Civ V Civilizations Roster

[say1988]

I would say Mongolia has a huge base, not of Mongolians, but due to their fame. Who doesn't want to conquer like the Khans?

 

[apenpaap]

The Mongols conquered the largest/second-largest (depending on your sources) empire in world history. It'd be really weird not to put them in Vanilla civ 5.

 

[Arakhor]

The Achamaenid Persians controlled 46% of the known world at their height and the British Empire in 1936 controlled some 23% of the entire world population. I believe it's a toss-up between Mongolia and China for the largest land empire ever

 

[Dragonflow]

Well Persia was big but not that big. The Persian Empire at its height was still smaller than Russia is today. Britain was the largest Empire ever created during its height in 1922.

 

[say1988]

The Achamaenid Persians controlled 46% of the known world at their height and the British Empire in 1936 controlled some 23% of the entire world population. I believe it's a toss-up between Mongolia and China for the largest land empire ever

The British Empire was unquestionably the largest Empire in terms of land area, with Australia, Canada, India (including Pakistan and Bangladesh) and huge swaths of Africa. The Mongols the largest contiguous. Population wise, in absolute terms it would be the PRC, in relative terms it was probably the Mongols, but that is just a guess.

 

[Ranbir]

I remember in old games it didn't really matter much because there were no specific asymmetric bonuses that one civ had over another, so you could quite easily just do the leader/name change and it was all good.

Stalin and Mao far from saints, and they're in the game.

True, but their legacy isn't as black and white for their respective countries as Hitler's is in Germany.

 

[Pangur Bán]

The Achamaenid Persians controlled 46% of the known world at their height

"Known world" is a bogus concept. Known to whom? Any human? The Persians? What Persians?

The Achamaenid Persians controlled 46% of the known world at their height and the British Empire in 1936 controlled some 23% of the entire world population. I believe it's a toss-up between Mongolia and China for the largest land empire ever

No, it's a toss up between the British Empire, the Mongol Empire and Russia, though the extent of all looks bigger on paper than they were (Russian Siberia was essentially just a rail track, and British Canada and Australia are similarly empty geographical masses). The Mongols conquered most of the great civilizations of the Old World, China, the Turks, Persia, Great Bulgaria, much of eastern Europe (Rus), and much of the Middle East (eventually northern India too). And they did it with medieval technology.

 

[Ranbir]

That medieval technology/tactics they did it with was state of the art for its time. Mobility, Flexibility, and Initiative.

I'd personally go for Britain. Rule Britannia, brap!

 

[villagelder]

The Mali were the second-largest empire in the world at their height (after the Mongols). They had scholars and students from hundreds of miles around in Timbuktu. They are far, far more important than Carthage, the Dutch, or the Byzantines.

That is an insane statement about Mali - "second largest (after the Mongols)." They were relatively insignificant to the affairs of world history. Not humanity, world history. As far as criticism about the Aztecs being an empire, they absolutely were. Check out their history - they militarily conquered all of MesoAmerica and made slave runs to honor their gods, and as far as I can tell, for fun. That makes for a powerful empire. They may not have conquered the Eurasian-African world, but before Columbus, the Eurasian-African empires did not conquer the Americas either.

Carthage dominated the western Mediterranean militarily and economically and rivalled Rome until Rome copied the Carthaginian quintequirreme (?sp), documented fact. Not to mention, Hannibal is argued as the best military general of all time.

Maya was not a full-fledged empire, they were a trading, and warring, collection of city-states much like ancient Greece - pre-Alexander. To be honest, if Alexander hadn't conquered most of the "known" world at the time, I wouldn't put Greece in the first release, and he was actually Macedonian.

Incans, like the Hittites, was a powerful kingdom, dominated by their central city, but not an empire.

Of course, this is all fun debate, that's why we're talking in forums.

Mongols and Japan could be in too, but they have limited it to 18 civs, not 20 or more. I personally would save them for a Warlords-type expansion pack.

-Peace all

 

[Arakhor]

It's just as "bogus" as saying that Alexander conquered 25% of the known world or that the Romans utterly controlled over 50% of the known world, Calgacus. It was the Classical world, after all.

 

[EMT]

Incans, like the Hittites, was a powerful kingdom, dominated by their central city, but not an empire.

Oh, it's on.

Let me show you a link from wikipedia showing the expansion of the Inca EMPIRE.
Largest Empire in PRE-COLUMBIAN AMERICA in the first paragraph

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Inca-expansion.png]

LOOK at that map. Would you call that peaceful expansion by a King? No, the Inca was emperor, descendant of the sun!

If the Inca Empire was so dominated by their central city, why did Huayna Capac almost do the same thing that happened to Rome? Split the empire, the northern half ruled from Quito, the other from Cuzco.

Okay, I'm through on my nationalistic rage. EMPIRE DAMMIT

 

[villagelder]

No, it's a toss up between the British Empire, the Mongol Empire and Russia,

Russian would be out in the top ten, but not competing for number one. Round globe to flat map make Russia appear a lot bigger than it is. Plus, IMHO, claiming the moon as part of your empire might sound good, but there are no people and therefore, no military, economic, or cultural impact comes from the moon. And lets face it 1/3 of Russian looks like a frozen moon. Several empires are ahead of Russia in conquering the known world - "known world" means per hemisphere in my book - Persia, Mongolia, China, Arab-Muslim Empire, Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire, Holy Roman Empire, Greek-Macedon Empire; even USA today is ahead of Russia all-time when considering military dominance, economic influence, and cultural influence.

 

[apenpaap]

Oh, it's on.

Let me show you a link from wikipedia showing the expansion of the Inca EMPIRE.
Largest Empire in PRE-COLUMBIAN AMERICA in the first paragraph

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Inca-expansion.png]

LOOK at that map. Would you call that peaceful expansion by a King? No, the Inca was emperor, descendant of the sun!

If the Inca Empire was so dominated by their central city, why did Huayna Capac almost do the same thing that happened to Rome? Split the empire, the northern half ruled from Quito, the other from Cuzco.

Okay, I'm through on my nationalistic rage. EMPIRE DAMMIT

I agree. The Incans make much more sense as an American civ to be included in vanilla civ 5 then the Aztecs. They're also a lot more fun IMO.

 

[cybrxkhan]

On Mongolia, it is actually reasonable marketing strategy. Sure, no one in Mongolia will care, but how many people in the Western world have heard of Genghis Khan? Quite a lot, actually. After Attila, he's the best-known conquering barbarian (or course in real life he was more complicated than just that).

 

[Pikkis]

Yes, The comment was regarding "buyer base" / "Home Country", and it is clear that Mongolia per se doesn't have that big of a fanbase as for example Germany or America does. And thus, if they were to mix it up, this could be one of the civs postponed to an expansion (also: another selling name for the expansion). Aztecs would for example fall into the same category.

Couldn't we then also postpone Greece and Rome to an expansion too? I think they would be very selling names even though Civ may not have very large fanbases in Greece and Italy.

 

[mitsho]

Yes of course ;-)

 

[CHEESE!]

The Achamaenid Persians controlled 46% of the known world at their height and the British Empire in 1936 controlled some 23% of the entire world population. I believe it's a toss-up between Mongolia and China for the largest land empire ever

I only know about my house and lawn. The CHEESE! empire spans the entire known world. Why aren't I in?

 

[Pikkis]

On Mongolia, it is actually reasonable marketing strategy. Sure, no one in Mongolia will care, but how many people in the Western world have heard of Genghis Khan? Quite a lot, actually. After Attila, he's the best-known conquering barbarian (or course in real life he was more complicated than just that).

Where did you get that information? I thought that Genghis Khan is more widely known than Attila.

 

[Evie]

That is an insane statement about Mali - "second largest (after the Mongols)."

As was already discussed in this thread, it's misphrased, not insane.

The Mali were, at the time of their greatest extent, the second largest empire in existence at that time, after the aforesaid Mongols. China at its peak wouold have been greater, but during Mali's peak, it was Mongol. Idem Russia. England at its peak or Spain at its peak would be greater, but one didn't even exist, and the other was a small island at the time Mali was as its Zenith.

They were relatively insignificant to the affairs of world history. Not humanity, world history.

And yet their gold fueled the European renaissance, and one of the motivation for the Portuguese to explore down the coast of Africa was to find an alternate route to the wealth of Sub-Saharan Africa than the Mali/Songhai controlled Trans-Saharan trade routes.

As far as criticism about the Aztecs being an empire, they absolutely were. Check out their history - they militarily conquered all of MesoAmerica

The Tlaxcallans, the Tarascans, the Zapotecs, the Mixtecs and a wide variety of assorted Mayan City-States would like a word with you, if you please...

More to the point, the Aztecs controlled a part of the northern half of Meso America, which is itself a fairly small region (essentially, southern Mexico) of North America.

and made slave runs to honor their gods, and as far as I can tell, for fun.

No, they waged localized wars with their neighbors and sacrificed some of the captured warriors, in order to keep the sun and the world from dying out on them. One presume that continued existence is a matter of more than just fun.

That makes for a powerful empire.

What, holding human sacrifices in a territory that's about a third or a quarter of Mexico?

Maya was not a full-fledged empire, they were a trading, and warring, collection of city-states much like ancient Greece - pre-Alexander.

Mostly true, although there were several occasions where one of the city States essentially came to dominate the others until the next revolt. Mayapan comes to mind.

Incans, like the Hittites, was a powerful kingdom, dominated by their central city, but not an empire.

...I'm confused. What did the Aztecs do that the Incans didn't that you'd call the Aztecs an empire and not the Incans?

 

[fantsu]

I would like to see this guy in, as Scandinavian or Swedish leader.
He is one of the greatest warrior kings afterall, and conquered almost whole Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustavus_II_Adolphus