Tweet
The thread on this digressed far and wide and I'm curious avout the initial point ...
So check out the poll.
-Oz
So check out the poll.
-Oz
-
70No Opposition, they're historically entirely relevant68.57%48Shouldn't be in, they weren't important enough to rate as a Civ4.29%3I'm against the Arabs being included unless a Hebrew / Israeli / Jewish Civ is in too10.00%7There should be an Hebrew/ Israeli / Jewish Civ but no Arab Civ BECAUSE OF MY PERSONAL BELIEFS1.43%1There should be no H/I/J Civ because WITHIN CIV TERMS they simply weren't significant7.14%5There should be neither an Arab nor an H/I/J Civ.8.57%6... And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!" Nothing beside remains. Round the decay of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare, the lone and level sands stretch far away ... -
I don't oppose to any civ being included. I say add as many as possible.
Besides, the Arabs have done far too much for the world to simply ignore. Much ancient Greek wisdom would have been lost had it not been for the Arabs. They held a huge empire at their peak, and created a religion that is still quite influential to the world.
On the world map, I'd simply remove the Babylonians and set the Arab starting location at Baghdad. In my opinion, the Arabs were definitely more significant than the Babylonians (not to mention how much I utterly despise Hammurabi in this game).
But since I rarely play on the world map, there really isn't any need to remove civs from the game, especially since there will still be plenty of vacant spaces to fill even when PTW takes 8 of them."Corporation, n, An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility." -- Ambrose Bierce
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." -- Benjamin Franklin
"Yes, we did produce a near-perfect republic. But will they keep it? Or will they, in the enjoyment of plenty, lose the memory of freedom? Material abundance without character is the path of destruction." -- Thomas Jefferson -
Hrm you forgot to include a choice that simply says "I think both the Arabs and Israelis should be in, but are not mutually exclusive." I ended up voting for "Arab Civ should be in if Israeli Civ is in", because that was really the closest thing to my choice.Comment
-
They weren't really a united nation...
Seljuk Turks- yes.
Moors- yes
Ottoman Turks- yes.
arabs- no... they were more like a bunch of disunited tribes...
Israel- not really needed in the game- merely for the fact that as a civilization it never held as much land as any of the other included civs
-->Visit CGN!
-->"Production! More Production! Production creates Wealth! Production creates more Jobs!"-Wendell Willkie -1944Comment
-
I'd say, none of the mentioned Civs should be in
This space is empty... or is it?Comment
-
Naturally, I'm curious -- may I ask why?Originally posted by ADG
I'd say, none of the mentioned Civs should be in
-Oz... And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!" Nothing beside remains. Round the decay of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare, the lone and level sands stretch far away ...Comment
-
Sure you may ask why (The question is, do you understands the reason )
Now, I don't know much about history, so don't kill me for my lack of knowledge...
But as far as I know, the mentioned Civs haven't had much infuence on the world...
Hebrew: I haven't got a clue, who they are
Israel: I only know them as some tiny Civ, somewere downthere...have they even got a history worth mentioning?
Arabs: Just like Israel: "Some Civ downthere"...
Jewish: Is that a Civ? I thought that was a religion...
I don't like playing as/against a Civ, I have no clue who is...Last edited by Adagio; October 22, 2002, 13:24.This space is empty... or is it?Comment
-
After Rome fell, the Arab Caliphates became the next, largest geographic Civ in the world.Originally posted by ADG
Sure you may ask why (The question is, do you understands the reason )
Now, I don't know much about history, so don't kill me for my lack of knowledge...
But as far as I know, the mentioned Civs haven't had much infuence on the world...
...
Arabs: Just like Israel: "Some Civ downthere"...
To risk repeating myself from the initial thread --
"Ca. 1000 AD the Fatimid (Arab) and Umayyad Capliphates ... ruled most of Spain, all of North Africa, and the entire eastern coast of the Med up to Anatolia (modern Turkey). Go back to ca. 770 and the Abbasid Caliphate ruled from the Atlantic to India, with borders in the north on both the Black and Caspian Seas."
BTW the Arabs came within a hair's-breadth of overunning Europe, only being stopped, in France, By Charles Martel in 732 CE, near Poitiers.
-Oz.... And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!" Nothing beside remains. Round the decay of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare, the lone and level sands stretch far away ...Comment
-
P.S. ...
Given the heated nature of the original thread, would you mind rating this one -- hopefully this will attract more poll-takers.
Thanks,
Oz... And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!" Nothing beside remains. Round the decay of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare, the lone and level sands stretch far away ...Comment
-
the arabs should be inCSPAComment
-
although the hebrews have been less significant, I wouldn't mind having them in civ3 eitherCSPAComment
-
The more the merrier!
but....does it really matter. I mean if you figure their can be only so many different civ attribute combinations...who cares.
As far the Arabs not being significant...that just shows personal ignorance.
Hebrew/Isreali/Jewish is more or less the same thing. They probably have had more influence for their little civ than any other group per capita.
There is no real reason to argue though, because in Civ 3 there there is Arab/Israeli conflict....it's just this group of data and variables against the other.
The civs should have been named A through Z. 26 civs...you pick your favorite letter. (like Sesame Street)Sorry....nothing to say!Comment
-
Civs
I believe Egypt -Persia and the Babs should be in ,However they are not Arabs . I believe Arabs are the Saudies and folks in that area of the world. Syrans and Jordan are not Arabs. Israel once ruled the world under King David so they should be in. I am not An Arab but the term Arabs are used for every country in the Mid East except Israel and actually none of them are "Arabs".Comment
-
Exactly how I feel.Originally posted by ACooper
The more the merrier!
but....does it really matter. I mean if you figure their can be only so many different civ attribute combinations...who cares.
To downplay anyone's ethnic civilization's achievement as not worth while is unfair. Any ethnic group did at least some significant things that is worth being considered a civilization. Thats how I see this game, something that you can achieve, whether militaristically, culturally scientifically etc. So in a way, every civilization is qualified to be in a game called civilization.
But in a gaming point of view, the variety really drops when you add 12 different types of warmongering civs. With the amount of variable available right now, there can only be so much civ with different feeling....
Too bad there is a limit. The guys at firaxis could increase the number of civ (as they are doing in PTW). But eventually alot of the civ will just become a clone civ.
Besides if you insult the native's civ history you usually get 2-3 posts that follow up that challenges your statement
:-pComment
-
Re: Civs
"Arabs" is the term most commonly used to ethnically label non-Jewish Semites (who "originated" in the Arabian peninsula and spread far enough north along the eastern end of the Mediterranean to include the Akkadians - ca. 2750 BCE - and Amorites - ca. 1850 BCE - and Assyrians - ca. 825 BCE) AS WELL AS the Hamites, who include the Egyptians, Ku****es (the northern side of the Horn of Africa westward to the Nile) and the Berbers (from the Egyptians to the Atlantic).Originally posted by roalan
I believe Egypt -Persia and the Babs should be in ,However they are not Arabs . I believe Arabs are the Saudies and folks in that area of the world. Syrans and Jordan are not Arabs. Israel once ruled the world under King David so they should be in. I am not An Arab but the term Arabs are used for every country in the Mid East except Israel and actually none of them are "Arabs".
"Arabs" were among the very first to:
1. Write
2. Work bronze and copper
3. Smelt iron (although this was more a "near-Eastern" technology, by ca. 1000 BCE occuring from the Balkans to the Arab/Persian Gulf, yet excluding Egypt until the Assyrian conquest ca. 700 BCE)
- Is anyone else beginning to see how Euro-or-otherwise-incompletely-centric most of our educations seem to be?
Abraxas,
Oz... And on the pedestal these words appear: "My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!" Nothing beside remains. Round the decay of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare, the lone and level sands stretch far away ...Comment
Comment