If real life were Civ3, who'd have the highest end score?

[SultanofATL]

Actually Japan leads us in the gross amount category as well. Unfortunately this only belies the state sponsored amounts of aid as they pertain to the U.N. When you factor in other forms the true tally would bely a much different tale. Hey I'm not here to argue...I just get a little touchy when I read or hear some of the rhetoric people spew at my country. All things being counted equal I would have to say a CIV III game played out currently would have to go to the former Soviet Union. Had they not lost a great deal of territory and people to the break up they would be top 2 in almost every important category.

[nato]

I don't want to argue either. The stats I read counted both government and private aid, and if I recall it was the private aid that really boosted the US. However that info might be a little dated. I'm surprised Japan is still giving so much considering the past decade and their economy.

People do spew at the US, like Scooby did ... I think it is natural. The world is a FFA (free for all) situation, and in those you always gang up against the guy who is ahead. Civ is real!

I would totally reject the Soviet Union in real life terms, but in Civ terms they may have been playing the war monger style just right. Forget consumer goods and keeping people happy, go for the military! I think they would be hurting in culture terms though.

I still don't think they could come close to China ... they were just too poor and backwards for too long. Actually they would be like the US ... pathetic score for most of history, and then enormous per turn score late game.

[Hagbart]

Originally posted by nato
Another statistic I remember reading, America gives out the most money in foreign aid in absolute terms, but Japan recently surpassed us in per person terms.

No Japan gives the most in absolute terms, US second most, but many European Countries give a lot more in % of GNP than the US.
Some numbers (% of GNP, 2000):
Denmark 1.06
Netherlands 0.82
Sweden 0.81
Norway 0.80
Luxembourg 0.7
France 0.33
Japan 0.27
USA 0.10 -(which is the lowest of the industrialised countries)
The goal is at least 0.7%

http://www.globalissues.org/TradeRelated/Debt/USAid.asp

hehe , I just show you this because Denmark is in the lead, woohoo .

[godinex]

And the nukes what?
I say Romans... Occident rules!

[Hagbart]

The Orcs have my vote.
They are typically believed to be brutal and mindless, possessing no humanity or empathy for other races. Although few are aware of it, the Orcs once cultivated a noble, Shamanistic society on the world of Draenor.

[Ninot]

well, just reading up since yesterday, im happy to see a few confident votes in Rome, and displeasured still by some votes in China, but, hey, its a free world, vote as you please.

Just some notes and remarks. I find it incredibly simplistic just to say that China would win due to land mass and history. Realisticly, how much of the land that is within their borders, is acutally inhabbiteed a good long portion of they year? the Himmalaya's and the Gobi ensure that those areas are void of many cities.

So (strangely enough... as an exact copy of my current Martha's world map game), China's bulk is by the sea. if ya look at it in a pure civ3 way, China can't claim to have the same land mass as it does IRL. I dunno, just my opinion

Also, there ARE the matters of conquest, that can't very easily be ignored.... (100 years of mongol rule? woa!). I dunno, but that sounds like they were eliminated from the game 800 years ago.

But, off of that. I don't care to start anything nasty about China. I like China, I just don't see it just for them to have won the game by any means.

My vote stays confidently with Rome, the father of the West, and cultivator of Christianity.

ps..: ROFL... hey, if ya look at the world from the Romans point of view, they won by conquest. Afterall, they had beaten everyone, it was nothing but "Barbarians" left. And, well, they dont count as civs.

[nato]

ps..: ROFL... hey, if ya look at the world from the Romans point of view, they won by conquest. Afterall, they had beaten everyone, it was nothing but "Barbarians" left. And, well, they dont count as civs.

Exactly the Chinese view! The ONLY civilization, the one true source, surrounded by barbarians!

Actually I remember a cool quote from a history book ... it said that the only time ancient China ever met a cultural equal was when it made contact with Rome. (just what the book said)

[Ninot]

i just thought of something... why didnt firaxis make an "economic" victory? its plausible. like, as soon as a treasury reaches a certain ammount, bang...they win. im guessing it would be remarkably like cultural victory, but with gold instead of music

[Ninot]

oh, just something i read just now from one of Nato's previous posts..., about crediting Buddism to India...

you can't

if anything, Buddism is to India as USA is to Britain. Buddism never took off in India, but it did in other places. to credit the culture of buddism to India just seems... wrong. I dunno about my analogy, but, i dunno, distort, it, and it works.

as for the China/Rome/Barbarians, well... atleast we can declare Rome and China 1 and 2 in culture, agreed? (even if we dont agree on whos 1)

[Dida]

Originally posted by Ninot


Also, there ARE the matters of conquest, that can't very easily be ignored.... (100 years of mongol rule? woa!). I dunno, but that sounds like they were eliminated from the game 800 years ago.

But, off of that. I don't care to start anything nasty about China. I like China, I just don't see it just for them to have won the game by any means.

My vote stays confidently with Rome, the father of the West, and cultivator of Christianity.

Mongols are not in the game, they are included in the Chinese race in Civ3. Roman Empire collapsed about 1500 years ago, that is even longer time since China was ruled by Mongols. Mind you, Christianity is not a part of Roman culture, it is Hebrew culture. Roman culture itself is from Greek. They were nothing more than pure barbarian before adapting Greek culture. The land mass of Roman Empire even at its height is at most 1/2 of China. Note that, China is only slightly smaller than the whole Europe.

[N. Machiavelli]

Naw, the Romans owe all that they are to the Etruscans, not the Greeks. Romans had the innate ability to assimilate all the cultures they conquered, so "Roman" culture derives from the Greeks, Carthaginians, Croatians, Egyptian, and to a lesser extent Persians and the Gauls. However, the very base of their culture came from their first rulers and then first conquest, the Etruscans. It's kinda similar to Britain to the US.

Which raises another point, America may be a once-colony of Britain, but Britain is a once-colony of France

[Ninot]

Mongols are not in the game

um, sorry Dida, but this has nothing to do with what civs are in the game... it has to do with IRL civs. in IRL, Mongolia was most definately not a part of China. They were, and still are, two seperate entities. Only thing is, Mongol ruled over China. Only in a game can China claim the vice-versa.

And, if you forgot, this thread isnt about "which civ in the game would have won IRL"... The Banana Republic vote is enough to prove your argument dead.

And nothing more than barbarian before the greeks? Hello? The barbarians that united their entire peninsula? (ok, I admitt, the Etruscan kings did have a hand in that...) barbarians that were able to unite in a way the greek city states never did? Rome may have been adoptive of culture, but it was never barbaric.

And, whats with the landmass argument? Rome may have had some land, but I'll never declare it was more than some of the big current day nations. Nor am i arguing thats how Rome would better China. Im arguing from a purely cultural point of view here.

And... wait, Christian culture originates from Hebrew? Like, sure, they share an entire testament, but it stops pretty much there. The only major Christian church (like, forgetting about the early Roman division of what Jesus was) was the Roman Catholic Church, and that lasted up untill Martin Luther. The head of that church has always been in Italy, or Rome if you prefer. Constantine, the first emperor to declare Christianity legal, well... he pretty much made a legal monopoly of the worlds christians by doin that.

And, like i said before, if you wanna argue that Christianity was never a claim for Roman fame... just look at how the bible was read for quite a long time. In latin, the language of Rome.



Now, as for Machiavelli... yeah, i admitt the Etruscan kings helped Rome quite a bit. And Roman culture does borrow from a bit of everything. Well, i find it hard to see how Phoenexian, Egyptian, and Gaul culture ever seriously effected Rome, but sure, Rome borrowed from Greece. But, if your gonna make me say something (however weak) on this argument, ill just say this:"Rome, the first melting-pot of global society"... and, as a post-note to that "Take that, America!"
Rofl, no offence there. I love my Yankee southern neighbors.

oh... and if USA is a once-colony of Britain, and Britain is a once-colony of France, and both Britain and France were a once colony of Rome... what does that make Rome?.....

[N. Machiavelli]

Originally posted by Ninot
Well, i find it hard to see how Phoenexian, Egyptian, and Gaul culture ever seriously effected Rome....

Heh. Half the ancient Egyptian obelisks are in Rome. Besides that, they learned early desert terraforming from the Egyptians. From the Cartheginians, their entire navy. From the Gauls the concept of mounted combat tactics, which were superior to the Greeks.

oh... and if USA is a once-colony of Britain, and Britain is a once-colony of France, and both Britain and France were a once colony of Rome... what does that make Rome?.....

Romans were an off-shoot of the Etruscans. The Etruscans came from the Pelloponesians. The Pelloponesians sprang from Croats. Croats from Ancient Turks in the Fertile Crescent. They from the Egyptians.....

[Styria]

If this is according to Civ III, don't forget that score is calculated per turn, not per year. So for any civ in existence from 4,000 BC to 1 AD, it only counts for 160 game turns. Meanwhile for the USA, every other year of its first century counts and I think every year of its second does, so it's scored for 150 turns right there. Should we average in everyone's zero-scoring turns when they weren't in existence, or just take the ones they were around for?

[Ninot]

Romans were an off-shoot of the Etruscans

Depends who ya ask, ya might get a different answer on that one.

I have been taught that the Romans were well settled by their own, somewhat mysterious origins (Romulus and Remus...), and the Etruscans came a few decades later, to become the predominant ruling class of the Romans.