19 Civilizations, lets vote! PART 3!

Which civs would you like to see in cIV? PLEASE vote for 2(two) civs ONLY!

  • Maya

    Votes: 10 12.7%
  • Byzantines

    Votes: 5 6.3%
  • Israel

    Votes: 14 17.7%
  • Ethiopia

    Votes: 9 11.4%
  • Ottomans

    Votes: 16 20.3%
  • Mongols

    Votes: 19 24.1%
  • Iroquois

    Votes: 11 13.9%
  • Incas

    Votes: 9 11.4%
  • Zulus

    Votes: 10 12.7%
  • Celts

    Votes: 15 19.0%
  • Carthaginians

    Votes: 11 13.9%
  • Dutch

    Votes: 14 17.7%
  • Portugal

    Votes: 7 8.9%
  • Quebec

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Siam

    Votes: 3 3.8%
  • Mali

    Votes: 6 7.6%
  • Tibet

    Votes: 5 6.3%
  • Brazil

    Votes: 4 5.1%
  • Poland

    Votes: 5 6.3%
  • Ukraine

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    79
  • Poll closed .
no the celts are not english..there are remenants of them in england..but that is not were they originally hailed from..but (even though this will pee some off) i do think that it is not necissary to have both turks and ottomans
 
covenant said:
The mongols are a waste of space. If the only criteria for inclusion is land area we are not talking about civilization. I want the most influential civilizations not the largest land grabs

Babylonia
Persia
Summeria
Greece
Egypt
Rome
China
India
England
France
Vikings
Arab Empire
most important African civ
second most important african civ
The most influential South East Asia Civ
Celts
Incas
Aztec
most influential native american tribe

I even consider civs who have peaked now to be secondary, like the USA. And yes I am American, but we have been around for just to short a time and so come as a secondary civ in world history. Germany and Austria are others. That regions is much better represented by the vikings who later evolve into there modern counterpart much as the US evolves from the British.

But I have no illusions about this.


You leave out Spain, ...that is just silly...

What criteria did you follow to leave out Spain?. (Colonies in four continents, empire bigger than the Mongol one, and probably bigger than the british one in its heydays, conquer a almost a whole continent, the phillipines, some colonies in Africa, and still a bicontinental country, First civ to circumnavigate the world, etc...) Your criteria is not based in historic facts, obviously.

Anyways, Spain will be in CIV IV, just like the other 17 civs that they are already chosen, so, who cares about this poll.
 
Superkrest said:
no the celts are not english..there are remenants of them in england..but that is not were they originally hailed from..but (even though this will pee some off) i do think that it is not necissary to have both turks and ottomans


Oooooohhhhhh...... at least, one person that doesn't have a highly english biased knowlegde of history..... :hatsoff:

There are celts in France and Spain as well, but it seems that some people that spend more time playing Civ than reading don't know that. They don't follow soccer as well, that's for sure, I they did, they should know that there are two main celtic football clubs in Europe, Celtic of Glasgow and Celta de Vigo, One of then is british, the other is Spanish.

And as far as the USA is concern, The first european colonies and cities in USA where spanish, not english. Even California have been part of New Spain for more time than it have been part of USA. So, if you want to give an historic based opinion about which civs should be in the game, some people should read more history, and not english biased one.

Edit: you don't know what New Spain was? That probes that your knowledge of history is highly english biased.
 
if we are talking main land..then im sorry but that is wrong..jamestown is the oldest permanent settlement in america...but in the americas..well then yes..the spanish were definitly there alot longer. the aztecs and incans were gone before the mayflower arrived.lol. and about the the celts..i think that people confuse the celts with kelts.( i hope not ..but i sometimes get that impression)..but we cant also forget that the vikings set foot on newfoundland years before others...i wonder why the silly buggers never said anything
 
Superkrest said:
if we are talking main land..then im sorry but that is wrong..jamestown is the oldest permanent settlement in america...but in the americas..well then yes..the spanish were definitly there alot longer. the aztecs and incans were gone before the mayflower arrived.lol. and about the the celts..i think that people confuse the celts with kelts.( i hope not ..but i sometimes get that impression)..but we cant also forget that the vikings set foot on newfoundland years before others...i wonder why the silly buggers never said anything


I don't know how strongs are the evidences of the vikings setting foot in Newfoundland, so I am not saying anything about that. (I have a friend from St. John, I would like to go over there one of these days) Anyway, We can discuss about that if you like, but even if it is true, that doesn't change my statement, The Spanish were the first european civ to have colonies and cities in the USA. Newfoundland is not USA, and it is not even in the American continent, (it is an island).

And I am sorry about that, but St. Augustine is way older than Jamestown.

http://www.staugustinelinks.com/st-augustine-history.asp

I copy and paste the first paragraph.

Saint Augustine is the oldest European city in the United States. The area was first visited by Ponce de Leon in 1513, but it was Juan Menendez de Aviles who established the first settlement, almost half a century before the first English settlers landed at Jamestown. St Augustine grew to become the Spanish center of power in North America for almost 200 years.

http://www.tobacco.org/History/Jamestown.html

Copy and paste the first paragraph again...

I may not forget the gentleman worthie of much commendations, which first tooke the pains to make triall thereof, his name Mr. John Rolfe, Anno Domini 1612, partly for the love he hath a long time borne unto it, and partly to raise commodity to the adventurers...
--Ralph Hamor, then Secretary of Virginia


So, St. Augustine is almost 50 years older. As i said before, there is a lot of english biased history everywhere.


Nice to talk to you, goodbye.
 
my apoligies..youre right about st.Augustine.....the vikings did leave some evidence(i personally belive it..but hmm.) on main land labodor. but i will still contend to your side about spain being the first new world colonial power
 
The texts I've been able to see claim Jamestown was abandoned in the 18th century. Is this correct?

If so, that would make it the first truly lasting settlement, but it would make the "oldest settlement north of Florida" (which, to me at least, imply STILL being around) claim dubious : a better claimant might be the one-year-younger but still standing Québec City (founded in 1608).
 
Frankly, you have 2 different ways to do this. One is to put 19 civs into the game based purely on how powerful they were at their peak, how long it lasted relative to its age and how much they influenced the world from their peak to today. The 2nd is putting some civs that are not as powerful as some others for the sake of geographical balance.

From my viewpoint as somebody who was born in the Philippines and moved to the U.S. only recently, there have been only 3 powerful and influential Asian civs in history, excluding the middle east. China and India really dominated the continent all throughout history. Japan wasn't a pushover for a long period of time but they were a bit player for most of history who only became important in the industrial - modern age, but they are still very important. So for Asian civs, I think these 3 should go into the game.

The problem with Southeast Asia is the region has always been fragmented into lots of weak city-states and countries. Most paid tribute to China or India, maybe, until they were colonized by the Europeans.

The Mongols were only powerful for a very short period of time, though they did conquer a lot of the known world at the time. They ruled China for around 200 years, too, so it isn't that short. You can make an argument that they and the Turks represent the various Central Asian steppe people who were quite a force throughout history, though it's always different tribes being in the spotlight one by one. The Manchus and the Jurchen had their time ruling China as well. The Huns, Scythians, Sarmatians, Parthians, Turcomans, Tatars, etc. all enjoyed their time in the spotlight. IMO, it's best to have a representative civ like Mongols for them rather than just calling them the Asian Steppe people. The Turks are another Asian Steppe people but they're more known for their Ottoman empire so I think there should be another Asian Steppe people representative and that's the Mongols.

Most of the rest of the powerful civs are European and Middle Eastern. The most powerful African civs in history were Middle Eastern and Mediterranean European in culture as well - Egypt, Carthage, Almoravid/Almohad, etc.

My 19 civs in my opinion:
Americas (3) - U.S., 1 Native American tribe from expansion, 1 old Native American Civ (think Maya is the best)
Asia (4) - India, China, Japan, Mongols
Europe (6) - Britain, France, Germany, Rome, Greece, Russia
Middle East (5) - Babylon/Assyria/Sumeria (pick 1 but rather have Babylon), Persia, Ottoman Turks, Arab, Egypt (kinda a mesh of Pharaonic - ancient Egyptian, Ptolemeic - Greek, hey, Cleopatra is Greek and she's Firaxis' chosen model for Egypt and Islamic - modern Egypt)
African - 1 native African I'm not sure what
 
Urederra said:
You leave out Spain, ...that is just silly...

What criteria did you follow to leave out Spain?. (Colonies in four continents, empire bigger than the Mongol one, and probably bigger than the british one in its heydays, conquer a almost a whole continent, the phillipines, some colonies in Africa, and still a bicontinental country, First civ to circumnavigate the world, etc...) Your criteria is not based in historic facts, obviously.


For the record historically speaking at its peak Spain had the 4th largest Empire it peaked in land area owned in 1790. The Mongels held the 3rd largest and was almost 2 million square miles larger than the Spanish.

But yes i agree Spain should be in.
 
Urederra said:
Oooooohhhhhh...... at least, one person that doesn't have a highly english biased knowlegde of history..... :hatsoff:
There are celts in France and Spain as well, but it seems that some people that spend more time playing Civ than reading don't know that. They don't follow soccer as well, that's for sure, I they did, they should know that there are two main celtic football clubs in Europe, Celtic of Glasgow and Celta de Vigo, One of then is british, the other is Spanish.

Indeed true many people think that the Celts and the English hare the same thing. That is simply not true, if thats the case then we must ask who are the Britons ? The Britons are fundamentally who the English are. Who came first the Britons or the Celts ? although not conclusive archeological finds would suggest that the Britons are alittle older than the Celts. Not by a great deal tho. But it is an important factor to keep in mind that the Britions, British, English whatever you prefer to call them have been around for a very significant amount of time and historically have held the single largest empire ever just to mention one detail of there history. Bigger than the Soviet Unions empire at it peak, that is quite something. So for the English not to be on that list is confusing to say the least and all i can think is there was confusion with the Celts here.
 
Himalia said:
For the record historically speaking at its peak Spain had the 4th largest Empire it peaked in land area owned in 1790. The Mongels held the 3rd largest and was almost 2 million square miles larger than the Spanish.

But yes i agree Spain should be in.

Well, my records say that the Spanish empire at is peak was during philip the second (1556-1598), not in 1790, where the spanish empire was composed of Spain, the french rosellon, The netherlands, Sicily, Sardinia, Milan, Naples, Oran, Tunisia, Portugal and its afroasiatic empire, all the discoveried america (brazil included) and the Philipines. It was 20 times bigger than the roman empire and the largest of the world ever. With territories in Europe, Africa, Asia and the Americas.

I know that in many places this is not recognized, mainly because they tend to separate Spain from Portugal, but during Philip the second, Portugal (and its empire) was part of Spain. Many of those places are english biased historians, where they try to demonstrate that the British empire was the largest ever, so they don´t take the joint of the Spanish and portuguese empires under Philip the second reign into consideration. But the fact is that Portugal was part of Spain between 1556-1598 and therefore, the spanish empire at its peak was larger than the british one.

Of course, England and Spain should be in, if you want to pick civs based on historical facts. I know that is difficult to leave out european civs from the game, but, if you want to be historically accurate and pick only four european civs, those should be Greece, Rome, England and Spain. Then, if you want to add more, we can study more history and discuss what else to add.


Edit: And I am not anti-english, just look at my sig.
 
@ Urederra i have stacks of history book heres with me and ive done a fair bot of searching on Spain and i still can only get them to 5th place on worlds largest empires.

1st British Empire 1920
2nd Soviet Union 1945
3rd Mongols 1259
4th Russian Empire 1990
5th Spain 1790
6th Russian federation 1991
7th Chinese Empire 1792
8th 3rd French Republic 1930
9th USA and its empire 1945
10th Gokturk Khanate 580

From about the 7th spot upwards the sizes really go up suddenly.
Do you have any deatails on the land mass occupied by Spain during 1556-1598 ? im intrested in this.
 
Crayton said:
Portugal and Spain were united from 1580-1640.
I think.

You are right, and that was the time when Spain had the largest empire, not in 1790.

Himalia, I have already told you what the colonies were, But findind them in a webpage written in english is as difficult as finding the size of the english fleet that lost the war of Jenkin's ear. (The english lost a fleet larger than the Philip the second invincible armada, but the war of Jenkin's ear remains unknown for most english population :D )
 
Ok the point that you are arguing is if you combine the two it would make them larger than the Spanish on there own in 1790. It seems you are not debabting that the sole Spanish Empire was large in 1790 than during the period of 1556-1598 but you stating that as Portugal was under Spanish (which is correct) rule during that period that when you combine the teritory of Spain and Portugal together in would be larger. For this i still must disagree simply beacause even if i add the land mass figures of both Spain and Portugal territories together (and being as favourable with any figures i have as possible basically always allowing them the benefit of the highest figure) still could only get them into second place and for that ive not allowed any favourable figures for any other nation. You mentiond a Spanish website a link to that would be fine.
 
DeathPantera said:
Carthaginian and Iroquois for me
The poll finished ages ago, dude... and the civs for Civ4 were revealed ages ago too. ;)
 
Himalia said:
You mentiond a Spanish website a link to that would be fine.

There are several...

http://www.duke.edu/web/spanish-lit/docs/kamen.html
http://www.ub.es/hvirt/public/congres97/masac.htm
http://barrapunto.com/journal.pl?op=display&id=7169&uid=15667

I don't want this thread to go off topic, so I let it as it is, you said that when Portugal was part of Spain it made the second largest empire in the world, that's fine with me. The statement I made before remains valid for me, If you have to choose four european civs based in history, those would be Rome, Greece, England and Spain, If you add a fifth one, that would be Russia. Then we have to study more history to choose other european civs.

I notice that you are not affaid either, :D that's good.

Have a good day.
 
Thanks for the links. Some of its very intresting. As for England, Spain, Greece and Rome i would agree. For a 5th one i find it alittle tougher but Russia would be one of those on a shortlist.
 
Back
Top Bottom