《文明7》中的漢朝：席德梅爾的設(shè)計與真實的漢朝相去甚遠
Civ 7 Han: Firaxis' version bears zero resemblance to real life Han China.
譯文簡介
Firaxis 將漢朝描述為一個注重科技和“外交”的文明。
正文翻譯
Civ 7 Han: Firaxis' version bears zero resemblance to real life Han China.
《文明7》中的漢朝：席德梅爾的設(shè)計與真實的漢朝相去甚遠
《文明7》中的漢朝：席德梅爾的設(shè)計與真實的漢朝相去甚遠
Firaxis' Han China is described as Scientific and *Diplomatic*.
In game, that's more or less how it is - with Han being built around big cities producing lots of specialists, and strong defensive capabilities with the Chu-Ko-Nu UU and the Great Wall UB. While that is I guess a part of Han China, especially Eastern Han, it doesn't at all encapsulate what made Han "its grandest".
Now let's turn our attention to Han China in real life. Following the reign of Emperor Wu of Han, diplomacy was never a serious option - other than capitulation.
Under the tenure of the Han Dynasty, China waged wars on literally every single neighbour it had, almost doubling China's territory from the Qin Dynasty. (1.7x at its maximum territorial extent) Look at this map from Wikipedia for reference, they didn't leave a *single* one of their neighbours alone.
https://preview.redd.it/b7sdj4vhimne1.png?width=1275&format=png&auto=webp&s=3073a0818d92d55097db7c504a85c002a002b39c
Their enemies/conquests included:
\\\\- Joseon (Korea)
\\\\- Nanyue, Minyue (Precursors of Vietnam)
\\\\- Dai Viet (Vietnam)
\\\\- xiongnu
\\\\- Greco Bactria
\\\\- Qiang
\\\\- xianbei
and more.
This was all built upon a system of universal male conscxtion, which the Han Chinese social fabric revolved around. If you've ever watched Mulan, you'll know what I'm talking about. Han Chinese men between the age of 23-56 were eligible for universal conscxtion, and thus the Han Chinese emperors were able to draw upon hundreds of thousands to \\\\~a million men for their campaigns and for the construction of the Great Wall.
Furthermore, this system of conscxtion was also behind the consolidation of the various fractured states, mixing and matching identities and cultures to build a unified Han Chinese identity that still persists today.
Making Han China a *diplomatic* civ is just dumb. It just isn't Han China. ~~Song or Ming~~ maybe, but not Han.
Edit: It has come to my attention, that Han China in game is pretty much the Zhou. Literally everything from ShiDafu, to Nine Provinces ability, to ChuKoNu would fit better with the Zhou.
Firaxis 將漢朝描述為一個注重科技和“外交”的文明。
在游戲中，漢朝的機制或多或少體現(xiàn)了這一點：它以擁有眾多專家的大城市為核心，并通過特色單位“諸葛弩”和特色改良設(shè)施“長城”獲得了強大的防御能力。 雖然這可能代表了漢朝的一部分，尤其是東漢，但這遠不能概括漢朝“最偉大”之處。
讓我們來看看歷史上真實的漢朝。自漢武帝統(tǒng)治之后，對方除了投降，外交從來都不是一個可行的選項。
在漢朝統(tǒng)治時期，中國幾乎對每一個鄰國都發(fā)動了戰(zhàn)爭，使得中國的領(lǐng)土比秦朝幾乎翻了一番（擴張最鼎盛時達到了秦朝的 1.7 倍）?？梢詤⒖季S基百科上的這張地圖（附圖鏈接），他們沒有放過任何一個鄰國。
漢朝的敵人/征服對象包括：
-朝鮮 (韓國)
-南越、閩越 (越南的前身)
-越南 (大越)
-匈奴
-大夏-希臘王國 (巴克特里亞)
-羌
-鮮卑
-等等
這一切都建立在普遍的男性征兵制度之上，漢朝的社會結(jié)構(gòu)也圍繞著這一制度展開。如果你看過《花木蘭》，你就會明白這一點。23 至 56 歲的漢族男子都有義務(wù)服兵役，因此漢朝皇帝能夠征召數(shù)十萬甚至上百萬的士兵參與戰(zhàn)爭和長城建設(shè)。
此外，這種征兵制度也是各個分裂國家統(tǒng)一的背后推手，它融合了不同的身份和文化，最終形成了統(tǒng)一的、沿襲至今的漢族認同。
將漢朝塑造成一個“外交型”文明是愚蠢的。這根本就不是真正的漢朝。也許宋朝或明朝更符合，但絕不是漢朝。
編輯： 我現(xiàn)在才意識到，游戲中的漢朝實際上更像是周朝。從士大夫到九州，再到諸葛弩，幾乎所有的設(shè)定都更符合周朝。
In game, that's more or less how it is - with Han being built around big cities producing lots of specialists, and strong defensive capabilities with the Chu-Ko-Nu UU and the Great Wall UB. While that is I guess a part of Han China, especially Eastern Han, it doesn't at all encapsulate what made Han "its grandest".
Now let's turn our attention to Han China in real life. Following the reign of Emperor Wu of Han, diplomacy was never a serious option - other than capitulation.
Under the tenure of the Han Dynasty, China waged wars on literally every single neighbour it had, almost doubling China's territory from the Qin Dynasty. (1.7x at its maximum territorial extent) Look at this map from Wikipedia for reference, they didn't leave a *single* one of their neighbours alone.
https://preview.redd.it/b7sdj4vhimne1.png?width=1275&format=png&auto=webp&s=3073a0818d92d55097db7c504a85c002a002b39c
Their enemies/conquests included:
\\\\- Joseon (Korea)
\\\\- Nanyue, Minyue (Precursors of Vietnam)
\\\\- Dai Viet (Vietnam)
\\\\- xiongnu
\\\\- Greco Bactria
\\\\- Qiang
\\\\- xianbei
and more.
This was all built upon a system of universal male conscxtion, which the Han Chinese social fabric revolved around. If you've ever watched Mulan, you'll know what I'm talking about. Han Chinese men between the age of 23-56 were eligible for universal conscxtion, and thus the Han Chinese emperors were able to draw upon hundreds of thousands to \\\\~a million men for their campaigns and for the construction of the Great Wall.
Furthermore, this system of conscxtion was also behind the consolidation of the various fractured states, mixing and matching identities and cultures to build a unified Han Chinese identity that still persists today.
Making Han China a *diplomatic* civ is just dumb. It just isn't Han China. ~~Song or Ming~~ maybe, but not Han.
Edit: It has come to my attention, that Han China in game is pretty much the Zhou. Literally everything from ShiDafu, to Nine Provinces ability, to ChuKoNu would fit better with the Zhou.
Firaxis 將漢朝描述為一個注重科技和“外交”的文明。
在游戲中，漢朝的機制或多或少體現(xiàn)了這一點：它以擁有眾多專家的大城市為核心，并通過特色單位“諸葛弩”和特色改良設(shè)施“長城”獲得了強大的防御能力。 雖然這可能代表了漢朝的一部分，尤其是東漢，但這遠不能概括漢朝“最偉大”之處。
讓我們來看看歷史上真實的漢朝。自漢武帝統(tǒng)治之后，對方除了投降，外交從來都不是一個可行的選項。
在漢朝統(tǒng)治時期，中國幾乎對每一個鄰國都發(fā)動了戰(zhàn)爭，使得中國的領(lǐng)土比秦朝幾乎翻了一番（擴張最鼎盛時達到了秦朝的 1.7 倍）?？梢詤⒖季S基百科上的這張地圖（附圖鏈接），他們沒有放過任何一個鄰國。
漢朝的敵人/征服對象包括：
-朝鮮 (韓國)
-南越、閩越 (越南的前身)
-越南 (大越)
-匈奴
-大夏-希臘王國 (巴克特里亞)
-羌
-鮮卑
-等等
這一切都建立在普遍的男性征兵制度之上，漢朝的社會結(jié)構(gòu)也圍繞著這一制度展開。如果你看過《花木蘭》，你就會明白這一點。23 至 56 歲的漢族男子都有義務(wù)服兵役，因此漢朝皇帝能夠征召數(shù)十萬甚至上百萬的士兵參與戰(zhàn)爭和長城建設(shè)。
此外，這種征兵制度也是各個分裂國家統(tǒng)一的背后推手，它融合了不同的身份和文化，最終形成了統(tǒng)一的、沿襲至今的漢族認同。
將漢朝塑造成一個“外交型”文明是愚蠢的。這根本就不是真正的漢朝。也許宋朝或明朝更符合，但絕不是漢朝。
編輯： 我現(xiàn)在才意識到，游戲中的漢朝實際上更像是周朝。從士大夫到九州，再到諸葛弩，幾乎所有的設(shè)定都更符合周朝。
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 9 )
收藏
likes: 804
Diplomatic doesn't necessarily mean peaceful in Civ 7. It means it is easier to bring your diplomatic relationship where you want: that can be to worsen it in order to declare war without a war support bonus for your enemy. And it is also about being able to vassalize and integrate city-states.
在《文明7》中，外交并不一定意味著和平。它指的是更容易將外交關(guān)系引導(dǎo)至你期望的方向：這可能是為了惡化關(guān)系，以便在不給敵人帶來戰(zhàn)爭支持加成的情況下宣戰(zhàn)。外交也包括能夠征服和整合城邦。
likes: 276
This. Diplomacy trait means more power to engage with other relationships in a good or bad way.
沒錯。外交特質(zhì)意味著擁有更多權(quán)力，以積極或消極的方式與其他文明互動。
likes: 14
Machiavelli as a diplomatic leader shows this idea quite well. His main tool is undoubtedly in the diplomacy system of this game, but does it mean that his playstyle is nice and peaceful? Hell no. His main idea is to bully and coerce others for your own benefit.
There are terms like gunboat diplomacy and big stick diplomacy for a reason.
馬基雅維利作為外交領(lǐng)袖很好地詮釋了這一理念。他的主要手段無疑是游戲中的外交系統(tǒng)，但這是否意味著他的玩法是友好和平的呢？當(dāng)然不是。他的核心思想是為了自身利益而欺凌和脅迫他人。
“炮艦外交”和“大棒外交”這些術(shù)語的存在是有原因的。
likes: 5
Machiavelli is weird. He's famous for championing a pragmatic, calculated form of politics - yet in the game his strategy is to outwardly piss everyone off so they hate him
He said it's best for leaders to be feared rather than loved - but never go so far as to be hated
馬基雅維利很奇怪。他以倡導(dǎo)務(wù)實、精明的政治手段而聞名，但在游戲中，他的策略卻是公開激怒所有人，讓他們憎恨他。
他說過，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者最好讓人畏懼而不是愛戴，但絕不能做到讓人憎恨。
likes: 3
Yeah, true.
I mean I get what the intention of the ability is, kinda that his pragmatic and calculated practices result in an advantage for him in diplomatic efforts.
But the actual effect of his ability is that you just spam endeavors that you know your angry opponent won't accept, because you get gold for free.
是的, 沒錯。
我理解這個能力的意圖, 大概是他的務(wù)實和精明的做法使他在外交活動中占有優(yōu)勢.
但是他的能力的實際效果是你只發(fā)送那些你知道憤怒的對手不會接受的提議，因為你可以白白獲得金幣.
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 29
When Napoleon's Emperor persona (being hated by everyone and having sanctions that make other people hate you even more) and Prussia (also being hated by everyone and having bonuses while being at war) are labelled at "diplomatic", it becomes clear that the Diplomatic attribute is not necessarily about just waging war, indeed.
當(dāng)拿破侖的“皇帝”特性（被所有人憎恨，且其制裁會招致更多憎恨）和普魯士（同樣被所有人憎恨，但在戰(zhàn)爭中能獲得加成）都被歸類為“外交”時，很明顯，“外交”屬性實際上并不一定只關(guān)乎發(fā)動戰(zhàn)爭。
likes: 72
Yeah this is the most "well actually" post I've seen here in a while. Like hate it for the bad stuff, not every minor little nitpick.
是啊，這是我最近在這里看到的最“杠精”的帖子了。那些糟糕的部分是該吐槽，但也沒必要對每個細枝末節(jié)都吹毛求疵。
likes: -202
" And it is also about being able to vassalize and integrate city-states"
Exactly what Han didn't do.
“外交也包括能夠征服和整合城邦?！?br /> 這恰恰是漢朝沒有做的。
likes: 106
What ? Han did have tributaries and vassals , it’s not because an empire is focused on conquest that it does not have vassals or cities states in its sphere of influence , quite the contrary in fact.
什么？漢朝確實有朝貢國和附庸國。一個帝國專注于征服，并不代表它的勢力范圍內(nèi)就沒有附庸國或城邦，事實上恰恰相反。
likes: -34
No it didn’t.
It had one of each, the rest were directly under han china with some degree of regional autonomy.
不，它沒有。
它各自只有一個，其余的都直接受漢朝統(tǒng)治，并享有一定程度的區(qū)域自治。
likes: 33
>directly under han china with some degree of regional autonomy.
You might need to revisit what a vassal means.
“直接隸屬于漢朝，但有一定程度的地區(qū)自治。”
你可能需要重新理解一下“附庸”的含義。
likes: -21
A vassal, and a commandery are very different concepts. Han China was very centralised.
附庸和郡縣是截然不同的概念。漢朝是高度中央集權(quán)的。
likes: 25
Yeah and colonies weren't full of the enslaved (especially the Hispanic colonies). Not to mention modern capitalism is totally not a mutation of the aristocracy with extra steps. Totally different!
是啊，殖民地里也不是到處都是奴隸（尤其是西班牙殖民地）。更不用說現(xiàn)代資本主義完全不是貴族制度的變種，只是多了幾步而已。完全不一樣！ (諷刺)
likes: 34
That’s like saying a production Civ “bears zero resemblance to history” because the player builds different things than the historical leaders did
這就像說一個注重生產(chǎn)力的文明“與歷史毫無相似之處”，因為玩家建造的東西與歷史上的領(lǐng)袖所建造的不同。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 124
Yeah? So? Han isn't focused on being suzerains, it's just focused on getting influence. It can be used freely from then.
是啊，那又怎樣？漢朝的重點不是成為宗主國，而是獲取影響力。然后就可以自由地使用這些影響力了。
likes: 47
It's an option that's there for all civs, it's not there just for Han, so if you want to play historically accurate, just don't do it.
這是所有文明都可以選擇的一個選項，不僅僅是漢朝。所以，如果你想玩得符合歷史，就不要這樣做。
likes: 14
Can you point to some historical sources that show that the Han dynasty did NOT establish vassals and tributaries? That would go against my understanding of Chinese history.
您能否提供一些歷史資料，證明漢朝 “沒有 ”建立附庸國和朝貢國？這與我對中國歷史的理解相悖。
likes: -5
Han China had vassals, - internal ones, under han Chinese rule. Khotan is a sorta exception, it wasn’t that under the yoke, although Han Chinese soldiers were still stationed
It only had one tributary, dayuan because it was too far to reach. That’s it.
Tributaries were a moreso tang and after thing - especially the ming had a ton of them.
漢朝有附庸國，是內(nèi)部的，受漢朝統(tǒng)治。于闐算是個例外，它沒有受到那么強的控制，盡管漢朝軍隊仍然駐扎在那里。
它只有一個朝貢國，大宛，因為它太遠了，難以控制。僅此而已。
朝貢國更多的是唐朝及以后的事情，尤其是明朝有很多朝貢國。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 9
Diplomacy is about power projection. In-game, influence currency is used for war support and declaring wars. Even concepts like the mandate of heaven is a tool to uphold legitimacy and spread propaganda. The Han collapsed because the child emperor was a puppet to a tyrant, lost legitimacy (or popular support) and the directive to rule hence civil war.
Sometimes you need an army to even have the opportunity for diplomacy. So it makes sense for civs like the Normans to have both diplomacy and military. They don't have the opportunity to marry into the great noble families like the Capet or the Hohenstaufen without being great conquerors.
外交關(guān)乎力量投射。在游戲中，影響力貨幣用于支持戰(zhàn)爭和宣戰(zhàn)。甚至“天命”這樣的概念也是維護統(tǒng)治合法性和進行宣傳的工具。漢朝之所以滅亡，是因為年幼的皇帝淪為了暴君的傀儡，失去了合法性（或者說民眾的支持）以及統(tǒng)治權(quán)，從而導(dǎo)致了內(nèi)戰(zhàn)。
有時候，你甚至需要一支軍隊才能獲得外交的機會。因此，像諾曼人這樣的文明同時擁有外交和軍事特質(zhì)是合理的。如果他們不是偉大的征服者，就沒有機會像卡佩家族或霍亨斯陶芬家族那樣，通過聯(lián)姻進入偉大的貴族家族。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 285
While I appreciate the effort of this post, i think you should consider the fact that no culture or time period can be boiled down to three game mechanics, let alone ones historians would agree upon.
I have my own bugbears with Civs in this game - in particular the Mughals - however something to keep in mind is that these are debates. The team at Firaxis no doubt have historians that would make a counter-argument as to why the civ was implemented the way it was, and what its referencing.
我很欣賞樓主為這篇帖子所做的努力，但我認為你應(yīng)該考慮到一個事實，即沒有任何一種文化或時期可以被簡化為三種游戲機制，更不用說讓歷史學(xué)家們達成一致了。
我對這款游戲中的一些文明也有我自己的不滿——尤其是莫臥兒文明——但需要記住的是，這些都是存在爭議的。毫無疑問，席德梅爾的團隊中有歷史學(xué)家會就為何以這種方式設(shè)計這個文明，以及它所參考的內(nèi)容提出反駁的觀點。
likes: -57
I know exactly what it's referencing.
They did encapsulate a time period extremely well with all of these abilities. Remarkably well even.
Problem is, it's the wrong dynasty.
This is as good as it gets for a representation of the *Zhou* dynasty. Shidafu, Chu Ko Nu, Nine Provinces.
That's why its so much of a mismatch.
我很清楚它指的是什么。
他們確實用這些能力很好地概括了一個時代。甚至可以說概括得非常好。
問題是，他們選錯了朝代。
這是對 “周 ”朝最好的概括。士大夫、諸葛弩、九州。
這就是為什么如此不匹配。
likes: 48
The Chu Ko Nu sure isn’t anything Zhou though considering the namesake which it’s named after is Zhuge Liang who lived at the end of the Han Dynasty during the Three Kingdoms era.
考慮到諸葛弩是以三國時期漢朝末年的諸葛亮命名的，它肯定不是周朝的東西。
likes: 24
All zhuge did was improve it. We have archeological evidence that it came about during the warring states period. It was way before him, and during the time where the Zhou was still a thing.
諸葛亮所做的只是改進了它。我們有考古證據(jù)表明，它起源于戰(zhàn)國時期。這比諸葛亮早得多，而且是在周朝仍然存在的時期。
likes: 69
Diplomats contributed a lot to Han’s conquests
The famous quotes like:
"The Han army is coming. Stay still, or your nation falls."
"Offend the mighty Han, and you will be punished, no matter how far."
"Where the sun and moon shine, and rivers flow, all belong to the Han."
are all from ambitious Han diplomats.
There’s a story of successful conquest behind each of them. The first one was even said by a diplomat who perished a whole country with a few other diplomats from Han.
Making Han a diplomatic civ is nothing wrong, and it’s kind of historical correct in my opinion. The problem is that you can do very little with diplomacy by the current system. Imagine you can make two allied civ declare war against each other (or just stop being ally) with a huge amount of influence, or you can use influence to transfer one city’s control to yourself.. There’re unlimited workable options here, but sadly the current diplomacy system in the game is little more than declaring war and making peace.
外交官對漢朝的征服貢獻巨大。
著名的言論，如：
“漢軍將至，勿動，動則滅國?！?br /> “犯強漢者，雖遠必誅?！?br /> “凡日月所照，江河所至，皆為漢土。”
都出自雄心勃勃的漢朝外交官之口。
每一句話背后都有一個成功征服的故事。第一句話甚至是一位漢朝外交官說的，他和其他幾位漢朝外交官一起滅亡了一個國家。
把漢朝塑造成一個外交文明并沒有錯，而且在我看來，這在某種程度上符合歷史。問題在于，在當(dāng)前的游戲系統(tǒng)中，你幾乎無法通過外交手段做太多事情。想象一下，你可以用巨大的影響力讓兩個盟友文明相互宣戰(zhàn)（或者不再結(jié)盟），或者你可以用影響力將一個城市的控制權(quán)轉(zhuǎn)移給自己……這里有無限的可行選項，但遺憾的是，目前游戲中的外交系統(tǒng)只不過是宣戰(zhàn)和媾和。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 3
Han envoys are sometimes used to literally annoy and provoke regimes to act hostile towards the Han (in the form of killing said envoy), which is then used as a CB to conquer/puppet said region.
漢朝使節(jié)有時會被故意用來激怒和挑釁其他政權(quán)，使其對漢朝采取敵對行動（例如殺害漢朝使節(jié)），然后這被漢朝用作征服/控制該地區(qū)的戰(zhàn)爭借口。
likes: 194
A Civ’s abilities don’t give an accurate picture of the totality of that civilization IRL? That’s shocking. Next you’re gonna tell me that Rome wasn’t the only city in the Roman Empire, and that they were also waging constant wars against all of their neighbors to expand their territory, which their in-game abilities don’t reflect at all
一個文明在游戲中的特質(zhì)并不能準(zhǔn)確反映該文明在現(xiàn)實世界中的全貌？這真是太令人震驚了。接下來你是不是要告訴我，羅馬城并不是羅馬帝國唯一的城市，而且他們還在不斷地對所有鄰國發(fā)動戰(zhàn)爭以擴張領(lǐng)土，而這些在游戲中的能力根本沒有體現(xiàn)出來？（諷刺）
likes: 50
I actually think Rome is fairly well modeled. Their key abilities are using the military to settle towns and getting culture for producing infantry.
實際上，我認為羅馬被呈現(xiàn)得相當(dāng)不錯。他們的關(guān)鍵能力是利用軍事力量建立城鎮(zhèn)，并通過生產(chǎn)步兵獲得文化。
likes: 26
I think the point is that Rome in one form or another for antiquities sake lasted for like 1200 years if were not counting going into exploration, so you can't really boil down that much time absolutely perfectly.
我認為關(guān)鍵在于，如果不算入探索時代的話，羅馬以這樣或那樣的形式，為了古典時代的緣故，存在了大約1200年，所以你不可能把這么長的時間完美地概括出來。
likes: 19
Ancient Egypt laughs at your puny 1200 years.
古埃及會嘲笑你們這微不足道的1200年。
likes: 5
They gotta have the record right? I mean at least for a nation that was still actually the same nation over time?
他們應(yīng)該保持著存在時間最長的記錄吧？我的意思是，至少對于一個隨著時間推移，實際上仍然是同一個國家的國家而言？
likes: 16
What does “nation that was still actually the same nation” actually mean?
“實際上仍然是同一個國家”到底是什么意思？
likes: 7
It's honestly more philosophical then anything. It's like if you ask how long has France been around? Well the kingdom of France and modern France are two totally different things, do the franks before them count? I guess the question is were the Egyptian dynasties different enough to qualify as a different nation and if so when is the cut off exactly?
老實說，這更像是一個哲學(xué)問題。這就像你問法國存在了多久？法蘭西王國和現(xiàn)代法國是兩個完全不同的事物，他們之前的法蘭克人算嗎？我想問題是，埃及的各個王朝之間的差異是否足以讓他們成為不同的國家，如果是的話，確切的分界線在哪里？
likes: 5
Egypt is split into:
- Old Kingdom (2663-2195)
- First Intermediate Period (2195-2066)
- Middle Kingdom (2066-1650)
- Second Intermediate Period (1650-1549)
- New Kingdom (1549-1069)
埃及被劃分為：
- 古王國時期（公元前 2663-2195 年）
- 第一中間期（公元前 2195-2066 年）
- 中王國時期（公元前 2066-1650 年）
- 第二中期（公元前 1650-1549 年）
- 新王國時期（公元前 1549-1069 年）
likes: 2
Good lord I was wrong. I guess in my head I always saw it as one big blob. Thankyou very much. That does make me wonder though, after the american revolution would the US be consider one contigious government. We have not had a revolution since then but have had many massive changes that completely changed how our government worked. Things like abolition and womens suffrage, along with voting rights for all citizens rather then just land owners.
edit:as well as the massive shift from being much more federalized in the beggining to more centralized now. The federal government tends to be much more heavy handed with making de facto laws now(such as cutting federal spending for infrastructure if a state wont agree to certain terms).
天哪，我錯了。我猜在我的印象中，我一直把古埃及看作一個整體。非常感謝。但這確實讓我好奇，在美國獨立戰(zhàn)爭之后，美國是否會被認為是一個連續(xù)的政府？自那以后，我們雖然沒有再發(fā)生過革命，但經(jīng)歷了很多巨大的變化，徹底改變了我們政府的運作方式。比如廢除奴隸制、婦女獲得選舉權(quán)，以及所有公民都擁有投票權(quán)，而不僅僅是土地所有者。
編輯補充： 以及從最初的高度聯(lián)邦化到現(xiàn)在更加中央集權(quán)的巨大轉(zhuǎn)變?，F(xiàn)在，聯(lián)邦政府在制定事實上的法律時往往更加強硬（例如，如果一個州不同意某些條款，聯(lián)邦政府就會削減用于基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施的開支）。
likes: 2
Nope. The longest lasting Egyptian Kingdom was the Old Kingdom for 500 years, and even it was ruled by 3-4 different dynasties.
不。存在時間最長的埃及王國是古王國，持續(xù)了500年，即便如此，它也由3-4個不同的王朝統(tǒng)治。
likes: -65
Rome is reflected quite well in civ 7.
Their abilities synergise towards an expansionist, militaristic civ - exactly what rome was in real life.
羅馬在《文明7》中得到了很好的體現(xiàn)。
他們的特質(zhì)協(xié)同作用，形成了一個擴張主義、軍國主義的文明——這正是現(xiàn)實生活中羅馬的樣子。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 81
They’re not Expansionist. They’re cultural and militaristic
他們不是擴張主義。他們是文化和軍國主義。
likes: -25
They're militaristic. Strongly so.
The Legatus, Legion all reflect a highly militaristic civ.
Culture makes plenty of sense, because roman culture is extremely influential even to this day.
他們是軍國主義。非常強烈。
執(zhí)政官、軍團都反映了一個高度軍國主義的文明。
文化也很重要，因為羅馬文化直到今天都極具影響力。
likes: 64
But in game they're not expansionist
但在游戲中，他們不是擴張主義
likes: 37
They're incetivized to get as many towns as possible, you cant tell me they are not expansionist just because they dont have that word written in their tags.
他們被激勵去獲得盡可能多的城鎮(zhèn)，你不能因為他們的標(biāo)簽上沒有寫“擴張主義”這個詞就說他們不是擴張主義。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: -1
That’s the original point. The Han having the tag of “diplomatic” (that’s actually a resource in game that can be spent for expansion and war) and “scientific” is not that relevant.
這才是最初的觀點。漢朝擁有“外交”（這實際上是游戲中可以用于擴張和戰(zhàn)爭的資源）和“科技”的標(biāo)簽并沒有那么重要。
likes: 2
Their abilities are all scientific and diplomatic..
他們（漢朝）的能力都是科技和外交方面的……
likes: 1
Diplomatic in that they get lots of influence and scientific in that they get lots of science. You can use those resources to do whatever you want.
外交方面，他們獲得了大量影響力；科技方面，他們獲得了大量科研值。你可以利用這些資源做任何你想做的事情。
likes: 3
They are one of the few civs to have a settlement limit increase in their civic tree.
他們是少數(shù)幾個在市政樹中增加了定居點上限的文明之一。
likes: 10
Every single empire used violence to expand their borders, I am sooooo sorry that Han isn’t a militaristic civ - they can’t all be.
每個帝國都使用暴力來擴張其邊界，我很遺憾漢朝沒有被設(shè)定為一個軍國主義文明——游戲里不能所有文明都是軍國主義。
likes: 35
Han dynasty ruled China for 400 years or so. And you are complaining they did reflect a different period then the expansionist one? Honestly Hans legacy is more about different stuff then just expanding borders lol
漢朝統(tǒng)治中國大約400年。而你卻抱怨他們反映的不是擴張主義時期？老實說，漢朝的遺產(chǎn)更多的是關(guān)于其他方面的東西，而不僅僅是擴張邊界，哈哈。
likes: -14
"Honestly Hans legacy is more about different stuff then just expanding borders lol"
None of which they represented.
“老實說，漢朝的遺產(chǎn)更多的是關(guān)于其他方面的東西，而不僅僅是擴張邊界，哈哈”
但這些其他方面他們也都沒有體現(xiàn)出來。
likes: 24
I’m so confused about your posts. Han dynasty was known for significant scientific advancement, and for establishing vassals and tributaries as they conquered their neighbours and ruled through diplomacy for a significant period of time. I get how you could have the opinion that you wished they did the Han as a military/expansionist civ, but I really don’t see how the interpretation in game is that inaccurate.
我對你的帖子感到非常困惑。漢朝以其重大的科技進步而聞名，并且在征服鄰國的過程中建立了附庸國和朝貢國，并在相當(dāng)長的一段時間內(nèi)通過外交手段進行統(tǒng)治。我理解你為什么會希望他們把漢朝設(shè)計成一個軍事/擴張主義文明，但我真的不明白游戲中的這種解讀有什么不準(zhǔn)確之處。
likes: 3
I hope they bring “flavors” to civs the way they did to leaders.
That way you can play all eras within a CIV’s history, or at least choose.
我希望他們能像對待領(lǐng)袖那樣，給文明帶來“風(fēng)味”（即不同的特性側(cè)重）。
這樣你就可以體驗一個文明歷史上的所有時代，或者至少可以選擇（不同的側(cè)重）。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: -1
That isn't what they were known for, aside from pop history outside of China.
They were known first and foremost for carving out China, and a Chinese identity. They finished the job that the Qin started and by the end of their reign, they conquered through force, (not diplomacy) what we now consider Chinese heartland and consolidated that through force.
Diplomacy really wasn't a main thing for the han, and decentralised government or straight up vassals was one of the things that the Han got rid of.
Science too, the Han in general aren't famed for their scientific achievements. Sure, there was a lot during the Han dynasty, but that's simply a virtue of being a massive prosperous empire rather than a culture tailored towards science and learning.
Much of the philosophical, or scientific stuff they tried to encapsulate would once again fit better with the Zhou. The one hundred schools, Confucius etc were all relics of the Zhou Dynasty.
然而在中國以外的通俗歷史中，漢朝并非以此（科技與外交）聞名。
他們首先是以開創(chuàng)中國和中華認同而聞名。他們完成了秦朝開始的事業(yè)，并且在他們統(tǒng)治的末期，通過武力（而不是外交）征服了我們現(xiàn)在認為是中華核心地區(qū)的區(qū)域，并通過武力鞏固了這一區(qū)域。
對于漢朝來說，外交真的不是一件主要的事情，而地方分權(quán)或者說直接的附庸是漢朝所摒棄的東西之一。
在科學(xué)方面也是如此，總的來說，漢朝并不以其科學(xué)成就而聞名。當(dāng)然，漢朝時期有很多科學(xué)成就，但這僅僅是因為它是一個龐大而繁榮的帝國，而不是因為它有一種專門致力于科學(xué)和學(xué)習(xí)的文化。
他們試圖涵蓋的許多哲學(xué)或科學(xué)內(nèi)容，再一次地，現(xiàn)在游戲中漢朝的特質(zhì)更適合周朝。百家爭鳴、孔子等都是周朝的遺物。
likes: 95
Wait, Harriet Tubman didn’t lead the Han empire? I’m fucking SHOCKED.
等等，哈莉特·塔布曼沒有領(lǐng)導(dǎo)漢帝國？我太震驚了。（諷刺）
likes: 36
Of course she didn't. She was an Egyptian pharaoh.
她當(dāng)然沒有。她是埃及法老。
likes: 2
I have to read my history books, Jesus.
Hey wait, where the HELL is Jesus Christ? That’s my president.
我得去讀讀歷史書了，天哪。
等等，耶穌基督到底在哪里？那是我的總統(tǒng)。（繼續(xù)諷刺）
likes: 11
There's a difference between ahistorical and having a civ be completely different from what they were in real life.
Would you be happy if they made mongols sailors?
不符合史實和讓一個文明與真實歷史上的情況完全不同是有區(qū)別的。
如果他們讓蒙古人成為航海家，你會高興嗎？
likes: 6
If the Mongols were ever significantly exposed to sea or ocean, they might have. In history, they were not. But in Civ, they can be.
Your original post cites *behaviors* as inconsistent with history. These arguments are immediately invalidated because the game lets you choose the behaviors as well as conditions for a civilizations existence.
If you want Han China to attack everyone around them, then feel free to play that way.
如果蒙古人曾經(jīng)大量接觸過海洋，他們 “可能 ”會成為航海家。在歷史上，他們沒有。但在《文明》中，他們可以。
你最初的帖子引用了漢朝的“行為” 與歷史不符。這些論點立即失效，因為游戲允許你選擇文明的行為以及文明存在的條件。
如果你想讓漢朝攻擊周圍的每一個人，那么請隨意按照這種方式玩。
likes: 11
Fine.
If they gave the mongols abilities entirely catered to sea faring?
好吧。
如果他們給蒙古人完全適合航海的特質(zhì)呢？
likes: 7
Napoleon Emperor is described as diplomatic, and his ability is that he gets gold for having people pissed at him. The diplomatic trait is not about having good relations, and much of the diplomacy system describes how two peoples feel about each other. You leverage your influence to try to guide external relations to where you want, either a good or bad place. It seems they could be describing Han China as a big bully.
拿破侖的“皇帝”特性也被描述為外交，他的能力是讓別人對他生氣就能獲得金幣。外交特性與擁有良好關(guān)系無關(guān)，外交系統(tǒng)的很大一部分描述的是兩個民族之間的相互感受。你利用你的影響力來引導(dǎo)對外關(guān)系，使其朝著你想要的方向發(fā)展，無論是好的還是壞的?？雌饋硭麄兛赡軐h朝描述成了一個恃強凌弱的大惡霸。
likes: 0
If you read the Han China abilities, you would realise that's not the case.
如果你看過漢朝在《文明》中的能力，你會發(fā)現(xiàn)事實并非如此。
likes: 5
I just did. I didn’t see anything about good relations. I’m not trying to be disingenuous (I’ve seen people derailing the conversation here and I really praise your patience in answering them), I just think there’s lots of posts were people misunderstand what diplomacy is in the game. I don’t know barely anything about Chinese history, so I believe you when you say that many civics represent the Zhou dynasty better, and it’s a shame they didn’t focus on representing Han better.
My point is exclusively about diplomacy; in game, it’s also a tool for war, directly related to war support. You can’t have every civilization have the tag militaristic, they were going for some balance, but most of the great civilizations in real world history could be described as militaristic.
我剛看過了。我沒有看到任何關(guān)于“外交特質(zhì)=建立良好關(guān)系”的內(nèi)容。我并不是想耍滑頭（我看到這里有人在擾亂討論，我真的很佩服你回答他們的耐心），我只是認為有很多評論誤解了游戲中的“外交”是什么。我對中國歷史幾乎一無所知，所以我相信你說的，文明中的特質(zhì)更好地代表了周朝，很遺憾他們沒有專注于更好地表現(xiàn)漢朝。
我的觀點只針對外交；在游戲中，它也是戰(zhàn)爭的工具，直接關(guān)系到戰(zhàn)爭支持。你不可能讓每個文明都有“軍國主義”的標(biāo)簽，席德梅爾想要實現(xiàn)某種平衡，但現(xiàn)實世界歷史上大多數(shù)偉大的文明都可以被描述為軍國主義。
likes: 2
There's nothing about *relations* in general either. That's the point. Aside from weiyang palace, but yeah. Han China is entirely built around isolationist and defensive. The Chu Ko Nu and great wall are all defensive, when they were the complete opposite in real life.
Han China can be considered exceptionally militaristic. Not every ancient civilization enacts general mobilisation, or has a whole bureaucratic arm to sustain an effort like such.
漢朝的文明設(shè)計中也沒有任何關(guān)于“關(guān)系”的內(nèi)容。這就是重點。除了未央宮。游戲中的漢朝完全是圍繞著孤立主義和防御建立的。諸葛弩和長城都是防御性的，而他們在現(xiàn)實生活中的表現(xiàn)卻恰恰相反。
漢朝可以被認為是極其軍國主義的。并非每個古代文明都會實行全國總動員，或者擁有一個完整的官僚機構(gòu)來維持這樣的行動。
likes: 4
I think the problem is that while they wanted a civ to represent the pinnacle of China in antiquity, they also wanted a balance because they already had other militaristic civs, so while they are specifically naming the civilization “Han”, they got some characteristics from antiquity China in general. Chu Ko Nu is a recurring unit in the civilization series, they probably just wanted it in there somehow. The bureaucratic arm sustaining mobilization is most likely the inspiration behind the “diplomatic” attribute.
我認為問題在于，雖然他們（游戲設(shè)計師）希望有一個文明來代表古代中國的巔峰，但他們也希望保持游戲的平衡，因為他們已經(jīng)有了其他的軍國主義文明。所以，雖然他們明確地將這個文明命名為“漢朝”，但他們還是從廣義的古代中國中提取了一些廣泛的特征?！爸T葛弩”是《文明》系列中反復(fù)出現(xiàn)的單位，他們可能不想拋棄。漢朝官僚機構(gòu)對軍事動員的支持，很可能是“外交”屬性的靈感來源。
likes: 2
That's my point. It doesn't feel in anyway Han.
I think they actually went with Zhou in the beginning, but renamed it because of marketing or something.
The abilities and everything distinctly feel like the Zhou, rather than the Han.
For instance, the Shidafu are pretty much all philosophers from the Zhou rather than the Han. There's only one Han philosopher, which should tell you something.
If they literally just changed the name to Zhou, it would pretty much be a surprisingly good depiction.
The abilities are also all very Zhou concepts that happened to also slightly or moderately apply to Han.
這就是我的觀點。它（游戲中的漢朝設(shè)計）沒有任何漢朝的感覺。
我認為他們一開始實際上選擇的是周朝，但可能是因為市場營銷或其他原因而改名了。
這些能力和所有設(shè)定都明顯地讓人感覺像是周朝，而不是漢朝。
例如，“士大夫”幾乎都是周朝的哲學(xué)家，而不是漢朝的。只有一位漢朝的哲學(xué)家（董仲舒），這應(yīng)該能說明一些問題。
如果他們直接把名字改成周朝，那將是一個對中國文明出人意料的、相當(dāng)好的描繪。
這些能力的概念也都非常“周朝”，只是恰好也稍微或適度地適用于漢朝。
likes: 4
Weiyang Palace isn't the only thing that gives them influence. Their unique civics contain social policies that add influence to science and happiness buildings. That influence could be used to play isolationist and deter wars, but you could also use it to to be aggressive and give yourself masses of war support to aid your expansion efforts. Being encouraged to build happiness buildings also helps with sustaining a war effort, or a wide empire.
The reason why they decided to go with this gameplay style I think, is mostly part of a marketing strategy - Confucius being the clear Geographic choice for China, they wanted there to be obvious synergy between Confucius's abilities and Han's. And while I'm not a big expert on Confucius, I have never seen anything that leads me to believe he had a power hungry ideology, so they went with this idea of a Confucius-led han being more of a peaceful, defensive, diplomatic hub for education. That's kinda the point of this entry - certain unique buildings, units and abilities are there as a small nod to the culture of a civ, but it's NOT supposed to be a historically accurate depiction, since the leader you pick will also have a big sway on how it plays. Friedrich leading Han would very likely be conquering lots of territory.
Now whether or not this would be better under the Zhou and not the Han, I have no stake in that conversation because I know very little of China's history. But I do understand why they went with this depiction for an antiquity era china, regardless of whether or not they used the right dynasty of china to represent it.
未央宮并不是唯一能給漢朝帶來影響力的東西。他們獨特的市政中包含的社會政策可以為科研建筑和宜居度建筑增加影響力。這種影響力可以用來奉行孤立主義和阻止戰(zhàn)爭，但你也可以用它來發(fā)動侵略，為自己提供大量的戰(zhàn)爭支持，以幫助你進行擴張。鼓勵建造宜居度建筑也有助于維持戰(zhàn)爭，或者維持一個龐大的帝國。
我認為，他們決定采用這種游戲風(fēng)格的原因，主要是出于營銷策略的考慮——孔子顯然是中國在地理區(qū)域上的選擇，他們希望孔子的能力和漢朝的能力之間存在明顯的協(xié)同作用。雖然我不是研究孔子的專家，但我從未見過任何東西讓我相信他有一種渴求權(quán)力的意識形態(tài)，所以他們選擇了這種想法，即由孔子領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的漢朝更像是一個和平的、防御性的、專注于外交的和一個教育中心。這正是這個條目的意義所在——某些獨特的建筑、單位和能力是對一個文明文化的輕微致敬，但這不應(yīng)該是一種歷史上準(zhǔn)確的描繪，因為你選擇的領(lǐng)袖也會對游戲玩法產(chǎn)生很大的影響。弗里德里希領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的漢朝很可能會征服大量領(lǐng)土。
至于這在周朝而不是漢朝的背景下是否會更好，我對此沒有任何立場，因為我對中國歷史知之甚少。但我確實理解為什么他們要對古代中國進行這樣的描繪，不管他們是否使用了正確的中國朝代來代表它。
likes: 3
The Mongols did raise large fleets for the attempted conquest of Japan, as well as Java.
(they were destroyed by typhoons/ultimate unsuccessful, but they did have large navies)
蒙古人的確組建了龐大的艦隊，試圖征服日本和爪哇。
（他們被臺風(fēng)摧毀了/最終失敗了，但他們確實擁有龐大的海軍。）
likes: 0
It’s an inaccurate video game. It’s a thing called suspension of disbelief. Some of those civs didn’t conquer the world with flaming arrow men but I can in the game. Some of those civs didn’t build the pyramids but I can in the game.
It’s a game. Read a book for accuracy.
這是一個不準(zhǔn)確的電子游戲。這就是所謂的“擱置懷疑”。有些文明并沒有用燃燒的弓箭手征服世界，但我在游戲中可以。有些文明沒有建造金字塔，但我在游戲中可以。
這只是一個游戲。要想獲得準(zhǔn)確的信息，請讀書。
likes: 35
Civ abilities are meant to be themed around their history
文明的能力應(yīng)該是以他們的歷史為主題的。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: -23
Eh, that’s you deciding that and you making your own definition for diplomacy. some of the civ leaders nowadays are not even leaders and diplomacy isn’t really the opposite of war anyways for this game.
Saying Han didn’t leave any of their neighbors alone would actually speak to having a diplomatic focus as far as what the game considers diplomacy (generating influence)
you need influence to declare war and increase war support.
嗯，這是你自己的決定，你對“外交”有你自己的定義?，F(xiàn)在有些文明的領(lǐng)袖甚至都算不上領(lǐng)袖，而且在這款游戲中，外交并不一定是戰(zhàn)爭的對立面。
說漢朝沒有放過任何一個鄰國，實際上表明了他們注重外交，也就是游戲中所認為的“外交”（產(chǎn)生影響力）。
你需要影響力來宣戰(zhàn)和增加戰(zhàn)爭支持。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 5
Small correction, Han didn't conquer Joseon, they existed alongside Ming China and had quite good relations with them. The one that Han conquered was Gojoseon.
小小地更正一下，漢朝并沒有征服朝鮮，朝鮮與明朝并存，并且與明朝的關(guān)系相當(dāng)好。漢朝征服的是高句麗。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 13
>Civ I-IV China was the ***
>In the Chinese version of III and IV, China was represented by Taizong of the Tang Dynasty
>Civ II, V-VI, Wu Zetian, also Tang Dynasty (technically)
> Qin Shi Huang (IV, VI), Qin Dynasty
>Kublai Khan (VI), Yuan Dynasty
> Yongle (VI), Ming Dynasty
It's a bit upsetting that in VII, the Han dynasty is finally in the game, considered by some to be the peak of Chinese culture, so who's going to be the Chinese leader on the game? Liu Bang, the peasant-turned-emperor that overcame impossible odds? Han Wudi, a great conqueror and reformer? Maybe even Liu Bei as a more "popular" choice... Nah, it's *Confucius*.
...Yes, I also wanted Lorenzo de' Medici instead of Machiavelli.
-《文明》1-4代的中國代表是中g(shù)；
- 在《文明3》和《文明4》的中文版中，中國的代表是唐太宗；
-《文明2》、《文明5》和《文明6》中，中國的代表是武則天，也算是唐朝（嚴(yán)格來說）；
- 秦始皇（《文明4》、《文明6》），秦朝；
- 忽必烈（《文明6》），元朝；
- 永樂帝（《文明6》），明朝。
有點令人沮喪的是，在《文明7》中，漢朝終于加入了游戲，有些人認為漢朝是中國文化的巔峰，那么誰會成為游戲中的中國領(lǐng)袖呢？是從農(nóng)民到皇帝，克服了重重困難的劉邦？還是偉大的征服者和改革家漢武帝？或許甚至可以選擇更“受歡迎”的劉備……然而都不是，是孔子。
……是的，我也更希望是洛倫佐·德·美第奇而不是馬基雅維利。 (注: 洛倫佐·德·美第奇是文藝復(fù)興時期佛羅倫薩的統(tǒng)治者和藝術(shù)贊助人)
likes: 4
Damn, they need to bring Taizong back, man was goated.
該死的，他們需要讓唐太宗回歸，這家伙太棒了
likes: 12
You’re trying to make the argument that the Han were a fundamentally militant or expansionist state, but most of the conquests you are citing date from a single emperor who himself is considered abnormal in his preoccupation with foreign conquests. The very map you use indicate all those major campaigns took place in a span of twenty-ish years in the last quarter of the 2nd century BCE, while the Han lasted for another 300. It would be like modeling the entire Rome civ on the reign of Commodus or something.
你試圖論證漢朝本質(zhì)上是一個軍事化或擴張主義的國家，但你引用的大部分征服都發(fā)生在一位皇帝（漢武帝）統(tǒng)治時期，而這位皇帝本人對外國征服的專注被認為是反常的。你使用的地圖也表明，所有這些重大的軍事行動都發(fā)生在公元前2世紀(jì)最后一、二十年左右的一段時間內(nèi)，而漢朝又持續(xù)了300年。這就像是把整個羅馬文明都建立在康茂德皇帝統(tǒng)治時期的基礎(chǔ)上一樣。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 3
Han China was at war for almost 200 consecutive years. Its entire society for its earlier years was built around the maintenance of a bureaucratic corps and infrastructure like roads and the great wall to sustain conscxt armies of up to a million men. Han men went through mandatory military training.
What more do you want?
漢朝幾乎連續(xù)打了200年的仗。在漢朝早期，整個社會都圍繞著維持一個官僚機構(gòu)和道路、長城等基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施而建立，以支持多達一百萬人的征兵軍隊。漢朝男子要接受強制性的軍事訓(xùn)練。
你還想要什么？
likes: 9
“It’s entire society for its earlier years was built around the maintenance of a bureaucratic corps and infrastructure like roads and the great wall to sustain conscxt armies of up to a million men.”
Putting aside the numbers question, you’ve just described 95% of ancient empires and a vast majority of imperial states period. The fact that the Han state retained relatively static borders aside from the initial conquests speaks to an inability or unwillingness to expand their territory beyond a certain point, and external conquests were of secondary priority to internal state cohesion. In this context I don’t think Firaxis’ depiction of the Han is some major misrepresentation.
“在漢朝早期，整個社會都圍繞著維持一個官僚機構(gòu)和道路、長城等基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施而建立，以支持多達一百萬人的征兵軍隊。”
先不談數(shù)字問題，你剛才描述的正是95%的古代帝國和絕大多數(shù)帝國時期的國家。除了最初的征服之外，漢朝保持了相對穩(wěn)定的邊界，這表明它沒有能力或不愿意將領(lǐng)土擴張到某個特定點之外，而且對外征服相對于內(nèi)部國家的凝聚力而言是次要的。在這種背景下，我不認為席德梅爾對漢朝的描繪有什么重大的失實之處。
likes: 19
To be honest calling it Han China is just wrong because it's basically a composite from Zhou until Han, and not just Han. It's especially egregigous in their unique unit case, Shi Dafu, who consist of Zhou and Spring and Autumn scholars too.
老實說，稱之為“漢朝”是不準(zhǔn)確的，因為它基本上是從周朝到漢朝的一個綜合體，而不僅僅是漢朝。尤其是在他們的特色單位“士大夫”這一點上，尤其明顯，其中也包括周朝和春秋時期的學(xué)者。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 19
Exactly. This isn't han china. This is Zhou China.
Nothing about this civ is han china.
沒錯。這不是漢朝。這是周朝。
這個文明沒有任何地方是漢朝。
likes: 6
They did spend the first 70 years or so paying off the xiongnu until they were strong enough to conquer them. Also, the first 50 years had somewhere under 1/2 of their territory controlled by semi-autonomous princes.
漢朝確實花了大約70年的時間向匈奴進貢，直到他們強大到足以征服匈奴。此外，在最初的50年里，漢朝大約有一半的領(lǐng)土是由半自治的諸侯王控制的。
likes: 7
eh, I don't think Maya is also a production powerhouse or Hawaii being the beacon of culture at exploration age, it's just for gameplay purpose.
嗯，我不認為瑪雅是一個生產(chǎn)強國，也不認為夏威夷是探索時代的文化燈塔，這只是為了游戲性。
likes: 4
There's probably some gameplay balance considerations going into these things, so I'm not that bothered by it.
Would be interesting to see if the Chinese players can come up with a full suite of interesting Chinese Dynasties for the Age of Antiquity via modding, seeing how there's a lot to choose from.
這其中可能有一些游戲平衡方面的考慮，所以我對此并不太在意。
如果中國玩家能夠通過模組的方式為“古典時代”設(shè)計出一整套有趣的中國朝代，那將會很有趣，因為有很多可以選擇。
likes: 1
Chinese players have already left by now.
Go to steam, sort by language -> simplified Chinese.
Every single review is bright red + a refund.
中國玩家現(xiàn)在已經(jīng)離開了。
去Steam，按語言排序->簡體中文。
每一條評論都是鮮紅色的+退款。
likes: 14
I feel like people are missing the point about this post. There is a difference between 100% historical accuracy and what the leaders/civs represents. Sure, Harriet leading greece isn’t at all historically accurate, but for what Harriet represents as a leader and for what Greece represents as a civilization, I think it’s perfectly fine. Not everything has to be a 100% historically accurate… no one is saying that, but there should at least be some resemblance to what they’re trying to represent….
覺得人們沒有抓住這個帖子的重點。100%的歷史準(zhǔn)確性和領(lǐng)袖/文明所代表的東西之間是有區(qū)別的。當(dāng)然，哈莉特領(lǐng)導(dǎo)希臘完全不符合歷史事實，但就哈莉特作為領(lǐng)袖所代表的意義和希臘作為文明所代表的意義而言，我認為這是完全可以的。并不是所有東西都必須100%符合歷史……沒有人這么說，但至少應(yīng)該與他們試圖代表的東西有一些相似之處……
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://m.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
likes: 3
My take is that the Han are more popular by name. Even people with passing knowledge of Chinese history know about the Han. The Chinese name for themselves, endonym, is Han Ren, or person of Han. The word Chinese is an exonym. for person of Qin. The end of the Han dynasty had become more popular literary-wise with the Three Kingdoms era by subsequent authors.
It's more a representation thing, than an accuracy one.
我的看法是，漢朝這個名字更廣為人知。即使是對中國歷史略知一二的人也知道漢朝。中國人對自己的稱呼是“漢人”。“Chinese”這個詞是一個外名，指的是秦人。漢朝末年，由于后世作家的創(chuàng)作，三國時期在文學(xué)上變得更加流行。
這更多的是一個代表性的問題，而不是一個準(zhǔn)確性的問題。
likes: 5
Then why not represent the han?
It really isn't that hard.
那為什么不在游戲中好好地表現(xiàn)漢朝呢？
這真的不難。
likes: 2
They most likely chose the aspects to focus on based on what would balance out the roster with different playstyle focuses, so the question really should be: why not represent the Zhou?
他們很可能是根據(jù)能夠平衡不同游戲風(fēng)格的側(cè)重點來選擇要關(guān)注的方面，所以真正的問題應(yīng)該是：為什么不代表周朝？
likes: 2
Honestly idk why they even went with such a specific dynastic period for the civ name when they've always just been China in the other games.
老實說，我不知道他們?yōu)槭裁磿x擇這樣一個特定的朝代作為文明名稱，因為在其他的游戲里，他們一直都只是“中國”。
likes: 2
Maybe to leave other dynasties for DLCs?
也許是為了把其他朝代留給 DLC？
likes: 1
There are at least 13 dynasties in China. One just happens to be the Mongolians. So that's 9 more possible DLCs.
中國至少有13個朝代。其中一個恰好是蒙古人建立的。所以還有9個可能的DLC。
likes: 1
Because the civ's name is *Han* China, not *Zhou* China.
因為這個文明的名字是漢朝，而不是周朝。
likes: 2
Yes, they could have picked Zhou instead since it matched their gameplay needs better.
是的，他們本可以選擇周朝，因為這更符合他們的游戲性需求。
likes: 1
This whole "Han" China really would fit extremely well if it was just renamed Zhou.
如果把這個所謂的“漢朝”改名為周朝，那就真的非常合適了。
likes: 3
Sinophiles at it again, another strategy game another list of "grievances"
華語玩家又來了，又對著一款策略游戲發(fā)泄一堆“不滿”。
likes: -7
ok incel.
好的，incel。（非自愿獨身者，通常帶有貶義和厭女傾向）。
likes: 2
Say hello to Spain. Money, ships WTF? Culture!!! XVII century was the golden age of Spain, but for the meme we always have the conquistadores stuff.
西班牙向你打招呼。金錢、船只，去你的吧？應(yīng)該是文化?。?！17世紀(jì)是西班牙的黃金時代，但出于玩梗，我們總是把西班牙征服者那一套拿出來說。
likes: 8
To be fair, how did that golden age come about..?
平心而論，你們那個黃金時代是怎么來的……？
likes: 1
Chu ko nu wouldn’t fit the Zhou but if doesn’t fit Han either
諸葛弩不適合周朝，但也不適合漢朝。
likes: 1
The actual Chu Ko Nu itself, fits han pretty well. It is the perfect representation of Han's philosophy of massed armies, and the crossbow was the centerpiece of Han's conscxt armies. Han China had upwards of 500,000 crossbows in supply for most of its history.
However the implementation of the unit, is not that. The Chu Ko Nu as a unit is very tailored towards defence.
諸葛弩本身非常適合漢朝。它是漢朝大規(guī)模軍隊理念的完美體現(xiàn)，而弩是漢朝征召軍隊的核心。在漢朝歷史的大部分時間里，漢朝儲備了多達50萬把弩。
然而，游戲中諸葛弩的實現(xiàn)方式并非如此。諸葛弩作為一個單位，非常注重防御。
likes: 1
The chu ko nu was invented by Zhuge Liang after the end of the Han dynasty
諸葛弩是諸葛亮在漢朝滅亡后發(fā)明的
likes: 2
That's a misconception.
The Nugong, the crossbow was invented far before.
Zhuge Liang simply made a few modifications to it.
Zhuge Liang has the best PR game in all of Chinese history. One of the five classics is half spent on glazing his ass.
這是一種誤解。
弩的發(fā)明要早得多。
諸葛亮只是對它做了一些改進。
諸葛亮在中國歷史上擁有最好的公關(guān)能力。五大經(jīng)典之一有一半的篇幅都在吹捧他。
likes: 1
Yeah and chu ke nu is specifically the model of crossbow that Zhuge Liang invented
是的，而諸葛弩特指諸葛亮發(fā)明的弩的型號。
likes: 1
It really isn't.
The name just stuck for some reason, especially outside of China.
It's highly doubted that he did half of the things that he was said to have done in the story.
并非如此。
只是由于某種原因，這個名字流傳了下來，尤其是在中國以外的地區(qū)。
人們非常懷疑《三國演義》中說的他所做的事情有一半不符合史實。
likes: 1
Diplomatic just means your civ shits influence. And Han was nothing if not influential.
外交只是意味著你的文明產(chǎn)出影響力。如果說漢朝有什么的話，那就是影響力.
likes: 1
hey , Mulan is not han
嘿，花木蘭不是漢朝的。