E3: Firaxis Announced 2nd Civ3 Expansion!
- Thread starter Thunderfall
- Start date
aaglo
Furioso!
So, will this expansion vol2 be a good thing?
Deathwalker
Warlord
But the French did allay with Germany when they thought they were going to win
Originally posted by Deathwalker
But the French did allay with Germany when they thought they were going to win
OK, revised example - you don't want the Holy Roman Empire to ally with the Fatimite Caliphate in a Crusades Scenario
ltccone
Prince
The Australian Aboriginies may have had religion, but they had little else. They never made it past the stone age. They built no cities and didn't farm. They wouldn't make a very good civ for Civ3.
thestonesfan
A Client of Ron Kuby
Why can't Australia just be open to colonization? The Aborginines were NOT a civilization. They may have had an advanced tribal structure, but so do South American natives.
Still, the Iroquois/American Indians were scarcely any different, even though they did farm.
Still, the Iroquois/American Indians were scarcely any different, even though they did farm.
Gingerbread Man
Dark Magus
The Australian Aborigines pretty much are as much as a civilisation as the north american Indians. Maybe the only difference would be farming, seeing that they lacked it.
And they actually did offer resistance to settlement. Bennelong and the rainbow warriors practised effective guerilla warfare, sabotaging and inhibitng pre-1800's European Australia. They had a very prominant religion, tribal structure and culture. To say they were never a civilisation, well, the only thing short of civilisation was no farming, and no organised cities, the biggest being a few tribes having permanent housing. So ultimately, and unfortunately to the Australian audiences like me, aboriginies fall just short of classifying as a civilization. But they were getting very close, some tribes closer than a large number of african tribes at the time.
And they actually did offer resistance to settlement. Bennelong and the rainbow warriors practised effective guerilla warfare, sabotaging and inhibitng pre-1800's European Australia. They had a very prominant religion, tribal structure and culture. To say they were never a civilisation, well, the only thing short of civilisation was no farming, and no organised cities, the biggest being a few tribes having permanent housing. So ultimately, and unfortunately to the Australian audiences like me, aboriginies fall just short of classifying as a civilization. But they were getting very close, some tribes closer than a large number of african tribes at the time.
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
I disagree about the Iroquois
They had an advanced Government (instead of negotiating with the Europeans individually, they negotiated as a single Governent, the Iroquois Confederacy)
However, the hight of their civilization was not in the Ancient age. Their hight was after European expansion into the New World. Once they had Dutch firearms, they became a civilization that rivaled the Europeans.
Although they never expanded before hand, in an effort to compete over trading grounds with the Hurons, they changed their strategy of warfare. Previously, they only did small warfare, sort of as a sport. Now they did an outright attack against the Hurons with an army of over 1000 men. Then they attacked the French, and were a constant danger to them as well.
ltccone
Prince
The "Iroquois" of Civ3 are an amalgamation of all of the NA Indian tribes. The name is from a confederation of eastern tribes. The mounted warrior UU is from the plains indians (after they got horses from the Spanish).
The "mound" civilization of the Mississippi valley built cities that contained thousands of people. That civ was destroyed by European brought diseases, before the Europeans even saw them.
By contrast the Australian Aborigines were still in the stone age, did no farming, and never lived in anything larger than a village. They don't qualify as a civ. It is not their "fault." They lived in an area where there were no domesticable plants or animals, so farming or herding was not possible.
ltccone
Prince
That's true, but since they didn't ever become a civ we don't know what their traits are or what their UU would be.
scotland_no1
Jimmy Hat Salesman
the words iroquis and nomad mudhuts come to mind
ltccone
Prince
The "Iroquois" in civ3 is an amalgamation of all of the NA Indian tribes. BTW, the Iroquois didn't live in "mud huts."
Louis XXIV
Le Roi Soleil
The Iroquois weren't nomads.
Hellfire
Prince
The Iroquois are an amalgamation of 6 major tribes from the North and mideastern United States. This nation banded together to defend each other from invasion and did form a rather large and powerful civilization.
If you read the entry on civ3.com its not entirely inaccurate and its a good place to start:
http://www.civ3.com/civoftheweek.cfm?civ=Iroquois
Also, here's a good place to start to find more information:
http://encyclopedia.com/searchpool.asp?target=iroquois+confederacy
And then there is google:
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=iroquois+confederation
However, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not mistake the iroquois civ in civ3 as an amalgamation of ALL native american indians. Thats like saying everyone in the Middle East are Arabs, and both statements are insulting and untrue, and show you don't understand the history of the civ
ltccone
Prince
Civ3.com gives a good overview of the Iroquois AND states that the Iroquois represent ALL NA natives.
http://civ3.com/civoftheweek.cfm?civ=Iroquois
http://civ3.com/civoftheweek.cfm?civ=Iroquois
ltccone
Prince
Originally posted by Hellfire
However, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not mistake the iroquois civ in civ3 as an amalgamation of ALL native american indians. Thats like saying everyone in the Middle East are Arabs, and both statements are insulting and untrue, and show you don't understand the history of the civ
The Iroquois in civ3 ARE an amalgamation of ALL Northern Native Americans. Below is directly from civ3.com on the Iroquois:
"In Civilization III, the Iroquois represent all the tribes of Northern Native Americans. Though the Iroquois rarely used horse-mounted warriors in combat due to the wooded terrain they usually fought in, many other tribes frequently made use of them (notably the Sioux and other tribes of the Great Plains), and to great effect. "
If they weren't an amalgamation, then they wouldn't have Mounted Warriors from the plains tribes...
what about differant leader heads for each era, can't stand looking at mao's face at 5000b.c. ex. german could have a germanic cheif than fredrick the great than bismark? or uu for each era. if you are germany by the time you get the panzer either you are already dominating the world or its too late to matter
Hygro
soundcloud.com/hygro/
I just hope getting this will ADD to PtW and not require me to pick which expansion I want to play on whatever day.
