Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
No, they just need to have distinctive culture, language and a cohesive government or empire.
That's why the Mongols are deserving and the HRE isn't!
The least deserving civilization?
- Thread starter NintendoTogepi
- Start date
- Status
That's why the Mongols are deserving and the HRE isn't!
No, they just need to have distinctive culture, language and a cohesive government or empire.
That's why the Mongols are deserving and the HRE isn't!
Those are your criteria, just because the culture of HRE wasn't united doesn't mean they didn't have culture. I am sure if you research it, you will find many tidbits of culture born from the HRE period like architecture, art, tradition, religious practice and so on. West and East Roman empires both shared the same majority/official language and yet this is no justification to remove either one...Byzantine empire also had many different languages spoken in it, more so than the HRE. Both East and West Roman empires spoke Latin, both German Empire and Holy Roman Empire spoke German. What is your definition of a 'cohesive' government, be specific...the HRE had a central government for most of it's time. The USA has state government, the HRE can't have some?
sylvanllewelyn
Perma-newb
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2006
- Messages
- 2,038
I'm quite surprised that so many people voted for America. Sure they are a young civilization, but their power doesn't seem to be waning any little bit, and in fact, they are far from their height yet. After a couple centuries, when they do fall, they will surely leave a permanent legacy as well.
If humans would even survive the environmental destruction a century later, of course. Any civ player would know that civilization would disappear once we hit 2050AD.
As for Native Americans, the appropriate thing to do is to pick a tribe, but the real question is which one. I feel that the term "Native American" is fine, but what they really need is another, more successful leader.
If humans would even survive the environmental destruction a century later, of course. Any civ player would know that civilization would disappear once we hit 2050AD.
As for Native Americans, the appropriate thing to do is to pick a tribe, but the real question is which one. I feel that the term "Native American" is fine, but what they really need is another, more successful leader.
RE 1st paragraph:
A few centuries? Um... what? While I agree that they'll be an important power for a while yet, they'll be far from being at the top!
RE 3rd paragraph:
How can we have "Native America" if the Aztecs, Mayans and Incas are already in? That makes no sense.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
The numbers don't lie... HRE leads the voting (and by a huge number of most every other civ except Native Americans). Unless you think I've got 60+ accounts on the board, I'm not the only one who thinks the HRE is least deserving!
The numbers don't lie... Holy Roman Empire takes the prize!
Word to your Mother!
AfterShafter
Deity
Wolf, I think that we both know that if popular opinion was definitive, the Backstreet Boys and Britney Spiers would be the defining musicians of our times 
A lot of us (myself included) are voting from perspectives of rather limited information, and I'd take the numbers in that poll as the least important source of definitive information. Heck, if polls were accurate, Bush wouldn't be president right now.
A lot of us (myself included) are voting from perspectives of rather limited information, and I'd take the numbers in that poll as the least important source of definitive information. Heck, if polls were accurate, Bush wouldn't be president right now.Vanilla Ice is a pretty lame counter argument. 
HRE may be the least deserving next to Native America, but being the least deserving doesn't mean it isn't deserving. Going by the most votes wins...on the poll we find 'I think every Civilization deserves to be in the game' to have 1/3rd more votes than HRE. So that settles it then.
HRE may be the least deserving next to Native America, but being the least deserving doesn't mean it isn't deserving. Going by the most votes wins...on the poll we find 'I think every Civilization deserves to be in the game' to have 1/3rd more votes than HRE. So that settles it then.
As I said, America is difficult to treat correctly because it's so young but very influential in the time it existed. You could say that the way time scales in civ 4 makes its age less of a factor, but most of my games are over before the late 18th century.
Being a direct colony of another civ doesn't help either.
In my opinion, the arguments are stronger for excluding America than for most others, after double entries (for example, we have Germany/HRE, Sumer/Babylon but no Rome/Italy) or questionable mechanics (Native America: better cast as a civilisation or as barbarians?).
That aside, because of its importance in the last 100 years I prefer America in the game. Also, I consider the bias towards civs that exist today as independent countries justifiable. After all, this is first and foremost a game meant to entertain and many players probably prefer their country to be in.
What I would like is an option to adjust random civilisations to the era. For example, Sumer would only up in ancient starts, America only from Industrial onwards and so on. Some civilisation with obvious successors could be renamed for different eras.
I admit to being a little obsessive when it comes to in-game consistency and elegant implementation. The developers on the other hand obviously make concessions to real-life sensibilities. The most glaring example is the absence of a certain Austrian corporal and amateur painter in the Road to War scenario... maybe to avoid offense, maybe due to my country's silly censorship laws.
Being a direct colony of another civ doesn't help either.
In my opinion, the arguments are stronger for excluding America than for most others, after double entries (for example, we have Germany/HRE, Sumer/Babylon but no Rome/Italy) or questionable mechanics (Native America: better cast as a civilisation or as barbarians?).
That aside, because of its importance in the last 100 years I prefer America in the game. Also, I consider the bias towards civs that exist today as independent countries justifiable. After all, this is first and foremost a game meant to entertain and many players probably prefer their country to be in.
What I would like is an option to adjust random civilisations to the era. For example, Sumer would only up in ancient starts, America only from Industrial onwards and so on. Some civilisation with obvious successors could be renamed for different eras.
I admit to being a little obsessive when it comes to in-game consistency and elegant implementation. The developers on the other hand obviously make concessions to real-life sensibilities. The most glaring example is the absence of a certain Austrian corporal and amateur painter in the Road to War scenario... maybe to avoid offense, maybe due to my country's silly censorship laws.
EweezE
Dog Soldier
I think these anti-American foreigners are just jealous of America's success. Therefore ignoring that America is actually doing much better than their country was at its comparable age.
Do not hold Native America in contempt due to your contemptible views towards America.
Germans should be censored in such a way. I find it ironic that he's not in the game (which loosely represents history), considering his attempts to re-write history himself, literally.. The World doesn't need any more nazis, or their false history books. I know you can't help being German, but how can you revere such an idiot?
My open distaste for your country is a result of yours for mine.
Do not hold Native America in contempt due to your contemptible views towards America.
Germans should be censored in such a way. I find it ironic that he's not in the game (which loosely represents history), considering his attempts to re-write history himself, literally.. The World doesn't need any more nazis, or their false history books. I know you can't help being German, but how can you revere such an idiot?
My open distaste for your country is a result of yours for mine.
While I don't like undue censorship, playing as Hitler creates a moral issue. When you are playing a nation in civ your goal is to win, by expansion and conquest. You must consider the connotations attached to trying to win as Hitler.
Good to hear you would still prefer to have America in the game, as you must consider the fact that a large fraction of the player base is here and Firaxis is here too! Considering the first settlements began in the 1600s, I think that puts to rest the issue of time. Other civs in the game have been vassals/conquered/under different management at various times throughout history. America is a late period civ, Carthage is an early period civ. While one could claim either is undeserving because of their demise/short history--they are both worthy. Also consider all of the crucial historical events/achievements America has been involved in: twice fighting off the greatest empire in history with a rag tag army, pioneering modern democracy, surviving united after (afaik) the bloodiest civil war in all of history, inventing and innovating many technologies, WWI/II, the cold war. Although our history is short we have made up for it with a rich one. I think the modern era while perhaps not as important as all the others, is still crucial.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
It takes a lame musician to represent the lameness of the HRE. It's apropos if you ask me.Vanilla Ice is a pretty lame counter argument.
Pfft... then you don't know how to read polls! You're looking at two columns and excluding all else as the voice of the masses...
You're comparing the (at the time of this posting) 94 votes for all civs vs the 66 votes against the HRE and acting like the consensus vote is leave them all in.
Nice that you ignored the 62 votes that didn't want the Native Americans... combine those two alone, and you've got 128 people who are all picking to eliminate civs from the game vs the 94 who want them all in... my how the odds have changed...
In fact, only 35% of the vote wants all the civs in, the other 65% would prefer change!
Now that's how you read a poll!
Yeah, for a couple of decades. Size isn't everything, especially if you can't hang on to it.
Also, Wolfshanze, enough with the poll worship. We get it.
Wolfshanze
CFC Historian
If you don't like to hear other people's opinions, what are you doing on a forum?
If you don't like to hear other people's opinions, what are you doing on a forum?
You're just distorting the numbers of the poll...adding votes for NA and HRE together is assuming those who voted for NA would also vote for HRE and vice versa. That doesn't work. 66 people voted for Zululand & Khmer combined, maybe we should get rid of those two since their combined number equals that of HRE.
65% of people 'wanting change' is misleading, as you have a lot of votes on this ridiculously long list for arguably well deserving nations like Ethiopia, Korea, Byzantium, Portugal, Netherlands...this has no relation to HRE as they all think these nations are the least deserving, not HRE.That's a bit rich coming from someone who doesn't seem to want to hear any opinion that's not shared by at least 50% of people who voted in a meaningless online poll.If you don't like to hear other people's opinions, what are you doing on a forum?
Firestorm94
zuh?
After 2050 then God will let some1 else play his civ game and start America in 4000BC
AfterShafter
Deity
Hah... That way of looking at it is comical, morbid, and accurate all at the same time.
Morbid but comical? I think not...
That way of looking at it is distorted...As offended as I am I have to take a page out of EweezE's book and mix it with a little bit of your twisted logic: Germany should not be included in the next game considering how many times they tried steal their neighbors land, murder the locals, and impose their own culture...same goes for England, Spain, Russia, Japan...
Where do you come from Charlie_B? Maybe there's something for you too.
Morbid but comical? I think not...
As offended as I am I have to take a page out of EweezE's book and mix it with a little bit of your twisted logic: Germany should not be included in the next game considering how many times they tried steal their neighbors land, murder the locals, and impose their own culture...same goes for England, Spain, Russia, Japan...
Where do you come from Charlie_B? Maybe there's something for you too.
Perhaps the next Civ game should have the blameless cultures who never started wars, broke treaties or invaded anybody. Switzerland and the Australian Aborigines would be in it but I can't think of any others offhand.
I voted for everyone deserves to stay in although theres quite a few others I'd like to see included. Iranon's idea of having the civs available dependent on the starting era is interesting. I often do something similar when starting a custom game.
- Status
Similar threads
