byzantium

I remember reading this awhile ago but I'll ask again. Why is byzantium a new civ? They themselves called them Romans and they occur on the same spot , at least partly, as the Ottomans. It seems redudant. Why didn't the god-like people at Firaxis choose people like the Maorins(sp) or Polynesions even. It makes no sence. Also if I still don't want them after given an explanation is anybody making the Pacific tribes I mentioned? They seem better but I can't do graphics. At least unit graphics and don't know much about them anyways.

Uh oh... I hear footsteps Look backin the archives for about a month or two. I think this topic comes up about every other day.

in a short answer,its because -

why they make a unique civ choice-
A)the Byzantine empire, afthe fall of the western empire continue on its own unique culteral course, merging differnt aspects of Roman, and Hellenistic (greek) culture and civilizations, while doing it from the unique religious perspective of orthadox christianity- this culture ended being far and away more differnt then a continuation of Rome in the west would have produced, and as such in the culteral real, of the arts and society it uniques

B)in governemnt as well, the Byzantine structure was differnt, right down to how the next emperor- for example, the Byzantine empire, having differnt social needs, and wants, placed an emphisis on peaceful transition of power, with the next emperor being ratified by a three way vote of the army, the senate, and the people!

c)this culteral diversion from main stay Roman culture was known to, approvied by, and activley persued by the populace of the empire, emperor Heraclius II, arguabley the BEST emperor the nation ever had, cleaning up the mess Justinin II "the great", and his wife had left the empire in by the end on there reign, actvely persued it, and wnet so far as to change to official language of the empire from Latin to Greek- furthing this culteral blend
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

now why do the deserve to be in the game-

A)for 1000 years, the byzantine empire served as the great wall of EUrope against middle eastern imperialist, protecting western europe, if unknowinglly, from the ravaging forces sure to be inflicted upon it with man,horse,steel, and blood

B)the Byzantines were the preservers of classical knowlrdge- knowledge theat would be passed, in some ways directlyy from Byzantium, and in other ways through the Arabic empires, to the western nations, knowldege that woul deventually lead to the Renaissance, and the re-birth of classical knowledge, and insperation in the west.

these two reasons alone should be more then enough, though I'll come back later if you need more convincing

Because Byzantine empire rules.

For a more detailed answer, see Xen's post

Just write "Renaissance".

Bizantium are in the game, they deserve to be in the game and they don't have the UU that they deserve...

Stop posting about this ...

Biz rules (after port of course )

Has Xen got to you all? Or is he just DLing a lot...

Short answer: they suck but they appear in some of the Conquests which are the base of the new expansion pack. That's why they are included over, say, an African civ becuase no African civs appear in the Conquests (that I've heard of anyway)

its true, the Byzantine empire dose rule as for other civs, i would think that it would civs like the Sumerians,Hittites, and Dutch would eb switched before the mighty Byzantine empire- besides, if the Byzantine empire is unjustified as a civ, then the barbarian mongols are an even poorer choice

:yawn:

I love Byz, I love the Dromon, and I like the Leaderhead.


But to answer the original post: If you want a Polynesian Civ, which would be really nice for Worldmaps, but rather questionable otherwise, play DyP. And if you don't want to use DyP, simply get inspired and use the existing Leaderhead and the UU (Outrigger, what else?), and replace an existing Civ of your choice. And the same applies for everyone who keeps complaining about Mali or Ethopia or the Sioux not being in C3C.
The reasons for the chossen Civs are valid, but WM compatibility wasn't a goal of C3C. That's what the editor is for.

Originally posted by Xen
its true, the Byzantine empire dose rule as for other civs, i would think that it would civs like the Sumerians,Hittites, and Dutch would eb switched before the mighty Byzantine empire- besides, if the Byzantine empire is unjustified as a civ, then the barbarian mongols are an even poorer choice

Click to expand...

I agree, the Mongols!? What the hell. But it is a shame you are so quick to discount the Sumerians and the Dutch. The Hittites achieved a lot too. You dissapoint me. I thought while you are a Byzantine nationalist you at least would recognise other great Civs where credit is due.

I do- but I ALSO want African civs as well

as such, these are the 'weakest links" in the x-pack civ choices- not because they didnt acheive much, they did (though new discoveries are constesting the value of Sumeria- recentlly, heiroglyphics. or rather 'pre" heirogluphics in bo h Egypt, and what COULD be some in china have arisen that are older then the first -known- sumerian documents, but thats a differnt hread in a differnt sub-forum)

As has been mention in this thread, the civ selection, from what I have heard, was based on civs that they used in the new scenarios.

Xen you are beginning to seem like Carrot Top in those 1-800-CALL-ATT commercials. You pop up whenever someone mentions the word Byzantium or Cataphract.

Originally posted by Roundman
Look backin the archives for about a month or two. I think this topic comes up about every other day.

Click to expand...

Very true! I think we have enough "Byzantium/Cataphract" threads for now. This one closed.