"new" civilizations

[barron of ideas]

We need the Portugese!

Prince Henry the Navigator (his sailors and captains) found the way to India. They colonized Brazil. And Parts of Africa. And India (Goa) If the pope had drawn his line a little futher west, lots more people in the Americas would be speaking Portugese. They had bad luck with the Spanish and some less than first class leaders, or they might have ruled the empre the sun never sets on, instead of the English.

 

[Anti-EUA]

yes i know, i am brazilian. but some others civs had the same or even more importance...
this is more like history forum, no?

 

[general_kill]

Yea I agree, but I really hope Fraxis won't try and solve this problem by simply coming out with another expansion pack. Maybe in civ 4 they can have a more complete list of countries.

 

[Sims2789]

yeah. i bet you the expansion pack will be called "Civ3, Play the World, Again"
________
Silver Surfer Vaporizer

 

[puppetmaster]

yeah, they've been forgetting the Portuguese since civ1, the Portuguese were one of the most important civilizations ever, If anyone can tell me why the iraquois, the zulu or the spanish appear in the game and not the Portuguese then i'll gladly hear.
They aren't probably aware of the great portuguese empire in Asia, Africa and America and the great contributions they gave to world history

 

[Darkness]

Originally posted by puppetmaster
yeah, they've been forgetting the Portuguese since civ1, the Portuguese were one of the most important civilizations ever, If anyone can tell me why the iraquois, the zulu or the spanish appear in the game and not the Portuguese then i'll gladly hear.
They aren't probably aware of the great portuguese empire in Asia, Africa and America and the great contributions they gave to world history

Iroquois: If they hadn't been included, there would only have been 2 amereican civs in vanilla Civ3 and that's a little low for a cultural group.

Zululand: Need at least 1 African civ, there's already enough European civs...

Spanish: Large historical influence, both in middle ages in Europe as well as in colonizing the New World...

The Dutch have played far more significnat roles in history than the Portuguese, we should definately be included first...
Think: Colonization of Indonesia and Surinam, founding of New York, 80-years war with Spain, giant naval battles with England. Immense trade empire in the 17th century, etc...
That's a bit more than just colonizing Brazil, don't you think?

My point here is: You can make arguments for almost every country to be included, but there's only so many places and I think they chose just about right when filling those places...

 

[Alkar]

Spanish Empire was the one called "where the sun never sets on". I never heard that about the English Empire (AFAIK).

Remember, Spain discovered America. I can't understand why the Portuguese are not included, why Sain was not included in Civ1 and Vanilla Civ3, and why Zululand and (North)Americans are in from the begining.

Compare England, Spain or Portuguese centuries of history to the 200 mere years of USA... Can you achieve Cult. Vict. in 200 years? He he (don't get angry, american patriots, it's just a joke)

 

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Alkar
Remember, Spain discovered America.

Hardly. The existence of the Americas was known at the time among European scholars and fishermen. What happened was that a private expedition, funded by the Spanish crown, found a new route. Mainly by luck, too, as they didn't even use the latest tech.

But then Spain did something new: they started the conquest and wide-spread colonization of the Americas, soon to be followed by other major European nations. The Chinese, Africans, Vikings, Irish etc. had never even considered that. THAT was historically of huge importance and put Spain on the Civ map IMHO.

I'm all for a second expansion. There are more than enough historically interesting civs still left out to fill another 8 slots. Apart from the Dutch and Portuguese already mentioned, there are for instance: the Maya, Polynesia, Mali, Ethiopia, Tiahuanaco, Australia, the Minoans, the Khmer, Zimbabwe.

 

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Darkness
Iroquois: If they hadn't been included, there would only have been 2 amereican civs in vanilla Civ3 and that's a little low for a cultural group.

Geography was a consideration (but strangely not for PTW), but the Iroquois were also the superpower in North America until the American revolution. They were the only regional nation to continue the expansion of their empire after the arrival of the Europeans.

That's a bit more than just colonizing Brazil, don't you think?

While I agree that the Dutch should come first, Portugal did a lot more than 'just colonize Brazil'. They were leading naval tech for over a century, had quite a few great expeditions and set up trading posts (plus colonies) all over the world.

 

[Alkar]

Originally posted by Ribannah
Hardly. The existence of the Americas was known at the time among European scholars and fishermen. What happened was that a private expedition, funded by the Spanish crown, found a new route. Mainly by luck, too, as they didn't even use the latest tech.

Absolutely true. Legends also say the Scandinavians crossed the Atlantic Ocean long time before Columbus did.

Unfortunately, Spain was pioneer in other aspect: the raze of ancient and glorious civilizations in America

 

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Alkar
Compare England, Spain or Portuguese centuries of history to the 200 mere years of USA... Can you achieve Cult. Vict. in 200 years? He he (don't get angry, american patriots, it's just a joke)

Remember, we have until 2050 AD, grant them some time!

Give me a religious & scientific civ and on a good map and with some good fortune (an early Settler or GL would be historically correct) I think I can manage 100K in - what is it? -187 turns.

But USA culture started to shape from the moment the first colonist settled in the area and began exchanging ideas with the natives. Else there might never have been a revolution.

 

[mrtn]

Originally posted by Alkar


Absolutely true. Legends also say the Scandinavians crossed the Atlantic Ocean long time before Columbus did.

Unfortunately, Spain was pioneer in other aspect: the raze of ancient and glorious civilizations in America

Legends, and archaelogical evidence from New Foundland (or was it Nova Scotia?)

And if you don't like the American civ (as I do, the sight of an american knight is creepy), you can replace them with the Inca. I think it is really strange that Firaxis hasn't included the largest south american civ.

 

[puppetmaster]

The Dutch have played far more significnat roles in history than the Portuguese, we should definately be included first...
Think: Colonization of Indonesia and Surinam, founding of New York, 80-years war with Spain, giant naval battles with England. Immense trade empire in the 17th century, etc...
That's a bit more than just colonizing Brazil, don't you think?

My point here is: You can make arguments for almost every country to be included, but there's only so many places and I think they chose just about right when filling those places...

You clearly know very little about what you're saying, you back your point of view with stuff that interests you and trim out what you don't like/know.
The Portuguese did much more than "just colonizing Brazil". We were the first europeans to discover Africa, we were also the leading nation in technology and commerce for about 100 years. We where the first europeans to dare to cross the atlantic and explore the sea. We were the first europeans to reach Japan, amongst other asian countries, we discovered the marithm path to India Which gave us total hegemony in the euroasian sea commerce. Several Settlements in China, India and Birmania amongst others. we had several territories in Africa (São Tomé, Moçambique, Guine, Angola, cabo verde, etc). Oh yeah we also discovered and colonized Brazil which is just about the size of Europe.
And many other achievements that very few nations in the world can be proud of.

 

[Quandary]

Interesting how large nationalism is in this thread.

For all I care, they could have left the U.S. out. I certainly never play it, and with the overall snottiness of the AI it's not generally friendly to me when it's picked for a game I play.

I have my own custom civ. One that never existed, never will exist, and is used by me only to add a bit of whimsy to my games.

And there's your solution. Creating a custom civ is not hard at all with the help of the great artists in C&C for leaderheads, UUs, and such.

Want Portugal or the Dutch? Want Portugal and the Dutch? Add them. Look for a decent leaderhead, and name the ruler whatever you want.

Why argue when this is something you can fix to your own tastes?

 

[The Last Conformist]

On the subject of nationalism: Despite my location, I've always been against including the Vikings/Scandinavians ...

The one truly glaring gap in the Civilization collection IMO is and remains the Inca. Were I to include one civ from the Americas, I'd choose the Inca over the USA, on the grounds that the later, geography notwithstanding, are culturally just another European civ, whereas the Incas represent something genuinely different.

I've always been slightly puzzled that they took the Zulu as the token African )) civilization. I'd probably chosen the Ethiopians.

 

[Harleqin]

Originally posted by puppetmaster


We were the first europeans to discover Africa, we were also the leading nation in technology and commerce for about 100 years. We where the first europeans to dare to cross the atlantic and explore the sea. [/B]

This is just sooooo funny First to discover Africa? And when was that? before the Romans fought Carthage? Before the Greeks traded in Egypt? The original tribal spaniards were, as I remember it, partially colonized by the Carthaginians before the Romans came and in the age there was no Spanish nor Portuguese nation.
First to discover Africa indeed....and was it ever lost?

Also, is Brazil more important than Spanish colonisation in Argentina, Peru, Mexico, California, the Philippines, Cuba and many other places? Or the Dutch colonies in Indonesia? Actually, though Portugal had a part of Africa it was insignificant compared with the French and the British. The Germans were just as strong there. And many had trading posts in China.

As I see it the main Portuguese contribution to history is the exploration voyages they made, most notably be Da Gama. Is this enough to make a civ? Perhaps, but there are others with a claim that is just as good.

 

[Padma]

[color=600f0f]Enough with the nationalism! This is not the place for "My country is better than yours". If you want to discuss what civs/countries/nations should have been in the official releases, fine. But no bashing of each other, no matter how "own-nation-oriented" their education may appear, or how uneducated their argument may seem to you. Let's keep it Civ-ilized, okay? [/color]

Just for the record, comparing the US vs. the Incas in the game, I am sure it was a business decision. Remember, the game was made in the US, and has most of its sales in the US. They weren't about to not include the US as a Civ.

 

[farting bob]

in reality, USA was probably not the best civ, since they really have only begun to start culturally influencing the world in the last century. they have not had an empire, in fact int he beginnignthey were apart of an empire, and have very little hotoric value. however, i agree, since the majoroty of PC ownes are american, not including them could have been risky.
i think that they havent bothered to ad any south americans other than the aztecs. inca's, mayans and omlecs all played a part in central and southern armerican history.
i also think is dd that in vanilla civ they could only inc 16 civs. even if they made it so you could not play al the civs at once, they could have ha a wider range to choose from. and PTW proves they could make it so more civs could play.

 

[Mongrel]

The US has been a part of world history for a limited time, but similarly, the Babylonians and Persians were only around for arelatively short time. They were at the other end of the time-line. Does that make those civs more significant? Has any civilization been more of a world-wide influence than the US?

The undeniable and profound impact the US has had on the world as a result of having at its core the ideal that everyone has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and our exportation of that ideal do indeed greatly distiguish it from the European civs with whom similarity is a result of those civs becoming more like the US, not the other way around. In order to be taken seriously, CivilizationIII has to include the US.

I have no complaints about the civ inclusions or exclusions in CivIII/PTW. As a fan of variety, I would like to see more. Abyssinia, Incans, Portuguese, Dutch are all good candidates, I think.

 

[Louis XXIV]

The problem is the Dutch, Portugeese, Sweedish, etc. all clump together into "The Europeans who didn't affect America as much as France, England, and Spain"

Think about this, what would their UU be? Their civ traits? How will it affect game balance? How will it affect the balance of culture regions?

I think the Iroquois were a good choice (but their UU is more appropriate of the Souix. The hight of Iroquois power was after the arrival of the Europeans. They could compete with the French, with the use of Dutch firearms)

I would like Firaxis to come out with a new expansion pack, with the purpose of a much greater editor.

It would add the same kind of stuff PTW has (New Civs, improvements, etc.)

Modding is "nice," but I would like some new "official" civs