What civilizations do you miss in BTS?

[cybrxkhan]

^see Traitorfish's words. my thoughts exactly!

Please note I mean no offense to anyone when listing these, I am merely stating whether they deserve a place along side the Russians or Greeks.

none of the civs in BtS can compare to civs like China and Rome and Egypt...

Indonesia - Indonesia is a country, not a civilization. Historically, I can't think of any civilizations off the top of my head that has come out of Indonesia that has had any impact of the world.

Indonesian states like the Majapahits and Srivajians were a vital part of a large maritime world trading route that was destroyed by the Europeans

Vietnam - Khmer is already represented on the game.

Vietnamese culture is actually more similar to Chinese culture, although our roots are more common with the Khmer... but we're pretty much unique copies of China... like Korea and Japan...

Congo - Sub-saharan African Tribes don't particularly constitue a Civilization. They have had no affect on world politics and they are largely semi-nomadic. The Congo also doesn't count as a Civilization. They're merely one of the many countries that came about after the Imperial Empires of Europe broke up.

its not sub-saharan, actually - Central African.


so, to conclude, "If the HRE can be in, so can [civ]."

 

[NyukXI]

The Civs of this game are added because they are unique, not necessarily because they are important on a global scale. The important ones: Egypt, China, Rome, England, Persia, etc. are naturally given priority over some of the others, but Civs like Khmer, Zulu, Native Americans, Koreans, Ethiopia, etc. while lagging far behind the afore mentioned big hegemonies of their day, are included for the sake of variety. While the Zulu are not remotely comparable to the Romans in their influence, that does not exclude them from being a distinct, or interesting (IMO), civilization.

its not sub-saharan, actually - Central African.

Central Africa is to Sub-Saharan Africa as the Balkans are to SE Europe. It's just a more specific region within a larger geographic region.

 

[Traitorfish]

The Civs of this game are added because they are unique, not necessarily because they are important on a global scale. The important ones: Egypt, China, Rome, England, Persia, etc. are naturally given priority over some of the others, but Civs like Khmer, Zulu, Native Americans, Koreans, Ethiopia, etc. while lagging far behind the afore mentioned big hegemonies of their day, are included for the sake of variety. While the Zulu are not remotely comparable to the Romans in their influence, that does not exclude them from being a distinct, or interesting (IMO), civilization.

And, if the world was a better place, the thread would end right there. Unfortunately, it's not, and this will undoubtedly continue until we all die of... erm... keyboard poisoning. Or something like that.

 

[esnaz]

I am not responding to anyone’s previous posts, but am writing my own.

(just to let you know I have just recently returned to playing and modding Civilization and return to civfanatics.com)

One civilization that I think should be in BTS is Israel. Although Israel is small, and the actual state is new, the kingdom is ancient and the influence is huge. Let me put it this way: if Israel was not important, why has there been almost constant war in Israel for the past 60 years? How is it not important if three major religions originated from Israel.

Israel’s influence is worldwide. Although the Israelis may have not had an enormously strong military in the past, they certainly do today. But a strong military does not define a civilization. A civilization is defines as a society that has a high level of culture and social organization. Israel obviously has the amount of culture needed to fit half this description. Israel also has social structure. In modern Israel, as one example, there are the Kibbutz. In ancient Israel, as another single example, there were noblemen and priests. This completes the second part of the definition.

Other civilizations I think should be included: Poland, Austria, Nubia, and the Iroquois (no “Native American Empire”)

 

[CIVPhilzilla]

I'm not really disappointed by the lack of any civilizations.

 

[Traitorfish]

Let me put it this way: if Israel was not important, why has there been almost constant war in Israel for the past 60 years?

Because it's important to the people living in Israel, not necessarily to the world as a whole. There have been wars in Northern Ireland, Somali, Nepal, Sudan, Nicaragua, thousands of places, but that doesn't necessarily make them all hugely significant on a global scale. Israel's conflict is only well-known because of Western involvement, and, as a result of that, Palestinian attacks on Western targets.
Put simply, a war only needs to be important to those fighting it to continue.

How is it not important if three major religions originated from Israel.

Islam is Arabian. Mecca and Medina, the two holiest cities in Islam and the places were Muhammad developed Islam, are both in Saudi Arabia. Jerusalem, the third holiest city, was where Muhammad is said to have ascended to heaven, not where he founded the religion.
Besides, that's questionable logic- surely, the place of the religion in the game represents it's significance, so is it really necessary to add additional representation with a civ?
As I've said before, Israel's importance is over-rated due to the predominance of Judeo-Christian religion in the west. Historically, Israel is no more significant than Armenia, Media or Elam, and certainly less so than the Hittites or Assyria. If we really need more Middle Eastern civs, those two certainly take priority over Israel.

 

[esnaz]

Because it's important to the people living in Israel, not necessarily to the world as a whole.

Yeah, but the war in Israel has been going on between MANy countries, and Israel has been able to hold them off both peacefully, and through war. It shows how powerful a military Israel currently has, and also the perseverance. Even though there are constant threats to Israel, people immigrate, and visit because of its importance.

What I said about the religions starting there, I worded that wrong and just messed up there. What I meant was that Israel is important religiously to several major religions.

f we really need more Middle Eastern civs, those two certainly take priority over Israel.

The amount of civs from a certain location in Civilization shouldn't affect whether or not it goes into the game, in my opinion.

Israel is one of the most important religious locations in the world, and therefore, it should be honored by going into the game.

 

[LilPinoyBoy]

I want the Philippines in the next Civilization Expansion or Civilization V.

We fought hard to help the Americans and we had a little revolt against the Americans after the American-Japanese War.

We need a little or more recognition lol D:

 

[Saim]

...and Byzantium. Plus Israel and the Hittites, that would be nine middle-eastern civilizations. As most of the Middle East contains of desert, it would be at least as crowded as Europe.

I wouldn't mind replacing the Celts, the Vikings and the HRE with Poland and any Nordic nation (may it be Iceland or the Kalmar Union, as long as it is a real political or cultural entity), decreasing the number of European civilizations by one.

True, the Byzantine's capital was in Europe, am I wrong?

Sioux - If you're going to have the Sioux, you should also include the Cherokee and possibly the Mohicans.

Iroquois - Same thing as the Sioux really.

Mexico - Mexico is not a civilization, it's a nation. Again, Mexico has been rather uninfluenctial in Ancient and Modern Day Politics. Besides, Aztecs are represented here. It's the equivalent of putting the Saxons in, aswell as the British.

Although I don't want Mexico, I have to ask: how the hell do the Aztecs represent Mexico?

Austria - German and Austrian culture are very similar. No need for them here.

So having similar culture to another state undermines the state's achievements?

Morocco - Morocco again, is an Islamic Country. This should be changed to Berbers. Even that's questionable.

So... Morocco being a Muslim country undermines it's importance?

Congo - Sub-saharan African Tribes don't particularly constitue a Civilization. They have had no affect on world politics and they are largely semi-nomadic. The Congo also doesn't count as a Civilization. They're merely one of the many countries that came about after the Imperial Empires of Europe broke up.

This is referring to the central African kingdom of Kongo, not semi-nomadic tribes.

Pakistan - Pakistan is a nation, though it has a rich culture, is rather similar to India, bar it's State Religion. In fact, if I remember correctly, Pakistan was a part of India until recently.

Didn't Pakistan split from Britain at the same time as India?

Indus Civilization - India is already represented.

Unfortunately...

Burma - Khmer is already represented on the game.

Thailand - Khmer is already represented on the game.

Vietnam - Khmer is already represented on the game.

So... Khmer being represented is somehow relevant?

Indonesia - Indonesia is a country, not a civilization. Historically, I can't think of any civilizations off the top of my head that has come out of Indonesia that has had any impact of the world.

Sri Vijaya?

Australian Aboriginals - Yes, most certainly. It oftens annoys me when Australia is bare on the game.

So... you want the Aussie Aboriginies? But... NOT Polynesia? Polynesia, although it shouldn't be in the game, actually had civilization and empires.

Commonwealth of Australia - No, it's just a country. How can you call it a Civilization?

How can you call England a civilization?

The Civs of this game are added because they are unique, not necessarily because they are important on a global scale. The important ones: Egypt, China, Rome, England, Persia, etc. are naturally given priority over some of the others, but Civs like Khmer, Zulu, Native Americans, Koreans, Ethiopia, etc. while lagging far behind the afore mentioned big hegemonies of their day, are included for the sake of variety. While the Zulu are not remotely comparable to the Romans in their influence, that does not exclude them from being a distinct, or interesting (IMO), civilization.



Central Africa is to Sub-Saharan Africa as the Balkans are to SE Europe. It's just a more specific region within a larger geographic region.

They're not in for the 'sake of variety'. They're in because they're a sort of tier 2 (or in some cases, 3 or 4), while they're not as high as China or Rome, they are pretty important. Except for the Celts.

Historically, Israel is no more significant than Armenia, Media or Elam, and certainly less so than the Hittites or Assyria. If we really need more Middle Eastern civs, those two certainly take priority over Israel.

You forgot Akkadia, Parthia and Phoenicia. Oh - and the Seljuks.

 

[Cromat]

As I've said before, Israel's importance is over-rated due to the predominance of Judeo-Christian religion in the west. Historically, Israel is no more significant than Armenia, Media or Elam, and certainly less so than the Hittites or Assyria. If we really need more Middle Eastern civs, those two certainly take priority over Israel.

I'm sorry but I think many of you are missing the point.
It's not the Ancient Kingdom that should be in the game, nor is it modern Israel. It's BOTH.

The history of the Jews is one history: from the ancient kingdoms, to the exile in Babylon, back to Judea, the revolt against the Greek, the Hasmonean independence, being a Roman province, revolt against the Roman, destruction and exile, 2000 years of exile, spreading to the 4 corners of the Earth and then being reunited as a country in the 20th century.

If a civ called "Israel" is included, then it stands for ALL of that. It represents 3000 years of history. And hundreds of the world's best scientists, inventors and artists were Jews, highly unproportinate to their number. I think I heard nearly 20% of all Nobel Prize winners are Jewish.

If you look at the Ancient Kingdom alone it might not deserve inclusion. It was small, didn't build any huge monuments and was conquered and vassalized by it's neighbours. It's only real achievement was a religous one.

Then if you look at modern Israel, it's a young and small country whose strong army does not warrant including.

But those two states and the 2000 years of exile between them are ONE AND THE SAME. It's the same people (maybe genetically dilluted, but nonetheless the same), in the same place, speaking the same language, believing in the same faith.

Assyria, Media and Elam were all great in their day, but they were assimilated and now no one calls himself an Assyrian, Median or Elamite anymore. They are dead and made no real impression on the world. Israel on the other hand, not only spurred the Western's world 3 major religions, but the Jews also had a part in the history of every place they lived in while in exile. The history of Europe is incomplete without Jews. And it still exists today, which is a monumental achievement in itself.

"As I've said before, Israel's importance is over-rated due to the predominance of Judeo-Christian religion in the west."

This sentence contradicts itself. If Judeo-Christian religions are predominant in the West, then how is Israel's importance overrated? You said it yourself. Jewish/Hebrew culture is one of the pillars of what we now call Western civilization. It's not overrated, and it certainly deserves inclusion.

If anything, this thread and this poll at least prove that it would be economically sound to include it. It's still #1 on the poll and i'm sorry but I can't see anyone going to a shop to buy an expansion because it has Elam. This is a game first and history lesson a far second, so if nothing else, Israel would be fun to play as and i'm sure many would agree.

 

[aronnax]

I personally would not like Israel. Lets imagine for a second, what if Israel and Judaism Never Existed. All Im saying is that the Middle East would be a lot more peaceful

 

[Cromat]

I personally would not like Israel. Lets imagine for a second, what if Israel and Judaism Never Existed. All Im saying is that the Middle East would be a lot more peaceful

Yes, but there would still be war between the French-Chinese and the Zulus!

Alternative history is useless. If Judaism never existed so would Christianity and Islam, and people would still be fighting, just in the name of a different prophet.

Besides, do you always think the best way to resolve conflicts is to remove one side from history? What if Britain never existed - boy would that make 1942 more peaceful in Europe!

 

[aronnax]

Yes, but there would still be war between the French-Chinese and the Zulus!

Alternative history is useless. If Judaism never existed so would Christianity and Islam, and people would still be fighting, just in the name of a different prophet.

Besides, do you always think the best way to resolve conflicts is to remove one side from history? What if Britain never existed - boy would that make 1942 more peaceful in Europe!

Other than introducing Monothethis religions to the world, name me one great thing they did that is at least respectable as a reason to view Israel as a country that would have change the worlds history

 

[Cromat]

Other than introducing Monothethis religions to the world, name me one great thing they did that is at least respectable as a reason to view Israel as a country that would have change the worlds history

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews

I give up.

 

[aronnax]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews

I give up.

Oh this convinces me so much... define please.

 

[silvio82]

What do you think of the yugoslavians or serbs and austrian-hungarian empire in the game?

 

[Tanktunker]

It was small, didn't build any huge monuments and was conquered and vassalized by it's neighbours. It's only real achievement was a religous one.

Oh yes, the first and second great temples weren't huge or monuments, they were only the most (arguably, yes, but still) important religious buildings of their time.

Other than introducing Monothethis religions to the world, name me one great thing they did that is at least respectable as a reason to view Israel as a country that would have change the worlds history

Monotheism has done nothing for culture, ever.
In fact, one might call it the least important invention ever

 

[NyukXI]

Monotheism has done nothing for culture, ever.
In fact, one might call it the least important invention ever

Polytheistic religions are, generally speaking, only loosely followed. They generally don't define a society as Christianity did for Medieval Europe, Judaism did for Judea and Israel (the ancient kingdoms), or that Islam has done for much of the Middle East, even into the present day. For better or worse it's important, as a unifying force or a destructive force. It can bring people together as they are united under the "one true God" or it can tear people apart as holy wars are waged against "heathen" nations, as all three Abrahamic religions are guilty of having done at some point in their history. If not for the influence of the Catholic church over all of Europe in the early middle ages, I don't think that Europe would have been able to create the balance of power that they did.

In contrast, polytheistic religions were seen as regional. Greek Gods were just that, the Gods of Greece. In Egypt there was a completely different group of Gods. I don't think that the Romans or Greeks saw their Gods as the "real" ones while the Egyptians' were fake, they simply thought that their Gods were stronger than the others. Polytheistic deities don't generally possess the quality of being omnipotent, otherwise what's the need of a division of labor among the Gods? Sometimes, Greeks and Romans actually felt that they could manipulate the Gods against each other.

They're not in for the 'sake of variety'. They're in because they're a sort of tier 2 (or in some cases, 3 or 4), while they're not as high as China or Rome, they are pretty important. Except for the Celts.

To a degree I'd agree with you. But it only holds true regionally. Zulu were influential in Southern Africa, the Mayans were influential in the Yucatan, etc. but neither has had a great influence on the world. Italy, Denmark, Belgium, Poland, Austria, Hungary, Byzantines, are all more influential than the Zulu or Mayans or Native Americans on a global scale. So why did Zulu make it into civilization before the Byzantines, and why haven't the other European nations listed not in the game after the initial launch and two expansion packs? For the sake of representing other regions. I mean the Zulu were still using the weapons available to humans 10,000 years BCE, why include them, because they were important in South Africa, but why represent South Africa if it was so stagnant technologically compared to the rest of the world? Because otherwise the game would represent European civilizations, which represent only a fraction of the global population, and because European nations are by and large probably closer to each other culturally and linguistically (they are exceptions) than China is to Burma or to Japan. Or India is to Persia (Iran), or Iran is to the Arabic world.

 

[SkippyT]

Other than introducing Monothethis religions to the world, name me one great thing they did that is at least respectable as a reason to view Israel as a country that would have change the worlds history

How about Theory of relativity, mass-energy equivalence, the bible, 160 nobel prizes. Oh, the list is too long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Jewish_inventors

On Civ standards, the Jews would be really unimportant but if you look at it from a different angle you'll see people who have been spread from far and wide for 3000 years and are reunited now in Israel with the same culture they have held, no matter if they lived in Morocco, Norway, India or Turkmenistan.
These people are more amazing than most and deserve a spot and at two leaders. I would pick Solomon (Org/Spi/Ind/Phi) and David (Spi/Phi/Org) as leaders but it might be interesting to play David Ben-Gurion (Org/Cha/Pro) or Golda Meir (Cha/Cre/Spi/Org).

 

[Gorgo]

As interesting and eloquent as this argument has been at times, isn't everyone missing the point a little bit?

This is a computer game, albeit a very good one. You'll never satisfy every country/race/religion's expectations or perceptions of themselves as deserving of inclusion. To be honest, I don't think Firaxis should have to defend the historical context of the inclusion or exclusion of any single "entity" in the game. Nations/races/leaders are to include a little more empathy and fun in the game rather than pass comment on which was inherently "better" than the other.

As I say, it's a fascinating debate, but I'd hate to see it escalate into something so politically sensitive that we end up with messages like:

KING from the civilization RED is asking you to convert to the SQUARE religion.