Polish Civ
- Thread starter Roundman
- Start date
Al Zan
King
maybe the Mail,But not the Poland and th Brazil.
FlakJacket
Warlord
Oops. If that was addressed to me, I was refering to the Dutch being more deserving than Poland rather than Byzantium.
, red alert aborted, stand down forward cannons....How about that:
- Poland ISN'T any worse or less deserving than any other civ/country,
- Dutch AREN'T any worse or less deserving than any other civ/country,
- Portugal ISN'T any worse or less deserving than any other civ/country,
- Netherlands, Brazil, Mali ... etc. etc.
right?
Pax!
- Poland ISN'T any worse or less deserving than any other civ/country,
- Dutch AREN'T any worse or less deserving than any other civ/country,
- Portugal ISN'T any worse or less deserving than any other civ/country,
- Netherlands, Brazil, Mali ... etc. etc.
right?
Pax!
I'm not from Eastern Europe, if I am, I would be very disappointed. They just forgot Eastern Europeans. Because there were always trouble there, and few people are rich enough to play games. The whole great slavs just have no represetations. Russia is of Viking oringine, they aren't even totally eastern European. It's not about which country was richer, it's about variaty in humanity.
Roundman
Prince
If it were my choice, my seven civs would be: Poland, Mali, Khmer/Thai, Byzantium, Inca, Sioux, and one other African civ.
thestonesfan
A Client of Ron Kuby
The Khmer and Thai are not interchangeable. Thailand used to be Siam, while Khmer became Cambodia.
Since we're doing this again, here's mine -
Dutch
Polish
Portuguese
Siamese
Incas
Nubians
Songhay(They handily eclipsed the Mali Empire)
Since we're doing this again, here's mine -
Dutch
Polish
Portuguese
Siamese
Incas
Nubians
Songhay(They handily eclipsed the Mali Empire)
Please tell me the Sumerians are not going to be in the main game.
It just seems so terribly redundant. I mean it's just gonna be all the same cities as Babylon, like Ur. And what about their UU, the "Ekidnu Warrior"?! Ekidnu was just a character in the Epic of Gilgamish. This whole civ just strikes me as horribly silly. Everyone on this thread has named civilizations more worthy of being in the game.
It just seems so terribly redundant. I mean it's just gonna be all the same cities as Babylon, like Ur. And what about their UU, the "Ekidnu Warrior"?! Ekidnu was just a character in the Epic of Gilgamish. This whole civ just strikes me as horribly silly. Everyone on this thread has named civilizations more worthy of being in the game.
thestonesfan
A Client of Ron Kuby
I didn't think you did Xen - I just put that in case someone got the wrong idea.
impressive
Chieftain
you are joking? The Netherlands was a very important nation in its time, quite a powerful force in Europe, and one of the major colonist European powers, along with Portugal.
I too would also like to see Poland included, as it has a powerful role in European history.
barron of ideas
Barron
We must not forget Alexander Graham Bellski, the world's first telephone pole.
Moderator Action: No trolling. Read the forum rules. You've been warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Moderator Action: No trolling. Read the forum rules. You've been warned.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Roundman
Prince
I know that the Dutch were important, especially in the 17th and 18th Centuries, I just think that there are too many Western European civs. Besides, anytime I think of the Dutch and colonialism, I think of them surrendering New Amsterdam without a fight. They couldn't pose much of a threat to England or France, even at the height of their power. I feel the same about Portugl. It was undoubtedly an important power a its peak, but Western Europe is too crowded and if we include too many European civs the politically correct crowd will scream that the game is too euro centric. I would personally include the Dutch, Poles, and Portuguese over the Hittites, Sumerians, and Maya
but that choicescreams euro-sentric 
, leave in the Maya (or replace with the Winnebago native americans ), but replace the hittites with the powerful Assyrians, Sumeria can(well, could) be tossed out, and make room for another civ...
, leave in the Maya (or replace with the Winnebago native americans ), but replace the hittites with the powerful Assyrians, Sumeria can(well, could) be tossed out, and make room for another civ...barron of ideas
Barron
How about some Pacific NW indians as a new culture, Chief Seattle would make a great leaderhead. BIg war canoes could be the UU,
Or the Nex Piece with Chief Joseph. Everbody wants the Plains Indians, but as hunter gathers they had a very low population density. With Salmon & Farming the Pacific NW had more (and better) indians than almost anywhere. They had such surplus they devolped ways to give it away. (The potlatch). Not sure we want to give civilization status to cultures that did not have agriculture.
Or the Nex Piece with Chief Joseph. Everbody wants the Plains Indians, but as hunter gathers they had a very low population density. With Salmon & Farming the Pacific NW had more (and better) indians than almost anywhere. They had such surplus they devolped ways to give it away. (The potlatch). Not sure we want to give civilization status to cultures that did not have agriculture.
Roundman
Prince
Originally posted by Xen
but that choicescreams euro-sentric
The reason that I hate that the Hittites and Sumerians make me so mad is that I though that the Babylonian civ was supposed to represent all of those ancient civilizations of the fertile cresent. I know that they are historically distinct, but the reason that I thought that Babylon waw supposed to represent those is because it has their cities in its list. Adding the Sumerians and the Hittites is redundant. If you want Sumeria in, replace Babylon with Sumeria. I think that the Dutch are more deserving than the Maya, but if the Maya have to be in, then I'd pick them instead of the Dutch.
Roundman
Prince
I like that idea. I'd rather have them than the Hittites. That way North America wouldn't be so open.
I definately don't think so, at least as far as this game is concerned. I think that city building and agriculture should be prreqs for a civ to make it. If your civ didn't grow crops or have at least villages, then it shouldn't be in as a civ. After all, half of the barbarian tribes were at least that advanced.
