some thoughts on middle east area and east asia

Sovietof17

Sovietof17

Warlord
Joined
Oct 26, 2005
Messages
295
I propose to get rid of Turkey and add in Korea instead. Babylon has like zero space to expand, and when it does, it just gets punished over and over again by new civs spawning. Korea could be like the Greece of the East I think. If you look at the east it is almost empty - just China for thousands of years, then Japan in the dark ages and Mongolia late in the game. I think China, Mongolia, and Japan have tons of space to expand in the East and Korea could fit in very easily.

Thoughts on playing Babylon:
The Middle East is WAY too crowded. I have been trying to win the Babylonian UHV but gave up on that after a while, pretty sure it's impossible, as I can easily get the sciences but never surpass India's culture of Buddhism/Hinduism spam.

Let's see what happens the poor Babylonians-
* I manage to flip either Al-sur, or shush
* Persia spawns. Gets Shush
* Arabia spawns, Gets Al-sur, Jerusalem

Ok, so you say, settle to the north near the iron, and the nw on the Anatolian plateau after greek comes by and razes hattusas. Oh wait
* Turkey spawns, Gets those two cities.

Turkey always has ridiculously buggy score [liek 31 or 126], then just submits to vassaldom, it makes no sense. Oh, and turkey gets my iron, so the Arabian camel archer rape on Babylon begins [if the AI was smart enough, it could easly raze the city with a stack instead of wasting time pilaging]
 
You should feel lucky that you still exist by the time Turkey spawns. You're already one up on history.

Babylon has like zero space to expand, and when it does, it just gets punished over and over again by new civs spawning.
Click to expand...

Let's bend reality so they're super powerful and never get destroyed.

I think China, Mongolia, and Japan have tons of space to expand in the East and Korea could fit in very easily.
Click to expand...

Korea would hardly ever be able to fit a third city on the mainland. They'd be lucky if they can settle Dairen.


Turkey always has ridiculously buggy score [liek 31 or 126], then just submits to vassaldom, it makes no sense.
Click to expand...

If anything this means Turkey should be helped out, not Babylon.
 
I havent played Babylon, but I just wanted to say that there is a balance between historical accuracy and playability. The player needs to have some control over the fate of their civ, or there is no point in selecting them to play. The other cultures I have tried have not had it as hard as Sovietof17 makes Babylon out to be.

Does anyone else have any experience, especially contrary to the one outlined above?
 
1. Well, this may not be the main point of the thread, but it IS possible to win the Babylonian UHV on Monarch level.
Check out this thread.

2. You don't have to actually submit to Turkey's demand for cities. I had a quite successful game as Babylon where I had Babylonia and a city to the NorthEast (in Turkey's core area) and waged succesful wars against Persia and Arabia. By the time Turkey spawned, I was strong enough to reject their request for my NorthEast city. Just plan your expansion properly, and you won't lose cities to spawning civs and go crazy. You can check out my map in the my signature if you want to see the core areas for civs (warning: I think Rhye changed the core areas in the latest version and I haven't updated it yet).

3. Babylon is a fun civ in my opinion. You really have to mix it up since you're so "boxed in." Trying to take Yerushalem is a neat goal I set for myself. And, trying to acheive their UHV isn't too bad. You don't get it every time, but if India slacks a little bit on their culture in Delhi, then you can win.
 
Sovietof17 said:
I propose to get rid of Turkey and add in Korea instead. Babylon has like zero space to expand, and when it does, it just gets punished over and over again by new civs spawning. Korea could be like the Greece of the East I think. If you look at the east it is almost empty - just China for thousands of years, then Japan in the dark ages and Mongolia late in the game. I think China, Mongolia, and Japan have tons of space to expand in the East and Korea could fit in very easily.

Thoughts on playing Babylon:
The Middle East is WAY too crowded. I have been trying to win the Babylonian UHV but gave up on that after a while, pretty sure it's impossible, as I can easily get the sciences but never surpass India's culture of Buddhism/Hinduism spam.

Let's see what happens the poor Babylonians-
* I manage to flip either Al-sur, or shush
* Persia spawns. Gets Shush
* Arabia spawns, Gets Al-sur, Jerusalem

Ok, so you say, settle to the north near the iron, and the nw on the Anatolian plateau after greek comes by and razes hattusas. Oh wait
* Turkey spawns, Gets those two cities.

Turkey always has ridiculously buggy score [liek 31 or 126], then just submits to vassaldom, it makes no sense. Oh, and turkey gets my iron, so the Arabian camel archer rape on Babylon begins [if the AI was smart enough, it could easly raze the city with a stack instead of wasting time pilaging]
Click to expand...

Okay, let's look at reality
1.) Who was crushed by the Persians: Babylonians
2.) Who became a world juggernaut until the 20th century: Turks

I wish everyone would stop opposing the new civilizations. If you don't like them, go play the vanilla version. As for the Baylonian cryers, you should realize you're overpowered as you are right now. First you crippled Arabia and now you want to do the same with Turkey. I am fet up with this. The purpose of this mod is to replay history.
 
Dafiden - that's a good answer. I enjoy when someone counters with real examples.



thenooblet22 said:
Okay, let's look at reality
1.) Who was crushed by the Persians: Babylonians
.......

The purpose of this mod is to replay history.
Click to expand...


Well..... you could argue that Babylonia had already been brought to its knees by the Assyrians, I'd give them the award in truth as post Sennacherib, there weren't any native rulers.

I also have to say that, unless I am very much mistaken, the purpose of this mod is not simply play out in mechanical fashion the events of history, but for those events to be a guideline for the game. Playing should still give you the freedom to make your own decisions and strategies rather than follow a formulaic approach to the real history.

Btw, for the record, I am not opposing anything! The more civs the better! :cool:
 
I don't know why people complain Babylonia is so hard to beat with Persia. I destroy it ever time with the initial stacks of immortals and I take Al-Sur also.

Also, what's up with the size of the middle east? Why does Europe get enlarged when it has the same amount of civilizations as them?

Lets see: France, England, Spain, Vikings, Germany, Greece

M.E: Tons of Barbarian pre-founded cities and stacks flooding all areas, Babylonia, Persia, Egypt, Arabia, Turkey

You say you want to simulate history, but how about balance? Just make Babylon a minor civ again if you want it to have next to no chance. At this rate, two crappy civs, Inca and Aztec, do way better because the naval invasion AI for Civ4 is worse then Warcraft 1...

If Korea doesnt have enough room to spawn, why not enlarge that area then? Like I said, anything good enough for Europe should be good enough for other areas of the world too. Or is this Rhye's and Fall of European Civilizations?
 
I would like to see Korea to in CIV. Korea should be about the same size of Great Britan. A max of 3 cties should be build in the penisula. Korea has been an independent empire, it has been a Chinese and Japanese vassal, and it should be included too.
 
I played as Babylon and culture is not problem. problem is be most populous.
I think there should be some modern civilization (brazil, Argentina) instead Korea. But Babylon is nice.
 
Babylon Shouldnt be around when Turkey spawns anyway. Besides, if you want more cities as Babylon, just bowman rush Egypt, India or Greece, it is still quite easy to do with the weaker bowman.

Also I think Korea is better represented as a minor civ since the AI will want to spam too many cities with them most likely, and end up with a civ that looks nothing like Korea.
 
That's what always used to happen in ROC. So, when I played as China I used to box them in and not let them expand outside of Seoul. It worked quite well :)
 
Spearthrower said:
Well..... you could argue that Babylonia had already been brought to its knees by the Assyrians, I'd give them the award in truth as post Sennacherib, there weren't any native rulers.

I also have to say that, unless I am very much mistaken, the purpose of this mod is not simply play out in mechanical fashion the events of history, but for those events to be a guideline for the game. Playing should still give you the freedom to make your own decisions and strategies rather than follow a formulaic approach to the real history.

Btw, for the record, I am not opposing anything! The more civs the better! :cool:
Click to expand...

My point is that you shouldn't weaken the Turks for a civilization that should have been destroyed centuries ago.
 
If you are playing as the Turks, then I agree that within the concept of this mod, Babylon should be either destroyed or a minor inconvenience.

If you are playing as Babylon though, you should have had the freedom to not only survive until the Turks, but to thrive as well.

It's hard to get the right balance between historical accuracy and enjoyable gaming.... I'm happy to sacrifice a little of both to help the other.
 
Sovietof17 said:
You say you want to simulate history, but how about balance? Just make Babylon a minor civ again if you want it to have next to no chance. At this rate, two crappy civs, Inca and Aztec, do way better because the naval invasion AI for Civ4 is worse then Warcraft 1...
Click to expand...

Warcraft I lacked boats. Ergo, Civ has a better naval invasion AI.
 
I think that instead of something like Korea, adding a Asia Pacific Civ, or a South-Asia civ would help more, since there are plenty of islands taken by Japan, and they don't really belong to them. Something like Thailand, or example.

(by the way, I do think that Turkey-Babylon is a fine civ to have)
 
Marmoteo said:
I think that instead of something like Korea, adding a Asia Pacific Civ, or a South-Asia civ would help more, since there are plenty of islands taken by Japan, and they don't really belong to them. Something like Thailand, or example.

(by the way, I do think that Turkey-Babylon is a fine civ to have)
Click to expand...

Ooh yeah, I agree, If, IF Rhye wants to add another civ it should be southeast asian. Either Khmer/thailand or srivijaya/indonesia(most influential SE civs). For example adding srivijaya might stop Japan from founding Nara in borneo.:confused: Also this might be another obstacle to colonial expansion to the human player(probably completely discourage the european AI from settling).
 
A couple barb cities in Indonesia could help, or maybe just spawning stacks of barb triremes and galleys could be enough to stop Japan from settling there.
 
but there's too much jungle in s.e. asia. how will an ai deal with it? AI hates jungle and water more then anything in the world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Leoreth
Resources and Resource Spawns
2
Replies
23
Views
4K
KIJLC
K
Rhye
v90 ready
Replies
7
Views
1K
Bonci
Bonci
Caesar of Bread
What leaders and/or nations do you want in Civilization VII?
83 84 85
Replies
2K
Views
79K
Caesar of Bread
Caesar of Bread
LuciusJunius
New Bronze- and Iron-Age Scenarios
Replies
10
Views
2K
Lazy sweeper
Lazy sweeper
LikeNothing
East Asia Overhaul
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
Cypriot
C
Top Bottom