Originally posted by Ruffinshot
Last I checked the game was called "Civilization", not "Nation-State". The Greeks were fractured into hundreds of distinct city-states, the Indians broken along linguistic and religious lines (still are), and the Germans not unified until the 19th century. Unity doesn't determine a culture.
Any group of people with a distinct culture (which usually entails common language, religion, taboos and mores, etc.) rates as far as deciding who can be a Civ. Generally the designers have tried to include the largest of them, and by that measure Celts should be included.
Last I checked the game was called "Civilization", not "Nation-State". The Greeks were fractured into hundreds of distinct city-states, the Indians broken along linguistic and religious lines (still are), and the Germans not unified until the 19th century. Unity doesn't determine a culture.
Any group of people with a distinct culture (which usually entails common language, religion, taboos and mores, etc.) rates as far as deciding who can be a Civ. Generally the designers have tried to include the largest of them, and by that measure Celts should be included.
Perfectly right, we're talking about "civilizations" here, and not only did the Celts overrun most of Europe, from Ireland to Ankara, in 387 BC they almost nipped the rise of the Roman Republic in the bud and Julius Caesar's first, last and only defeat in battle was at their hands, at Gergovia in 52 BC (anyone read "Asterix"?


As someone else suggested: use the editor!!! Oh, and the Zulus were the only sub-Saharan people which ever managed to defeat a colonial army in battle, so I guess that makes them at least as good a representative of this region as any other. And there's a highly interesting thread about the Iroquois somewhere. People who talk about "uncivilised barbarians" should perhaps first get informed about what they're talking about. Not to mention reviewing their attitude towards people who are different in general...
Comment