MOD: Mongols

[Luca Brasi]

I'm really surprised no one has posted a Mongol mod yet (unless I missed it and then I appologize), so here's something I cooked up. Since I edited not the original files, but the civ3mod I always use, it has Spain instead of Persia and the Eiffel Tower wonder insted of Longevity. The Mongol special unit is the Raider, which is a cheaper Knight which doesn't need iron. Mongols start with The Wheel and Warrior Code, so that they get horses on the map ASAP and so that you can research Horseback Riding ASAP as well.

Instructions in readme.txt

 

[atonfive]

Thanks for the mod. What was Firaxis thinking leaving out the Mongols and the Spaniards, anyway?

 

[animepornstar]

i was working on a mongol civ during the holiday, but the files are on a computer far away now. the uu was a cavalry archer (knight 5.2.3) and i had finished the run animation for it. the animations were a mix of the cossack and the mangduai from aok2.

 

[Sobieski]

What Firaxis was thinking, was that the Mongols were nomads, not a civilization, since they didn't really build any cities.

 

[Stereophobia]

maybe not but they stole plenty

 

[LordAzreal]

Originally posted by Sobieski
What Firaxis was thinking, was that the Mongols were nomads, not a civilization, since they didn't really build any cities.

People only think that the Mongols didn't build any cities because Genghis Khan is the most well-known Mongol leader and under him, no cities were built. He did take some, but he burned most them to the ground. However, after Genghis Khan, the Mongols divided up somewhat. The Mongol ruler Tamerlane actually rebuilt Samarkand (which Genghis Khan destroyed) and established it as the capital of his empire. Tamerlane may have been of the Islamic faith, but he was of Mongol heritage. The Mongols DID build cities, only that was under their not-so well known rulers. As is the consensus in this thread, it was a bad decision to omit the Mongols from the game as they forged a legacy that surpassed Alexander the Great. Genghis Khan's empire at its peak was even larger than Alexander's at its peak. Don't forget that Genghis Khan took most of China when he went eastward and move far enough west to be able to ransack the Saracen empire (including their capital in Baghdad).

 

[God]

Well his name was Timur the lame. He claimed to be related to Genghis Khan. Europeans interpreted the name wrong hence Tamerlame.
Anyway he was far more destructive than Genghis khan. He sacked Delhi and made a pyrimaid of skulls.

 

[LordAzreal]

Correct. But I was only using his example to prove that the Mongols actually did build cities.

 

[Sobieski]

Yes, but they did not build them to the degree that I think would be needed to be considered as a civilization.

I understand that it isn't clearcut. You can't see this group of people were civilized and this group was not. I'm just saying that they were not a civilization in the literal sense nearly as much as any of the ones in the game (save the iroquois, but I don't think they should be in their either, and I do NOT mean that in a racist way). Ghengis' Mongols and Kubilai's Mongols were not much in terms of building civilizations. They were more involved in terms of taking over other people's civilizations and then just integrating into them. When most people say that the Mongols should be in the game, those are the Mongols they are usually referring too. If that was the criteria, then the Manchu should be in the game, cause they would just take over China and integrate into it, rather than building anything themselves. But then again, maybe the peole that were suggesting the Mongols, were using them as a generalization for all the peoples of that part of the world including the Manchu.

So all in all, in my opinion the Mongols were not involved enough in building civilizations to be considered for the game. Maybe they shouls be a group of super-barbarians, but I can't see that happening. I am pretty sure that most of the ancient cities of Central Asia were built by the non-Mongol tribes that lived there, but people migrated so much in that area, it is really hard to tell.

 

[Sobieski]

The Mongols didn't build cities (in general) they just sacked other people's cities.

I do think they should have some significance in the game however, because after all if they hadn't come west, they would not have brought gunpowder, magnetism and other technologies from China and the east which were absolutely crucial for Europe dominating the world. The Mongols are of huge significance to history, but perhaps more for destroying civilizations and maybe INDIRECTLY improving some, rather than DIRECTLY contributing.

During their peak they did not do much in terms of civilization. Hell if we counted what civilizations have done throughout their entire history, then we should include the Indonesians (Jakarta has 10 million people), and Nigeria (Lagos is pretty large).

Besides you cannot necessarily say it was the Mongols who built Samarkand because the leader might have been partly Mongol, because by that time the Mongol bloodline was all over the Eurasian continent. Hell lots of Poles would have been of part Mongol or Tartar descent. Hahahhah sorry I forgot where I was going with this. Oh ya. When you consider when the Mongols were powerful in comparison with the civilizations of the world, they were not much involved in building civilizations.

 

[Montezuma]

2Sobiesky and together

It's bull****! Europocentrical arrogance is only. In 300 AD the World (Oicoumena) was hellenistic. In 1400 BC World was mongolistic. Lots and lots of states from China to Poland, from Russia to India are heritige of Mongol Imperia. Government system even dynasthios is originated from Mongol 'barbarians'.
Yes, Mongols was ruined many cities, ruined Great Wonder of Central Asia - irrigation, died millions of people. But what european barbarians was in Middle East? Ruined ancient cities, died millions during Crucados, Quonquista in Americas. Why Americans is civ in Game, and Incas, Mongolians, Yoruba, Ethiopians etc isn't? It's wasp racism only.
Don't flame, man.

 

[Luca Brasi]

Well, the Mongols were both in Civ I and Civ II. They're the only nation from Civ I not in Civ III.

 

[Sobieski]

First of all I am not an anglo-saxon protestant (though I am white) so I do object that generalized racist remark.

I didn't say that the people of Central Asia did not have some great civilizations. I am saying that the MONGOLS as a tribe, in the period of time which MOST people suggest they should be in the game (In the times of Ghengis and Kubilai), were still not civilized, and I do not use the terms non-civilized as meaning barbaric. Just cause you don't understand the literal meaning of civilization, you don't have to lash out at me. During the time of G and K, the kingdoms "created by the Mongols" had not yet begun becoming civilized (building cities, although they of course were using farming). During the time frame which MOST PEOPLE seem to be recognizing as the time which the Mongols should be in the game, they were still pillaging and had not yet begun to integrate much into the local civilizations, but rather just rule them.

CIVILIZED DOES NOT EQUAL GOOD
UN-CIVILIZED DOES NOT EQUAL BAD
I am not being racist towards the Mongols

On the other hand, if they were to make a civ that represented all the people of Central Asia, then they SHOULD be in the game. However there were so many different non-Mongol tribes that were powerful as civilizations that it would not be accurate to label the civilization as Mongols, as they were only in control for a brief, yet significant period of time. After all you say that the Mongols moved in and had a significant impact on the local blood lines, well there were other tribes that moved around and had signifcant impacts on other tribes (including the Mongols) as well. The whole area is a giant melting pot of people, and it is not fair, in fact if might even be RACIST, to label them all as Mongols. It is similar to labelling most white North Americans as WASPS.

 

[Sobieski]

Hell, why don't we just call them the Huns. Or, we could even call them the Tartars. Or to represent the northern tribes, why don't we even try Russians.

 

[Sobieski]

And remember the definition of civilization is to take part in the act of building cities and agriculture. It is hard for us to argue about something when we are arguing about different things. I am giving my point-of-view based on that criteria. Now if you can use that criteria to explain to me why the Ethiopians should be in then you will probably make an excellent point, since I honestly do not have much background knowledge on the non-modern Ethiopians, especially before Euro-domination of Africa. I understand your point about the Incas, and in fact I think that they should maybe be in instead of the Iroquois, considering that the Iroquois (representing North American natives) do not fit my criteria as well as the Incas (which should be used to represent all the civilizations of South America)

I am by no means racist towards the North American natives. As a Canadian who is very environmentalist in cause, I believe that there is incredible wisdom that can be learned from these tribes, and although many will say that they were not advanced in terms of "civilization", they were far advanced past any European nation in terms of their attitude towards the environment, and sustainable living.

I am looking forward to hearing your reponse Montezuma, as I always enjoy a good debate.

 

[Exsanguination]

2 things:

1) arent the mongols the turks (or the turks descedants of the mongols)? If not, dont shoot me. If so, then the mongols definetely count as a civ

2) THIS IS A GAME. Hell, I'll make a mod that makes garbagemen a CIVILIZATION if i want to... who cares?

 

[Sobieski]

I am not saying people shouldn't make mods, I am just trying to give to the players what I think Firaxis was thinking when making this game.

I personally think they should make a civ that represents all the people of central asia. Maybe they should call them the Turkic people, but then that would exlude a lot of other people in that area that should also be in it.

That is the neat thing about mods. You can make anything you want.

 

[Ad Hominem]

Now, that would be an extremely interesting Civilization to meddle with. The Redneck Moronians. Leader could be George "Shrubya" Bush and I guess Blair could play a significant role in it. Other great leaders: Iron Maggie, Reagan, Simitis (the Greek PM - fits like a glove in the "Moronian" civ) etc. etc.

J/k

 

[Steve Morse]

in response that the mongols and turks are one and the same it is complicated. the mongols used mostly turkic troops in their wars, so the russian word tartar means mongols as well as turks (as in crimean tartars) turkic people should definantly get their own civ, as earlier said. Central asia has long been an area of great civilization and should get recognition. as for the mongols, they were in control of many of the civs in the game like the chinese and russians, and their effect on them should count for it's own civ, as they follow in the traditions and common background of the huns, avars, and khazars before them

 

[God]

Tatars are a Turkish tribe that was brought under control of the Mongols and in the army. Russians started to call Mongols Tartars, which is a common mistake.
Under Mongols, almost all of Asia and Europe(known world) was in peace called Mongol peace.
Mongol conquest also led to establishment of Silk Route by Kublai Khan which helped make Renaisance possible in Europe, which led to colonization of Americas and world, and later domination of most of the world.
So if Genghis Khan decided he didn't want to go out and steal some gold, the world would be quite different... :crazyeyes

Even if Mongols aren't a civ Luca Brasi has made a nice mod and we should be happy with that.