America isn't old enough to be in Civ3

[Dauphin]

Washington was sworn in as President in New York, his official residence was Philadelphia.

[Dauphin]

Oh and Albany is the Capital of New York State, not New York City.

[Harovan]

Albany is the capital of New York state now, but has it always been?

By the way, wasn't New York made of this old dutch colony New Amsterdam, we all know from Colonization times?

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Arrian
IIRC, the old capitol of the USA was Philadelphia. New York, to the best of my knowledge, has never been the capitol of anything besides New York State.

-Arrian

Ok, my bad, but here is an article to support my input, erroneous as it is.
Re: What was the first capital?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Town Crier Archive - The Early Republic
[ Town Crier - The Early Republic ] [ FAQ ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by Charles Orndorff on March 01, 19100 at 16:08:00:

In Reply to: What was the first capital? posted by Brent on February 29, 19100 at 20:46:36:

: A question on "Who wants to be a Millionaire" tonight was, "Which of the following was the first capital of the United States after the signing of the constitution?" The choices were narrowed down to Philidelphia and New York City. New York was the correct answer. I always believed that Congress met in New York, but the first actual capital was in Philidelphia. Am I wrong? What was the first capital?

Brent, Philadelphia could be considered to be the first capital, since the Continental Congress met there during most of the period from 1774-1783. It was the de facto capital at the time of the Declaration of Independence. However, the first Congress under the Constitution met in New York (where the Confederation Congress had been meeting since 1785) as the temporary capital. Therefore, it was the first capital under the Constitution. Philadelphia became the temporary capital in late 1790, and remained such until the move to Washington, D.C. in 1800.
.
Charles Orndorff

Yours In Civin

Troll-Nice guy wanna-B

[Ironikinit]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph
Good point, Arrian. Guess this one goes to you.

But the result of the WWII with all other (especially European) countries weakened and the USA strenghtened (in Civ3 terms I'd call it a Golden Age) makes it hard to believe, that it wasn't planned this way. At least I was taught so, and it's the opinion of many German and most Russian historicians (I had military lessons in Russia).

What shall I believe? I think, the truth must be somewhere in the middle, as it's in most cases.

Well, it's hard to think of the US being so manipulative as to play the war for it's own benefit, but if we did, I'm not sorry.

Europe screwed itself.

I'm not saying that they deserved what happened, but it's nobody's fault but theirs. And by "them" I mean a bunch of dead people, not today's Europeans.

Wow, a bunch of interesting threads back here, and I've been ignoring this forum more or less.

[TacticalGrace]

Originally posted by Troll
As for Washington D.C., it was not the original Capital of the US, but rather New York was.

That's not the point. In Civ isn't Washington the default?

Perhaps they called New York "New York" because it was a term of endearment to a former location "York" which provided some good memories, not necessarily a good living environment (the original York).

So an America with a history independent of england makes little sense.

As for "stealing", well in this game as well as other games, when we "re-write" history, then that is exactly what we are doing. no offense, but I detect a lot of bitterness from other than "American" folks whom play this game that really amounts to a small amount of frustration.

No! that wasn't my point. My point was that the Americans speak English. Not American.

People were comparing america/england to rome/greece. Romans spoke Latin, a language distinct from greek.

Please, we are not "re-writing actual history books"

I know that. My point is that playing as the Americans is just a bit silly. In civ terms they are the English, just much later down the line.

I don't think the Americans should be removed from furture versions of civ. There are clearly people out the who play them. I just think they don't fit in. If I'm playing the English and Find out that the Americans have founded New York before I've founded York then I just think "uhh?"

It's bit like the fiasco in CTP where you could be the romans (capitol Rome) and you conquor the Italian Capital (Rome).

What would you say to the suggestion that there should be an American city called New Amsterdam either as well as or instead oif New York?

[Dry]

Originally posted by TacticalGrace
It's bit like the fiasco in CTP where you could be the romans (capitol Rome) and you conquor the Italian Capital (Rome).

In civ2, the Roman could found Londinium, Lugdunum,... very long after the English found London, the French Lyon,...

FYI: I know there are at least 3 Tripoli in real world - and outside USA - (Lybia, Liban and...forgot), and I have been told there are a huge number of Alexandria.

Muenchen (Germany) - DesMoines (USA) - Monaco (Monaco)

So, where is the problem?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ironikinit


Well, it's hard to think of the US being so manipulative as to play the war for it's own benefit, but if we did, I'm not sorry.

Europe screwed itself.

I'm not saying that they deserved what happened, but it's nobody's fault but theirs. And by "them" I mean a bunch of dead people, not today's Europeans.

Wow, a bunch of interesting threads back here, and I've been ignoring this forum more or less.

Did 'Europe' screw itself in the Pacific? Examine the reasons for Japan allying with the other Axis powers, and you will see the racism of Woodrow Wilson and the Versailles settlement at the end of WWI had a part to play in fuelling Japanese expansionism in the Pacific- let's not pretend that American interests in the Pacific were all above board- the brutal suppression of the Philippine Independence movement after the Spanish-American War shows that commercial interests were the driving factor.

[Serb]

Originally posted by molly bloom


Did 'Europe' screw itself in the Pacific? Examine the reasons for Japan allying with the other Axis powers, and you will see the racism of Woodrow Wilson and the Versailles settlement at the end of WWI had a part to play in fuelling Japanese expansionism in the Pacific- let's not pretend that American interests in the Pacific were all above board- the brutal suppression of the Philippine Independence movement after the Spanish-American War shows that commercial interests were the driving factor.

You are reading my thoughts.
Americans never do anything without benefit.
The reason for both World war was redirection of resorses and territories and USA was interested in that no less than any other country.

Europe screwed itself.
I'm not saying that they deserved what happened, but it's nobody's fault but theirs. And by "them" I mean a bunch of dead people, not today's Europeans.

Well at this case:
I'm not saying that USA deserved Pearl Harbor, but it's nobody's fault but theirs. And by "them" I mean a bunch of dead people, not today's Americans.
How do you feel now?
A little angry I supose?

[Ironikinit]

I'm not going to say that the US provoked war with Japan, but we should've seen it coming. In that sense, yeah, we screwed ourselves at Pearl Harbor. How could we really blame anybody but ourselves for that? The Japanese had a history of sneak attacks, like when they whipped the Russians at Port Arthur.

[Fresno]

About Russia in the EU: the Russian culture is related closely to the culture of the rest of Europe. But that doesn't mean it's the same.

See it like this: the English, the Spanish, and the German peoples (for example) are all part of the European culture. The Russian culture is a separate one, partly with the same roots. During the last centuries the Russian elite adopted elements of European culture. This brought Europe and Russia closer to eachother. Unfortunately, during the 20th century they were separated again.

I agree Europe and Russia can't be seen apart from eachother, but they aren't the same either.

Another point: the population.

Russia: 148 million
Germany: 81 million
England: 58 million
France: 57 million
Italy: 57 million
Spain: 38 million
Netherlands: 15 million
Belgium: 10 million
Portugal: 10 million
I'll let the smaller countries out.

The source I took this from seems a bit outdated (I think so because the Dutch population actually is 16 million now), but I guess it still gives a good idea about the current proportions. as you see: Russian population is far bigger as those of the other European countries.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Fresno
About Russia in the EU: the Russian culture is related closely to the culture of the rest of Europe. But that doesn't mean it's the same.

See it like this: the English, the Spanish, and the German peoples (for example) are all part of the European culture. The Russian culture is a separate one, partly with the same roots. During the last centuries the Russian elite adopted elements of European culture. This brought Europe and Russia closer to eachother. Unfortunately, during the 20th century they were separated again.

I agree Europe and Russia can't be seen apart from eachother, but they aren't the same either.

You are right man
We have something common in our cultures but we are not the same, of course Russian culture is different. I just want to say that not only Russian elite adopted elements of European culture, but Europeans adopted something from our culture, remember Tolstoy, Tchaikovsky, Dostoevsky and others. You count them as only part of Russian culture or they are the part of European culture too?
Actually I don’t agitate anyone to include Russia in EU, I was kidding.

P.S Actually I can imagine Russia without Europe, you was right we have a periods of full isolation in our history. We are self-sufficient country, in terms of natural recourses we are the richest country in the world. Can you imagine EU without Russia?

P.S.S. Actually I was kidding again, seriously speaking I can’t imagine Russia without Europe. We have common future, so let’s make this future. It is not necessary to include us in EU, just let’s live in peace, let’s work together and making this future.

[Serb]

Originally posted by Ironikinit
I'm not going to say that the US provoked war with Japan, but we should've seen it coming. In that sense, yeah, we screwed ourselves at Pearl Harbor. How could we really blame anybody but ourselves for that? The Japanese had a history of sneak attacks, like when they whipped the Russians at Port Arthur.

Agreed. They have ninja’s traditions.
All I want to said is that World Wars was not Europeans creations as someone typed here, I don’t remember who it was, and I’m too lazy to check it. Both of worlds wars was world's creations (if only I could say so) but not only Europeans.

[TacticalGrace]

Originally posted by Serb



Agreed. They have ninja’s traditions.
All I want to said is that World Wars was not Europeans creations as someone typed here, I don’t remember who it was, and I’m too lazy to check it. Both of worlds wars was world's creations (if only I could say so) but not only Europeans.

Actually I think that both wars were very much the responsibily of Europe:

World war II on a global scale was very much the result of the European conflict (the "German Problem") which was in turn a direct result of World War I. WWI was mainly a result of European nationalism (France, Central Powers, Russia, with Italy, UK and Turks getting dragged in)

The "German Problem" was entirely the responsibility of the European powers and, after the result of 1918, it was well within their power to control Germany.

[Oligarf]

The points that other people also make here is that it is unimaginable that the Americans invent Ancient things. I think that the Americans shouldn't have been in because their base technology is not their own, their complete nation is largely based on ideas and concepts from Europe. You could doubt if the distinction in Europe went to far, Franks and Germans are both Germanic people.

Another point, America is the only former colony, with mainly it's people not coming from the own continent, in the Civilization list of Civ III. You can say that India was a former colony, but I hope you can see the difference between these.

And about that UN thing, the US recently paid it's debt to the UN, guess why... What is unacceptable is that as soon as the US paid their debt, other countries that have a debt at the UN may not vote anymore. Again thanks to the US for this unfriendly behaviour...

PS I don't dislike Americans or America, there is even a big chance I end up living in the US, but some of the things happening in the US, make me question if everything that happens in the US are the right things and are meant by it's Founding Fathers.

[Ironikinit]

Originally posted by Oligarf
...but some of the things happening in the US, make me question if everything that happens in the US are the right things and are meant by it's Founding Fathers.

Don't buy into the whole founding fathers hype too much. We had to fight a civil war to fix one of their mistakes, after all.

Serb, I think that I was the one who said that both world wars were European in origin. It's probably an oversimplification, like saying that slavery was the cause of the American civil war.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Fresno
Another point: the population.

Russia: 148 million
Germany: 81 million
England: 58 million
France: 57 million
Italy: 57 million
Spain: 38 million
Netherlands: 15 million
Belgium: 10 million
Portugal: 10 million

Per the CIA.

Russia: 146 million
Germany : 83 million

Total EU at present: 378 million

Relatively speaking, the Russian's population is no more of a problem than Germany's is presently. At the moment Germany makes up 22% of the EU population. Add in Russia and it (Russia) would makes up 28% of the population. Add in the other prospectives, such as Czech Republic Hungary etc and it is reduced to about 23% - in other words as relatively strong as Germany is now.

[LarryBernard]

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin
I have ancesotors going back to 2b.c. from Germany

That would be after 100-odd generations, therefore so do a lot of people.

In fact, anyone with British anscetry probably does to...

Ergo thats pointless **PLONK**

it can count itself as one of the most influencial nations to have ever existed.

At present, but in 100 or 1000 years time will it be seen as such. Even after 2000 years the Roman Empire is still remembered as a great empire, after 100 years the British Empire has similar accolades, but the Spanish are largely ignored despite being the world power for longer than the US has currently.

The Spanish were only a world power During the Hapsburg period, and the burned out during 3 reigns to becoming a weakened world power.

[Dauphin]

Spain can be considered a world power from at least 1492 (when the Moors were finally pushed out of Spain) to at least1588 (the defeat of the Great Armada), the US from the 1900s to 2002.

A conservative estimate places Spain as being the world power as long as the US.

I can't find my original post but I think you must have added this:

In fact, anyone with British anscetry probably does to...

Ergo thats pointless **PLONK**

You do realise the bolds were reference quotes? My point was that the previous point was pointless.

[Dauphin]

Found the original post, jeez, I wrote that back in September.

Yeah, anyway the first comment was a rebuttal to a point (in bold) that someone else made.

[Oligarf]

Originally posted by Ironikinit
Don't buy into the whole founding fathers hype too much. We had to fight a civil war to fix one of their mistakes, after all.

OK, I don't know that much about it to say you are wrong, but another point is that the first presidents of the US were mainly atheists. I don't try to say with this that religion is wrong, but sometimes religion has to much influence in American politics. I even heard that some christians, if you may still call them that way of course, in the US could be could fundamentalists. Not that nice an idea I think.

(and yes, I don't deny that the Netherlands have some idiots walking around as well)

Originally posted by Sagacious Dolphin
Per the CIA.

Russia: 146 million
Germany : 83 million

Total EU at present: 378 million

Relatively speaking, the Russian's population is no more of a problem than Germany's is presently. At the moment Germany makes up 22% of the EU population. Add in Russia and it (Russia) would makes up 28% of the population. Add in the other prospectives, such as Czech Republic Hungary etc and it is reduced to about 23% - in other words as relatively strong as Germany is now.

If that is the case it doesn't seem to me that unreasonable, but Russia would be the only real big country, although France and the United Kingdom are a bit smaller than Germany it's a whole lot other proportion when Russia is added. There should happen some things out there before I would consider to let them join the EU.

[Ironikinit]

Well, there's been some talk that Thomas Jefferson was an atheist (and that talk happened when he was alive, too), but calling the US founders atheists is a bit of a stretch.

Like a lot of educated people of the period, some of them could be called deists. Deism hinges IIRC upon the principle that there is a creator, but not an interventionist god.

Washington, for example, was a soldier, and like many soldiers was a believer. He made references to a divine providence lots of times.

The US is a relatively religious country today, and believers do sometimes attempt to force their views upon others. Of course, to some Christians efforts by the American Civil Liberties Union to keep prayer out of school and religious images off public property seem like having their beliefs denied. Some fundamentalists believe that the US is powerful because of the intervention of god.

IMO, the founders were wise to make religious freedom the law of the land, and doubly wise to separate church and state.

[Fresno]

Sagacious Dolphin:

Relatively speaking, the Russian's population is no more of a problem than Germany's is presently. At the moment Germany makes up 22% of the EU population. Add in Russia and it (Russia) would makes up 28% of the population. Add in the other prospectives, such as Czech Republic Hungary etc and it is reduced to about 23% - in other words as relatively strong as Germany is now.

See it like this: the Russian population is bigger as the population of Germany and France together. This would make them VERY powerful, even if the Eastern European countries you mentioned would be added.

And further, don't forget they still have huge political and economical problems, which should be solved before they could be added anyway.

[Oligarf]

"Allah, bless America!"

[Oligarf]

Originally posted by Fresno
See it like this: the Russian population is bigger as the population of Germany and France together. This would make them VERY powerful, even if the Eastern European countries you mentioned would be added.

And further, don't forget they still have huge political and economical problems, which should be solved before they could be added anyway.

Isn't that the same as I already said?

[Fresno]

Maybe. You should be glad someone agrees with you.

[Dauphin]

And further, don't forget they still have huge political and economical problems, which should be solved before they could be added anyway

I was talking under the assumption that they would be ready for EU membership (i.e resolved economic/political difficulties). I wouldn't forsee that for 20-30 yrs anyway.

With regards outnumbering Germany and France combined, what is the problem? If you apply the one person, one vote principal, why should it matter where that vote is coming from.

In the UK, England makes up 75% of the population. Its not a problem.

[Worthingtons]

America, England, France, and Germany are nations, not civilizations

WOT!?!?!?!
England Controlled 1/4 of the Globe I'll have you know!! Our Empire is perhaps the greatest Empire in HISTORY!!, Yes these days we are just a mighty nation, but at one time we were a glorious formidable civilisation!!. We then decided to be kind and give the other places thier independance.


Interesting Poll this

[Cairo_East]

If all poltical, economic, and cultural developments of former English colonies are directly related to England, then it means that England is responsible for both the Irish boyband Westlife and the American boyband the Back Street Boys. Personally, I ache for England.

[Dauphin]

Colonies never can afford the real thing - hence it is fair to say that they are just poor copies of the original boy band - the Beatles.