What Real Life Civilizations would have achieved one of the victory conditions?

[PPQ_Purple]

The problem with the Culture victory is that unlike in CIV cities in the real world also loose culture and the culture requirements for the different levels rise constantly hence making once legendary cities not count as such any more.

Athens for example, or Rome or Alexandria were all Legendary cities at some point in their past but they are no more. Hence we must redefine the Culture victory as: "Hold 3 cities with Legendary culture during the time that they are actually Legendary."

Taking that and a few other things into consideration we can say the fallowing:
1. No one has yet completed the tech tree
2. Several civilizations are still in the Industrial and earlier eras

Victory conditions:
1. Several civilizations have gotten close to Cultural but none has succeeded.
2. Spain, Britain, USA, USSR and quite a few others have had a go at domination either via vassalage or via direct conquest but none has done so.
3. No one has yet tried to, succeeded or even made a reasonable try at a conquest victory.
4. No one has yet tried to, succeeded or even made a reasonable try at a Space Race victory.
5. The US tried and failed a Diplomatic victory.
6. Several civilizations over time have had a go for Religious, but none of them could hold control over the religion it self after spreading it. The closest call was and still is the Vatican but Saudi Arabia is closing fast.

 

[hewhoknowsall]

It's not, nor has it ever been about guts. There is a divergence in the US between the civilian, military and political classes which is hard to define, even to those of us intimately familiar with American culture. The American military has never lacked courage. The question is whether the wars discussed are moral imperatives for the american people.

The last American war fought with a civilian army (vietnam) was a disaster which resulted in the end of the draft. Not one single major battle in that conflict was lost by the US, yet we lost the war. The reasons for that were political, as fragging (the murder of superior officers) was growing more common and the political unrest regarding the war grew untenable for both the military and political classes. The problem was with how the war was framed: the political and military powers in the US honestly believed in flawed ideals vis a vis communism, most famously depicted as the "domino theory." For a more nuanced view of how the Johnson and Nixon administrations saw the cold war (of which vietnam was a pure element, regardless of how the vietnamese saw it) read a government document known as "NSC 68." This document, written during the Eisenhower administration, laid out the basic idea of containment. That the document was a rigid polemic did not stop it from being the basis for American diplomacy in SE Asia (and Latin America, and the Middle East).

Because American foreign policy is dictated by esoteric ideals, often espoused in ideological polemics (as true today as it was in 1965) it is inaccessible to the american civilian class who use a dumbed down version of the polemics to formulate opinions. The fact that Al Qaeda is more accurately defined as a movement than an organization doesn't change the way that most Americans perceive the issue of international non-governmental political violence, simply because it requires a nuanced view of something (9-11) which cannot help but stir visceral feelings in Americans.

Those visceral feelings are much easier to use than rational discourse when a politician wishes to manipulate the people into a war like Iraq, Afghanistan or Vietnam. And american politicians have long since adopted a "ends justify the means" philosophy in regards to telling the civilian population about the motivations for our foreign policy; from the dollar diplomacy of the 1930s to the WMD excuse used for Iraq.

To further complicate matters, the divisions between the political, military and civilian populations of the US are blurry at best. Most americans are more or less like most people: the most important things to them are the health, welfare and prosperity of their families. The political powers in the US know this, and have endeavored to utilize military deployments in an effort to plunder the wealth of the world for Americans. So long as we have our two car garages, nice lawns and plasma TVs, we won't demand change to a government so corrupt that bribery is an industry here.

It's extremely complicated. Even moreso than my rambling might indicate. But the political divisiveness of the US is a sham to cover the collusion of the two major political parties to continue military dominance while the defense contracting industry bribes congresspeople, who go on to serve on the boards of the companies which financed their campaigns. Add to that the fact that many of the people in these positions have served in the military. In fact, the famous Eisenhower phrase "military industrial complex" was originally "military-congressional-industrial complex" as the three work in combination to ensure an aggressive foreign policy.

No matter how much any one man might promise change, it won't happen until the people of the US, the 60% who don't vote, get uncomfortable enough to change things.

You may make some good points, but remember that at least here in America you can actually post this type of stuff without getting executed (unlike a few countries, not all of them, but a few).

 

[hewhoknowsall]

The problem with the Culture victory is that unlike in CIV cities in the real world also loose culture and the culture requirements for the different levels rise constantly hence making once legendary cities not count as such any more.

Athens for example, or Rome or Alexandria were all Legendary cities at some point in their past but they are no more. Hence we must redefine the Culture victory as: "Hold 3 cities with Legendary culture during the time that they are actually Legendary."

Taking that and a few other things into consideration we can say the fallowing:
1. No one has yet completed the tech tree
2. Several civilizations are still in the Industrial and earlier eras

Victory conditions:
1. Several civilizations have gotten close to Cultural but none has succeeded.
2. Spain, Britain, USA, USSR and quite a few others have had a go at domination either via vassalage or via direct conquest but none has done so.
3. No one has yet tried to, succeeded or even made a reasonable try at a conquest victory.
4. No one has yet tried to, succeeded or even made a reasonable try at a Space Race victory.
5. The US tried and failed a Diplomatic victory.
6. Several civilizations over time have had a go for Religious, but none of them could hold control over the religion it self after spreading it. The closest call was and still is the Vatican but Saudi Arabia is closing fast.

Sorry for double post


1. Haven't some of the world powers completed the tech tree? I guess that would depend on what Civilization 4 means by fusion/genetics/etc. and how advanced you must be in those areas.
2. True



1. If we were to disregard the fact that a city loses cumulative culture after getting captured (as that would make it too difficult), if the EU were to form a permanent alliance then they'd win...but have any of them researched communism yet? USA given a decent amount of time could also pull this off. China might be close, as would several other countries, but not close enough.

2. Correct. Closest was Great Britain.

3. Germany almost succeeded but failed. Alexander had he lived long enough could've conquered the rest of the Old world and then advanced down the tech tree to invade the New world, as could have Rome/Mongols/a few others.

4. True, unlikely to reach Alpha Centauri by 2050.

5. LOL I guess

6. I guess

 

[mariogreymist]

You may make some good points, but remember that at least here in America you can actually post this type of stuff without getting executed (unlike a few countries, not all of them, but a few).

I'm not saying I don't think the USA is the best country on earth*. We just have a long ways to go until we are as good as we can be.

*And yes, unlike many of my fellow americans, I have spent significant time in a number of other nations.

 

[Grimberht]

But America already has oil sources at home, right?

They must have hit the Corporate Greed Pop up event!

 

[PPQ_Purple]

1. Haven't some of the world powers completed the tech tree? I guess that would depend on what Civilization 4 means by fusion/genetics/etc. and how advanced you must be in those areas.

Advanced enough for it to have a reasonable practical application.
For example for Fusion it would be the creation of a non experimental functioning Fusion Reactor.

1. If we were to disregard the fact that a city loses cumulative culture after getting captured (as that would make it too difficult), if the EU were to form a permanent alliance then they'd win...but have any of them researched communism yet? USA given a decent amount of time could also pull this off. China might be close, as would several other countries, but not close enough.

In order for a city to become Legendary it must transcend the local and even the continental. The example would be Byzantium or Rome during their respective primes.
In my opinion there are no cities today that earn that title.

This is because, if we want a realistic system we must apply the same principal to the Culture requirement for Legendary status as we do to the Great Person bar. Each time a city grows in status the bar for all cities is raised. Todays cities might seem legendary compared to those in the past but compared to each other I don't think any of them is truly special enough to claim the title.

2. Correct. Closest was Great Britain.

What about the Mongol Empire, they held a huge chunk of Eurasia?

3. Germany almost succeeded but failed. Alexander had he lived long enough could've conquered the rest of the Old world and then advanced down the tech tree to invade the New world, as could have Rome/Mongols/a few others.

Germany newer even tried, not once.
They newer tried to conquer Asia (other than the USSR) and south America. What they were working on is clearly Domination.

4. True, unlikely to reach Alpha Centauri by 2050.

... I do not think that time victory is applicable, considering that time is not about to stop at 2050.

 

[Irgy]

There's two ways to look at it. One is to try to directly model the game mechanics behind a victory, e.g. count culture points, percentage of land mass owned, number of space ship parts etc. Under that view, no-one has won, and I would say the best chance is indeed a time victory - not sure by who though, depends how you score it.

If you take it in a way that's a bit less tied to the game mechanics, then I (even as an non-American) would say that America either has won or is winning a culture victory. English is spoken nearly everywhere in the world, most scientific conferences are in English - it's the language most often used for communication between people with different languages, even if neither of those native languages are English. That's partly a result of the British empire, but it's mostly a result of American wealth, American culture and the internet - which is again, predominantly in English, and mostly because it started in America. MacDonalds, coke, rock and roll, hollywood, the free market and democracy are taking over the world, and while not all those things are entirely American (particularly not democracy, America has the one of the worst democratic systems in the developed world imho but that's another issue) they're all strongly associated with it. American culture has invaded the entire world. To me that's a real cultural victory, three legendary cities is just the way the game mechanics try to approximate and model it.

The other victory conditions no. No-one has dominated the globe (British empire probably being the best attempt), conquered all other civilisations (many have tried, none close), settled another star system or even another planet (getting to the moon is impressive but it's not a victory), diplomatic victory is looking hopeless, religeous is looking impossible, and I don't know of a sensible analogy for time victory.

 

[ilikepies]

Conquest: Several lunatics have tried, all have failed.
Domination: Genghis Khan probably technically won this, except since he didn't actually do much administrating in places he conquered, it was more like his empire just moved across the world and then died. Britain got very close, and Russia did in landmass.
Diplomatic: US tried and failed, as many have said.
Space: No.
Cultural: I dare say Greece almost did. Thanks to Alexander, Greek culture spread to the entire Middle East, and to Rome, which spread it through most of Europe. However, still not enough.

As to America, it came close but then there were high maintenance costs, all its rivals got mad and there were a bunch of annoying random events.

 

[hewhoknowsall]

What about the Mongol Empire, they held a huge chunk of Eurasia?

According to most/almost all of my sources, Britain's was larger by a little bit, but still not large enough.

But what if NATO formed a permanent alliance (in game terms)? Do permanent alliances combine land mass/cities/etc. in terms of victory conditions?

 

[Otaku-sama]

The British Empire was the largest empire by landmass, covering 33.7 million km^2. The Mongolian Empire was a close second, covering 33 million km^2.

The British Empire was also the largest empire by population with 531.3 million people. The Chinese was second with 432.2 million people under the Qing dynasty.

That should resolve people's questions of domination.

I think the reasons there are victory conditions in Civ is because no civilization on Earth has ever achieved these conditions. Having such conditions would be saying your civilization is more successful than ones that have existed in real life, therefore deserving a victory.

 

[avdale]

iirc Alexander won a technical conquest victory in that he ruled all the land and all the civilizations he knew of.

As has been said if he lived longer and consolidated his empire he might have gone further.

 

[hewhoknowsall]

iirc Alexander won a technical conquest victory in that he ruled all the land and all the civilizations he knew of.

As has been said if he lived longer and consolidated his empire he might have gone further.

He conquered almost all/a great portion of all the civilizations he knew of, but he knew about India and some other countries but didn't get to conquer them.

 

[silverjack100]

Little are any of you aware, but Canada is currently planning on pursuing a Conquest victory.

 

[AfterShafter]

Little are any of you aware, but Canada is currently planning on pursuing a Conquest victory.

That's just Alberta. Bloody redneck province... Should team up with Texas and form a country.

 

[Hasuike]

I thought this thread was going to be an amusing read full of funny quips. Its instead turned into the ever popular online "whip em' out" nationalistic arguments I have become accustomed to seeing on news websites. I think we can all agree that some Americans need to be more humble while some of America's critics are justified and others are just coming off as complaining.

Bottom line is Civ is a game, a really good game. But it does not accurately represent the exact realities of statecraft. It saddens me that as an American born to an immigrant mother that often-justified bashing of unpopular policies pursued in my country's interest generates such petty emotion over what our government's unethical actions have been. Especially when many of the countries that often criticize the USA's policies are only doing so when politically convenient. It disappoints me equally to see fellow Americans use our military force to threaten (even jokingly) people of other nations on a internet forum.

America has done many unethical things to maintain its standing and acheive national interest goals... As should any responsible government whose first interest is to preserve its own existence in order to provide for its people. Any state that does not follow this model is automatically failing in its raison d'etre to provide first for the people it has purview over. Let's not pretend that there is a saintly country/govt out there, the idea is as ridiculous and simple as an evil countries/govt. One view is wishful idealism and the other is rhetoric.

The main comment that really bothered me was the one made about America not invading N. Korea. This opinion is repeated too much for its worth. It criticizes the USA for not being able to handle casualties while spontaneously criticizing unilateral actions in the mid east. So does this mean unilateral action is ok as long as the USA attacks the country that other nations wish us to attack? For shame. We are not a nation of cowards sir, quite the contrary. If anything I think our history would prove such to be true. This is tantamount to calling Japan or Switzerland cowardly for being pacifist or calling France a country of cheese eating surrender monkeys. No sane person or well ruled country wishes for war anymore than another country/person wishes to be subjugated.

 

[Hasuike]

Little are any of you aware, but Canada is currently planning on pursuing a Conquest victory.

I have long warned about our aggressive northern neighbors. Sure, it starts with simple things like ham and smokeables from BC then BAM! All the pennies in your pocket are suddenly Canadian and you can't buy the philly blunt at 711 cuz the Jain behind the counter says this isn't real money. You've been warned America! The threat is real so we must all rally against those incredibly nice guys up north unless you like your "freedom fries" with gravy.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

The British Empire was the largest empire by landmass, covering 33.7 million km^2. The Mongolian Empire was a close second, covering 33 million km^2.

The British Empire was also the largest empire by population with 531.3 million people. The Chinese was second with 432.2 million people under the Qing dynasty.

That should resolve people's questions of domination.

I think the reasons there are victory conditions in Civ is because no civilization on Earth has ever achieved these conditions. Having such conditions would be saying your civilization is more successful than ones that have existed in real life, therefore deserving a victory.

...Other than diplo of course . Culture too. RL equivalents are impossible.

 

[Otaku-sama]

We Canadians were the elite troops is WWI and II, so one for one, our soldier can beat the American soldier. Only problem is that America has a massive navy, while the Canadian navy is two ships: One battleship for each side. America also has the latest military technology to date and whatever is in Area 51.

 

[Hasuike]

We Canadians were the elite troops is WWI and II, so one for one, our soldier can beat the American soldier. Only problem is that America has a massive navy, while the Canadian navy is two ships: One battleship for each side. America also has the latest military technology to date and whatever is in Area 51.

Elite troops in WW1 and 2 so one for one your soldiers can beat the American soldier? Care to elaborate?

 

[PublicEnemy]

The victory conditions need to be changed so we can clearly see who would have won what.

America have had the 'arrogance' slider at 100% for about 100 years and are currently swamping the world. How do they swamp the world? They use the world wide web and make out they invented it!

France would have tried to win a 'nonchalance' victory, but bicker between themselves far too much, usually shrugging their shoulders at each other and saying 'pah!'.

Britain are still trying to win a 'we used to be the most powerful nation and are living in the past' VC.

Switzerland are in a race with Luxembourg for the 'please don't hurt me' VC.

Italy have tried on many occasions to win the 'let's wait and see who's winning before we take sides' VC.

Germany/Prussia have tried to conquer people's sense of humour, and are still trying.

The Chinese have been very cunning and are to this day still invading nations with their 3rd rate takeaways which have no resemblance to real Chinese food.

The Indians are even worse with their good awful 'curry' which is by far the smelliest and most disgusting food in the world. They are trying to win a 'we can get the rest of the world to voluntarily go to a restaurant and eat the crap we dish up' VC. They must be pretty close.

To be fair though, the Spanish have probably already won. For at least 200 years they have been shouting and screaming claiming they won the 'Biggest non-entities on the entire planet who like to believe they were once a significant nation' VC.


If I were a leader in the game I would be Montezuma. I also hate everyone.