latin american civilization

[aelf]

Aside from being in poor taste and looking like a moron, I think you can get banned for crap like that.

I must say it's not as bad as the suggestion one guy made to make terrorist the 2nd UU for Arabia. And somebody tried to rip my head off for criticising that. Talk about sophisticated people playing a game called 'Civilization'!

 

[Mr. Civtastic]

hmmm, If u would read the whole quote I said J/K at the end.. honestly man read the whole thing before you try to rip my head off.. :| .. and a few of my friends are latin americans.. They joke about this kind of stuff all the time :|

Did you ever take a second to think that the entire world reads the internet and people would still be offended, even if you said it was a joke? Obviously not. And somehow I doubt your friends are a good sample of all latin american people.

Making light of a stereotype is offensive, and labeling it a joke does not lessen it's insult. Or your ignorance.

 

[onedreamer]

As far as I'm aware (and I'm no expert) there was no unified Mayan state prior to the arrival of Europeans. The great Mayan relics were, instead, a result of a number of small kingdoms engaged in a state of perpetual warfare. I'm not sure they are a good choice.

Greeks were not unified either, but still a great civilization. Mayas are, in my book, undoubtely the best choice for a civ among south american ones, since they reached higher cultural and scientific values than the others.

 

[a4phantom]

hmmm, If u would read the whole quote I said J/K at the end.. honestly man read the whole thing before you try to rip my head off.. :| .. and a few of my friends are latin americans.. They joke about this kind of stuff all the time :|

Let's put it this way. Chris Rock and a hundred rappers use the N word every time they open their mouths. That doesn't make it ok for that idiot who played Kramer. And saying that you have minority friends when someone calls you on the carpet for saying racist things is not a good defense, in fact it's a famously bad defense. If your friends joke like that and are ok with you doing the same, then it's none of our concern what you say with them. But this is "public", and talking like that in public makes you look like a moron or worse.

Note that I am not calling you a racist. I doubt you are, and I really don't care. I'm just warning you that here talking like that could get you banned, and in real life it could get you fired or worse.

 

[onedreamer]

I don't know why you should pick so much on him for a joke. To me it was more offensive to read that italy is a young country with no achievements and for this reason there shouldn't be an italian civ. FYI, the italian civ dates quite many centuries before the american one and can list great cultural values and achievements.
Also, to those who think that roman and italian civs are "essentialy" the same thing, could you point out what are the essential things they have in common ?

 

[a4phantom]

I don't know why you should pick so much on him for a joke. To me it was more offensive to read that italy is a young country with no achievements and for this reason there shouldn't be an italian civ. FYI, the italian civ dates quite many centuries before the american one and can list great cultural values and achievements.
Also, to those who think that roman and italian civs are "essentialy" the same thing, could you point out what are the essential things they have in common ?

Actually what I said was "Italy is only a very young unified country, and while I had a blast there modern Italy's political/military achievements are limited." Not at all the same. FYI, Italy unified around 1861, which was 145 years ago, making Italy a very young country. You're either mistaken or playing games by pretending I said civ when I said country, and pretending I said Italy had no achievements when I specifically said limited "political/military achievements". And if you think saying Italy should not be a high priority civ is more more offensive than calling Latin Americans "border jumpers" . . . well, there's probably no sense in trying to convince you otherwise.

But if you think Italy should be a civ, independent from Rome, by all means make your case. Leader? Traits? Unique military unit?

Edit: I want to make it clear that I am not denying the greatness of the Italian people. It is quite proper and realistic that a huge fraction of the game's Great People are from the region now known as Italy, since a huge fraction of the western world's great artists, scientists, merchants and engineers, not to mention religious leaders have been from that area.

 

[Aristos]

I am a border jumper

I jumped some... what? 12 borders to get here...? whatever, I am one of "those", and I'm glad to be...

No offense taken here. I came from South America, but I refuse to be called a latinamerican. You see, from my point of view, "latinamerican" is a state of mind, and not a nationality. I know many people with different nationalities but with a "latinamerican" state of mind, and I also know a lot of people born in Latin America, with different mind sets.

If you want to know my opinion about the "latinamerican" mentality, post me in private. Here, as I can see, it is a little dangerous to express one's own opinion... exactly one of the things I would expect from my former "countrymen"... Ironic, isn't it?

Now back to the topic (I acknowledge my part of responsibility for dropping this post out of topic).

Mayans are not southamerican, they were from the region that is now Guatemala.

c-ya,

 

[a4phantom]

Are Lee, Grant or Jackson Great Generals in the game?

 

[onedreamer]

You're either mistaken or playing games by pretending I said civ when I said country

Yeah I can read what you wrote. Problem is that you justified the exclusion of the italian civ stating that Italy is only a young country with poor achievements, hence my objections. One thing is Italy as a unified political entity, and another thing is the italian civilization and culture.

edit: the area has been known as italy since the roman age, not just right now. Again... geographical and political maps: 2 different things.

 

[Arlborn]

I am a border jumper

I jumped some... what? 12 borders to get here...? whatever, I am one of "those", and I'm glad to be...

No offense taken here. I came from South America, but I refuse to be called a latinamerican. You see, from my point of view, "latinamerican" is a state of mind, and not a nationality. I know many people with different nationalities but with a "latinamerican" state of mind, and I also know a lot of people born in Latin America, with different mind sets.

If you want to know my opinion about the "latinamerican" mentality, post me in private. Here, as I can see, it is a little dangerous to express one's own opinion... exactly one of the things I would expect from my former "countrymen"... Ironic, isn't it?

Now back to the topic (I acknowledge my part of responsibility for dropping this post out of topic).

Mayans are not southamerican, they were from the region that is now Guatemala.

c-ya,

Im not bortder jumper, I love my country and its warmth. But I cant choose who my heart will choose to love heh(stupid online games! ).

One day I might go back to Brazil, but the violence only seems to be getting worse and then I will have to think of my family, if the situation donht gets better, I hardly will live there again.

But I was probably going to live my whole life there if it wasent by my heart at the first place hehe.

By the way, I hate that term, "latin american", its as much depreciative as the term "african". I dont think that a Dutch guy would be happy to be called German only because he lives beside that country(belive me, they woudlent be happy at all, I already tried ) or a guy from England be judged to be of US only because of his language...

 

[a4phantom]

Yeah I can read what you wrote. Problem is that you justified the exclusion of the italian civ stating that Italy is only a young country with poor achievements, hence my objections. One thing is Italy as a unified political entity, and another thing is the italian civilization and culture.

edit: the area has been known as italy since the roman age, not just right now. Again... geographical and political maps: 2 different things.

Now it's hard to believe you're not misunderstanding deliberately.

I hate to quote myself but I addressed your points already, and you're claiming I said things I clearly did not. <i> Actually what I said was "Italy is only a very young unified country, and while I had a blast there modern Italy's political/military achievements are limited." Not at all the same. FYI, Italy unified around 1861, which was 145 years ago, making Italy a very young country. You're either mistaken or playing games by pretending I said civ when I said country, and pretending I said Italy had no achievements when I specifically said limited "political/military achievements". </i>

As for geography vs. politics, sure. That's why I said "young country". Did Dante call himself an Italian or a Florentine? Michaelangelo? The primary center of political, military and cultural achievement in the penninsula was the Vatican, which still isn't part of Italy.

Again, if I'm wrong and Italy is a civilization well suited for the game, show me. Who would be the leader? UU? If I'm wrong in saying that modern Italy lacks "political/military achievements", what are they? I'm wrong a lot, this could be one of those times, but you don't refute my statements with facts, not any statements I've actually made anyway.

 

[onedreamer]

Ok since you like quoting here are the facts:

Originally Posted by Robo Kai
Italy is not included because Italy is essentially Rome, I think.

Your answer was:

Italy is only a very young unified country, and while I had a blast there modern Italy's political/military achievements are limited.

Which to my understanding means that Italy is not included NOT because it's essentialy Rome, but because it is a young country with poor political and military achievements. To this I objected that the italian civilization was not born in 1861. This is not the place where to discuss about a leader and UU, however I am sure that you know there can be many choices for both, and just FYI, the Vatican has not been the prime center of achievements for the italian civ., I'd rather say it's always been an obstacle for it, and still is (as you noted, Vatican is not in Italy).

 

[a4phantom]

Ok since you like quoting here are the facts:



Your answer was:



Which to my understanding means that Italy is not included NOT because it's essentialy Rome, but because it is a young country with poor political and military achievements. To this I objected that the italian civilization was not born in 1861. This is not the place where to discuss about a leader and UU, however I am sure that you know there can be many choices for both, and just FYI, the Vatican has not been the prime center of achievements for the italian civ., I'd rather say it's always been an obstacle for it, and still is (as you noted, Vatican is not in Italy).

I think there's a near consensus that the Vatican impeded Italian unity, which is one of the reasons I was right about Italy being a young "country". Being a young country shouldn't disqualify, since Germany and America are also young countries (but America is a superpower and Germany was). FYI, I said that the Vatican was the center of achievements in the geographical area, since you declared that Italy should be a civ based on geographic rather than political maps. Anyway, I'm always happy to learn more history so if you can make a historical case for including Italy be my guest.

 

[MightyGooga]

The Brazilian architect Oscar Niemeyer has made a famous monument of them that can be found in Brasilia.

Actually, the monument is in Sao Paulo, the fifth biggest city of the world. Santo Amaro AVENUE. The monument is called Borba Gato, and yesm, he was a great conqueror.

Im walways wuestioning people why wont they put in the official version of the game a Brazilian civilization. We are the 10th economy of the world, have lots of beaches, awsome artists. We only lack in governement, and education. Becouse all the governament keeps stealing money dedicated to education. Vicious cicle i'd say.

Any way the guys ideia is pretty good. Don Pedro II: Great Dude. Declared Independency. Unique unit could either be, the Bandeirante strong cavalary unit, or the Cangaceiro, a strong desert man, armed with knifes and courage. Unique building: Sugar Industry, or somehting to do with cows. We have a major agricultural trait.

Americans werent a civilization neither were the Vikings, there is a lot of examples on that. Im thinking in creating a South America scenario. ....

 

[a4phantom]

'Americans werent a civilization neither were the Vikings, there is a lot of examples on that.'

Someone please go ahead and define what makes one nation or group a "civilization" or not.

 

[Aristos]

'Americans werent a civilization neither were the Vikings, there is a lot of examples on that.'

Someone please go ahead and define what makes one nation or group a "civilization" or not.

marketing?

 

[a4phantom]

Jajaja, tu lo tienes.

 

[Aristos]

We only lack in governement, and education. Becouse all the governament keeps stealing money dedicated to education. Vicious cicle i'd say.

that is exactly what makes you an UNCIVILIZED nation, like the rest of southamerica (oh, yes, argentinians included... and paraguayans, off course, so spare your Ad Hominem falacies)...

You know, education is part of civilization... so are values like honesty, responsibility... now look at your post again, and tell me: are you a "civilization"?

Yeap, I didn't think so... thank you for being honest. Unlike your government...

 

[Elandal]

Civilization in general is taken to mean permanent settlement, division of labour, and accepted procedure for handling disputes.

This usually means agriculture, but the required food surplus to allow for division of labour may be gained by abudance of fish for example. I'm sure there are other methods of gathering enough food to support part of the population doing something else.

In cIV the city tile provides enough food for one population point. This means that even size 1 city can have people working for other goals (in the early game this commonly means working hammer or commerce tile instead of food tile, and later in the game may mean eg. size 1 city with the only population point assigned as specialist), but that way the city won't grow, growth usually being what people want those smallest cities doing

Certainly there are narrower definitions as well, requiring something in addition. But from looking at the game, I'd rather opt for the broad definition as narrower ones may well require some tech path or building and thus would mean all players start as barbarians and not all of them ever become civilizations..

Of the civs in game I believe all meet the definition. So would hundreds of others. So for purpose of choosing which ones are included and which ones are not, some additional requirements must be set. Obviously several different criteria have been used with probably very few of the civs meeting all of them. How much common would USA (it's quite clear the America is USA, not meaning "all of America" or anything else) have with eg. Vikings (or rather Scandinavians, maybe Norse, Swedes, or Danes, depending on time and your preference)? Different times, different civs.

 

[Arlborn]

'Americans werent a civilization neither were the Vikings, there is a lot of examples on that.'

Someone please go ahead and define what makes one nation or group a "civilization" or not.

Asnwer:

A group of people who mostly think they are better than anybody else and are made to be the greatest civ..ups..group of people in the world one day. Untill of course they get wiped out of the face of the Earth by other group of people who think that they are better..


Is that defination any near of accurate?

Sorry for quoting myself!