusades?

Had you asked me what is number one I would have said "the enclosures/ industrial revolution"

Personally I think the best solution to all the little countries thing, is to have thematic mods or expansions that focus on different areas or epochs.
I wrote the following hundreds of time but I am going to write it again: the best way is not to have tons of little mods, the best ways is to have a game that allows for all civs ever created to available for the epic game (even if the each single match will be able to host a limited number of civs)

I would not call the Crusades even one of the top 10 world events, but maybe it is my ignorance, what is so important about the crusades?

Had you asked me what is number one I would have said "the enclosures/ industrial revolution" Just like Alexander's conquests had resulted in a golden age for civilization at that time, Crusaders have also triggered a wake up from the Dark Ages for the European nations. Unfortuantely for the Islamic civilization it was another story since they were victimized both by the Crusaders and Mongolians they took refuge in fundamentalism and the culture of tolerance came to an ideologic end.
To understand todays conflicts, you have to look back on Crusaders and their impact on modern world.

I would not call the Crusades even one of the top 10 world events

Would disagree. The current situation on the Middle East was created in the time of the Crusades. Whatever it looks now from the surface point of view, the deeper reasons there still lay within the three-sides religious confrontation in the region.
And the Middle East problem is that main knot of the currenct political situation in the world throughout the XXth century and to our days.

the most influential events in world history were triggered and/or influenced by the Turks.

(..)

C- Bolshevik Revolution

Never knew Lenin was a Turk :lol:

U think turkey should be in, I think Denmark should be in... and Afghans prolly think they should be in... dough! Stupid question. There will be 18 civs and I am sry to say - Turkey is simply not among the top 18...
I guess that u were not very succesful in your history classes, what the hell denmark achieved throughout history?? were u ever an imperial power?? did u ever achieved anything significant, except pillaging the shores of britain, france and germany. come on be more clever...

Never knew Lenin was a Turk :lol:
did u ever heard about the war of gallipoli in which 200.000 Turks and 200.000 Anzacs fought and died. the battle ended with a turkish victory and the allies couldnt take istanbul and the bosphorus adn as a result of this they coulnt help the mensheviks...

[QUOTE=Gr3yL3gion]...As I am still researching the Ottoman expansion and defeat of the Byzantine Empire, I can realize and agree with historian statements that there would have not been any satisfaction if the Ottomans did not conquer the Byzantine Empire, as the Norman Franks, Venetians and other Latin groups conspired their own claims to Greek land.

I posted this history lesson, which is basically a paraphrased excerpt from books I have, to introduce the Ottomans. I think people post on here saying they want a Civ on the game yet dont have the insight to these Civs. I hope it was fun and interesting to read.


It is so nice to be interested in history though you must judge history objectively if you dont u turn out to be a facsist. If ottotmans were cruel invaders, blood thirsty monsters, they couldnt control all of balkans - including Greece-for 400 years. u can build an empire on horse but u cannot control and rule it on horse. I guess that 600 years is enough time to accept turkish imperial superiority. By the way the greeks have given many things to civilization but your golden age have long past, and i guess u are not even a shadow of your former glory..

By the way the greeks have given many things to civilization but your golden age have long past, and i guess u are not even a shadow of your former glory..


You too today arent even a shadow of your (a lot more recent, and arguably less significant than ancient greece's) former glory either, so what?
greece is in the game due to ancient greece (byzantine could have counted too, but the ancient era was enough anyway) and not due to modern, and likewise turkey would be in (if it had been in civ4 vanilla) due to the ottoman era and not due to turkey today.

dont use the thread to troll.

oh my gawd...why do these threads keep going. who cares about who did what when....you cant take out any civ without causeing more uproar or unbalancing the game from the 18 to make room for turkey or the ottomans...now id love for them to be in the expansion..but lets stop this nonsense "well their better than you" crap....geeze :suicide:

why do these threads keep going. who cares about who did what when

To quote just that bit by your super :)

if noone knew who did what when you wouldnt remember anything....ANYTHING!

On a serious note i gotta say the Ottomans are in my view my favourite Empire of the Middle east of all time maybe drawing with the Persian Empire and because if this i found out about both of them and they are brilliant to read about. The Amazing stuff they did is very interesting and i advise people to found out about them otherwise your knowledge of 1200's - 1920's is missing quite a bit :P

Greece HAS to be in the game as its what i call a classic civ. Same goes for Rome. *England, America, France, Germany amd Russia* (WW1+2 and dominant after the Roman Empire) and also other civs like Japan, China and Korea (Dynasty's of such and legendary Samurai etc.) AMONG OTHERS for those who may add more, please dont :P

All these Civs are basic and general knowledge and i think Turks actually are not because i has to read up on them to get my first taste of them. Turkey may of done all that amazing stuff but not a lot of people know about it, therefore historical importance doesnt come first its popularity because the people (epically outside of civfanatics) wanna see the civs they know about rather than civs they havnt heard of or have no idea what they have done in the past.

If we did it all by Historical Importance i would say Serbia & Austria-Hungary should be in there as they praticaly started WW1 and killed millions of people. Although this wont happen and i am glad for that and glad you see those classic civs there instead.

i let my emotions run a tad over...personaly..im very into history ..and i enjoy learning about turks and other nations..but ive heard all of this info in about 70 other threads in this very forum...we are ultimitly talking about a game...and thats it...people start getting caried away about there cultures great achievements compared to civs in the game. it just gets redundent...id love to see the turks in civ4 but at what cost...theres really none of the 18 you can remove...be it for marketing..appeasement...or just to have repersentation(mali=africa) hopefully they will make it in an expansion..pretty sure they will..but these threads get soo ugly and sooo worn out...and what does it acomplish..not much...maybe elevated blood pressure..

the main thing to remember is these civ are chosen based on marketing,appeasment,reconizable names,and region repersentation...its a game about "what ifs" more the "what was"...please try to remember that all..

I love it how most of these champions use the same set of arguments to justify their claims, then attack people for not accepting those arguments.

"Country X beat (clearly superior) Country Y in a battle, that makes Country X good enough! It's a travesty!" -- One battle, maybe two, and usually one in which the inferior nation got lucky!

"Country X had an empire that controlled two farms in land Z, that makes Country X good enough!" -- It's not landmass that counts.

"Because of Country X, your people would never have had event A occur, which caused event B!" -- that one's really grasping at straws.

"Country X has a superior culture because it invented Dance F and believes in Religion D." -- a highly subjective claim with no real basis in fact.

Give me a break. There's a reason why the Ottoman Empire was called "The Sick Man of Europe", and there's also a reason why the Ottomans were able to take over Turkey. Think about it.

Besides, this is a GAME. This is a game that can be MODIFIED. This argument is senseless, and for the creator of this thread to push his agenda in the manner he has been is both naive and mean spirited.

The Gauls underwent genocide by the hands of the Roman Empire. When Rome pillaged this region the reports and documented data on this genocide is said to be the worst wide-spread genocide ever committed.


Huh? What documents are you referring to? The Romans put down resistance brutally, burning conquered towns that continued to resist, but they did not commit genocide in Gaul nor was it the "worst widespread ever". I don't know what documents you're referring to. The Gauls continued to live in Gaul after they were conquered, taking on Roman culture and becoming Romanized provincials.

Huh? What documents are you referring to? The Romans put down resistance brutally, burning conquered towns that continued to resist, but they did not commit genocide in Gaul nor was it the "worst widespread ever". I don't know what documents you're referring to. The Gauls continued to live in Gaul after they were conquered, taking on Roman culture and becoming Romanized provincials.
the pompaii world new reports...and you cant forget the commision on gaul(roman senate case#1423-154) just kidding of course..the thing we have to remember about that early of a history..is that no one really knows...

[QUOTE=varwnos]You too today arent even a shadow of your (a lot more recent, and arguably less significant than ancient greece's) former glory either, so what?

i dont want to argue but this is a wrong statement.

modern turkey gave the world's first anti imperialist war.we know someone call ataturk as murderer for his achivements.yes he is a murderer who gave women political rights and turkey had the world's first female supreme court justice. ;)

modern turkey have a 9th military force in the modern world.(first six nations have nukes as we all know)

modern turkey ranked 17th in population if we dont remember other turkic people.

modern turkey has an unstoppable economical growth.last year turkey has the best economical growth even better than china.

european union fears modern turkey. reason1;
Turkey's large political power once in the Union. Its almost 70 million inhabitants will bestow it the second largest number of representatives in the European Parliament, after Germany. With the current rate of population increase some fear it might even surpass Germany by the time of accession.(wikipedia)

reason2;possible muslim migration to europe.as some of them defines muslims as terorists.they dont know turkey has seperated mosque and state before(not from all of them)they seperated church and state.

reason3;cultural and religious things are small reasons of course in the modern world.

however european union knows if they want to challenge with america and china they need modern turkey and ukraine. :)

(sorry for my english)

You should stop thinking that you=turkey. You=you, with your abilities, and your problems on the other hand, your strong and weak points. Do not render yourself effectively braindead by pushing everything to the side for a belief that your country is somehow part of yourself. Such thinking is simply childish.

i originally commented also on your fashination with big armies. Witha bit of logic you could realise that it is at least backward. As for the other clear fashination with country sizes: you better not hear what it can be linked to :lol:

Turkey is part of Asia and is Oriental by culture! It does not belong to Europe and to the EU. Forgive me, Attaturk, but your deeds are not enough! Although Istanbul is a modern city with modern people, most of the country is not!

wow if that wasnt trolling i dont know what is...and by the way..go to yahoo...search for the "world fact book" ..its a cia public report on countries...and read about the military..you may find it suprising

It looks like the fate of Cyprus is going to be decided right here, at CivFanatics.

It will be interesting to see how the relationship between the EU and Turkey evolves over the next decade.

wow if that wasnt trolling i dont know what is...and by the way..go to yahoo...search for the "world fact book" ..its a cia public report on countries...and read about the military..you may find it suprising On a second note, CIA "World Fact Book" is not really a good source. It gives the elementary basics from a skin deep, biased American high school graduate level. I don't expect CIA to publish online their proper country analyzes for obvious reasons.

OK, I have read 1/2 post, maybe I repeat was someone said.
Not exactly on this thread: The civs are already finished. Don't start useless "I want my country in the game because we are the best civ of all time!" C'mon
On topic: Turks, altough great, are for the x-pack. Probably the 1st. The Babs are out! I hope they will be in the first x-pack, but it may be the second. It is not in the category of the "all obvious civ", including one of the forgottens: Babylon (or any Mesopotamia civ). The Ottomans have high chances of being in the 1st x-pack, but I would have been surprised to see them in the original game.

Returning to the Issue of turks in the game. Especially if one is including as the Turks the vast central asian people groups (ie having a civ that is the 'Turks' and not 'Ottomans' or 'Turkey') I would consider them something that should be added in the 20-30 range (earlier if the Mongols are not in to fill that area)

A Specific 'Ottomans' I'd have in the 20-40 range, 'Turkey' as seperate from the Ottomans or Turks in general in the 70+ range (although for 'the Turks' Attaturk would be one of the top few candidates for leader if 'Turkey' wasn't in the game)

From this point on this thread will get back to normal or it will get closed. I've deleted some of the posts which do not fit (and that includes moderator discussion).

Returning to the Issue of turks in the game. Especially if one is including as the Turks the vast central asian people groups (ie having a civ that is the 'Turks' and not 'Ottomans' or 'Turkey') I would consider them something that should be added in the 20-30 range (earlier if the Mongols are not in to fill that area)

A Specific 'Ottomans' I'd have in the 20-40 range, 'Turkey' as seperate from the Ottomans or Turks in general in the 70+ range (although for 'the Turks' Attaturk would be one of the top few candidates for leader if 'Turkey' wasn't in the game) What is your reasoning behind putting Turkey/Ottoman in the 20-30 or 40 or 70+ range?

How many of your top 20 have been at ANY given time in history a superpower? What is your criteria about defining a superpower?

hi everyone
i want to say that when i looked at the nations that existed in civ 4 i realized that turks didint exist in the list. mali is in the list, inca is inthe list, spain is in the list and turks are not. in my opinion, this is absolutely ridicalous. turks formed the second long lived empire after the romans and 150 milion turks live troughout the world. what do you think about this??

Mali and Incas did alot more than the Turks. Turks did have there thing but people who tend to put down these are just ignorant of their histories and all the things they actually did

Mali and Incas did alot more than the Turks. As in what exactly? Can you be a little specific? What would you consider a lot? What is their impact in world civilization history?

As in what exactly? Can you be a little specific? What would you consider a lot? What is their impact in world civilization history?
Well this brings up an important issue. What defines a good civ and what makes a civ better than another. Its like this civ builded a mountain but that civ sailed around the world twice. Its like comparing apples and oranges at times. I know more about ottoman history than native american history but I do know that Turks are not on the same level as Incas or Mali.
some quick things on both these civs
Mali:
-Caravan routes have passed through Mali since 2300 B.C.
-The Malinke Empire ruled regions of Mali from the 12th to the 16th century
-the Songhai Empire reigned over the Timbuktu-Gao region in the 15th century
-The Mali region has been the seat of extensive empires and kingdoms, notably those of Ghana (2nd–11th cent.), Mali, and Gao
-The medieval empire of Mali was a powerful state and one of the world's chief gold suppliersunder Mansa (Emperor) Musa (reigned c.1312–1337), who made a famous pilgrimage to Mecca in 1324 laden with gold and slaves to proclaim Mali's prosperity and power. During his rule Muslim scholarship reached new heights in Mali, and such cities as Timbuktu and Djenné (Jenne) became important centers of trade, learning, and culture.
-formed a succession of Sahelian kingdom
-Sundiata's grandnephew, Mansa Kankan Musa I or Musa I, ruled over the Mali Empire while it was the source of almost half the world's gold. Musa was a devoted Muslim and Islamic scholarship flourished under his rule. With Musa as a benefactor, Sankore University in Timbuktu reached its height. Craftsmen and Islamic scholars came from all over the Muslim world to receive a free education at Sankore's guilds and madrasas. Musa is most famous for his hajj in 1324. On his pilgrimage to Mecca, Musa gave gold away generously. When he passed through Cairo, he gave out so much gold that the value of the commodity didn't recover for at least 12 years. Musa was so generous that he ran out of money and had to take out a loan to be able to afford the journey home. Musa's hajj, and especially his gold, caught the attention of both the Islamic and Christian worlds.

The famous Moroccan traveller ibn Battuta visited the Mali Empire in the years 1352 and 1353, and his account is an important first-hand written description of this empire Mali Empire was an Islamic Empire of the Mandinka people in West Africa from the 14th to 17th centuries. The empire was founded by the king, or Mansa, Sundiata Keita, was famous for the generosity and wealth of Mansa Kankan Musa I, and for the fabled wealth of the city of Timbuktu
More on inca in next post
-
-

-Without paper or a system of writing, the architects and master masons who designed and supervised the construction of public buildings and engineering works in such cities as Machu Picchu and the fortress of Sacsahuamán built clay models and, in actual construction, employed sliding scales, plumb bobs, and bronze and stone tools. Without wheeled vehicles for transport, the huge polygonal stone blocks for fortress, palace, temple, and storehouse were emplaced by ramp and rollers and were fitted with extraordinary precision. Wall corners were always carefully bonded. Adobe bricks and plaster were common, especially along the coastal desert. Buildings were usually of one story
-One of the most remarkable evidences of Inca engineering skill was an elaborate network of roads, which in many places still survives. Streams were crossed by a log or stone bridge, placid rivers by balsa ferry or pontoon bridge, and chasms by a breeches-buoy contrivance or by a suspension bridge that might be as much as 200 ft (60 m) long. Road sections were maintained by the nearest village, as were the shelters and military storehouses that were spaced a day's travel apart; a village also supplied messengers for its sector. These men, serving 15-day shifts, relayed messages about every mile. About 150 mi (240 km) could be covered daily, a distance that later took the Spanish colonial post 12 to 13 days to cover
This just shows that the Inca were more advanced in enginering, geographical navigation and road building than europeans who were very advanced peoples
-The stone temples constructed by the Inca used a mortarless construction process first used on a large scale by the Tiwanaku. The Inca imported the stoneworkers of the Tiwanaku region to Cusco when they conquered the lands south of Lake Titicaca. The rocks used in construction were sculpted to fit together exactly by repeatedly lowering a rock onto another and carving away any sections on the lower rock where the dust was compressed. The tight fit and the concavity on the lower rocks made them extraordinarily stable in the frequent earthquakes that strike the area. The Inca used straight walls except on important religious sites and constructed whole towns at once
-Like many other civilzation Incas didn't develope literarcy so besides the physical aspect of raods and vasta mounts of gold we know not much about them. We do know they had complex social systems though

And aside from both of them having vast amount of gold resources (which is random geographical), what was their impact in world civilization history? And can you please try to compare them to Turkish civilization in those aspects?

if they had included all the civs in vanilla version they wouldnt have any room for the exciting,interesting new civs for x-pack.

seems like creative assembly(medieval total war) and microsoft(age of empires) likes turkish players more than firaxis :)

if they had included all the civs in vanilla version they wouldnt have any room for the exciting,interesting new civs for x-pack.

seems like creative assembly(medieval total war) and microsoft(age of empires) likes turkish players more than firaxis :) It's still sad when you think about the fact that the Lead Programmer of Civ 4 is Turkish himself.

I would love Kemil Ataturk and Pasha to be in for Modern Turkey, maybe a scenario, and Greeks could have Venezelos and King Constantine I. And Yugoslavia with Marshall Tito. It would be quite interesting to see this WW1 scenario slash Balkan Wars with the League of Nations negotiating peace accords.

I dont care so much that the Turks didnt make it. I am just happy the Greeks are there. Im hoping that there is a second leaderhead for the Greeks.

You should stop thinking that you=turkey. You=you, with your abilities, and your problems on the other hand, your strong and weak points. Do not render yourself effectively braindead by pushing everything to the side for a belief that your country is somehow part of yourself. Such thinking is simply childish.

i originally commented also on your fashination with big armies. Witha bit of logic you could realise that it is at least backward. As for the other clear fashination with country sizes: you better not hear what it can be linked to :lol:

i answered to your entry before but then i saw it was removed under a moderator action.but i have to repeat again that i expected better answers at least about my comments than trying to give advises.

i have to add that if anybody wouldnt take himself as a part of his country turkey couldnt resist frank's,england's,italian and their strategic pawn;greek's attacks and win their independence war(first anti imperialist war).when the last sultan vahideddin of ottomans began negotiations with england to become a colony of england for surviving from the attacks.MUSTAFA KEMAL ATATURK(NOT KİMEL OR ATTATURK) came and united the people of anatolia and win this epic war.he formed the Republic of Turkey.his achievements impressed many great leaders after.

also;considering number of troops turkey ranked 7th military force.but in overall turkey ranked 9th military force in the world.and country sizes are important things for countries.

and although i see megola idea(great greece) simply childish i also see turanism(uniting turkic peoples) childish and pathetic ideals.

i will play civ4 of course but also wait for x-pack.i guess i will choose between ataturk and sultan mehmet the conqueror or maybe suleiman the magnificent(sultan of ottomans at the height of its power).

dont hold your breath waiting for a reply.

also;considering number of troops turkey ranked 7th military force.but in overall turkey ranked 9th military force in the world.and country sizes are important things for countries. Do you have a link for this? ...would be fun just to compare different countries...
When it comes to spending money - from CIA factbook - http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2067rank.html

1 United States $ 370,700,000,000 March 2003
2 China $ 67,490,000,000 2004
3 Japan $ 45,841,000,000 2004
4 France $ 45,238,100,000 2003
5 United Kingdom $ 42,836,500,000 2003
6 Germany $ 35,063,000,000 2003
7 Italy $ 28,182,800,000 2003
8 Saudi Arabia $ 18,000,000,000 2002
9 India $ 16,970,000,000 2004
10 Australia $ 16,650,000,000 2004
11 Korea, South $ 16,180,000,000 2004
12 Turkey $ 12,155,000,000 2003
13 Brazil $ 11,000,000,000 2004
14 Spain $ 9,906,500,000 2003
15 Canada $ 9,801,700,000 2003
16 Netherlands $ 9,408,000,000 2004
17 Israel $ 9,110,000,000 FY03

Edit: Russia and perhaps some other countries are not included, because of "Countries for which no information is available are not included in this list."

the important thing is the percentage of GPD to military issues for countries.north korea spends %20-25 of their money to military and ahead of turkey.greece also a strong country with good military.they need a strong navy than foot soldiers for their agean sea position.(although they have a strong navy)

modernisations and productivity problems also affects the spended money in a period of 3-5 years.
and i think we cannot completely trust any web site.some stables may be changed to military camp before web sites edit the articles.:)

however (wikipedia) and jane's defence (magazine) can be more trusted.

Ok, we need to go to the core issue here. Lets all cool down :) It's just a pity we need to discuss it right here. To cut the long story short, this is not even a useful thread anymore as Turkey is not in. It's an injustice but who cares, it's a game after all and everyone knows that it will either be in the first expansion or modded right away. Others here claiming turks to be inferior: go back to elementary school, then to highschool; then to college; then hit your head once very hard; repeat step 1. :)

that's just stupidity and racism and no decent human (%99 of this forum) would look nice upon such ideas. We are all equal, nation wise, and humanity wise, some nations happened to be luckier than others to be in the right place in the right time. :)

As per Firaxis, they will add Turks hopefully in the first available option. I personally bought Civ III only after the release of Play the World, but since i'm a dire fan since Civilization (the original) i'm more likely to buy it at the first release this time since i'm getting better at modding. Now everyone go kiss eachother and keep playing nicely :D

As I said before, it is a scam. They leave out the Turks and Babylonians to FORCE us to buy the expansions. I'll probably add these among other civs, but many users just play the game and don't even know there are people online talking about the game. This is WHY the Turks are not in the game. Do they DESERVE to be in the game? That is up to each individual's opinion. Personally, I'm one of those: "Turks, as in Central Asia plus Ottomans and such, should be top 18".

What is your reasoning behind putting Turkey/Ottoman in the 20-30 or 40 or 70+ range?

How many of your top 20 have been at ANY given time in history a superpower? What is your criteria about defining a superpower?

Because you

1. need some degree of geographical balance

2. All of the top 20 have been super powers in the 'mid-continental sense' ie dominant influence over say 10-20 mill square km with the exception possibly of Egypt (and I'd include Babylon), but they have the excuse of being really ancient civs, and some of the American Civs which get in there for geographic balance... In terms of a Modern superpower (dominant influence over the globe) there have probably been a total of 10 or less in all of history.

I'd say that its only once you get to 30 that you start running out of 'superpowers' ie all superpowers need to be in by 30 (which is why I put the Turks in the 20-30 range) their problem is they are in a crowded position already, which pushes them to later in the list. (I'd also say they lose out because they really peaked in the late Middle Ages and Ancient peaking or Strongly significant Modern Civs are probably the bigger market (ie did everyone hear a lot about it in
a-their history book...the more ancient the Civ the more widespread discussion of it. (Rome, Greece, Egypt, Babylon...probably Persia)
b-the newspaper/their parents (this gives us ..US, Russia, England, France, Germany, Japan, China, and India..some of the last also get points under Ancientness)

Then throw in some for geographical balance...Africa, America, Throw in Mongols for being the people Most successful at a land war in Asia, and that's when it starts getting really hard because there a a Large number of really good candidates for those next positions, and because they went for 18 civs, Turks weren't one of the lucky lottery winners.

(Ottomans are the best Single representative of the turks, which is why they could substitute, at a fairly low level... Turkey itself going in at that later point was assuming you already had the Turks or the Ottomans and you're getting to the point of adding in things like North And South Korea, the Confederacy, Texas, in other words all sorts of minor political divisions and changes

How can the turks doesnt exist in the game??

------

Got the same question about the Catalans, who also fighted the Turks...

Because you

1. need some degree of geographical balance

2. All of the top 20 have been super powers in the 'mid-continental sense' ie dominant influence over say 10-20 mill square km with the exception possibly of Egypt (and I'd include Babylon), but they have the excuse of being really ancient civs, and some of the American Civs which get in there for geographic balance... In terms of a Modern superpower (dominant influence over the globe) there have probably been a total of 10 or less in all of history.

I'd say that its only once you get to 30 that you start running out of 'superpowers' ie all superpowers need to be in by 30 (which is why I put the Turks in the 20-30 range) their problem is they are in a crowded position already, which pushes them to later in the list. (I'd also say they lose out because they really peaked in the late Middle Ages and Ancient peaking or Strongly significant Modern Civs are probably the bigger market (ie did everyone hear a lot about it in
a-their history book...the more ancient the Civ the more widespread discussion of it. (Rome, Greece, Egypt, Babylon...probably Persia)
b-the newspaper/their parents (this gives us ..US, Russia, England, France, Germany, Japan, China, and India..some of the last also get points under Ancientness)

Then throw in some for geographical balance...Africa, America, Throw in Mongols for being the people Most successful at a land war in Asia, and that's when it starts getting really hard because there a a Large number of really good candidates for those next positions, and because they went for 18 civs, Turks weren't one of the lucky lottery winners.

(Ottomans are the best Single representative of the turks, which is why they could substitute, at a fairly low level... Turkey itself going in at that later point was assuming you already had the Turks or the Ottomans and you're getting to the point of adding in things like North And South Korea, the Confederacy, Texas, in other words all sorts of minor political divisions and changes I don't agree with you, but you have excellent reasoning skills.

And aside from both of them having vast amount of gold resources (which is random geographical), what was their impact in world civilization history? And can you please try to compare them to Turkish civilization in those aspects?

No matter what civ you say someone else can say they didn't have a world impact. There will always be some part of the world that was not affected by one civ or another. Up until the world wars america was an isolationist country does this mean they had no historic impact before then. No. What counts is affecting the world around you or known to you. In the case of the Incas they were not a long lasting civilzation because of the spainsh conquest but if you come from central or south america it is a very sigificant empire for you. In my opinion I think the mayans should be in the place of the incas. Plus I don't think the incas are and 18 civ. Mansa (Emperor) Musa (reigned c.1312–1337), who made a famous pilgrimage to Mecca in 1324 laden with gold and slaves to proclaim Mali's prosperity and power. During his rule Muslim scholarship reached new heights in Mali, and such cities as Timbuktu and Djenné (Jenne) became important centers of trade, learning, and culture. Obviously at the height of its empire place like timbuktu were important and wealthy cities that had historical impact. They paved the way for other west african civs that came after them. This civ was very important because it was basically the richest civ at it time. The only reason why it didn't take over more places was because it would be impractible at this time in history to have militaries cross and colinze places over the vast desert regions which are the biggest in the world. Does it affect europe much. Not really. But it had a big impact on asia, african and middle eastern nations which basically all the countries that it new. So yes they had influence on world history at their time.

might be true there- Rome for all it's glory never had much impact on China.
Vikings never settled Australia. Maybe America is the one civ that has world wide impact.
("how can the turks doesn't exsist in the game"...lol kasmasnou)

might be true there- Rome for all it's glory never had much impact on China.
Vikings never settled Australia. Maybe America is the one civ that has world wide impact.
And Sweden - You must have heard ABBA.. :p

yes- i heard their SOS and i am in the sticks of the U.S

might be true there- Rome for all it's glory never had much impact on China.
Vikings never settled Australia. Maybe America is the one civ that has world wide impact.
("how can the turks doesn't exsist in the game"...lol kasmasnou)
This is exactly my point. Up until the 1400 powerful civs were genrally spread out and had more of a regional affect than a world wide effect. Any civ you can name did not effect some person in some place so it is hard to talk about global impact like that

Crusaders had a global impact.

Not on the Mayans, or Japanese, or Aborigines.

Crusaders had a global impact.
Like the other guy said. Also what impact did crusaders have on the zulu or polynesians. I thought so. No one civlization has affected every other civlization up until recently where globilazation has effected shrunk the world

The turk are a good civilization and reasonable but they aren't going to replace the original 18. I do however think that the turks is a reasonable suggestion.

People here are either in denial because of their shallowness or ignorance. No one here makes a good reasoning why a superpower for several hundred years is considered out of first 18 while you are giving examples as to Crusaders impact on Aborigins. You are simply going around the question instead of looking it right into the eye.

might be true there- Rome for all it's glory never had much impact on China.
Vikings never settled Australia. Maybe America is the one civ that has world wide impact.
("how can the turks doesn't exsist in the game"...lol kasmasnou)

I disagree. Rome had the Silk Road. And especially Eastern Rome or the Byzantine Empire functioned between Chinese Dynasties and Rome, Italy.

The Vikings as the Danes had given their name to the Moari island: Zealand. New Zealand and Australia have obiously been affected by the Vikings in their later years. Even Constantinople hired Vikings that travelled the rivers through the Frontier (better known as: the Ukraine). Vikings were hired to guard Byzantine Cities.

In a sense, many other civilizations have had world impact. The largest being Germany, Britain, United States, France, Portugual and Spain. After that the Dutch, Romans, Greeks and Russians. The problem with Turkish global infuence is that most people relate to the Roman Empires. So by a natural reaction, Turks are disliked naturally for ending what Westerners saw as their greatest moments. The only global Turkish influence was the Ottoman Empire, while other Turkish Kingdoms and conquests were large, they did not effect the world the way that the Ottoman rulers did.

I think the reason why they leaft out the Turks (and the babylonians for example too) is the commercial one. But that in turn would not explain why they didn't consider Korea... :)

mfG mitsho

PS: I know that there are many many turks in the world who would prefer to be able to play with the Turks. But the point probably is that civ 1-3 didn't sell top with those 'ethnicities'.

I disagree. Rome had the Silk Road. And especially Eastern Rome or the Byzantine Empire functioned between Chinese Dynasties and Rome, Italy.

The Vikings as the Danes had given their name to the Moari island: Zealand. New Zealand and Australia have obiously been affected by the Vikings in their later years. Even Constantinople hired Vikings that travelled the rivers through the Frontier (better known as: the Ukraine). Vikings were hired to guard Byzantine Cities.

In a sense, many other civilizations have had world impact. The largest being Germany, Britain, United States, France, Portugual and Spain. After that the Dutch, Romans, Greeks and Russians. The problem with Turkish global infuence is that most people relate to the Roman Empires. So by a natural reaction, Turks are disliked naturally for ending what Westerners saw as their greatest moments. The only global Turkish influence was the Ottoman Empire, while other Turkish Kingdoms and conquests were large, they did not effect the world the way that the Ottoman rulers did.

We already been through the fact that there is no such thing as direct world impact until very recently. Portugal had little affect even in europe

Turks,Turks,Turks.Something reminds me that word.................Ooou i rememember.My favorite neibords.They really aren't in Civ4;Probably because they mean nothing for the world history.

Hellas before yuo yuo say that first yuo look yuor history. Whihch thing the ortodoxs greeks (they are not not ancient greeks ) give the history : First yuo look yuor history.
I realy dont understand why turks isnt in civ 4.
ı see no reason to do it.
Turks are the 4000 years in history.
But if we look France when it start at the years 350-400 so which one is bigger culture or civizilation???
Civ4 builders must do turks on orginal game.
If they dony do it i will see them They are against Turks.

Put me down for saying the Turks belong -- I think they are one of the most important in history. They were a key power from the 11th century to about the mid 18th -- and a world power of greatest proportions in the middle.

I'm an American, and lived my whole life in the USA, but I'd put the Turks ahead of the US, for instance (and a few others on the list).

I also don't think you can put the Turks in with the Mongols. At their height, the Turks were a world leader, if not hte world leader, in science, literature, etc. The Mongols excelled at Military Science but were never a cultural power. The Turks were a superpower in every sence of the word.


Best wishes,


Breunor

Hellas before yuo yuo say that first yuo look yuor history. Whihch thing the ortodoxs greeks (they are not not ancient greeks ) give the history : First yuo look yuor history.
I realy dont understand why turks isnt in civ 4.
ı see no reason to do it.
Turks are the 4000 years in history.
But if we look France when it start at the years 350-400 so which one is bigger culture or civizilation???
Civ4 builders must do turks on orginal game.
If they dony do it i will see them They are against Turks.


:lol: Good joke my friend.The Turks have 600 gears history and before that they named as Mogolians.The Mogolians traibe slave the free nations of Turkey in one nation.

But the Greeks exist from the beging of the humans.And they managed to survive until today and make three empire.The first when they defeat Atlandians,the second of the Great Alexander and the third whith Byzantium.The greeks history isn't only the history of orthodoks(who dissolve the Othoman empire)dut all history of the nation of Greeks.We as the Turks believe in our God but we aren't fanatics as them with the religion.So ours ancient Greeks are the same orthodoks Greeks.And Greek never dies.

I don't think you guys are real.

Portugual had a great impact on Europe. In the British-Spanish Wars, WW1 and 2. And the fact that Portugual was the first to introduce gunpowder in Japan and is the cultural influence over the creation of Brazil. Portugual is not only a western power within Europe, it is one among the world.

The kingdoms within the superpower of a unified Turkish Empire (which I assume is the Ottoman Empire seeing as the others were not unified), did survive because of Turkish rule. Where do we carry Turkish laws, language, and political thought? Not even the kingdoms within the Ottoman Empire look to Turkification as their identity. They did gather respect for each other's cultures, food, and clothing; but militarily and social interaction was most clearly as inspirational as placing two magnets together of the same negative or positive ends. Which Ottoman Kingdoms today, of those that even survived the Ottoman collapse, call themselves Turks. Turcomen (from Turkmenistan) and Anatolian Turks. I bring this up not say that the Turks had nothing to offer us, because they had much, but there empire was not revered in its own time as was the Roman Empire and the Hellenic Kingdoms.

Portugual is not only a western power within Europe, it is one among the world.

I can accept WAS, but IS? Portugal is probably currently in the top 100 of world powers, maybe the top 50 if you stretch it. The only time they were possibly in the top 10 would be the Age of Exploration.

Likewise, the Turks were a top 10 in the 15th through 17th Centuries. Bummer, they were in my top 18 for Civ4 but I guess I will mod them in and wait for an expansion.

We turks dont want a mod or expention. We want TURKS on game. Not in mod.
If they dont do it we all thinks that Fraxsis is a fasist company.
And we know what can we do aganist fraxsis. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

We turks dont want a mod or expention. We want TURKS on game. Not in mod.
If they dont do it we all thinks that Fraxsis is a fasist company.
And we know what can we do aganist fraxsis. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Jeez, it's a FREAKIN' GAME!!! Lighten up, man! If you start acting this way when trying to get into the EU, you'll never get in!

Oh, and what DO Turks know about fighting fascists? Please tell... :mischief:

We turks dont want a mod or expention. We want TURKS on game. Not in mod.
If they dont do it we all thinks that Fraxsis is a fasist company.
And we know what can we do aganist fraxsis. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

Then get a Turkish Company to make the game, or write one yourself and supplant the narrow minded Civ series.

We turks dont want a mod or expention. We want TURKS on game. Not in mod.
If they dont do it we all thinks that Fraxsis is a fasist company.
And we know what can we do aganist fraxsis. :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

See why you not belong in EU;You are in 80% fanatics mousulmans.And what you can do against Fraxis;

First ın my opinion ı dont want Turkey to join EU.
And ım not a fanatic muslim people. Im a democratic person
And always uses againt turkey EU are yuo full of democray and judge and freedom.
Of course no
And yuo europans always see yuorselfs bigger than other countries.
First yuo look yuor people after say something to others
You know how many people yuo killed in africa and america first yuo accept this after yuo want something from others
And at least yuo are capitalsms castle
WE all see what capitalism bring this world:starving curroption and other bad things
And ı see fraxsis isnt same with other and ı thinks that Fraxsis still dont see turks a civiziled country but ıf they see better they can understand TUrks
If uyo looks the middle age history yuo we see better yuor and Turks
And after this word dont thinks taht ım against euorope and europe peoles
I lilke all peoples ım humanistic
I want freedom democrasy and judge and peace all the world

Balaban_pasa
WE all see what capitalism bring this world:starving curroption and other bad things
Sure, there wasn't any stavation or corruption in the world before capitalism came along, was there?

Get a brain!

Balaban_pasaSure, there wasn't any stavation or corruption in the world before capitalism came along, was there?
Get a brain! Can't say much about corruption, but mass starvation is indeed a byproduct of capitalism. Before requesting others to acquire a brain, start reading some Economy please :)

Fried egg do yuo know politics and ecnomy
I thikns yuo dont know
And ı have a brain but yuo cant

And ıf yuor nation for example greece hellas what do yuo do
Or if they dont put England what english peoples do
I wonder a lot
pls make some empaty

Can't say much about corruption, but mass starvation is indeed a byproduct of capitalism. Before requesting others to acquire a brain, start reading some Economy please :)
I don't know if this is really the place for an economics discussion, but I'm pretty well read (although not a qualified economist) in economics.

Perhaps you would like to justify your claim that capitalism actually causes starvation (let alone en-masse)?

What I do know is that mass starvation has long been a part of this world as far back as you care to go. Certainly long before anything resembling modern capitalism came about.

Indeed, capitalism offers the best possible way forward to allow humanity to feed itself.

I don't know if this is really the place for an economics discussion, but I'm pretty well read (although not a qualified economist) in economics.

Perhaps you would like to justify your claim that capitalism actually causes starvation (let alone en-masse)?

What I do know is that mass starvation has long been a part of this world as far back as you care to go. Certainly long before anything resembling modern capitalism came about.

Indeed, capitalism offers the best possible way forward to allow humanity to feed itself. Start with British Indian economy, how the British textile industry caused millions [that is millions of humans] starve to death just to acquire cheap cotton. This is just a brief example, you can then study the capitaist exploitations in China, Egypt and Africa that led to several other millions to starve.

As a Turkish guy, I am sorry that the Turkish (or Ottoman) civilization was left out of the 'vanilla' Civ4. Obviously, this decision was made due to marketing (and perhaps budget) reasons and not historical significance. Why are there exactly -18- civs in the game anyway?

When it comes to these stupid fights I see in most forums between the Greeks and the Turks, I can say at least this: For the last 4 years, I have been living in Switzerland, working towards my Ph.D., in an environment that has people from all around the world. Yet, aside from the other Turks here, I've consistently had the most satisfying and pleasant conversation with a Greek friend of mine. I (like many others) still cannot comprehend what it is that makes the masses hate each other and become pawns in the political games played by the few. And perhaps, ironically, why we all like playing Civ for that matter.

Im not here to fight with others
Im here for my wanting
I want TURKS on game thats all
And ı want it on the game not in expention

Im not here to fight with others
Im here for my wanting
I want TURKS on game thats all
And ı want it on the game not in expentionI'm going to be frank on this, and say it here for the first time: The main reason Turks are excluded from the major vanilla package is Turkish piracy. They had to make a marketing decision and among the first 18 they placed most likely target buyers and what they perceive as juicy civilizations. Turkey has a very large young population (around 10 million potential gamers) with access to computers, yet although protected by copyright laws, every single game released in the world hits the streets of Istanbul the next day. The police force is ineffective fighting piracy and the penalties are ridiculously low. So lets be honest to eachother and not threaten Firaxis with a market that doesn't exist for them. I live in the USA and pay around 30 to 50 US dollars for every game that I purchase. Most Turkish gamers are tempted to buy a game for a dollar or two when they see it on the sidewalk. Same goes for pirate books, pirate music cd's, dvd's etc. There's a lot of pirating here in New York too, especially in Chinatown and Harlem but it's not that widespread and even less for video games. So when it comes to release a game, they go with their marketing managers and even though the lead producer of Civilization 4 is Turkish himself, Turks are not in until a possible expansion.

Im not here to fight with others
Im here for my wanting
I want TURKS on game thats all
And ı want it on the game not in expention

You're not here to fight...yet you post things like this:

We turks dont want a mod or expention. We want TURKS on game. Not in mod.
If they dont do it we all thinks that Fraxsis is a fasist company.
And we know what can we do aganist fraxsis.

and this:

And yuo europans always see yuorselfs bigger than other countries.
First yuo look yuor people after say something to others
You know how many people yuo killed in africa and america first yuo accept this after yuo want something from others
And at least yuo are capitalsms castle
WE all see what capitalism bring this world:starving curroption and other bad things

and this:

Fried egg do yuo know politics and ecnomy
I thikns yuo dont know
And ı have a brain but yuo cant

Get over yourself. The Turks just aren't in the initial release. You will have the capacity to mod them in yourself, and you can bet they'll be a primary candidate for an expansion Civ. Beyond that, it's a game. It's not worth making threats! It certainly isn't some heinous crime. You really need to take a look at your priorities...

Tunch han ıf yuo say that in turkey tere are a lot of illgegal cd are sellings thats true
But yuo say how many original cd selling in mali?
And doronon ı m not here to figt with other here somebody write something and ı give answer to them
first europen peoles say me Eu here and ı give them this answer:
And yuo europans always see yuorselfs bigger than other countries.
First yuo look yuor people after say something to others
You know how many people yuo killed in africa and america first yuo accept this after yuo want something from others
And at least yuo are capitalsms castle
WE all see what capitalism bring this world:starving curroption and other bad things
is it ok?
and first fried egg say me no brain after ı write this:
Fried egg do yuo know politics and ecnomy
I thikns yuo dont know
And ı have a brain but yuo cant
And ı thinks this writing is true :
We turks dont want a mod or expention. We want TURKS on game. Not in mod.
If they dont do it we all thinks that Fraxsis is a fasist company.
And we know what can we do aganist fraxsis
I says here We want TUrks on game
İs it ok?

And doronon ı m not here to figt with other here somebody write something and ı give answer to them
first europen peoles say me Eu here and ı give them this answer:
And yuo europans always see yuorselfs bigger than other countries.
First yuo look yuor people after say something to others
You know how many people yuo killed in africa and america first yuo accept this after yuo want something from others
And at least yuo are capitalsms castle
WE all see what capitalism bring this world:starving curroption and other bad things
is it ok?

So, instead of simply refuting the other person, you extend your response to include something hurtful towards everyone remotely associated with him? How is this not being hostile?

and first fried egg say me no brain after ı write this:
Fried egg do yuo know politics and ecnomy
I thikns yuo dont know
And ı have a brain but yuo cant

This is simply childish. Not much different from saying "I know you are, so what am I?" If you want to be treated like an adult, you should at least attempt to act like one.

And ı thinks this writing is true :
We turks dont want a mod or expention. We want TURKS on game. Not in mod.
If they dont do it we all thinks that Fraxsis is a fasist company.
And we know what can we do aganist fraxsis
I says here We want TUrks on game
İs it ok?

This is an unmitigated threat, totally uncalled for and rather nasty. Also rather stupid. Again, you're threatening a video game company over the content in a game. This honestly shouldn't be important enough in your day to day life to make this kind of effort or engender this level of animosity on your part.

What's "Grow up and get a life" in Turkish? :mischief:

I'd try babelfish, but I'd expect it would screw up the translation.

Im not here to fight with others
Im here for my wanting
I want TURKS on game thats all
And ı want it on the game not in expention

Balaban you live in your world.You are a little guy who doesn't know what he want.The upper coments isn't serious.Tell as what's this you really want;

Balaban you live in your world.You are a little guy who doesn't know what he want.The upper coments isn't serious.Tell as what's this you really want;

You don't have much right to speak, either. You were goading him then, just as you are now.

Can't this thread be closed? It's going absolutely nowhere.

Can't this thread be closed? It's going absolutely nowhere.

I agree. It's devolved.

Thread closed. Still it proves some people can't have a normal conversation.