i am really looking forward to this expansion

[Securion]

So how exactly are the Iroquois watered down? Is Poland watered down as well? Is Israel watered down as well? And you were commenting in the speculating of native American civs with similar comments as well... how exactly are the Pueblo watered down too then?

I said the word "Civilization" probably are watered down these days.

 

[Gucumatz]

Furor Teutonicus? And that fits part of German history. England has one of the most powerful civs in the game, not sure what more you want for them.

Spain and the Netherlands get economic bonuses too? And lets look at those 'ME' Empires: Arabia, Ottomans, Babylon, Persia, and now Assyria. Ottomans certainly aren't OP, and whats wrong with any of the others? And two of the 5 get some science bonuses, but yes that is all of them "in fact" getting science bonuses

Perhaps Civfanatics is getting watered down these days too... I probably should avoid responding to some posts it seems.

 

[Securion]

Furor Teutonicus? And that fits part of German history. England has one of the most powerful civs in the game, not sure what more you want for them.

I think I made that pretty clear in my post, didnt I?

Spain and the Netherlands get economic bonuses too? And lets look at those 'ME' Empires: Arabia, Ottomans, Babylon, Persia, and now Assyria. Ottomans certainly aren't OP, and whats wrong with any of the others? And two of the 5 get some science bonuses, but yes that is all of them "in fact" getting science bonuses

Your right about Spain and the Netherlands. Although Spain is more like playing roulette than actually having an economy bonus.
... And dont get me started on the most OP civ in the game, the Ottomans...

EDIT; Seriously, you dont think Babylon, Persia, Arabia, Ottoman are some of the best civs in the game?

Perhaps Civfanatics is getting watered down these days too... I probably should avoid responding to some posts it seems.

Ok..?
Have a nice day.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Two quick ones;

Germany; Known for being one of the biggest engineering and technology powerhouses of the world gets a "please go chase barbarians" bonus.
England; Known throughout the world for being the largest trade empire on earth. No economic bonus what so ever in the game though.

Who gets science and economy bonuses? Middle eastern civs. In fact, all of them. Its kinds weird.

I suppose because only Europeans had the greatest achievements of all time. Only Europeans are capable of building great and complex societies. There's no way the Middle Easterners are capable of establishing large trade networks, innovating new forms of technology or improving on existing ones such as waterwheels and methods of surgery and quarantining of ill people, or creating great libraries full of knowledge from the ancient world.

No, all the greatest things of the world happened in the last couple of centuries because of Europeans. Only the achievements of the Europeans in the past few hundred years or so matter, everything else from the other 90% of history is irrelevant because they cannot compare to the greatness of the European civilizations, because only the Europeans know how to make a proper civilization.

 

[Gucumatz]

You are joking right? I don't think anyone thinks you have been clear on a single post of yours with what you want. And the Ottomans are OP? Right...

And you continue to ignore every point someone makes with your hugely flawed arguments worse than any politician could.

 

[Sonereal]

Two quick ones;

Germany; Known for being one of the biggest engineering and technology powerhouses of the world gets a "please go chase barbarians" bonus.
England; Known throughout the world for being the largest trade empire on earth. No economic bonus what so ever in the game though.

Who gets science and economy bonuses? Middle eastern civs. In fact, all of them. Its kinds weird.

It is probably because the Middle East was the center of world commerce and science for centuries, while for most of that time Germany chased barbarians. Not that your argument makes sense, given the Ottomans.

As for England, they're also known for their powerful navy, which is what the UA rewards, and to be completely honest, the Dutch deserve a trade UA way more than the English.

 

[Gucumatz]

No, all the greatest things of the world happened in the last couple of centuries because of Europeans. Only the achievements of the Europeans in the past few hundred years or so matter, everything else from the other 90% of history is irrelevant because they cannot compare to the greatness of the European civilizations, because only the Europeans know how to make a proper civilization.

Why stop there, lets go with 99%. Why isn't the world map always a generated version of Europe I wonder?

 

[Gucumatz]

And certainly Germany is a great civilization. A center of modern manufacturing, philosophers, and medieval European balances of power. Germany is one of my favorite places to be in the world, but I certainly see nothing wrong with including a UA based on barbarians [I always like to joke with my family in Germany that it takes Vandals like us to change things]. Do I wish the civ on a whole was improved? Yes, I view it as one of the weakest civs in game, India being the other. Certainly that anti-European bias you think the world has is responsible for that one too.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Why stop there, lets go with 99%. Why isn't the world map always a generated version of Europe I wonder?

Because Europe has to conquer the rest of the primitive tribes of the world, I guess, and show them what a real civilization is.

 

[PhilBowles]

Your right of course, but I wasnt really talking about anything but not being able to play maps we can make in MP.

Well, you did also mention diplomacy, which Firaxis has paid attention to (more positive modifiers, removal of the universal warmonger penalty, and in the last patch more sensible peace deals)

And how exactly are either "Disney" civilizations if I may ask the all knowing Securion?

With the two examples given, I took him to refer to the fact that these (and several other factions) are not civilizations as the word is defined (i.e. as a complex society defined by urbanisation, a centralised and hierarchical society, and technological progress), nor do they represent the traditional Civ definition of a civilization as a sovereign, developed nation-state.

Polynesia is not a civilization. It's a collective ethnic group with shared cultural traditions, but which never represented a unified state and few of whose component societies developed the trappings of civilization.

The Iroquois arguably are a civilization, as they exhibited some degree of centralisation and settlement, albeit not urbanisation, but they were still predominantly tribal and not characterised by technological development or substantial division of labour.

Other example of non-civilizations now in the game include the Huns (who were primarily nomadic, too short-lived to develop a technological society distinct from their neighbours, and without centralised government), the Celts (a conglomerate, non-unified 'civilisation' similar to Polynesia, with a primarily village-based culture rather than urbanisation) and, presumably with BNW, the Zulu (a tribal warband-based culture with a somewhat developed civil service but no other trappings of complex society).

 

[Securion]

I suppose because only Europeans had the greatest achievements of all time. Only Europeans are capable of building great and complex societies. There's no way the Middle Easterners are capable of establishing large trade networks, innovating new forms of technology or improving on existing ones such as waterwheels and methods of surgery and quarantining of ill people, or creating great libraries full of knowledge from the ancient world.

No, all the greatest things of the world happened in the last couple of centuries because of Europeans. Only the achievements of the Europeans in the past few hundred years or so matter, everything else from the other 90% of history is irrelevant because they cannot compare to the greatness of the European civilizations, because only the Europeans know how to make a proper civilization.

Ah, so now you want me to sound like im some sort of rasist or something? Because i think England should have a economy/trade bonus, or Germany an engineering/science one?
The good old rasist card eh. Cant beat that.

And no, im not going to sit here and list wikipedia links to all the things that have come from Europe. I could literally spend the rest of my life with that, and i dont even like Europe...

Its totally realistic and balanced that the best of everything comes from the middle east. (best science civ (babylon), best happiness civ (persia), best economy civ (arabia), best naval power civ (ottoman), etc, etc)

 

[Gucumatz]

Well, you did also mention diplomacy, which Firaxis has paid attention to (more positive modifiers, removal of the universal warmonger penalty, and in the last patch more sensible peace deals)



With the two examples given, I took him to refer to the fact that these (and several other factions) are not civilizations as the word is defined (i.e. as a complex society defined by urbanisation, a centralised and hierarchical society, and technological progress), nor do they represent the traditional Civ definition of a civilization as a sovereign, developed nation-state.

Polynesia is not a civilization. It's a collective ethnic group with shared cultural traditions, but which never represented a unified state and few of whose component societies developed the trappings of civilization.

The Iroquois arguably are a civilization, as they exhibited some degree of centralisation and settlement, albeit not urbanisation, but they were still predominantly tribal and not characterised by technological development or substantial division of labour.

Other example of non-civilizations now in the game include the Huns (who were primarily nomadic, too short-lived to develop a technological society distinct from their neighbours, and without centralised government), the Celts (a conglomerate, non-unified 'civilisation' similar to Polynesia, with a primarily village-based culture rather than urbanisation) and, presumably with BNW, the Zulu (a tribal warband-based culture with a somewhat developed civil service but no other trappings of complex society).

Sure you could argue that. And not saying that isn't a (relatively) valid argument for certain societies. That said, his implications have been primarily on Native American civilizations without any proof or logical process to back up his ideas or assumptions. Its just silly to see him focus it on one particular area of the world and then try and call bs on "PC" considering how bs his own stuff has been so far.

 

[Gucumatz]

I think you are the only one on these forums who think the Ottoman are a top tier civilization power wise or naval wise. They are consistently ranked at the bottom of all civs whenever a discussion comes up. England's UA and Ship of the Line make them easily the most powerful naval civ and while that is my opinion, that's also the opinion of most other people here at Civ Fanatics.

 

[Gucumatz]

Ah, so now you want me to sound like im some sort of rasist or something? Because i think England should have a economy/trade bonus, or Germany an engineering/science one?
The good old rasist card eh. Cant beat that.

And no, im not going to sit here and list wikipedia links to all the things that have come from Europe. I could literally spend the rest of my life with that, and i dont even like Europe...

Its totally realistic and balanced that the best of everything comes from the middle east. (best science civ (babylon), best happiness civ (persia), best economy civ (arabia), best naval power civ (ottoman), etc, etc)

Maybe not a racist, but perhaps seriously deluded? Whats wrong with including a part of Germany's more ancient history as part of its UA? Could it be improved to make it stronger - Yes.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Ah, so now you want me to sound like im some sort of rasist or something? Because i think England should have a economy/trade bonus, or Germany an engineering/science one?
The good old rasist card eh. Cant beat that.

And no, im not going to sit here and list wikipedia links to all the things that have come from Europe. I could literally spend the rest of my life with that, and i dont even like Europe...

Its totally realistic and balanced that the best of everything comes from the middle east. (best science civ (babylon), best happiness civ (persia), best economy civ (arabia), best naval power civ (ottoman), etc, etc)

It's not racist that you think England and Germany should have economic bonuses. But it is Eurocentric when you say that it's "weird" that Middle Eastern civs have economic and scientific bonuses. The Middle East, India, and East Asia led the world in trade and science for centuries, if not millennia. I don't think it's "weird" if these civilizations have economic or scientific bonuses. You were essentially dismissing the achievements of these civs with your usage of the word "weird".

 

[Securion]

I think you are the only one on these forums who think the Ottoman are a top tier civilization power wise or naval wise. They are consistently ranked at the bottom of all civs whenever a discussion comes up. England's UA and Ship of the Line make them easily the most powerful naval civ and while that is my opinion, that's also the opinion of most other people here at Civ Fanatics.

Lets try it then?
Water map. Ill go Ottoman and you can be England?

 

[Guandao]

I wonder what civs they'll reveal next? a European one? Asian? African? or Amerindian?

 

[PhilBowles]

Sure you could argue that. And not saying that isn't a (relatively) valid argument for certain societies. That said, his implications have been primarily on Native American civilizations without any proof or logical process to back up his ideas or assumptions. Its just silly to see him focus it on one particular area of the world and then try and call bs on "PC" considering how bs his own stuff has been so far.

Oh, I'd agree with that, but insofar as he takes exception to a misuse of the term "civilization" I can agree with him. There is too much of a trend on this and other threads to equate "tribes aren't civs" with neocolonialist "non-Europeans aren't civs", which is just as absurd as Securion's implicit insistence that the current game is swarming with tribes selected for PC reasons and the 20 poor European civs are marginalised.

I think the developers did well in the Iroquois finding a well-known Native American group that, without too much of a stretch, could be validly considered a civ instead of Civ III's tribal Sioux or Civ IV's conglomerate Native Americans - most of the developed native civs in North America (such as the Pueblo and Mississipians) largely predated European contact and are simply not well-known to the gaming public, as well as not representing unified nations.

Polynesia was selected to represent a new area for the series, and was probably the best way of doing so.

The Celts, I suspect, are in the series for little better reason than that there's a large American demographic that considers itself Celtic (whether or not they actually have Celtic ancestry), and America is the game's main market.

The Zulu were added for reasons that might be considered politically correct (to represent Africa in a game otherwise devoid of Africans) ... but that was in 1990, the heyday of "political correctness" when everyone was obsessed with tokenism and every American TV series was apparently contractually obliged to have a black character they could marginalise (a proud tradition recently revived in The Walking Dead).

But maybe they added the Huns to be politically correct...?

It's not racist that you think England and Germany should have economic bonuses. But it is Eurocentric when you say that it's "weird" that Middle Eastern civs have economic and scientific bonuses.

Personally I'm not persuaded that science was the best focus to give Babylon; the Mesopotamian civs were vital to the development of key early technologies, but science is represented in the game as active research and the speed of technological advancement, neither of which well-represents the Mesopotamian cultures.

 

[Gucumatz]

Sure Securion I'd play you (not this Easter Weekend though. PM me if you are serious, I could play some on Friday).

 

[Buccaneer]

Good grief, why are some of you wanting to project literal, real life nations/tribes/federations/etc. upon an ahistorical strategy game? Just think of these as "Blue" civ, "Green" civ, "Yellow" civ ... - each with unique traits, abilities, units, etc. and be done with it.

In other words, given the variety of maps and elements, I would think there would be an opponent that takes advantage of barbarians or forests or deserts or water or whatever. Assign those characteristics to whomever, make it up if you have to but make each civ/opponent distinct and unique to play as and play against.