Expansion Pack Civs (Part 3): Just one more...

[jdd2007]

so let me get this straight, i have 3 left.

+3 malians

[Gramphos]

Locutus,
how long do you plan to keep this poll open?
(I'm dying to find out what the Apolyton Program is about )

Please stop the poll before the Neanderthals reach top 32...

[lukasz]

Poles 20
Ukrainians 20
Czech 20
Slavic 20
LithuUzbek 20

[lukasz]

..... and 20 for canada

[Lumpkin]

Spanish 19
Portuguese 20
Dutch 20
Turkish/Ottamons 20
Incas 20
Khmer 20
Ethiopians 20
Koreans 20
Fatty Lumpkins 1

Looking over the top 16 civs im quite surprised by some of the choices

I don't see why everybody is so keen on the Mongols. IMHO they were just a very sucessful barbarian horde. They briefly took over half the world, and then immediately collapsed into lots of little, rapidly distintegrating fiefdoms. They didn't found any cities and they didn't lead to any progress.

I also don't think the Celts or Vikings should be civs for the same reason. The Celts is just very loose term used to a very widespread culture which never come close to being united. The Viking is just a word which means "pirate" and applies to two seperate, rival cultures - the Norwegians and the Danes. These cultures formed independant fiefdoms which usually quickly dissapeared so I don't think they can be considered proper civs either.

I don't know enough about Arab history to say whether they should be included but as far as I'm aware when people talk of "the Arabs" they are referring to a culture not to any historical, unified empire. So I don't think they should be included either.

The one that surprised me as the Byzantines. They are just the eastern-half of the Roman Empire after it split in two. We may as well have another civilization called "the Roman Empire in the West".

The civs I've chosen were all unified, long-lasting, organised empires who excelled and made big impacts either on a world scale (Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese and Turks) or on a continental scale (Khmer, Koreans, Ethiopeans and Incas) and because they were not formed as a rebel off-shoot of another civilization. Or because they're cool (Fatty Lumpkins)

[orange]

wow, didn't know I still had points left to vote with.

Add 10 more to Celts

[mactbone]

Hey Lumpkin, start a new thread if you want to debate about how relevant a civ is. That's how the Poles are getting their votes. Anyways, who says that the Vikings, Celts, and Mongols *aren't* cool?

[Lumpkin]

One post on and I've changed my mind

More small civs need my help!

Spanish: -15
Inca: -15
Turks: -15
Maya: +5
Assyria: +20
Mali: +20

Everything else stays the same

[Boris Godunov]

My points.

Ottoman Turks - 20
Hebrews/Jews - 20
Poland-Lithuania (or Polish, whatever) - 20
Incas - 20
Venetians/Italians - 20
Carthaginians - 20
Spanish - 20
Austrians - 20

NOTE - I categorically reject the Iroqious/Sioux/etc., as these were tribes, not civs. They didn't build cities. How can we play civ true to their cultures and have them build cities?

Cheers.

[borg]

Poles 20
Slavs 20
Serbs 20

[ogotai]

At last, MY wotes:

Poles 20
Spanish 10
Portuguese 10


Alexander01:
"Polish - Jan Sobieski - Winged Hussar - Warsaw" - I think it would be better: Jan III Sobieski

Locutus:
"The Polish indeed pushed the Polynesians out of the top 16; they are now #14, 10 places higher than a week ago or so... Personally, I'm not sure if I'm extremely happy with this development; not that I dislike the Polish (heck, I voted for them myself!) but as it is, half the civs from the top 16 are European, while historically very important areas such as Oceania (Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans..."

It is interesting what you are saing - specially: while historically very important areas such as Oceania (Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans...

Maybe you didn't know, that Australia was kolonized by the British, and nations like: Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans are nothing more than Siux or Apaches (something like that... my english should be better, but I don't like to study :P )

[Solmyr]

My votes:

Byzantines 20
Ottoman Turks 20
Arabs 20
Vikings/Normans 10
Mongols 10
Spanish 5
Khmers 5
Incas 5
Maya 5
Koreans 5
Poles 5
Hebrews 5
Assyrians 5
Armenians 5
Georgians (the ones in the Caucasus) 5
Serbs 5
Bulgars 5

[Solmyr]

Originally posted by Alexander01
Celts - Boadicea - Woad Raider - La Tene

REPLY: La Tene is not a city AFAIK, it's the name given by modern archeologists to a particular Celtic culture. I'm not sure what would be a good choice - Caernarvon, perhaps, like in Civ2, or Scone.

Arabs - Saladin - Xebec - Mecca
Turks - Suleiman - Janissary - Baghdad

REPLY: Odd choices to say the least. Arabs should have Baghdad as capital. Turks should have Constantinople if Byzantines are not included, otherwise Bursa if they are meant to be Ottoman Turks (they can conquer Constantinople later) or Konya if Turks in general.

[Tarquinius]

Personally, I'm not sure if I'm extremely happy with this development; not that I dislike the Polish (heck, I voted for them myself!) but as it is, half the civs from the top 16 are European, while historically very important areas such as Oceania (Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans - okay, maybe not extremely important historically but the area still covers something like 1/3th (if not more) of the earth's surface!), South East Asia (Siam, Annam, Khmer) and sub-Saharan Africa (Mali, Ghana, Zimbabwe - not the pathetic Zulu!) are not represented at all

Ok, you have a point here Locutus, Ill modify my vote a bit (to make you happy )

-20 Swedes, +20 Khmer

[Chris Horscroft]

Thanks for for the correction Locutus.

Would you mind modifying my vote slightly?

Siam - 5
Khmer + 15

That should use up my remaining 10, and reflect my new, more accurate understanding of South East Asian history!

Cheers

Chris