The worlds two largest EVER empires not in game??

Discussion in 'Civ5 - General Discussions' started by Modified77, Sep 21, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Couch Tomato

    Couch Tomato First Tomato Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2007
    Messages:
    146
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    My opinion on the whole England/Britain issue is this:

    The English were the main cultural group to dominate and make up the core of the empire that would conquer much of the world. After all, the British Empire spoke English, its capital was London, and the majority of the British citizens were English.

    The political entity was the British Empire. There was never such a thing as the "English Empire," as Civ always calls it.

    Personally, I don't care what they call it -- either name it after the dominant cultural entity (i.e. civilization) or the geopolitical entity.

    BUT at least be frikkin consistent.

    The Ottoman Empire is a geopolitical entity. Its culture base started with Turks and seat of power with the the Turks. So you can call it the Turks/Turkey/Turkish Empire (like Rise of Nations did with calling them Turks) if you want a culturally-based name (and fyi, the Ottoman Empire was often referred to as "Turkey" even before the modern republic)... or the Ottomans/Ottoman Empire if you want the geopolitical.

    Unfortunately, Civ went with one for one option, and the other for the other option. That kind of blows my mind.
     
  2. UiiN

    UiiN Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2010
    Messages:
    1
    Em... no. I'm British but i'll be damned if i ever say i'm English. I'm quite sure Glasgow's steal works had alot to play in Britain.
     
  3. crag

    crag Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Messages:
    71
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    I never said America won the war. I said without our help you would've lost.

    So lets take stock of where England was before America directly entered the war (or even sent aid - which we were doing long before an American solider set his foot in Europe).

    London was burning. England was running out of planes. And food. And steel/iron. And money. And people. And medical supplies, and ammo - in short, England was on life support. Churchill HAD to get us into the war. Directly. Even or support wasn't enough.

    Now Russia was another matter. What saved her was the winter and land. Russia was losing- what 5 soldiers for every 1 German solder? If we had not entered the war Russia would've sued for peace. Of course Hitler was such a nut job, he should not have declared war on Russia in the first place. But you know, Hitler did offer peace to England. Before the heavy fighting began. I personally don't think he wasn't war with Britain.

    Remember Russia had a non-agression treaty with Germany, at first. Hitler broke it.
     
  4. craig123

    craig123 Prince

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Messages:
    314
    Location:
    UK
    Lol. Maybe I misinterpreted but that's what it seemed to imply to me. If he was just saying that the US was an essential piece of the eventual victory then I wouldn't have felt the need to reply (although how is that relevant to this thread?). And I never said that Americans were stupid - just that films and computer games can be biased and anyone relying on them will end up with quite a biased view of history. :p

    That might very well be true. What's your point though? If Britain hadn't fought against Germany what would the world be like today? What would have happened to America? Without our help maybe you would have "lost." It would be an interesting debate to have but hardly relevant to the topic at hand.
     
  5. darrelljs

    darrelljs Immortal

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,246
    Location:
    South Florida
    That's for sure...but I think OT is allowed in a troll's thread :D.

    Darrell
     
  6. WastedEfforts

    WastedEfforts Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2010
    Messages:
    41
    Rubbish. A common mistake is that only the enemies suffer from "General Winter". The USSR wasn't losing either as Germans couldn't pass some of the critical choke points even before reaching the capital. Without the land-lease Soviets would have lost though.
     
  7. civ_king

    civ_king Deus Caritas Est

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    Messages:
    16,368
    The US is almost the size of Europe, IMO that's close enough
     
  8. Kushluk

    Kushluk Warlord

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2006
    Messages:
    212
    Spain and Mongolia need to be added, fun stuff like Siam and ESPECIALLY the lame Iroqois (seriously, both the Mongols and the Spanish are/were more important than a bunch of barbs). If we are going to go the whole Barbs route, I can imagine the Huns and Goths are better choices.
     
  9. OliverFA

    OliverFA Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2008
    Messages:
    57
    Mistaking Britain and England is like mistaking Spain and Castille. No. They are not the same.
     
  10. Venger

    Venger Give it a tumble, sport

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2002
    Messages:
    783
    Oh, I do love a good WW2 pissing match!

    Let's play.

    If we want to do what if, WW2 ends very differently without the US or USSR. Think of it this way - if Germany does not launch Barbarossa, it easily bleeds and likely conquers Britain. If there is no US, all of those resources, divisions, and fortifications on the Atlantic end up in the East, where Russia was rapidly eating up it's manpower pool. Add in a lack of US support for Russia, and you likely end with a nasty, bloody stalemate, or a slow German taking of Moscow leaving Russia a rump state in Siberia.

    Britain played a key role, yes, and had it lost, any future US intervention in Europe would be much harder, requiring a forceful landing in Portugal and a much tougher fight, and a hellacious crossing of the Atlantic without the UK keeping Germany's navy hemmed in and assisting against the UBoat fleet. Britain also assisted in the Eastern campaign, with troops and Indian allies helping curtail Japanese moves on the continent.

    Even considering the British/Aussie aid, the US singlehandedly defeated Japan. The most savage fighting of the war was in the Pacific.

    God Bless the Germans for invading North Africa. It allowed US forces to get bloodied and learn a great many lessons before the real deal began in Europe. DDay goes differently, as does the Bulge, if US forces are still green.

    Take away the US, Russia, or Britain away, and WW2 has a likely different and odd outcome.
     
  11. Rinus4

    Rinus4 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    10
    I hate the fact Netherlands isn't in the game. Should be a great 'trade'/gold-nation.
     
  12. jam3

    jam3 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    20
    To the OP. go look up the word hegemony.
     
  13. AdamMorva

    AdamMorva Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    30
    Location:
    Hungary, Europe

    Ah, gee. What are you proud of? For misspelling proud twice? Or for the achievements people COMPLETELY independent of you did? That's sort of ********, but if that's the case you should be proud of all the murderers, rapists, thieves, crooks and frauds your proud country produced, you can't just cherry pick the nice things and ignore all the bad stuff. Grow up, kid.

    There are going to be expansion packs to get all the civilizations you like, but more importantly: mods. In Civ4 you can have numberless detailed civilizations thanks to the awesome modding community.
     
  14. delra

    delra Warlord

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    180
    Where are Spaniards? Where are Portuguese and the Dutch with their empires?

    Any why is USA in, they are only a short episode in world's history, and they will be gone before we get old with all the debt they are accumulating...
     
  15. imperialman

    imperialman Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Glasgow
    I don't see a problem with someone being proud of what their ancestors achieved, you don't have to insult someone for their own preference, some would argue that doing such a thing is itself childish.

    (BTW at what point must pride extend to people like rapists? I think you've misunderstood why people are proud of things but no matter.)
     
  16. imperialman

    imperialman Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,028
    Location:
    Glasgow
    England? Come on man, you mean Britain. This seeems like my catchphrase now... England =/= Britain. It's been discussed since the first page of this thread.
     
  17. Tee Kay

    Tee Kay Silly furry

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    Messages:
    22,022
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Melbourne
    They're in the soon-to-be-announced "Age of Discovery" expansion packs and/or DLCs.
     
  18. craig123

    craig123 Prince

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Messages:
    314
    Location:
    UK
    Come on! Just because your preferred civs are not in the game doesn't mean it's let's-insult-America time. The USA have a much stronger argument to be in the game than a lot of civs that made it in (Iroquois or Songhai, for example). Yes, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands are all worthy of being in the game - and no doubt they will be added in expansions or DLC - but the vanilla game only has 18 civs and there has to be a balance (both geographically and culturally).

    Don't forget that the USA did have an imperial era and expanded from the original 13 colonies to take nearly half of North America - gaining land from Britain, France, Spain, Mexico and Russia - as well as a lot of Pacific islands; it is also the world's only superpower (unless China counts yet). Besides, the game is made in the US and that's where most of its sales are. Do you really expect Firaxis to leave them out?
     
  19. Lebowski89

    Lebowski89 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2010
    Messages:
    30
    I'm Australian and what is this?!?
     
  20. troytheface

    troytheface Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,262
    Siam? really? Siam?

    i think that they just look for wierdo civs to put in so that they can put like a normal one in the expansions

    Siam?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page