It's official: Mali is in as a civ. -snicker-

[troytheface]

Mali? Mali? is an insignificant Civ that was added just to get an African Nation included. I read some posts talking about what an important civ it was - lol-
yes the great mali navy- no army- no air force- no...the great Mali space program- no
the great- ...what a joke- it never was a great power- it influenced nothing- and it amounted to nothing-amused at how some will look up stuff like "mali exported lots of wheat" and then proceed to write about how great and worthy a civ it is- do you think these these minor arguements really convince a reasonable man that Mali is a worthy addition when anyone with half a brain knows that they included Mali just to cover the map- which is fine- just say that instead of trying to convince people of something that is not true.

 

[rhialto]

With all due respect, troytheface, that post is worthy of an ignorant hick.

No army? At the time William the Conquerer was invading England, Mali was invading its neighbours with armies a hundred times greater in size. No navy? Fair enough, but neither did the Mongols, Aztecs, or Incas. Mali's geographical location didn't necessitate a navy, so I don't consider that a flaw anyway. No airforce? Neither did, umm, just about every civ before 1900. No space program? Neither does Japan, Spain, France (Ariadne is a multinational project), England, Germany, or Babylon. Better remove those too. As for exports, how about exporting enough gold, via a certain pilgimage, to destabilise the bullion market across half teh known world for several decades?

 

[troytheface]

lol- not sure i should defend me post but i will give it an ignorant hick try....
reading the oft times wordy posts- (wordiness tends to get better grades in acadamia-which i suspect many of these wordy posters are still involved) i have the feeling that i am listening to someone that read a couple history books and took a logic class. Since i am close to a university i will ask the world history folks there to name 18 of the most signigficant civs. I assure u mali will not be one of the choices.
It is not grand reasoning- however, i do know that we all have our favorite civs and times of history we like to speculate about- asked a afghanistani social studies teacher about great civs and he goes on and on about afghanistan....it is personal and hardly definitive- as are most assertions based on interest. I suppose we could all have our own standards defining a "great Civ". I would use a civ's art work as one indication of worthiness-
But being an ignorant hick poster
i suppose that i am in the shadow of great history book readers that read english versions of texts and take all that they read as fact- and they can even quote and give sources....
and by the way- i thought that Spain's import of gold was what destabilized the gold market....but hell- it could have been certain European leaders hording up all the gold and faking or producing this effect and then paying someone to write about how Mali mucked up things....
but all in all- they should have had Assyria- however, i like the camel archer uu- always thought they should have a camel unit

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

Since i am close to a university i will ask the world history folks there to name 18 of the most signigficant civs.

Of course they will. If you ask the history folks of the university of Cairo. Or, if you ask anyone focusing on mediaval history (since the Ancient buffs will of course list you 200+ Ancient Civs first).
What makes me really upset in this discussion is not denying Mali to be among the "18 most important Civs of all times". Maybe they are not.
But, they of course were for several magnitudes more important for the World history than Aztecs, Mayans, Incans, Sioux and Iroquois together...
As long as there is a single American Civ (except for the US!) in the game, it's ridiculous to deny Mali the significance.

 

[troytheface]

and here i might disagree- aztecs, incans and mayans had lots of original art and buildings that people to this day visit- mali art may exsist but it is not on the same world stage as the aforementioned three- i say any civ that bases its claim to fame on economics rather than culture is doomed to obscurity-

 

[Kyriakos]

Just a small note, i noticed this while reading through the threads.
Do not think that 'greek stud' (i would really doubt that he has ever come even near a woman in his life ) speaks for anyone other than himself. He is either immature or seriously problematic & should seek help :shakehead

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

aztecs, incans and mayans had lots of original art and buildings that people to this day visit

People = American Tourists?
And with that argument, Walt Disney would deserve to be included as Civ, and Mongols for sure have to be dropped.
Face it: The first American Civ that had any, even remote, significance for the rest of the World were the US (and those of course have a major impact).

Spain of course shipped a lot of (melted) gold from there to Europe; but, that was Spain, not the Aztecs (while Mali did export actively).
Again, I have no problems with the Aztecs or Incans or Mayans in Civ, they are worthy for their architecture or astronomy.
But, as long as those pre-Iron Age Civs and even pre-Bronze Age ones like the NA tribes are in Civ, any arguments for Mali or Mongols or Celts or Scythians or Tibet or Khmer or ... not "deserving" to be in are ridiculous.

 

[troytheface]

walt disney? lost me on that one- disney world is just an amusement park inside of a certain civ. Maybe iroquios Casinos would be a better analogy- but i am talking art- not entertainment- art is often used in connection with spirituality whereas entertainment seldom is (think that incan or mayan or aztec ball games were linked to religion tho-as a matter of fact i have an new idea- that in the west sports are religion
In so far as the mongols- yes they are indeed a strange civ to argue for or against- they are the contradiction to my own reasoning- however , i would include them because of their size and how they just smashed everyone around them. Someone wrote an idea that an expansion pack could include all the great barbarian groups like the mongols the huns the vikings ect. - that is a good idea. It would be a nice option to choose a barbarian group where you don't build cities - u just conquer and war then try to hold things together and if u survive long enough u get to start to build cities like the vikings

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

disney world is just an amusement park

Exactly. A distinct style of "art", and lots of people visit it.

 

[troytheface]

there is a big difference in art made to facilitate worship and in art made to make a buck- however it has been said by many that Americans are spiritually bereft and maybe to many religion is entertainment.

 

[Kyriakos]

I think that, as many others have said, Babylon was the main civ that was left out, and now there is no messopotamian civ, which is unfair ;\ Ofcourse in a way Persia covers that gap, but then its not the same.
Personally i would think that the incas are in mostly so that a latin american civ is in, and the aztecs are in for more shady reasons (probably a second civ, albeit mesoamerican, of that general type, didnt need to be in the original civ4). The Mali possibly are also in for the wrong reasons, if they werent centroafrican they wouldnt be in, just like other economic civs were left out. One could argue that if Denmark was in africa it would have been in instead of Mali for example. And i mention Denmark because there is no scandinavian civ.
Perhaps the arabs could have been left out, they werent a real civ anyway, and egypt was arabic later on so they could have covered that, but on the same logic the byzantine empire shouldnt be in- yet they byz empire isnt in the original game and very rightly so).

 

[rhialto]

...Perhaps the arabs could have been left out, they werent a real civ anyway...

Yeah, I guess you're right. All they did was invent the entire field of mathematics as we know it today, including the concept of zero and decimal notation. Not really credible as a civ at all.

[/sarcasm]

 

[Kyriakos]

Yeah, I guess you're right. All they did was invent the entire field of mathematics as we know it today, including the concept of zero and decimal notation. Not really credible as a civ at all.

[/sarcasm]

You are just trying to be antagonistic. My point was very clear, and was about whether the arabs are collectively one civ. There was nothing there against the arabs, nor was there anything regarding their achievements, so your post was rather silly
try to imagive a "christians" civ, it would be more or less equally uninteresting as an "arabs" civ.

Without being sarcastic i could very easily go on to make a comment about what you said about "the entire field" of mathematics, but i dont have any urge to say something against you for the hell of it. I suggest that you learn to react a bit less offensively though.

 

[troytheface]

i almost replied to that one as well...there were the ottomen turks, and the seljek (sp)
turks- but i do not remember the great "arab" civ- and i was one of those that thought byzantine should not be included- tho i did like the dromon as a graphic.

 

[Tidiazuron]

I think the whole post makes no sense.
Civilization IV is a game. There is no point discussing if Mali should be in it or not because this is not a well funded research on History. This is a game and should be considered as it. The whole idea of comparing civilizations out of Historical context is ridiculous. One can not compare Sumeria and Korea because they where not in the same place, same era... Even the idea of Germany or Spain as a civilization can not stand in front of Greece (Ancient) or Persia. This post is a great example of how stupidity, anger and hate arise when people is well fed, healthy and bored. Get out, breath air and enjoy the fact that you are alive and in peace.
And, please, when entering to this sacred place always bear in mind that we are talking about a game. Licoln never dressed in leather, Xerxes never saw a rifle and probably the Colossus never increased comerce in Rhodas.

 

[rhialto]

So good I posted it twice.

 

[Xen]

probably the Colossus never increased comerce in Rhodas.

that ti did do; even though it fell down around 50-60 years after its intial construction, it was still a MASSIVE statue, and still brough tin tourist attention; living in an area whos entire economy is based on tourism, i can attest that thier are few othe rmoneymakers quite like toruism, and naive (and annoying) tourists

as far as the Arab-Byzantin question goes, I'm in favor of both being in; I can see the Varwnos argument in that thier certinally could be more islamic arbaic based civlizations, but thier inst too much room for them; Carthage will likelly be added in an x-pack, and so would babylon; with existing egpypt, Persia, and hopefully the greeks (the Ottoman turks I coudl live without, though they will likelly be included, and promptlly modded by me to be the steppe turks) thier isnt much room left.

 

[troytheface]

mod out the ottomen's? they were the biggest empire up til that time dwarfing the
eastern roman empire's size -indeed personal preferences and reality are two distinct beasts....

 

[Kyriakos]

well there were arabic caliphates, which were analogous to western countries, eg the abbasids, fatimids etc. Bagdad, where the '1001 arabian nights" were written wasnt in the same 'nation' as the al-Andalus. Just because we do not know much about arabs it doesnt mean that it is a great idea to have them collectively as one civ.
on the other hand the seljuks are clearly (no one doubts that, and turkish people ofcourse dont doubt it at all, unlike you ) the ancestors of the ottomans. The ottomans were just one seljuk tribe/sultanate, which slowly dominated over the rest, and over the balcans/byzantine empire.
But you do not really inspire the other person to discuss anything, and i wouldnt really interest myself with wondering particularly about what causes you to behave like you do.
good luck

 

[rhialto]

You are just trying to be antagonistic. My point was very clear, and was about whether the arabs are collectively one civ. There was nothing there against the arabs, nor was there anything regarding their achievements, so your post was rather silly
try to imagive a "christians" civ, it would be more or less equally uninteresting as an "arabs" civ.

Without being sarcastic i could very easily go on to make a comment about what you said about "the entire field" of mathematics, but i dont have any urge to say something against you for the hell of it. I suggest that you learn to react a bit less offensively though.

If I was being offensive, it was only because you were being offensive against the Arabs. And while I am not an Arab, I play the Lorax, and I speak for the Arabs, for here the Arabs have no speakers.

And I said "Arabs" as a civ, not "Muslims". Contrary to popular belief, there is actually a place called Arabia, distinct from the Muslim world as a whole, in which people called Arabs live. It is a certain part of what is now Saudi Arabia.

If you wish to argue that they were not united are therefore not deserving of being called a civilization, I would like to point out that exactly the same case can be made against your Greece.


ok, saying the entire field is maybe a bit of an exageration, but not by much. Seriously, decimal notation made things such as multiplication and division trivially easy compared to doing it with Roman numerals. Try it some time if you don't believe me.