Scottish Civ for Civ3 expansion pack! - Page 3

Oerdin · October 14, 2001, 17:23

I thought I'd take this opportunity to list a few more historically significant Scots. People like Mrs. Keiller who invented Marmalade, Charles MacIntosh who invented the rain coat & the trench coat, John Laodon who invented Tarmac (as in that stuff you drive your car over), John Chalmers who invented the adhesive stamp, William Patterson who founded the Bank of England (that's right the Bank of England was founded by a Scotsman), John Paul Jones who was the father of the American Navy, Robert Louis Stevenson who wrote Treasure Island, if you read an English version of the bible then then the first person mentioned is the Scotsman King James VI who authorized it's translation.
Then of course there's goods and produce from Scotland that is know around the world such as Scotch Whiskey which is widely regarded as the finest Whiskey in the world or Aberdeen Angus, also know as black angus, which is believed to be the finest beef that can be eaten. Anyone who has watched a ceremony commenting the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington has no doubt heard Bag Pipes being played. Anyone who has played Golf or watched the discus, the hammer throw, or curling during the Olympics has seen a uniquely Scottish sporting event. Also if you ever watched "Lassie" as a child then you have seen the Border Colie and perhaps even the Scottish terrior which are unique breeds of canine that originated in Scotland. Just a little FYI.

Oerdin · October 15, 2001, 03:47

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch

They listed Glasgow because they probably believed that it was the capital and didn't bother to check.

Did they have Canberra as the capital of Australia, or Sydney?

I had to check this one out but it seems they did screw up and list Sydney as the Australian capital. Boy, these guys need to learn to do a little bit of homework before they rush to publish their stuff. Personally, I'd be mortified to have my name attached to such a glaring mistake.

Myrddin · October 15, 2001, 15:44

Quote:

Since we already have 5 group included (Romans [who are set up for failure], Angles, Saxons, Jutes, & Norse/Vikings) that only leaves use with 3 spaces to cover everyone else. I think I'd give one civ each to a tribe from Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. Each of the three has numerious tribal names to choice from. Hope this helps.

Do the Romano-Britons get Arthur as a great leader?

Dauphin · October 15, 2001, 17:53

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
I had to check this one out but it seems they did screw up and list Sydney as the Australian capital. Boy, these guys need to learn to do a little bit of homework before they rush to publish their stuff.

I hate to think what they put the capital of Canada as. Toronto, Quebec, Montreal, anything but Ottawa no doubt.

Dauphin · October 15, 2001, 18:01

Quote:

John Laodon who invented Tarmac (as in that stuff you drive your car over),

All he did was add tar to the prevalent method of building roads, in order to stop stones getting caught in pneumatic tyres. Hardly a great achievement, considering he discovered it by spilling bitumen on a driveway.

However the name "tarmac" is an abbreviation of tarmacadam, MacAdam being the guy who came up with the method of building roads in a very specific way, to a very high degree of precision. Without him there would have been no turnpike revolution in 18th century England. It was his method of building roads that was later adopted across Europe. And with a name like MacAdam I wonder where he was from.

Oerdin · October 15, 2001, 19:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Myrddin

Do the Romano-Britons get Arthur as a great leader? [/QUOTE]

I can't think of a better leader. Can anyone else come up with City names or Leader names for Angles, Jutes, Saxons, or Vikings?

Oerdin · October 15, 2001, 19:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch

I hate to think what they put the capital of Canada as. Toronto, Quebec, Montreal, anything but Ottawa no doubt.

I'm begining to think Activision just listed cities from largest to smallest and just made the biggest city in each country the default capital. It seems like 5 minutes with a world atlas and they could have gotten the right capitals so I don't know what they were thinking.

Dauphin · October 25, 2001, 14:22

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch

Quote:

John Laodon who invented Tarmac (as in that stuff you drive your car over),

All he did was add tar to the prevalent method of building roads, in order to stop stones getting caught in pneumatic tyres. Hardly a great achievement, considering he discovered it by spilling bitumen on a driveway.

However the name "tarmac" is an abbreviation of tarmacadam, MacAdam being the guy who came up with the method of building roads in a very specific way, to a very high degree of precision. Without him there would have been no turnpike revolution in 18th century England. It was his method of building roads that was later adopted across Europe. And with a name like MacAdam I wonder where he was from.

Civ Trivia anyone?

Oerdin · October 25, 2001, 19:05

Sorry I've been gone for so long but I've been asked to help flesh out the Celtic civ proposal for the expansion pack. If any of you would like to contribute it would be much appritiated.
Also I've been toying with the idea of attaching the Scottish civ that we worked out here to the larger Celtic civ as an example of a more narrowly defined Celtic civ. Does anyone think this is a good idea or should I can it? It would kind of give Fraxis two different versions of the Celtic civs to choice from.

Admiral PJ · October 25, 2001, 19:20

Scotlands capital is Edinburgh, always has been really.
Glasgows a wee bit bigger.

Leppersson · October 26, 2001, 15:11

Yes, there was a lot of rush about Polish civ.
Here you have Great Scotland -quiet and admitting atmosphere...
I know why:
Holywood movies about Poland concerns only Jewish Holocaust there, nothing else (it is easy to understand - Holywood was founded by Jews, mostly with Polish origins

).
Wise Americans know far more about Braveheart than all other European nations last years

Sandman · October 27, 2001, 10:05

Scotland is not really Celtic. The (extinct) Scots language is very similar to English, which is probably why it died off.

Gaelic, a different language, which could be claimed to be 'Celtic', is still spoken in Scotland and Ireland, mainly thanks to government support (which I strongly disapprove of).

StarBegotten · October 29, 2001, 08:46

I have to say that Scotland is just too small to be included as a world spanning Civ (which is surely the focus of the game?), it's just too small. And I am Scottish!

I can see people wanting to add Scotland into scenarios and such like, but on a world stage? No, it just doesn't work.

Oerdin · October 30, 2001, 16:50

Quote:

Originally posted by StarBegotten
I have to say that Scotland is just too small to be included as a world spanning Civ (which is surely the focus of the game?), it's just too small. And I am Scottish!

I can see people wanting to add Scotland into scenarios and such like, but on a world stage? No, it just doesn't work.

The same could be said for the English civ because both of them didn't have huge impacts upon the rest of the world until unification. Fraxis decided not to include a "British" civ and opted for an "English" on instead so Scotland has as much right to be included as England does.
Scottish scientists have had a huge impact on the world and Scottish military officers and statesmen had a lot to do with the expansion of the British Empire.

Dauphin · October 30, 2001, 17:10

Quote:

The same could be said for the English civ because both of them didn't have huge impacts upon the rest of the world until unification

Whilst the presence of Scotland in the union was a help, (especially considering their prior hindrance as an enemy) I do not agree with the rest of that statement.

Without the Scots England would still have lead to global conquest. Look at the populations of the two countries and it is like saying that without New York the USA would not be a global power.

For every major Scotsman in British history you could easily name 7 or 8 Englishmen.

Oerdin · October 31, 2001, 15:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Big Crunch
Whilst the presence of Scotland in the union was a help, (especially considering their prior hindrance as an enemy) I do not agree with the rest of that statement.

Without the Scots England would still have lead to global conquest. Look at the populations of the two countries and it is like saying that without New York the USA would not be a global power.

For every major Scotsman in British history you could easily name 7 or 8 Englishmen.

I didn't say Scots did everything by themselves and that the English, Welsh and Irish did nothing. The English were (and continue to be) the senior partner in the country; that said, without Scotland the country just wouldn't have been the dominant world power of the 19th century. Scotland's natural recources are concentraited in strategic industries (coal, iron, oil, and such) that became EXTREAMLY inportant in industrial Britain. Plus Scotland's inventers came up with devices that were instromental in creating an industrial society and a growing Empire (things like the Steam Engine, the telephone, & the repeating Rifle).

I've said it before and I will say it again. I'd rather have a British civ but since we don't Scotland's accomplishments along with its economic, and scientific vitality put it well ahead of countries such as Poland, Hungary, or the short lived Malian or Khmer kingdoms.

Dauphin · October 31, 2001, 18:10

Oil, 19th century,

Also, when was North Sea Oil discovered.

England has extensive amounts of coal, with proved reserves ~300 years (if sole energy source at current energy usage).

England also has huge amounts of iron. Look at Sheffield, it grew up solely because of that resource in the Pennines.

Put simply, Scottish resources were not that important to England. The only resource that was unique was its vast amounts of seaweed used in making substitutes for saltpetre.

If you want to list major Scottish inventors/engineers then O.K, but I don't see that their "ommision" from history would have stunted the growth of a purely English empire. There were hundreds of English inventors/engineers/entrpreneurs .... Arkwright, the Darbys, the Stephensons, Hargreaves, Brunel (ok half frog

), Davy, Faraday, up to the challenge if a Scot hadn't invented it.

Added to that the economic importance of the workforce and capital that England had alone, (the % attributable to Scotland is minor, just look at the populations for starters) it would have dominated the world in the 19th Century even without Scotland.

Quote:

I didn't say Scots did everything by themselves and that the English, Welsh and Irish did nothing

I know you weren't, but you have said that England (Britain) would not have been the global power without Scotland. I disagree. Just as I believe that the removal of Texas or New York from the US would not diminish its world superpower status.

Va-Toran · November 1, 2001, 07:32

England was a major power before 1707, whereas Scotland was not and never has been, it's greatest achievement was unifing before England did. Having said that Scotland and Wales made significant contributions to what was in effect the English empire.

I was amazed to find the English special unit was a man o'war, rather than a C19th Ironclad. Rather than moan and include a seperate Scottish civilization we should alter the English Civilization to reflect the Scottish contribution to the British hegenomy of the C19th. On its own Scotland has made little impact on the world stage, it may have done in the C19th, but that is the realm of the hypothetical.

Incidentally the Industrial - Scientific Civ is the Persians.

Oerdin · November 1, 2001, 15:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Va-Toran
Incidentally the Industrial - Scientific Civ is the Persians.

The Persians are now the industrial-scientific civ. Six weeks ago when that was written there was none.

Oerdin · November 19, 2001, 01:58

bump.

History Guy · November 19, 2001, 16:46

Oi! Where in yer list of great Scottish leaders is our Bonnie Prince, Chucky? Oh, I know he was a reprobate and all, but he was still one of Scotland's great leaders. And wasn't Duke Wellington a Scot himself? Robert the Bruce should be Scotland's leader. Laird Robert. Wallace is, I'm afraid, included in the great leaders of Great Britain list. Sorry.

molly bloom · November 19, 2001, 21:27

Quote:

Originally posted by History Guy
Oi! Where in yer list of great Scottish leaders is our Bonnie Prince, Chucky? Oh, I know he was a reprobate and all, but he was still one of Scotland's great leaders. And wasn't Duke Wellington a Scot himself?

The Iron Duke was born in Ireland, and Bonnie Prince Charlie was an appalling leader, militarily and politically. Makes for good Scottish laments, ballads and greetin', and biscuit tin lids, however....

'The 1745 rebellion did not start well. It was almost the shortest of visits since his entourage were soon quarrelling. They had heard of the arrest by the government of the chief of the Macleans of Mull as a Jacobite plotter. Only Antoine Walsh and Charles argued that the rebellion should continue. Growing paranoia led to the ship "Du Teillay" sailing for the safety of the sea lochs of the mainland. Charles set foot on the mainland at Loch nan Uamh on 25 July. Meetings with other important clansmen were as discouraging as that with Alexander Macdonald had been. They were Jacobite supporters but also realists. They knew the likelihood of success was negligible and that failure would spell disaster for their clans. Charles refused to listen to any advice and gradually assembled a few local supporters.

If the rebellion had not started well the fact that it began to flourish was largely the fault of the British government. With their customary disregard for Scotland they had left the country inadequately defended. Even the locally raised troops in the Highlands, the Black Watch, told originally that they would only serve in their own land, had been marched down to England in 1743. This was in spite of (perhaps because of) the known plans for a French invasion in 1744 (see above). In addition, Clan Campbell, traditionally militarily strong and allied to the government, had been very much weakened as a military force because of structural changes the Clan chief had made. As a result Charles was able to march from Glenfinnan to Edinburgh, taking Perth on the way, virtually unopposed. A government force under General Cope had marched north but avoided engagement believing the Jacobite force to be larger than was the case. On 21 September 1745 General Cope's force was routed by the Jacobites at the so-called Battle of Prestonpans. This engagement lasted no more than 15 minutes before the government forces lost their nerve and ran away. Incidentally, the small forces on either side at the battle (approx.2,500 men) indicate what a small-scale uprising, despite its great fame, the '45 really was. Be that as it may, Charles was now, however temporarily, master of Scotland. The government in London had expected the rising to fizzle out at the first show of force. Now they began to take it more seriously.

Despite the reluctance of major figures to support him and despite the lack of willing volunteers (attempts to raise a regiment in Edinburgh had failed), Charles managed to muster a force of about 5,000 for his invasion of England. His officers, including his most experienced general, Lord George Murray, advised against it but Charles was adamant that he would receive massive support in England. In the event he was wrong. His force got all the way to Derby without any more than about 200 Englishmen joining his cause. By that time the cause was lost. The Prince was keen to continue the march to London where there was some panic but the British military held firm.

The end came for the Jacobite cause on Wednesday 16 April 1746 at Drummossie Moor near Inverness. The Prince mistrusted his most able general, Lord George Murray, and rejected his advice as to where to establish the Jacobite base. Instead he was persuaded to choose an open moor which was military insanity. For the first time Charles took personal charge of his force. In less than an hour the fresh, well-fed government force, which outnumbered the tired half-starved Jacobites two to one, defeated them for the first and last time. The key to their success was the effectiveness of their artillery, which they had in abundance, and used to pulverize the Jacobites who were not ordered to charge by their commanders until many had been killed or wounded. Jacobite artillery was virtually non-existent and ineffective. Charles fled the field before the battle was over and spent months in hiding in the Highlands before escaping to France.'

See also: www.electricscotland.com/history/culloden

There is also an excellent film by Peter Watkins about the Battle of Culloden and the extinction of the Jacobite hopes:

www.peterwatkins.lt/

History Guy · November 20, 2001, 12:09

Yeah, that's about right, I guess. I still like Bonnie Prince Chuck's picture on biscuit tins though!

Oerdin · November 20, 2001, 13:29

Quote:

Originally posted by History Guy
Oi! Where in yer list of great Scottish leaders is our Bonnie Prince, Chucky? Oh, I know he was a reprobate and all, but he was still one of Scotland's great leaders. And wasn't Duke Wellington a Scot himself? Robert the Bruce should be Scotland's leader. Laird Robert. Wallace is, I'm afraid, included in the great leaders of Great Britain list. Sorry.

Arhh, I can't believe Firaxis made Wallace into an ENGLISH great leader! I could possibly, some how, maybe, understand if it was the British civ but ENGLISH? Wallace spent his life fighting the English. The indignity of it all...
Speaking of indignity, I suppose we could include Charlie but I always considered him a very distant part of the Scottish family tree. He's like that crazy aunt who comes over for the holidays who talks to her cat and mummbles to her self all the time. Sure she's a relative, but, no one really wants to admite it. ;-)

Oerdin · November 20, 2001, 13:37

Quote:

Originally posted by History Guy
Yeah, that's about right, I guess. I still like Bonnie Prince Chuck's picture on biscuit tins though!

Hehe, I guess it is kind of like a concelation prize. "We're sorry your rebellion fizzled and your head got cut off, but, we'll still put your picture on a cookie tin!". It sort of sounds like something Monty Hall would have said on "Let's Make a Deal". Cheers.