Israel

[notyoueither]

Biggest argument against Israel as a civ in the basic game is that they were not the first in the immediate area.

Would you replace Egypt?

[Joseph]

Originally posted by DarkCloud




Sorry Sirotnikov- no nation on Earth was as technologically advanced as the Chinese until the late middle ages in Europe- they invented the rocket, paper, the printing press, advanced agricultural tools, basic geology, navigated to the tip of africa, traded with half of the known world, and did much much more.

Zhongwen shi hen da hao

Sorry the Printing Press was invented in Korea.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Ah yes, but it took ages for their inventions to ever take fame, and until the late medeival times, they haven't really affected a huge part of the world.

Printed press in china had very little effect on the world. On the other hand, once it got to europe and people began printing books, bibles, newspapers and what not - there began a revolution of thought.

Um, yeah. It affected THEIR PART of the world, it's just that their culture wasn't particularly exploration-inclined, so it never got much further.

Not that I'm saying chinese shouldn't be included though.

The Israelite Jews haven't invented too much. Many of the laws and religious rules were already developed in ancient Babylon and Sumaria. The difference is - Israelites eventually knew how to market it well enough. Though we do owe quite alot to one bloke called Jeshua from Nazareth ;-)

Israel wasn't a huge super-power, but it was a power to consider. It was much more influtential eventually than the hitties, moabites, knaanites, adomites or what not. And it is the only one of those cultures that still has an effect on the world.

Israel probably should have been a civ3 civ, given the number of civs they included; but they shouldn't be a civ4 civ. Every one of the civs included, possibly excepting mali (since i know squat about mali) and the aztecs, has had a bigger role in the world than Israel. Religion just doesn't cut it ... Jews have never amounted to a significant portion of the world's population, have never had a world or even significantly sized regional empire, and frankly have had little effect on either christians or muslims, except for being targets of abuse.

Christianity borrows more from pagan religions than it does from Judaism; although it technically springs from the Jewish faith, that's pretty technical; most of the holidays are pagan (Christmas, Easter), the religious mythology is primarily pagan (rising from the dead after 3 days comes directly out of one myth, I'm too tired to recall which, go read the davinci code or something ); and even the Catholic mass is primarily pagan (although the format is half based on jewish services, nearly all of the symbolism and symbols, plus the more-important second half of the mass, are based on pagan artifacts - particularly the eating of the body and blood of christ).

Anyhow, the great thing about civ is you can just MAKE an israeli civilization. I'm sure there are plenty of people who'd want to do that.

[tuckson]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Biggest argument against Israel as a civ in the basic game is that they were not the first in the immediate area.

Would you replace Egypt?

Right, and ehhh... America was?

Or Germany?
Or france?
Or... (you name it?)

Civ is a mixture of civs that are powerful nowadays and civs that had their glorytime long ago.

Whatever u say on Israël, the fact that nearly 2000 years after their destruction the nation is re-established and is florishing (in spite of the continuous war-like situation) is quite an achievement imho.

[Senethro]

I disagree that theres an achievement. I think its more culture myth that modern Israel is somehow a legitamate successor to the ancient state.

Basically, Snoopy is right. And little more need be said than that.

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by GeoModder
Not a single civilization really affected a "huge" part of the world by that definition (until the late middle ages for precision).

Not true.
Romans, Greeks, Phoenicians did.

Btw, I would for instance include another middle eastern or african civilization, instead of some of the american ones.

Merely a cultural difference. And that 'revolution of thought' in Europe was also the pretext for some horrible religious wars in that continent.

It is an important cultural difference. Makes a difference whether an empire was an influencial one or not. Eventually, much more people follow the bible than Hammurabi's laws.

And factually, the gunpowder for instance, had very little affect on our world today, before it reached europe. This is exactly history.

I'm just saying that its a nation's effect on history that should be more important.


The last part of the statement is a bit awkward. Lets agree that being judgemental of civilization's actions accoring to a current moral standard is silly. By this standard you could write off the roman, greek, mongol and arab effect on the world, since it often involved very bloody wars.


Anyways, this is an unrelated arguement about china's achievements as a nation, so I think we should minimize it.

[GeoModder]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
Not true.
Romans, Greeks, Phoenicians did.

Check the original post again, and think it through...
In particular the defintion used by the original poster;

[DarkCloud]

Originally posted by Joseph
Sorry the Printing Press was invented in Korea.

Show me who claims that

---

they got all that tech-and just stopped. europe kept going,even when out-teched and what did china really add to the world?yeah they got that stuff...but the western areas duplicated most of it independently later

Answer to the first point:

1.) True. They just stopped at a point, yes.
And so did the Europeans (Don't you remember the "dark ages"??) And now, like the Europeans, the Chinese have started researching again.

The chinese were ahead of them from basically 2000 BC until 1600 AD... I think that is reason enough to give them commendation. IT's not the most recent works that have meaning to the world- it's what's already happened.

2.) China certainly improved the standard of living in China. And many of hteir products were mcuh demanded in Europe as of the 1400-1600s, heck, even the Romans purchased chinese goods. The arab world too did a brisk trade.

And to bicker that chinese inventions didn't 'improve the world', well, that's really a tedious argument- because European inventions honestly were only ever fully applied in Europe- the nation that invents a secret likes to keep it. It just so happens that the Chinese were better about keeping their secrets and expertise than the Europeans.

3.) As for the west inventing it independently... some things perhaps- but: the printing press and paper came from china- Gutenberg based his designs on chinese inventions

[DarkCloud]

quote:
Originally posted by GeoModder
Not a single civilization really affected a "huge" part of the world by that definition (until the late middle ages for precision).

Not true.
Romans, Greeks, Phoenicians did.

Btw, I would for instance include another middle eastern or african civilization, instead of some of the american ones.

Sirotnikov- I think that you forget that Asia is as large as Europe- indeed, even larger. China had a huge effect on Korea, and southeast asia- and frankly, China is almost as large as the United States of America- and the US is almost as large as the combined EU- so frankly- China has been more or less, been a gigantic influence on a large part of the world

[Joseph]

Originally posted by DarkCloud


Show me who claims that

We had a big discussion over at the FFZ about who invented what. Chris 62 remember him, look it up.

[FrostyBoy]

Out of all the Civilizations in the world, China would be the most appropriate one to put in the game, then the Romans, then the English.

After that. well, who cares.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov




Don't forget the classic:

Civ X doesn't deserve to be in the game! Civ X never did anything for the world, and Civs A, B and C are worthier, and they're not in the game. Why, Civ X never even accomplished [insert arbitrary cultural delineator Z here]. This is just political correctness run amok! Aaaaarrghffffllppppbbbbbbbbt!!! *foam, snarl*

Also:

Civ X doesn't deserve to be in the game! Civ X is only a couple hundred years old!

[FrostyBoy]

No need for the X on that one Kuci

[Mart]

Re: Israel

Originally posted by Sharule
After watching CivIV for a few months, the only complaint that I have is that Israel isnt in the game.

Sharule, I think that Firaxis decided on the set of civilizations based on some criteria. I would not form any conclusions that since some civ is not included in this set of civs, it means that it is less significant than those present there. I think that one of the strong factors was simply limited number of civs Firaxis was able to make within time limits and resources. I see the set more like some interesting representation of variety of cultures present on Earth.
Probably soon a lot of civs will be modded in by either Firaxis or players that will do it with the same quality as the game creator team.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Joseph
We had a big discussion over at the FFZ about who invented what. Chris 62 remember him, look it up.

Well, he's flat wrong, as usual. I remember an argument I had with him once wherein he claimed that the disappeared Roanoke colony was massacred by natives (saying the village was burned). Of course, this is preposterously untrue, as the village was intact and all the evidence suggests the colonists moved inland and integrated with the natives.

Block printing was being done in China in the 9th century C.E., and moveable type was invented there in 1041 C.E. by Bi Sheng. The metal type the Koreans invented didn't come until over a century or more later.