Which New Civs should be in CIV V

[Yared]

Meh. Instead of calling it "the Native American Empire" they could've just taken the most known tribe and included it.

They could do the same with the Australian example.

 

[RobinHat]

To be honest I am sick and tired of all you people who want to add the 'Scandinavian Civilization'... The three Scandinavian countries have never been a single, united civilization.
Just to give you an idea of how stupid it is, it would be like throwing the Aztecs, Incas and Mayans together and calling it the 'South American Civilization'...

I say again... It should be the DANISH Civilization as I have described in detail (with map and all) on page 2 (I think) of this thread. And for all you Swedes out there, I have no problem with adding Sweden too, as Sweden was a powerful economic force in the 1500-1600's.

But when we are talking about the 'Viking' era, the Danes were the absolute power in Scandinavia, and the word 'Danes' was the only one used about the raiders and settlers who influenced Western Europe from 793 to 1066 (and yes, Norwegian Vikings were also known as 'Danes').

So forget 'Scandinavians', 'Vikings', 'Norsemen' or any other daft name you think would work.

I am a history major with special focus on the early middle ages, so trust me on this.

Sorry for the rant...

 

[PeteAtoms]

Meh. Instead of calling it "the Native American Empire" they could've just taken the most known tribe and included it.

They could do the same with the Australian example.

In the in-game civilopedia, it says the Native American Empire is a theoretical cilivilization:

The "Native American" civilization in the game represents the empire that would have formed had these disparate people ever united.

-Civilopedia

So given that explanation, I have no problem with the "Native American Empire" civilization, even though it is more alternate-history than actual history.

 

[Silv Something]

To be honest I am sick and tired of all you people who want to add the 'Scandinavian Civilization'... The three Scandinavian countries have never been a single, united civilization.
Just to give you an idea of how stupid it is, it would be like throwing the Aztecs, Incas and Mayans together and calling it the 'South American Civilization'...

I say again... It should be the DANISH Civilization as I have described in detail (with map and all) on page 2 (I think) of this thread. And for all you Swedes out there, I have no problem with adding Sweden too, as Sweden was a powerful economic force in the 1500-1600's.

But when we are talking about the 'Viking' era, the Danes were the absolute power in Scandinavia, and the word 'Danes' was the only one used about the raiders and settlers who influenced Western Europe from 793 to 1066 (and yes, Norwegian Vikings were also known as 'Danes').

So forget 'Scandinavians', 'Vikings', 'Norsemen' or any other daft name you think would work.

I am a history major with special focus on the early middle ages, so trust me on this.

Sorry for the rant...

You make a good point.

 

[PeteAtoms]

To be honest I am sick and tired of all you people who want to add the 'Scandinavian Civilization'... The three Scandinavian countries have never been a single, united civilization.
Just to give you an idea of how stupid it is, it would be like throwing the Aztecs, Incas and Mayans together and calling it the 'South American Civilization'...

I say again... It should be the DANISH Civilization as I have described in detail (with map and all) on page 2 (I think) of this thread. And for all you Swedes out there, I have no problem with adding Sweden too, as Sweden was a powerful economic force in the 1500-1600's.

But when we are talking about the 'Viking' era, the Danes were the absolute power in Scandinavia, and the word 'Danes' was the only one used about the raiders and settlers who influenced Western Europe from 793 to 1066 (and yes, Norwegian Vikings were also known as 'Danes').

So forget 'Scandinavians', 'Vikings', 'Norsemen' or any other daft name you think would work.

I am a history major with special focus on the early middle ages, so trust me on this.

Sorry for the rant...

As someone who sounds authoritative on the subject (history major), is Ragnar the leader you would choose for the Danish Empire? If not, who? I'm just curious.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

I would not choose Ragnar. But that's just me.

 

[KentuckyJared20]

To be honest I am sick and tired of all you people who want to add the 'Scandinavian Civilization'... The three Scandinavian countries have never been a single, united civilization.
Just to give you an idea of how stupid it is, it would be like throwing the Aztecs, Incas and Mayans together and calling it the 'South American Civilization'...

I say again... It should be the DANISH Civilization as I have described in detail (with map and all) on page 2 (I think) of this thread. And for all you Swedes out there, I have no problem with adding Sweden too, as Sweden was a powerful economic force in the 1500-1600's.

But when we are talking about the 'Viking' era, the Danes were the absolute power in Scandinavia, and the word 'Danes' was the only one used about the raiders and settlers who influenced Western Europe from 793 to 1066 (and yes, Norwegian Vikings were also known as 'Danes').

So forget 'Scandinavians', 'Vikings', 'Norsemen' or any other daft name you think would work.

I am a history major with special focus on the early middle ages, so trust me on this.

Sorry for the rant...

Dude, are you Danish by any chance? JW-ing.

 

[Yared]

To be honest I am sick and tired of all you people who want to add the 'Scandinavian Civilization'... The three Scandinavian countries have never been a single, united civilization.

Kalmar Union

 

[Tee Kay]

Of the Civs not in Civ4 BTS, I'd add:

Vietnam
Thailand
Burma
Polynesia
Poland
Israel
Austria
Assyria
Srivijaya (alternatively, Java)
Tibet
Shona
Imazighen

And I'll leave out:

Holy Roman Empire

Total of 45 Civilizations

 

[RobinHat]

As someone who sounds authoritative on the subject (history major), is Ragnar the leader you would choose for the Danish Empire? If not, who? I'm just curious.

I would choose Knud den Store (Canute the Great). His Empire was enormous - I have posted a map of his Empire earlier in this thread - Page 2 I think.

Kalmar Union

The Kalmar Union was never considered a single nation or a united empire. The countries were still independent, but the union was united when it came to economic and foreign policy. It was initially ruled by the Danish queen Margrethe I (she is described as 'Queen of Norway' in your wiki-link, but that is wrong - she was born and raised in Denmark, daughter of Valdemar) and what was particularly interesting was the fact that the Swedes hated the union (even going so far as sometimes refusing to deal with the Danes, particlarly Margrethe who they called 'King No-pants').

Sweden did not like the fact that Denmark called most of the shots and eventually left the union when Gustav Vasa became king.

Using the Kalmar Union as a reason to throw all three together in the 'Scandinavian' Empire is as wrong as suggesting that the EU is reason enough to add the 'European' Empire.

It is simplified and terribly historically inaccurate.

 

[Yared]

I would choose Knud den Store (Canute the Great). His Empire was enormous - I have posted a map of his Empire earlier in this thread - Page 2 I think.



The Kalmar Union was never considered a single nation or a united empire. The countries were still independent, but the union was united when it came to economic and foreign policy. It was initially ruled by the Danish queen Margrethe I (she is described as 'Queen of Norway' in your wiki-link, but that is wrong - she was born and raised in Denmark, daughter of Valdemar) and what was particularly interesting was the fact that the Swedes hated the union (even going so far as sometimes refusing to deal with the Danes, particlarly Margrethe who they called 'King No-pants').

Sweden did not like the fact that Denmark called most of the shots and eventually left the union when Gustav Vasa became king.

Using the Kalmar Union as a reason to throw all three together in the 'Scandinavian' Empire is as wrong as suggesting that the EU is reason enough to add the 'European' Empire.

It is simplified and terribly historically inaccurate.

I misread your post. I didn't see that you wrote "united". My apologies.

 

[RobinHat]

No problem.

But do you agree with me on this? I also believe that Sweden deserves a place in the game. During much of the rennaisance era Sweden was a tremendous power in Europe (kicking Danish ass all over the place )... But during the Viking period, Denmark was the main force to be reckoned with in Western Europe.

 

[Yared]

No problem.

But do you agree with me on this? I also believe that Sweden deserves a place in the game. During much of the rennaisance era Sweden was a tremendous power in Europe (kicking Danish ass all over the place )... But during the Viking period, Denmark was the main force to be reckoned with in Western Europe.

Well, I am going to sound biased but there was a period (between 1611 and 1718) where Sweden was considered a super power. I wont go into the details (you can read more here) but basically under the leadership of Oxenstierna and Gustavus Adolphus (who's in Civ 4 as a Great General) it expanded and stuff. Eventually, it got gangbanged by its neighbors (and occupied territory) whom it managed to hold off. Then for some reason they decided (this was after the reign of Gustavus Adolphus) to invade Russia. They failed.

We read about this stuff in 5th grade so I might be off. So don't cite me on this!

Also, even though I'm sure there are posters on this forum who're better than me one history, I'd like to add this:

Gustavus Adolphus (Spiritual, Protective)

 

[nutnut]

I would choose Knud den Store (Canute the Great). His Empire was enormous - I have posted a map of his Empire earlier in this thread - Page 2 I think.



The Kalmar Union was never considered a single nation or a united empire. The countries were still independent, but the union was united when it came to economic and foreign policy. It was initially ruled by the Danish queen Margrethe I (she is described as 'Queen of Norway' in your wiki-link, but that is wrong - she was born and raised in Denmark, daughter of Valdemar) and what was particularly interesting was the fact that the Swedes hated the union (even going so far as sometimes refusing to deal with the Danes, particlarly Margrethe who they called 'King No-pants').

Sweden did not like the fact that Denmark called most of the shots and eventually left the union when Gustav Vasa became king.

Using the Kalmar Union as a reason to throw all three together in the 'Scandinavian' Empire is as wrong as suggesting that the EU is reason enough to add the 'European' Empire.
It is simplified and terribly historically inaccurate.

I'd say it's closer to the United Kingdom than the European Union. Do you think it makes more sense to have the UK or the English Empire?

 

[RobinHat]

It is not closer to the United Kingdom, because the Kalmar Union did not come about by force or conquest, but rather by economic nessecity. We are talking about a union of autonomous countries (each with their own armies, laws, languages and governments) that were combined into an economic union that worked together.
That is closer to the EU than the UK.

 

[RobinHat]

Well, I am going to sound biased but there was a period (between 1611 and 1718) where Sweden was considered a super power. I wont go into the details (you can read more here) but basically under the leadership of Oxenstierna and Gustavus Adolphus (who's in Civ 4 as a Great General) it expanded and stuff. Eventually, it got gangbanged by its neighbors (and occupied territory) whom it managed to hold off. Then for some reason they decided (this was after the reign of Gustavus Adolphus) to invade Russia. They failed.

We read about this stuff in 5th grade so I might be off. So don't cite me on this!

Also, even though I'm sure there are posters on this forum who're better than me one history, I'd like to add this:

Gustavus Adolphus (Spiritual, Protective)

I agree. The Swedes under Gustav Adolph are definitely deserving of a place in the game.
But you must agree that the so-called 'Viking Empire' in the game should really be the 'Danish Empire'.

Oh and as for Ragnar Lodbrok... He is described in the game as 'King of Sweden and Denmark'. Ragnar was a mythical figure (although most likely historical), and he was only King of Denmark, not Sweden. He invaded Sweden a few times (again, in the legends) but that was all.

And the horns on his helmet hurt my eyes every time...

 

[Yared]

And the horns on his helmet hurt my eyes every time...

yeah, they haven't found any viking helmets yet right?

 

[nutnut]

It is not closer to the United Kingdom, because the Kalmar Union did not come about by force or conquest, but rather by economic nessecity. We are talking about a union of autonomous countries (each with their own armies, laws, languages and governments) that were combined into an economic union that worked together.
That is closer to the EU than the UK.

The UK didn't come about by force or conquest either. Scotland went bankrupt so decided to merge with England (which had taken Wales and parts of Ireland by force, but the union between England and Scotland was primarily an economic one). Wales has a National Assembly. Scotland has it's own Parliament (which will be voting on a referendum in the coming year to decide whether they should become independent or not, how many conquered peoples have been able to do that?).

 

[RobinHat]

yeah, they haven't found any viking helmets yet right?

Hehe not with horns anyway... No 'viking' ever had horns on his helmet... EVER!

 

[nutnut]

Hehe not with horns anyway... No 'viking' ever had horns on his helmet... EVER!

Ceremonial Helmets quite often had helmets on them (as has been discovered by excavatig graves). It's helmets used in battle that have never had horns.