Martinus
Emperor
On Sioux or Iroquis I may agree with you, but Khmers...??? You seem to have no idea about history.
Poland as 1 of 10 new Civilizations added in BTS?
- Thread starter MusX
- Start date
- Status
kdaag
Chieftain
While it's understandable that you want to add your own country I don't agree with your arguments for Poland being among the great civilizations that somehow shaped world history.
Your arguments about the glorious polish history could basically go for any nation of reasonable size throughout history. It is not difficult to pick out examples in history of great battles won or great persons that belonged to a specific nation. I could easily write a petition for a swedish civ using many of the same arguements: For example Sweden "saved" Northern Europe from the Papacy (catholicism) in the 30-years war. This definately influenced world history greatly but is it a reason for a Swedish Civ? This is an examples of a historic fact that could just as easily be considerd good as bad, depending on if you're a protestant or catholic.
Too counter some of your arguments:
1. Yes western civs are overrepresented but this may be due to the fact that they have been overrepresented in world history and greatly influenced the world through colonization and trade. I know Civ sometimes includes nations that did not really influence history in order to be politically correct, ie the Sioux if they arrive etc. I however do not feel that Poland influenced history enough to be a truly great civ, although a nice country!
2. Well if their is already a functional civ mod why is there a need for an official version?
3. I'm sure that if you made a poll in any country people would miss their own country this is not unique to Poland. Also stating that 10 million people in the US are of Polish descent is a bit odd. If you put together all people by country descent in the US you would get a lot more than the official population simply because people have more than one ancestor. This could easily be used as a reason for a jewish civ, an irish civ, a finnish civ etc...
4. Once again good for the polish community, why again is this a reason/need for an official polish civ?
Historical reasons:
1. Many countries trace their history back a long time. Some nations have however accomplished a lot more in a short time and influenced world history. Poland and Sweden share a long history but really neither has influenced world history that much...
2. The Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth was not a modern ethnic state but more of a multiethnic feudal based elective monarchy. (I'm not a novice in polish history and have read many books and other sources of history) The elective monarchy and the overpowered nobles were more of an obstacle to the development of a strong polish nation than a benefit. We have a saying in sweden called "polsk riksdag" (polish parliament) meaning chaos and fractionalism. The nobles in Poland we're very well off but the majority of the population lived in utmost misery. The one really strong king Jan Sobieski III who rescued Vienna from the turks being a major exception but after him Poland was once agains sqwandered by the nobles and their self interests.
3. A constitution is not a sign of greatness. Many historical powers had absolutely no constitution and Great Britain still has none!
4. I'm really happy that you managed to break free from Soviet vassalship and join the EU and Nato, but sorry if I say that so have many other countries.
5. Poland is very unlucky historically being stuck between the very agressive germans and russians and having no natural borders to protect you. There is no question that you have suffered greatly and that many many Poles fought galantly to preserve/regain your freedom against fascist and communist dictators as well as nasty Tartars (mongols) and imperialistic grandeurs of the Swedish king Charles X who devastated Poland and its people. (sorry for that)
Naturally Poland being an old nation you have your glorious moments in history such as the saving of Vienna, the battle of Legnica (where you and the germans stopped the mongols) as well as defeating the Teutonic knights at Grünwald. The battle of Kircholm is not a good example as you squandered the victory and later lost all of Livonia to Sweden. The Polish-Soviet war of 1920 and the miracle at the Vistula was also more a result of Soviet overstrech and french officers and also resulted in Poland abandoning its ally Ukraine and Simon Petlura to the Soviets. The Soviets we're in no position to take over Europe even if they we're hoping for a rising of the German workers.
6. Lastly you do have a lot of great people in your history! Some of them good however be argued to be jews, germans, lithuanians, masurians, kashubians and slovincians by these nations. In fact they could have been more than one ehtnicity as this was not important before the birth of the modern ethnic state. Examples Copernicus in some sources is german in others Masurian, Mickiewicz is considered Lithuanian by them and Rubenstein is definately jewish.
I'm not trying to say that Poland does not have a great history and that you should not be proud. I'm just saying that history is not always objective and how one country views its history and creates its "national mythology" may be very different to another. For example many of our Swedish warrior kings were outright bastards who murdered and plundered other countries. Charles X for example indirectly killed 1/4 of the population of Poland, this is NOT a good thing! I know for example that you're very proud of the Polish pope Johannes Paulus II and he did many good things but in many countries his refusal to accept contraception and adopt it into the catholic church and stem the spread of AIDS is considered very bad so there are always two sides to the coin.
Man I'm I going to get many irretated responses from Poles now, but please try to read my post obejectively...
Your arguments about the glorious polish history could basically go for any nation of reasonable size throughout history. It is not difficult to pick out examples in history of great battles won or great persons that belonged to a specific nation. I could easily write a petition for a swedish civ using many of the same arguements: For example Sweden "saved" Northern Europe from the Papacy (catholicism) in the 30-years war. This definately influenced world history greatly but is it a reason for a Swedish Civ? This is an examples of a historic fact that could just as easily be considerd good as bad, depending on if you're a protestant or catholic.
Too counter some of your arguments:
1. Yes western civs are overrepresented but this may be due to the fact that they have been overrepresented in world history and greatly influenced the world through colonization and trade. I know Civ sometimes includes nations that did not really influence history in order to be politically correct, ie the Sioux if they arrive etc. I however do not feel that Poland influenced history enough to be a truly great civ, although a nice country!
2. Well if their is already a functional civ mod why is there a need for an official version?
3. I'm sure that if you made a poll in any country people would miss their own country this is not unique to Poland. Also stating that 10 million people in the US are of Polish descent is a bit odd. If you put together all people by country descent in the US you would get a lot more than the official population simply because people have more than one ancestor. This could easily be used as a reason for a jewish civ, an irish civ, a finnish civ etc...
4. Once again good for the polish community, why again is this a reason/need for an official polish civ?
Historical reasons:
1. Many countries trace their history back a long time. Some nations have however accomplished a lot more in a short time and influenced world history. Poland and Sweden share a long history but really neither has influenced world history that much...
2. The Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth was not a modern ethnic state but more of a multiethnic feudal based elective monarchy. (I'm not a novice in polish history and have read many books and other sources of history) The elective monarchy and the overpowered nobles were more of an obstacle to the development of a strong polish nation than a benefit. We have a saying in sweden called "polsk riksdag" (polish parliament) meaning chaos and fractionalism. The nobles in Poland we're very well off but the majority of the population lived in utmost misery. The one really strong king Jan Sobieski III who rescued Vienna from the turks being a major exception but after him Poland was once agains sqwandered by the nobles and their self interests.
3. A constitution is not a sign of greatness. Many historical powers had absolutely no constitution and Great Britain still has none!
4. I'm really happy that you managed to break free from Soviet vassalship and join the EU and Nato, but sorry if I say that so have many other countries.
5. Poland is very unlucky historically being stuck between the very agressive germans and russians and having no natural borders to protect you. There is no question that you have suffered greatly and that many many Poles fought galantly to preserve/regain your freedom against fascist and communist dictators as well as nasty Tartars (mongols) and imperialistic grandeurs of the Swedish king Charles X who devastated Poland and its people. (sorry for that)
Naturally Poland being an old nation you have your glorious moments in history such as the saving of Vienna, the battle of Legnica (where you and the germans stopped the mongols) as well as defeating the Teutonic knights at Grünwald. The battle of Kircholm is not a good example as you squandered the victory and later lost all of Livonia to Sweden. The Polish-Soviet war of 1920 and the miracle at the Vistula was also more a result of Soviet overstrech and french officers and also resulted in Poland abandoning its ally Ukraine and Simon Petlura to the Soviets. The Soviets we're in no position to take over Europe even if they we're hoping for a rising of the German workers.
6. Lastly you do have a lot of great people in your history! Some of them good however be argued to be jews, germans, lithuanians, masurians, kashubians and slovincians by these nations. In fact they could have been more than one ehtnicity as this was not important before the birth of the modern ethnic state. Examples Copernicus in some sources is german in others Masurian, Mickiewicz is considered Lithuanian by them and Rubenstein is definately jewish.
I'm not trying to say that Poland does not have a great history and that you should not be proud. I'm just saying that history is not always objective and how one country views its history and creates its "national mythology" may be very different to another. For example many of our Swedish warrior kings were outright bastards who murdered and plundered other countries. Charles X for example indirectly killed 1/4 of the population of Poland, this is NOT a good thing! I know for example that you're very proud of the Polish pope Johannes Paulus II and he did many good things but in many countries his refusal to accept contraception and adopt it into the catholic church and stem the spread of AIDS is considered very bad so there are always two sides to the coin.
Man I'm I going to get many irretated responses from Poles now, but please try to read my post obejectively...
Poland should be represented. They even once in history burned down Moscow, and had the livonian knights order.
Special building should be a religious building like improved cathedral or something.
Special unit should be a replacement for either maceman or knight. (Google for boyars/bojar, a "light knight" maybe a knight with same function as keshik dunno)
Special building should be a religious building like improved cathedral or something.
Special unit should be a replacement for either maceman or knight. (Google for boyars/bojar, a "light knight" maybe a knight with same function as keshik dunno)
kdaag
Chieftain
...to have burned down Moscow? This is NOT a reason to be considered a great civ in history and be included in Civ 4!
They also had a great significance in spreading christianity throughout europe. Whatever you say, they have been doing numerous wars as a nation, the fought battles and defended themselves and never had the oppurtunity to expand. They had their small golden age of time and was quickly forgotten in the 1900:s the day hitler blitzed their cavs
kdaag
Chieftain
Well the part of the Polish cavarly attacking german tanks is a myth created by the Nazi propaganda machine! Poland ofcourse had cavalry components in its army bt so had every other army in WW2.
When it comes to spreading christianity to NE Europe this should be more attributed to the crusader order of Teutonic Knights and the Livonian Order who were mostly german knights. The later spread of christianity into the Lithuanian part of the commonwealth has more to do with the catholic church cooperating with local nobles, and not Poland as a nation as there was basically no central government at the time that could enforce any religion from above.
When it comes to spreading christianity to NE Europe this should be more attributed to the crusader order of Teutonic Knights and the Livonian Order who were mostly german knights. The later spread of christianity into the Lithuanian part of the commonwealth has more to do with the catholic church cooperating with local nobles, and not Poland as a nation as there was basically no central government at the time that could enforce any religion from above.
Modern ethnic state?
Most great powers haven't been single-ethnic states. UK, France, Spain, USA, Russia: all have ethnic seperatists, and people from 'different ethnic backgrounds' as part of their "core".
Unless you define "ethnic" to mean "from a nation", which is an act of pulling boots over one's head.
Most great powers haven't been single-ethnic states. UK, France, Spain, USA, Russia: all have ethnic seperatists, and people from 'different ethnic backgrounds' as part of their "core".
Unless you define "ethnic" to mean "from a nation", which is an act of pulling boots over one's head.
Martinus
Emperor
Even if you consider this a good thing, this is not true - Poland never had any serious missionary bent.
MusX
Prince
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2006
- Messages
- 400
huh... how do you guys can even compare addition of Austria-Hungary and Poland?!?
Austria-Hungary wasn't a nation! there were many nation in it.
Poland has formed own nation in AD 966 and it has own culture for all those years! NOT JUST A TEMPORARY AUS-HUN without own nation and culture. Poland deserve not for beeing scenario civ but for normal playable civ in epic games!
Austria-Hungary wasn't a nation! there were many nation in it.
Aus-Hun is much better civ for some scenario not for epic games!Lockesdonkey said:
Poland has formed own nation in AD 966 and it has own culture for all those years! NOT JUST A TEMPORARY AUS-HUN without own nation and culture. Poland deserve not for beeing scenario civ but for normal playable civ in epic games!
MarkM
Cow Herder
Well, I already admitted my ignorance of Polish history (pre-1900 anyway). But I don't see you making the point I'm looking for, nominating some iconic historical Polish leader. You seem to be starting from the point "I want something called Poland," then flailing about trying to figure out civ unique aspects and digging up a half-notable leader. For gameplay, you want to start with an iconic leader and/or civ, then call it Poland.
Tecumseh
(p.s. - there's a bone for the Canadian contingent!
Boudica
I could add others, say gilgamesh of the Sumerians (main importance: the first great historic leader we know much of anything about. He's from 2600bc, so long ago that he's come down to us as half-mythic, 1/3 human and 2/3 god).
Anyway, all that is tangential to the point. The point is that each of these leaders have very dominant/semi-unique character traits that they are well known for, and set them somewhat apart frmo the "typical" leader. So they translate well to the game. I am neither Canadian, British, or Native American so I take no "pride" iin suggesting them. But I think they fit the needs of gameplay.
kdaag
Chieftain
By nation I mean country, when I talk about people with separate languages and culture I use ethnic groups.
The Austro-Habsburg empire is definately a more worthy candidate for Civ-status than Poland. It only became Austria-Hungary in the middle of the 19th century. It managed to resist the strongest military power of the day, (ottoman empire) for a couple of hundred years and finally push i back into the balkans as well as partake in the dismemberment of Poland...
to be honest...
Canada and Australia have ~200 years of history as a country
but I would not say that there is sth like Canadian or Australian nation
In both examples theres only a mixture of other nations: there are French Canadians, English Canadians, Chineese Canadians, natives, a bit of Poles, German, Spanish and Swedish Canadians - but not Canadians itself
In Australian soil we have Greeks, Chineese, Italians, offsprings of English banits of course and natives
With a great respect to the people who live in these countries - I dont think these countries should be on the top of the list of most significant civilisations.
*nod*, Poland, Canada and Austrailia are all pretty mediocre sources for an epic civ. They are all decent choices for a mod. 
On the other hand, adding civilizations of nations that buy lots of copies of the game might be a good thing.
I think, as a minimium test, a civilization must be top-notch in it's era. Ideally during it's era, the region it is in must be top-of-the-heap world wide.
Geographically, if a region has no other civilizations, adding the "most advanced" or "most impressive" native to that area makes some sense. Factor in the length of the civilization's dominance.
On the other hand, adding civilizations of nations that buy lots of copies of the game might be a good thing.
I think, as a minimium test, a civilization must be top-notch in it's era. Ideally during it's era, the region it is in must be top-of-the-heap world wide.
Geographically, if a region has no other civilizations, adding the "most advanced" or "most impressive" native to that area makes some sense. Factor in the length of the civilization's dominance.
All really great civilizations have already place in CIV.
These 10 could be at best medioacre. Considering civilizations like: Mali, Zulu, Aztec, Inca, Khmer, Hittites, Iroquis or Sioux - Poland was and is military and cultural "superpower", and have longest existence.
These 10 could be at best medioacre. Considering civilizations like: Mali, Zulu, Aztec, Inca, Khmer, Hittites, Iroquis or Sioux - Poland was and is military and cultural "superpower", and have longest existence.
MusX
Prince
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2006
- Messages
- 400
i don't know where are you from and what studing level was in your school but do you know the earth is circular? you know who discover this?
not the stonehage builder for sure 
also Chopin's works are very important for it's music genre. also Poland's stamina during WWII was very heavywieght. in close future the Anti-Rocket shield which might be build (by US gov) in Poland might save your ass 
So copernicus en Chopin are to be made great people or are already great people. Don't remember ever getting them. And just because they got attacked during WWII isn't a real archievement. But you don't say anything that they commited as an country/civilization to the world. Just an action of induvidials.
Scaramanga
Brickhead
i don't know where are you from and what studing level was in your school but do you know the earth is circular? you know who discover this?
Hey - don't forget Maria Skłodowska-Curie. But, you know, every great nation has its share of great people. With the Dutch at least you had a nation that journeyed to the far parts of the world and at its height was one of the grandest nations on earth (considering its size) - making everyone take notice. I admire your spirit, but perhaps Poland doesn't quite fit in with the game right now. Comparing Poland to smaller or more "primitive" nations already in the game to make Poland appear more illustrious isn't really a good argument. Firaxis has its own agenda for picking civs I guess. As a Canadian-born Dutch person who's never been to Holland and can't speak a word of Dutch, I'm thrilled the Netherlands is going to be in Civ 4; I expected they would appear eventually after they made it to Civ 3, although I was very surprised when that had happened. If Canada, however, made it into Civ 4 I'd be a little confused.
- Status
Similar threads
