APOLYTON EXTRACIVS PACK.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Locutus
Stuie,
You bring up a very important issue. I asked (maybe a bit too implicitly?) in my first post if it was appropriate at all to mess with the existing civs but since noone responded to it or seemed to object to it (until now), I assumed noone really had a problem with it. ...

Thanks for at least taking the time to register my concern, Locutus. If a compromise solution is pursued, I will help with the areas I previously mentioned in my original post: development of the Ethiopians and playtesting.

[Locutus]

Then you have a very weird bible 'cause that's the 3rd commandment. Here is a website which offers 10 different, highly respected, (English) Bible translations (plus a whole bunch of non-English translations). In all versions, the second commandment is similar in meaning: "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." (Exodus 20-4). I once compared portions of the NIV version (first one on the website) with the original Greek (well, 'original', the real original Old Testament is in Hebrew of course but I don't speak Hebrew and the New Testament *was* written in Greek - the differences between NIV and NT should be similiar to NIV and OT) and it's quite similar. So, as I said, if your Bible says the second commandment is about not using God's name in vain, you have a very weird version of the Bible (that's the problem with translations: they're not the original anymore but an interpretation of the original; I always prefer reading originals over translations but my Greek is too rusty for that in case of the Bible)...

But now even I am getting off-topic. Anyway, I found out that the dhow is an Arab ship, similar to the Xebec, so I'll start a batch of polls in a moment.

Stuie,
The whole idea of this Pack is to come up with something that at least the vast majority of Apolytoners can be satisfied with, so I'm sure we'll be able to work something out.

[Spartan187]

I don't know if this is still being discussed, but I definetly would like to see the Jews/Hebrews included in an expansion pack. Why?
-The Old Testament. (According to the Library of Congress the Bible with the OT at its heart is the most important bookf of all time.)
-Ancient Israel was a powerful force in the Middle East.
-In Western Europe the Jewish upper-upper class was an important force in many economies (Rothschilds, Montefiores)
-Have had a very important affect on Western culture and history(Mendelhsson, Buber, Einstein, Kissinger)
-Israel remains an important foreign policy issue for nearly every state in the world.

Leader: David Ben-Gurion (I suppose an argument could be made for King David, but since he was a religious figure that could offend some and since he had direct contact with God he was assured of victory.)
UU: Either Zealots, an upgraded Swordsman (Jewish Zealots fought very well against the Romans once their numbers are considered) or perhaps the Palmach, an upgraded infantry.
Generals would include Deborah and Dayan.

[El hidalgo]

Originally posted by Locutus

El hidalgo, tmarcl,
Thanks for those files, they contain some good suggestions. I too am especially fond of composing city lists so I think you, El hidalgo, and I might be in for some interesting discussions (some surprising and interesting things on the Mongol city list, I'll probably have some comments/questions on that at a later time, I'm too busy now - keep an eye on the 'XPC explained: Spanish & Mongols' thread)... BTW, El hidalgo, I like your suggestion for the Junk as well, I'll add that to the list. Question though: what's a 'dhow'? I don't think I ever heard of that... (I'll probably post the polls as soon as I find out what it is)

A dhow is a type of ship. Now that I look more into it it doesn't seem that it would be a particularly interesting unit. Apparently it was used by merchants.

I look forward to your comments about the city lists. It will be interesting to draw on everyone's knowledge and resources here and come up with some really definitive lists.

[tmarcl]

Originally posted by IncreduloDriver
Regarding using Mohammed for the Arabs: If you use Mohammed as the leader of the Arabs, I wonder how certain people of a very specific faith may feel when they see a beat-up version of Mohammed on the victory screen? I'm no Muslim, but I don't think it'd be too nice. I think you run into the same problem as with using Jesus for the Hebrews ("Why didn't God's profit beat the pants off these heathens?").

Actually, you'd run into an entirely different problem using Jesus as leader of the Hebrews-the Jews at *most* acknowledge Jesus as a great teacher. He doesn't even reach prophet status. Choosing Jesus as the leader the Hebrews would be in quite poor taste, to put it mildly. A better example for your analogy would have been Moses.

However, I do take your point, and agree with you.

I'm all for using great historical leaders, but perhaps we should keep *divine* historical leaders out of anything destined for mass public consumption. There are a whole slew of other awesome Arab leaders (Peter O'Toole, for instance, my personal favorite) that would make great leaders. And, while the majority of Arabic people and countries may be officially Islamic, there's no need to unfairly stereotype *every* Arab as a Muslim, just as it would be unfair to stereotype *every* American, Canadian, Limey, or Armenian as a Christian. So perhaps religion should take a back seat to more secular history? [/QUOTE]

That would be difficult. In the Western world, we are primarily secular-our religion and our politics don't mix much, if at all. In the Middle East, however, most nations make it the law to be Muslim (Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia (I *think*-don't quote me on that one) to name a few. In some Middle Eastern countries, people are strongly persecuted for belonging to other faiths. In Israel's golden age (which I'm saying to be during King David's time and King Solomon's time), everyone was Jewish, and, according to the Old Testament, at least, if you weren't, you were put to death. King David himself was the writer of many of the Psalms.

The problem is that you're looking at the Middle East through Western eyes-you can't do that, any more than you can look at the Far East that way. The cultures are just too different.

Marc

[tmarcl]

Originally posted by Locutus




But these numbers aren't even that important. What matters more is that 20 odd years ago, an ordinary European/American citizen would encounter simply not encounter Islam in everyday life. Today the Islam is a phenomenon that noone can ignore (and that's complete unrelated to the 'war against terror') anymore. Knowing at least something about it is only the 'right' thing to do...

In your opinion, at least

What, you don't even know the 10 commandments? Regardless of your own (lack of?) religion, shame on you! In any case, the fact that most Christians have a problem with the 2nd Commandment ("Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above [...]") doesn't mean that Muslims have the same problem, does it? I'm fully aware of the many violations of this Commandments by Christians but Muslims enforce the rules of their religion very strictly (or at least their interpretation of the rules, which can widely differ: Taliban <-> 'Western' Muslims) and displaying Muhammed is indeed a terrible sin.

Edit: Martinus, I did not take any theology classes as I'm an atheist myself but I *did* take the effort of learning a thing or two about the world's biggest religions, and that includes reading the 10 Commandments....

It might not have been a bad idea to have taken a theology class, Locutus. This isn't the forum to discuss it, but you are way off. Before accusing people of violating this that or the other thing, it might be a good idea to find out *why* they do it. (Admittedly, most Christians probably don't know why they are allowed to make graven images, but that's besides the point).

Marc

[Dark Horseman]

Important Civilizations for an expansion:

The Hapsburg Empire (aka Austria-Hungary): Very old European Empire nearly primarily responsible for World War I. Vienna is often considered the 2nd cultural capital of Europe to Paris especially during the classical period.

Sweden: The most powerful European nation to attain neutrality during World War II. Also a viable power in the medieval ages with famous leaders such as King Gustave. Sweden was among the first countries to successfully implement socialist policies into Democracy *successfully* providing an example for Europe through the 2nd half of the 20th century to today. All the while countries like Russia, Germany, France, and England were all relying on political extremes which led to the World War catastrophes.

The Khmer: Someone did mention them, but I wish to reiterate. They constructed the most impressive Buddhist religious buildings that are still standing throughout Indo-China. Also a very rich empire. Religious and industrious.

Korea: Always left out in the Asian theatre. Korea is an important Asian nation. In AOE2 they were represented by their superior imperial navy, and in CCRA2 they represented the modern day allies with Black Hawk fighter Jets. Scientific and industrious.

Sioux: Largest Native American congregation. Dissappointed they were dumped after Civ2. Militaristic Expansionist.

Hebrew: One of the most influential religious cultures of all time (if not the most). The home of 3 of the largest world religions today (Christianity, Judaism, Muslim). A better leader candidate imo is King David. Religious and Commercial.

Ethiopia: Also mentioned; until the imperialist age they were the most wealthy civilization in the world. The only African country to fight back imperialism (Italy) until World War II.

Ottoman Turks: Largest and most powerful despot empire which threatened Europe many a time and dominated the middle east.

Mayans: Oldest civilization in recorded history.

Incan: Largest native Southern and Central American tribe.

Feel free to correct any information that is wrong this is all off the top of my head, and it's late. I'd like to see the old civs brought back too: Carthage, The Vikings, The Celts, Mongols.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by tmarcl
It might not have been a bad idea to have taken a theology class, Locutus. This isn't the forum to discuss it, but you are way off. Before accusing people of violating this that or the other thing, it might be a good idea to find out *why* they do it. (Admittedly, most Christians probably don't know why they are allowed to make graven images, but that's besides the point).

I agree this is not the place to discuss it but you can't deny the 10 Commandments say you're not allowed to do so. In the few 'theology lessons' (if you can call them that) I followed in highschool they even explained that. I know about there are plenty of other inconsistencies in the Bible and that many theologists have (good or not so good, I'll leave that open here) explanations for them (IIRC this particular case was decided by the iconnoclastic(sp?) movement in Byzantium) but as an atheist I don't particularly care, that's something Christians have to figure out for themselves. And I'm not accusing anyone of anything, merely pointing out a fact. Since when is breaking your own rules by definition a bad thing? Treating men and women equally also violates the rules of Christanity, yet I don't think many people today would view that as a bad thing. In some cases breaking your own rules merely reflects the insight that justice/religion is more than a book of laws...

[Wernazuma III]

Dark Horseman (and others): I think this thread should not be the place to discuss which civs should be included, we should stay on topic. Dark Horseman: check your pm.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Locutus


I agree this is not the place to discuss it but you can't deny the 10 Commandments say you're not allowed to do so. In the few 'theology lessons' (if you can call them that) I followed in highschool they even explained that. I know about there are plenty of other inconsistencies in the Bible and that many theologists have (good or not so good, I'll leave that open here) explanations for them (IIRC this particular case was decided by the iconnoclastic(sp?) movement in Byzantium) but as an atheist I don't particularly care, that's something Christians have to figure out for themselves. And I'm not accusing anyone of anything, merely pointing out a fact. Since when is breaking your own rules by definition a bad thing? Treating men and women equally also violates the rules of Christanity, yet I don't think many people today would view that as a bad thing. In some cases breaking your own rules merely reflects the insight that justice/religion is more than a book of laws...

Ok, but it is you who started with the point with Christianity being prohibited to display images of god, but this is fallacious. The 10 Commandments AS THEY ARE TAUGHT by many Christian religions do not include the prohibition against making images.

There are many things in OT which has been interpreteted by Christianity in a way contrary to their face meaning (indeed there are many contradictions and inconsistencies there).

The thing is: OT prohibits making images of god. Mainstream christianity doesn't.

Jeez, I don't know why even I care. I am an atheist

[Locutus]

AS THEY ARE TAUGHT by many Christian religions

That's not what they taught me... (then again, I was never that good a student, or I wouldn't be an atheist today )

The 10 Commandments are among the most basic rules of Christianity and all I was pointing out is that displaying images of God is against the rules of Christianity. That these rules are interpreted differently by Christians today has nothing to do with that. But I was merely trying to illustrate a more important point; I guess falsely made the assumption that people knew and accepted the 10 Commandments as they are, regardless of their importance in today's Christianity...

Jeez, I don't know why even I care. I am an atheist

My sentiments exactly

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Locutus
My sentiments exactly

Good, let's stop juggling the stone tablets. My hands are starting to hurt

[tmarcl]

Originally posted by Martinus

Good, let's stop juggling the stone tablets. My hands are starting to hurt

Awww...no fair! I had more to say! Oh well, it's not important to what we're doing here, anyway.




Hey, what *were* we doing here???? (j/k)

Marc

[Harel]

Originally posted by Spartan187
I don't know if this is still being UU: Either Zealots, an upgraded Swordsman (Jewish Zealots fought very well against the Romans once their numbers are considered) or perhaps the Palmach, an upgraded infantry.
Generals would include Deborah and Dayan.

Why not the Merkava, an upgraded advanced tank? Have some pride in modern Israeli tech! :-)

I disagree that Israel should be a religious country. I would call it a scientific militaristic state.

[ranskaldan]

Locutus:

can you post that civ database? Once it's open to the public you will have the entire apolyton community there to make corrections and suggestions. All the changes can then be systematically recorded.

The database will need to include:

leader's name
names of the great leaders
capital
a good list of city names
unique unit
specific abilities