Mali Delenda Est

[Imran Siddiqui]

As for the Incas, they were more advanced than people often give them credit for. Don't compare the Malinese at their zenith with the Incas at their point of collapse.

I'm not. At both their peaks Mali pwned the Incas.

Here's some of the Incas' accomplishments: brain surgery using hardened copper and obsidian tools, 30,000 km of efficient roads, the civil service, a form of due process, constructing Machu Picchu in the mountains, in addition to being the dominant military power in their region.

This beats Mali how? And how does that impact the modern world in any way?

Maybe you aren't as Euro-centric as you are anti-African. People seem to slam the accomplishments of the "Dark Continent" as much as they can while holding up the tribes of the Americas. It seems as if people keep telling themselves that no one in Africa could have done anything worthwile to include themselves in such a game.

[General Ludd]

Africa is the birthplace of humanity. To say " Africa has had a much much smaller impact on the world than basically everyone else" is beyond ridiculous.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I'm not. At both their peaks Mali pwned the Incas.

Please don't write posts like a cellphone text message. Saying "pwned" doesn't strengthen your argument.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
This beats Mali how? And how does that impact the modern world in any way?

This is a moot point, because Mali hasn't had any big effect on the modern world either. Therefore, one must judge them by their impact on their day.

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to make 30,000 km of roads in the Andes, especially for that era?! That's quite a feat.

Anyway, as I've said before, who would you bet on in a cagematch? The Incas, a highly militaristic culture, millions of people spread across the western half of South America, or the Malinese, a confederation of trading cities in the sub-Saharan sahel with gold and camels who were destroyed by disunited Morocco, of all people.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Maybe you aren't as Euro-centric as you are anti-African.

Well, it depends on your definition. If you mean I hate black people, the answer is no. If you mean that after having studying all the civilizations of the world, I find many of Africa's contributions to the world to be less substantial than those of other civilizations, then yes. But I would clarify - I am Anti-Mali in Civ4. Calling me other names presents some interesting value judgments, especially when based on vague assumptions.

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
People seem to slam the accomplishments of the "Dark Continent" as much as they can while holding up the tribes of the Americas. It seems as if people keep telling themselves that no one in Africa could have done anything worthwile to include themselves in such a game.

I'm not "people." Do not make assumptions about what I think based on anything anyone has said to you in the past, rather only upon the things that I say.

Moreover, Mali ought to be destroyed.

[ArchdukeNewell]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Africa is the birthplace of humanity. To say " Africa has had a much much smaller impact on the world than basically everyone else" is beyond ridiculous.

This is relevent how? The game we're talking about is called "Civilization," not "the Hazy Mists of Millions of Years Ago." In recorded history, which is what we're talking about, Africa has had substantially less influence in the world than ANY other people. (At least, any other people that we're actually considering for Civ4. I mean, I'm sure Mali's achievements are greater than Melanesia's.)

I'm still waiting for someone to explain how Mali is greater than the Ottoman Empire.

[Alexander I]

I really don't see why we can't all have a reasonable discussion about this topic.

We can discuss any issue and disagree completely without the need for any personal attacks or name-calling.

Moreover, Mali ought to be destroyed. -A.01

[GeoModder]

Well, let's open another can of worms then:

There should at least one 'black' african civ be included just for the sake of proper representation of all of humanity in al it's colors and shapes.

[ArchdukeNewell]

Originally posted by GeoModder
Well, let's open another can of worms then:

There should at least one 'black' african civ be included just for the sake of proper representation of all of humanity in al it's colors and shapes.

Why? They don't include the Australoids (Aborigines, Pacific Islanders) or the Capoids (African Bushmen), so why Negroids only for diversity? Why not the freaking Inuit, for goodness' sake?

Explain to me why every race should be included? Once again, this game is entitled "Civilization IV," not "the Every Race Make Everybody Happy Game."

I don't care what race a civ is, it simply needs to meet certain criteria.

Political correctness might make some people feel good but it does not accurately represent anything.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by ArchdukeNewell
Why not the freaking Inuit, for goodness' sake?

Indeed, why not?

[ArchdukeNewell]

Originally posted by General Ludd


Indeed, why not?

Because they freaking live in IGLOOS, that's why!

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by ArchdukeNewell
Explain to me why every race should be included? Once again, this game is entitled "Civilization IV," not "the Every Race Make Everybody Happy Game."

Civ IV will also be moddable, and for the more casual modder (or scenariomaker if you want) it is easier to have the representative 'races' on Earth, that's the main reason for me.

I don't give a damn about political correctness for the simple reason that it is only 'fashion' of a given timeframe.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by ArchdukeNewell
I don't care what race a civ is, it simply needs to meet certain criteria.

The Mali brought literacy, organized religion, organized government, urbanism and trade in a region that was largely devoid of it all. They civilized the place. Please tell me how they aren't a civilization, I'm curious.

Political correctness might make some people feel good but it does not accurately represent anything.

Since when did Civ represent anything accurately?

[ArchdukeNewell]

Originally posted by Spiffor

The Mali brought literacy, organized religion, organized government, urbanism and trade in a region that was largely devoid of it all. They civilized the place. Please tell me how they aren't a civilization, I'm curious.

Since when did Civ represent anything accurately?

I never said they aren't a civilization! In fact, I think it was mentioned earlier that they most assuredly are.

However, my point remains that I do not rate it in the top 18 civs. With limited spots available, I think the top 18 civs in world history deserve to be in the first version of Civ4. Put Mali in an expansion.

And despite all of the Malinese achievements you list, the Ottomans outdid them in every last one of those, and they are being left out.

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by ArchdukeNewell


Because they freaking live in IGLOOS, that's why!

That just shows their ingenuity.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Alexander01

To the contrary, I've studied sub-saharan African civilizations to a great extent, including Mali, Songhai, Ghana, in addition to Benin, Kush, Axum, Meroe, Great Zimbabwe and the Bantu. I find them all quite fascinating. Nobody is saying that they aren't civilizations, as they most certainly are, only that they do not merit inclusion in Civ4. (At least, not until the expansions.)

My position is, and always has been, that Civs in the initial version of the game should be the civilizations with the greatest impact on the world.

I am not attempting to belittle Mali in any way, I just don't think they stand up to the towering, monolithic likes of China, India, or Persia, all of which have had a massive undisputed (and undisputable) impact on the entire world.

Furthermore, Moreover, Mali ought to be destroyed. -A.01

I believe that I posted this earlier. Mali is definitely a civilization. Moreover, Mali ought to be destroyed.

[sophist]

Originally posted by Alexander01
I really don't see why we can't all have a reasonable discussion about this topic.

We can discuss any issue and disagree completely without the need for any personal attacks or name-calling.

Moreover, Mali ought to be destroyed. -A.01

Constantly repeating that catch phrase does not help to achieve a reasonable discussion.