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

[JohnnyCanuck]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Rome. Hands down. No other city has ever, or will ever effect the history of the world to such an extent as it has.

Argue all you want. Scream into the wind while you're at it. The fact is the children of Rome have us all speaking the same language on this board right now. Not Chinese. Not Hindu. Nuff said.

Salve

This despite the fact English is primarly a Germanic language?

English is a somewhat strange language in that it was first entirely Germanic after the Anglos and Saxons invaded. They never adopted latin. But later on when William the Conqueror led in a French speaking Germanic tribe they became the new elite. Eventually the two languages merged. That doesn't happen very often in history.

English is not a Romance language...

[Ninot]

Long live the Canucks, the peacekeepers!
Im glad to see I'm not the only one supporting the glory of Rome. Also glad to see the fevor for China has lessened, for a more inteligent thread..

quick question for notyoueither... are you Canadian too? A Quebecer too? (from what i might gather from your response to my "Vive la France" post... if so, i can see im in good company, for my love of Rome.

This is probably my favorite thread, so even if this post is for nothing else... welll then... BUMP!

but seriously. Fuddle duddle (woo Trudeau) to anyone who says Rome isn't deserved of high cultural respect. Like has been said, Christianity, modern alphabet, heck, we've even named half the planets in the solar system after Roman gods. Rome is immortal.

And, well, as for Greece's effect on Rome, let's look at it from Civ3 terms. Rome invades Greece, cuz its strategically smart to do so. Helenism isn't bothered too greatly by this, and sure, it spreads a bit to the Latin peninsula. In civ3 terms, Rome moved a few greek workers to their own cities. But, by the time of Christianities flourishing, Helenism started to fade. Just like, with the turns of a game, the Greeks would fade out as well. Helenism, in today's world, is pretty much non-existant. But, so many of the things that were Roman, are still around.

Also, just a tidbit. In Ancient Rome, a city wasn't truly prosperous untill it had some kind of colloseum or sports stadium. The same can be said about current western cities. The most flourishing cities, have nice big stadiums. Yet another Roman custom.

[Captain]

quick post this time
I know it seems like I spend all my time here but I do have a life outside Civ...

I acknowledge Rome is way up there, but I disagree with counting all of Europe as a Roman successor. Rome did not continue to exist as an entity. It broke up, merged, changed, improved, expanded, and reformed. Holy Roman Empire was nothing like Rome. England took a lot from Rome, but it is an amalgam. Major changes occurred from a variety of influences. If you added Greco-Roman accomplishments to English ones, maybe. But I don't think that's valid. It is definitely not the same entity.

Against China, in which the Mandate of Heaven still applies. Even though the communists are totally atheistic. It is still the same entity. I won't go much further into unless you want me to.

Very few on these boards have posted of China's accomplishments. Mainly because most of the vocal folks here are Westerners. Obviously we are more familiar with Rome and Eurocentric history, that is the product of our school system. Like I said in my last post, it is natural to know more about the civ that one is raised in.

Now, let us assume that you CAN lump (Greco-Roman Judeo-Christian Rule of Law Habeus Corpus Representative Govt Individualism Civil Liberties Socialism Technologicultism Growth-Economics, etc...) all into something we call Western Civilization. That's powerful.

BUT as powerful as Westernism is, it is not globally dominant.
Modern Western Civ acounts for maximum of 2 B people. China alone accounts for 1B. Add in rest of Asia into "Sinic Civ", that's 2B. Same as Mod West Civ. India 1B. Islam 1B. Cannot be counted as either Sinic or Western (India has western trappings but underneath is intrinsically different).

That's 6B. But that's already giving lot of credit to Western Civ. I've thrown in Africa and south America, even though I would normally count them as separate civs. If we take them out, and we take Japan out of Sinic Asia, we're still neck and neck between Mod West Civ and Sinic Civ.

I have dual heritage. I prefer Western culture and thinking, but I deny that it reigns supreme in the globe. We think it does because we're using Western standards to judge it. But in Civ 3, its all abstracted, so my specific preferences should not be allowed to bias my vote towards Western Civs. China would tie Western Civ. But if we cannot clump together a "western" civ (as Civ 3 does not), then China is the only remaining entity with that kind of clout.

Thus, China remains the winner. Disagree if you like, just don't insult me as being less than intelligent. That's a cheap shot.

ok, so that really wasn't quick at all...

And yes, I am Canadian too.

[JohnnyCanuck]

It really has to depend on your definition of "culture."

Political structure and organization is a very different animal than cultural achievements. Besides, the Greeks developed all those systems of laws well before the Romans: they merely adapted them. Look up the Athenian law system sometime. Rome did not remain a republic forever either.

The Romans never really improved upon Greek cultural achievements. The Romans built a great and powerfull civilization with "wonders" of the time in aqueducts, collaeseums and plumbing. Even their basic military unit, the legion, was an adaption and improvement of the Greek Phalanxes.


For those of you who believe Hellenism has no effect on our culture today, you are sorely mistaken. When Europe emerged from the Dark Ages they began to re-learn not Roman, but Greek knowledge. This knowledge was, fortunetly, preserved by the Arabs to a large extent. Unforutunetly many important works were lost forever when the Great Library burnt down. It is true that Alexander's Empire was short lived. That has nothing to do with its cultural impact. Consult a historian/good book and you will quickly find that Alexander's conquest of "the world" was the single greatest event of a culture spreading throughout our world. We are talking about a people whose cultural origins began in 2100 BCE in Crete.

At the particular instance in history when Alexander united Greece, their culture was so infathamably far ahead of everyone else in the world that in my opinion it would constitute a "cultural victory." How else can you explain how every part of his conquered empire adopted Hellenism in an instant. Remember that with the exception of the Yellow River Civilzation in China, he conquered every major civilzation of that time period.


I'll try to summarize Greek Cultural Achievements:

Society: Law ruled. Equality amoung male citizens.

Literature: Greek Drama, Plays, Tragedies, Poetry, Chorus, Comedies. Themes done in Greek plays are still being regurgatated today in Literature. Think about that...

Art and Architecture: The Temple of Artemis, The Mausoleum, The Acropolis, The Temple of Athena, The Parthenon, The Statue of Zeus, The Collossus, The Great Library and Lighthouse in Alexandria. 5 out of 7 wonders of the Ancient world built by Greeks and the other 2 were under Greek control (in Babylon and Egypt).

Historians: Herodotus and Thucydides both set standards for historical writing that has seldom been equaled in the nearly 2500 years since they wrote. Their literary style became the model later on for the Romans.

Medicine: Created the Hippocratic school of medicine: Hence medical school graduates take the "Hippocratic oath" today.

Philosophy: Too much to say here, we all know Greek philosophers' achievements and reputations.


You can argue all you want about things that happened in history after Greece's hayday. That does not change the fact that Greece's culture was totally and utterly dominant over the world at its zenith.

[nato]

Now that I've had a chance to read it, I just wanted to say that your first long post was cool, and well thought out, Captain.

I agree with it mostly, though I'm a little less impressed with India, and a little more impressed with Britain, myself.

Ninot, I don't think any of the pro-China posts could be described as unintelligent, unless your definition of intelligent is agreeing with you.

I absolutely love the West (my name is nato) and I see Rome (with Greece and Germans) as the big forefathers of the West. So I love Rome.

However, we are talking about the Romans themselves, not the West. (All the West together, sure no contest!) Rome alone just doesn't stack up well against China. If Rome had been at its height for many centuries before and after it actually was, then they could compare. As it is, Rome just didn't last long enough.

Further, China is a source of "Eastern" culture comparable to Rome as a source of Western culture. As a die-hard Westerner I like Western ideals better, but its wrong to say they count as something special while Chinese culture doesn't.

Thats all just how I see it.

Anyway, I don't mean to be argumentative. Rome makes my top list too ... I just don't think anyone can match China, and there are compelling, intelligent reasons to believe so.

[Ninot]

i hope this will be a quick reply to Captain, but i can get carried away.

My argument has less to do with the populations of the Asian continent, and the population of all nations considered western, but more to do with how, in relativity, the accomplishments of Roman culture are more asstounding than those of Chinese culture.

I mean, sure, China, India, the Buddhist countries, they all truly do have amazing culture. But, (provided you say Rome is gone by 500 ad), they have had 1500 years more to gather and preserve culture. And, eastern culture is (arguably, as proven) no more penitrating than western culture is. But, Rome only had roughly a millenia to become the fore-father of the western world. Rome hasn't been around the past 1500 years, to ultimately ensure the survival of Roman culture. But Roman culture has survived, and spread. Without Rome existing, it will always be rememberd, and its customs may go on forever. And, it was able to reach this goal by 500 a.d.

But all of that is meaningless, cuz Canada will surely win, either due to the amazing cultural influence of the C.N. Tower , or by the amazing diplomatic abilities of Jean Chretien . Blessed are the peacekeepers.

(this is the edited part) Oh, and well, as for my comments on unintelligent China posts (as observed by Nato). Im not saying that any post involving pro-china views is dumb. What im saying is that such posts as "China been around long long time, many folk in China, China win"(exagerated for the puposes of the argument) are too simplistic to make the debate interesting. I would prefer to be completely stopped dead in my tracks by one amazing pro-china post, than read twenty posts saying "China big, China old"

So far, the remark ive seen that has made me think thrice i cant remember who it was by, but it was roughly "Does any civ have the double culture of any other civ, needed to get a culture victory?". Thats thought inspiring! "China big, China old" is what i deem unintelligent.

[nato]

Ok now I've read Captain's second post (I'm a little slow).

If you put all of the West together I think it would be number 1. I think this because of the Industrial Revolution.

I would say that China had a very long and good size lead. The West would start to catch up in per-turn score around the Renaisance, but still be far behind in overall points. Then the Industrial Revolution ... bam! The West starts raking in huge points per turn, because industrializing puts it so far above China in production. I think the West would pull in so many more points per turn during the last 500 years that it would amazingly overtake China's centuries long built up lead.

This is because before industrialization, China and the nascent West were both agricultural civs ... China was just much better and much much bigger at it. So its per turn lead would be big, but not gigantic. After industrialization, the West is fundamentally different, exponetially greater. So its per turn lead would be gigantic.

That is totally just my opinion, and totally just theoretical, since there is no uber West civ. I do agree that Westernization is not at all universal in the world today, and the Muslim world and East Asia are clearly angrily rejecting it.

JohnnyCanuck, cool stuff on Greece. I have to admit I tended to think of Rome instead of Greece.

Hmm ... I must be like the only non-Canadian here!

[Ninot]

Ok, i gotta say something now that i read Nato's post.

The REASON why i deny any merrit to a "China big, China old, China wins by score" argument, is cuz, like i said once, 48 years is a LONG time, for a lot of stuff to happen. It is wrong to count out any country before 2050, and all that score China has racked up might be worthless by 2050.

I say we oughta look at the victory conditions, carefully.

[Dida]

Western culture achievement surely is very impressive, but Roman should not take credit for all of that. In fact, Greek culture is the origin of Western Civilization. Roman was never considered as a great civlization. It was an great empire, but to be a great civilization, you will need more than just a powerful military and big land mass. In fact, even at the height of Roman power, Chinese military might could have well match that of Rome. Rome can never match Chinese achievement in philoshophy, science, literature and history and Fine Art etc.

[nato]

Well I'll admit "China Big, China Old" is pretty simplistic ...

But isn't that essentially what would translate into a high Civ3 score? (I'm not arguing, I'm seriously asking, that would give a high Civ3 score right?)

Now if we go outside of a Civ3 context, into just who we think was "greatest" in real life, thats different. I would still have enormous respect for Chinese acheivements (which are immense). But I can't bear some aspects of Chinese values and would definitely have to go with a Western civ.

But in Civ3 terms ... how can there be a question? "China Old, China Big" wins it.

Edit: I also want to say, that part of the "Big" includes social, cultural, scientific, and political advances ... China was a lot more than just a lot of bodies.

[Ninot]

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)

That quote is from Nato. I now bow out, to allow Dida the chance to explain why China exactly is so much better at being a civ, at being cultureful than Rome.

I admitt, China very well probably is a great equal to Rome, but... what Dida explains China is, i most definately disagree with.

(edited after reading Nato's fresh post... we should be in a chat room)
Well, sure, China old and big wins it, IF nothing serious happens by 2050... but what are the odds of a very bland 48 years, without a serious event coming to pass? I agree, China is ahead in score... but we aren't fortune tellers... maybe Jamaica will make a super banana, and win by diplomatic victory threw a banana-brainwash?

well not me! i dont eat bananas!

[nato]

Chat room, no kidding!

Ok don't take this wrong, this is more for fun, but ...

The one thing we know for sure about the next 48 years is it won't help Rome!

The only thing that could happen in that time is the US could overtake China ...

However, all the big hype is how powerful China is getting, and that it will be the next hegemon (I know, the EU has some hype too, but so does China). So if anything, the near future just looks good for ... China.

Of course those Jamaicans are pretty crafty...

[nato]

OMG I've just figured it out ...

All these years Rome has just been biding its time!

On some little traveled square in the Alps, there they sit ... Legion upon Legion upon Legion! They don't need supplies, and they last forever ...

Just waiting ...

To pounce upon a complacent Europe! Now that Europe thinks its safe from the Soviets, they'll be totally taken by surprise. And who wouldn't?

Rome will get a huge last minute boost, just enough to push its previous score (what they refer to as "Golden Age #1") over the top! Just as they planned, all along.

Ok, I'm getting a little carried away.

Anyway, like I said Rome makes my short list of contenders too, no question. I hope I didn't like chase you away from the thread or something, Ninot. Now I'll stop spamming this thread, heh heh...

[Dida]

Originally posted by Ninot

why China exactly is so much better at being a civ, at being cultureful than Rome.

I will not give a lecture on oriential or classic culture here. But before I say anything more, make sure you first make it clear, the difference between a great empire and a great civilization.

[Ninot]

no, didn't chase me away. i was getting tired of keeping up with the pace of a chat room... in a forum.

The one thing we know for sure about the next 48 years is it won't help Rome!

You have quite the point there.

But hey, who knows? im personally of the opinion that the EU is gonna surpass the USA in most areas eventually(thats just mostly guesswork tho). Im also of the opinion that China is on the right track to great things (or greater things, depending on your point of view).

Now if only them legionaries come out at JUST the right time... I have a feeling they superfreezed Juluis Caesar with them too... they just gotta figure out how to cure the common death by multiple stab-wounds...