No announcement yet.

Matching of UU, leader and GA

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    And I can relate to hating the Romans building Jerusalem. It just doesn't look right. But then the game also has the Egyptians building Alexandria, even though it was built by Alexander the Great after he conquered Egypt. But then the English built a lot of the original American cities, and the Mexicans built a lot of them in the west. And the Dutch built New York (it was once New Amsterdam).
    And what about the Iroquois cities? The game uses the ENglish translations of the names (but then this game is catered to English-speakers.
    And as for UUs, I am partial to either a modification of the Modern Armor for the Americans (based on the M-1) or possibly a version of the Spitfire fighter for the English. Or maybe an Eagle Warrior for the Aztecs to replace the Jaguar Warrior, which becomes obsolete way too quickly.
    Whew! I'm back and ready to start writing again.
    Coming soon: Pax America Redux (Including concepts/civs from Conquests)


    • #17
      Personally I think the Firaxis team watches too many cowboy and indian movies. The native american tribes were not always so damn warlike. The french who settled near the great lakes had excellent relations with the native tribes. I terms of civ the Iroquois should be a goody hut. You want to talk about "civilizations" or empires of the new world look at the Haida or other west coast tribes. You ever seen a totem pole? That is called a cultural development, provided by the west coast nations. All the average person knows about plains indians comes from John Wayne movies or boy scout manuals!! The image of mounted souix warriors attacking the caravan of wagons comes from the age of steam. European settlers were building railroads all across new england at this time UU leader and golden age DO NOT coincide at all.


      • #18
        The iroquois never struck me as warlike in the game.
        And I know a bit about the Native American tribes, and now Hollywood made them seem so much worse than they were.
        Hell, I'm half-Inuit myself.
        I know that the Plains Natives fought mostly defensive battles, because Andrew Jackson and other xenophobic American leaders forced them to leave their ancestral lands.
        But hey, there's nothing we can do about the past. We can try to alter people's perceptions of Native Americans.
        And for the record, Hollywood has gotten better about its depictions of Native Americans. In one movie I saw, Geronimo was depicted as a hero instead of a villan, as he has been historically portrayed by Hollywood.
        Maybe someday all the old stereotypes will be gone.
        And as for the game, hey, the Iroquois were an important group if tribes. They formed North America's first real democracy, after all. They made peace with the first settlers, until they were overrun.
        Portraying all Native Americans as savages was most likely an attempt at justification for wiping them out.
        That's my theory, anyway.
        Whew! I'm back and ready to start writing again.
        Coming soon: Pax America Redux (Including concepts/civs from Conquests)


        • #19

          I agree with you, they did certainly portray(sp?) native americans in a bad light in Hollywood. The point I was trying to make is that the Iriquois were not plains indians, and did not use mounted warriors significantly in warfare. The UU is inaproriate. That and there should be another civ for north america, esp. for earth maps. I mean really you have Rome, Greece, France, Germany, Spain, Celts, Scandinavians all within 6-8 tiles of each other.

          While the AI does not use the Iriquois in a very warlike fashion, they are one of the easies to use for ancient era conquest.