Byzantine lobby for civ5

:D

Anyway, the Panagia Chalkeon has been completed.



However i need help with nifs. I exported it as a nif, but i cannot find the file anywhere (i know where i exported it, but it doesnt show up). I have 3dsmax2010.
If someone can help, i can upload the building in a few hours :)
 
I hope once you have a chance to try it in game you consider our warnings about the extremely high poly count.

The problem is the high detail curves.
 
As EMT said the Byzantines were a continuation of the Imperium Romanum, but as a Civilization they were a distinct entity. They were the medieval Greek-Roman Empire and they created large parts of what we consider Greek culture. They were a great civilization but putting them in the Vanilla game wouldn't be a good idea. We already have Rome, Greece and even the Ottoman Empire( which is the Muslim continuation of the Roman Empire). The Byzantines deserve to be in Civ5 but not in Vanilla, they should be added in the first or second Expansion pack. As much as I like the Byzantines ( they were my favourite civ in both Civ3 and Civ4), it would unjustified to have them in the Vanilla release and leave out Spain or Persia.

Also wasn't this thread about modding Byzantium in and not about whether they should or shouldn't be in Civ5?


Ugh the Ottoman comment is so wrong because Byzantium was Rome... they did not come in and conquer or change Rome, they were the part of Rome that didn't fall in 476. In fact Rome didn't fall in 476, it fell in 1453.

Russia, Holy Roman Empire, and other nations all declared themselves to be Roman too... Just because the Ottomans said it doesn't mean they were.


I don't think Byzantium is good for Vanilla because although they had a huge impact, they were Rome... You cannot deny that. A chunk of the Roman Empire survived on for 1000 years more. In fact it is in my opinion that Constantine's moving the capitol from Rome/Milan to Constantinople is what doomed the West to fall anyways.

Yes, Byzantium was different but take England for example, over time there language has changed a little, they went from Catholic to Protestant and their military today doesn't look anything like their military back in the early days. Someone from 20th Century England would not look English to someone from 900 AD and vice-versa.

I always thought that it would be neat to have Civ treat Rome differently and allow Rome to become "Byzantine" as they advance into the Middle Ages or just do what they are doing now and have them come in an expansion. It is just wierd to play Byzantium on Civ III or IV and not get Legions as well as play Rome without Cataphacts.

Justinian is the face of Byzantium... other possible leaders are Constantine, Basil II, and Irene.

P.S. off topic I never did understand why HRE made the game and not Austria. I thought Austria should have been stuck in to represent the Hapsburgs and HRE of later age while Germany represents Prussia and the later German Empire.

When I did a full civ map (Did Earth map with all civs at start)... I stuck HRE in Austria to be Austria since that area was blank and stuck Ottomans (which I renamed Turks) in Central Asia where the Turks are really from. Calling the Turks Romans is an insult since they murdered most the Greeks and Romans in Turkey.
 
Not to be mean or a jerk about this but any game about Civilizations are going to appear to be Europe-Centric because the Europe has had most the World Powers and Great Civs throughout history.

I mean from 1500 until 1950s, Europeans help a monopoly on world power and the nation that has replaced them, the United States, is just Europeans on a different continent. As an America, I really consider the USA and other European Colonies (Australia, NZ, Canada for example) to just be a New Europe or a part of Europe.
 
With a little help i turned it into a civ4 building, but i didnt like the result. Almost all of the detail (bad textures without a uv map) got lost.

I think that i will wait for civ5 and see how things work there :)
 
not to be mean or a jerk about this but any game about civilizations are going to appear to be europe-centric because the europe has had most the world powers and great civs throughout history.

I mean from 1500 until 1950s, europeans help a monopoly on world power and the nation that has replaced them, the united states, is just europeans on a different continent. As an america, i really consider the usa and other european colonies (australia, nz, canada for example) to just be a new europe or a part of europe.

exactly right!
 
seems like a lot of people are easily insulted by stupid stuff. "oh hey, the hagia sophia has minarets, that's insulting!" "oh hey, someone said that the ottomans took over the eastern roman empire but kind of said it wrong, that's insulting!" "oh hey, awesome said i'm easily insulted, that's insulting!"
 
seems like a lot of people are easily insulted by stupid stuff. "oh hey, the hagia sophia has minarets, that's insulting!" "oh hey, someone said that the ottomans took over the eastern roman empire but kind of said it wrong, that's insulting!" "oh hey, awesome said i'm easily insulted, that's insulting!"

No offense, but what was the point of posting that? To ask us to try and be more open minded? Hardly. To give thoughtful input on the debate we're having? No way. To point fingers ant other users? Yes.

Anyway, what do you (Varwnos) think of Byzantium being portrayed as a continuation of Rome in ciV?
 
basically, quit being insulted by the smallest things, especially when they have nothing to do with you. but, of course, you were insulted by it.
 
Yeah for one I really love the religion part and now Civilization is taking it out to be politically correct. That is why I love Total War, they are not politically correct throwing in the Pope, Crusades, Jihads, etc. in their games. (see the original Medieval Total War). In fact I would love to see religions on Civ done like Total War where you have % in each city (and say you have to have 20-35% before you can build their buildings). That way you can run religions out and encourages others to spread (your national religion for example).
 
basically, quit being insulted by the smallest things, especially when they have nothing to do with you. but, of course, you were insulted by it.

Yeah, stop being insulted, idiot!

:rolleyes:

Can you tell me how many times people have stopped being insulted by something because you demanded that they stop?
 
I don't think religions were removed to be politically correct. They were already as politically correct as they could get in Civ4. There's some other reason.
 
I don't think religions were removed to be politically correct. They were already as politically correct as they could get in Civ4. There's some other reason.

Good point here... the biggest reason a religion fails in Civ4 is only when it is founded... otherwise, they are absolutely equal in every single respect (for game purposes).
 
I don't think religions were removed to be politically correct. They were already as politically correct as they could get in Civ4. There's some other reason.

Yeah, this is completely true.

I was playing Civ 4 yesterday and looking at the roster of opposing civilizations, all of them were "-4 you have fallen under the sway of a heathen religion" and to be honest... it does seem pretty stupid.

"-4 completely arbitrary reason that makes no strategic sense" might add some variety to the AI but it's not exactly ideal for a tactical game.
 
Top Bottom