Renaming Civs?

[johny smith]

You can rename a civ to anything in personal details,

I really have never noticed that. Oh well one day I will learn all that civ 4 has to offer.

 

[Menzies]

I hate this, if I had atomic weapons I would nuke this thread. If the Darwin Awards have taught us anything, people who don't like the names Ottoman and Vikings will end up in the Darwin Awards.

They name the Civilizations after great civilizations and Empires and not after ethnic Groups.

STOP GROUPING PEOPLE YOU RACIST LABOR VOTERS!!!

No Scandanavia, your just having to many blue pills with your corn flakes.

 

[johny smith]

STOP GROUPING PEOPLE YOU RACIST LABOR VOTERS!!!

How the game is setup I think it just begs for nationalism and racism unfortunately. I would one like to play Mr. Hankey ruler of Poo compared to I rule a group of that was created in beginning of time that never change their ethnicity supposedly in 6050 years.

 

[Traitorfish]

I hate this, if I had atomic weapons I would nuke this thread. If the Darwin Awards have taught us anything, people who don't like the names Ottoman and Vikings will end up in the Darwin Awards.

They name the Civilizations after great civilizations and Empires and not after ethnic Groups.

STOP GROUPING PEOPLE YOU RACIST LABOR VOTERS!!!

No Scandanavia, your just having to many blue pills with your corn flakes.

-_-

Firstly,ethnic groups exist, there's no disputing it. It's only racism when you begin to imagine inherent superiorities and inferiorities within those groups. People group themselves.
Secondly, screw "great empires". Civ is about making your own history, making your own great empire, not just pretending to be an historical one. The different civs are only there to provide flavour, they could just as easily be made up. In which case, it makes sense to me to have the greatest variety of civs from around the world, so we don't drive the flavour into the ground with a 50% European game. This of course raises the argument of which European nations we do add. Germans or Austrians? Poles or Russians? Wouldn't it just be easier to use broad cultural groups like Celts, Germans (in the sense of the Germanic tribes, not the modern English name for Deutschlanders), Slavs, etc. Obviously, certain groups will be synonymous with states- Rome, Japan, etc.- but that's not a rule. Hell, every Civ game to date has included the Greeks, even though, until modern times, they where only united by a foreign power. They had four separate languages and dozens of independent city-states, all clustered onto a scraggly peninsula. Hardly what you'd call a "Mighty Empire". Following your logic, they should be renamed "Macedonian Empire" to reflect their imperial period.
Anyway, how is empires better? As I recall, most empires involve the domination of one ethnic groups over others, not peace and harmony.
p.s. "Vikings" were not an empire, it was merely a term used to refer to Scandinavian raiders.

 

[Depravo]

European empires tended to be racial ones, in which white people would exercise more power and control etc. than the subject peoples, the same is not tru of the Ottoman Empire, especially during the golden age.

I don't buy that. Either way we're talking at cross purposes - my objection to 'Ottomans' is that it limits Turkish culture in Civ to that one, limited incarnation.

Btw - final point most of the cities may be in modern turkey, and may have turkish names, but most if not all the cities in modern turkey were founded by the Greeks, not the Turks.

Many settlements in western Europe were founded before anyone spoke of the Spanish / French / English nations.

 

[Pascal Nouma]

Btw - final point most of the cities may be in modern turkey, and may have turkish names, but most if not all the cities in modern turkey were founded by the Greeks, not the Turks.

Mostly cities created by Greeks but all of them populated by Turks.(French cities build by Romans and Gauls but no one say Marsille a Greek city or Barcelona a Carthaginian city.)

European empires tended to be racial ones, in which white people would exercise more power and control etc. than the subject peoples, the same is not tru of the Ottoman Empire, especially during the golden age.

Ottoman culture of course effected much from the civs around at its golden age but;

1- Until the conquest of Istanbul main culture was Turkish Culture.
2- Empire started by pure Turkish state and legal successor state of Ottoman empire is Turkey.

I mean it was Turkish empire(as well as CCCP Russian, Achemenid Persian) and just a part of Turkish history.

Well i am no racist i love all nations and as long as i could rename theres no problem.

 

[Dnomal]

Well i am no racist i love all nations and as long as i could rename theres no problem.

While in the game go to your details and you can call your civ whatever you want.

I don't think people are understanding what i am saying, if the Turkish people did not dominate the machinery of state, but it was instead comprised of a multitude of peoples, then calling it a turkish empire, would be misrepresentation (in my opinon) it would make more sense for it to remain the Ottoman empire.

Btw - until the conquest of Istanbul turkish culture was the main influence? The Ottoman empire existed for approx. 2 cents before 1453, but almost five afterwoods, so the cultural influence of the Greeks(and other, including a HUGE jewish interaction) can't be ignored.

 

[Pascal Nouma]

While in the game go to your details and you can call your civ whatever you want.

I don't think people are understanding what i am saying, if the Turkish people did not dominate the machinery of state, but it was instead comprised of a multitude of peoples, then calling it a turkish empire, would be misrepresentation (in my opinon) it would make more sense for it to remain the Ottoman empire.

Btw - until the conquest of Istanbul turkish culture was the main influence? The Ottoman empire existed for approx. 2 cents before 1453, but almost five afterwoods, so the cultural influence of the Greeks(and other, including a HUGE jewish interaction) can't be ignored.

I understand what you say.But i say we can call of an empire started by Turks and successed by Turks an Turkish empire.

Agreed with you at its height population was mostly non Turks and lots of nonTurkish people acted important roles at empire but reffering to Ottomans as a Turkish empire is not wrong in my opinion.

There wasnt a huge Jewish interaction(instead there was no Jewish interaction (lets not discuss about it you can look at Ottoman History at wiki) we mostly interacted with Byzantine at 15.century and western culture at 16.century.

 

[Dnomal]

I understand what you say.But i say we can call of an empire started by Turks and successed by Turks an Turkish empire.

Agreed with you at its height population was mostly non Turks and lots of nonTurkish people acted important roles at empire but reffering to Ottomans as a Turkish empire is not wrong in my opinion.

There wasnt a huge Jewish interaction(instead there was no Jewish interaction (lets not discuss about it you can look at Ottoman History at wiki) we mostly interacted with Byzantine at 15.century and western culture at 16.century.

Pascal Nouma It's funny you mention Ottoman History on wiki, i looked up an article on culture to double check this:
"For all of its history, the Ottoman Empire had a significant Jewish population, which absorbed and enriched Ottoman culture. Ottoman Culture had always been in change and constantly in relation to other cultures."
Third line, on the article about Ottoman culture, many jews went on to flee religous persecution in Christin Europe, and settled in the Ottoman empire, the jewish influence was i believe noteworthy.

The Ottomans are far more famous, and as the successor of it, the modern Turkish State is in no way harmed, or misrepresenated by calling it the Ottoman Empire.

 

[Pascal Nouma]

Pascal Nouma It's funny you mention Ottoman History on wiki, i looked up an article on culture to double check this:
"For all of its history, the Ottoman Empire had a significant Jewish population, which absorbed and enriched Ottoman culture. Ottoman Culture had always been in change and constantly in relation to other cultures."
Third line, on the article about Ottoman culture, many jews went on to flee religous persecution in Christin Europe, and settled in the Ottoman empire, the jewish influence was i believe noteworthy.

The Ottomans are far more famous, and as the successor of it, the modern Turkish State is in no way harmed, or misrepresenated by calling it the Ottoman Empire.

Ottoman Empire had a significant Jewish population (but surely more lower than Europans and Arabs) but we really effected by much more from europe(especially from 16.century).

Calling Ottoman Empire does not misrepresenate Turkey but surely it is wrong Ottoman is a dynasty name and its like calling Russia as Romanov.

Ottomans are the most famous surely but Seljuks ,Huns ,Gökturks ,Uyghurs ,Khazars are all Turkish and we have a big history.Ottoman Empire is just a part of it.

 

[Optimizer]

Agree on Vikings. "Viking" a North-Germanic word meaning word for "sailor", "voyager" or "pirate". Most people living in Scandinavia during the "viking age" were peasants who feared viking raids. Stockholm, today the capital of Sweden, was founded as a fortress against raids from the sea.

There has never been any tribe, state or other cultural, ethnic or political entity called "Vikings".

Calling a civilization "Vikings" is comparable to calling the Americans "Cowboys". Though cowboys are iconic and world-famous representatives of American history, and many American might be proud of the heritage from the Old West, Americans _are_ not cowboys. The same applies to vikings.

"Norse" or "Nordic" would be a better name.

 

[Louis XXIV]

The thing about the Ottoman empire is that there were efforts while the empire existed to make something "Ottoman". To be a "Turk" was to be a peasant. Ottomans felt they were multi-cultural and multi-ethnic. Just like there is pride in America that someone of Irish, German, British, African, or Chinese heritage can all be Americans, people thought it was great that someone of Turkish, Arabic, Armenian, Jewish, or Turkish descent could all be Ottoman. Yes, the official language and ruling family was Turkish, but the bureacrats were likely of a different ethnicity.

I was in favor of renaming in the past, since I think Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) was an interesting leader and would make a great addition. This is something he couldn't do as an Ottoman leader, since he clearly marks the point where Ottomanism disapeared (yeah, there was Turkishness with the Young Turks and Pan-Turkish movement, but it was still mixed with Pan-Ottomanism sentimentality and nowhere near as strong as what Kemal pushed).

As for Vikings, Scandanavians is just a better name. The Vikings were raiders from various Scandanavian Kingdoms. Sure, they were seperate kingdoms, but I'd suggest that its similar to Athens, Sparta, Thebes, Corinth, etc. being placed under Greeks. Plus, it allows later Scandanavian Kingdoms (like Sweden, which was a great power in the mid-1600s) to be included in that civ.

 

[Saim]

Ottoman Empire had a significant Jewish population (but surely more lower than Europans and Arabs) but we really effected by much more from europe(especially from 16.century).

Calling Ottoman Empire does not misrepresenate Turkey but surely it is wrong Ottoman is a dynasty name and its like calling Russia as Romanov.

Ottomans are the most famous surely but Seljuks ,Huns ,Gökturks ,Uyghurs ,Khazars are all Turkish and we have a big history.Ottoman Empire is just a part of it.

They are Turkic. Key syllable: "ic". Franks, Goths, Vandals and Angles are not Germans they are Germanic. Get it? Just like Russians, Serbs, Bosniaks and Poles are all Slavic people.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

The Ottoman Turks are the Turks that followed Osman and their descendants. Their were several other Turkish peoples, such as the Seljuk Turks, some of whom were the Ottomans bitter enemies.

I would prefer the ability to change AI civs names the same way you can change your own, preferably both before and during the game.

 

[Pascal Nouma]

They are Turkic. Key syllable: "ic". Franks, Goths, Vandals and Angles are not Germans they are Germanic. Get it? Just like Russians, Serbs, Bosniaks and Poles are all Slavic people.

I completely agree with you but it would be better using a civ name than a dynasty name i believe.
Also at anatolia there wasn't only one branch of Turks I mean Ottoman Turks were a mixture of all Turks from middle asia.

The Ottoman Turks are the Turks that followed Osman and their descendants. Their were several other Turkish peoples, such as the Seljuk Turks, some of whom were the Ottomans bitter enemies.

Seljuk Empire was ended before the Ottomans begined.