Ahriman
Tyrant
Ah. Looks like hunted to extinction by roughly 7000 BC. So, long before the game starts or any of the in-game factions exist.
Also, looks like existing in north america, but not south america.
No, no horsies for incas.
Byzantine lobby for civ5
- Thread starter Kyriakos
- Start date
Ah. Looks like hunted to extinction by roughly 7000 BC. So, long before the game starts or any of the in-game factions exist.
Also, looks like existing in north america, but not south america.
No, no horsies for incas.
Oh god, that's just funny. The wheel? Check. They used it for toys, but they never used it for any practical purposes, after all, no large beasts of burdens in the Andes. Writing? Have you ever heard of the Incan bead system which essentially WAS their writing as they recorded EVERYTHING in them, but nowadays no one knows how to read them, and there are few around as the Spanish burned them all. Construction? I mentioned INCAN ROADS AS GOOD AS THE ROMANS, who certainly needed to be architects to do what they did with their roads. Philosophy? Hmm, that I can't really argue, but for all we know, they might have, seeing as we have close to no information on the cultural life of the Inca Empire. Code of Law? The Inca was the law, just as the Caesar often said 'Screw the Senate' in the Empire's later years, but if you're determined to see hard law, the Inca regularly issued decrees about tax, and of course, regulating the subdivisions of the empire, and conscription. So, the Inca had a bureaucracy as well. Currency? The Incas measured value in textile, the quality of the textile, and the amount. The Incas paid(Note, PAID) their soldiers in textile which was traded for food, objects, etc. Essentially, the Inca did have a system of economics. Representation? That, I have zero argument for, but the Inca DID place local rulers in power over their conquered provinces, to lessen revolt chances. So, representation in a way, of their minorities. Drama, again, no info on Inca Cultural life. Horseback Riding, or to humor your claims, riding a Llama. Yes, they did ride Llamas on occasion, but only for short, short periods of time. With no sturdy beast of burden, how could the Inca possibly have any knowledge of this? Monotheism? Now having a certain belief system in one god makes you smarter/more advanced? The Romans where polytheists for most of their existence, and the Inca centered around Inti, the sun god, but there WHERE other gods, according to them. Paper? The Romans had papyrus, far from paper. Sailing, the Inca had a fleet and sailed all the way to Easter Island! Pizarro found Incan subjects ON A BOAT, not on land. Yes, they knew how to sail. Theology? The concept of studying a religion, and in general, becoming a well-informed individual(to word it shakily) on a religion? The Inca had an elaborate priest system. You're not wrong on a few of them....you're wrong on almost all of them.
But this is getting WAY off of topic. If someone called the Inca-Roman comparison above to stop, I haven't read through the next page, so I wouldn't have seen that. But anyway, enough, but my point is, the Inca WHERE comparable to Rome.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
Sorry, but you are completely wrong here. It appears you need to look up some definitions, because you don't seem to understand some words (code of laws, currency for example). I have provided quick definitions where applicable.
*The Wheel - They had it in toys. If only toys were something to measure a society by. Too bad they never figured out how to apply it to anything meaningful... things like construction projects, example, pulleys. This is a basic concept. FAIL.
*Writing - Haven't heard of that, but since no one can figure out how to read it, and no knowledge was passed on from it (this is the point of writing)... FAIL. Let me add Alphabet to the list of FAILs, while we are at it.
*Construction - is about more than just roads. Again, the use of the pulley is something that can be applied in Construction. I am talking about massive self-standing structures (arenas, etc)... FAIL.
*Philo/Drama - you know why you have no info on Incan cultural life? Because they didn't write it down! Or, at least, we can't prove they did. FAIL.
*Horseback Riding - FAIL. I will admit they didn't really have the opportunity, but, it is still a fail. You can certainly advance without horseback riding though.
*Monotheism - Your response here is to get into a philosophical debate. Fact is, they hadn't developed it. Can you advance without it? Yes, but, just pointing out, they didn't have it. FAIL.
*Code of Laws - OK, Code of Law means the law was codified, written down so everyone could study it. Think Hammurabi here. FAIL.
*Representation - FAIL.
*Sailing - I will grant I don't know much about this. So, passing grade applied. Now, let's compare the boats of the Roman Navy to those of the Incans since you are saying they were as advanced. FAIL.
*Theology - Your response here was to talk about preisthood, which I didn't put on my list, because I am aware they had preists. FAIL.
*Paper - Papyrus is far from paper? Why? Because you say so? And, well, what did the Incans have? Something like papyrus and paper (lightweight, easily transportable)? If not, FAIL.
*Currency - is something minted by the state. Not a series of trades, that is a barter society that you are talking about, which is basically pre-currency. FAIL
The Incans were not anywhere near comparable to the Romans, and it was 1000 years later for crying out loud. They were more advanced than any others in the New World, but far from the Romans.
Now, let's take this outside of Civ4 Techs. Let's consider art, military technology and strategy, vastness of empire, influence of empire upon the modern world and the future world, literature (something I could have added to the tech list), etc, etc, etc.
Let's also consider the Romans basically continued on as the Byzantines. The New World was discovered shortly after the downfall of the Byzantines. I will give you the difference in years, and we can compare the Byzantines to the Incans on a pretty similar timeline.
Sorry, Inca loses.
Enough off topic. If you want to continue this discussion, feel free to send me a PM.
This thread is about the Byzantines and getting them into Civ5, not about how advanced you think the Incans (who got crushed by how many spaniards?) were.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
You guys should beat the dead horse more... 3 people crying about a couple of off topic posts that were then moved to PM at our own accord. Jeez.
bestrfcplayer
Steppin' up!
Hey, the Byzantine Empire wasn't in CIV, but, was in BTS, so we'll just wait for the expansion packs in what, a year. So till then, let's wait.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
What if Fireaxis ends up merging Byzantium into Rome this time around? Are you going to stick to your guns and keep this mod alive all the way to the last expansion? I guarantee you that if Fireaxis doesn't add Byzantium by the end in some form, your mod is going to end up merged with any other civ mods for civilizations that got left out for my personal use.
I think merging the two would be bad... and I would hope for a mod in that case, personally.
Well, technically, it IS the same state, just one is more Christian-Greek centered....
Personally I don't think the HRE should have been added either. Given the nature of the market and the unprecedented level of global influence it has had America was inevitably going to be in. I even remember there being a pre-BTS poll that suggested significant support for a Confederate 'civ' in vanilla 
Byzantium is Rome: they wouldn't even have acknowledged the difference. Though the empire of the 11th century was almost unrecognisable from the perspective of that of the 6th never mind the 1st, the line of continuity is pretty straight.
Byzantium is Rome: they wouldn't even have acknowledged the difference. Though the empire of the 11th century was almost unrecognisable from the perspective of that of the 6th never mind the 1st, the line of continuity is pretty straight.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
The change was over time, sure, but through hindsight there are very clear splits.
The Greeks referred to themselves as Romaoi(spelling?), meaning Romans, all the way until the independence of Greece. If you've ever played Europa Univeralis, it's the equivalent of changing your cultural group within your empire to something else, but the point being, they considered themselves Romans all the way to the very end, not Byzantines, and not something distinct.
You should define what old Rome is. If it is Roman Empire after Constantine, things may not go well for you.
But back on topic, I am wondering who the leader should be. Justinian comes to mind because he is famous for the Justinian's Code. But, because this is a mod, there is no need to consider marketability. So, is there some one who is better than him to represent the Byzantine Empire?
Well, if you consider Constantine the first Byzantine ruler, then him. If you consider the break between Powerful Roman Empire and Declining Roman Empire(which in my opinion is either Manzikert or after Heraclius(again, spelling?)), then Heraclius COULD work. Meanwhile, Basil II is probably the best option.
kochman
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 10,818
You should define what old Rome is. If it is Roman Empire after Constantine, things may not go well for you.
But back on topic, I am wondering who the leader should be. Justinian comes to mind because he is famous for the Justinian's Code. But, because this is a mod, there is no need to consider marketability. So, is there some one who is better than him to represent the Byzantine Empire?
Old Rome, the place where the city Rome was the capital.
Alex Commenos or whatever his spelling is would be a good choice.
Similar threads
[PYTHON]
Landmine Triggers
