Petition to add Poland

[Julian Delphiki]

Carthage absorbed enough Greek culture eventually, plus, Pheoniciens were a Greek colony, sort of. A lot of "civilizations" were Greek colonies.

China and Korea, I used the same reasoning as Rome and France. Chinese is like Latin, and modern China is frighteningly similar to Europe, culturally.

And most Viking tribes actually hailed from Germanic lands (check the similarity of the names of their Gods), unless you're talking about the Lapps and Finns that lived like the Inuit there, but I doubt that's the Vikings people are talking about.

Origin of Phoenicians is still widely disputed. Please, state your source claiming that they were a Greek colony. Carthage competed with Greece (City states, actually) for suitable settlement places and trade. Many Carthagian/Phoenician city etc names have Greek origins, though (the names we use nowadays - no doubt they had their own names).

Your best claim for Vikings/German connection is similar god names? Please, try to do bit better. There were many germanic tribes on europe, and most of them did not have much in common.

Lapps and Finns lived like Inuits? As Hitti-Litti said, climate here is quite different. This winter is exceptional warm, (+6c at Helsinki in southern Finland today, usually -10~c around this time) but climate in Lapland is subarctic anyways.

I think that by your reasoning we only need "Olduvai Civilization" since we all seem to have our roots there. Leader would be Lucy, of course.

 

[Eskel]

Just few points:

Civilization is depicted in terms of specific habits, customs, beliefs, ideas, social models. It is strongly connected with nationality and ethnic group affiliation.
Phoenicians and Carthaginians were Semites, while Greeks or proto-Greeks not. Their customs were different, as well as religion. So we cannot say they were one Greek civilization. Remember, that Phenician-Carthaginian civilization were strongly influenced by mid-east civilization, I mean Assyrians, Hetites, and many various civilizations of Euphrat - Tigirs delta. However, we can say they were members of one great mediterranean culture group (along with Romans, Greeks, Mycenians, Minoans, Etrusks, Iberians, Illyrians and Thracians).

And I like idea to tie civilization assignement with ethnic group affiliation (as well as abandonned idea of culture groups from Civ3).

BTW: For me, the main criteria of being recognized as important country, is population and GPB in relation to world's one, now and in the past. Under both of those terms Poland is now in the world's top 30, so don't tell us that we are completely unimportant country. In past, as Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth we even scored higher.
Of course, any spectacular scientific and cultural achievements also should be taken into consideration - and similarily, we arent the 1st league, but strong player in 2nd.
USA and Britain surely are different cultures, both are worlds 1st league, and surely deserve to be always included in Civ separately (because of their huge impact on world's history). C'mon people, don't deny facts because you dont like USA, or Poland - for example I am not fond of Russia, but I wouldnt ever call it unimportant as it hits world 3rd place in terms of influence and power (after USA and China), not to mention imperialistic and surely glorious for Russian people history.

 

[paperchase417]

And I like idea to tie civilization assignement with ethnic group affiliation (as well as abandonned idea of culture groups from Civ3).

The question i find myself asking most often about this culture grouping is...
Does Carthage get grouped with the Greco-Romans, or the Africans. Also, Egypt, Middle Eastern or African?

 

[Mirc]

Carthage, Rome, Greece and Egypt are in Civ3 in the "Mediterranean" group. Arabia, Ottomans, Persia, Sumer, Babylon, Hittites, etc are in the "Middle Eastern" group.

 

[Vertico]

For example I am not fond of Russia, but I wouldnt ever call it unimportant as it hits world 3rd place in terms of influence and power (after USA and China), not to mention imperialistic and surely glorious for Russian people history.

Come on. What fact stands behind this words? GDP? Maybe GDP per capita?
Russia is not on world 3rd place as well as China is not on the 2nd. It's just marketing and PR. Doesn't matter that China bought lot of American bonds. In case of conflict USA just won't pay them back Comparing GDPs - American is still 6 time higher than Chinese, and 16 times higher than Russian. It is a HUGE difference! It like when you play Civ and have 16000 points when opponent has 1000.

With 2% rise of american economy Russia would need rise of 32% - just to keep the same relation. Think how big Russian rise should to compete with USA until the end of century?

I would repeat: Russia is not the first power of the world. Using your terminology it is also in 2nd league. "Small" Poland with half GDP of "big" Russia has 50% higher GDP per capita and has much better long-term opportunities being the part of world's biggest economy - European Union.

 

[Antilogic]

Vertico made some good points. I would have to put the Germans high on the list (being one of the top GDPs and the driving force in the EU) and Japan (tiny Japan exceeds the giant China's GDP).

I don't think this has been posted before, but check out euratlas.com. Especially this map: http://www.euratlas.com/big/big1400.htm. At a time, Poland was the largest European power (I'm counting the Mongols as an Asian power, of course, despite their influence in East Europe).

EDIT: And, when you look at the map, notice the outlines of sky blue around some of Poland's neighbors? That means those countries are under Polish occupation, or are otherwise tied to Poland.

 

[paperchase417]

Thats a cool website. Watching the map change from century to century makes you wonder what happened. Poland for example, is tiny, for a long time, then one century it blows up, 100 years later its like a third of what it was before, then its huge again, Then it disappears all together and is replaced by Prussia only to return 200 years later, about 3/4ths the size it was before Prussia.

Thats a lot of drastic change.

 

[a4phantom]

Come on. What fact stands behind this words? GDP? Maybe GDP per capita?
Russia is not on world 3rd place as well as China is not on the 2nd. It's just marketing and PR. Doesn't matter that China bought lot of American bonds. In case of conflict USA just won't pay them back Comparing GDPs - American is still 6 time higher than Chinese, and 16 times higher than Russian. It is a HUGE difference! It like when you play Civ and have 16000 points when opponent has 1000.

With 2% rise of american economy Russia would need rise of 32% - just to keep the same relation. Think how big Russian rise should to compete with USA until the end of century?

I would repeat: Russia is not the first power of the world. Using your terminology it is also in 2nd league. "Small" Poland with half GDP of "big" Russia has 50% higher GDP per capita and has much better long-term opportunities being the part of world's biggest economy - European Union.

Russia has a very weak economy, after years of Putin's freeze, a decade of robber baron looting, and almost a century of Soviet mismanagement, on the pathetic system the Tsars left. Add to that devastation in two world wars. The Russian military is barely sufficient to bully small neighbors who have been vassals for centuries and that Stalin routinely crushed without effort. The only Russian cultural export I've heard of lately is Kalashnikov vodka.
However: Russia defeated Nazi Germany. Russia put the first man into space. Russia dominated half the world for decades, and there were very few nations whose foreign policies and even domestic policies weren't shaped by the Cold War struggle, of which Russia was half. Russia was the patron of one side or the other of most struggles across the globe for 45 years. Prior to the Soviet revolution, I think Russia was often over estimated, as it was the Winter not the Army that beat Napoleon, and they did badly in the Crimean war. But during the mid and late 20th century, Russia was one of the top powers. And even now, you don't see most dictators conducting obvious assassinations of their political opponents in London. (True, Pinochet did it in Washington but we pretty much gave him permission )

 

[Yeekim]

Well, Soviet Union - a direct descendant of Tsarist Russia and predecessor of today's Russia was about 1/6 of the world's total mainland. Even as Russia today is smaller, it has population of "only" about 170 million and, for most part, vastly underdeveloped economy, its sheer size and amount of resources make it one of top league players.

 

[BadHorsie]

I don't think Poland should be included. You'd only get overtaken by the Germans anyway

But seriously, I don't think being Polish is a good enough reason for Fireaxis to include Poland.

 

[Grimus]

I am 1/4 Polish...

and I approve of this thread.

 

[Vertico]

However: Russia defeated Nazi Germany. (...)
I think Russia was often over estimated, as it was the Winter not the Army that beat Napoleon, and they did badly in the Crimean war. But during the mid and late 20th century, Russia was one of the top powers.

We can add here Russian - Japannese war at 1904, Polish - Soviet war at 1920, Soviet - Finish war at 1939, Soviet - Afgan war at 1973. What kind of super power it is then?

p.s.
Not Russia defeated Nazi Germany but coalition of countries: USA, UK and Commonwealth, Poland, France, Russia, and almost all ocupied countries.

 

[a4phantom]

We can add here Russian - Japannese war at 1904, Polish - Soviet war at 1920, Soviet - Finish war at 1939, Soviet - Afgan war at 1973. What kind of super power it is then?

p.s.
Not Russia defeated Nazi Germany but coalition of countries: USA, UK and Commonwealth, Poland, France, Russia, and almost all ocupied countries.

I'm almost certain I said that Russia was not always a super power. Nor does being a super power mean winning every war, as the colonies defeated Britain, the Vietnamese defeated America and the Iraqis are currently. And no one does well in Afghanistan. I suspect even mighty Poland has lost a war or two. But the Soviet Union was by far the most important of the Allies regarding the war in Europe. Britain and France's contributions were not even close, and the rest were much less critical to Germany's defeat.

 

[Vertico]

Russia would not succed without western countries. Without luftwawe being beaten during battle of England, without risk of opening the second front, without north convoys with weapon, some contribution had also polish army fighting under russian comand, and contstant sabotage on supply lines in Poland and winter as always. Best Russian contribution unfortunetly was there were too many often to let them all killed by german army. Unfortunetly tactics were to fight, no matter how. Germans maybe would not kill you, but NKVD for sure if you step back. How many Russians were killed?

It was not a contribution - it was a mass murder on the nation. But unfortunetly Russian got used too with their always despotic goverments.

Regarding winter - nobody from the west doesn't know that could be cold deeper inside the continent?

 

[a4phantom]

Russia would not succed without western countries. Without luftwawe being beaten during battle of England, without risk of opening the second front, without north convoys with weapon, some contribution had also polish army fighting under russian comand, and contstant sabotage on supply lines in Poland and winter as always.

I didn't say Russia did it alone, I said Russia made the biggest contribution.

Best Russian contribution unfortunetly was there were too many often to let them all killed by german army. Unfortunetly tactics were to fight, no matter how. Germans maybe would not kill you, but NKVD for sure if you step back. How many Russians were killed?

There were also Zhukov and the T-34, not small factors in Germany's defeat.

It was not a contribution - it was a mass murder on the nation.

It was both.

But unfortunetly Russian got used too with their always despotic goverments.

The Tsars were despots, the Communists were despots, and Putin is a despot. But only one of them could hold the country together under invasion, Putin can barely hold onto Chechnya.

Regarding winter - nobody from the west doesn't know that could be cold deeper inside the continent?

Napoleon was arrogant enough to think he could win before Winter, and he either underestimated the Russians or overestimated them, depending on how you classify the burning of Moscow. Having a prior example of what not to do, Hitler was just plain stupid.

 

[K.F. Huszár]

Hi.
There topic was about Poland. As a Hungarian I support it. As a historian I also support it (e.g. Poland compared to Mali).

About Russia: Russia alone lost her battle against Nazi Germany. Russia began winning battles after concentrating to one front and getting help (enormous amount of materials) from the West. That's about the second world war.

But, Russia is Civilization - no doubt.

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

Again, I'd rather let Siam be a civilization before Poland, representative of Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Malaysia, and the Polynesians of New Zealand, representative of Pacific Islanders. I agree with K.F. Huszár with the point that Poland is more significant than Mali, but that is only individually. Mali in this game is used to represent all the Northern and Western African cultures (which are, BTW, sorely underestimated), while Poland and other Eastern European nations are already represented by Russia, Greece and the Romans/Byzantines... sort of, at least in this over-simplistic game. Yeah, I know, I don't want to be flamed and yet I post highly-flammable materials on this forum, and Civ player are already the educated and polite variety.

Again, just because a country doesn't qualify as a civilization, doesn't mean it isn't unique and distinct, with a wonderful history and cultural traditions. It's just that there are over 150 countries in the UN, and countries close to each other do have similarities. As to my China/Korea comment: yeah, it does sound strange, but it's quite consistent with my claim of France and Spain being Latin cultures, while England and the Scandinavians being Germanic. To quote a gentle, non-flammable example: France, Spain and Italy drinks wine, Germany and England drink beer. Alcohol habits are deep-rooted, not something modern history can "create".

As to America being a civilization...
- manifest destiny and constant expansion.
- free religion, but deeply religious. "seperation of church and state" and "in god we trust" on the same dollar bill.
- very welcoming of immigrants and foreigners, but very isolationist and unaware of happenings outside the country
- The American dream, for both Americans and non-Americans
- Colonization and militarism for democracy. Obsession with universal sufferage.
I think they're quite unique.

Of course, now that I think about it, they should've included Ethiopia rather than Zulu. If the ferocity of the Zulus were what they were after, the Ethopians defeated a full European army, the Zulus didn't. Plus, they could beeline for Christianity like Asoka beelines for Buddhism.

 

[Wodan]

Well... my heritage is 1/2 Bohemian. Based on all I've read and studied, as well as my own culture bias, I'd have to say that Poland shot itself in the foot with the lack of primogeniture.

Without that, it's easy to see how Poland would have stood much more the "test of time", would have refused the Teutonic Knights, etc.

The world today would be a much different place, that's for sure. Who knows how Poland would have dealt with the Mongols, but it's easy to say that they would have either fought or capitulated (e.g., Novgorod), but 200 years later they would be intact.

WWII would have been totally different, that's for sure. No Prussia pretext, no prelude to the war. A strong Poland would have either allied with Germany (Poland had a long history of intermarriage etc) or been strongly opposed because of their strong nationalism. Either way, things would be very different today.

As it is, I think Polish culture is unique enough, but their historical influence is lacking. It's really, really hard to recommend them to be a Civ, despite that I very much would like to do so.

Wodan

 

[Vertico]

Mali in this game is used to represent all the Northern and Western African cultures (which are, BTW, sorely underestimated), while Poland and other Eastern European nations are already represented by Russia, Greece and the Romans/Byzantines...

If Poland is represented by Russia, why Germany is not reprezentaed by France.
I wan to remind that Germany apeared after split of Franks Empire.
There were no Germany before.

So why Germany can be a different civilization when Poland has to be represented by Russia which btw was created much later

 

[sylvanllewelyn]

There's a reason why historians called the Franks a Germanic tribe. They only absorbed Latin culture after entering former Roman lands. Besides, I said modern France is a Latin culture, not a Germanic one. If beer/wine is not convincing enough, try linguistic structure, or the very basic vocabulary.