Similiar Civs?

Inverse Icarus · May 28, 2002, 19:24

maybe it's just me, but when i hear the word "Gauls" i think Charlemange, and i think France.

what exactly is the difference betwen the Gauls and the French, territory wise?

Carthage Barca · May 28, 2002, 20:37

Gauls were what the romans called the people of the region that is now france. I think that it was an error, the Gauls are really the Celts in the game. Soemhting I would like to add though does the game really need the Koreans? I mean Three Civs (China,Japan,Korea) are all squeezed in that area of the world. Now my Korean History isn't very good but, are that that much different from china?

Darkworld Ark · May 28, 2002, 22:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Carthage Barca
Now my Korean History isn't very good but, are that that much different from china?

They're closer to Japan than China. (Same language family, Korea got alot of Japanese influence during Japan's conquests of Korea)

JtheJackal · May 28, 2002, 22:34

Your reason for not including Korea isn't really a good one. China, Japan, Korea all in northeast Asia. Babylonia, Persia, Ottomans, Arabs all in the Middle East. (Most of thier territories overlapping throughout history). Aztec, Mayans, Inca all Central and South America. English, Germans, French, Gauls, Spain, all western Europe, Ect. Its just the way civilizations work out. They branch off each other.

monkspider · May 28, 2002, 22:45

Well put J.
I really don't think Korea is any more similar to Japan than England is to France. In fact, probably much less so.

KaiserIsak · May 29, 2002, 09:53

I agree with monkspider on that one. But Koreas historical role is much less then the one of france and britain.
I think koreas historical role is to small to be included.

Inverse Icarus · May 29, 2002, 14:46

Quote:

Originally posted by KaiserIsak
I agree with monkspider on that one. But Koreas historical role is much less then the one of france and britain.
I think koreas historical role is to small to be included.

i was talking to my chinese friend about this today (he's a bit more up on his asian history than i am) and he said Korea was the Poland of Asia, in that it was constantly conquered and subjigated by other powers, seperated by small attempts of self-rule.

JtheJackal · May 29, 2002, 16:22

Korea got a chapter in my high school history book, Poland didn't.

Panag · May 29, 2002, 16:23

Quote:

Originally posted by KaiserIsak
I agree with monkspider on that one. But Koreas historical role is much less then the one of france and britain.
I think koreas historical role is to small to be included.

hi ,

wrong , what they did was huge , only it aint documented so much in the western world , .......

have a nice day

phunny_pharmer · May 30, 2002, 01:43

"Korea got a chapter in my high school history book, Poland didn't" How about: Solidarity? Chopin? Curie? The Poles have contributed a lot to world history and culture. I'm not even Polish.

That is no way to judge a civ. Who is to say that your textbook was right, or wasn't biased?

However, considering that there already is an overabundance of European civs, I don't think the Poles should be included. Korea should be in.

GeneralTacticus · May 30, 2002, 03:32

Quote:

i was talking to my chinese friend about this today (he's a bit more up on his asian history than i am) and he said Korea was the Poland of Asia, in that it was constantly conquered and subjigated by other powers, seperated by small attempts of self-rule

Are you sure he didn't mean dominated? Prior to 19th-20th centuris Korea was independant for more than a thousand years...

KaiserIsak · May 30, 2002, 04:31

Poland were for several hundred years one of the biggest power in europe, and we would probably be moslems all of us if it was´nt for their victory outside Vienna in 1683 (i think thats the year) over the ottomans.
Panang, what was huge? Could you please tell me? i dont know so much about korean history, but i would like to learn.

Adm.Naismith · May 30, 2002, 08:12

Quote:

Originally posted by KaiserIsak
I agree with monkspider on that one. But Koreas historical role is much less then the one of france and britain.
I think koreas historical role is to small to be included.

Hmmm, are you baiting Yin26 to coming back with a vengeance?

He wrote a very extended (somewhat overextended, are you listening my friend?

) tirade to explain the role of Korea during History.

I must admit it was interesting for an European as I am, in fact an Italian that suffered an excessive amount of history lesson about Roman History, to learn more about Asian history.

civman2000 · May 30, 2002, 10:42

poland was huge, but iirc weak. Thye were the largest country but really not one of the strongest powers.

Miznia · May 30, 2002, 15:16

But Polish culture spread, overwhelming neighboring cultures that became more powerful. For instance, German, Russian, and Uralic culture are all Polic off-shoots.

Korea on the other hand has no unique culture, and survives only because it's like Australia in Risk: four provinces that take forever to get to and don't have to be heavily defended, and only give you two armies per turn if you own them all. And to top that off, they couldn't even count as a continent without lumping in Indonesia and Papua New Guinea!

Korean Pop is awesome, by the way.

Miznia

Inverse Icarus · May 30, 2002, 16:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Adm.Naismith

Hmmm, are you baiting Yin26 to coming back with a vengeance?

yes, yes i am

Veracitas · May 30, 2002, 20:15

Quote:

Originally posted by KaiserIsak
I agree with monkspider on that one. But Koreas historical role is much less then the one of france and britain.
I think koreas historical role is to small to be included.

KaiserIsak, before you make such quick and rash judgments, please think over your words more carefully. My main quarrel would be with the last part of your statement: please check out this thread for more info. I know it's long, but I encourage you to at least read the first post. If it piques your interest at all, an interesting debate follows...

KaiserIsak · May 31, 2002, 13:28

You are wrong about poland being weak, like i said, without them we might have been moslems all of us.

miznia, i think you are wrong. What i have heard is that they definatly are unique compared to their neighbourd. But i may be wrong.

I read about korea, and i still dont think they should be in. Even if it was good reading and good achievements they would not be to high on my list.

H Tower · May 31, 2002, 14:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Miznia
Korea on the other hand has no unique culture

have you studied korea AT ALL? from your post, it doesn't seem likely

Inverse Icarus · May 31, 2002, 15:43

Quote:

Originally posted by H Tower

have you studied korea AT ALL? from your post, it doesn't seem likely

make him ask yin, wasnt there a 6 page topic on why korea should be included? maybe firaxis listened. :loL

Miznia · May 31, 2002, 16:15

Quote:

have you studied korea AT ALL? from your post, it doesn't seem likely

Did you even READ my post? If so, then how about addressing some of the points I raised?

For the record I am pro-Korean-inclusion.

H Tower · May 31, 2002, 17:46

you compared korea to the australian territory in risk. was that you point?

Oerdin · May 31, 2002, 17:57

I've been to Korea several times and I like it. However, Korea is no more deserving of inclusion then half a dozen other nations I can think of...

Darkworld Ark · June 1, 2002, 00:09

Quote:

Originally posted by H Tower
you compared korea to the australian territory in risk. was that you point?

I like Australia in Risk, easy to protect.

Mikhail · June 1, 2002, 17:25

Korea does have a distinct culture, but I think Oerdin said it best. If firaxis were going to add 16 civs instead of 8, then I'd consider putting them in.

If I were going to add another Asian civ, I'd put in Tibet. They're probably THE most distinct culture in Asia, along with a significant role in history.

Furthermore, the Asia culture set will be the only culture set without a 'lost civilization'. Romans, Zulu, Babylon, Aztecs, and soon to be Gauls for Europe...Asia needs one for the 'what if' factor.

spicytimothy · June 1, 2002, 18:29

I agree that Korea should NOT get included.

Although unlike Poland it's beeb independent for an extremely long time (both China and Japan has numerous attempts to invade, but failed most of the time...) it has no unique culture. Period. The Korean language u see today is a relatively new usage bud off from Chinese. They hv been using Chinese characters of thousands of years. They fashion, language, economy, arcitechture, and basically culture in general is very Chinese. Recent years, there hv been more Japanese influence, but Japanese bud off from the Chinese n e ways...

All in all, I believe that Civs should b chosen due to their historical acheivements, and Koreans did NOT do much. If u talk to Koreans nowadays, most of them (at least all the ones around me) agree that they copy more than invent. i think firaxis added the Koreans only to balance the original locations of the XP's new Civs. Some from EU, some from Asia, some from Americas.

spicytimothy

P.S. I would like to know what's the special unit of the Koreans...

Oerdin · June 1, 2002, 18:48

Supposedly the Korean special unit will be a rocket cart. Incidentally, both Chinese and Japanese also had this type of devise. If I recall the Chinese were the first to invent it too.

Spiffor · June 1, 2002, 18:48

Spicymonthy :
The Korean UU is likely to be the Hwacha, a kind of artillery cart firing a bunch of arrows with gunpowder.
When you say Koreans didn't invent much, it think you're completely wrong : check this thread : http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=25219.

spicytimothy · June 1, 2002, 19:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor
Spicymonthy :
The Korean UU is likely to be the Hwacha, a kind of artillery cart firing a bunch of arrows with gunpowder.
When you say Koreans didn't invent much, it think you're completely wrong : check this thread : http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=25219.

Thanks for the threat and the politeness Spiffor. But i still don't agree that Koreans should b included.

The first few points are all modern statistics. Not only did it prove nothing about the cultural value, it's all just numbers. The Choice isn't based on how large the country is, or how many ppl live in the capital, or how dense it is. there're smaller countries with more cultural values, capitals with less ppl that has more sights to see, a lot less dense countries with more interesting pasts.

As for the foreign currency reserves and import/export market, these only proves the economy of Korea (or more specifically South Korea) (BTW, I find it hard to believe that Korea is the 13th largest country... There's no Korea! Only South Korea and North Korea!)

Biggest airport... Hyundai and Samsung... yeah, like... the richest man in the world lives in the US, and The largest dam will be completed soon in China, and the longest river of the world is in Egypt... what do these prove???

And let's not even discuss the "achievements" that Korea made in comupter gaming and internet usage...

Quote form article:"Koreans have great concern for education, and illiteracy is almost non-existent." Hello??? North Korea??

Quote form article: "Many shows like the Simpsons are actually produced in Korea and shipped back to the U.S. for broadcasting." Wow. I'm impressed. Ever stop and wonder where do all the "Made in China" products in the US market come from?

"Taekwondo" is a Chinese word. Koreans merely learned it from a branch of Chinese kungfu.

"Will Co-host the 2002 World Cup with Japan." How many countries had hosted World Cup b4???

"In the past 2,000 years, Korea has been attacked or invaded nearly 1,000 times. And yet, it has never lost its cultural identity." Aside from being called Koreans and the Korean language, I don't see any cultural identity. On the other hand, I think they learn more from others every time they have a war... But I DO give them credit for the good defense they have.

As for the places that the threat introduced, I don't see how they protrait the uniqueness of Korea. a canon with Chinese characters, temples and statues that represents Buddhism more than Korea, a building with the longest floor space (??) a diary that was written on a daily basis for a long time... How do they prove Korea as a unique historically and culturally rich civilization?

As for the inventions, I doubt that they invented them. Especially Printing machine thingy and the water clock... Chinese is long credited for inventing paper and the printing process. And water clocks are invented separately by many many civs.

Like one of the first replies on that threat, Korea didn't have a large impact on the world in history. Don't think i'm talking about conquering and "forcing their culture on others"... but unlike many other more impressive civs, Korean culture and way of life are exclusive to Koreans and have not much effect on the world... this is a fact.

Thank you for posting this great link and thank yin26 for typing up such a great topic... but it fail to persuade me from my stand...

spicytimothy

Boney · June 2, 2002, 00:58

Okay so I am a little biased here, but people tend to forget Thailand. All I am seeing is Poland and Korea, whilst I think that both have their pros and cons Thailand would be a better inclusion.

Quote:

I think koreas historical role is to small to be included.

Quote:

Korea got a chapter in my high school history book, Poland didn't.

Quote:

However, considering that there already is an overabundance of European civs, I don't think the Poles should be included. Korea should be in.

Maybe I should say Thai (as opposed to Thailand) as in the people and culture, which encompass 5 countries.

Firstly Thailand has always been independent. Thai language is one of the widest spoken languages in the world, it is spoken in Laos, in Burma and in Southern China (between thailand and Burma by the Shan people, their ancient name is 'Thai Yai' or Big Thai, it is also spoken in southern Yunnan province in China, I can actually go there and be understood)Thai has its own script totally different from any other language. Thai even has its own script for numbers which are still very prevelant despite the clammer for Western tourist dollars, and easier understanding for tourists. Thai language has an alphabet, but there are more characters than in English, but Thai is more phonetically correct. (eg. bough, bought, rough would not happen)

Culturally Thai people are totally different from the rest of Asia, an anomally. There is no caste system, women are not looked upon as so inferior as in other Asian nations. People have more freedom to express themselves, gays or ladyboys are not shunned by society, and are not beaten up or picked on. essentially Thai fashion, language, economy, architecture, and basically culture in general is very, ...well, ...Thai.

Quote:

If I were going to add another Asian civ, I'd put in Tibet. They're probably THE most distinct along with a significant role in History

What is Tibet's significant role in History?

Thailand benefitted by being between the English in India and the French in Indo-China, this made Thailand an important factor in the 19th century power games.

Thai monks also reintroduced Buddhism to Sri Lanka.

With the late 20th century focus on Indo-China Thailand has also been significant, as the only safe western enclave.

Also Muay Thai is one of the few forms of fighting that has become an art, with fights being fought to the accompaniment of traditional music, and opponents having to stick to certain rituals before fighting.

Even today Thailand is one of the few Asian countries where westerners can feel totally safe, and not be treated like aliens. Maybe Buddhism helps both Thailand and Tibet in this case.