The KOREAN Civilization: Things Every Civ Player Should Know

[King of Rasslin]

Christians do not oppress others, although our zeal is often mistaken for harmful aggression. When you are doing God's will, you really cannot put in too much effort, although some people do not understand this. It would be wonderful for the Chinese (oppressed by athiests, not Christians) to learn about Jesus.

[yellfromhell]

KoR,
Sure. Im Christian, but I dont eat your bananas
You talk about christians like if they came to existence last year, like a new hope for the world. Remember we have 2000 years of history and at least 70% of that time we gave terrorific treatment to the others. Christianity killed, blamed, tortured, spoiled, destroyed innocent people and civilizations in the name of god (but because of the will of christians, not God`s). So, please, dont talk as if we are all saints only because we are christians. We make the same mistakes as all the other people (and sometimes worse).
Hugs
Yell

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by yellfromhell
KoR,
Sure. Im Christian, but I dont eat your bananas
You talk about christians like if they came to existence last year, like a new hope for the world. Remember we have 2000 years of history and at least 70% of that time we gave terrorific treatment to the others. Christianity killed, blamed, tortured, spoiled, destroyed innocent people and civilizations in the name of god (but because of the will of christians, not God`s). So, please, dont talk as if we are all saints only because we are christians. We make the same mistakes as all the other people (and sometimes worse).
Hugs
Yell

Amen, it's so sad that a peacful religion like Christianity got hijacked by greedy warmongers, because it has forever tainted its reputation.

Not to mention all the groups and nationalities that despise it now. Unfortunately, Islam seems to be suffering the same fate.

[Aro]

You are quite right, Mr. GenghisFarb. The old “my God(s) is (are) better than your(s) and I will kill you right now if you don’t agree IMEDIATELY” it’s a curse that affect almost all religions, one time or another. Intolerance is poison, as we can see.

[GhengisFarb™]

My God's MORE omnipotent then your God!

(think about it)

[Aro]

Originally posted by GhengisFarb
My God's MORE omnipotent then your God!

[Aro]

About the original matter of this thread,, we have already some important points directly referred to it.
1- There’s a big lack of knowledge about Asian Civilizations in Europe and USA.
2- There are (and was) a lot more civs than that who have a typical restaurant in Occidental cities.
3- Some links or references, in a well-organized way could help a lot fixing that big lack of knowledge.
4- Korea is one of the most important civs in Asia, but there’s another ones, like Vietnam (btw, how long Vietnam exists?).
5- There’s a potential market to Firaxis in Asia.
6- So, could we think about one more civ in the game? Korea does not count, is already in the PTW. Three civilizations (China, Japan and Korea) in the game. It's all? This was all the power of the East over the centuries?

I’m just trying to resume 30 pages of posts…

[King of Rasslin]

Hey, I actually read a lot of this thread, so I'm not as ignorant as Firaxis. I know very little about Asia but I do know that Mao killed more than Hitler, and Firaxis put him in the game. I don't know of any other ruler that could be for China. Most of the emperors were very corrupt. Wasn't the Chou dynasty the strongest Chinese dynasty (and is Chou pronounced Joe?)

[King of Rasslin]

Vietnam should be in the game since it had the greatest military tactics of all time, and used them to defeat us. It is kind of like Aikido, the martial art the ninjas used. I think the purpose of Aikido is to use your opponent's momentum against him, and that is how Vietnam fought. Although most of Vietnam's history occured in the 60's, I think it should be in the game if a partisan unit is added in Civ 3.

[yellfromhell]

KoR,
By coincidence every post I submit is in reply to one of yours
Just one thing: I dont think the game civs truly represent in any form the real civs. I really dont think we should worry about putting a murderer as leader or not... ¡¡¿isnt this just a game?!! maybe Im missing something... maybe I really crushed the frech yesterday... maybe that message I received from Herodotus wasnt just a dream
Come on... Hitler, Stalin, Mao... even Charles Manson if you want it (in "The Family" Civ)
Im psychologist, and there is a psychological operation called "sublimation" (dont really know the word in english, but in spanish is 'sublimación'). Every human has 'bad desires': suppose in the very deep of you mind, you want to rape your neighbour (a lovely blond that doesnt give you a chance ). You know that raping is wrong, and you know you will feel guilt after doing it. You also know the society wont admit such an act, so you decide not to satisfy that desire. But the energy you keep wasting in such desire needs to transform into action. So, without being conscious of it, you sublimate: you use that energy in another thing (you paint, you play music, you build a house, you take care of someone, you fight for a right, etc).
A game is fantasy, so being bad in fantasys territory helps us not to be worse in realitys territory. When we play we are sublimating much of the energy we otherwise would employ to do bad things in real life.
So the lesson is: the more rude you play in civ3, the less energy you`ll have to be rude in your life
Take this as you like: it can be a stupid joke or a stupid truth... also a stupid lie, but someone will later reply me with this argument
Well, all this was in defense of Hitler, Mao, Mussolini... ¡¡Ohh God, Im crazy!!
Hugs
Yellfromhell

[Lord Merciless]

Chou dynasty was the longest, but far from the strongest. From 770BC on, the Chou king was no more than a figurehead of its former feudal vassals. But the dynasty would survive until around 240BC, when the powerful Chin kingdom no longer saw any use for Chou on its way to unification.

Chinese dynasties all went through the same cycle: competent and dynamic rulers at beginning were later replaced by either morons or tyrants. All dynasties started out in great hopes, peaked around 100 years after their foundations, stagnated for a few decades, and went into decline for the next 100 years. None of the five major dynasties, the 2 Hans, Tang, Song, Ming, Qing, escaped this pattern.

[yellfromhell]

KoR,
I believe Vietnam has at least 500 years, but Im not really sure.
Hugs
Yellfromhell

[GhengisFarb™]

The info on Oriental cultures is available in the US, you just have to look for it. And as far as interest in the subject matter: someone started a thread titled "The KOREAN Civilization:Things Every Civ Player Should Know" and it has garnished over 700 replies amd almost 9000 views.

Many of those replies were questions/answers and I'm sure a lot of people have learned something in this thread, I know I have.

Unfortunately, I believe this thread will soon be closed as I've been given to understand that long threads like this tend to wreak havoc on the server.

Maybe, someone can summarize all the info in a smaller thread.

[King of Rasslin]

Putting Mao as the leader of China would be like putting Hitler as the leader of Germany.

[Lord Merciless]

Originally posted by King of Rasslin
Putting Mao as the leader of China would be like putting Hitler as the leader of Germany.

I was in China a couple of months ago and found the Chinese version of Civ3 in stores. Well, the Chinese leader is no longer Mao, but a very famous and successful emperor from the Tang dynasty. I guess Mao is neither acceptable for the Taiwanese nor the Mainland censors.

[King of Rasslin]

Where can I get the leader head?

[Lord Merciless]

How about asking Firaxis or Infogrames?

[GhengisFarb™]

Maybe they'll include it with PTW.

Anyway, back to the KOREAN Civilization....

Who should be Korea's Leaderhead?

[Q Classic]

for the hundredth time...

Daewang Sejong.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
for the hundredth time...

Daewang Sejong.

Do you have any pictures?

[Q Classic]

not on me right now. but if you look at the W10000 bill in korea, he's on there. and a graphics pack in the civ3-files forum has a picture of him as a leaderhead.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
not on me right now. but if you look at the W10000 bill in korea, he's on there. and a graphics pack in the civ3-files forum has a picture of him as a leaderhead.

I'll see if I have one of those at the house, this weekend.....

Seriously, I might just have one. is that the pinky-red one?

[Q Classic]

W10000 is green.
W5000 is orangy red.
W1000 is pinky red.

[King of Rasslin]

HA! I just scratched one improvements of the Koreans. I watched the news about the Monitor being brought up, and they (Dan Rather here in the US) said that it WAS the first ironclad! The turtle ships weren't true ironclads; the Monitor was. So, the turtle ship could be called influential in Asian naval warfare, but it wasn't as important as the Monitor. The American Monitor brought an end to the age of sail. Although the turtle ships were important in Korea, they didn't change the world or how ships were made around the world.

It's ok to say the turtle ships were important to Korea, but not truly revolutionary.

[GhengisFarb™]

Originally posted by King of Rasslin
HA! I just scratched one improvements of the Koreans. I watched the news about the Monitor being brought up, and they (Dan Rather here in the US) said that it WAS the first ironclad!

It's ok to say the turtle ships were important to Korea, but not truly revolutionary.

I wouldn't take Dan Rather as the authority on naval history, mainstream American Media broadcasts what sells not what's accurate.

[King of Rasslin]

But I saw it on the news! They can't get away with lying, and now I have 2 solid sources: the news and my schoolbook. It would be great if someone could bring up 3 sources that the Koreans were the first in ironclads. But the news is rather solid and reliable, and it is commonly accepted that the Monitor was first.

However, while a very small minority of people think the Koreans made the first ironclads, it is true that the Monitor had the first rotating turret and was most likely the first ironclad. I say "most likely" because the Korean ships might have had a small amount of iron on the sides, but probably not enough to call it a true ironclad.

[eric789]

King of Rasslin

It would be great if someone could bring up 3 sources that the Koreans were the first in ironclads

Here we go

When we think of the dawn of ironclad warships, our thoughts generally turn to the famed Civil War battle between the USS Monitor and the Confederate ironclad Virginia (ex-USS Merrimack) at Hampton Roads, Virginia on March 9, 1862. This engagement officially heralded the dawn of a new era in naval warfare and the demise of the age of wood and sail. However, did you know that over two hundred and fifty years prior to this battle, ironclad warships thwarted the Japanese invasion of Korea?

The ships in question were designed, built, and implemented by one of Korea's most beloved historical figures -- Admiral Yi Sun Shin (1545-1598; pictured left). Utilizing vessels known as Kobukson or "turtle ships", Admiral Yi defeated the Japanese naval forces from 1592-1598 during the Hideyoshi invasions. These Kobukson were low-decked ironclad galleys which possessed iron overhead coverings with large spikes and blades to discourage any boarding attempt. They also were equipped with heavy iron rams and multiple cannons which fired from gun ports along the sides and stern. The ship's bow was fitted with a dragon head through which a cannon could be fired or embers could be burned to create a smoke screen. Finally, the "turtle ships" employed a number of archers who fired incendiary arrows at the sails and rigging of the enemy.

source: http://militaryhistory.about.com/lib.../aa100100a.htm

Neither the Monitor nor the Virginia was the first ironclad war vessel on the seas. The concept of providing metallic armor to wooden vessels dates back to at least the 1592, when Korean Admiral Yi Sun-Sin led a fleet of armored Kohbudson, or "turtle ships," against an invading Japanese fleet.

source:http://www.mariner.org/monitor/02_na..._warships.html

The first ironclad was not made in America. It was the "turtle ship" from Korea

source:http://www.orinda.k12.ca.us/OIS/stud...nclad.html.htm

First Ironclad Warship is Korean
In 1592, the Korean admiral Yi Soon Sin invented the Turtle Boat, the world's first ironclad warship.

source:http://www.colorq.org/Articles/1999/asiatech.htm

Kobukson, the world's first ironclad battleships, were built by Admiral Yi Sun-shin, which helped the Koreans prevent Japan from taking over Korea.

source:http://www.media.granite.k12.ut.us/C...ea/history.htm

One cannot speak of Admiral Yi without mentioning the kobukson, or turtle ship
that he designed. These were the first ironclad warships, and played a

source:http://www.jadedragon.com/archives/h...yisunshin.html

admiral,Yi
Sun-shin,who invented the first ironclad warship[calleded Turtle Ship]

source:http://www.oriengate.net/k-southern.htm

The famous 'Turtle Ship' was the first ironclad battleship

source:http://www.marimari.com/content/kore...e/culture.html

The kobukson or turtle ship, was the first ironclad in recorded history

source:http://www.throughtheages.com/tc/civs/koreans.shtml

dynasty, Admiral Yi Sun-shin created the first ironclad ... The turtle warships, called
Kobukson, were used to ...

source:http://deall.ohio-state.edu/culture/eall131/related.htm

Believed to be the first ironclad warship, the turtle ship had its upper deck covered
with armored plates

source:http://www.cnfk.navy.mil/News%20Rele...iral%20Yi.html

. Inventor of the "turtle ship," first ironclad warship

source:http://www.indiana.edu/~easc/pages/e...ea/korpuzz.htm

IN THE KOREAN SHIPBUILDING INDUSTRY 1. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW The Korean shipbuilding
industry, which built the first ironclad war-ship, so-called Turtle Ship, in

source:http://www.cs.arizona.edu/japan/www/...tip95.93r.html

These ships called 'turtle ships,' were in fact the first ironclad

source:http://www.asd.k12.ak.us/Schools/Wes...eaHistory.html

a Korean naval engineer designed the world's first ironclad ... Korea's Admiral Yi Sunshin
employed these turtle ...

source:http://www.pacificrim.usfca.edu/rese...mreport21.html

One cannot speak of Admiral Ri without mentioning his brainchild "kobukson": the world's first ironclad battleship designed after a turtle.

source:http://www.korea-np.co.jp/pk/100th_issue/99062307.htm

The list goes on and on.... phew~ I'm tired of writing all this....

The steam engine and the rotating turret are just fancy modifications of the more modern ironclad. It's not sensible to demand the standard of 19th century military technology to the 16th century war ship. Can you ask why the Wright bros' little plane doesn't have the features like jet engine, radar, flight control system,etc,etc to be the first air plane in the world? The turtle ship did not need to be fully armoured because it was specifically designed to deal with 16th century adversaries whose firepower is rather less lethal compared to the 19th century warships. the Koreans did not need to over armour their ships at that time and if any need was there, they would have done that without any doubt.

[eric789]

I found a site that contains video footages of Hwacha, the Korean multiple bullet/rocket launcher which has 10 variants regarding their size, projectile and firepower.

Tongjeon, the bullet firing Hwacha: I'd rather call this the pre-modern version of the gatling gun.

source:http://chunghondang.com/movie/tongjeon.mpg

Singijeon, the rocket propelled arrow firing Hwacha: this is the smallest version reconstructed. Awesome!

source: http://chunghondang.com/movie/singijeon.mpg


I express my deep appreciation towards my Korean friend Jinsoo, whom I met at an AOK forum a while ago, for all the valuable information about Korean military history he has provided.

[eric789]

The Annihilation of the Japanese fleet in 1592 and the Korean naval tactic called Hagik

source:http://chunghondang.com/movie/hagik.mpg

[Q Classic]

HA! I just scratched one improvements of the Koreans. I watched the news about the Monitor being brought up, and they (Dan Rather here in the US) said that it WAS the first ironclad! The turtle ships weren't true ironclads; the Monitor was. So, the turtle ship could be called influential in Asian naval warfare, but it wasn't as important as the Monitor. The American Monitor brought an end to the age of sail. Although the turtle ships were important in Korea, they didn't change the world or how ships were made around the world.

But I saw it on the news! They can't get away with lying, and now I have 2 solid sources: the news and my schoolbook. It would be great if someone could bring up 3 sources that the Koreans were the first in ironclads. But the news is rather solid and reliable, and it is commonly accepted that the Monitor was first.

It was also commonly accepted that the world was flat quite a few years ago. And it was also commonly accepted that America was invulnerable until a few years ago from outside agression.
These things were on the news, and the textbooks, etc.
KoR, don't believe everything you see on TV. and don't believe everything you get in a schoolbook.

======

However, while a very small minority of people think the Koreans made the first ironclads, it is true that the Monitor had the first rotating turret and was most likely the first ironclad. I say "most likely" because the Korean ships might have had a small amount of iron on the sides, but probably not enough to call it a true ironclad.

small amount? have you seen pictures of the ships? they had armor plating all over the top, and most around the sides. there were narrow ports for cannons and for archers, and the armor had spikes to prevent a boarding.

seriously, do a little research. learn a little. you didn't scratch an achievement here today.