Civilization 4 hates Native Americans

[Hannabir]

The only reason the Iroquois became powerful is that they were the first group in the region to make contact with Europeans interested in trade and not conquest.

Actually, the Algonquin were, but they did not have the level of organization to profit from having first contact.

But must importantly the Game is called Civilization which means city. Iroquois had none. In fact in 4000bc when you build your first city it would be a larger city then the iroquois ever lived in.

Civilization does not mean city. Nonetheless, Iroquois towns like Akwesasne and Cattaraugus are large enough today by the arbitrary civ standards. They didn't stop developing when the Europeans arrived, you know.

 

[Nyvin]

There were more prime locations where cities could be supported but most towns there had a few thousand inhabitants max, too. And even in a huge city like London almost all houses were of poor quality and lasted less long than a longhouse.

Didn't Venice have half a million people around the year 1200? And Constaninople had nearly a million people ever since the sixth century. Both London and Paris were more or less 'post-renaisance' cities really.

 

[Hannabir]

""East to west statement" is very reasonable and is introduced by professor Jared Diamond. This verticality and impenetrable jungles in Central- America/ desert of Northern Mexico did prevent trading between different areas. Incas never knew anything about Mexico and people in Mexico never knew anything about Peru. Farming also would have moved faster to North- America without deserts of Mexico. "

The jungles were not always there. At the peak of the Maya civilization, the climate was much different, and the land where they lived was fertile. It was the climate change that destroyed their society.
Meanwhile, trade did exist at least between meso and north America (much less is known about the Inca and their predecessors in Tiahuanaca). Domesticated corn, tobacco and other products made their way north. The Maya in their time sailed the east coastline, and there were overland roads. Entire peoples trekked thousands of kilometers to new homes from south to northeast and from northwest to south.

In defense of Dr. Diamond, this wasn't the only argument as to the 'bonuses' that old world civs had. take for example Domesticated animals. Chickens, Cows, Horses, Pigs, lowland sheep- all old world.

Europe didn't create them either. They imported them from Africa and Asia.
Further, to balance the European headstart, the native Americans maintained their wildlife in that era whereas the Europeans killed theirs.

 

[Hannabir]

Didn't Venice have half a million people around the year 1200? And Constaninople had nearly a million people ever since the sixth century.

Not sure about the numbers. Venice was about 120,000 in 1500 AD, I believe. People fled to these cities to escape the wars (Venice had a deal with the Mongols), they were not typical European towns. After the Mongol threat dissipated, the number of inhabitants of Constantinople shrank considerably.

Both London and Paris were more or less 'post-renaisance' cities really.

Well, London was quite large when it burnt to the ground in 1666.
Around 500,000 people lived there. But the second city in England, Bristol, counted only 30,000.

 

[Rhye]

it's easy to say that they should be in, but who would you have left out?

 

[Hannabir]

Not one. There should be more civs!

 

[troytheface]

well the contention of the original post stated that Civ 4 hates native americans because they are not represented. Based on this criterea They hate alot of other people too like Canadians who actually buy the game. If i were a firaxin i would only include countries whose people buy the game. Mexico instead of "Aztecs". If i were a shareholder i would demand it based on economic common sense.

 

[Hannabir]

Now, beyond the tenous at best influence on the American democratic system, Iroquis and Cherokee, have really left no last mark on the world as we know it. They had different customs and own culture, but so did Aboriginal tribes in Australia or Africa.

The Iroquois taught the Europeans at least three important things: democracy, interplanting, and town planning. The impact of these three are seen everywhere in the modern world, even though we tend to forget much (the Iroquois would never have built New Orleans in that location).

 

[Hannabir]

This is something I've heard several times now, however, I frankly have never heard of this before. Can anyone elaborate on it?

The Iroquois advised the founding fathers in great detail on how to set up their government and judicial system, and a number of American leaders lived among the Iroquois for years to study their society. Parts of the US constitition come straight from the Great Law of Peace; even the national symbol, the eagle, was copied. Iroquois leaders were present as honoured guests at the founding ceremony.

 

[Ephor]

It would have been nice, but I think the exclusion is fair. Unlike most other civs, Native Americans were nomadic and never built anything that stood the test of time, like say, the Mayans to the south.

 

[Hannabir]

Another misconception. None of the native peoples were nomadic. The plains tribes had summer and winter homes, but that's all.
Pueblo's, burial mounds, temples and totempoles have stood the test of time, and many towns are still there.
Most skyscrapers in North America were built by Mohawks.

 

[wit>trope]

There are already Amerindian -- is that the right word? or does that mean mixed race? -- tribes as civs in Civ 4 so what's the problem? There's probably as many Amerindian civs as there are Far East civs. The more civs the better if you ask me, but if given a choice between more Amerindian civs or more Euro civs, the choice is clear. I'd say about half the civs should be European, then 1/4 Far East and then 1/8 Middle East and the last 1/8 should be split between Africa, Amerinidina, aborigine, and Pacific Islanders.

They should also include ALL the civs they intend to put in instead of wanting to make big bucks on expansions.

People who say a civ SHOULD NOT be included are being silly if they mean it in absolute sense since if you don't like it, you can always not play with it.

 

[brachy-pride]

Only Mayas, Aztecs and Incas deserve to be in the game.

 

[Hannabir]

The problem is not so much that the Iroquois, Anasazi, Adena etc. are not in the game, since we can and will add them if we want to, but that their history is denied.

 

[trotskylite]

Most skyscrapers in North America were built by Mohawks.

... what do you mean by skyscapers

 

[Nyvin]

Not sure about the numbers. Venice was about 120,000 in 1500 AD, I believe. People fled to these cities to escape the wars (Venice had a deal with the Mongols), they were not typical European towns. After the Mongol threat dissipated, the number of inhabitants of Constantinople shrank considerably..

oh, it must've been later the size of Venice grew. And I do remember the city of Constaninople shrinking sometime.

Well, London was quite large when it burnt to the ground in 1666. Around 500,000 people lived there. But the second city in England, Bristol, counted only 30,000.

1666 is post-renaisance. At this time Europe already underwent its population explosion.

 

[wit>trope]

The problem is not so much that the Iroquois, Anasazi, Adena etc. are not in the game, since we can and will add them if we want to, but that their history is denied.

You could have their history mentioned in the Civlopedia. They still have a Civlopedia right? I was confused by the Pre-Release info -- it said the Civlopedia will include all of the manual or something and was confused about whether it would also include the bonus history info.

Honestly, most people haven't even heard of some of those tribes. Also, some of those tribes shouldn't be in the game at the expense of say Poland or Switzerland.

 

[MarineCorps]

... what do you mean by skyscapers

American Indians were emplyed in great numbers in the bulding of some of Americas skyscrapers in the 1930s. I forget the reason why. They had some kind of unique skill

 

[Nobody]

Man get over it, there is a limited number of position in the game. Civilizations dosent have indians, or jews or the french or africa. And he definatly dosent hate qubec

 

[CivFan91]

They were strong, and did not fear the heights at which they worked. Also, they allowed themselves to be paid less than American workers. They were happy to work, and America had it's buildings they needed. Worked out nicely.

EDIT - Oops, got beat to the post. I am referring to the question two posts above me.