We need Austria

[GoodSarmatian]

Phoenicia ?
No, it was afaik the Persians, then Alex and the Seleucid Empire and then some decades of independece before the Romans came.
The second Roman was probably just some kind of typo.
I am against putting Israel in the game because independant Israel was never a major power.
All they have contributed to world history is Judaism and its seperatist religions (Christianity and Islam), and those religions are already in the game.

 

[Hitti-Litti]

Okay then. I just thought that Phoenicians owned Israel that time, the main point was to show his typo.

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Yeah, Italy should be in, with their unique unit being a Mobster (replaces Corporate Missionary). Basically, you send him to other cities, and he creates unhappiness and higher maint. costs... Unless you build a Jail!

NO! The Mobster should allow you to spread your corporations to other cities without a chance of failure...because they make 'em an offer they can't refuse! (Oh, the puns.)



Okay, seriously, now.... The first post in this thread seems a bit too trolly, and I hope it doesn't turn into a flame war.

Austria might be nice, but I honestly don't have strong feelings either way.

 

[Barton]

I'll show you a bit trolly and starting a flaming war.

Poland is worth about as much to the world as the Mark in 1930!!!

Oh, oh yeah, bite that hook fishies

 

[Paideia]

In the same way your face is made of marble you goit. Re-read your "history further back than 2002 for dummies and Labor Politicians" and re-think what you have typed.

That applies to more than one person...

Now Israel is significant and Jewdaism is the fundamental basis of 2/3's of the worlds religion and the religion itself as well as those who took on that which sprang from it have made the world what it is today. As an empire itself it was taken by the roman yes, but what it had done before and its people after is by far more important. It is a bit unorthodox to my own views on a civ in this game, but it deserves its place.

Wow, I must have hit a nerve.. To the rest of you, I realize that this a little off-topic, but I will try to make it as brief as possible.

Thank you, first of all, for that curteous and concise reply, which I shall try to answer as best I can. Since you insist that the religious aspect must be considered I will examine it in more detail. First of all you claim that 2/3 of the world's religions are based one Judeo-Christian Monotheism. Now it is notoriously difficult to count this because many nations to not keep census records of it, the alternative then is to use national or state religions which is even messier. However the general consensus places the number just over half the world's population (including all christian/muslim sects and churches).
Moreover, the religions you speak of are based on a wide variety of semitic and middle-eastern movements and religious thinkers, Zoroaster being the most obvious. Secondly most of the actual religion-building did not take place in Israel (Christianity evolved around Rome, Islam around Medina).

Moving on to the actual civilization of Israel, I would firstly argue, that since we are calling the Civilization Israel and not the Jews it makes sense to speak primarily of geographical, not ethnic limits to this "nation". Now as I've read in "history further back than 2002 for dummies and Labor Politicians" it is important to rely on verifiable historical information and not singular sources. This means, that the Bible/Torah is not a prime candidate for historical information about Israel. In fact one of the first outside mentions of Israel or its peoples come from the Egyptians around the 14th-15th century BC (I am not willing to accept the Hyksos people as antecedents of Israel, if you want to make that argument, go ahead). These annals speak of a people/ethnic group that can be viewed as Jewish/Israeli, however at this time Israel itself was under Hittite control. This group later moved back to Israel but did not establish central government or build a nation as such.
The first Kingdom/Empire/State Entity one can speak of is the Kingdom of Israel and Judeah established under Saul in 1050 BC (this is using biblical dating which in itself is problematic as stated earlier, but you see my point..) The Kingdom later split in two, the northern Israel being conquered by the Assyrians and the southern Judeah somewhat later by the Babylonians ending independent rule in 587 BC (again, historical caveats in mind). As stated in my earlier post, the region was then under foreign control (Assyrians/Babylonians, Persians, Greek, Roman, Arabs/Crusaders, Ottomans and finally English) until the establishment of the modern state of Israel.
Again, since we are speaking of a Geographic entity, not an ethnic one, to me it makes no sense to speak of an Israeli state between these two and I see no reason to accept that modern Israel is a continuation of the ancient Kingdom. Rather, I see modern Israel as a product of the Zionist movement, which (understandably dissatified with the situation of the Jewish people around the world) sought to establish a Jewish state in the region of Palestine. I withhold any judgement on the merits or successes of that endeavour, since they are hardly relevant to the discussion.

Let me finally add, that I am not in any way refuting the dramatic influence that the Jewish people have had on the world, but rather the influence of a state/nation/kingdom of Israel.

Oops.. I seem to have failed miserably in my attempt to be brief.. My sincere apologies.

To Hitti-Litti
Mea Culpa. My somewhat infuriated typing had gotten the better of me. The sequence is of course Babylon, Persia, Greece and Rome. I have edited my previous post.


EDIT: As GoodSarmation so eloquently (and considerably shorter than myself) pointed out the significance of the religion is already represented in the game.

 

[Barton]

I have now got a new sense of respect for you and can't squeeeeeeee-e-e-e-e..... meh... can't insult you now.

Yes I do agree that in terms of the geography israel is a bit off the rails because Jerusalem has been fought over for so long by basically everyone. In fact the more I think about it I can't justify israel by my usual method because the kingdom of Israel was brief and yes the modern israel is a not truly a continuation of it. But I only chose the name israel for it pure meaning. It culturally is the most significant place on earth, but in terms of a civ is hard to rationalised, but yeah. They are significant for my earlier reasons, but yes geographically no.

Hi-five for that one!

 

[Edungeon]

It culturally is the most significant place on earth...

 

[TheLastOne36]

Ok in my absence i have led the topic develop enough for me to do some serious posting, Here it is:

In my opinion Israel had a good chance to get in the beginning. But as more information got released, Babylon and Sumeria and a new Ottoman leader are known to be in BtS. The ME is now overcrowded. So why does Israel have a chance of getting in now? It would be completely stupid for Fireaxis to put them in instead of the Hittites who already have a horrible chance of getting in as 2 ME civs and an Ottoman leader are already in.

And as Paideia posted before, there is no reason for the State of Israel to be in as for much of there history THEY HAVEN'T BEEN A STATE.

The Modern Israel is not a continuation from the Kingdom of Israel from 2 Millennium ago, Other then they have the same religion and the same ethnic group as the Kingdom of Israel.

Also my question is what sort of UU will Israel have in the game? (please not a religious one)

And as someone previously posted, the area is represented and is now over-represented. The Religions are already represented in the game so there is no real argument about that 3 major world religions originated from that very small area.

On other words, Israel has not conquered any large areas, or any significant areas at all. They lost there independence to many empires and nations, And were never a real Power back then or now.

And there is no civs representing an ethnic group in the game. If they had to, The germany would be Germans or Germanics, Russia would be Slavs, England would be Anglo-Saxons, Native Americans would be Athabaskans/Iroquoians, Vikings would be Scandinavians, Celts would be Gauls etc.

So if they didn't represent an Ethnic group before, why should they now?

Now back on topic, the Topic is about Austria not Israel.

First of all i want to say that Austria has a good chance of getting in into the expansion, First of all i just want to point out a few reasons why Austria should be included.

1. The Austro-Hungarian Kingdom was a big Kingdom.
2. Austria on itself back then was quite powerful.
3. The conquered Areas of Europe unlike Israel who haven't conquered any area of significance. (for example: Silesia)
4. As i have stated before, Germany represents the State, Nation and Country of Germany. Not the Ethnic group. So that leaves Austria open to be in the game. (Many people including I have made this mistake)

My points against Austria being in the expansion pack will come with my points about Poland.

So as you see here, Austria has a good chance of getting in. Perhaps better then Poland. I think it was unfair to bring in Sumeria and Byzantine over Poland and Austria but that's my opinion.

------------

Now Poland.

Why should Poland be in? Well mainly because although Europe is overrepresented, East Europe is Seriously underrepresented. Greece is in Mediterranean/South Europe and is not East European for that matter.

So the only Country representing East europe is Russia.

And now let's Go into the Dividing the Slavic groups part of my post :

There are the main Slavic Groups. East Slavs, West Slav, and South Slavs.

East Slavs consist of Russians, Ukrainians, Rusyns and Belorussians.

West Slavs consist of Poles, Silesia, Pomeranians, Czechs, Slovaks, and Sorbs.

South Europeans consist of Bulgarians, Slovenians, Montenegrins, Croats, Bosniaks, and Yugoslavs.

So only Russia is represented in Slavic Europe. But there are still Many other slavs out there that are unrepresented. Poland will help if not fix this situation.

Also many Non-Russian slavs hate being represented by Russia and only russia mainly because of the past recent history with Russia. (if you have a brain, You know what i mean) And Russia DOES represent all of Russian history from Modern to medieval. I know this because Stalin, Catherine and Peter are all russian leaders.

So it is only fair for most the non-russian slavs to have Poland represented in the game.

Now my previous post says that i'd give 10 good reasons why poland should be in instead of Austria.

1. Poland represents the Non-russian Slavs Austria does not.
2. Poland at ounce had a greater empire then Austria ever had.
3. Poland has a longer history then Austria
4. Poland had to fight both Russia and Germany in World War 2 and there was never any Treaty or surrender while Austria surrendered to germany before the war even started.
5. Poland saved Austria in the Battle of Vienna
6. It is dabatable if Austria is even in East Europe

Ok well i'm stuck at 6 major reasons, i can't go on without putting in any minor points. Maybe other fellow posters might like to continue?

And now Why Poland should be in over Israel:

Well, from 966 to 1370 the Polish Piast dynasty ruled Poland, from 1386 to 1569 the Lithuanian Jagiellon was in charge, from 1569 to 1772 the Poles were co-rulers of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth, and in 1772 they were partitioned into the Prussian, Russian and Austrian empires, and, save for a short live puppet-state under Napoleon in 1707-1815, stayed that way until 1918, when it was independent until 1939 when it was taken over by the Third Reich and USSR, and then in 1945 it was made independent until 2007, although it's arguable that the 1945-1991 period had it as a Soviet puppet-state.
All in all, out of a 1031 year history, that makes 644 years of self rule (62%), 354 years of foreign rule (34%) and 54 years as a puppet state (5%). That still means that the Poles spent most of their history independent, I acknowledge that, but 38% still means quite a lot of time spent non-independent.

Compared to isreal? Come on.

And i know i'm dead after this post. Might as well :suicide:

Ok i'm gonna let you have a chance to flame me while i get ready to flame back, or we could let a mod close this thread before any flaming starts.

 

[Tronicoz]

We need more civs representing minor European countries! Europe is the only place that matters! Only white people can build real civilisations!
You see, this is the kind of nonsense we are three steps from embracing. The game is Eurocentric enough as it is, we don't know more European civs. Poland and Austria are both bad ideas for new civs.

that's the spirit

 

[TheLastOne36]

Same thing goes for Middle east.

 

[durfal]

In my opinion. I get the feeling You need Austria. I certainly not, so don't use we. And in my opinion the German Civilization includes all German speaking people.
It is still civilizations and not countries in this game, though sometimes the borders between those two are vague. But that is my opinion.

This does means nothing about my opinion about the great and important nation of the Austro-Hungarian Empire but I prefer the Hungarians seperate or even the Polish far before Austria as a seperate civ.

But seen how they make all the former civs from earlier versions of the game into this expansion you have a good change in getting "your" wish.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

Israel is needed because more than 2/3s of the world's populous in under one of the religions that originated out of Israel.

I think including Judaism as one of the world religions was entirely justified. However, Israel as such has not done much to affect world civilization. Judaism emanated out of a remnant of the ancient kingdom of Israel called Judah, and then that country also disappeared. The many gifted Jews who made all kinds of contributions to the various countries where they lived did not belong to "the civilization of Israel"; they belonged to the Jewish diaspora. Modern Israel can't really be regarded as identical with ancient Israel; it is a recent creation based on religion, not on ethnicity. So I don't see a good case for including Israel.

I also think that we have all the European civs that can reasonably be demanded. Now it's time for the Khmer, Ethiopia, Polynesia and perhaps a Latin American civ - I favour Brazil, with the bandeirados (sp?) as a special unit.

 

[LDeska]

And in my opinion the German Civilization includes all German speaking people.

durfal - I totally agree with you. From my point of view Austria is represented by Germans. Though I'm against inclusion of Austria - it would be nice... the problem is that there are only 3 slots left... but it's all up to Firaxis - we'll see

 

[Archduke Otto]

Bigot alert! Cretin spotted putting words into other people's mouth!

I salute you!

 

[danieldaniel]

Hey, I wouldn't mind Israel if the put jesuschrist as their leader

then they could use Mel Gibson for the animated head

 

[GIR]

I would like to see Austria, too.

For some time they were big global players...

But that's only my 2 cents.

 

[Traitorfish]

And there is no civs representing an ethnic group in the game... Celts would be Gauls etc.

"Celts would be Gauls"? Interesting, considering 5/6 of the remaining Celtic nations are in Britain, and the only 1 on the continent speaks a Brythonic language, not a Gaulish one. Celts are an ethnic group, it's a fact.
Look, the Celtic ethnic group breaks down into four language groups: Gaels, Britons, Gauls and Celtiberians. Of these, the Gaels and Britons still survive to this day, the Gaels as the Irish, Manx and Scots, Britons as the Welsh, Cornish and Bretons. (Some Cumbrians consider themselves Celts, because of the now-extinct Cumbrian language.) The Gaulish languages, and it's relatives Lepontic, Noric and Galatian, were spoken across Europe, and Celtiberian refers to the extinct Celtic languages of the Iberian Peninsula.
While it may be possible to have seperate Civs representing each group, we don't, we have "the Celts", an ethnic group. After all, I am one, I'd know.

 

[Lance of Llanwy]

"Celts would be Gauls"? Interesting, considering 5/6 of the remaining Celtic nations are in Britain, and the only 1 on the continent speaks a Brythonic language, not a Gaulish one. Celts are an ethnic group, it's a fact.
Look, the Celtic ethnic group breaks down into four language groups: Gaels, Britons, Gauls and Celtiberians. Of these, the Gaels and Britons still survive to this day, the Gaels as the Irish, Manx and Scots, Britons as the Welsh, Cornish and Bretons. (Some Cumbrians consider themselves Celts, because of the now-extinct Cumbrian language.) The Gaulish languages, and it's relatives Lepontic, Noric and Galatian, were spoken across Europe, and Celtiberian refers to the extinct Celtic languages of the Iberian Peninsula.
While it may be possible to have seperate Civs representing each group, we don't, we have "the Celts", an ethnic group. After all, I am one, I'd know.

Indeed. Celtic civilization was very widespread throughout Western Europe, and they were quite advanced...and they were all related culturally. This is proven by the archaeological record, and the accounts we have. They weren't unified as one Celtic nation, but, then again, neither were the Greeks or indeed many other civs in the game. The difference between a Gaul and a Briton is about the difference between....an Athenian and a Makedonian, or perhaps an Epeirote, I'd guess. You could certainly DO it(just like you could separate Makedonia from Greece), but the result is a flimsy civilization. Perhaps, in the future, some civs will have "sub-civs" (Celtic examples are demonstrated above. Greece could have a ton, like Athens, Sparta, and maybe even the Successor States) that all have a slightly different flavor and maybe even variations on the UU...but not as full-fledged civs. I want Firaxis to show some love to Asia...

 

[bonafide11]

I'd really be disappointed if Austria made it into BTS, just because that would probably leave out Ethiopia, which I am really hoping for...

I don't expect either of them to be selected though, but I really think Africa deserves another Civ before Europe does... I think a few others deserve it before Austria too though

 

[Barton]

Abbysiania, Austria, Poland, Israel... They will all get their time. I think I might just backoff my order of which should be first and just go with "GO KHMER!!!"