Is the Roman Empire too weak in Civ 5?

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Artifex1, Oct 22, 2010.

?

Is Rome too weak?

  1. Yes Rome is too weak and needs to be much stronger. It was a great empire.

    34 vote(s)
    21.0%
  2. No Rome isn't too weak. It is about right. Not too strong but not weak by any means.

    92 vote(s)
    56.8%
  3. No Rome is actually really strong in Civ 5 and a top tier Civ.

    31 vote(s)
    19.1%
  4. Yes Rome is very weak in Civ 5 and I am glad. I am sick of it always being OP in Civ.

    5 vote(s)
    3.1%
  1. flyingbunnys

    flyingbunnys Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Messages:
    141
    Modern architecture style, High tech style and post modernism styles are also American styles. All three are styles of skyscrapers.

    This got a bit off topic. To get back on topic I would rather that every civ have no abilities and be balanced than for a particular civ to be more powerful in game than another because of how it defined the real world. I don't play games to make the real world, I play them to make my own world.

    Someone mentioned that to play as Rome you have to sacrifice focus in 1 area to utilize its UA and UU so I think if I had to vote again I would say its just right rather than upper teir. I still think there are other civs that need brought up to par or nerfed.
     
  2. JLoZeppeli

    JLoZeppeli Prince

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    598
    A study comparing Mongols and Rome? Is it a joke or are you trolling just for fun?? That's so stupid to nonsense, but now i understand that i must not feed trolls... And i was thinking the discussion was a serious one....:crazyeye:
     
  3. WarKirby

    WarKirby Arty person

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    5,317
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    no, the unique ability does NOTHING for rome. It only benefits other cities aside from the capital.

    It encourages building your capital up to be a supercity with everything in it, but it doesn't actually give anything to help you do that.
     
  4. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    Hey, didn't you say that scientific studies support the contention that Rome is more influential than Mongols? That was my impression of what you said when you brought "scientific studies" into it. If that wasn't what you meant, then why say "scientific studies?" Was that just for rhetorical effect?
     
  5. flyingbunnys

    flyingbunnys Warlord

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2006
    Messages:
    141
    If your other cities build buildings faster than that is extra hammers that can go towards military units or producing gold or science. It is a very powerfull ability, unless you are really into specialized cities.

    Every hammer saved is a hammer that can be spent on something else. How is that not powerful?
     
  6. JLoZeppeli

    JLoZeppeli Prince

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    598
    Moderator Action: *snip* I made a clear statement of resemblance between Alexander Empire and Mongolian, in matter of conquest, sreading of knowledge and fall...

    It was because i can't compare Mongolian empire with Rome, but i can with Alexander's, Moderator Action: *snip*

    So if you want to continue, use your faculties, Moderator Action: *snip* , and discuss about that in serious way, or drop the game, because i don't want that all the previous discussion could became meaningless...

    Moderator Action: We don't have any tolerance for flaming here.
     
  7. Danielion

    Danielion Prince

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    420
    Location:
    Antwerpen
    One thing I do know. The Mongols were very influential in the fact that they meant a major setback for the Chinese civilization. Who knows how China would have developed if it weren't for the Mongols ? Would the West have gained on East Asia in the Modern era ?
     
  8. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    JLoZeppeli:

    Hey now, don't be that way! I was being polite. You mentioned scientific studies, and I said that there was no such thing. You could have just acquiesced at that point and said that, "Well yes, discussions about the relative influences of past empires can't be subjects of scientific study."

    I am a scientist and I take my science seriously. If you have hard science to back up your statement that Rome is more influential than the Mongols purely for the fact that they lasted longer (and for no other attendant reason), then I would like to see that. Otherwise, just say yes and we can continue discussing it in subjective fashion.
     
  9. awesome

    awesome Meme Lord

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    2,768
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    behind you
    wat


    United States of America - 9.67 million km2 (1899)

    Roman Empire - 5.5 million km2 (117)
     
  10. ChaplainDMK

    ChaplainDMK Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Messages:
    103
    Rome was so far ahead of its time its insane.
    Standing armies, large paved road network, a unified goverment system, advanced law system, huge advances in medicine and construction, extreamly developed economy etc.
    Rome (and to a simelar extent, Greece) were only matched in the late 17th century.
     
  11. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    ChaplainDMK:

    Please compare to Han-dynasty China which existed at about the same time.
     
  12. JLoZeppeli

    JLoZeppeli Prince

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    598
    Ok, i'm sorry for the eruption (i think of myself as a scientist too, because i need knowledges of chemistry, geology and biology in my work too, i'm actually working in a pottery laboratory) I put it in a scientific view.

    We need significant evidence of influence in art, science and economy to establish a grade of influence toward other people.

    We can say that Rome left an abundance of those evindances not only during his life but a long time after, as stated by the research in the matter.

    We can also say that Hellenism made the same, but not Macedonian Empire in itself, that only helped the culture to spread, ensuring the period called helleinism, where a lot of countries were born from the Empire itself.

    The question is, how much of those evidence have left Mongolian Empire? If you can give me a reasonable amount those, we can discuss of the influence it had and compare it with Rome. I can't because i'm not chinese, and my knowledge of chinese history is limited to some periods..
     
  13. Aybara

    Aybara Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Messages:
    10
    Well the US bought Alaska and many of the central/midwest states. I stand by my point. Just because you have a big landmass doesn't mean you conquered it all. The "conquest" of much of America was essentially a migration interspersed with skirmishes against loosely organized tribes of Native folk.

    wat
    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_purchase)
    (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_1803-04-1804-03.png)
     
  14. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    It's hard to say, since I'm not Chinese either, and the Chinese have this thing against the Mongols anyway, so it's not like they're going to do anything to further that theory.

    We know that the Mongols protected the trade between East and West and reinvigorated the Silk Road during their tenure. I believe this would be at least up to the rule of Kublai Khan, since Marco Polo's infamously inaccurate account is supposed to have occurred at that time.

    During this time, Eastward influences spread West and Westward influences spread East, the occurrence to which I largely attribute Mongol influence on the course of history. I'm not a historian by trade, so even my knowledge of how much of this occurred at this time is sketchy.

    I was basing my reasoning largely on how large an impact the East-West trade at the time came to later affect Western views of the East and how it inspired the European nations to seek a way over.

    There is also the matter of their successor states. As the Tatars, the Mongols of the Golden Horde continued to hold sway in Russia until what? 1400s, I suppose? Such a period of occupation cannot fail to generate some degree of development in the country. What aspects of Russia were developed under Mongol rule?

    Wasn't the rise of Moscow dated all the way back to the eventual defeat of the Golden Horde rule in the area?
     
  15. JLoZeppeli

    JLoZeppeli Prince

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    598
    First of all... what the heck did Marco Polo do to you to be so bitter?:lol:
    i'm italian, and calling infamous the author of the Milione is a bit harsh.:p

    Then speaking of the Golden Horde, i can say little about it, but like as all the incursions of mongols, from the Uns of Attila to Tamerlane, they were almost a fire fast to spread and so to extinguish... Golden Horde come in the proximity of Wien too, but it left nothing after in Europe, I dunno how much it left in Russia, but i remember clearly that they were so illiterate to adopt the language of the pursuited Cumans to write...

    Perhaps that was the most important part of the mongol conquest, but the most important influence of mongols (and we are speaking not of the great empire as a whole entity by that moment) was under the rule of Tamerlane, he ensured patronage to arts and economy, especially to Samarkand. But he was mostly fond of the mulsim culture, so i'm not sure how much of mongolian culture was in it...

    For sure the most influence they left was in central Asia, where the kahnates were spreading. I must ask something to the Oriental History department...

    Ps i think it's debatable if the Turks may or not be considerate part of the mongolian lineage, it's difficutl to say, but surely part of the turkish people was of that lineage (and now we can see an horde of turkish civ players denying that to death ;))
     
  16. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    I was thinking that the rise of Russia, which went on to become a modern superpower, could be directly traced to Ivan III's defeat of the Golden Horde and throwing off the Mongol Yoke following his Novgorod campaign. Being that they were in charge for a long time, I'd venture that Russia's postal network, roads, and military organization were developed under Mongol rule.

    Of course, the influence of Tamerlane can't also be underplayed, though I'm not generally impressed with Mongol influence as Mongols. I mean, they generally integrated into their ruled countries pretty thoroughly, didn't they?
     
  17. JLoZeppeli

    JLoZeppeli Prince

    Joined:
    May 11, 2009
    Messages:
    598
    As i stated,they mostly integrated, where possible, the culture of the subdued countries, but not developed any by themselves. That's so similar to the barbarians invasion in the later Roman Empire... But we know very well that these people had a nomadic culture, so they ensure personal handcraft and oral history, but nothing else in the most cases... When they became geographically stable, they took the culture of the country.

    The main problem to point out that they took a lot, but gave few things, is their lack of writings, they don't have a written language, when other people had it or developed it. they applied other languages to close the gap, but without the necessary experience to manage it; in the end that didn't produce any significant evidence of their culture, i can add that they lasted too little to develop a mastery of the language experience or even contaminate it with their own...
     
  18. Roxlimn

    Roxlimn Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2005
    Messages:
    3,526
    I don't know that we can forward a claim that Mongol culture has had any long lasting worldwide influence, but the Mongol Empire is not Mongol culture. I think I need to clarify that. The Mongol Empire is the Mongol Empire. If they did nothing else but burn every city they conquered into the ground, they would have had a lasting influence on world history, just from the scope of their rule.
     
  19. Dachs

    Dachs Hero of the Soviet Union

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    32,588
    Location:
    Moscow
    That's all well and good for the Mongols, I guess. Not that I want to denigrate them or anything, because that's a fairly profitless endeavor, but you could say similar things about, say, the Yuezhi or Gokturks as regards the Silk Road, with similar examples of successor-state influence (the Yuezhi-Baktro-Kushans kind of ruled northern India, the Gokturks spawned the Xazarlar and eventually the Seljuqs and Ottomans, albeit by a roundabout method).

    Hence my ongoing campaign to get the Yuezhi, Mongols, and something properly Turkic into Civ5's expansions. :p

    FWIW, as far as the OP goes, I think that Rome is weaker than usual, certainly weaker than desirable, but not totally gimped.
     
  20. Minervis

    Minervis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    14
    Location:
    The future
    Rome was ahead of its time, and so is America
    Colosseum =>Modern stadiums on opiate of the masses +internet/ video games :p
    Both have influenced their known worlds
    treatment of citizen and non-citizen I'd say America is better, would you rather live America now? or Rome at its height?

    Also Rome never abolished slavery

    It does seem when things want to look official it's all in Greek/roman (our whole medical and legal language)
     

Share This Page