Which civs should be left out?

[Saiko]

Meh, so I'm kinda opinionated.

 

[Trias]

Answering the question of Weik:
HRE, I never understund why them? The Austrian-Hungrian Empire should be it.

I think the main reason for the existence of the HRE is to give a civ to Charlemagne. Charlemagne, clearly is one of the great leaders in European history. (He is literally the stuff of legend.)
This is clear form the fact that he is the sole leader of the HRE, while what is usually thought of as the HRE only formed centuries after his death. The name HRE is odd to say the least for this construct. It would make much more sense to just call the Carlolingian empire by the name it was known by at the the time: the Frankish empire.

And no this is not the same thing as France. At its peak the Franks controlled most of (western) europe including Germany and France. Which later formed from different pieces of the Frankish empire when it fell apart. (Put this also holds for Spain and the Netherlands, which are also civs.)

Replacing with Austria-Hungary makes even less sense (than calling it the HRE). Austria-Hungary existed for less than 50 years with as primary achievement starting the Great War. The HRE existed in one form or other for several centuries. Then again it hard to look past the 20th century for many posters here.

 

[Zenon_pt]

Byzantium they still were Roman. Out with them.

 

[kochman]

Byzantium they still were Roman. Out with them.

We just discussed this. This statement is not even close to factually being true.
First, the spoke Greek. Second, they were a Christian, complete theocratic government which Rome never was. Third... ah, just go back and read the previous posting...

To put that in perspective, its like saying Portugal is really Spanish...

 

[Zenon_pt]

I think the main reason for the existence of the HRE is to give a civ to Charlemagne. Charlemagne, clearly is one of the great leaders in European history. (He is literally the stuff of legend.)
This is clear form the fact that he is the sole leader of the HRE, while what is usually thought of as the HRE only formed centuries after his death. The name HRE is odd to say the least for this construct. It would make much more sense to just call the Carlolingian empire by the name it was known by at the the time: the Frankish empire.

And no this is not the same thing as France. At its peak the Franks controlled most of (western) europe including Germany and France. Which later formed from different pieces of the Frankish empire when it fell apart. (Put this also holds for Spain and the Netherlands, which are also civs.)

Replacing with Austria-Hungary makes even less sense (than calling it the HRE). Austria-Hungary existed for less than 50 years with as primary achievement starting the Great War. The HRE existed in one form or other for several centuries. Then again it hard to look past the 20th century for many posters here.

Ok Charlemagne was a great leader, I agree. But still HRE have only him as a leader, could you say one more?

 

[Zenon_pt]

We just discussed this. This statement is not even close to factually being true.
First, the spoke Greek. Second, they were a Christian, complete theocratic government which Rome never was. Third... ah, just go back and read the previous posting...

To put that in perspective, its like saying Portugal is really Spanish...

If that is true, then US are really England... ^.-

Yes they spoke Greek, were the remain of the Rome Empire, were Christian (after Costatine), I know the story, if I recall it was Fiftychat who explain the Byzantium facts during the 2nd expansion of Civ III.
But you are asking for a opnion, and my is that! Out with Byzantium and HRE.

 

[kochman]

If that is true, then US are really England... ^.-

Yes they spoke Greek, were the remain of the Rome Empire, were Christian (after Costatine), I know the story, if I recall it was Fiftychat who explain the Byzantium facts during the 2nd expansion of Civ III.
But you are asking for a opnion, and my is that! Out with Byzantium and HRE.

Yes, by your logic of getting rid of Byzantium, Portugal is Spanish, Brazil is Portuguese, and the USA is British, but we all know that's not true... right? So, I guess you see my point then.

The Byzans were Christian from Constantine, not after, Constantine made them a Christian nation and moved the capital. The fact that he didn't officially convert until he was on his deathbed is usually interpreted by historians as him wanting to seem "even handed" to his mixed empire, but all his policies were Christian leaning, including giving them official status, and funding, with state money, the building of MANY churches.

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but I didn't ask you for it... someone else did who started the thread... I wanted to correct your misunderstanding is all... but just understand that the Byzantines are a separate entity in history (and lasted MUCH longer than the Romans did anyhow). I say add more civs rather than put civs out... why bother removing major civs?

 

[Zenon_pt]

I say add more civs rather than put civs out... why bother removing major civs?

I agree!

 

[Saiko]

I agree!

Same here.

 

[Ataxerxes]

Byzantines - As Kochman pointed out, they were quite significant and long-lived. True, they were originally founded by Rome, but were quite distinct with a different language, religious break (Orthodox Christianity). They definitely belong.

Native American - I have to agree with half the posters here. Lumping all of them as a civ makes very little sense. Lumping, say, the Sioux, Mississipian, and Iriquois is, I'm sorry, ridiculous. Probably should bring back the Iriquois from Civ III.

Khmer, Mali - I kinda like them. Although I like history, I was ignorant of them. I admit I have a hard time justifying Mali.

Holy Roman - should be in, Charlemagne was very important. I don't agree you can say that they are basically Austria, German, whatever. Part of the problem is that there were basically 2 different Holy Roman Empires. One was the Carolingian (Charlemange, grandson of Charles Martel, definitely Frankish, originated and included modern day France), that basically collapsed soon after his death. The other was the more recent Holy Roman Empire, which was largely ruled by the Hapsburgs and incorporated a lot of modern-day Germany and the Austria-Hungarian Empire, that was largely an enemy of France. A second Hapsburg leader from the later-day HRE would be a nice addition.

As has been said before, the more the merrier, except for the native americans.

I agree with the Hitler debate. Either include him or get rid of Stalin and Mao. Admittedly, for marketing reasons, he can't be included. So, at least get rid of Stalin. Any other Soviet leader would be less offensive. My wife is Lithuanian, I'd hate to try to explain to her Stalin is in the game and Hitler isn't.

 

[Saiko]

I admit I have a hard time justifying Mali.

The Malinese were an extremely wealthy West African empire, and I think the Europeans traded with them a lot because they had so much gold. That's all I can say about them, though...

 

[Huayna Capac357]

Timbuktu was a center of learning and trade for hundreds of miles around and the Malinese Empire was the second largest in the world at its height (second only to the contemporaneous Mongolian Empire).