The Holy Roman Empire? Seriously?!

[monkspider]

"The Holy Roman Empire is neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire"
-Voltaire

Of all the stupid creative decisions that Firaxis has made for this expansion, from the Native (now North?) Americans to the freaking Cristo Redenator as a wonder of the world, this one really has to take the cake.

According to the latest IGN preview, one of the 10 new civs in BTS is the Holy Roman Empire. I guess that Firaxis forgot that Germany is already in the game? Or perhaps worse, is Germany going to be removed from the game now that the HRE is in?

It is just stupid, stupid, stupid, beyond stupid to include the HRE when Germany is already in the game. So is Frederick the Great, who was technically a ruler during HRE times going to stay with Germany or will he be be moved to the HRE? Should I be surprised we didn't' also see Italy in the new expansion? Or Mexico? Or maybe Iran?

For those who are unfamillar with the HRE, you can can learn more about them at this wikipedia article. Although it did include small portions outside of modern Germany, there is no doubt that the essential character of this confederation was German. And it wasn't really a civilization anyway, it was just an artificial construct of the pope.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Roman_Empire

While I applaud Firaxis for finally adding Ethiopia and Khmer, they really have been monumentally braindead in some of their creative decisions lately.

Oh, and De Gaulle and Lincoln instead of a second Japanese or Spanish leader? Utterly shameful.

But seriously here folks, the Holy Roman Empire? The mind just boggles. I know there are some bright people working on the BTS project. How on earth it ever came so far as to having the HRE as a separate civ, i will never know.

Frankly, this decision infuriates me to no end. Although BtS may be fated to receive high review scores because of the sheer amount of new content they dump on the player, it will always be a zero with me just for the unbelievable braindead idiocy that has been shown in some of their creative decisions.

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh.

[/meltdown]

[Guynemer]

We could mod them into Franks. And NA into Lakota. City lists would need tweeking, but it is an option.

[Will9]

I was very happy to know that discusstions had been left to the CFC where they have ~8 threads about this (that is spam even by Poly's standerds). The HRE was an Empire and was Christian (Holy). It was called Roman to claim protection of the Pope and to rival the Byzantine Empire. When it dissolved in 1806 was because it was Neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. That quote describes the HRE at the end of its life not during the Middle Ages.

German was only largest the culture in the HRE (I'm not sure you could call German a single culture at the time) Dutch, Austrians, Italians, Poles, Burgundians, and French (the last 3 were only on the edges for much of the HRE's life) Probably half the HRE was not German. You may use the excuss that the full name of the HRE was The Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. "of the German Nation" was in the late 1400s by the time it wasn't a real a country (more of a union). Frederick was a ruler when the HRE was still in exsistence, but as I just said, it wasn't a real country at that point. The HRE was far more that German.

About De Gualle and Lincoln, let your voice be heard!
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=167066

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by monkspider

Oh, and De Gaulle and Lincoln instead of a second Japanese or Spanish leader? Utterly shameful.

Well, I guess those will have to go on the modding list too.
I'd pick Meiji for Japan and El Cid for Spain.
(My reasons for choosing them instead of say, Nobunaga and Philip II are that Meiji's and El Cid's behaviors would be diametrically opposed to the current leaders, whereas those other leaders would basically be behavior clones of Tokugawa and Isabella). Anyway.

So now adding them to the list beside the Hebrews, Moors, and Barbarossa. I guess Barbarossa should go with the HRE instead of Germany, huh.

Just think of Charlemagne as the third German leader. With his own flag, UU, and UB. Extra diverse.

[Will9]

Originally posted by Alexander I


Well, I guess those will have to go on the modding list too.
I'd pick Meiji for Japan and El Cid for Spain.
(My reasons for choosing them instead of say, Nobunaga and Philip II are that Meiji's and El Cid's behaviors would be diametrically opposed to the current leaders, whereas those other leaders would basically be behavior clones of Tokugawa and Isabella). Anyway.

So now adding them to the list beside the Hebrews, Moors, and Barbarossa. I guess Barbarossa should go with the HRE instead of Germany, huh.

Just think of Charlemagne as the third German leader. With his own flag, UU, and UB. Extra diverse.

I think you should start talking to Dan about your own sub-forum. BTW, the Franks should be a separte civ with Charlemagne as its leader.

[LDiCesare]

Charlemagne is a leader of both France and Germany, and the HRE is Roman, French and German. You might mix in Spain since Charles V was a Holy Roman Emperor too... This civ is just out of place.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Will9

I think you should start talking to Dan about your own sub-forum. BTW, the Franks should be a separate civ with Charlemagne as its leader.

I wish. I need a team first, as I have neither coding nor graphical skills. I'd work as the coordinator, (I actually have a lot of ideas mapped out) and as the writer for any text (civilopedia, diplomacy, etc.). I don't plan on starting until after BtS comes out at any rate.

The point is basically to include any facets of the game that would make Civ4 a "complete" experience. As such, I would plan on including several aspects of different mods. However, this would not be a mod for including crappy things, such as caravan units or random unbalanced features.

Here's just a little of what I have planned:

New Civs/Leaders
Hebrews: Solomon (Spi, Fas)
Moors: Yakub al-Mansur (Cre, Fas)
Arabs: Harun al-Raschid (Phi, Fas)
Spanish: El Cid (Cha, Fas)
Japanese: Meiji (Ind, Fas)
HRE: Barbarossa (Org, Pro)

"Fas" stands for Fastidious, my current idea for a new trait. This is still tentative, and can be changed as the ideas solidify.

Originally posted by LDiCesare
Charlemagne is a leader of both France and Germany, and the HRE is Roman, French and German. You might mix in Spain since Charles V was a Holy Roman Emperor too... This civ is just out of place.

I'm thinking the HRE is the catchall European civ. It wouldn't fit entirely with France, Germany or Rome, so they made it its own.

[Dis]

wonder what the city lists for hre will be

[DrSpike]

It really doesn't matter which civs are in - as soon as they decided to put America in all historical discussion became moot, as it's obviously about including Civs Firaxis thinks people want to play.

HRE sounds kinda cool.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by monkspider
Although it did include small portions outside of modern Germany, there is no doubt that the essential character of this confederation was German.

You are absolutely right that the HRE was very much German, but much of the time they controlled huge territories outside Germany. If Firaxis' intention was to add a pan-European civ to the game in the HRE (which their UU also supports, the Landsknechte were sort of a Renaissance version of the French Foreign Legion), they would have a very strong case. Of course, wanting to add a pan-European civ to an already very crowded Europe would be a bit silly to say the least...

And it wasn't really a civilization anyway, it was just an artificial construct of the pope.

That's not true, for a long time they were a very powerful force in European politics. However, you are right that they weren't a civilization, they were a state (of the German civilization).

How on earth it ever came so far as to having the HRE as a separate civ, i will never know.

Isn't that obvious? They wanted to add Charlemagne to the game, that's got to be the one and only reason. And I think most of us can agree that Charlemagne is a great choice for a leader in Civ. However, that does create a problem: was Charlemagne French? German? Neither? Both? Assigning a civ to him is pretty much impossible and you're bound to piss of a lot of people no matter what you do -- a lose-lose situation for Firaxis, despite Charlemagne himself being such a good choice.

If you make Charlemagne French you (a) have 4 French leaders while lots of other civs still have only 1, as you pointed out yourself (and you need De Gaulle for the WW2 scenario) and (b) you piss of the Germans. If you make him German you piss of the French and that wouldn't be terribly accurate as he wasn't German at all, he just conquered a lot of territory in Germany and created the foundation for what would 200 years later become the HRE. You could make him Frankish but since the Merovingian and Carolingian Franks were the first French that doesn't make any sense at all, the late Franks and the early French are one and the same people. Since Charlemagne was a Holy Roman Emperor and created the foundation for the Holy Roman Empire you could make him leader of the HRE, but that's not accurate since the HRE wasn't created until 200 years later and was mostly Bavarian-Saxon, not Frankish/French.

So there's no good solution for Firaxis. Either making Charlemagne French or leaving him out of the game altogether would probably have made the most sense, but they decided otherwise. It rather smells like a compromise to me, which means everyone's equally unhappy. I know both Alexman and Trip (two of the main designers of course) well, they're both big history buffs and I highly doubt either of them would've lobbied for this situation, but making a game like Civ involves hundreds of people so unfortunately sometimes such decisions are unavoidable. If you don't like it, you can always mod it...

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending Firaxis. There can be no doubt that this was a bad call. But I at least understand how a decision like this came to be. They still got 8 out of 10 civs right though (VERY right even with civs like the Khmer and Ethiopians), which is frankly more than usual.

Frankly, this decision infuriates me to no end. Although BtS may be fated to receive high review scores because of the sheer amount of new content they dump on the player, it will always be a zero with me just for the unbelievable braindead idiocy that has been shown in some of their creative decisions.

That's preposterous. Just because of the HRE you give BtS a zero no matter what else they do and without having even played the game? All the other stuff is worth nothing at all just because of one tiny little decision that a single edit in the XML files can fix? Just set the bPlayable and bAIPlayable values for the HRE in CivilizationInfos.xml to 0 and you never even need to be reminded that the game shipped with the HRE, while you still get to enjoy all the other good stuff that's in there.

And even if it wasn't moddable, in the end the civ, wonders, building, unit, etc names are all just flavour. They don't determine how good or bad the game is, they can just make an already good game slightly better (or worse). Coming from me, one of the biggest whingers when it comes to this stuff (even if I do all my whinging away from the public eye these days) that's saying something

[Kuciwalker]

I'd rather have Charlemagne left out and the Hebrews in.

[Locutus]

I'd rather have 10 HREs than 1 Hebrew civ...

[Solver]

If you make him German you piss of the French

Sounds like a win-win to me

All the other stuff is worth nothing at all just because of one tiny little decision that a single edit in the XML files can fix? Just set the bPlayable and bAIPlayable values for the HRE in CivilizationInfos.xml to 0 and you never even need to be reminded that the game shipped with the HRE, while you still get to enjoy all the other good stuff that's in there.

Or better yet, just change the name to something you enjoy more. For example, rename the HRE to the Frankish Empire, and you have a different civ for which Charlemagne fits well.

[Pinchak]

I agree... HRE is redundant and stupid.

What is next? Post-comunism Russia?

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I'd rather have Charlemagne left out and the Hebrews in.

So let's properly mod the Hebrews in already! Anybody want to volunteer to help? If not, don't complain any more about it.

[Kuciwalker]

I'm allowed to complain about it not being in the official game

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I'm allowed to complain about it not being in the official game

But it doesn't do any good.

[monkspider]

Well, I thank Locutus for shedding a bit of light on Firaxis' reasoning. Is Charlemagne's leaderhead so distinct that he can't be passed off as, say, a Hungarian or Polish leader? I know, it sounds desperate, but this is just such a tragically dumb move. Pinchak made a better analogy than my attempts in the initial post. Does this mean we might see in the future a Soviet Union civ? A Vichy France civ? An Abbasid Caliphate civ? Seriously, the floodgates are open at this point.

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I'm allowed to complain about it not being in the official game

Quoted for truth. I am far from a proponent of Hebrew inclusion, but I would rather see them a thousand times than proto-Germany.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by monkspider
Does this mean we might see in the future a Soviet Union civ?

Well, you've already got them with Josef Stalin. They just don't have a different UU, UB, or flag than the Russians.

[Solver]

Is Charlemagne's leaderhead so distinct that he can't be passed off as, say, a Hungarian or Polish leader?

Like I said, I think you'd be better off renaming the civ itself. Charlemagne is a very worthy leader. The problem is more with the HRE civ itself, but no reason why you wouldn't mod him to belong to another civ.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Solver

Is Charlemagne's leaderhead so distinct that he can't be passed off as, say, a Hungarian or Polish leader?

Like I said, I think you'd be better off renaming the civ itself. Charlemagne is a very worthy leader. The problem is more with the HRE civ itself, but no reason why you wouldn't mod him to belong to another civ.

Indeed. Ol' Big Chuck can easily be modded into the French or the Germans, or the HRE can be renamed the Franks, Teutons, Carolingians, whatever you want ad nauseum.

[Virdrago]

When I do my modding, I'll just make Charlemagne leader of the Franks, and Sitting Bull leader of the Sioux (or make him one of the leaders of the Iroquois, despite the headress). I'd have to figure out a name change for the Totem Pole, though... what Native American culture had Dog Warriors? Anybody?

You could make him Frankish but since the Merovingian and Carolingian Franks were the first French that doesn't make any sense at all, the late Franks and the early French are one and the same people.

True. By the same token, the Byzantines were Romans who spoke Greek, and still considered themselves the Roman Empire until the Ottomans took Constantinople in 1453. Only historians today call them the Byzantine Empire, and only because Rome had fallen by then, and calling it the Roman Empire 1000 years after the fall of Rome would make no sense either.

That's why I believe Franks would have been just fine.

I'm happy about the rest, though. I'm certain we'll get Siam and Morocco later (and the Hittites), either in the next XP or Civ 5.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Alexander I
But it doesn't do any good.

If enough people whine about the lack of Hebrews, they might come in Civ 5.

[monkspider]

Originally posted by Virdrago

I'm happy about the rest, though. I'm certain we'll get Siam and Morocco later (and the Hittites), either in the next XP or Civ 5.

Alright, time for a thread hijack. Does everyone else agree that this will be the last XP? They probably could have stretched things out for another XP if they didn't include so many new civs in this one.

There really isn't enough quality civs left to justify a third XP at this point. There is Siam, Hebrews, Poland, Polynesia, maybe someone like the Hittites or Assyrians, maybe a modern nation like Australia, but that's it, and I would consider those to be definite third string civs. There are still a lot of leaders for existing civs like the always mentioned Spain/Japan/Arabs. But with all the new units, techs and so on, I think they have pretty much shot their load on what could possibly be added at this point unless they go for something that totally expands the scope of the game, like a new "future" age beyond the modern age.

Are we all pretty much in agreement on this?

[Robert Plomp]

The "Charlemagne must be in civ" argument is pretty good. He's indeed maybe one of the most important leaders on earth ever anyway. He had a huge impact on Europe, and therefor on the world.

I think it's a pitty though that he hasn't been named "Carl the Great" though. But maybe he'll be named like that in European versions of civ? I never heard of Charlemagne, untill someone pointed out to me that he's Carl the Great. Carl the Great is known among everybody who at least payed attention at least 10 seconds during history lessons.

@America in as a civ:
yes, obviously America should be in as a civ. Maybe the USA doesn't have old roots or something, but they're clearly a dominant civilization in the modern times. The influence of jeans, coca cola, Mcdonalds and Hollywood all over the world justifies the inclusion of the USA already. And the USSR is already in, in fact, since Stalin is in. Ok, it's called Russia, but the USA is being called America as well, so that doesn't really make a change.

@Hebrews
I think that the Hebrews really really deserve to be in the game. Maybe they're small but their cultural impact on the world is huge, if not only for the reason that 2 of the major world religions (Christianity, Islam) have their offspring in some way in the Hebrew history. Not to start about their scientific influence in modern days, 160 noble price winners anyone!!??. And obviously their impact in modern times regarding the Middle East Problem.

It's a pitty that there are still no Hebrews in since there are many interesting scenarios waiting!
They're most probably not in b/c political reasons, and the fear for antisemitism. But once again, Judaism is in the game as a religion, and there haven't been huge islamitic demonstrations in front of the Firaxis office because "Saladin converted to Judaism" so far anyway. (Not to mention that I couldn't spread Islam to Arabia in one of my last games )

[Robert Plomp]

Can someone explain to me why Poland is considered to be a 'major' civ? I don't want to be cruel against the Polish people, but seriously..........

[Locutus]

Originally posted by CyberShy
I think it's a pitty though that he hasn't been named "Carl the Great" though. But maybe he'll be named like that in European versions of civ? I never heard of Charlemagne, untill someone pointed out to me that he's Carl the Great. Carl the Great is known among everybody who at least payed attention at least 10 seconds during history lessons.

He's called Charlemagne because that was his name: that is the Latinised version of his name and Latin was the lingua franca in those days (his native name was in some ancient Franconian language that doesn't exist anymore, I don't know if we know even what he was called in that). He's called that or something similar to that in most major European languages (French, English, Spanish, Italian), so most of the world knows him as such. Only in German, Scandinavian and Dutch is his name a variation of Karl der Große. If you never heard of the name Charlemagne that is an error on your side, not Firaxis's.

[Robert Plomp]

i will not blame Firaxis for the fact that I didn't knew Charlemagne = Karel de Grote before I heard it from BtS

I do not blame myself either. It's not as if I'm deep into history, but I've always payed attention during history lessons, and he's never been named "Charlemagne" during those lessons, neither have I ever seen that name in papers, magazines or anything, and it's not as if I haven't read many papers (Trouw, Volkskrant, AD, Elsevier, VN, HP de Tijd, Quest, Donald Duck )

[Locutus]

Then you've had shabby history classes (which granted is pretty much a given for anything below university-level education) and read all the wrong things

[Robert Plomp]

Originally posted by Locutus
Then you've had shabby history classes (which granted is pretty much a given for anything below university-level education) and read all the wrong things

Or you just did got an academical education and think that everybody who's not that educated on your specialism is either dumb or got a crappy education