So far, which nationality?

[Mads Raven]

So far we have seen "Civ of the week" at the official Civ 3 web site, but which nationality do you think looks the best so far? (Considering with the nationalitys "special unit").


"Beware of the English Empire; the English people are going to rule the world again in "CIVILIZATION III""

[Sabre2th]

Originally posted by Mads Raven
So far we have seen "Civ of the week" at the official Civ 3 web site, but which nationality do you think looks the best so far? (Considering with the nationalitys "special unit").

No opinion yet, but I've been a big fan of the Aztecs since civ2.

"Beware of the English Empire; the English people are going to rule the world again in "CIVILIZATION III""

[Stuie]

The more I think about it, the more I'm really liking the Chinese. The Rider's increased defense makes it a viable unit well into the industrial age, and its increased movement will be a benefit for exerting a better ZOC and for whatever combat bonuses end up being attributed to movement.

Then again, I am impatiently awaiting the revelation of the Roman Legion. I think increased attack and movement would be very cool for them, but that might make them too powerful. Then again, that's why Rome conquered most of the "known world" in their day.

[Pembleton]

I was disappointed that the Chinese had their abilities changed. If it's possible, I may change it back to scienfitic/industrious. The reason they changed it to military/industrious was so that the Great Wall could satisfy their peaceful golden age trigger. But I don't really care about that.

[Inverse Icarus]

panzer

[Bkeela]

I think they all look fantastic so far! In Civ II, I seemed to only play either Egypt, England or the Aztecs for their secure starting positions. But now that each of the civ's have personality, I now have incentive to play them all.

It was a great move to give the differing factions in SMAC individual personalities, now that this has crossed over to Civ, the enjoyment of playing will be increased incredibly. There is no delight in conquering a bland, nondescript civ.

Bkeela.

[Christantine The Great]

panzer

hoplite

[TVA22]

I concure whole-heartedly

I've always been fascinated by the Chinese, I study their language, culture, and history... And the change from scientific to militaristic is just pure insanity. True, martial arts originated in China, which you could say makes them warlike, I guess, but the entire message behind the Great Wall is that THE CHINESE WERE NOT A MILITARISTIC PEOPLE. If they were, they would have set out with their armies (more than ample #'s of men) to crush the northern barbarians. I suppose on some level you could say they're warlike, refering to the numerous Chinese civil wars, but if the Romans, Aztecs, and Japanese are rated as militaristic, there's no way China should be. They really were the cradle of Far Eastern Civilization, from which all other cultures derived, and were the dominant force in Asia, up until the 1930's you could say. And the whole connection between the Great Wall and the Militaristic ability is just stupid anyway--The Great Wall didn't have wheels, it didn't attack people!! (sarcasm)

[Madine]

Actually it's hard to condense a great civilization down to two attributes.

France looks to be a good choice for peaceful players. (Industrious and Comcercial).

And China being Militaristic and Industrious looks to be a good choice for warmongers.

[KrazyHorse]

Either Greeks or Persians. Both are commercial/scientific. Probably Persians , though, because their UU appears a bit later, right in the timeframe when I want to tigger a GA.

[DonJoel]

I agree! The chinese is a really peaceful civilization judging by the history i know!! And China is almost synonymous with Science so changing from scientific to militaristic seems utterly wrong!

[jdd2007]

i think they are all cool, but the japanese sound awesome. how can u not be the SAMURAI...?

[JellyDonut]

I really want to play them all, perhaps adopting different empires based on the type of game I want to play, or just do it randomly.

BOW DOWN BEFORE THE MIGHTY HIAWATHA, YE PUNY BRITISH "EMPIRE" !!!

[Seau]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Either Greeks or Persians. Both are commercial/scientific.

Persian have now been changed to Scientific/Industrious.

[Transcend]

Originally posted by DonJoel
I agree! The chinese is a really peaceful civilization judging by the history i know!! And China is almost synonymous with Science so changing from scientific to militaristic seems utterly wrong!

Chinese peaceful? Are you kidding me? If they were peaceful, they would have never become the third largest and the most populous country in the world. It took "blood and iron" to crave out an empire this size. Maybe they don't qualify as "militaristic", but more as "expansionistic". But one thing is clear: Chinese were never peaceful.

[Dimorier Maximus]

So far, I like China's UU the best - 4.4.3

But I like France's SA the best - Commercial/Industrious.

Of course, I've never played Civ3 yet, so I don't know how good these things really are.

[Roland Ehnström]

Don't forget the Persians! Their UU is the Immortal, and it has an attack-rating of *4* already in the late Ancient times, when everyone (except the Romans [Legion 3.3.1] and Greeks [Hoplite 1.3.1]) will be defending their cities with Spearmen (1.2.1) or Swordsmen (3.2.1).

Peace!
-- Roland

[Roland Ehnström]

btw: The Persians are Scientific and Industrious, which should be pretty strong CSA's, don't you think?

Peace!
-- Roland

[DonJoel]

If you say so Trancend, but I have never heard of any Chinese war. Sure it requiered law and order to manage such a big nation but China is almost been the same size for many thousands of years if you forget China annecting Tibet.

[jdd2007]

actually, China has grown a lot in the last 2000 years. In the last 200 years, no, but what other country grew that big?

[KrazyHorse]

First the Persians get changed to SC, then the Greeks are SR and now the Persians are SI and the Greeks are SC...

My head's spinning.

[Transcend]

Originally posted by DonJoel
If you say so Trancend, but I have never heard of any Chinese war. Sure it requiered law and order to manage such a big nation but China is almost been the same size for many thousands of years if you forget China annecting Tibet.

When China was first united in 220BC, it didn't even control most of the Yangtze River that is the economical heart of China today. Under the first 2 dynasties(Qin and Han), Chinese territory and population both tripled. Especially the Han Dynasty mounted century long campagns against Huns who migrated west due to this pressure. Almost a parallel to the Roman Empire, Han Empire had fallen in 220AD and a three hundred years of dark age ensued. Barbarian invasions, civil wars were fought almost on annual basis during this time.

It was not until 589AD when the newly founded Sui Dynasty unified China again. Until 751, China embarked on a series of conquest which recovered lost territories, acquired new ones, and expanded its cultural influence like never before. In 751, a Chinese army was defeated by Arab forces at river Talas in modern Afghanistan. An internal rebellion 4 years later put China back into chaos and disunity. Song empire restored order in 960AD, but it fatally weakened its military by imposing too much civilian control. Song saw a constant decline in its territory until conquered by Kublai Khan in 1279AD.

Ming Dynasty managed to chase out Mongols in 1368AD and went on offensive in the first 50 years of its existence. Emperor Yong-Le not only committed his fleet to scour around Indian Ocean, but also mounted 5 five offensives deep into Mongolia. However, economic pressures forced subsequent emperors to carry out a policy of contraction and conservation. The extremely ineffective economic system and state philosophy imposed by the first Ming emperor, along with increasing corruption and negligence, proved fatal to the dynasty in long terms. It broke in 1644 both due to both internal rebellion and Manchurian attacks.

The Manchurian takeover of China turned out to be a blessing for China in historic aspect. Under their leadership, China's territory tripled and the population quadrupled in a span of 200 years. Culturally, they blended within Chinese societies in a matter of decades. In 1697AD, Mongolia was finally defeated and pacified. Tibet was conquered in 1722. Xin Jiang was taken in 1757. Burma, Nepal, Vietnam all became Chinese vassals by 1792. It was only in the 19th century, when the Chinese traditional systems were finally outcompeted by the West, did China start losing its power and territories.

The decline stopped after the Communists took power. Xinjiang and Tibet were recovered in 1950 and 1951, respectively. Today, China is still more than twice as big as in it was in 1600. Only Outer Mongolia and large Amur Valley regions are permanently lost. The Republic of China(Taiwan) still draw Outer Mongolia as part of China on their maps.

So much for Chinese history and an image of "peaceful" China.

[Alex 14]

Originally posted by Dimorier Maximus
So far, I like China's UU the best - 4.4.3

But I like France's SA the best - Commercial/Industrious.

Of course, I've never played Civ3 yet, so I don't know how good these things really are.

I agree, so far the chinese upgrade to the knight is pretty good.

[Comrade Tribune]

Unique Unit: I think the Legion is best. Not very expensive, probably, so you can churn out masses of them, and very durable.

On the other hand, I like the religious/scientific combination, so this would make me a Babylonian.

[Ubik]

So far I can say that the Greek and the Persian civ have my vote. But let us see the rest before we decide, huh?


And... About the Chinese... pardon me, but "show me a peacefull nation and I show you a nation that is extinct"...

...ancient times were not really a heaven for "peacefull" nations. All those nations or ethnic groups that advocated peace and harmony in the past, are now mere footnotes in the history books. Those who faught are still here, alive and kicking.

So, there is not much to argue about whether the Chinese were or were not "militaristic": Any civ of the past should appear "militaristic" to us today - if we judge it with the current standards.

But, think of it, is the "militaristic" aspect the one that gave the Chinese their reputation? No, not really. They should be scientific/commercial, if you ask me.

...but Firaxis didn't

What would my attributes for civs be?

Here you go
Greeks: Scientific/commercial (yeah, Firaxis got this one right)
Chinese: Scientific/commercial
Rome: Militaristic/industrius
Egypt: Industrius/religious
German: Militaristic/industrius

...and so on. You get the spirit, right?

[TVA22]

Your argument against a peaceful Chinese civilization has no base. I'm sorry, all you're doing is listing wars, which EVERY civilization on the planet has been involved in.

You claim that because China is so large that it is most definitely a militaristic nation by nature. To that assumption I suggest you go read a political science textbook.

World Political Science studies show China's great population and size not a factor of military prowess, but a factor of the geography. Take Robert Kennedy's thesis (not related to the political Kennedy's): He compares political development of China with that of Europe. Kennedy puts fourth the idea that the wide sweeping plains of China, with few natural boundaries (contrasting Europe) allowed a great, expansive civilization to emerge from relatively few conflicts. Again contrasting to Europe, in which no nation even to the present day, has maintained a stranglehold over all of Europe. That's why Europe was the first into the industiral age. It's called the "European Miracle" by political scientists.

Now, I say relatively few wars, because. compare China to other civilizations-- how many others were totally untainted by war? How many others gave the world the compass, printing, accurate maps, delicate paintings, silk clothes, gunpowder etc etc etc well before any other people on the earth even concieved of such things?

By your assestment, every civilization in the game should be militaristic! But clearly, these traits are supposed to be relative to each other. To that, I say, CHINA should be scientific. Historically, no other people on the planet ever came close to Chinese sceintific sophistication. (excluding the last 300 years of western civilization, which lets face it, is but a drop of water in the ocean of human history)

Again, you cite all Chinese conquests, rarely were these conquests on foreign peoples. You cite the huns, Chinese conquests against them were resultant of Hun raids on Chinese settlements in the north.