Current (SVN) development discussion thread

Addition of Congo has just really shocked me is all, I think it shocked everyone.

Really nope, I was hoping for them to get into Civ V in the G&K expansion, but we go Sweden instead :sad: (Seriously, Norway-Denmark are already DLC!)


CSA could work on a conditional spawn, it's a huge empty continent & it's probably the biggest of all the "what if's" of modern history.
Not really, I am going to be brave and say that you are American rather than Azerbaijani, because I think the USA is the only nation (quite reasonably) to be obsessed with the CSA. In any case I don't see why the CSA couldn't be represented by America as it is seeing as most Civs represent drastically different nations (i.e. England Represents Scotland, Scandinavia is all covered in one Civ and so on)
 
Haven't checked the newest commit so IDK how complex the Slavery system is, but I think CSA can be represented as event based on war between cities that often have slaves and built slave plantations versus cities that rarely use Slaves.

AI America respawn will be really stable and for Human, I'm kinda confident the idea of civil war and being on either side of USA or CSA (depends on your views about slavery) will be a fresh, challenging and fun event.
 
Really nope, I was hoping for them to get into Civ V in the G&K expansion, but we go Sweden instead :sad: (Seriously, Norway-Denmark are already DLC!)



Not really, I am going to be brave and say that you are American rather than Azerbaijani, because I think the USA is the only nation (quite reasonably) to be obsessed with the CSA. In any case I don't see why the CSA couldn't be represented by America as it is seeing as most Civs represent drastically different nations (i.e. England Represents Scotland, Scandinavia is all covered in one Civ and so on)

Stepanikurt is Armenian, this area was handed over to Azerbaijan during Soviet times. Of course I know a lot of relatives and relatives of friends who live in America, I recently emigrated so that's why I haven't posted here in a while. I don't know how I appear "obsessed" with this, but I'm sure far more people outside of America have heard of the Civil War than an obscure central African slave-state.
I need to look it up now actually.
 
CSA is in the game, and so is the American civil war.
It's America running Slavery, and the anarchy from switching to Slavery to Emancipation.
If we would go in such detail, then the English possessions in France, all the different Chinese dynasties, Scandinavia in different countries and what not should be in the game too.
 
I don't know how I appear "obsessed" with this, but I'm sure far more people outside of America have heard of the Civil War than an obscure central African slave-state.
I need to look it up now actually.

That would be a good argument if this were a populist mod, but it's aim is historical accuracy. It would also give Kongo some much needed attention and help dispel some of the Imperialist myths about Africa before we got our grubby mits on the continent.
Also I didn't say that you were obsessed but rather the American populous as a whole puts more emphasis on the CSA in world history than it deserves.
 
I am unable too use SVN.
Why?

Addition of Congo has just really shocked me is all, I think it shocked everyone.
Actually I got the idea to add it because it was suggested here and many people seconded the idea.

Do you think that Latin America could get some work though? A lot of people seem to torture themselves over getting the perfect spawn for America so they can recreate the Mexican wars.
Yes.

CSA does not deserve to be a civilization,it was a short-lived nation that didn't accomplish anything important.
Actually, the CSA weren't even their own nation. They were a secessionist offshoot of the USA that didn't manage to survive. It's like making two civs for Republican and Phalangist Spain.

Dynamic names are better suited to represent this. And in fact, America has a Confederate dynamic name already (now that slavery is in the game CSA might make for an interesting RP game, actually).


By the way, that's what I'm working on now:
Spoiler :
 
Originally Posted by Lawrie View Post
I am completely impressed by the mechanics for religious schism (in Christianity) and am wondering if we might see the same for Islam (ie. Shias / Sunni) as Islam is obviously a big religion in the came, spread across many empires and it would be great to include that eventual distinction if possible?
I've considered this, but I don't think it's that necessary. The only civ that is historically Shia is Persia, and maybe respawned Egypt (but only for a while). The Christians had to be divided, because there's just so many of them and historically about even numbers ended up Catholic/Protestant/Othodox.

For the Muslim civs, most of them historically ended up Sunni so that wouldn't accomplish anything besides weakening Iran which isn't all that powerful already anyway.

Yep I can see your point especially in relation to breaking down Christianity (reflectings its denominations) and for competitive gameplay too.

In regards to Christians (these are specualtive estimates) there are about 2.2 billion (of which 1.2 are Catholic, about 240 mil are Eastern Orthodox.

Of Muslims, there are about 1.6 billion, I think about 250mil of which are Shia. Interesting in this article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Islam it indicates at least today that Shia represent a distinct minority in most Muslim countries.

Historically we also know that the violence (Between Sunnis and Shias) were such, that its a shame that it can be noted (somehow). I think I would love to see this schism reflected especially as it concerns a great schism in the worlds 2nd largest religion (and fastest growing) then these denomination distinctions may have yet an even larger role to play.

Perhaps the penalties of these differing denominations could be less between the Islamic (or most Islamic leaders?) Some were particularly hardcore against Shias... for example, such as the Ottoman campaigns against the Shia's of Anatolia (not disimilar but smaller in scale to the crusades.)

I think your right in saying that gameplay is the tricky one here to balance, (especially in the face against the wide spread of Christianity in the game) however, later game Islam continues to retain a level of 'unity' that seems a little ahistorical compared to the (brilliant and freakin awseome) attention given to Christianity.

So id implore you to consider a 2nd look, perhaps even with an exploration to alternatives to Shia as a religion/denomination ingame but (perhaps it can trigger an event or something else to reflect its contributions to history.) In anycase keep up the great work - your vision is seeing this through however you decide to go! :)
 
I'll keep that in mind.
 
Someone else posted a suggestion a while ago. It involved Shia islam without actually having to represent it as a separate religion. It had to do with an event popping up with two options (just like the Reformation event): Diplo hit with other civilizations and receiving gold per turn, or leaving everything as it is.
 
To play devils advocate with the religion option, the 'choice' of embracing this or the new denomination - like the schisms of Christianity before it, saw rulers making pragmatic choices (oft of political expediency) so that they could consolidate opposing positions to their neighbours.

We see that in the wars of the Reformation, but similarly for those rulers that embraced Shia- making it their state religions etc. The fact that Sunni nations today, hold suc suspicion and antagonism towards predominant Shia countries (just look at Syria right now, Iraq before and Iran etc or even centuries ago - in this link) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Safavi...easons_for_Ismail.E2.80.99s_conversion_policy

That Muslim countries would fight one another over this issue is not unlikely either. That we don't reflect this common cassus belli presents Islam with a sense of enormous unity compared to Christianity. So something to reflect that conlflict (be it a new civ religion/denomination with a reformation event) or something more abstract would be cool.

However i think at least with a new religion, it lends an interesting counter-factual historical chocie for civs that embrace that particular denomination, to make it the predominate one in the Muslim world.
 
The problem with that is it Schisms really early, with it spawning from the dispute over the death of Muhammad in 657, and a few other points which could be used, but all around 700 AD where there is only really the Arabs as a Muslim nation in a 600 AD spawn.
 
That's true. But another problem is that Sunni and Shia Islam formed pretty soon after Islam itself was founded - when the event rolls around at a historical date, only the Arabs would exist anyway. And I can't think of a good reason to have you make the decision later.
 
Spoiler :
Yep I can see your point especially in relation to breaking down Christianity (reflectings its denominations) and for competitive gameplay too.

In regards to Christians (these are specualtive estimates) there are about 2.2 billion (of which 1.2 are Catholic, about 240 mil are Eastern Orthodox.

Of Muslims, there are about 1.6 billion, I think about 250mil of which are Shia. Interesting in this article, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Islam it indicates at least today that Shia represent a distinct minority in most Muslim countries.

Historically we also know that the violence (Between Sunnis and Shias) were such, that its a shame that it can be noted (somehow). I think I would love to see this schism reflected especially as it concerns a great schism in the worlds 2nd largest religion (and fastest growing) then these denomination distinctions may have yet an even larger role to play.

Perhaps the penalties of these differing denominations could be less between the Islamic (or most Islamic leaders?) Some were particularly hardcore against Shias... for example, such as the Ottoman campaigns against the Shia's of Anatolia (not disimilar but smaller in scale to the crusades.)

I think your right in saying that gameplay is the tricky one here to balance, (especially in the face against the wide spread of Christianity in the game) however, later game Islam continues to retain a level of 'unity' that seems a little ahistorical compared to the (brilliant and freakin awseome) attention given to Christianity.

So id implore you to consider a 2nd look, perhaps even with an exploration to alternatives to Shia as a religion/denomination ingame but (perhaps it can trigger an event or something else to reflect its contributions to history.) In anycase keep up the great work - your vision is seeing this through however you decide to go! :)

I really don't think it should be any more than a random event, like Leoreth said, Shia is only majority in Iran and area's of other countries under heavy Persian influence.

The actual differences between Shia and Sunni are quite superficial compared to between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, at least it seems this way to me. Though I think Islam has always been far more of a political-ideology/regressive legal-code than a genuine religion, so I'm really not the person to ask.
I'd much rather see inclusions of low-spread-rate minor Indian-religions founded on building-completion almost exclusively Persian sect of a religion that was forced on them anyways.
 
That's true. But another problem is that Sunni and Shia Islam formed pretty soon after Islam itself was founded - when the event rolls around at a historical date, only the Arabs would exist anyway. And I can't think of a good reason to have you make the decision later.

That is a good point in itself, if i may ill have a wee think on this with some suggestions if thats useful? (And if they all suck then what-oh and c'est la vie hehe!

The actual differences between Shia and Sunni are quite superficial compared to between Orthodoxy and Catholicism, at least it seems this way to me. Though I think Islam has always been far more of a political-ideology/regressive legal-code than a genuine religion, so I'm really not the person to ask.
I'd much rather see inclusions of low-spread-rate minor Indian-religions founded on building-completion almost exclusively Persian sect.

Superficial? I suggest examining http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Shia_Muslims and take a peek at the politics (and conflicts) arising from those states (with these religious differences.) Its not that we consider them superficial in a theological context (that makes the distinction relevant) it is the consequences of those distinctions in politics, culture and history that mark their relevance. I also think calling it a regressive legal code is unnecessarily provocative to those reading here that might share that faith.

Also - calling it an exclusively Persian sect is ludicrious, they form a distinct minority in almost all Muslim countries http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shia_Islam - and in its time (in the conflicts of those nations that prescribed to differeng Islamic denominations) could have become the dominant muslim denomination today. That makes for a fascinating what if conflict that might be fun to explore ingame for players of Persia, Arabs and Ottomans!

But in discussing this lets avoid the bs innuendos about theology of this or that religion, its about its political and cultural implications that I would think, make it relevant for the mod not cos some joe thinks its theological distinctiveness is not comparable...
 
Why?


Actually I got the idea to add it because it was suggested here and many people seconded the idea.


Yes.


Actually, the CSA weren't even their own nation. They were a secessionist offshoot of the USA that didn't manage to survive. It's like making two civs for Republican and Phalangist Spain.

Dynamic names are better suited to represent this. And in fact, America has a Confederate dynamic name already (now that slavery is in the game CSA might make for an interesting RP game, actually).


By the way, that's what I'm working on now:
Spoiler :

That screenshot is beautiful.
 
+1 civ_king im blown away by it too - it'll make things so much easier too to get a grasp on things!
 
Thinking about combat, some civic should reduce the instability from combat losses.
 
Top Bottom