Which of the included civs is least important?

Gramphos · September 6, 2001, 13:45

In case that you can't add civs, what civ shall be removed first to make room for other civs?

I have nothing more to say, just vote.

(Thanks to Markos for increasing the maximum options)

monkspider · September 6, 2001, 14:27

although they are all worthy in their own way, I would argue that the Persians, with the inclusion of the Babylonians already, will be the first to go in favor of a quality Mongol mod.

Vlad Antlerkov · September 6, 2001, 15:38

Iroquois. They'd be the first to go. I'd put either the Phoenicians, Inca, or Maya. Since my graphical talents are... nonexistent... I'd wait until someone makes a mod for any of those nations.

mactbone · September 6, 2001, 18:45

Can I ask why people are voting America as the civ to be thrown out?

Felch · September 6, 2001, 18:50

Mac, I think it's because of an emotion we Americans rarely experience: jealousy.

ancient · September 6, 2001, 18:53

i think americans are being voted about because of its propaganda machine..

ok i'll shut up...

I pledge alegiance to...

Zopperoni · September 6, 2001, 18:55

French

DarkCloud · September 6, 2001, 19:37

... This is one poll I am glad the Iroquois lead

St Leo · September 6, 2001, 20:16

The Zulus should definetly be replaced by the Mali or the Abyssinians; the Inca or some SE Asian civ should replace the Iroquois.

although they are all worthy in their own way, I would argue that the Persians, with the inclusion of the Babylonians already, will be the first to go in favor of a quality Mongol mod.

Right... Are you sure you want to get rid of the largest pre-Arab middle eastern empire? I think you should replace the Babs with Assyrians (they had the same land are + Egypt) or perhaps even Arabs (their empire spanned from Spain to Persia).

Gatekeeper · September 6, 2001, 22:12

Everyone:

Regarding the Indians, are they the Native American type Indians or the subcontinent type Indians (i.e. Mohandas Gandhi)? I hope it's the latter.

CYBERAmazon

September 6, 2001, 22:29

My vote is for none of the above.

monkspider · September 6, 2001, 23:06

Come, don't vote for the Iroquois! As much as I would love to see a Mongol, Carthaginian, or Inca Civ, we must restrain ourselves from picking on the little guy and vote Persian...I mean we already have the Babylonians for pete's sake!
If I may quote Ribannah for a moment, "

LOVE HIAWATHA!!!

"
I believe I have made my case

Gramphos · September 7, 2001, 00:43

Quote:

Originally posted by MacTBone
Can I ask why people are voting America as the civ to be thrown out?

I voted Americans as they are no civ from the beginning, they came to late in the real world. Therefor I should replace them with another Native American tribe.

mactbone · September 7, 2001, 00:53

Hate to burst your bubble, but there is quite a bit of evidence that the ones we call Native Americans crossed the Bring Straight from Asia. Therefore no civs should be in the Americas. That means that at least Romans should be out too, they were after at least the Greeks. Same goes for English. Heck, we only need three civs. One Mesopotamian, one Asian(around the Ghanges River I think?) and one in Africa (have no clue where/who). Fun, huh? Basing the civs only on when they came into being would make the game boring, accurate, but boring.

aaglo · September 7, 2001, 03:06

The question in itself is very bad. Do you really think that civilizations can be put in the order of importance?

Shame on you!

I refuse to vote in this poll. Personally I think that this thread should be

, but that is only my opinion. If somebody wants to vote, go ahead...

Tingkai · September 7, 2001, 03:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Felch X
Mac, I think it's because of an emotion we Americans rarely experience: jealousy.

Of course, no one would ever say it was because of arrogance.

Rogan Josh · September 7, 2001, 05:47

Quote:

Originally posted by MacTBone
Can I ask why people are voting America as the civ to be thrown out?

Presumably because the civs are supposed to be distinctive and/or dominant. American culture is derived from European culture, the US does not have an empire, has only been dominant for a very brief period (which will probably end reasonably soon) and has not contributed significantly to civilisation.

All the other civs had large empires (like the French), had a distinctive culture (like the Iriquios) and/or made great contributions to society (like the Greeks).

Arent · September 7, 2001, 07:24

Oohh, bad move... there's a war about to break lose in this thread...
*is hiding under the table*

Thing is: What europeans see of "american" (better say USA, cause I know some people in south america don't like the implication) culture is fastfood and shareholdervalue - and most of them (especially french guys) are *quite* proud
of their culture: "They are all barbarians!" - some french guy about death penalty.
- hey that's... *starts to grin*....
...

Arent

Keygen · September 7, 2001, 07:54

Quote:

Originally posted by MacTBone
Can I ask why people are voting America as the civ to be thrown out?

I wonder too.

It might be a relatively "young" nation but for the past century its contribution to North America and the rest of the world positive or negative was huge.

Certainly not the greatest civilization of all times but worth much more than other included civilizations

Internationalist · September 7, 2001, 09:26

It is strange that many people are voting Americans.Perhaps due to psychological reasons(it is first on the list).Also possible is the fact that there is an increasing flow of Anti-americanism globally.That, however, shouldn't apply here because it's just a game we're talking about and to tell the truth, I don't think it would be as enjoyable without them.
As for the arguments others provided, I have to say these:
Americans, though a nation with a midget historical background(compared to most European and Asian countries) are growing fast and dominate 20th century history(at least the 2nd half-also they have a fair portion of exciting history with their internal wars, innovative law and judiciary system[for the time it was created at least,if I'm not mistaken Hellenians based ours to theirs and inventions that changed the face of Earth{for better or worse}).Their culture is also the dominant one(you can find their food, tv shows, Disneylands, movies, etc. everywhere nowdays-short of speech)and their technology is leading in every field.And they are the only superpower remaining in the globe.(others might be close but they have a long way to cover for).
As long as these things remain as they are, they will remain dominant.(I don't think their reign will end reasonably soon, i don't see any such signs, but the same could be argued for the British empire, I guess).

KrazyHorse · September 7, 2001, 10:26

Hey, I'm a typical yank-baiter, but I'm not going to vote for them as having less impact than the Iroquois...

They may certainly have difficulty proving that they're distinct from the rest of Anglo-Saxon civilisation, though.

Bereta_Eder · September 7, 2001, 12:13

I voted Iroquois but I hadn't noticed the american option

Anyway, that poll is a certain way to raise tentions!

Buck Birdseed · September 7, 2001, 13:45

I know a lot of people vote for the Americans not because their lack of importance but because they feel they are part of a wider anglo-saxon culture already represented by the British. I disagree, but that is the reason I've seen.

I'd say the least interesting/colourful civ here is the Germans. To me, fun potential is the only thing that matters, and we already have three european civs and don't need the relatively dry and boring Germans.

Tarquinius · September 7, 2001, 14:41

It was tempting to vote the Americans out

, but I dislike the Iroquois the most of all civs. I agree another native American tribe is nice for the gameplay, and I have nothing against that.

It's just that I don't like the name of the civ.
When the English said the word "Iroquois" they didn't mean one specific tribe, but all the Indians who were an enemy of England!
I think it's pretty sad for a civ to be named what enemy called you

I would rather see the Incas in the game, or maybe the Sioux again, because they were real tribes.

That is my opinion, please tell me yours!

monkspider · September 7, 2001, 14:52

What many of you are forgetting is that the intention of Civ 3 is to "rewrite history" rather than relive it. In another world, in another time, on a different plain of reality, the Iroquois may have ruled the world. I think they have a far more unique culture and geographic location than some of the other civs included.

Dauphin · September 7, 2001, 15:29

I could quite happily play civ without the Iroquois or the Zulus.

Americans may not be a Civ in peoples' estimation, but they need to be in the game. They are still an important "entity".

Why people vote for them as unimportant is ridiculous. Were the Iroquios more involved in the development of Western civilization than those who call themselves American?!?!?!?! Have the Zulus in their entire history, really impacted the world more than the US in its entire history?!?!?!

mactbone · September 7, 2001, 15:58

Instead of one Native American tribe, why not the Cherokee Nation? They did impact some of the world, would represent more tribes, and it would provide a rival or partner for the Americans. There, problem solved. If only something similair happened in Africa...

Gramphos · September 7, 2001, 16:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch
I could quite happily play civ without the Iroquois or the Zulus.

Americans may not be a Civ in peoples' estimation, but they need to be in the game. They are still an important "entity".

Why people vote for them as unimportant is ridiculous. Were the Iroquios more involved in the development of Western civilization than those who call themselves American?!?!?!?! Have the Zulus in their entire history, really impacted the world more than the US in its entire history?!?!?!

No, but the Americans were Europeans very long, and therefor not a native tribe of the west. It could start later then the other civs

mactbone · September 7, 2001, 16:10

It's not about where or when the civ started, it's about impact.

Gramphos · September 7, 2001, 16:33

Quote:

Originally posted by MacTBone
It's not about where or when the civ started, it's about impact.

No it is not. Americans was added in Civ I just to make it sellable in the US.