What is everyone's favorite civ from a lore perspective? I know the Balseraphs are popular (the thread about them inspired this). It is a tough choice - Kael and everyone else on the storyline team have done an amazing job creating a living, real world.

Personally, I find the tale of the Bannor the most compelling. Forced to survive Hell and battle their way to freedom, fighting a crusade to keep Hell from following them into Erebus. I really like Kylorin's speach to the Amurite army at the battle of Adenshire about this:

"I had a dream of a city plunged into the abyss, a place of eternal night and fire. Those people, surrounded by demons, are fighting to return to creation. They have hope in a barren world and memories of the joys of this world."

"Yet here we stand in their paradise and see nothing but loss around us. You have not seen victory beyond a single successful hunt, and often too many days between those. The empire of men has been broken, but we will reforge it here. We will fight through this world and claim it again for men, and if those in hell do return there will be a world here worth their efforts."
-Kylorin

Donal Lugh is also my favorite hero. I find him to be the most badass, as well as heroic, hero, and his backstory is awesome.

I love the Amurites... so much potential and power...

Probably the Elohim. Possibly the Grigori.

Undoutbley the Illians

Ljosalfar. The idea of untamed natural beauty everywhere appeals to me so much. I guess I'm a Romantic.

The Grigori for me. The idea of an ideally pacifistic group who choose to not worship any god, but don't try to impose their view on others has stuck by me since I first played as them

Calabim, with honorable mentions going to the Grigori and Balseraphs.

Definitely the Lanun. . . no I'm just kidding, of course it would be the Balseraphs. By far the most unique and fun civ in the game.

The Bannor.

Whilst they look like the "good guys" at first glance (with a shiny gold angel leading them) - they're not your fairytale knights in shining armour. These are hard people, who have literally been to hell and back. Uncompromising, relentless - but no matter how intolerant and closed-minded they may be, they're going to be there on the front line, fighting to save civilized humanity from whatever threat arises - barbarian, demonic, libertarian... erm... hang on.

Still - great lore.

Sheim, end of the world is Über 1337 stuff.

The Bannor.

Whilst they look like the "good guys" at first glance (with a shiny gold angel leading them) - they're not your fairytale knights in shining armour. These are hard people, who have literally been to hell and back. Uncompromising, relentless - but no matter how intolerant and closed-minded they may be, they're going to be there on the front line, fighting to save civilized humanity from whatever threat arises - barbarian, demonic, libertarian... erm... hang on.

Still - great lore.

Hahahaha, not a fan of the libertarians? Watch out, they are going to invade your lands by secretly undermining your own government until it cannot protect itself.....

Also, well put on why the Bannor are so interesting. The Crusade civic is appropriate for them - they're not much different from the historical crusaders. I feel the real life crusaders would have felt exactly as the Bannor feel (though the Bannor fight palpably evil foes intent on the destruction of civilization - though, in second thought, many Crusaders probably felt their enemies sought the same thing). I guess the fact that the Crusades are one of my favorite historical subjects is what draws me to the Bannor.

Looking at this thread, it is interesting to see that there is little overlap. It is a great testament to the mod team that so many different civs have such compelling backgrounds.

I'd have to say the Doviello. All those other civs are so... pretentious...

ahwooooooo

Sheelba would disagree with loocas, but Jonas is borrowing her dictionary, so she doesn'tknow what pretentious means...

I am compelled by the Malakim and the Kuriotate.

Sheaim and amurites... can't decide which :)

Al

Hahahaha, not a fan of the libertarians? Watch out, they are going to invade your lands by secretly undermining your own government until it cannot protect itself.....


Hay now ;) we liberterians are not anarchist we like guns and a big military. Just get the government off our backs and let us do what we want in our own houses as long as it dont effect others in a negative way.... And on that note my favorite civs are the Hippus and the Clan, need I explain more?!? It is neet to note that most of our world views have a civ that matches up pretty well...

Some libertarians are anarchists. In some countries the terms are considered synonyms. There are many different types of anarchist who have little resemblance to each other. There are Right-Anarchists and Left-anarchists, and Right-Libertarians and left-Libertarians. In the US we only view right-libertarians as libertarians. Some Libertarians are pro-military, others are very much against it. Libertarian anarchists (anarcho-capitalists) are often the pacifistic kind. (Libertarianism is probably opposed to the Law sphere, but definitely not aligned with Chaos. The closest it would come to chaos is represented in FfH by Air. At its best libertarianism is closer to Spirit, at its worst it is closest to mind)


While I wouldn't call Libertarianism evil, The Order/Bannor certainly would. It just doesn't square with unquestioning obedience. I had assumed that they were mentioned to concede the moral downside of the civ/religion. It would however be embraced by the Empyrean and Runes of Kilmorph, but in different forms. Runes would be more about protecting their own rights (to their profits, traditions, etc) and self sufficiency, while Empyrean would emphasize that we must not infringe upon the right of others. (The most libertarian civ is still the agnostic/deistic Grigori.)

I'm prepared to jump ship and be a big fan of the Ilians when it's clearer what Auric is actually up to with his whole "One of the most dedicated builder AIs" thing, but for the moment I'm a fan of the Khazad. I like my dwarves greedy and warlike.

Hay now ;) we liberterians are not anarchist we like guns and a big military. Just get the government off our backs and let us do what we want in our own houses as long as it dont effect others in a negative way.... And on that note my favorite civs are the Hippus and the Clan, need I explain more?!? It is neet to note that most of our world views have a civ that matches up pretty well...

Haha, I know. I was just kidding. I actually consider myself a classical liberal as well. I just found it funny that one could consider libertarians evil - their whole platform is about not oppressing anyone. Though MC's argument does make sense for the Bannor not liking them.

Haha, I know. I was just kidding. I actually consider myself a classical liberal as well. I just found it funny that one could consider libertarians evil - their whole platform is about not oppressing anyone. Though MC's argument does make sense for the Bannor not liking them.

Heh - that was really the point I was making, it's the "dark side" of the Bannor - they're not big on personal freedoms and those who want them (rather than just being Unquestioningly Obedient) would be seen as a disruptive influence to Social Order (which is bad). I definitely wasn't implying anything from a RL point of view (I keep RL politics out of Roleplay).

[Libertariansim] would however be embraced by the Empyrean and Runes of Kilmorph, but in different forms. I think FoL as well, in the "as long as you don't affect the whole ecosystem, you're cool to do your own thing" sort of way.

I'd imagine the Fellowship of Leaves would have a very tightly controlled economy, placing importance on balance and not interfering with the state of nature. It would seem odd for them to have farms and plantations of any sort, for example, as that involves massively altering the environment to make it more suitable for growing/rearing what you aim to grow/rear. I suppose that's why the Ancient Forests cover them up. I'd imagine people in FoL nations are mostly self-sufficient, with the wealthy being able to buy excess food from the successful poor and the majority of industry occuring on a very small scale. I don't imagine there would be anything like a multinational company.

Multinational cooperations may be capitalistic, but aren't looked upon all that favorably in classical liberalism. Have you read Adam's Smith's Wealth of Nations? I admit I only read the first third or fourth of it and that was a couple years ago (it is a very boring and redundant text, with too many very old examples, but it does address a lot more issues than people give it credit for, even those related to game theory and environmentalism that we tend to think of of as being recent), but he was certainly not a fan of big business. The popular view of libertarianism may be one that favors big business and the rich, but that is not the case. Real libertarian ideas have never been given much of a chance to be tested, since people tend to favor it except when they think they personally would benefit from governmental interference. This often leads to corrupt, crony capitalism. In Erebus, that would be the economic model of choice for the Council of Esus and especially the Stewards of Inequity (these aren't in the game, but is the religion of those who worship Mammon--even though most of them don't realize they are doing so). It may be common in many empires, but this is a sign of the influence of Mammon. The good and neutral gods are very much opposed to it.


I'm not quite sure how FoL economies would work. It doesn't really have a unified dogma and its practices vary greatly, so the economies might too. I'd expect the good FoL civs to be similar to the Empyrean's libertarian type views, except emphasizing respect for all life instead of just sentient forms. For the Neutral ones they would take the last part a little too far, giving a forest much more respect than an individual human and probably creating a tightly controlled economy that protects trees more than people. I tend to think evil FoL civs follow extreme versions of Social Darwinism.

Multinational cooperations may be capitalistic, but aren't looked upon all that favorably in classical liberalism.

Ditto! see sig...


A note on the gigori I would agree to a certain extent that they are the most libertarian, but the hostility they show to faith - though in erabus its well placed - makes them one of my less fav civs. All forms of central power tends to corruption over time be it religious, political, cooperate, etc.
IMHO :bowdown::borg::assimilate:

Heh - that was really the point I was making, it's the "dark side" of the Bannor - they're not big on personal freedoms and those who want them (rather than just being Unquestioningly Obedient) would be seen as a disruptive influence to Social Order (which is bad). I definitely wasn't implying anything from a RL point of view (I keep RL politics out of Roleplay).

Yeah, I was kind of unclear on what I meant in my last post. I knew you meant the Bannor would see them as enemies (and not you).

Multinational cooperations may be capitalistic, but aren't looked upon all that favorably in classical liberalism. Have you read Adam's Smith''s Wealth of Nations? I only read the first third or fourth of it and it was a couple years ago (it is a very boring and redundant text, with too many very old examples, but it does address ), but he was certainly not a fan of big business.

Haha. So true. I tried reading through the whole thing (versus sections that I'd read in school) during a trip to Scotland (figured the location was appropriate and I had time to kill on the train) but I could only get through about 100 pages or so before becoming bored out of my mind and stopping. The infamous pin manufacturing tale at the start is pretty classic though.

My fav civ lore wise is ..... Bannor as well. Like their story, and like to play as Sab.

Regarding FoL: anyone else thinks that the Luchuirp version of nature worship os something like "all praise nature - look how much raw material it provides us!"?

It would be interesting to give a phrase for each civ/religion, but that's a different thread.

The Illians, since the AoI scenario pedia entries make Mulcarn and the various members of the Illian civilization very interesting. They're definitely a unique group and I absolutely love the civilopedia entries for Priests of the White Hand and Javelin Throwers.

Going to have to agree with ÆNEAS; the Bannor are certainly the best, though the Amurite lore is rather unique even by FFH standards.

For the record, I wouldn't say that the Bannor, being a martial feudal confederacy more than anything else, would necessarily be the antithesis of libertarianism (though they won't be its paragons either; that would have to be the Grigori). Semi-feudal warrior cultures do tend to greatly value personal liberties (it's what they usually fight to protect from everybody else, after all), if not in serfs, but the Bannor strike me as being relatively egalitarian out of necessity. Less clear with the Order, but it too does not strike me as necessarily being on the opposite side: after all, the Order means the rule of Law, and the Law also usually includes some personal liberties as well. I guess that it won't be so big on personal liberties when they clash with a general idea of public interest, but it won't be tolerant of their abuse and demeanment either. All in all, the Bannor and the Order strike me as standing not so much on the opposite end of the libertarian scale, but more like in the middle and to the right.

The true antithesis of libertarianism would have to be the Calabim under the Octopus Overlords. Incidentally, that's also one of my favourite civilisations and religions, though more for different reasons. :p

I love the Bannor and the Embers. There are more to the orcs than you might first think.

The Calabim is just one of the best renditions (or however I should call it) of vampires I think. It works well with the story. (That they are the kids of the first female, who is immortal but they are not)

The Amurites are cool, but at the same time somewhat bland (the whole magic society has been done).

I kinda like the Ljosalfar and Svartalfar too, the sacrifice Thessa has to do is just so... I'm lacking words. We are used to the Elves being the goody two shoes, better than everyone people. But the Ljosalfar can be ruthless like nature itself. And the Svartalfar queen is just smoking hot.

Perpentach is just a great personality, so is his daughter but less so.

I like them all actually but, I guess the above are the favorites.

By the way, now that you mentioned it, I too love the comparatively original take on the elves and the orcs here.

I love the elven races, since I am a fan of celtic type fae and the courts myself. The Sidhe (Elves) are awsome.

I quite enjoy the Calabim or Sheim. As the Calabim i focus on just one unit (the first bloodpet mostly) and roleplay as that unit eventually progessess into becoming an all-powerful vamp lord. The Sheim also interest me in how powerful a civ become without any melee after pyre zombies.

The Kuriotate are very interesting as well, with their ability to look beyond what you are on the outside, and see what you can be. Plus, having boy genius which is a complete and uter dictator, yet a Benevolent* one who is normaly fairly compasionet, yet at time brutal, as quit cool. Plus, he share a body with a dragon.
Edit Benevolent, not Manevolent

I think you mean benevolent. Malevolent means really, really nasty.

Yes, than you Wilboman

1) the Bannor - For all of the reasons already listed in this thread

2) Kuriotates or Sheim- I like the idea of being able to control the dragons (the ultimate weapon of an earlier age)

Ditto! see sig..
IMHO :bowdown::borg::assimilate:

Borg Worshiper!

Its cool to see people that reckongnize that labels don't always include they're whole definition - doing otherwise is like assuming a plane flies and levels off a piece of wood.

Back on topic. . . Malakim. Because they're yellow. Er, hardworking multi-race (at least they were back in 021 when I could capture and use both dwarven and elven workers to make a forest-mine super capital)making the best out of their bad starts.

Kurio's cool that way to, though I think we need more backround for Cardith to make him more Badass or dark or still a boy for some reason...
Or is Eurabates evil?

P.S. I hate how settlements force you to builder. Can we have tech requirement city hubs? PLEASE?