GRAPHICS: Animated Leader Heads

[mfauzi]

Hmm.. I don't know. But I don't think they were really anti-democracy. Yes, some arab states are anti-US but some of the arab states are democratic themselves.

Anyway, went to look out a bit about the Arab's golden age. Got a pretty good source. You can read it and maybe decide on a leader:
http://islam.org/mosque/ihame/Sec7.htm

 

[Mikoyan]

Thanks for the link.
I don't know how i should do it, some current arab nations are basically Democratic, some are Monarchies and some are influenced by Communism, and there are Despotisms.
I don't know what the shunned government should be, but the ideal one would be republic, since most of the middle estern/north african nations are republics.

 

[mfauzi]

Hmm.. but is it the modern republic or the old kind? I mean, by right, US is a republic too, but that's a whole lot of complicated things to explain it. Maybe we should see what the other things. Since we're talking a lot about this, we might as well make a whole new thread just to discuss this, how about that?

 

[Mikoyan]

There is no need for a new thread, i simply want to know what to do with my Arab civ.

 

[Beelzibub]

is it possible to change your advisors as well?
i think it would be great if each civ had their own advisors. so that if Tony Blair was priminister then you could have Robin Cook as foreign advisor and so on. (ok so he isnt foreign minister any more but who cares!)
maybe The Sun newspaper could be the domestic advisor!!!

i am but a novice in terms of customisation so any advise on how to achieve this would be gratefully received.

 

[Graeme the mad]

HEY ARAB GUY - PLEASE, PLEASE DONT MAKE THE ARAB SU THE MAMELUKE

I DONT WANT ANOTHER UNIT TO REPLACE KNIGHT and as well as that you have been influenced by AOK big style - when i add an arab civ im going to make the SU - teh Ghazid which replaces the longbowman ( STATS: 5,2,1)

Btw to whoever said saladin shouldnt be leader: yes he should he was a big arab leader who, incidentally, mullah omar models himself on. he is very well known and liked in arab countries

NOT THE MAMELUKE THEY WERE NEVER A UNIT AS SUCH (okay neither were ghazids but just not another knight replcacement - if you must do mamelukes make them replace longbowman or pikeman or something oh please not another knight replacement) (alternativelyt I could just not download your mod especially since im not anyhow cos im waiting till more can be added and then ill do my own except for the animation cos i cant draw for tofee even very nice toffee, but dont, please)

 

[Mikoyan]

Okay now, there is no need to shout.
Maybe i'll make the SU a desert hunter, upgraded Infantry (+1 attack, +1 movement)

 

[ComradeRed]

I mean, by right, US is a republic too, but that's a whole lot of complicated things to explain it.

According to the civilization rules, if you read the description, The US falls under democracy. The republic in this game is a collection of city states, a confederation might be a good way to describe it.

 

[Thuloid]

Not that it necessarily disqualifies him from leading the Arab civ, but I believe Saladin was a Kurd.

In any event, why has arguably the most successful, universally recognized, and historically significant Arab in history been overlooked as a potential leader? Mohammed seems almost too obvious a choice.

UU-wise, a mounted unit is the natural preference for the Arabs, but the Knight and Mounted Warrior are already overwritten twice each. Maybe Camel Cavalry (6.2.1, replaces Cavalry, all terrain as roads)?

 

[mfauzi]

Hmm, I don't think that's a good idea. Mohammed may be the person who reorganized the arabs and brought religion and order and all. But any muslim players out there most likely would disagree. IMO, I would rather have some other as a leader. Some people who might be anti-Islam might play just for the sake of getting rid of him maybe? That would be a similar effect of introducing Jesus or Moses in this game wouldn't it?

Anyway, I agree on that choice of the camel cavalry

 

[Thuloid]

While a controversial figure, the historical fact is that Mohammed was the leader of the Arabs, in a religious, cultural, and military sense. Especially since any Arab civ is just a mod, the choice of leaders need not be perfect from a religious sensitivity standpoint, though I kind of doubt that Muslims might object too strongly to their recognized prophet being depicted as leader of the people he really did lead into historical significance. (whew! A bit wordy).

Jesus and Moses would make much sillier choices for Civ leaders, given that Jesus never led more than a few hundred people, and for much of his career only about a dozen notable guys, and that he seemed to lack political ambition or power base. Moses did lead people, and a significan number of them, but they were nomads, and CivIII is of course city-based.

Come to think of it, Gandhi is nearly as strange a leader choice. Same for Joan of Arc. Ashoka and Louis XIV or Napoleon would be better.

Might not anti-Islam players object to an Arab civ in general? I suppose white supremacists might also object to the Zulus, Chinese, Japanese, Persians, Indians, Iroquois, Aztecs, Babylonians, Egyptians and possibly others, but I'm not exactly preoccupied with catering to such goofy ideas.

 

[mfauzi]

Originally posted by Thuloid

Might not anti-Islam players object to an Arab civ in general? I suppose white supremacists might also object to the Zulus, Chinese, Japanese, Persians, Indians, Iroquois, Aztecs, Babylonians, Egyptians and possibly others, but I'm not exactly preoccupied with catering to such goofy ideas.

No, no, what I mean is, would those anti-Islam players get the mod just so that they could destroy it, just as those who are strongly anti-nazi would get the fascist patch just so that they could destroy it? Then again, it's their game and it's up to them what they wanna do as long as it does not involve real harm.

But I still think Muslim players would react strongly against the Mohammed being the leader. They too are against pictures depicting Mohammed himself and any films made with an actor playing him.

Anyway, Arabs were not all Muslims (in fact indonesians make up more muslims than arabs themselves) and before that Mohammed came, they were paganistic. And the true golden age of arabs only came a few centuries after Mohammed. This was the age where science, technology, medicine and art flourished.

 

[Wolfshanze]

Uhhh... Thuloid,

You might want to recheck your history books... "Saladin was the most successfull arab"...

UH HELLOOOOO....

After Saladin, where were the Crusaders? Still in the Middle East last time I checked!

In other words, Saladin NEVER FINISHED THE JOB!!!

HE NEVER BEAT THE CRUSADERS OUT OF THE MID EAST, SO WHY IS HE THE MOST SUCCESSFULL?

Those Arabs that came AFTER Saladin got rid of the Crusaders!!! Saladin NEVER accomplished this feat!

Westerners have a lot to learn about successful Arab leaders... he's only popular and famous in the west, primarily because he never beat the west!

Nice guys finish last... Saladin was a nice guy.

 

[IceBlaZe]

if mongols are considered arabs than genghis hun was the most successful arab leader I guess.
but I have no idea if mongols are considered arabs, so jsut say yes or no, dont insult or shout or something.

 

[Mikoyan]

No that's Turks, Arabs hail from the deserts of Saudi Arabia.

 

[Caos Dragon]

Hey people... i think that this post is about the animater leaderheads and not about arabs, etc...
dont be offended but... go by the right way....


by the other way, i suggest a set of animated heads in civ I style (i like em really much :crazyeyes ) or as the US leader somebody like mickey mouse, or bugs bunny

 

[Thuloid]

I never meant to imply that Saladin was the greatest Arab leader. I thought I made that clear by saying he was a Kurd and not an Arab. By "greatest Arab leader" I was referring to Mohammed. I still think Saladin was a heck of a leader, though, and his historical significance shouldn't be measured on the mere presence or nonpresence of Crusaders in the Middle East after his death. Saladin did a tremendous amount to stabilize and strengthen the Muslim states and set them up for future successes against the Crusader kindoms.

Mongols, Turks, Kurds, and Arabs are all separate ethnic groups and mutually exclusive. Probably easiest to classify by language-- Mongols spoke an Altaic language, as did the Turks (the two were related but definitely distinct), Kurds spoke an Indo-European language of the Iranian branch, and Arabs speak Arabic, a Semitic language. Any and all of these groups might of course include practicing Muslims.

To get back to animated leader heads, the issue of depicting Mohammed really is a big one. However, many Muslims have had objections, historically, to representations of any human beings at all, and hence the whole game (including, obviously, animated leader heads) becomes a problem. Part of the fun of the Civ series is its irreverant attitude towards history and leaders (see the print ads for the game which feature Gandhi throttling Honest Abe).
I'll never forget the first time, in Civ I, that Lincoln informed me his words were backed by NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

 

[Thuloid]

A pop culture figure like Mickey or Bugs seems peculiarly appropriate for the American civ. More disturbingly, how about a threatening-looking Ronald McDonald?

 

[mfauzi]

Originally posted by Thuloid

I'll never forget the first time, in Civ I, that Lincoln informed me his words were backed by NUCLEAR WEAPONS.

Hmm.. I always hated that. I mean, when I had nukes, they were the ones complaining, but once they get nukes, they threaten me with it

 

[IceBlaZe]

ronald macdonald must come with happy meals.
I mean, if you make ronald macdonald, change the food icon to small hamburgers and the granary to a macdonlands outpost!
on the other hand, it will kill everyone from disease even if they werent near any jungle ;P