More XP speculation fun! Predict the Civ leaders!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Mikhail
Boris: True, but Native American culture is STILL American Culture. The building set of the Americans in the game IS Native American. The citizen heads are Native American. Iroquois, as you say, incorporate all North American natives. But, with a slight tweak of the civilopedia wording, the AMERICAN civ, could incorporate that as well. They've got everything else needed to represent the Iroquois.

If you're going by Firaxian "cultural" dileneations, fine...but otherwise, Iroquois and American culture are very different things. Look at the word "American"...It's a European word given by Europeans to the land, coming from European explorer Amerigo Vaspucci. Where do the Iroquois fit into this?

Remember, Iroquois culture existed for 100s of years before the word "America" even existed.

Who says 'America' ONLY represents the COUNTRY? Didn't you make a point to the contrary the other day regarding Germany? I'm not anti-Iroquois, I'm anti-having-two-civs-that-encompass-the-same-thing, or at least COULD.. Especially considering that all surviving Iroquois are now part of the COUNTRY, as well.

Well, under these terms, we might as well only have 5 civs at all: American, European, Mediterranean, Asian and Middle Eastern. After all, all the individual civilizations COULD fit under those.

As for the surviving Iroquois...well, you're not totally right. Given Iroquois represent all Native "Americans," you should know that Indian Reservations are considered to be (in name at least not in practice) sovereign territory of the tribes. There is a significant Iroqious freedom movement that operates in the NE US and SE Canada.

Had the Natives willingly united with the colonials to form a united country, I could almost see your point...but they were conquered, brutally.

Saying the Iroquois were just a part of "American" culture is painfully Eurocentric.

Depends on your interpretation of the term "America". Native Americans are 'American culture' United States culture is "Western Culture"

I don't think many Natives would ever say their culture is "American." Ribannah, any thoughts?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Dom Pedro II
I think the problem with the "realism" of democratic elections is that I don't think the player personifies the leader of the government. I think the player personifies the civilization as a whole: citizens, government, army, businessmen, everything. The reason is IF the player were to represent the government, in a Democracy or a Republic, you wouldn't control the workers, you wouldn't distribute labor, you wouldn't build banks, marketplaces, temples, cathedrals, colosseums, factories, manufacturing plants, Wall Street, Cure for Cancer, Theory of Evolution, Universities (maybe), and a slew of other things. In fact, only under Communism would you be in charge of controlling all these things. Otherwise the computer would manage these affairs.

Furthermore, until the period of telecommunication, much of the affairs of your extended empire would be unbeknownst to you until 2 or 3 turns later... an invading army could capture a city and you wouldn't even know till two turns after because you're just the king at his capital. Your armies would act independently of your command on far-off campaigns until the invention of the radio (unless you go with them in which case your domestic affairs would be taken out of your hands). Actually, this might actually give the AI a fighting chance of winning.

All this is waaaaaay beyond what I was suggested. I was just saying, to add one measely extra layer of depth and realism, the civs should have some superficial semblance of dynastic and governmental change. I'm all for abstracting the civ's actions in order to make the player responsible for all things, but I don't see the hurt in saying "Hey, if you want the bonus of Democracy, ya just might have to worry about an election!" And it's not like losing the election would end the game or kill your civ...It would just cause minor hiccups, like a real election and transition of power would.

[siredgar]

I'm not arguing for a Eurocentric game. I'm just saying that most of the greatest civilizations of the world have come from Europe AND Asia. But not the Americas, Africa, or Australia.

I'm not saying that space considerations shouldn't be taken into account at all. But let's judge more by merit, less by space. Really, I'm surprised no one has been pushing for a Penguin civ to fill the space in Antarctica!

In my opinion, the greatest civilizations in world history are (roughly, though not exactly, in order):

1. English (Europe)
2. Chinese (Asia)
3. Romans (Europe)
4. Americans (Americas)
5. French (Europe)
6. Spanish (Europe)
7. Russians (Europe-Asia)
8. Egyptians (Africa)
9. Babylonians (Asia)
10. Germans (Europe)
11. Arabs (Asia)
12. Indians (Asia)
13. Japanese (Asia)
14. Portuguese (Europe)
15. Dutch (Europe)
16. Koreans (Asia)
17. Persians (Asia)
18. Turks (Asia-Europe)
19. Phoenicians (Asia-Europe-Africa)
20. Mongols (Asia)
21. Assyrians (Asia)
22. Vikings (Europe)
23. Inca (Americas)
24. Khmer (Asia)

P.S. I reserve the option to change my mind at any time since I came up with this list in only five minutes.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by siredgar
I'm not arguing for a Eurocentric game. I'm just saying that most of the greatest civilizations of the world have come from Europe AND Asia. But not the Americas, Africa, or Australia.

I'm not saying that space considerations shouldn't be taken into account at all. But let's judge more by merit, less by space. Really, I'm surprised no one has been pushing for a Penguin civ to fill the space in Antarctica!

In my opinion, the greatest civilizations in world history are (roughly, though not exactly, in order):

1. English (Europe)
2. Chinese (Asia)
3. Romans (Europe)
4. Americans (Americas)
5. French (Europe)
6. Spanish (Europe)
7. Russians (Europe-Asia)
8. Egyptians (Africa)
9. Babylonians (Asia)
10. Germans (Europe)
11. Arabs (Asia)
12. Indians (Asia)
13. Japanese (Asia)
14. Portuguese (Europe)
15. Dutch (Europe)
16. Koreans (Asia)
17. Persians (Asia)
18. Turks (Asia-Europe)
19. Phoenicians (Asia-Europe-Africa)
20. Mongols (Asia)
21. Assyrians (Asia)
22. Vikings (Europe)
23. Inca (Americas)
24. Khmer (Asia)

P.S. I reserve the option to change my mind at any time since I came up with this list in only five minutes.

An interesting list...but I think specious. Trying to determine the intrinsic value of a civilization over another is simply open to too many variables, vagaries, and subjectivism. What are the criteria?

I think even making a list like this (no offense) is Eurocentric, as it is a very Eurocentric tendency to compare things, rank them, make lists out of them.

Instead, I think a better approach is to take each civilization on its own merits within its own scope of history...and also to realize how much "civilization" itself is a subjective, arbitrary term. These societies for the large part all fed off one another, interacted, exchanged ideas and technology and culture. And each had their ebbs and flows of power. After all, whilst the Englishmen were wallowing around in their own filth, the Arabs were enjoying a golden age of prosperity and enlightenment.

Can't they all just get along?

[Jon Shafer]

I agree. Eurasian civilizations have had more of an impact on the history of the world than any other. However, that being said, that doesn't always relate to the best gameplay. Just like with the group-effort on Satya's world map a while back, there were some things about the actual structure of the land and placement of resources that might not have been the most accurate that they could have been, but do you really want to create the situation where you're the "sucker" stuck in the Arabian desert with nothing to advance your civ? Some things have to be sacrificed for better gameplay, IMO. You can disagree and that's just fine, I think that a more diverse group of civs in the game makes things a little more interesting.

But anyways, back on topic, who do you think should be the leader of all those countries anyways?

[siredgar]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

What are the criteria?

World Impact + My Opinion - My Education = Results

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by siredgar


World Impact + My Opinion - My Education = Results

My criteria henceforth will be:

1) Who had the best uniforms
2) Who has the best food
3) Who made the best music

Right now, it's a 3-way tie between 1) Brits, 2) Mexicans and 3) Germans.

[siredgar]

1. English (Europe) - Elizabeth I
2. Chinese (Asia) - Mao Zedong
3. Romans (Europe) - Julius Caesar
4. Americans (Americas) - FDR
5. French (Europe) - Napoleon Bonaparte
6. Spanish (Europe) - Philip I
7. Russians (Europe-Asia) - Catherine the Great
8. Egyptians (Africa) - Cleopatra
9. Babylonians (Asia) - Hammurabi
10. Germans (Europe) - Otto von Bismarck
11. Arabs (Asia) - Saladin
12. Indians (Asia) - Mohatma Gandhi
13. Japanese (Asia) - Tokugawa Ieyasu
14. Portuguese (Europe) - Alfonso I
15. Dutch (Europe) - William of Orange
16. Koreans (Asia) - Sejong
17. Persians (Asia) - Xerxes
18. Turks (Asia-Europe) - Ataturk
19. Phoenicians (Asia-Europe-Africa) - Hannibal
20. Mongols (Asia) - Genghis Khan
21. Assyrians (Asia) - Tiglath-Pileser
22. Vikings (Europe) - Leif Ericsson
23. Inca (Americas) - Pachacutec
24. Khmer (Asia) - Jayavarman

By the way, I did not realize this but Asia comes ahead of Europe:
Asia- 10 1/3
Europe- 9 1/3
Americas- 2
Africa- 1 1/3
Australia- 0

[siredgar]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

1) Who had the best uniforms
2) Who has the best food
3) Who made the best music

1) Germans, English, Japanese.
2) All food is good. If you have to ask French, Italians, Koreans, Japanese.
3) English, Americans.

[Boris Godunov]

You could do better with American and African civs. What about Mali? A very powerful state that exercised considerable influence.

And I still say we should drop Bismarck for the Germans and put Frederick II back in.

[monkspider]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
My criteria henceforth will be:

1) Who had the best uniforms
2) Who has the best food
3) Who made the best music

Right now, it's a 3-way tie between 1) Brits, 2) Mexicans and 3) Germans.

You have a fair point Edgar, and I don't think anyone is going to dispute that the Spanish had a greater impact on history than civs like the Iroquois, but you can't underscore how UNIQUE Native-American culture was compared to any other civilization in the world. To leave such a huge chunk of humanity unrepresented would be a tragedy. After all, the point of Civ 3 is to rewrite history. In fact, that was one of the buzz phrases they had going during the early ad campaign, was it not? Perhaps in a different world, in a different time, on a different plain of reality, the Iroquois ruled the world.
However, your basic point that the civilizations that had the most impact on history should always have a certain system of brownie points working for them is a fair one. But certainly you would agree that groups as massive and unique as North American natives and Sub-Saharan Africans deserve representation in a game such as Civ 3, do you not?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by siredgar


1) Germans, English, Japanese.
2) All food is good. If you have to ask French, Italians, Koreans, Japanese.
3) English, Americans.

While I can except variations on 1 and 2, I will not tolerate any answet to 3 except the Germans. The ghosts of Bach, Beethoven and Brahms will be pounding on your door...

[siredgar]

Okay, I was only thinking of rock and roll. I forgot about classical music. Then, the Germans should definitely be added in.

[siredgar]

Originally posted by monkspider
But certainly you would agree that groups as massive and unique as North American natives and Sub-Saharan Africans deserve representation in a game such as Civ 3, do you not?

Sure, why not. I'll just crush them later in game-play.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by siredgar
Okay, I was only thinking of rock and roll. I forgot about classical music. Then, the Germans should definitely be added in.

Thank you!

I think, however, the 3 B's can be expaned to accomodate a 4th...

Bach, Beethoven, Brahms...and the Beatles!