Oppositions to Arabs

[GePap]

Most players play most games on new maps, so the geographic argument against the Arabs is meaningless for the basic civ game, which ahs always been centered around brand new maps, since on a world map, you know where everything is at the start.
The Arabs re a great addition to the civ game. The problem is not too mnay, but too few. Its too bad the graphics are getting to a point that it is difficualt for most players to add new things sinc ethye lack the computer graphics skills to add all the necessary paraphenalia.

[Ikarus]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
actually we should have more middle eastern civs, like the Assyrians, Hittites and a couple more i can't remember right now

Yeah, like the Phoenicians too.

[Rebel67]

I don't play on the world maps so a crowded Europe doesn't bother me too much (Something about the British Isle appearing to be off the coast of spain that puts me off). New civs shouldn't be chosen based on how they will fit on a world map but by what impact they had on the world.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Ikarus


Yeah, like the Phoenicians too.

Thats more mediterranean, stupid

[Ikarus]

Originally posted by Kramerman


Thats more mediterranean, stupid

It could be argued both.

The name-calling is unneccessary.

[Az]

actually, a great way of putting it would be a canaanite civilization. . Both Hebrews and Phoenicians are a part of the canaanite people that had common heritage language group ( the languages ,are very similar, and one could probably get confused between them ). The hebrews were the one part of those group of people that first raised the level of their primary deity to a monotheistic god., while the phoenicians dominated trade. there are several less known , and much smaller kingdom.

The cities of this civilization would be ancient cities of Israel, and what is now Jordan and Lebanon, The Carthaginian cities ( because Cathargo is basically a phoenician city-state ) , Cities that the phoenicians had all around the middle east , and the new Israeli cities.

If firaxis could do this by lumping all mesapotamic civilizations into a 'Babylon' , I think that it could be done to the nations that lived and still live in the East Med , Including the ones that , for some reason, call themselves arabs.

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by rob.derosa
England is 5000 years old, may not be the oldest, but certainly older than America with only a few centuries. Why not replace the Americans with the Inca, much better.

1) america influence(d/s) the world a lot more than inca, iroquois, maya, sioux, etc... even though it only exists since a few centuries.

2) civ3 is primarily programmed for western countries and mainly for america. by including the americans they could sell it better ...

i could bet you, that most (non-hardcore) players play mainly their own civ

[rob.derosa]

Originally posted by sabrewolf


1) america influence(d/s) the world a lot more than inca, iroquois, maya, sioux, etc... even though it only exists since a few centuries.

2) civ3 is primarily programmed for western countries and mainly for america. by including the americans they could sell it better ...

i could bet you, that most (non-hardcore) players play mainly their own civ

I was doing pointless ranting

Being kinda patriotic

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by sabrewolf
1) america influence(d/s) the world a lot more than inca, iroquois, maya, sioux, etc... even though it only exists since a few centuries.

I'm thinking that the world influenced America even more ...

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Ribannah
I'm thinking that the world influenced America even more ...

presently TRYING to, but not really successful

[Blue Moose]

Originally posted by sabrewolf


presently TRYING to, but not really successful

LOL.

I think it isn't necessarily about "what civs influenced the world the most" as opposed "what civs are interesting/neat." Which just naturally includes the civs of their customers (or maybe that part is just patriotism).

Though, if I was going to vote on what civilization influenced the world the most....I'd go with the Greeks (I think they probably win hands down).

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Blue Moose
Though, if I was going to vote on what civilization influenced the world the most....I'd go with the Greeks (I think they probably win hands down).

haha,
totally off-topic, but your post reminded me of "a big fat greek wedding" ... it's a must-see
whoever saw this one will understand, what made me laugh

but to bring it back on-topic:
i honestly can't decide which civ had the biggest influence.

you could group it by categories (e.g.)
scientificly: greeks (philosophy)
militaristically: romans, maybe also chinese

or by time
or geographicly...

but i really can't think of THE most influentual civilization.

[Traelin]

Originally posted by panag
hi ,

if they go for N-africa its fine , .....

but they should only be in if the Israeli are in , ....

Firaxis , please include them !

have a nice day

My sentiments exactly. I would've really like to have seen the Israelites/Israelis in PTW, especially since the Arabs are now in. They're an ancient Civ and have contributed greatly to the culture of the world.

[Kingof the Apes]

Originally posted by sabrewolf

but i really can't think of THE most influentual civilization.

I would say Romans, as they sread their culture all through Europe/Asia.

of course, they were influenced by the Greeks...

[hr_oskar]

Yes, the Romans indeed... according to Western history

I think the answer depends entirely on how you define the different 'civilizations'... I hate to sound like a smart-ass, but I believe that's true.

I might say that the most influential civilizations in their respective parts of the world have been the Chinese, the Greeks ('Hellenistic' civ), the Indians, and the Arabs.

On a more worldwide level, I think I must acknowledge that the most influential civilization of all has been the 'Western' one. In second place, the Arabs again... consider how widely Islamic civilization has spread, and thus impacted the regional cultures (the Mid-East, most of Africa, the Balkans, Central Asia, India, and South-east Asia).

[Martinus Magnificus]

Originally posted by Ikarus
Yeah, like the Phoenicians too.

The Phoenicians are to be included in PTW, only they are called the Carthagenians. Firaxis made a mistake there. Carthage surely was their capitol, but they were called Phoenicians, not Carthagenians.

[Methril]

My civ belief has always been that if the civ was ever the strongest in the world,it deserves a spot.According to my logic that would include in order (i hope)...

1.Sumerians

2.Babylonians

3.Assyrians

4.Persia

5.Greece

6.Rome

7.Byzantine Empire,Mongol Empire

8.Charlemagne Empire and Holy Roman Empire

9.Kingdom of France

10.Great Britain (England)

11.Spain

12.Germany,England,France

13.United States,Soviet Union

14.United States

I'm just going by my historical memory here.This doesn't mean civs like China,India,Ottomans,Egypt and others don't deserve to be in the game.They all had their place whether it be technology,other science or immeasurable wealth.

[Kramerman]

Originally posted by Ikarus


It could be argued both.

The name-calling is unneccessary.

your mom is uneccessary

[Oerdin]

Even if you don't play on the earth map there is still a valid argument against having to many civs from one geographic area. Since Civ3 is usually played with culturally linked starts, and each civ generally has better relations with civs from the same cultural group, we should do our best to make sure that each cultural group is blanced. Right now we are over loaded with mediterranean.

We should be doing a better job of balancing the different cultural groups.

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Even if you don't play on the earth map there is still a valid argument against having to many civs from one geographic area. Since Civ3 is usually played with culturally linked starts, and each civ generally has better relations with civs from the same cultural group, we should do our best to make sure that each cultural group is blanced. Right now we are over loaded with mediterranean.

We should be doing a better job of balancing the different cultural groups.

culturally linked starting position is the only thing i ALWAYS turn off. pure randomness makes the game more interesting and your strategies more flexible!


in an old thread i once started, i asked for the idea of having 32 to 64 civs, of which you can choose whichever you want. i think with help of the community, firaxis could easily make this possible.

then you could play mediterranian games, american games, battle for the tigris/euphrat-games, etc.... without having to change the mods and units every time you want a new combination...

[rob.derosa]

Originally posted by Methril
My civ belief has always been that if the civ was ever the strongest in the world,it deserves a spot.According to my logic that would include in order (i hope)...

1.Sumerians

2.Babylonians

3.Assyrians

4.Persia

5.Greece

6.Rome

7.Byzantine Empire,Mongol Empire

8.Charlemagne Empire and Holy Roman Empire

9.Kingdom of France

10.Great Britain (England)

11.Spain

12.Germany,England,France

13.United States,Soviet Union

14.United States

I'm just going by my historical memory here.This doesn't mean civs like China,India,Ottomans,Egypt and others don't deserve to be in the game.They all had their place whether it be technology,other science or immeasurable wealth.

Is that 1 being the most powerfull? And why is France, England, US on there twice?

[Methril]

I put them on there twice because at two different "periods" they were the strongest countries in the world.The 1 is to show that they were the earliest.

[rob.derosa]

Originally posted by Methril
I put them on there twice because at two different "periods" they were the strongest countries in the world.The 1 is to show that they were the earliest.

But they cant be in the game twice, if they have been strong in just one period they still deserve a place , no need to put them on there twice.

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Methril
My civ belief has always been that if the civ was ever the strongest in the world,it deserves a spot.According to my logic that would include in order (i hope)...

1.Sumerians
2.Babylonians
3.Assyrians
4.Persia
5.Greece
6.Rome
7.Byzantine Empire,Mongol Empire
8.Charlemagne Empire and Holy Roman Empire
9.Kingdom of France
10.Great Britain (England)
11.Spain
12.Germany,England,France
13.United States,Soviet Union
14.United States

You left out China, the Arabs and the Dutch.

[rob.derosa]

Originally posted by Ribannah


You left out China, the Arabs and the Dutch.

But they were not as powerful as the countries on the list.

[Blue Moose]

Originally posted by rob.derosa


But they were not as powerful as the countries on the list.

China and the Arabs certainly were at their heights of power.

[Ikarus]

Originally posted by Kramerman


your mom is uneccessary

That's it, you're not allowed at my home anymore!

[LionQ]

Originally posted by Blue Moose


China and the Arabs certainly were at their heights of power.

So were the Netherlands in the 17th century: they were the mighteist country in the world!

[sabrewolf]

Originally posted by CivilopediaCity
so were the Netherlands in the 17th century: they were the mighteist country in the world!

please forgive my lack of history knowledge in this case... i didn't know that.

which parts of the world did they control (except present day's holland, republic south africa and some caribbean islands (antilles, etc.))?

[LionQ]

Indonesia, Malacca and Ceylon. In territory we weren't the biggest in territory, but in might and power we sure were! We, in Holland, call that period The Golden Age. In that period WE could say: Holland rules the waves.