Extra Pack Finalization Project (Part 3)

[Eli]

But then the Golden Age is in the Modern Era.

[Solomyr]

so have we decideed to make the Hebrews a modern golden age. i actually think this would make some type of sense. be can we finalized this. so the Hebrews are a modern civ. and the UU is an upgraded armor, Gholam's suggestions of "28.20.2, perhaps 15-20% lower cost than regular modern armor" sounds good to me, however, 28 attack plus the reductin of cost might be a little unbalencing.

and if it's a modern GA, i say we switch King David with David Ben Gurion. the title would be Prime Minester, the desired gov democracy and the shunned communism. what do you all think.

[Wernazuma III]

Solomyr: Maybe we could still have a mix, like having an ancient ruler but a modern GA, I don't know...

28+cost reduction also seems unbalancing to me, although there is lettle experience with modern UUs. German Panzer has one more movement like manyy UUs, american F-16 got 2 more attck but is an air unit, thus restricted in its use...
We'd definitely have to pleay around a bit with this. I'll sleep over it and post a sugestion tomorrow.

[Solomyr]

An ancient leader and a modern GA…an excellent compromise. I rather like it actually, as it does sort of represent the long, and constant history of the Hebrews. And on that note, should we change the name?

As far as the Merkava goes, I think it should have the attack of a standard modern armor, the defense of a mech. Infantry, only two movement, and a reduction in cost of 20%. So I think this would be 24.20.2, though I am not sure the defense is right (I am a few turns away from computers in my game, and don’t trust the manual) I think a 33% reduction in movement is about equal to a 25% increase in defense and a reduction in cost. Besides, that late in the game, and quality city should be able to pump out modern armor in 5 or less turns anyways. What do you guys think?

oh yeah, and irrelavent of who the leader is, the prefered gov should be democracy.

[Rosacrux]

Some objections here.

Since this is about the Hebrews the civilization should have a distinctive ancient flavor. Ancient UU and ancient leader.

I don't think the modern Israel represents the Hebrew history and actually we are getting into a quite controversial issue if we endorse what is considered today a state that performs ethnical cleansing and is heavily disliked by most democratic people on this planet.

This is not an issue with the Isreali people, nor a PC thing - it's merely some amount of respect to the fact that people are dying there everyday.

How would some people like a Yugoslavian civ with Slobodan Milosevich as leader and Serb militia as UU? Or, worst, an Afghani civ with OBL as leader and Al Quaede suicide trooper as a UU? I am sure it would sound unpleasant to most "western" ears.

Well so, a civ that represents modern Israel would sound quite insulting to some of us.

And don't start me with "but other brutal people/nations/leaders are in the game" - there is the era proximity factor. The modern Israel is now violating human rights and is now disliked by so many.
Just my 2c...

[Wernazuma III]

Rosacrux: I absolutely can't agree with you. Though I I'm not a special friend of Sharon either, whether a nation is loved or not, is irrelevant here. The Americans are disliked by many too, so are Arabs if you ask around. The latter even more so among the populace of "most democratic states".
To me, it's a matter of respect to include even a "disliked" civ, if it has contributed sth. to man's history. And don't forget: Jews were disliked for most of their history, from hellenistic ages to nowadays (don' go into the reasons of this now please)

Whether modern Israelis should be associated with ancient Hebrews is a matter of point of view, but should not be neglected "just because".

[Rosacrux]

Respect the poll, too

Wernazuma

Modern Israel Is not the civ people have voted for in the first place.

If I am not seriously mistaken the vote was for Hebrew, a very ancient civ, dating back to 1200 BC, who had a major impact in human history, as the nation where the Bible come from.

That's the civilization people have voted for. NOT the state of Isreal, an otherwise completely insignificant little state in the middle of nowhere, not better than any other modern state per se and not distinct by any accountable means - it's power derives from the friendship and alliance to USA, it has no significant power itself and it merely is able to exist surrounded by non-friendly nations. Culturally, pollitically and technologically backwards too. So, distinct and special in what way?

Could you tell me what modern Israel would do into an expansion pack featuring the most distinct civilizations that have been left out from the original Civ3 game? Why not Yugoslavia? Romania? Hell, why not Palestine? We voted for Arabs, so let's make the Arabs=Palestine - it's the same like making the Hebrew=modern Israel equation

It has no place in Civ, and that's it. This is not an issue of me not liking Israel, it's an issue of validity of this team effort and of accuracy. Todays Israel is close to nothing on a world scale. Once-upon-a-time Israel has had a major impact on world issues. But that time is over, as it is over for the Egyptians, the Greeks, the Babylonians (they have been vanished, anyway) and many others of the civs included in the original game or the expansion pack.

Therefore, the Hebrew civ should be an ancient civ and that's it.

Think of Greece - what is today's Greece? A small country in the Balkan peninsula and that's it. But nobody questions the including of Ancient Greece, as it was one of the most influental civs worldwide. But I don't see any of the - many - Greeks on this forum insist on putting the "Turkofagos" as the Greek UU instead of the hoplite and Venizelos as the leader instead of Alexander. It would be ridiculous and that's precisely what making Hebrew a modern civ is - ridiculous.

Is there a reason we have to include a modern age unit for Hebrew? Why not go with the Macabee which was the prime choice anyway? Who's agenda are we trying to forward here?

[Wernazuma III]

And if I'm not mistaken we lumped Hebrew and Israeli choices in the same pot in the poll. There was even a discussion on how we should name them, that wouldn't have been the case if we hadn't regarded it as almost the same...
Israel is still distinct in its religion, being the only state with a jewish majority. It's distinct in its historical aspect. Most of its inhabitants regard both ancient Hebrew and the history of their Exiles etc.
Thus they inherit also the achievements of those whom they conmemorate as their ancestors.
Politically spoken, the Hebrews haven't been very strong either, they never ruled large territory and they always had to watch out for stronger neighbors.
Your analogy with the palestines is simply incorrect. Palestines are only a part of the bigger arabic civ, whereas Israel can be seen as the ONLY heir of old hebrew civ.
Thus, I think, they can be treated like one, having Hebrews as the more universal name but the Mercava as more unique unit.

[Gholam]

Re: Respect the poll, too

Originally posted by Rosacrux
If I am not seriously mistaken the vote was for Hebrew, a very ancient civ, dating back to 1200 BC, who had a major impact in human history, as the nation where the Bible come from.

You might have not noticed, but we're still the same people, with the same language, and same culture... (adapted to modern environment of course). All those great civilizations that conquered us in the past have crumbled into dust, yet we keep on hopping...

the state of Isreal, an otherwise completely insignificant little state in the middle of nowhere

The middle of nowhere happens to include one of the world's biggest supplies of oil, hmmm...

not distinct by any accountable means - it's power derives from the friendship and alliance to USA

Hmm... so please explain me, how did we win War of Independence (vs Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq) with no allies whatsoever, then the 1956 Operation Kadesh, then 1967 Six Day War... FYI, up until 70s, relations between USA and Israel were neutral at best - Israel had very strong socialistic tendencies, and early on, was heavily leaning toward USSR.

it has no significant power itself and it merely is able to exist surrounded by non-friendly nations.

So how does it happen that we have the most combat-capable military force in the region? At the moment, with USSR collapsed, there's not a single Arab country (save probably Iraq, Saddam is crazy enough) that would start an open war with Israel and have a chance of winning. For some cold, hard numbers, check here.

Culturally, pollitically and technologically backwards too. So, distinct and special in what way?

Well, I dunno what you mean by "culturally and politically backwards", but on the technological side, I can tell you this... there's a good chance that parts of the computer you are using to read this board have been designed in Israel: Intel isn't the only hi-tech company to have research centers here. The "nuclear club" includes USA, Russia, China, France, England, India, Pakistan, probably a few other european countries (can't pull it all off the top of my head)... and Israel. We design our own small arms: Jericho 941, Uzi, Galil, Tavor, Negev; our own tanks and artillery: Merkava Mk.1-3, Rascal, others; our own missiles: Gill/Spike (ATGM), Gabriel (ASM), Python (AAM), Arrow (SAM); our own naval vessels; even our own aircraft: Nesher, Kfir, Lavi - a project that started with the intention of developing a cheap attack aircraft, and ended up with a multirole fighter outperforming F-16 at approximately half the flyaway cost - and was killed by Americans, in the same way a similar Japanese project was killed, because it was going to be too strong a competitor to F-16 and F/A-18 on the export market.

Could you tell me what modern Israel would do into an expansion pack featuring the most distinct civilizations that have been left out from the original Civ3 game? Why not Yugoslavia? Romania? Hell, why not Palestine? We voted for Arabs, so let's make the Arabs=Palestine - it's the same like making the Hebrew=modern Israel equation

Maybe because, as I said before, we're the same people, speaking the same language, living in the same area as the "great Hebrew civilization of 1200BC"? The fact that Assyrians, Babylonians and countless other smaller nations have completely disappeared by now, and other nations of that age are mere shadows of their former selves doesn't mean we have to follow their footsteps...

[Rosacrux]

Re: Re: Respect the poll, too

You might have not noticed, but we're still the same people, with the same language, and same culture... (adapted to modern environment of course). All those great civilizations that conquered us in the past have crumbled into dust, yet we keep on hopping...

...and you ask me why I consider Israel culturally backwards... ?
And why does that distinct you a couple dozen others? After all, Israel was never great in history - significant, yes, due to the bible and all that, but great not. Just a tiny strip of land, usually occupied by others (you don't want a list, do you?).

The middle of nowhere happens to include one of the world's biggest supplies of oil, hmmm...

The largest, actually, after Siberian. And, your country hasn't got a drop of it... so it happens

Hmm... so please explain me, how did we win War of Independence (vs Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq) with no allies whatsoever, then the 1956 Operation Kadesh, then 1967 Six Day War... FYI, up until 70s, relations between USA and Israel were neutral at best - Israel had very strong socialistic tendencies, and early on, was heavily leaning toward USSR.

Outright lie. US-Israel relationships date back to the creation of the Israel state. Period. You are getting US aid from the early '50's and on. The tanks and plains you won those wars with (bravo for the effort, btw) were bought at a bargain price from USA and european countries (allies of USA). Or given away after WW2 for free by USA and Britain. Period.

So how does it happen that we have the most combat-capable military force in the region? At the moment, with USSR collapsed, there's not a single Arab country (save probably Iraq, Saddam is crazy enough) that would start an open war with Israel and have a chance of winning.

Did I questioned your ability to defend yourself? No, not really. Then why throw these on me? Military might does not equal sifnificancy or distinction by any way. And... yes, in the region. If we abandon the region, what is the absolute military might of Israel?

Well, I dunno what you mean by "culturally and politically backwards", but on the technological side, I can tell you this... there's a good chance that parts of the computer you are using to read this board have been designed in Israel: Intel isn't the only hi-tech company to have research centers here.

Cheap mind-labour. Same in India and other third world countries. What is this has to do with technologically advanced? I've been there, and it looked more like a third world country to me...
And the fact that you don't know what I mean by "culturally and politically backwards", just proves my point for Israel being excactly that.

The "nuclear club" includes USA, Russia, China, France, England, India, Pakistan, probably a few other european countries (can't pull it all off the top of my head)... and Israel. We design our own small arms: Jericho 941, Uzi, Galil, Tavor, Negev; our own tanks and artillery: Merkava Mk.1-3, Rascal, others; our own missiles: Gill/Spike (ATGM), Gabriel (ASM), Python (AAM), Arrow (SAM); our own naval vessels; even our own aircraft: Nesher, Kfir, Lavi - a project that started with the intention of developing a cheap attack aircraft, and ended up with a multirole fighter outperforming F-16 at approximately half the flyaway cost - and was killed by Americans, in the same way a similar Japanese project was killed, because it was going to be too strong a competitor to F-16 and F/A-18 on the export market.

As for the nuclear club thing, I certainly hope you are not reffering to Pakistan and India as "advanced" countries... As for the rest, notice that we are talking only about weapon systems? Is that what a civilization today, in times of peace and prosperity is counted with? Weapons? Doh!

The fact that Assyrians, Babylonians and countless other smaller nations have completely disappeared by now, and other nations of that age are mere shadows of their former selves doesn't mean we have to follow their footsteps...

Yeah, I know, you believe the guy up there inherited you the whole world and you act accordingly, but - sorry - this is not how things work right now. And, please, you are just a 5 million small nation in the middle of nowhere (as I said), what makes you any better than Persian, Greek, Egyptian, Chinese and other that you consider "mere shadows of their former selves"? What is Israel giving to humanity today except advanced weaponry and an unaccountable death toll?
Keep on like that and you'll sooner or later join the Babylonians and Assyrians into oblivion. You know, they too fought to the death... to the last of them, actually...


Wernazuma

Your bias shows... I wonder why? Do you insist on this? A modern UU for the Hebrew? And make them a "modern" civ? Is this your final word?

[Eli]

I agree with Rosacrux. He exaggerates a lot, but the main point is that Ancient Israel was far more important than Modern Israel.

It should still be called Israel IMO, since the name of the Ancient Kingdom was Israel.

Rosacrux : So there were Hebrews that lived in 1200BC, when the writing of the Bible began. And then the Jews just popped out of nowhere, with no connection to those people?

[Ecthy]

Yeah, call it Israel, the name is old as stone.

But the nationality should be Hebrew though now shouldn't it?

[Wernazuma III]

Re: Re: Re: Respect the poll, too

Originally posted by Rosacrux
Wernazuma

Your bias shows... I wonder why? Do you insist on this? A modern UU for the Hebrew? And make them a "modern" civ? Is this your final word?

It's not my "final word", but there has been, among the participants of this discussion, a strong tendency towards having the Mercava as the Hebrew UU. I originally had the Macabee as a UU, but discussion here proved it less desired than the Mercava. If you read the thread, I asked some weeks ago, if anyone complains if I change the UU due to "public wish". No one did, so I changed it. Now I've changed it and up goes resistance again. I'm not going to switch my first post every now and then, just because of one opinion, that would prove futile, we'd never get on... Thus I'm always trying to defend, simply out of conservativism, the actual version of the first post.
And YOU brand having a modern UU as a "modern civ", to me it's a blend of old and modern...

And if you ask me personally: I think it WOULD be better to have cities like Teheran in the persian list, maybe have Khomeni as a great leader etc. Modern Iran is in many aspects still the cultural heir of ancient persia, they always kept themselves distinct from arabs, something that wouldn't have been possible without their cultural tradition. Same goes for modern jews. They wouldn't have remained distinct as a small minority in the exile, without a strong tradition.

[Rosacrux]

Wernazuma

OK, no problem.


Eli

I am not trying to open a vendetta with Israeli around here. And I did not questioned wether todays inhabitants of Israel are descendants of the ancient ones. I questioned the validity of having modern Israel represent the civilization in the Apolyton expansion pack - and I stand to my thesis.

Otherwise, you are not bad people alltogether. Just a bit trigger-happy

[Wernazuma III]

Trigger-happy is what every Civ3 player should be, otherwise he wouldn't find the game much fun I think