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

[Jay Bee]

...and, let's not forget, Korea is hosting the World Cup!

[ranskaldan]

Are you saying that adding the Arabs takes precedence over adding the Spanish, Vikings, Mongols, Koreans, Portuguese, Dutch, Turks, and Indo-Malays (or Khmer, whatever)?

of course!! without a shred of doubt, I'd place the Arabs over all of the civs you've named, except the Spanish maybe.

In fact, I think that the Arabs are about as important and deserving as the Romans, Chinese, or Egyptians. Now no one, I believe, doubts that there should be these three civs in any civ game.

The Arab contribution to human civilization is as great as the Roman or Chinese contribution.

For the 'overlapping' argument and why it doesn't work in this case, please see http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...threadid=30518.

[Ribannah]

Re: Re: Re: How can you leave out the Spanish?

Originally posted by siredgar
Also, why did they include TWO native American civilizations? The Aztecs are acceptable, but they should have dropped the Iroquois and put the Spanish in instead. After all, what did the Iroquois really achieve besides getting wiped out by the Americans?

For your information, the Iroquois are still alive and kicking, with their own governments. Their main achievements before European contact were agricultural, social and political. Trading knowledge as well as goods with the Europeans led the Iroquois into their Golden Age, hand-in-hand with their natural allies the Dutch.
In 1680 their empire reached its maximum size and until the American Revolution, when the confederacy fell apart with Iroquois fighting on both sides, they remained a superpower in their part of the world. The individual tribes did not decline, there are more Iroquois around today than in 1680, but the sheer number of immigrants to the USA turned them into small minorities.

As for the Incas, do you really need them if you have the Aztecs?

Depends on your definition of Incas. The Inca empire was simply a new dynasty in pretty much the same area ruling the same peoples as before since Tiahuanica, much like Egypt and China, so if you include the earlier kingdoms they clearly surpass the Aztecs IMHO. But the Mayas are still my number 1 choice south of the USA.

Indo-Malays:

Good choice. A more common name would be Polynesians though.

[mfauzi]

Re: Re: Re: Re: How can you leave out the Spanish?

About the indo-malays. Take note that for hundreds of years (maybe a thousand), the Malayans and Javanese went down their own cultural path. In these times, they have more or less existed in their own countries, Malaysia and Indonesia, with the Javanese dominating over the other cultures within Indonesia. Malaysia though is largely Malayans and Chinese, with some indegineous tribes and Indians (west indians from the Indians subcontinent) as minorities

Oh yeah, and these are separate from the indo-chinese which consists of Thais (or siamese), burmese, Khmer, viet.

Of course, you can't get all these people in or you might as well make a South East Asia Mod or scenario for them

[JayKay]

siredgar: You do have a point!

Originally posted by siredgar
Please check out Yin's thread!

I've always been a supporter of underdogs and Korea has long been overlooked despite its impressive achievements during the 15th and 16th centuries: world's first moveable print and ironclad, as well as accomplishments in language, literature, and the arts.

As i said i already knew that, but i don't think they made a best use out of them! (but i really don't know much of their history, only their acomplishments - but i'll take a look to that thread)

Originally posted by siredgar
In terms of playing on a real world map, if we already have England, France, Germany, Rome, and Russia in Europe and plan on adding Spain, Portugal, Holland, Scandinavia, and Turkey, then why can't we add Mongolia, Korea, and Khmer to China, Japan, and India in Asia? After all, Europe is how many times smaller than Asia?

Hmmm...you do have a point here! And Europe is far more crowding than Asia!

BTW, perhaps we can make up new African and American Civilizations, since there's so many in Europe and Asia, it would seem unfair to let Egyptians and Zulus have all the Africa for themselves (perhaps the continent more resourcefull) and Americans/Iroquois with North America and Aztechs with all the South America!

Of course historically, the American and African Continent would be far less crowded, but that (in the game) would lead to the unfair expansion room for those tribes and would make the game very unbalanced! Let me know what you think!
_________________________________________________



Portugal
Nation of: Magellan's (from Magellan's Expedition);
Vasco da Gama (Discoverer of the Maritime path to India);
and Pedro Álvares Cabral (Discoverer of Brazil in 1500)

[MarkG]

Since locutus is returning to ctp2(sorry to see you go!), i think we can declare the end of this poll

it has run for months anyway!

[orange]

A beautiful list of Civs...

I agree with all but the Israeli...thank God we got Byzantines out of there

[pithorr]

Originally posted by Jay Bee
...and, let's not forget, Korea is hosting the World Cup!

Yes, together with Japan, it's enough...
However no chance against Poland and Portugal in qualifiers, man...
Now you can see that Portuguese and Polish civs are more important than Korean one...
(Not mentioning USA at all...)

[Shaka Naldur]

the Byzantines are off the top16

I´m not sure if I voted for them or not, what a pity

[Jrad]

Jewish/Israeli special unit

Mossad, upgraded version of the Paratrooper! Its logical, at least to me...

[Makeo]

I still protest the prescence of the Fatties. When my kittycats are excluded.

[Keygen]

Originally posted by Shaka Naldur
the Byzantines are off the top16

I´m not sure if I voted for them or not, what a pity

I guess people do not understand the importance of that civilization and its huge contribution to the shape of the modern world.

a) For near a millenium they kept off Europe several ambitious civilizations. They prevented the Persians from expanding to Eastern Mediteranean & Minor Asia therefore Europe as next target, Arabs from entering Europe from the east and slowed a bit several Turkish tribes (Seljuks, Ottomans, etc.) to expand toward west.
Therefore if Byzantine empire had colapsed several centuries earlier it would be uncertain whether modern Europe would be what is now. They could worship Allah and speaking Arabic by now for instance.
They might not had grown as much as they did so they might not had the strength to deal with invaders comming from all directions.

b) The cultural rousement that took place in Europe known as Renaissance was prepared by the occupation of Byzantine lands during 13th century and triggered by the massive Byzantine refugee wave toward Europe created from the gradual collapse of Byzantium during the 14th & 15th centuries. Do not tell me that it was a coincidence. Such things in such magnitude simply does not happen by coincidence

So Europe without Byzantine empire probably would not had the chance to gradually overtake the entire world during the centuries that followed the fall of Byzantium and Western culture would not had a chance to dominate.

[Locutus]

Aaaaaahhh, this brings back some nice memories Thanks for the bump, Makeo