Expansion Pack Civs (Part 4): A never-ending story?

[Jer8m8]

Just pointing out, but you might want to link Yin's thread about Korea where you have links of expansion pack civs explained

[Dinner]

Why is it every Civ de jour who puts up a thread seems to get all sorts of instint converts even if there really isn't a case? This is so depressing I might just go back to drumming up votes for Scotland. At least they have a semi-reasonable case for inclusion... unlike most of the other "why XXXX should be included" civs.

[Jofre]

Ok, XarXo, you're a bit exagerated to me, but I agree your ideas, so...

Catalans -20
Spanish -20


and...


Crown of Aragon +20
Castilla +20

Now, please, use the thread to post info about Aragon, not only for useless discussions.

[Kazimierz]

My votes...if can give. (Modified)

Hello!

I've been trying to follow the threads on this topic, but with their length, it has been hard and gave up. Jumping to the end, I would like to give a couple civs. My choices are based on being a history teacher, an American, speaker of 4 languages (and dabbler in ~ 5 others)....strange for an American, I know!

Here they are:

Poland +20 (Central Political Figure In East/Central Europe 900- [w/ leader Kazimierz III Wielki] 1795)
Spain +10 (Political Force/Colonist 1490-1800's)

Arab +20 (Major Political/Cultural Force)
[w/ leader Mohammed (faceless of course)]

Magyar/Hungary +10

S.E. Asian (Khmer/Thai/Etc.) +10

Kush (region of current day Sudan--offsets power of Egypt) +10


My humble additions...hopefully I didn't miss something important in the "overlooked" posts. (Modified to meet rules of thread)

Kazimierz - Minnesota, USA

[Locutus]

Kazimierz,
I'm afraid I can't count your post like that. As described in the rules (second post of the thread), you must vote for at least 6 civs and give at least 80 points (and at most 16/160). If you change it I will count it of course...

Jer8m8,
I considered linking to the Korean thread but a large portion of that thread is fairly irrelevant discussion and the whole things doesn't exactly have the compactness and overview of the other threads. If noone else beats me to it I'll make a summary of all the info in that thread (and possibly other sources) and post it in a new thread (together with the Poles, for whom the same applies).

All,
I will try to update soon again but with Civ3 being released and me having an awful lot of duties for both school and CtP2 modding (contrary to Firaxis I *do* keep my promises, no matter how inconvenient they can be), it might take a few days...

[dasaecorvic]

votes

Hello all, these are my votes:

Spanish 20
Mongols 20
Arab 20
Inca 20
Vikings 20
Turks/Ottomans 20

Greetings.

[Pyrodrew]

Point Adjustments

Point Adjustments (after reading various additional points & counterpoints on these civs as well as giving additional thought to balance on this):

Turks/Ottoman + 4
Inca +4
Dutch + 2
Poles/Polish +1
Byzantine -6
Huns -6
------------------
Difference = -1


New List

Mongols = 20
Spanish = 20
Vikings = 20
Arabs = 15
Australians = 11
Brazilians = 11
Inca = 11
Turks/Ottoman = 11
Dutch = 7
Phoenicians/Carthaginians = 7
Poles/Polish = 7
Czech = 6
Hungarians = 6
Swedes = 6
_________________

New Total = 158 (was 159)

[Myrddin]

The list needs to be amended as the Mayans are in Civ III - look at the barbarian cities list in the editor

[jasev]

Are you saying Mayans are in Civ3 as a barbarians?????
If so, I can't doubt the guys in firaxis are completely crazy.

[Spathi]

Go Polynesia!

C'mon people, Vote Polynesia! One more vote (maybe two after Locutus updates) and they make the top 16!

By the way, I assume we're making Polynesia represent a general Pacific civ, including Hawaii, Micronesia, New Caledonia, New Zealand etc. (well maybe not NZ). If so, may I suggest we move the New Zealander votes to the Polynesian category? This is especially true given that, if the screenshots are accurate, there isn't a New Zealand on the Civ 3 world map.

Fun Pacific Fact of the Day:

The island country of Nauru is the smallest republic in the world. It is also the only country which does not have an official Capital City.

Also, did you know that scientists believe the Australian Aborigines invented seafaring centuries, maybe even millennia (I don't remember) before ANY other civilization, got to the Australian continent, then promptly forgot how to navigate the ocean?

[Trifna]

Huns=Mongols

I just wanted to say a little something about Huns, which many persons have put in their choice.

I saw somewhere (Encarta?) that in fact they would be a last part of the Mongol civilisation.

[kochman]

i don't really think it would make sence to have the hebrews as a civ (despite the fact that i'm jewish). its just that they never really had much of an empire. it was just that tiny strip of land about the size of connecticut. but, i think that there should be some jewish influence in the world.even though it's like .002% of the world, can u name one person who hasn't had bagles and locks (smoked salmon for all you non-new yorkers)? the arabs though, would make for a good civ

[Va-Toran]

My second update after doing a bit more research:

Austrians -15 (Austria was part of medieval Germany)

Mayans +10
Mali +5

Altered Post

Arabs 20
Spanish 20
Turks 20
Mongols 15
Vikings 15
Incans 10
Dutch 10
Mali 10
Mayans 10
Phoenicians 10
Portugeuse 10
Assyrian 5
Celts 5

[Trifna]

a changing

By reading a little of the Britannica Encyclopedia (on computer, I like it :-), I concluded that Goths were in fact more a division of some other cultures and were in fact englobed in Germanic culture, so I needed to change a little my voting. By the way, I'll say about my vote concerning Aborigens that Aborigens seem to me very distinct culturally. They were on Australia and islands around it. I also say that I consider Incas and Mayas of a general same culture than Aztecs. That's why I think they are within Aztecs.


Here are the new score I give and the difference with my old one:

Aborigines 12 (+4)
Khmers 14 (+2)
Polynesians (or the name that would define them) 14 (+4)
Hebrews/Jews 15 (+1)
Arabs 16 (-1)
Spanish 16 (-1)
Mongol 16 (-1)
Goths 0 (-17)
Celts 15
Viking 15 (+3)
Algonquiens 15 (+3) (they are the other (very distinct) cultural type of native Amerindians with Iroquois. I include Inuits and lots of others in Algonquiens)
Phoenicians/Carthage 12 (+3)

[Trifna]

Algonquiens

I wanted to point something that it seems I'm the only to aprove yet (for some unknown reasons, maybe people don't know them?).


There were two distinct general native Americans: Iroquois and Algonquiens (we lurn it in history casses in Canada).
Iroquois are matriarcal, opposit for Algonquiens. Iroquois are at war, opposit for Algonquiens (very pacifists). They are totaly distinct which also conducted to some conflicts between Iroquois and Algonquiens. During France/England colonization wars, they each took a different side.

Inuit/Eskimos/Aleutians, culturally, are in fact a branch of Algonquiens even if they developed differently because of the hard weather. But Algonquiens are from way in the north (like in Quebec), til we call them Inuit, right to the south.

So, any comments? Is there a reason why I'm alone who voted Algonquiens (which seems pretty logical to me) or is it because no one thought to it?