Eastern Europe is NOT under-represented

[Willowmound]

Where, exactly is that line, anyway?

The Ural mountains in Russia.

I mean, I'm pretty sure it's based on tectonic plates, so there's a geographical basis, but...there are myriad tectonic plates in North America. Maybe California should be considered a continent .

These things are based as much on tradition as they are on your kind of steely logic.

There is Europe, there is Asia. You can argue, but you cannot win.

 

[TheLastOne36]

There is Europe, there is Asia. You can argue, but you cannot win.

Except when it comes to the ME and India.

 

[kdaag]

Holy Roman Empire was in Eastern Europe and Charlemagne was it's leader. Are you from America?

Well I'm from Sweden and in no way has the Holy Roman Empire in any way had any territorial control over Eastern Europe. People tend to be too fixated with the current geographical and ethnical borders to realise this.

True that the Holy Roman Empire controlled Schlesien and Pommern (in modern day Poland, then inhabited by Germans that Poland kicked out after WW2) but these areas are still in Central Europe and so was Bohemia (modern day Czech Rep). Slovenia was also part of the Holy Roman Empire but this is definately Central Europe as well.

If you consider the territories under the nominal rule of Charlemagne (not really Holy Roman Emperor at all, but it's fictional founder) you could also include the Pannonian plain (part of modern day Hungary) but this was just a tributal territory and is still part of Central Europe, not Eastern.

I know that you Poles have had a terrible time in history with malicious neighbours attacking you from all directions all the time but now we live in the 21th Century so stop being so stupidly nationalistic! Why is it every time you hear about Poland anywhere it's about the Poles being difficult and going against everyone else and refusing to co-operate?

"Why is there no Polish civ and why won't the EU give us twice as many seats as the population deserves?"

So welcome into modern day Europe and please try to move away from the 20th Century!

 

[eric_]

Hrm...nope, the separation is based on medieval concepts of continents and cites rivers and mountains as the dividing line in the north. Otherwise, they share a continental shelf.

Apparently North and South America only became connected about 3M years ago.

Just kinda interesting.

 

[Mirc]

The Cold War is finished. Germany is one state. This map is null and void today.

This is Eastern Europe if you wanted to know.

Ah, so Russia is not in Europe, the biggest geographical part of EE is not in Europe, good that I know.

 

[Xen]

As a note, two major countires in the area arnt slavs at all, The Romanians (and by extension, the Moldavians), and the Hungarians. And of course a great deal of the strife arising in the former Yugoslavia is the fact that Albanians arnt slavs either.

That said, Byzantium is only a good inclusion when it comes to Eastern Europe, since it has been an incredible influence on the region, even in areas traditionally catholic.

 

[eric_]

There is Europe, there is Asia. You can argue, but you cannot win.

Heh...it's not like all geologists agree that the line is anything but arbitrary.

And, it's not just the Urals. It's also rivers, inland seas, etc.

I'm also not gonna argue with anyone. I mean, I effectively think of them as separate continents, even though I think it's kinda silly.

 

[TheLastOne36]

The Cold War is finished. Germany is one state. This map is null and void today.

This is Eastern Europe if you wanted to know.

Ah, so Russia is not in Europe, the biggest geographical part of EE is not in Europe, good that I know.

It shows the civs that are already represented to show how eastern europe is pretty much, well unrepresented. East gernaby on the other map is just a "blooper" of the map. It still shows east europe clearly.

 

[RedRalph]

One thing I've never understood is why Europe and Asia are considered separate continents. It's ridiculous.

apart from culture, we do have the Urals and Caucasus dividing us form Asia... but yeah I know what you mean. the Europeans are caucasian and the Asians are mongoloid, but geographically there isnt a proper dividing line as to my mind, a mountain range dosent count

 

[Willowmound]

Heh...it's not like all geologists agree that the line is anything but arbitrary.

And, it's not just the Urals. It's also rivers, inland seas, etc.

I'm also not gonna argue with anyone. I mean, I effectively think of them as separate continents, even though I think it's kinda silly.

I didn't want to go into details. Or do a lot of reasearch.

My point is, logic does not dictate how continents are defined. And I think that's fine.

 

[RedRalph]

As a note, two major countires in the area arnt slavs at all, The Romanians (and by extension, the Moldavians), and the Hungarians. And of course a great deal of the strife arising in the former Yugoslavia is the fact that Albanians arnt slavs either.
.

Nor are the baltic states

 

[TheLastOne36]

As a note, two major countires in the area arnt slavs at all, The Romanians (and by extension, the Moldavians), and the Hungarians. And of course a great deal of the strife arising in the former Yugoslavia is the fact that Albanians arnt slavs either.

That said, Byzantium is only a good inclusion when it comes to Eastern Europe, since it has been an incredible influence on the region, even in areas traditionally catholic.

Yes but the byzantines aren't in Eastern Europe entirely. most of the land was in Southern europe and asia. And it doesn't fix the problem about slavs either.
Romanians and Hungarians are part of eastern europe. It doesn't matter if there slavic or not. There still part of eastern europe.

 

[eric_]

I mean, in the field of geography, I would certainly hope they don't simply rely on cultural and historical conceptions of land mass. That would be tres unscientific.

In my day-to-day life, though, logic plays no role in how I think about it. I'm not about to start saying Thailand's in Eurasia, for instance.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Nor are the baltic states

The Baltic states are small... I think there represented by vikings in some way. (don't quote me i'm obviously wrong )

 

[Willowmound]

The Baltic states are small... I think there represented by vikings in some way. (don't quote me i'm obviously wrong )

Clearly.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Damn. You quoted me....

But the balts are to "small" to be represented "succesfully" in Civ. Closest there going to get is Finland.

 

[RedRalph]

Damn. You quoted me....

But the balts are to "small" to be represented "succesfully" in Civ. Closest there going to get is Finland.

Only Estonia is Finnic out of the three

 

[TheLastOne36]

yah i know that. I meant the closest a baltic state is going to be represented is by Finland. (which only counts for Estonia). Lithuania can someway be represented by Poland.

 

[Xen]

Yes but the byzantines aren't in Eastern Europe entirely. most of the land was in Southern europe and asia. And it doesn't fix the problem about slavs either.
Romanians and Hungarians are part of eastern europe. It doesn't matter if there slavic or not. There still part of eastern europe.

depends on how far north you extend "Southern Europe". A border on the danube and making tributary states of both the Hungarians and the Kievan Rus speaks only of being one of the most prominent powers of its era, in both southern Europe, and the east.

Though I wouldnt mind sticking in the Poles, Romanians, and Hungarians (or Croats, as opposed to Hungarians)

 

[TheLastOne36]

I'd say heck with Serbia/Croatia. Let's just add Yugoslavia instead to add a modern civ, and represent the area. Perhaps 2 leaders would be good? Tito and a medieval Serbian one.