Licentia
Prince
Jack the Ripper said:
How about Slingshot guys with extra attack power.
New Civilizations
- Thread starter Corey
- Start date
How about Slingshot guys with extra attack power.
Licentia
Prince
How about along with Israel have the Phillistines. They may have become the Carthaginian people though after they were wiped out though.
Licentia
Prince
onedreamer said:
What is a civ then anymore? It's all one big civilization now in the world. Everything is blended. But different countries develop their own cultures and customs even if they came from another civ. Like America,, England and Canada say words differently and also like different sports and TV shows, etc. We are our own cultures which makes each into a civilization, I think.
Licentia
Prince
Roso said:
Turkey was the Muslim hub and they definitely kicked butt. The Ottomons or Turks they should be called.
Regarding Turkey and that region, I feel we should have:
Ottoman Empire (Sogut)
Byzantine Empire (Constantinople)
refs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sogut
http://mnmn.essortment.com/historyempireo_rumj.htm
Ottoman Empire (Sogut)
Byzantine Empire (Constantinople)
refs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sogut
http://mnmn.essortment.com/historyempireo_rumj.htm
Licentia
Prince
rhialto said:
Both Civs have quite a history for sure.
Greek Stud
Prince
Phillistia is in orgin from Caphtor (Crete). The area we see today as Gaza Strip holds the mountains in which these Mycenaen cave dwellers settled. Philli meaning 'friends' and stia 'of the cave'. Avimelech, the King of the Phillistines held his capital at Gerar. Phicol the general of his legion. Some cities they founded were: Gaza, Gat, Ashdod, Ekron, and Ashkelon. Each town had a seren derived from tyran from the Greek word tyrannos. Avimelech strangly has a semetic name while Achish who is a seren of Gat had a Greek name. Historians point out that the land was Canaanite land before it became Phillistia.
The whole confusion with this civ is that a Phillistia existed before Israel's conquests under King Joshua. Completely destroyed another group of Cretians immigrated to Israel and laid claim to the previous Phillistia, yet this second wave built cities close to the sea, while the first laid closer to Beersheba in Negev. We see this happening today with the Palestinians who adopted an ancient name in order to lay claim to the land of Israel.
The two Phillistines have completely different histories, only in name are they connected. The first was semetic (Canaanite), the second are believed to be the Pelasgians mentioned in the Illiad who allied with Troy.
The first Phillistia had an anachronism form of government under one King in Gerar. The Greek Phillistia which was the enemy and sent Goliath had five seranim or governor-kings.
The whole confusion with this civ is that a Phillistia existed before Israel's conquests under King Joshua. Completely destroyed another group of Cretians immigrated to Israel and laid claim to the previous Phillistia, yet this second wave built cities close to the sea, while the first laid closer to Beersheba in Negev. We see this happening today with the Palestinians who adopted an ancient name in order to lay claim to the land of Israel.
The two Phillistines have completely different histories, only in name are they connected. The first was semetic (Canaanite), the second are believed to be the Pelasgians mentioned in the Illiad who allied with Troy.
The first Phillistia had an anachronism form of government under one King in Gerar. The Greek Phillistia which was the enemy and sent Goliath had five seranim or governor-kings.
Licentia
Prince
Greek Stud said:
Umm... You know too much.
Greek Stud
Prince
All I have left to say is: OPA!
Furius
Prince
Well, if Serbia and Israel deserve to be in Civ IV, I would propose the inclusion of New Zealand as well. And of course everyone who actually has heard of New Zealand will know that that is a bad idea.
My reasoning is thus:
Serbia-
1. European, of which we have a lot already
2. Generally localised effect on the world- Serbian has only (With the major exception of WWI) been important to the history of the Balkans
3. It never experienced a period when it was among the most advanced, powerful nations in the world.
Israel-
1. Middle Eastern- of which we may have too many already, depending on how things end up working out in Civ IV
2. People keep justifying Israel with, "...judaism, from which Christianity can..." or similar with whatever faith/idea/philosophy that is the most important. But these philosophies would not be related to the nation of Israel as represented in Civ. Civ is about conquest and economy (And now culture a bit). Religion may possible feature in Civ IV but I don't think a Civ could be justified by the birth of religions within their borders. If I was to say that NZ should be included because we invented pavlova it would be taken as a joke- likewise Israel should not be included because Christianity was discovered/invented/born there.
3. Israel has never been one of the most advanced, powerful nations of the world. This may sound slightly anti-semitic but it isn't. Israel's history is first one party conquered them then another. True England was conquered by Rome and the Aztecs by Spain, but that was not permenant in the first case and after centuries of being top dog in the other. Israel is just conquered by power after power and when it isn't conquered it takes up a middling position in terms of power and advancement rather than becoming powerful (Like Spain did in the 1500's for example).
Let this not be confused with a personel view of those countries; I have deep respect for both Israel and Serbia.
On the other hand, if NZ was included in Civ IV then they would have every right to appear as well.
My reasoning is thus:
Serbia-
1. European, of which we have a lot already
2. Generally localised effect on the world- Serbian has only (With the major exception of WWI) been important to the history of the Balkans
3. It never experienced a period when it was among the most advanced, powerful nations in the world.
Israel-
1. Middle Eastern- of which we may have too many already, depending on how things end up working out in Civ IV
2. People keep justifying Israel with, "...judaism, from which Christianity can..." or similar with whatever faith/idea/philosophy that is the most important. But these philosophies would not be related to the nation of Israel as represented in Civ. Civ is about conquest and economy (And now culture a bit). Religion may possible feature in Civ IV but I don't think a Civ could be justified by the birth of religions within their borders. If I was to say that NZ should be included because we invented pavlova it would be taken as a joke- likewise Israel should not be included because Christianity was discovered/invented/born there.
3. Israel has never been one of the most advanced, powerful nations of the world. This may sound slightly anti-semitic but it isn't. Israel's history is first one party conquered them then another. True England was conquered by Rome and the Aztecs by Spain, but that was not permenant in the first case and after centuries of being top dog in the other. Israel is just conquered by power after power and when it isn't conquered it takes up a middling position in terms of power and advancement rather than becoming powerful (Like Spain did in the 1500's for example).
Let this not be confused with a personel view of those countries; I have deep respect for both Israel and Serbia.
On the other hand, if NZ was included in Civ IV then they would have every right to appear as well.
frekk
Scourge of St. Lawrence
I tend to agree. If they are going to expand the civs, I really don't want to see any more from the Meditteranean/Europe/Near East, the game already has too many. Anyone who has played an Earth map with all 32 civs knows exactly what I mean. The rest of the world is pretty bare, and all kinds of really interesting civs aren't represented.
Civ can be a vehicle to get people interested in learning about new things, and I'd like to see more civs that are less well-known featured, and more from Asia, Africa, and particularly the Americas.
Civ can be a vehicle to get people interested in learning about new things, and I'd like to see more civs that are less well-known featured, and more from Asia, Africa, and particularly the Americas.
Licentia
Prince
Furius said:
Okay, then screw Israel, and let's bring in Austrailia!! and... Korea or something, and maybe another country in each of the Americas. Another indian tribe like the Mohawk tribe or something and like brazil. Hey why not? America is included even though it's a modern civ. Why not brazil. Brazil is becoming a powerful nation I hear. Having more Civs in other places will be good.
Greek Stud
Prince
The largest Native American group:
Chippewa
or O'chippewa or Ojibwe (all pronounced exactly the same):
speak the language of: Algonquin
The tribes related or at one part of the Chippewa include: Ottawa and Potawatomi when the 3 tribes were all part of the Anishinaabe who fought the Iroquis.
Later the Chippewa fought the Dakota (Sioux) tribes and forced them from their land.
Existing in: Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Michigan, Minnesota, Alberta, North Dakota, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. Parts of Wisconsin. Focused near Lake Huron, Mackinac Strait and first encountered the French at Saulteur, upper Michagin.
Today the US recognizes 22 Chippewa groups and Canada recognizes 130.
History:
Conflict with Dakota and Winnebago.
Peace at Green Bay.
Fur Trade Wars.
French began to supply with firearms as British took Quebec.
Dutch supplied Iroquis with firearms.
Chippewa take Green Bay.
Iroquis and Huron fight over territory.
Iroquis retreat from battle with Erie.
Chippewa kills most of those who retreated.
Sturgeon War occured when Erie was sacked by Iroquis in a second attack that destoryed them and refugees overwhelmed the Wisconsin tribes.
Iroquis make every attempt to dominate trade with French over the Chippewa.
At Iroquis Point, bands of Chippewa stealth attacked and Iroquis halted any further attacks.
Other various battles with the Cree and Fox.
Failed attempt to ally Algonquin (Chippewa) and Iroquis.
Illionois territory awarded to Iroquis, Algonquin tribes ally themselves with all surrounding tribes against the Iroquis.
Detroit becomes cultural center for tribes, Fox native land.
French ordered genocide of the Fox who had most hostility against them.
http://www.famousamericanindians4.homestead.com/Ojibwahistory.html
there's more but you get the point.
Chippewa
or O'chippewa or Ojibwe (all pronounced exactly the same):
speak the language of: Algonquin
The tribes related or at one part of the Chippewa include: Ottawa and Potawatomi when the 3 tribes were all part of the Anishinaabe who fought the Iroquis.
Later the Chippewa fought the Dakota (Sioux) tribes and forced them from their land.
Existing in: Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Michigan, Minnesota, Alberta, North Dakota, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. Parts of Wisconsin. Focused near Lake Huron, Mackinac Strait and first encountered the French at Saulteur, upper Michagin.
Today the US recognizes 22 Chippewa groups and Canada recognizes 130.
History:
Conflict with Dakota and Winnebago.
Peace at Green Bay.
Fur Trade Wars.
French began to supply with firearms as British took Quebec.
Dutch supplied Iroquis with firearms.
Chippewa take Green Bay.
Iroquis and Huron fight over territory.
Iroquis retreat from battle with Erie.
Chippewa kills most of those who retreated.
Sturgeon War occured when Erie was sacked by Iroquis in a second attack that destoryed them and refugees overwhelmed the Wisconsin tribes.
Iroquis make every attempt to dominate trade with French over the Chippewa.
At Iroquis Point, bands of Chippewa stealth attacked and Iroquis halted any further attacks.
Other various battles with the Cree and Fox.
Failed attempt to ally Algonquin (Chippewa) and Iroquis.
Illionois territory awarded to Iroquis, Algonquin tribes ally themselves with all surrounding tribes against the Iroquis.
Detroit becomes cultural center for tribes, Fox native land.
French ordered genocide of the Fox who had most hostility against them.
http://www.famousamericanindians4.homestead.com/Ojibwahistory.html
there's more but you get the point.
Greek Stud
Prince
Americas:
1. Chippewa (Algonquin)
2. Apache (leaderhead: Geronimo) (this includes the Navajo, because of blood relation, and the Pueblos that allied out of necessity against the Spanish. Americans (whites) and Mexicans learned quickly not to anger the Apache nomadic tribes)
3. Inuit
Australia:
1. Aborigines
2. Mauri (New Zealand)
3. Australians
4. Tonga
1. Chippewa (Algonquin)
2. Apache (leaderhead: Geronimo) (this includes the Navajo, because of blood relation, and the Pueblos that allied out of necessity against the Spanish. Americans (whites) and Mexicans learned quickly not to anger the Apache nomadic tribes)
3. Inuit
Australia:
1. Aborigines
2. Mauri (New Zealand)
3. Australians
4. Tonga
I don't think we should have tribes put in for the sake of balancing the civilizations. There is a reason that there are more European and Near East civs than any other group - they had a much bigger impact on world history as a whole. It makes me laugh to see people right off Serbia because it only had regional importance and then propose civs that themselves only had regional importance.
Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps there is a minor tribe out there that somehow changed the course of a major war, or discovered something under their European overlords. But all the same, I don't think the reasons for putting them in are good enough.
I just know someone's going to ask me to go through all the civs and explain their importance.....
Maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps there is a minor tribe out there that somehow changed the course of a major war, or discovered something under their European overlords. But all the same, I don't think the reasons for putting them in are good enough.
I just know someone's going to ask me to go through all the civs and explain their importance.....
Licentia
Prince
Spatula said:
You are speaking from the perspective of the history of the "Western World," as they say. Basically European and Middle to East Asian history that only starts in North America back in the 1500s. Who then says that Native American history is not just as important in world events just because they didn't interact with those civilizations across the ocean? Just because they aren't in the history of the Western World, doesn't mean they weren't great civilizations. Same goes for Austrailian tribes. It wouldn't matter what these tribes did because they were accross oceans that people never could cross, so there was no interaction. Those Native Americans on the East coast sure beat off the Nords who came to Eastern Canada. It wasn't until guns and more modern ships became available that the Natives could be conquered.
I'm not speaking from the perspective of the 'Western World'. It is purely froma world point of view. They aren't 'not important' because they didn't interact with the West; they're not important (from a global perspective) because they simply didn't contribute as much to the world as a whole as much as the Eurasians did. There were some civilizations - such as the Aztecs and Incas - who did other things that would qualify for 'greatness' (namely large empires). The small tribes being proposed neither made significant scientific and cultural changes to the world nor did they have empires on the scale of those currently in Civ3.
On the whole I think the whole 'Western perspective' arugment is dumb anyway. This is a game produced in the West for citizens of the west for use on something invented by the West that is obtained from spending money earned by the Western phenomenon of capitalism. I'm sure you'll now understand why there seems to be such a Western slant on the game.
On the whole I think the whole 'Western perspective' arugment is dumb anyway. This is a game produced in the West for citizens of the west for use on something invented by the West that is obtained from spending money earned by the Western phenomenon of capitalism. I'm sure you'll now understand why there seems to be such a Western slant on the game.
Similar threads
