Real World

[jar2574]

I've been to America. I didn't like it. I came back.

That's cool man, I'm not asking you to live here.

Your points re: America being unable to fight a war were just ridiculous, and seemed overworried about the affects of immigration and assimilation. Your worries have no historical basis, because America's immigrant communities have never been a threat to national stability during wartime.

America is very nationalistic, and that is not isolated within the white population. It's immigrant groups are in the front lines in every war. The black and Hispanic communities you hung out in no doubt have some soldiers in Iraq today. (unfortunately.)

I can assure you nobody I met there or knew actually went there because of any profound love for American values. It's all about the money.

Who said love of money isn't an American value?

 

[jar2574]

Oh and the "it is very difficult to immigrate to America," is just a myth believe me. People do it all the time or at least used to 4 years ago. As a matter fact I know only one guy who actually went there legally.

I should have qualified that statement. It's difficult to immigrate to America "legally." And that is most definately not a myth.

Your friend either won a national lottery, is very intelligent, or has some other skill that America values. Or he's lucky enough to come from a country like Ireland or England where our restrictions on immigration are less strict.

 

[me_Barb]

You are right about most of the stuff. If we go into details indeed most people are not educated enough to know what they actually follow and where it came from and that indeed innovation is a continius process. And the legal imigration part is true too. What I meant is that America cannot wage a war of aggression for example like Hitler did. That is why Bush went through all that trouble to convince Americans that Sadam practically has his fleet offshore and will attack at anytime China on the other hand can invade and take over taiwan and doesn't have to explain it to its people. America on the other hand well we see it everyday on the news "Stay the course" speaches. I wonder did Napoleon had to explain to his citizens why he wants to invade Russia in the middle of winter. That is why I say America can only win wars of selfdefence. In fact did it ever win a war that was not based on self defence. I can't remember exactly. Even the Cold war was presented as a selfdefence against the onslaught of Communism. Which is rather funny from my point of view.

Oh and I forgot to mention. The imigrant communities were not a problem historically because at the time they were really small. Now it is not so and in time they will grow big enough to actually be a problem. Do you say that there is no bias agains muslim imigrants in USA now. In England there is now for sure. Just imagine if they all came to the belief that BUsh is actually waging war on Islam. It doesn't have to be true but just that they believe it. Would you stay calm if suddenly you came into believing that the goverment is trying to get you for what you believe.

 

[carn]

Why are you chewing the savage example. You do know that every sane commander will order his "saveges" to surrender, be nice and either blow themselves up when you come closer, invite you to a poison food dinner or basicaly stuck his knife in your back in some way when you are not looking. .

The whole argument about america "winning" this "game" from current position is, that it would be possible by commiting genocide by massive use of nukes. In that scenario accepting surrender is pointless, its about killing all the rest.

And you can't afford to kill everyone. Because if you do who is going to work for you.

Losing all chinese slave workers would seriously hamper american economy, but it would still be a victory according to civ rules and that's what my argument is, america could achieve victory, if it somehow could get rid off ethical restrictions and the threat of counter strike from russia.

In fact you are slowly in the process of being overrun by said savages. Just think about it. We have America. It is full of people that in case of unprovoked war against their homeland will stub you in the back. The whites are still a majority but it is full of people from around the world. That is the big thing. America doesn't have a coherant nation. If we take China for example what is good for one chinese is probably good for 90% of the rest too. America on the other hand is so split because of so many different people with different interests that in a case of a full scale war in which every citizen will be needed you can bet that America will suddenly find itslef short of a lot of trustwordy citizens and the enemy with a lot of unexpectes allies. You are doomed face it. The only way you can keep a war is to keep the public away from actually doing anything. Most people are pretty satisfied with having food, shelter and security and doesn't really care who provides it all and how is the goverment called.

Got to cite myself:
You're idea, that a sufficient number of savages can beat someone is no longer true since 150 years, if the technological superior force is not hampered by ethical problems.

With that i included having large part of population or even government being reluctant to kill a few billion people and losing half of own.

And US would not need to keep the war running long, 1-3 years silent preparation, after that 1 hour is enough.
Only the current government would be a head shorter afterwards and civil war might destroy US afterwards.

If they get rid of such ethical problems(read "Mein Kampf" as introduction to civing in real world without ethical restictions) and somehow deal with russia, they have a time window next 10-20 years to win by extermination of all others.

Of course russia has the same choice, if they find a way to deal with US.

With limited morale switched on, as it is currently, anything but a cultural or space ship win is impossible.

Carn

 

[jar2574]

Yeah, I agree that America must couch her aggression in terms of "self-defense."

The Mexican American war, the Spanish-American war, WWI, WWII, Vietnam, Iraq 1, and Iraq 2 were all supposedly done in self-defense.

The incidents that the Presidents used to justify the Mexican (a border skirmish), Spanish (the bombing of the Maine), Vietnam (the Gulf of Tonkin incident), and Iraq 2 (WMD) were basically faulty intelligence or outright lies.


Edit: @me Barb: Regarding the Muslim population--yes there is discrimiation against them. But I don't think that most of them believe that Bush is waging a war on Islam. Many were supportive of a war to depose Saddam (though I'm sure they're pissed off, like everyone else, about the bungling of the subsequent occupation.)

 

[me_Barb]

Well I didn't have the game in mind when I wrote that so miscomunication happens.

Of course. I only said imagine. I just present possibilities. But if Bush goes Iran, Syria and so on with his crazy advisors agenda I think every sane man will seriously start doubting his motives. They do know just put greed and Jews as the prime suspects.

 

[Reignking]

Exactly. Can we kill this conversation and talk about the game?

 

[carn]

Well I didn't have the game in mind when I wrote that so miscomunication happens.

Ok, then i agree to you, US is in no position to win by conquest and is currently on the downslope to win diplomatically and China has chance to overtake it culturally this century, if they somehow avoid to much civil unrest.

Carn

 

[me_Barb]

Exactly. Can we kill this conversation and talk about the game?

Game? What game? Did any serious talk in this topic for the last 5 pages had a game in mind. . Silly me

 

[SlipperyJim]

My vote is for a resurrected Babylon to come perilously close to a Domination victory, until it is stopped by Judgement Day....

 

[mjs0]

On the original topic of the thread...
I stand by my choice of China with time victory. Just look at the way scoring is calculated which is basically...
population score = 5000*civ pop/world pop
land score = 2000*civ land/world land
technology score = 2000*civ tech/world tech
wonders score = 1000*civ wonders/world wonders

The first two (pop/land) are easy to quantify using the following resources
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2119rank.html
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2147rank.html
Note: I used 150m sq km for total land area.

Using the top 5 largest and top 5 most populous countries:
China:
pop score 5000*1.31/6.4 = 1023
land score 2000*9.6/150 = 128
For a subtotal of 1151

India:
pop score 5000*1.08/6.4 = 844
land score 2000*3.3/150 = 44
For a subtotal of 888

USA:
pop score 5000*0.30/6.4 = 234
land score 2000*9.6/150 = 128
For a subtotal of 362

Russia:
pop score 5000*0.14/6.4 = 109
land score 2000*17.1/150 = 228
For a subtotal of 337

Brazil:
pop score 5000*0.19/6.4 = 148
land score 2000*8.5/150 = 113
For a subtotal of 261

Indonesia
pop score 5000*0.24/6.4 = 188
land score 2000*1.9/150 = 25
For a subtotal of 213

Canada
pop score 5000*0.03/6.4 = 25
land score 2000*10/150 = 133
For a subtotal of 158


So in table form the top five from pop and land are
China 1151
India 888
US 362
Russia 337
Brazil 261

In the real world the nature of technology sharing means that maintaining a sizeable tech lead is tough and most will score close to the max 2000 on this one.
Also, in the real world, wonders (even if the definition of them is highly subjective) are clearly spread around the world with no country holding a significant monopoly.
These facts taken together mean that the chance of anyone overhauling China and India as the one-two on score is extremely remote.

Of course some will argue that other victory conditions have already been achieved, but I just don't see it.

 

[Sisonpyh]

and Canada now is there for them too.

I bet Cuba feels extremely secure now.

 

[Sahkuhnder]

You are doomed face it.

So far all civilizations have eventually lost their place at the top. America(United States) probably will someday too. Although you may personally wish to see America slip from power, I see no signs it will be happening anytime soon.


Preface: America is not perfect. This is not a flag-waving "My country is the best because I live here!" post or worst yet a "Your country sucks because I'm not from there!" post.


By civ rules scoring America would currently be in the lead. Three examples:

1. World's strongest military. America's military is larger and more advanced than anyone else. Supercarriers, stealth planes, remote drones, a large and modern nuclear arsenal, attack subs, satellite technology, etc. The US maintains large forces positioned around the globe in a way no other nation even attempts to do. The US military surpasses the next dozen countries combined, most of whom are US allies or friends and share their advantage through tech and production cooperation with the US.

2. Cultural spread. You may not like American culture and may not consider it 'culture' at all, but whatever you chose to call it the fact it has globally spread can not be denied. The US entertainment, media and marketing industries produce vast quantities of globally consumed products that are distributed by giant corporations to the far corners of the earth. 'Coke' is the world's best known consumer product. US movies, music, food and corporate capitalism have reached everywhere. US movie actors, musicians, and sports stars are global celebrities in such numbers that no other country can compare. Internationally what nation is more known, talked about, imitated, loved and/or hated? Could you even imagine anyone saying "United States? Never heard of it. Where is that again? Why I really don't know much about the place. I'll look it up on the map when I get home."

3. Scientifically. Other nations can rightly claim leadership in individual fields, but again from a global view the US still produces the most and with its vast corporate structure then markets the advancements to the rest of the world. The EU and Japan are both powers in this category also, but the US outdoes them in sheer volume and a very wide diversity of research areas. Look at the computer you are reading this on and tell me there is no US tech inside. The pills you take, the machines you use and the bio-engineered and chemically enhanced food you eat all are likely to have some US science in them somewhere along the way. And of course most importantly America produces some darn good computer games too.


This is just my opinion as to how I view the current situation. It is not meant personally or as an assault to your politics, viewpoint, country etc. so please don't take it that way.

 

[malclave]

If you are going to claim that you gain points because McD's, Starbucks, etc are spreading round the world, then us English would gain points for everywhere that English spreads.

Absolutely... especially if the final score was tallied in the days of the British Empire, with huge amounts of the map "red".

 

[SewerStarFish]

Methinks this game'll come down to points.
Early game Rome, ever present China, Spain or England with globalization of their language, and a reasonable case for American hegemony.
Well there's still 44 turns - who knows.
Check this forum on 1 January 2050.

 

[zeeter]

Anyhow, In that case, let's go for Italy, which will have had points building since the rennaisance. Japan who will have had points for a long time. England will have had culture points building for almost 1000 years, including the works of Shakespeare amongst other things, plus the legacy effects of wonders such as Stonehenge.

the fundamental point here is still that the culture that the US has spread around the world has not had anywhere near enough time to set in for a cultural victory. the golden age of Hollywood, when it really burst into the forefront was only around 80 years ago. MacDonalds really started to spread in the 60s? 70s? Starbucks is a 90s thing. England's cultural influence spread around the world for centuries, as did France's. Even if, for the sake of argument, we assume that no city has greater cultural points per turn than LA, it would still have a long way to go to catch, for example, London up. Or Paris for that matter.

Italy: Doomed for culture when the Allies took over. France: Same but by the Germans. England, I guess, is the only country to choose here.

I'm beginning to lean more and more against McDonalds and Starbucks as "culture".

On the topic of the USA, I don't think it's a matter of time, but of the amount of "culture bombs" that the major cities have had. Every year LA gets a culture bomb with the Academy Awards. It's huge. In NYC, the movements there over time have been huge. Greenwich Village and the "birth" of Dylan. Major Broadway shows. Everything that is anything seems to be born in NYC.

 

[Mauritania]

Well let's figure that one out, err...stonehenge was finished in 2,000 BC with the laying of the Bluestones, so thats 8 culture per turn and 2 great people points. So thats about 406 turns if your play on normal speed so thats 3248 culture from Stonehenge.

 

[me_Barb]

Lets not forget the Sphynx. It should be as a separate wonder anyway as recent research showed it was built when Sahara was still green and had Rain. Who exactly built is another question. It must have been the Aliens

 

[mjs0]

Well let's figure that one out, err...stonehenge was finished in 2,000 BC with the laying of the Bluestones, so thats 8 culture per turn and 2 great people points. So thats about 406 turns if your play on normal speed so thats 3248 culture from Stonehenge.

The problem with applying many wonders, including the real Stonehenge, to a cultural victory is that they are nowhere near a city that would be trying for legendary culture.
In the case of Stonehenge it is stuck in the middle of Salisbury Plain with no signs of civilization for miles around.

 

[Percinho]

Well let's figure that one out, err...stonehenge was finished in 2,000 BC with the laying of the Bluestones, so thats 8 culture per turn and 2 great people points. So thats about 406 turns if your play on normal speed so thats 3248 culture from Stonehenge.

Ah, but you have to take into account modifiers and sliders.

In fact, given that you really need to have your culture slider to max for centuries in order to win a culture victory, I'd say that there is no country that could win a culture vistory. It's simply not a realistic option.

The US may have a lot of culture now, but its slider would be set to maximise science and money, so you wouldn't have the accumulation you need to hit the 50,000 point on a standard game.