Which civ LEAST deserves to be in the original 18?

[trotskylite]

game, set, match

 

[oldStatesman]

3) I said that America is a nation, not a civilization of it's own. OldStatesman obviousily misinterpreted this as saying that America is not deserving of being called civilized. I say B, he thinks I say E.



-- Roland

Please re-read my post. You have taken me totally out of context. I am saying the exact opposite.

I WAS NOT saying that America is not deserving of being called civilized - just the opposite - I said that IF ALL Americans were as rude as the poster I was quoting that you could say that America did not deserved to be called civilized. In the very next sentence I say we ARE not like that - only a small minority. As in any culture.

Thanks!

 

[Favorius]

I would like to see good old Zulus (since civ1) instead of Mali, probably it is fun to have an aggressive African nation but actually lacks reality. On the other hand in my Civ3 games Zulus were never able to rise to power, they were always a weak nation. (hell, but I still recall my childhood days, seeing green colored cavalry and chariots rushing to conquer middle east) When we look actual history of Zulus, we see they didnot last long but actually they respresent the Black people of Africa continent.(I am sorry if this "black" is an offense in English, but I did not mean any discrimination). On the other hand Mali is again an African civilization but their relations with Muslim world and their religion makes them a respresenter of Middle East civilization.

Before Zulus, I would be more than happy seeing Turks instead of Mongols, because Turks influenced history more. Mongol built the largest empire the world ever saw, but Mongol Kingdoms except the Empire in China were Turkic Kingdoms, and the Mongols were a minority in those countries they conquered and eventually 3 of the 4 Mongol Khanates Turkicified, together with the acceptance of Islam within a century. Turks is a better choice for representing both nomads and Muslims.

Aztecs are there since Civ1 but I think they are far too expansionistic. Peaceful Maya civilization is my personal choice.

Spanish are fine, but with them Europe is over-represented. Instead of them we need Babylon to represent ancient Middle East.

And America is fine, I like waiting America whether to dominate the world or be puny civilization when they reach modern age but disgust their presence in middle ages.

 

[osirishotep]

Romans? Greeks? Chinese? just curious, but, why did people pick these?

 

[Jonathan]

One argument of the anti-Americans is that the Americans are the civ that is the farthest away from the 4000 BC starting point. But now, with civ4 - we are talking about civ 4 in here, right? - we gained the option to start the game in the industrial or even modern era. Anyone wants to say America doesn't make sense there?

Not me. If you start the game in or after the 18th century, the Americans should definitely be in -- and various civs that didn't make it that far in reality should be out.

This is something I'm unlikely to try myself. At least in previous versions of Civ, I much preferred the early part of the game, and rarely played through the modern period.

 

[CrazyMrLeo]

America, England, France, Germany, and Spain will always be included in the list of civs.

Well, Spain had to wait for an expansion pack in Civ 3.

 

[joethreeblah]

The USA's influence on the modern world is undeniable, but irrelevant, compared with the fact that it's existed for less than 3 of the 60 centuries covered by the game.

And how many turns of 500?

 

[Jonathan]

And how many turns of 500?

In Civ 3, 187 turns out of 540, which you could easily work out for yourself from the CivFanatics info (see under Victory Conditions).

In Civ 4, who knows? There are to be 400 turns in total, but I haven't seen any information on how they break down.

I get the impression from reviews that Firaxis is trying to spread the game more evenly over time, in which case the modern period may take up a smaller part of the game than in Civ 3.

 

[joethreeblah]

In Civ 3, 187 turns out of 540, which you could easily work out for yourself from the CivFanatics info (see under Victory Conditions).

In Civ 4, who knows? There are to be 400 turns in total, but I haven't seen any information on how they break down.

That was actually a bit easier than looking under the info you have suggested.

 

[Roland Ehnström]

I am saying the exact opposite.

I WAS NOT saying that America is not deserving of being called civilized - just the opposite - I said that IF ALL Americans were as rude as the poster I was quoting that you could say that America did not deserved to be called civilized.

You got ME wrong. I was NOT saying that you were calling the Americans uncivilized. I was merely saying that your post made it sound like I was calling Americans uncivlized, when all I was trying to say was that America is a nation rather than a seperate civilization.

-- Roland

 

[Roland Ehnström]

If you start the game in or after the 18th century, the Americans should definitely be in -- and various civs that didn't make it that far in reality should be out.

Yup, I agree to that too.

-- Roland

 

[Eshnunna]

Ooookayyy people getting a bit too serious in here.

I voted for spain (nothing personal) since, although they have had a tremendous influence on many things in our world today, I think there are too many european powers already in the game (miss Babylon and Zulus...)

And about the silly fight over America, I think that CIV with late UUs are important in terms of gameplay in order to balance the game a bit. And they obviously make sense when the game begins n the late eras.

 

[Honda Tadakatsu]

I'd remove the Americans we haen't been around very long and are too close to the English

 

[general_kill]

ok i have a huge problem with how the vote went, who in the hell voted for:

arabia?!?!? all of u (who voted for arabia) say that the cradle of civilization needs to be cut from a game CALLED civilization.

chinese?? chinese culture has been undeniable for thousands of years, even dating back before roman times. up until 18-19 century, they were the richest civilization in the world. you should vote for the japanese before you vote for the chinese since japan basically stole the chinese culture.

greek... how can u cut out the greeks! so much of the game revolves around them: the architecture in european styled cities, the technology of democracy, and a bunch of other things which blends with the norm but wouldnt be there without the greek.

india also had a profound effect on the world. sheesh, without india, ghandi jokes wouldnt make sense! and there woulda never been The Beatles!

stop being so foolish by voting like a history-******!

 

[Kyriakos]

i agree that all of those should stay in the game but Arabia is not the cradle of civilization: as you know Babylon, Sumeria and the other messopotamian civs were not at all arabic; their area was conquered by arabs in the 7th century AD

 

[Muki]

i think there should be Mayans instead of Aztecs and there should be most certainly Babylons or another civ from mesopotamia. As for the america i think without them the game wouldnt be the same cause they are the most powerful nation in the world now, i really dont care they didint excist before 1700 or something..

 

[Jonathan]

india also had a profound effect on the world. sheesh, without india, ghandi jokes wouldnt make sense! and there woulda never been The Beatles!

I didn't vote to chuck out the Indians; but in fact there are considerable problems with the idea of an Indian civ.

As I understand it, history has seen not one Indian civ but a whole succession of different civs located in India, and all of the most notable ones seem to have been controlled by incoming foreigners. Even today, Indians are divided into different tribes with different religions and cultures.

If you have an Indian civ in the game, the question might well be asked, "Which Indians are you referring to?"

Admittedly this problem exists not only in India. Britain, for instance, was overrun and ruled for some time by several successive waves of foreigners (Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Normans); though the last successful invasion was in 1066 AD.

 

[TerraHero]

If i'd remove any civ to replace it with another i'd boot America out in a blink of an eye.

It might have some reason to be here, but the main reason its in is 90% pure comemrcialistic and 10% for other reasons not all of them very good either.

But 2nd to America i find the mongols hard to place. They are ancient, they have had a vast empire in there greatest days, they pretty much pwnd all the bitzes and whatnot. But in the end the Empire was no Rome that lasted for amny centuries and appart from these early very effective conquests, wich where often periodical it mainly served more as a band of un-united barbarions. But surely proving that if they stop killing eachother for long enough they could conquer the world.

 

[RegentMan]

Mali, in my opinion.

 

[Jecrell]

If i'd remove any civ to replace it with another i'd boot America out in a blink of an eye.

It might have some reason to be here, but the main reason its in is 90% pure comemrcialistic and 10% for other reasons not all of them very good either.

*tears his hair out of his head while screaming "WHY GOD WHY?!?!"*