Uncle Paul
Bittereinder
Most western countries like Kruger better than AshokaDid you not listen to what I said? You are setting the search to South Africa specifically. That is obviously going to be biased.
Most western countries like Kruger better than AshokaDid you not listen to what I said? You are setting the search to South Africa specifically. That is obviously going to be biased.
I'd rather not have either. They're both about as bad, just in completely different ways.You really would take Mugabe (self-identified as the "African Hitler) over Dr. Malan?
Dr. Malan was nowhere near as bad as Mugabe.I'd rather not have either. They're both about as bad, just in completely different ways.
"Would you rather arsenic or cyanide in your coffee, my sweet. This choice is up to you?"
And while Ashoka could be a few other things, Kruger could be Freddy Kruger or Chad Kruger, each of whom has many more hits than Paul Kruger.Most western countries like Kruger better than Ashoka
Freddy Krueger and Chad Kroeger?And while Ashoka could be a few other things, Kruger could be Freddy Kruger or Chad Kruger, each of whom has many more hits than Paul Kruger.
Of course I don't think that Gandhi will leave, and I really have never minded him reoccurring like others. That also doesn't mean we can't get another like Chandragupta appearing in Civ 6. And of course Gandhi is much more well known, especially in South Africa. That doesn't mean he needs to be the only leader they use.Gandhi - civ legend, well-known in the West
Ashoka - obscure
It's not a theory.I think Henri Christophe has a very black-centric view of the world, similar to how I have a very Boer-centric (and to a lesser extent White-centric) view of the world. So in some ways, we are counterparts to each other. Horseshoe theory.
Spelling errors are often corrected by Google searches if they're close enough for the AI to figure out (at least in the most utilized languages on the Internet - I don't know about Afrikaans in that regard).Freddy Krueger and Chad Kroeger?
Already when civ3 came out 20 years ago users were more interested in adding wonders like Angkor Wat or the Taj Mahal than keeping adding another hundred wonders for each tiny monastery in western Europe.This game does not need more white colonialist civs if you ask me. Heck I think it has too many already.
An Irishman who starved because the potato crop failed did not.
Pretoria is named after Pretorius, and everyone knows the Krugerrand. Ashoka is obscure, I only know him because he was in Civ 4, but Gandhi is so much better known than Ashoka.
Yeah, not if you specify what you’re actually searching for so you don’t up with random people surnamed Kruger or random people named Ashoka (which I think is a thing?)Most western countries like Kruger better than Ashoka
This game is primarily (but not entirely) geared at western audiences, not Indian audiences.Regardless, Ashoka is almost twice as popular as Kruger worldwide when sorting by the historical category. This is with Kruger having a massive bias considering how many famous people are named Kruger. There is only one noteworthy historical Ashoka so the odds are stacked against him and he still came out on top.
And even if you (incorrectly it seems) think Kruger is more popular, Ashoka is still at least within the same ball park so he is hardly obscure and can definitely replace Gandhi.
No, there already is a Boer civ for Civ 5 and Civ 4 in a mod. I want a fully animated and voiced leader head for them in Civ 7, and for them to have the best uniques of any civ in that game.tl;dr are you going to make a Boer civilization or not? Or at least help somebody make it? Because so far all you're doing is still complain about how nobody acknowledges your superiority.
You're really reaching here.Spelling errors are often corrected by Google searches if they're close enough for the AI to figure out (at least in the most utilized languages on the Internet - I don't know about Afrikaans in that regard).
So two modern post-colonial states that were artificial creations of colonial powers? We don't need all the White colonial civs. Just the Boers, America, and maybe Australia, Canada, Argentina. (Brazil isn't majority White, neither is Colombia).You could probably pick any other random culture in Africa from Algeria to Zimbabwe and I’d be more interested tbh. This game does not need more white colonialist civs if you ask me. Heck I think it has too many already.
I didn't realize anti-Western sentiment was that popular back then in gaming circles.Already when civ3 came out 20 years ago users were more interested in adding wonders like Angkor Wat or the Taj Mahal than keeping adding another hundred wonders for each tiny monastery in western Europe.
What is your family's native language?Given how common a misconception it is, I feel I need to point out here that the Irish didn't starve during the Great Famine because their potato crop failed. There was well more than enough food being grown in Ireland to feed everyone on the island, but food that otherwise would've prevented the ~25% drop in population was instead exported to England to ensure that English landlords continued to make money off of their holdings in Ireland. The potato crop was also only so important in the first place because of extreme rents charged to Irish farmers that forced them to grow the most profitable crops they could and sell them to afford that rent, leaving only the areas difficult to grow profitable crops in for their own food consumption. Potatoes could grow in many of these areas - but not all potatoes, only specific strains, leading to an over reliance on a small variety of strains that made the area extremely susceptible to the potato blight. Even after all that, the British Empire actively chose not to give them food that had already gotten to Irish ports for the start of the famine. There was certainly a potato blight that impacted the crops grown in Ireland, but the famine was not caused by potato crop failure - the famine was an intentional choice of the British Empire. Not overly relevant to the topic of the thread, but given how commonly the deaths are attributed to crop failure and not intentional policy choices, I felt the need to clarify.
I was born in South Africa to a South African family and lived there for my youth, and I had to go search as to what the Krugerrand is. Pretoria is definitely better known, and I assumed it was named about someone, but I had no knowledge as to who Pretorius is. You're really wildly overestimating how well-known these figures are, particularly in comparison to someone who has already been in a Civ game.
Ashoka is apparently a common male Indian name. The question is, is Civ more popular in India, or in South Africa, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland?Yeah, not if you specify what you’re actually searching for so you don’t up with random people surnamed Kruger or random people named Ashoka (which I think is a thing?)
Thinking Ashoka is minor and obscure guy is absurd btw, he’s a major figure in Buddhist history, which is a major religion in East and Southeast Asia, where an absurd amount of people live? Not to mention having conquered most of India? Which has to mean relevance to at least 20% of the world’s population right there.
That's irrelevant, because you're ONCE AGAIN, after I brought up yesterday for you doing it twice, and several other times since you started posting, assuming the player base of Civ games lacks the greater knowledge of, and interest in, broader world history and figures within that they do, in fact, have above the typical Western, "everyperson," and assuming interest in Civ's is only is major European and European-descended Civ's, and, outside that, only with hugely-known names to the average Western, "everyperson." Every time you state this (false) assumption, you presumptuously insult the whole Civ player base, including everyone else in this thread and the several others you're involved in. Could you kindly cease and desist this practice?This game is primarily (but not entirely) geared at western audiences, not Indian audiences.
Ashoka is apparently a common male Indian name. The question is, is Civ more popular in India, or in South Africa, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland?
Now you want Civ7 to have Boers with BETTER uniques than all the rest of the civs in the game? Is that a joke?No, there already is a Boer civ for Civ 5 and Civ 4 in a mod. I want a fully animated and voiced leader head for them in Civ 7, and for them to have the best uniques of any civ in that game.
No, you are.You're really reaching here.
Might I suggest reading more carefully? I said from Algeria to Zimbabwe: from A to Z. So that includes basically everyone from the Akan to Benin, to Morocco, to the Swahili or the Yoruba.So two modern post-colonial states that were artificial creations of colonial powers? We don't need all the White colonial civs. Just the Boers, America, and maybe Australia, Canada, Argentina. (Brazil isn't majority White, neither is Colombia).
Again, I suggest reading more carefully, I said if you filter the results specific for those topics instead of a general web search, which is exactly what I have done (you’ll note the search term says “Ashoka (King)”).Ashoka is apparently a common male Indian name. The question is, is Civ more popular in India, or in South Africa, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland?
Way late to the party on this point, but I totally want Haiti as a civ. The first revolution that was really about freeing themselves from the bonds of slavery.No, about, equal in historical interest and significance, but Haiti comes out on top for warranting a Civ slot.
This game is primarily (but not entirely) geared at western audiences, not Indian audiences.
According to your link Ashoka is more commonly searched up in the U.S.Ashoka is apparently a common male Indian name. The question is, is Civ more popular in India, or in South Africa, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland?
I don't view it as particularly anti-Western sentiment in wanting to include actual wonders of the world like Taj Mahal in the game.I didn't realize anti-Western sentiment was that popular back then in gaming circles.
My family's native tongue is English, but if you're arguing that only Afrikaans South Africans are expected to know these figures that you're claiming are universally acclaimed (above and beyond extremely important historical figures like Ashoka), you're shooting your own argument in the foot, given there are ~3 million Afrikaans speakers world-wide.What is your family's native language?