Expansion Pack Civs (Part 3): Just one more... - Page 8

jdd2007 · September 28, 2001, 18:22

well well well ... the poles get more and more votes, yet the ISRAELIS havent gotten anything.

DZASKUL · September 28, 2001, 20:02

Poles +20 (POLAND)

ranskaldan · September 28, 2001, 20:23

i'm changing my votes:
(oldvote+change=newvotes)

Arabs - 20+0=20
Turks/Ottomans - 16+4=20
Spanish - 14 -14=0
Celts - 11+9=20
Phoenicians/Carthaginians - 11-1=10
Dutch - 11-6=5
Portuguese - 11-6=5
Poles - 11+9=20
Siamese - 11+9=20
Koreans - 11 +9=20
Ethiopians - 11-11=0
Vikings - 11-11=0
Magyars - 11+9=20

JellyDonut · September 28, 2001, 22:23

Poles are skyrocketing

Once it gets to the top 16, maybe Gramphos will post a Pole about them!

(Sorry, had to get that pun off my chest

)

Ubik · September 29, 2001, 03:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Internationalist

Unit: Why not be original and give them a sea transport with 1-2 more movement and unit cargo?
Was Ierapetra called Ierapytna back then, or is it one more case of foreign language castration of words?
Cities: you could add some modern names also like Chania,Handakas, etc.
On The Fun Part, Special unit : Minotaur

LOL

"Foreign language castration"

That's funny, ok! No, Ierapetra was called Ierapytna back then. Olus is the modern Elounda. Lato is the current Agios Nikolaos. Malia is... Malia

Tylisos, Gortys kai Itanos are still standing (weel, ok, modernized a bit

but under the same names).
The rest didn't make it to the modern times....

About Chania, Iraklion (Handakas) etc. - nah, they are modern towns, established in the Byzantine era or later, why should they be "Minoan"?

about the Minotaur... now, that would be completely ridiculous... what is this patrioti, "Age of Myths"

vasyl · September 29, 2001, 06:00

Here is next set of my points:

Magyar/Hungarians +5
Byzantines -10
Koreans -20

Greetings everyone!

jdd2007 · September 29, 2001, 08:25

Quote:

Byzantines -10

Yay!!! SOMEONE around here has some sense!!!

Stefu · September 29, 2001, 09:08

YES! YES! Poles are rapidly gaining on Polynesians, and come the next edit, the Polynesians will surely be GONE! GONE WITH THE WIND! BWAHAHAHAHA! I love you, Poland!

jdd2007 · September 29, 2001, 10:35

-20 polynesians
+13 dutch

i give up
+ 7 malians

jdd2007 · September 29, 2001, 10:39

i just realized it but im a WARLORD!!! i dont think the last post put me up, but that was when i first noticed it. im SO proud of myself.

eXimius · September 29, 2001, 16:44

Poles 20
Spanish 20
Mongols 20
Vikings 20
Arabs 20
Inca 20
Magyars 20
Portugese 20

jdd2007 · September 29, 2001, 17:18

again- where IS locutus???

Alexander I · September 29, 2001, 21:45

This isn't a vote (I've already gone); it's just my list of a possible Firaxis-mentality 16-civ expansion pack.

It would include, of course, all the civs taken out from Civ2.

Civ, Leader, Unit, Capital

Mongols - Genghis Khan - Mangudai - Karakorum
Spanish - Isabella - War Galleon/Armada - Madrid
Vikings - Cnut the Great - Berserk or Longship - Trondheim
Celts - Boadicea - Woad Raider - La Tene
Sioux - Sitting Bull - Brave (if not Iroquois) - Little Big Horn
Phoenicians - Hiram - Quinquireme/Pentekonter - Tyre
(Carthaginian cities and leaders included in this civ)

Then other additional civs.

Arabs - Saladin - Xebec - Mecca
Inca - Atahualpa - War Party? - Cuzco
Turks - Suleiman - Janissary - Baghdad
Maya - Chaan Muan? - Plumed Archer - Chichen Itza
Israelites - David - Slinger or Zealot - Jerusalem
Portuguese - John or Henry the Navigator - Carrack/Galley - Lisbon
Dutch - William of Orange - Merchantman/Fluyt - Amsterdam
Polish - Jan Sobieski - Winged Hussar - Warsaw
Ethiopians - Sheba - Camel Rider - Aksum
Koreans - ? - Turtle Ship - Seoul?

Does this seem like a reasonable pack?

Locutus · September 30, 2001, 10:36

Update: 164 votes (up to eXimius), 22966 points.

The Polish indeed pushed the Polynesians out of the top 16; they are now #14, 10 places higher than a week ago or so... Personally, I'm not sure if I'm extremely happy with this development; not that I dislike the Polish (heck, I voted for them myself!) but as it is, half the civs from the top 16 are European, while historically very important areas such as Oceania (Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans - okay, maybe not extremely important historically but the area still covers something like 1/3th (if not more) of the earth's surface!), South East Asia (Siam, Annam, Khmer) and sub-Saharan Africa (Mali, Ghana, Zimbabwe - not the pathetic Zulu!) are not represented at all! As much as I like the Polish, the Portuguese and the Byzantines, I would personally be more than happy to trade them in for the Polynesians, the Mali and the Khmer. Oh well, eventually it's up to Firaxis anyway...

Ubik,
I apologize, I made a mistake: you didn't have 100 points left, you voted with 100 points, meaning you only have 60 points left. My mistake... So unfortunately I can only change Numides to Nubians, the rest of your vote I had to ignore. Sorry for that... but feel free to post a new update.

Anunikoba,
Was that an actual vote for the Antarticans or just a sarcastic remark or something? The smiley (and common sense) suggests the second so I didn't count it as a vote but I could change that if you really want to...

Triped,
You have 140 points left.

MarsJan,
You have 140 points left.

Kalbarczyk,
The Chinese are already in Civ3, no need to vote for them. So you have 60 (unassigned) + 20 (Chinese) = 80 points left.

LoD,
You now have 60 - 20 = 40 points left.

Chris Horscroft,
Actually, it were the Khmer who build Angkor Wat and the other jungle temples in Cambodia. The Siam were also an important civ from that region but not quite the same as the Khmer (IIRC they were often at war with each other though). I left your vote for the Siam as it is but let me know if I should change it to Khmer and/or if you wish to 'spend' those last 10 points...

jdd2007,
You already gave 20 points to the Poles in an earlier update, so I have to ignore that +3 vote. I hope I processed your updates properly: I removed your 20 point vote for the Polynesians, added 10 points to the Dutch and added a 7 point vote to the Mali. This means you have 3 points left. Let me know if I did it wrong though and/or if you'd like to spend those 3 points after all...

Also: relax, give me some time! I don't plan on updating the ranking every single day. I know you would all love that but it's a fairly time-consuming process and I simply don't have that much time (and even if I did have it, I wouldn't spend it all on this one thread!). I will usually wait until 15-20 people voted or until a day or 2, 3 has passed (whichever comes later).

Henryk Przerwa/almaryk/bartuk/Maveus/DZASKUL,
You all have 140 points left.

vasyl,
You can't give negative points to civs so I had to ignore your votes for the Byzantines and the Koreans. If you see people giving negative points that's because they gave points to those civs earlier and have decided to retract those votes (as described in the rules).

ranskaldan,
Your 'oldvote' didn't quite correspond with what I had in my records about your old vote (no mention of Mongols or Incas while you did for for them, 11 points for Ethiopians while you gave them 5 points earlier, etc) but since the 'newvote' nicely added up to 160 and doesn't break the rules I just assumed that that is your final vote.
Edit: Just noticed that you edited your original vote, that caused the inconsistencies. Like I already said at least 3 times earlier: don't edit your vote but instead post a new one, even if it's less than an hour later...

Ubik · September 30, 2001, 10:51

Alright, errare humanum est

My final votes (the 60 left) are:

+20 Carthagenian/Phoenician
+20 Minoan
+20 Arabs

jdd2007 · September 30, 2001, 11:15

so let me get this straight, i have 3 left.

+3 malians

Gramphos · September 30, 2001, 11:16

Locutus,
how long do you plan to keep this poll open?
(I'm dying to find out what the Apolyton Program is about

)

Please stop the poll before the Neanderthals reach top 32...

lukasz · September 30, 2001, 17:32

Poles 20
Ukrainians 20
Czech 20
Slavic 20
LithuUzbek 20

lukasz · September 30, 2001, 17:37

..... and 20 for canada

Lumpkin · September 30, 2001, 19:02

Spanish 19
Portuguese 20
Dutch 20
Turkish/Ottamons 20
Incas 20
Khmer 20
Ethiopians 20
Koreans 20
Fatty Lumpkins 1

Looking over the top 16 civs im quite surprised by some of the choices

I don't see why everybody is so keen on the Mongols. IMHO they were just a very sucessful barbarian horde. They briefly took over half the world, and then immediately collapsed into lots of little, rapidly distintegrating fiefdoms. They didn't found any cities and they didn't lead to any progress.

I also don't think the Celts or Vikings should be civs for the same reason. The Celts is just very loose term used to a very widespread culture which never come close to being united. The Viking is just a word which means "pirate" and applies to two seperate, rival cultures - the Norwegians and the Danes. These cultures formed independant fiefdoms which usually quickly dissapeared so I don't think they can be considered proper civs either.

I don't know enough about Arab history to say whether they should be included but as far as I'm aware when people talk of "the Arabs" they are referring to a culture not to any historical, unified empire. So I don't think they should be included either.

The one that surprised me as the Byzantines. They are just the eastern-half of the Roman Empire after it split in two. We may as well have another civilization called "the Roman Empire in the West".

The civs I've chosen were all unified, long-lasting, organised empires who excelled and made big impacts either on a world scale (Dutch, Spanish, Portuguese and Turks) or on a continental scale (Khmer, Koreans, Ethiopeans and Incas) and because they were not formed as a rebel off-shoot of another civilization. Or because they're cool (Fatty Lumpkins)

orange · September 30, 2001, 19:18

wow, didn't know I still had points left to vote with.

Add 10 more to Celts

mactbone · September 30, 2001, 20:37

Hey Lumpkin, start a new thread if you want to debate about how relevant a civ is. That's how the Poles are getting their votes. Anyways, who says that the Vikings, Celts, and Mongols *aren't* cool?

Lumpkin · September 30, 2001, 21:54

One post on and I've changed my mind

More small civs need my help!

Spanish: -15
Inca: -15
Turks: -15
Maya: +5
Assyria: +20
Mali: +20

Everything else stays the same

Boris Godunov · October 1, 2001, 00:11

Ottoman Turks - 20
Hebrews/Jews - 20
Poland-Lithuania (or Polish, whatever) - 20
Incas - 20
Venetians/Italians - 20
Carthaginians - 20
Spanish - 20
Austrians - 20

NOTE - I categorically reject the Iroqious/Sioux/etc., as these were tribes, not civs. They didn't build cities. How can we play civ true to their cultures and have them build cities?

Cheers.

borg · October 1, 2001, 02:05

Poles 20
Slavs 20
Serbs 20

ogotai · October 1, 2001, 06:12

At last, MY wotes:

Poles 20
Spanish 10
Portuguese 10

Alexander01:
"Polish - Jan Sobieski - Winged Hussar - Warsaw" - I think it would be better: Jan III Sobieski

Locutus:
"The Polish indeed pushed the Polynesians out of the top 16; they are now #14, 10 places higher than a week ago or so... Personally, I'm not sure if I'm extremely happy with this development; not that I dislike the Polish (heck, I voted for them myself!) but as it is, half the civs from the top 16 are European, while historically very important areas such as Oceania (Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans..."

It is interesting what you are saing - specially: while historically very important areas such as Oceania (Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans...

Maybe you didn't know, that Australia was kolonized by the British, and nations like: Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans are nothing more than Siux or Apaches (something like that... my english should be better, but I don't like to study :P )

Solmyr · October 1, 2001, 06:44

My votes:

Byzantines 20
Ottoman Turks 20
Arabs 20
Vikings/Normans 10
Mongols 10
Spanish 5
Khmers 5
Incas 5
Maya 5
Koreans 5
Poles 5
Hebrews 5
Assyrians 5
Armenians 5
Georgians (the ones in the Caucasus) 5
Serbs 5
Bulgars 5

Solmyr · October 1, 2001, 06:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander01
Celts - Boadicea - Woad Raider - La Tene

REPLY: La Tene is not a city AFAIK, it's the name given by modern archeologists to a particular Celtic culture. I'm not sure what would be a good choice - Caernarvon, perhaps, like in Civ2, or Scone.

Arabs - Saladin - Xebec - Mecca
Turks - Suleiman - Janissary - Baghdad

REPLY: Odd choices to say the least. Arabs should have Baghdad as capital. Turks should have Constantinople if Byzantines are not included, otherwise Bursa if they are meant to be Ottoman Turks (they can conquer Constantinople later) or Konya if Turks in general.

Tarquinius · October 1, 2001, 09:28

Quote:

Personally, I'm not sure if I'm extremely happy with this development; not that I dislike the Polish (heck, I voted for them myself!) but as it is, half the civs from the top 16 are European, while historically very important areas such as Oceania (Polynesians, Aborigines, Javans - okay, maybe not extremely important historically but the area still covers something like 1/3th (if not more) of the earth's surface!), South East Asia (Siam, Annam, Khmer) and sub-Saharan Africa (Mali, Ghana, Zimbabwe - not the pathetic Zulu!) are not represented at all

Ok, you have a point here Locutus, Ill modify my vote a bit (to make you happy

)

-20 Swedes, +20 Khmer

Chris Horscroft · October 1, 2001, 09:59

Thanks for for the correction Locutus.

Would you mind modifying my vote slightly?

Siam - 5
Khmer + 15

That should use up my remaining 10, and reflect my new, more accurate understanding of South East Asian history!

Cheers

Chris