View Full Version : Rhye's Ancient World


Arkaeyn
Jul 08, 2006, 05:20 PM
First new thread!

I think the ancient world is coming along nicely. When Greece, Rome and Persia get going, they typically get involved in a war that ends with one, if not two, destroyed.

Historically, I believe it should look something like this:

Persia and Greece get involved in a fairly permanent war which starts with Persia taking Asia Minor, and ends with Greece taking over most of Persia and some of Egypt. At this point, Rome attacks and takes over the Greek cities. Persia, to simulate the Sassanids and Parthians, still exists. Greece and possibly Egypt are both destroyed. India is involved a bit, but not dramatically so.

Currently, this is only half-feasible. Egypt and India are too passive - this is, I think the biggest problem. Also, come the Middle Ages, the winner or winners is generally too powerful for the new Civs, especially the Arabians.

I would fix this by slightly increasing Egypt and India's aggressiveness. I would also, when Warlords comes out, add the Ethiopians to prevent the Egyptians from spending all their resources expanding into Africa.

Of course, Warlords will add the Celts and Carthaginians too, which will seriously alter the look of the ancient world. Probably in a good way for this mod, although it may be necessary to add more turns to the ancient world. It would be hard work for Rome to destroy Greece, the Celts, Carthage, and Egypt in 50 turns.

Eddiit
Jul 08, 2006, 05:58 PM
First new thread!

I think the ancient world is coming along nicely. When Greece, Rome and Persia get going, they typically get involved in a war that ends with one, if not two, destroyed.

Historically, I believe it should look something like this:

Persia and Greece get involved in a fairly permanent war which starts with Persia taking Asia Minor, and ends with Greece taking over most of Persia and some of Egypt. At this point, Rome attacks and takes over the Greek cities. Persia, to simulate the Sassanids and Parthians, still exists. Greece and possibly Egypt are both destroyed. India is involved a bit, but not dramatically so.

Currently, this is only half-feasible. Egypt and India are too passive - this is, I think the biggest problem. Also, come the Middle Ages, the winner or winners is generally too powerful for the new Civs, especially the Arabians.

I would fix this by slightly increasing Egypt and India's aggressiveness. I would also, when Warlords comes out, add the Ethiopians to prevent the Egyptians from spending all their resources expanding into Africa.

Of course, Warlords will add the Celts and Carthaginians too, which will seriously alter the look of the ancient world. Probably in a good way for this mod, although it may be necessary to add more turns to the ancient world. It would be hard work for Rome to destroy Greece, the Celts, Carthage, and Egypt in 50 turns.

Hrm...I think your getting too specific with your results. We want to make it Possible for that outcome...not necessarily set in stone.

Arkaeyn
Jul 08, 2006, 06:23 PM
I'm focused on possible, because right now history is impossible. Nobody ever attacks Egypt

Gunner
Jul 08, 2006, 06:46 PM
I don't think that its an already concluded fact that the Celts will be included in the mod. For RoX they weren't in.

I'm not sure how I feel about the general idea behind this though. Part of me likes the idea of things unfolding historically, but part also wants it to be a bit freeform. In the end it comes down to what direction Rhye wants the mod to go in.

Arkaeyn
Jul 08, 2006, 07:18 PM
I know that Rhye isn't planning on including the Zulu, but I think the Celts could do great things for the mod, which currently has Rome fighting billions of barbians from the north and east with only the Greeks as neighbors. Add the Celts and the Carthaginians and things suddenly get a lot more interesting in ancient Europe.

Plus it's not so difficult to mod a mod. I had decent success turning Open Borders off, without Rhye needing to give me the go-ahead.

Eddiit
Jul 08, 2006, 08:58 PM
I know that Rhye isn't planning on including the Zulu, but I think the Celts could do great things for the mod, which currently has Rome fighting billions of barbians from the north and east with only the Greeks as neighbors. Add the Celts and the Carthaginians and things suddenly get a lot more interesting in ancient Europe.

Plus it's not so difficult to mod a mod. I had decent success turning Open Borders off, without Rhye needing to give me the go-ahead.


I agree the Carthagians will add alot to the mod as long as we improve the area around Carthage. Which Barbarian Tribe had that Fersegederix guy? They might be a good civ to add around the Roman period.

Gunner
Jul 08, 2006, 09:01 PM
That would be pretty exciting if the Celts and Carthaginians were added in. Something would have to be done to ensure that they fell though, it would just be a bit too weird to have them around into the Middle Ages.

Just what are you envisioning that could actually be done to accomplish the goals that you set out earlier here? The two main diffucult things would be to encourage Greece and later Rome to go on the correct conquests. I can tell you from the game I just played that as it is it would be absolutely impossible for an AI Greece to even come close to the conquests of Alexander.

Eddiit
Jul 08, 2006, 09:01 PM
You know about making open borders much harder thing...doesnt open borders allow trade? If we make open borders harder there would be way fewer trade routes.

How about seperating Trade from open borders. Having a Trade treaty establish trade (which is pretty easy to get) and having open borders be what it is (but harder to get) now minus the trade component.

Gunner
Jul 08, 2006, 09:12 PM
Had a cross post there with you.
I agree the Carthagians will add alot to the mod as long as we improve the area around Carthage. Which Barbarian Tribe had that Fersegederix guy? They might be a good civ to add around the Roman period. Vercingetorix was a chieftan of a the Arverni tribe, which was a tribe in Gaul. The Celts in civilization are refering to the Gauls.

here's a place where you can educate yourself ;):http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vercingetorix

Elhoim
Jul 08, 2006, 09:23 PM
How about seperating Trade from open borders. Having a Trade treaty establish trade (which is pretty easy to get) and having open borders be what it is (but harder to get) now minus the trade component.

That´s a pretty nice idea!

And about the gauls, they could be later replaced by the french. I think Rhye was thinking of doing something along those lines with some civs now the 18 civs limits are removed with warlords.

Arkaeyn
Jul 08, 2006, 10:42 PM
My hope is that Warlords show how to mod "barbarian" tribes, and thus the Franks, Vandals, Saxons, etc show up and if they successfully capture a city, they would settle down into civs.

If that's not conceivable, then the game could work essentially the same, if the Celtic capital is placed somewhere where it won't flip when others show up - like Ireland.

rappstar
Jul 09, 2006, 12:21 AM
On a completely unrelated note, I think Universities should be changed a bit. They should give +10%:science: and +1:culture:, and another +10%:science: and +1:culture: for every 10% :culture:. By this I mean to reflect that Universities would normally be among the institutions that benefit when a government invests in culture and that the more budget a University has, the more ingenuity and production can come out of it with time. It also gives another reason to invest in your :culture: slider, even if you aren't trying to make people happy or expand borders.


This might get buried here, but I think that this has value...

Also separating trade from open borders is novel and inspired. Nothing irritates me more that watching a luke-warm ally march settlers across my territory.

Blasphemous
Jul 09, 2006, 02:40 AM
This is confusing. I know we're all used to having absolutely EVERYTHING to do with the mod all in one thread, but now we have a forum. It makes a lot of sense to create a new thread for the trade and open borders subject (as I did for my University idea). This thread should be about making the ancient world realistic.

Tyranausaurus
Jul 09, 2006, 08:59 AM
I still think that the addition of a Mesopotamian civ is crutial and important to gameplay in this mod. Having a fourth first civ would be nice, perhaps not the Sumerians (too early), but the Babylonians.

I still didn't get a confirmation from Rhye if anything of this sort would be added into the mod, but I think an empty fertile crescent with no playable civ in the beginning of the game is just plain wrong. Hey we're forgetting a complete chapter in history this way!

Red Threat
Jul 09, 2006, 09:33 AM
I still think that the addition of a Mesopotamian civ is crutial and important to gameplay in this mod. Having a fourth first civ would be nice, perhaps not the Sumerians (too early), but the Babylonians.

I still didn't get a confirmation from Rhye if anything of this sort would be added into the mod, but I think an empty fertile crescent with no playable civ in the beginning of the game is just plain wrong. Hey we're forgetting a complete chapter in history this way!
I prefer as it is now (barbarian cities with big culture). It's more realistic (rarely Mesopotamia was united under one ruler only) and avoids complications. Maybe ONE or TWO minor civs (e.g. Babylon and Assyria, with Ur still barbarian) with little chance to expand would fit well also.

Gunner
Jul 09, 2006, 10:34 AM
I like the idea of keeping Mesopotamia for the most part barbarian. It does a good job of representing its city state nature. Having a Babylon or Assyria minor civ would be a pretty good idea too, if we can get that concept to work correctly.

Karam
Jul 09, 2006, 11:24 AM
I prefer as it is now (barbarian cities with big culture). It's more realistic (rarely Mesopotamia was united under one ruler only).

While that is partially true, we could include it in some form. Meaning that we could have Babylon start with Akkad as the capital city (with Ur and Nineveh) as minor civs or barbarian, but then expands to control both of the cities. This would simulate the act of unification that was done by both Hammurbi and earlier by Sargon of Akkad (the first leader to unify the region).

This is my idea, even egypt stared as scattered empires, and so did Persia, and china.

I hope this idea jotted above would be something. ;) . what do you guys think?

Eddiit
Jul 09, 2006, 03:35 PM
While that is partially true, we could include it in some form. Meaning that we could have Babylon start with Akkad as the capital city (with Ur and Nineveh) as minor civs or barbarian, but then expands to control both of the cities. This would simulate the act of unification that was done by both Hammurbi and earlier by Sargon of Akkad (the first leader to unify the region).

This is my idea, even egypt stared as scattered empires, and so did Persia, and china.

I hope this idea jotted above would be something. ;) . what do you guys think?

I hate to harp but I think that could be getting a little too realistic. Let history unfold as it will. Just give the setup.

Tyranausaurus
Jul 09, 2006, 04:04 PM
While that is partially true, we could include it in some form. Meaning that we could have Babylon start with Akkad as the capital city (with Ur and Nineveh) as minor civs or barbarian, but then expands to control both of the cities. This would simulate the act of unification that was done by both Hammurbi and earlier by Sargon of Akkad (the first leader to unify the region).
This is my idea, even egypt stared as scattered empires, and so did Persia, and china.
I hope this idea jotted above would be something. . what do you guys think?
Excellent idea! :goodjob: :thumbsup: !

I hate to harp but I think that could be getting a little too realistic. Let history unfold as it will. Just give the setup.
I don't get your drift? can you please clarify? ;)

IMO we can't blow away almost 5'000 years of history out of this mod (Although I recognize it starts at 3'000 BCE), these were the civilizations that invented writing, the wheel and civil law. These were the civilization which built the Hanging Gardens, and were the ones who fought major wars with Persia, Egypt and several other nations (represented by Barbarians).

I don't know but I really think that at least the Babylonians should be in Rhy'es of Civilization. If having it would make the scenario too historically accurate then so does having wars between Greece and Persia - It's okay to simulate history in some matter. Let the Babylonians in Please!

Rhye can you please give your say here?

Eddiit
Jul 09, 2006, 08:40 PM
Excellent idea! :goodjob: :thumbsup: !


I don't get your drift? can you please clarify? ;)

IMO we can't blow away almost 5'000 years of history out of this mod (Although I recognize it starts at 3'000 BCE), these were the civilizations that invented writing, the wheel and civil law. These were the civilization which built the Hanging Gardens, and were the ones who fought major wars with Persia, Egypt and several other nations (represented by Barbarians).

I don't know but I really think that at least the Babylonians should be in Rhy'es of Civilization. If having it would make the scenario too historically accurate then so does having wars between Greece and Persia - It's okay to simulate history in some matter. Let the Babylonians in Please!

Rhye can you please give your say here?

I think hes waiting for warlords to give his say. He cant make design decisions like that until he knows what options are available and what mechanics are introduced in warlords.

dh_epic
Jul 10, 2006, 08:44 PM
I think you can only go for so much historical accuracy before you start hamstringing the player, tying them down into predictable results. Not to mention that predictability is extremely easy to exploit.

If Rome can basically build an empire, that should be good enough. As well as Alexander. Because, right now, we don't really have a game that allows an empire to fall, or split into civil war.

Blasphemous
Jul 11, 2006, 02:55 AM
Erm, yes we do. The rise and fall system. Alexander's empire is toast once a power like Rome appears out of thin air in or right near it (which is unhistorical but close enough). And then the Roman Empire is doomed to fail when, count 'em, four different civs appear in rapid succession in or right near their whole western section. It doesn't take as much as it used to to topple an empire, with the fall system in. With some concentrated testing and tweaking we should have a pretty realistic scenario on our hands as far as empires rising and falling.

dh_epic
Jul 11, 2006, 09:42 AM
I was speaking about something more dynamic / spontaneous... but point taken :)

Elhoim
Jul 11, 2006, 10:24 AM
And the addition of new civs should keep the rise and fall system active after the 1200s, as now there is a stagnation after those years... I also think that the apparition year should have a little variation, like for example, unless played by the player, Rome can appear in somewhat between 800bc and 700bc. I suggest this to prevent the player to exactly know the civ rise year and take countermeasuress against them, and to also add a little unpredictability and less rigged gameplay. You know that somewhere near 600ad the spanish are going to appear, but you don´t know exactly when.

Blasphemous
Jul 11, 2006, 10:53 AM
Good idea Elhoim (on non-exact starting years)! Maybe we can also add some very broad and likely requirements for a civ to spawn so sometimes a civ doesn't spawn... Like for the post-Roman civs, maybe there has to be some non-Barbarian city in the civ's general area for them to spawn. Or for America, they should only spawn if some European civ has at least one city in North America. Stuff like that, to keep things realistic and unpredictable.

DSChapin
Jul 11, 2006, 11:49 AM
And the addition of new civs should keep the rise and fall system active after the 1200s, as now there is a stagnation after those years...

The age of nationalism really ought to introduce a "second wave" of independence movements, anyway. Historically, after all, most of the world ended up owned by a few "players", who then lost it all to newly founded or refounded countries.

Elhoim
Jul 11, 2006, 12:06 PM
Yep, it would be nice to recreate the independence movements in America during the 1800s...

dh_epic
Jul 11, 2006, 05:16 PM
The idea of making the appearance of new civilizations semi-random is a good idea. Predictability breeds exploits -- when I know exactly where and when they'll appear, I can leverage that to my advantage.

Elhoim
Jul 11, 2006, 06:08 PM
Personally I prefer all of them appearing at some point, or the reasons for the not appearence of a civ should be very strong. Warlords should open a whole new world of possibilities, as several falls a re-births could be modded. For example, if Rome is destroyed, it can appear later as Italy.

rappstar
Jul 11, 2006, 06:15 PM
I smell something yummy here..... semi-random Indepence movements?


Hmmmmmm.... an empire that stagnates for a while could suddenly Balkanize? My imgaination is reeling.

Arkaeyn
Jul 11, 2006, 09:03 PM
I actually was asking for more randomization before we moved forums, so I'm glad to see a bunch of us on the same page. In an ideal game, I'd like to see many, many civs on a POTENTIAL list with a few on a GUARANTEED list (the starting civs, Rome, England, Arabia, Japan). The potential list would be weighted according to certain factors - leaderheads, importance, other civilizations in the area, etc.

So you might have a 90% chance that the Aztecs would appear, but a 50% chance that the Maya would.

This is worth another thread, which I'm going to start up nowish.

Surtur
Jul 12, 2006, 04:13 AM
I actually was asking for more randomization before we moved forums, so I'm glad to see a bunch of us on the same page. In an ideal game, I'd like to see many, many civs on a POTENTIAL list with a few on a GUARANTEED list (the starting civs, Rome, England, Arabia, Japan). The potential list would be weighted according to certain factors - leaderheads, importance, other civilizations in the area, etc.

So you might have a 90% chance that the Aztecs would appear, but a 50% chance that the Maya would.

This is worth another thread, which I'm going to start up nowish.

But this won't be possible untill the 18 civs cap has been removed.

NateDawgNY
Jul 12, 2006, 11:34 AM
But this won't be possible untill the 18 civs cap has been removed.
Which is what will happen when Warlords comes out.