Should America be a civ?

[Chilean Presidentâ„¢]

[Daz]

Hey! This thread was not meant to be a place for political/ideological rants. So cut it out!

The question should have been do you want Civilization to reflect human history more or less correctly or not. America is just the best example to point this out.

Someone mentioned the Ottomans. Well, yes I am aware that they didn't "start" in 4000BC but at least it WAS BC. So did most of the others. This doesn't apply only to America. England is somewhat older but also not historically correct. You should play the Celts (please correct me if I'm wrong) and be able to change your nations name. Thus you could one day become English, or Scotish, or American, or anybody else who evolved from them.
Russians would evolve from Slavs, Ottomans from Babylon (I guess) and so on.

Your 2 cents?

[Jamski]

The Ottomans came around 600-700AD, IIRC, or even later, and lasted until 1918. Just making a point

The game does mix cultural groups (Celts) with nations (America) and real civilisations (Egyptians) Almost none of the "civs" in the game were actively in competition, with the exception of France, Germany and England, and these only in the last 1000 years (of a game that covers 6000 years) Its a game, so it has to make some "unhistorical" compromises, which is part of the fun of playing a civ game. Ha ! My Bablonian (modern Iraq) tanks defeat the invading American longbowmen.

-Jam

[Jamski]

Originally posted by Daz
England is somewhat older but also not historically correct. You should play the Celts (please correct me if I'm wrong)

Well, not really wrong but you should start as the Celts, get taken over by the Romans, regain unwanted independence as a Romano-Celtic culture, be invaded by the Saxons, assimlate the Saxons, be invaded by the Angles, who form a post-Roman Anglo-Saxon culture and drive the Romano-Celts into Wales and Scotland, where they meet up with the surviving Celts, then be invaded in the North by the Vikings, who divide your country and then assimilate, just in time to be invaded by the Normans, who then impose a French-speaking feudal aristocracy for 300 years, claim the throne of France, lose it, become assimmilated too, reclaim the Celtic people of Scotland, Wales and Ireland for your empire, take over half the world, and give it away again, taking some of the captured populations home to work in your cities, untill they too are English.

Enough ?

-Jam

[Yanghead]

I have no problem with "America" being a civ, however they need a new city list and a new leader. I live in Canada was born a Canadian and am also a NORTH American. If the Civ is supposed to be USA then call it that. I'd throw in some more good natured american bashing but I don't want to be accused of Jacking the thread.

[Chilean Presidentâ„¢]

Originally posted by Yanghead
I have no problem with "America" being a civ, however they need a new city list and a new leader. I live in Canada was born a Canadian and am also a NORTH American. If the Civ is supposed to be USA then call it that. I'd throw in some more good natured american bashing but I don't want to be accused of Jacking the thread.

Well then maybe we should stop speaking of "America" because that's the real name of the entire continent, after all I'm an american too.
The problem would be, how we call the citizens of the US, "unitedstatians"?

[Centauri18]

Would you prefer Norteamericano?

[Jamski]

How about calling them "Yanks" ?

-Jam

[Chilean Presidentâ„¢]

"Norteamericano" could be a mexican too. "Yancs", only for the northern states, right?
What I mean is that the country don't have a name "of his own", as the states that compose the country have. Is kind of weird, but I think is the only nation in the world that uses the same name of their own continent.

Well I don't want to jack this thread, it was only a remark.

[Amesjustin]

Well, I was going to post something along the lines of 'Stop all the USA-Bashing!' but then I read this post...

Originally posted by ottok
NO.
USA ISNT CIVILIZATION IT IS MILITARISATION!

THIS IS A one reason,which are build a terrorism.

And anyway! Who is the Saddam? Whot fool hee doo...

is only tell that its HATE all to usa! Some one others think same... Why only saddam? And after Saddam,there at cam a seccond men who tells"USA IS SATAN!" and became the leader! But he at also maybe the TO MUCH DANGER than saddam newer!!

...and could not stop laughing. I actually agree that USA should not be in the game from the start, but should come into power later (same with other late comers). Of course that would require such an extensive reworking of the game that you might as well make a new one where civilizations evolve, grow into power, and eventually lose it (as they all inevitably do). Civolution would be a good name....

[Centauri18]

I don't care about real history and where it relates to starting civs. I always play with the Americans (slightly modified, but still) and I like being able to start early. I don't care if it's historically incorrect. But let's face it. It was pretty much just the Egyptians and a few others in 4000 BC, and none of the other civs we recognize today would have been recognizeable.
So I say, so what? It's just a game.

[Amesjustin]

Until Someone actually comes up with a Civolution-type game, I am with you Centauri 18.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by War of Art
The problem is that most of the potential buyers for any new game are Americans. Note also that the American city list contains more cities than any of the others, 50 cities to be precise, I believe, so wherever you are in the states, your local big town is included. Aw, ain't that nice.

-Jam

If we tried to get 50 great English cities we would have to resort to naming cities after small villages and hamlets.

[Dauphin]

Wasn't America only brought into Civ1 at the 11th hour because of marketting considerations?

I have no problem with them being in. Makes it funny to see them as a backward and hopeless nation for a change.

[Jamski]

Originally posted by Chilean President
Is kind of weird, but I think is the only nation in the world that uses the same name of their own continent.

Australia ? Or is the continent called "Oceania" or something ?

] Originally posted by Chilean President
Well I don't want to jack this thread, it was only a remark.

Well, if you are, then so am I.

-Jam