Pirates, Really?

[kaspergm]

Wasnt he known as the Pirate King? Here is an article that I found.

https://aswedishfika.com/the-pirate-king/

But I might be wrong.

As I read it, Pirate is a bit of a stretch here. Yes, apparently he did send some naval forces to raid his opponents, but I don't think that's particularly "piraty" in itself? But again, my knowledge goes no further than what I read on these sites, so ...

 

[agamemnon_of_the-bronze_]

As we discussed in another thread recently, I would have preferred if they had modeled this Republic of Pirates more in view of the barbary corsairs of the Mediterranean.

However, regarding the comments that the pirates should not be considered a real "civ", I would like to point out that we also had Venice in Civ V, which also should not have counted as a proper "civ" in the traditional sense of the series.

I also think that a pirate civ actually works better within the context of the civ switching in Civ VII than it would have in earlier games. Since the Republic of Pirates is one choice in one age, it is not really a civ in itself, but more like an episode in the history of your civ. So your civ basically becomes a rouge pirate state for one age, before becoming "civilized" again in the next age.

And even if this Republic of Pirates actually only existed for 12 years and did not become a proper "nation" in reality, Edward Teach and the other "governors" of this republic propably envisioned it as one day becoming one. Just because they did not succeed in real life, this does not mean that they cannot succeed in an alternate version of history in a game like Civ. After all, isn't this game series about alternative "what-if"-histories? So what if this Republic of Pirates had been more successful and existed for more than 12 years? Why shouldn't you be able to play out something like this in a game of Civ?

From this point of view, I see the Republic of Pirates as an addition to the game not a detraction.

thats absolutely not true. Venice is well attested in the historical record. they conducted legitimate trade on a large scale in the med and had diplomatic relations with Ottomans and a fierce rivalry. they were an industrial and economic powerhouse and the Ottomans coveted their empire greatly. Not comparable to this Disney-esque POTC ride civ we have gotten.

 

[agamemnon_of_the-bronze_]

Yes, but I thought the OP was making the connection based on historical importance. Happy to have mixed that up if I have!

put it another way: Not even the most myopic scholar would complain about Venice being in the game. not only do they have the historical chops, they have precedent having been in civ 5.

 

[agamemnon_of_the-bronze_]

i will have to post this in another thread, but its basically a similar argument to before. So the two leaders they included should NOT have been included over an Ottoman leader. Between Mehmet II "the Conqueror", Selim I, Sulieman and Mehmet IV they have so many choices. in addition, an Ottoman Sultan is a great ruler for other countries thematically such as persia, abbasid, bulgars, greece because he actually conquered and ruled them. Teach and that pirate lady ruled nothing. Whoever is making these decisions at Firaxis deserves to be fired immediately

 

[Kwami]

thats absolutely not true. Venice is well attested in the historical record. they conducted legitimate trade on a large scale in the med and had diplomatic relations with Ottomans and a fierce rivalry. they were an industrial and economic powerhouse and the Ottomans coveted their empire greatly. Not comparable to this Disney-esque POTC ride civ we have gotten.

Again, the Republic of Pirates was a real thing that actually existed in The Bahamas for about 12 years and it was actually lead by Edward Teach (Blackbeard). This isn't a Disney ride.

 

[agamemnon_of_the-bronze_]

Again, the Republic of Pirates was a real thing that actually existed in The Bahamas for about 12 years and it was actually lead by Edward Teach (Blackbeard). This isn't a Disney ride.

real historians study the republic of venice. they don't study edward teach and his short lived stint of unrecognized nationhood on the periphery of civilization.

 

[untitledjuan]

real historians study the republic of venice. they don't study edward teach and his short lived stint of unrecognized nationhood on the periphery of civilization.

Not only on the periphery of civilization, but actually acting against actual civilizations

 

[agamemnon_of_the-bronze_]

Not only on the periphery of civilization, but actually acting against actual civilizations

correct. they were a criminal organization, not a civilization. should we add La Cosa Nostra next? XD

 

[Kwami]

real historians study the republic of venice. they don't study edward teach and his short lived stint of unrecognized nationhood on the periphery of civilization.

I guess all the stuff that we know about the pirates and their leaders came from fake historians, then. That's a weird job.

 

[Leucarum]

I guess all the stuff that we know about the pirates and their leaders came from fake historians, then. That's a weird job.

Someone's gotta study Ancient Aliens..

 

[stealth_nsk]

Someone's gotta study Ancient Aliens..

That kind of fake historians are, unfortunately, quite popular profession currently.

 

[timmychompchomp]

correct. they were a criminal organization, not a civilization. should we add La Cosa Nostra next? XD

Many legitimatized, recognized governments are criminal organizations masquerading as a political movement.

 

[Krikkit1]

Many legitimatized, recognized governments are criminal organizations masquerading as a political movement.

All legitimized, recognized governments are (previously) criminal organizations.

 

[Gorbles]

This just shows, again, that history has been relegated more than what was usual and acceptable in this particular entry of the Civilization series.

(image is of Mahatma Gandhi, born 1869 - with advisors represented by Ancient Egyptians, including a Horus falcon and hieroglyphic-themed UI - as King and monarch of the Indian civilisation in Civ 1)

 

[Gori the Grey]

Someone's gotta study Ancient Aliens..

 

[James_Champagne]

I know I've been harsh on CIV VII, but I'm not totally opposed to a Pirate Republic. I mean, yeah, I'd rather see some of the old-school classics like the Aztecs and Byzantium implemented first, but I feel like the pirates/Teach would be fun to play against. One of my issues with VII is that, what with its focus on at times non-traditional "leaders," there haven't been as many "fun" antagonist leaders, if you know what I mean. Like, it's hard to feel cool or a bad ass beating up on Ada Lovelace, Confucius, or Ibn Battuta! But Teach could make for a fun baddie.

 

[Siptah]

Teach can be an antagonist, but also an ally. You don’t want to be neutral or merely friendly, as that‘s where he gains the most.

 

[ehecatzin]

real historians study the republic of venice. they don't study edward teach and his short lived stint of unrecognized nationhood on the periphery of civilization.

Don't historians study history...the recollection of all past events? you might not find caribbean piracy glamourous but It's history and you bet there are real historians that study it

 

[Gori the Grey]

Since the Republic of Pirates is one choice in one age, it is not really a civ in itself, but more like an episode in the history of your civ.

All right, but combine it with their other recent announcement, and we can eventually look forward to playing the Republic of Pirates through all the Ages.

Matey!

 

[Leucarum]

All right, but combine it with their other recent announcement, and we can eventually look forward to playing the Republic of Pirates through all the Ages.

Matey!

Are you trying to turn people against Civ-Continuity?