Civilizations that should have been in civ III

[The Great]

I must have skipped your post. I agree that the Ethiopians (Nubian desendants) should be in place over the Zulus. Most general historians just likes to shout SHAKA alot.

I like the idea of the Brazilians too.

 

[Baleog]

Its unfair to say there is too much Arab/Middle
Eastern/Muslim influence in the game. The fertile crescent (Iran Ithink) is where civilisation started. The Egyptians, Babylonians and Persians all deserve to be in the top 16. Its debatable whether the Arabs or Indus or others would be in the top 16, but the fact is the middle east is where civilisation began and thats what the game is about. Out of the three in the game (Egyptians, Babylonians and Persians) none of them are Muslim. Admittedly the egyptians became Muslim but they are in the game for their ancient culture.

 

[fsume93]

Egypt/Babylonia/Persia arent Muslim?! Are you nuts? All three are, perhaps you would recognize them better if I said Egypt/Iraq/Iran (which I already did in my earlier post).

The Fertile crescent is in modern day Iraq by the way. It starts in the norther tip of the Persian Gulf, goes up through Basra and Baghdad and continues on past that. It is what made the Babylonian Empire what it was.

 

[rosa]

I understand that Sid and Fieaxis can´t include every civilization in their game. I understand the inclusion of a minor civilization, like the Iroquois, because there should be some nation representative of the natives of North America. But there are also a lot of things that I don´t understand.
Why the Aztecs and not the Incas or Mayas? Weren´t the Celts and the Vikings good examples of distinctive and powerfull civilizations? Is there a reason to forget about the Arabs and/or Muslims? (maybe september the 11th?)
And, why they didn´t include the Spanish, a nation with more than 1.000 years of history? Didn´t we discovered America? (I know that the Vikings arrived there first, but they didn´t truly discovered it). Didn´t we fought against Napoleon, Nelson, and even against the USA (Cuba 1898)? Have the americans forgot the nation who gave name to places like San Francisco, Los Angeles, Florida, California, and many more? Do they remember that 400 millions of people speak spanish in todays world, and quite a lot even in the USA?
There are many examples like the ones I described above, but I think that I´ve been clear. I consider the lack of some civilizations a mayor fail. I know that Civilization is just a game and its aim is to be fun, but Fireaxis and Sid Meier have to take into consideration that they can offend millions of possible customers with their attitudes.

 

[Suvorov]

Think of all the middle east civilizations they DIDN'T include. Hittite, Sumerian, Assyrian...
I think the Arabs would definitely be a civ that should be included. Medieval Arabs invented algebra, and the renaissance was largely caused by Arabic ideas brought back from the Holy Land by the crusaders.

Also, how about the Incas, the Mongols and the Celts?

 

[MKSheppard]

I think the Spartans should have been in. Although it could have been difficult, since the only thing that seems to fit them is Militaristic...Maybe have it double strength? Oh well, I love the spartans

 

[rosa]

In the particular case of the Spartans, I think that they´re well covered with the Greek civilization, which includes Minoic culture and many others as well. Sparta is a nation, not a distinctive civilization. They shared their cultural background with all the other greeks.

 

[Alexander I]

I think the Spanish should definetely be included, their influence on history is overwhelming as Rosa pointed out. Let's not forget spreading catholisism over the world. Opposing a culture to such a large group of people is quite impressive, as todays civs have the greatest problems with integrating a small group of people (immigrants) in to their culture, at least in the Netherlands we have those problems.

Than. The Muslims should definetly have been in the game. I know a lot of you guys think Persians, Babylonians and Egyptians were islamic, but islam was invented approximately 2000 years later by the prophet Mohammed. Those civilizations were history for a long time than. The Mohammedans (followers of Mohammed) were extremely powerful back then. They came all the way up to the north of Spain. I think that if the Mohammedans hadn't conquered Spain, the Spanish wouldn't be as great as they were (a strong enemy unifies a nation), it made them see the importance of a common believe: Catholisism.

Than finally the Dutch should be included. No I'm not saying that because I'm Dutch myself. The Dutch were quite a great empire in their golden century. They invented the first corporation (ownership and governance seperated) of the world (the true trading spirit!). Also on the cultural side the Dutch are worth mentioning. A lot of great painters are Dutch: Rembrandt, van Gogh, Vermeer, Appel, etc. Rembrandt's Art School would have been a nice wonder, don't you think?
I especially would like to play the Dutch on deity level, because than you'll be a real small civ, (compared to the AI) where diplomatic relationships are very important. In real live this is how the Dutch became great, bargaining and trading everything, everywhere.

BTW to all you Canadian fans. What's so great about Canada? What have you contributed to human history? I know you have quite a large territory, but most of it (say 80-90%) is inhabitable, so what's the reason that they should be in the game?

 

[burak]

1. There is difference between civilizations and nations e.g. venetians are italians, scots are celts and canadians also seem for me to be part of british civilization.(There I have an idea. maybe all main civ's should have "daughter civs" which could separate from them during in case of civil war(is there something like that? I don't have civ3 yet.) So canada would form from part of english civ, mexico -spanish etc.)
2. There is also difference between civ that take the same geographical position in different ages. Ancient Egyptians or Babylonians weren't Arabs, as Romans are not the same as French or Spanish.
civs i would add:
Celts,vikings, portuguese, spanish, dutch?,italians, polish obviously, turks, arabs, byzantines, ethiopians, mongol, korean, maybe thai?, incas, mayans (about all north american indians, i don't think they much resembled civilizations, as they didn't build cities or create states, the same of huns, and other nomads, but you can do what you wish in your game.)

 

[Suvorov]

Why Poland? Poland was a nation for a short spell (reasonably powerful too) in the Middle Ages, then was basically absorbed by Russia and Germany, and only emerged again after WWI and then again after WWII, although it was only a satellite until the fall of Communism.

Also, Italians and Portuguese weren't really influential enough to really count as a civ.

 

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by burak
about all north american indians, i don't think they much resembled civilizations, as they didn't build cities or create states, the same of huns, and other nomads, but you can do what you wish in your game.

The Iroquois were not nomads. They built quite a few towns, with up to 4,000 citizens (a good-sized town by European standards at the time), complete with palisades, community buildings, granaries and even gardens. Larger than that was not practical in the woodlands.
The confederacy of 5 (later 6) nations had a constitution and a parliament, ahead of any European civilizations at the time.
At their peak they controlled a vast empire:
http://www.tolatsga.org/iro.html

The original homeland of the Iroquois was in upstate New York between the Adirondack Mountains and Niagara Falls. Through conquest and migration, they gained control of most of the northeastern United States and eastern Canada. At its maximum in 1680, their empire extended west from the north shore of Chesapeake Bay through Kentucky to the junction of the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers; then north following the Illinois River to the south end of Lake Michigan; east across all of lower Michigan, southern Ontario and adjacent parts of southwestern Quebec; and finally south through northern New England west of the Connecticut River through the Hudson and upper Delaware Valleys across Pennsylvania back to the Chesapeake.

The Iroquois way of life differed much from that of other North American tribes like the Sioux, the Navaho, the Hopi, the Seminole etc.

To human civilization as a whole, they gave important agricultural and social knowledge, a.o. combining crops (which propelled the Dutch into their golden age) and women's rights.

I don't know what more is needed to earn the right to be called a civilization.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

There was a pre columbian town building civilization in North America, centered in the Ohio and Mississippi river valleys, which build hugh earthen monument mounds with wooden temple on top.

 

[Suvorov]

Fact is, North American Indians were settlers until the arrival of spanish horses, when they became nomads, because they were now capable of following the great buffalo herds as opposed to just attacking them as they passed by.

 

[burak]

Why Poland? Poland was a nation for a short spell (reasonably powerful too) in the Middle Ages, then was basically absorbed by Russia and Germany, and only emerged again after WWI and then again after WWII, although it was only a satellite until the fall of Communism.

Also, Italians and Portuguese weren't really influential enough to really count as a civ.

Poland was powerful not only in middle ages but also in Renaissance until 18th century. Poland was under russian or german control totally for about 150 years in its 1050 years long history. Anyway Russia and Germany also were occupied some time (Russia was over 100 years under mongol domination.)

I wonder that you say nothing about Dutch or Vikings when questioning Portugese and Italians.
First were great first medieval explorers, and colonized America together with Spanish. They found Brasil, which is quite a big country now.
About Italians, they begun the Renaissance, and there were also Venetians and Genoans among them
(like Columbus).

Iroquis might have some cities, but they were still on neolitical level technically. I may be wrong, but they probably didn't have most of first civ advances like iron working or Wheel. Anyway, if they were the most advanced nation in North America i suppose we can add them to list:

Celts,vikings, portuguese, spanish, dutch?, italians, polish, turks, arabs, byzantines, ethiopians, mongol, korean, maybe thai?,incas, mayans, iroquis.

 

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
There was a pre columbian town building civilization in North America, centered in the Ohio and Mississippi river valleys, which build hugh earthen monument mounds with wooden temple on top.

The Mound Builders are seen as related to the Maya civilization. The Choctow and Chickasaw probably descended from them.

Suvorov: not all Amerind tribes changed their way of life after European contact. The Sioux were driven from their homeland by the Iroquois, who wanted the land for the fur trade with the Europeans, and had to adjust to the plains.
The Apache were always hunters, even before they got the horse. They, as well as the Iroquois and the Pueblo tribes in the south, did not change
their life.

Burak: don't forget that the Iroquois Golden Age only started AFTER European contact. They traded much knowledge with the Europeans.
Before contact, it's true that they did not have The Wheel (although they were close: they already had hoops as toys) or Iron Working (the iron axes found in early 16th century Seneca burial mounds were probably obtained from trade with other tribes that had already met the Europeans). But besides advanced agriculture they did know about construction and battle tactics, and had a working democracy with written laws and currency for trade.

 

[PanaGo]

Originally posted by Erdrick
Byzantine Empire

Well Erdrick, the Roman empire was divided in two parts, West and East. West been the Catholics and East been the Orthodox Christians. The command of the East part, namely the Byzantium named after king Byzantas was given to the Greek-Romans. So technically the Byzantines are covered by the existence of Greek and Romans. Althought I would just love to have them too!

 

[Atros]

Turks (Ottoman Empire)
Vikings
Mongols

They should also add more rulers for the existing civs , so you could play a more millitaristic Brits under Churchill or a commie Russia under Stalin.

If they put Arabs in, soon you'll see tons of scenarios in which you drop nuclear missles on their city, and their leader would be osama.

 

[Baleog]

Havent looked at this thrread for a while.
While I am absolutly for the Arabs to be put into this game its probably worth saying that the Arabs actually didnt create algebra. It was an idea that had been knocking around since Diophantus of Alexandria. Al - Kharizmi of the Arabs wrote a book on it called Al-jabr and this gave it more form. He also wrote a book concerning Hindu numerals (1,2,3 etc). When the style of this book was adapted by the west it ws assumed that the numbers were invented by the Arabs.
Hence now a days they are called Hindu - Arabic numbers.


I konw its incredible isnt it!!!

Thanks to Alexander I for finally pointing out that Persians Babylonians Egyptians had absolutly NOTHING to do with Islam. Seen as there is no Islamic race in the game the Arabs should be included.

 

[Evangelist666]

If you make an Arab civ then give them the name they really had...Saracens. And I'd like to see Hannibal and Carthage as a civ, if you argue for Canada then I'm gonna argue for Carthage.

 

[akadyer]

Australia really needs to be on there true we have only been around 100 years (this year) and our independence was won by a vote and not a war and in those years we have created a new distinct country

If any one remmbers the fantastic worlds add on the mars scenario Australia was on of the playable civilizations and any one who has played CTP will know that Australia is a playable civ

I rest my case