MAP development
- Thread starter kbrennan7654
- Start date
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
OK. I start to understand more about the difference of opinion on the EU issue. I feel that the consensus is to keep the entire EU but just excluding UK. So I won't suggest to minimize it to the Eurozone any more. (i.e. to pull out Poland, Sweden and Balkan states )
On the other hand, I think grouping UK, Norway and Turkey to be called NATO is not as popular. Excluding UK can still give us a EU with about 90% of the actual size; the suggested NATO combination probably represent only 10% of the actual size. This is very misleading. There are only 3 countries left, I suggest we might as well just keep them independent.
Other than the NATO issue, don't forget there are many gray area in Africa, Asia and Latin America that we will need to consider later. But let me look further into that before I raise them here.
On the other hand, I think grouping UK, Norway and Turkey to be called NATO is not as popular. Excluding UK can still give us a EU with about 90% of the actual size; the suggested NATO combination probably represent only 10% of the actual size. This is very misleading. There are only 3 countries left, I suggest we might as well just keep them independent.
Other than the NATO issue, don't forget there are many gray area in Africa, Asia and Latin America that we will need to consider later. But let me look further into that before I raise them here.
ianinsane
Prince
I'm not sure (and honestly never was) what the idea behind Sri Lanka is. As you said, DVS, it's because of the War between government and LTTE. But what will the effect in our game be? We'll have a one-city-civ, constantly fighting spawning Barbarians on 3 island tiles without significant international involvement? That doesn't add too much flavor IMO...
So I'd say make Turkey independent, make Sri Lanka a Minor Nation. It could be interesting to have Turkey in, muslim country with good relationships to Israel, defensive pact with NATO countries, trying to join the EU.
Well, well...that truly is Pandora's Box.
So I'd say make Turkey independent, make Sri Lanka a Minor Nation. It could be interesting to have Turkey in, muslim country with good relationships to Israel, defensive pact with NATO countries, trying to join the EU.
Well, well...that truly is Pandora's Box.
ianinsane
Prince
I'd have no problem with making Norway & Iceland minor.
How many cities are there in non-EU Balkans (Albania + the former Yugoslavian states excluding Slovenia)? We could "balkanize" them, too. Making them Minor nations, giving only Belgrad/Serbia to Russia...struggling with EU cultural influence.
BTW I just checked it. Croatia and Albania are not yet NATO members. They'll be joining in April 2009, though.
MasterOfDomain
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2009
- Messages
- 98
I am fine with the idea of having the UK as a seperate country, but grouping it with some Balkan States that don't fit anywhere else is a bit silly to me. I think the Balkan States need to be grouped or vassaled to other civs to avoid this problem.
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
If we are keeping the same density as in the 1940 scenario, the cities in the Balkans are:
Tirana
Zagreb
Belgrade
Sofia
Thessaloniki
Athens
Iraklion
Tirana
Zagreb
Belgrade
Sofia
Thessaloniki
Athens
Iraklion
Now that I have the Civics done, it's time to suggest my advice about what countries should be set to at the start of the game. At the top of the collumn will be the Civ name, beneath on the left will be the Civic category (Religion has been replaced with media), and on the right will be civic name:
America
Government: Presidential
Legal: Internationalism
Labor: Organized
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Corporate
China
Government: Technocracy
Legal: Martial Law
Labor: Collective
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Censored
North Korea
Government: Totalitarian
Legal: Isolationism
Labor: Collective
Economy: Communist
Media: State-Run
Russia
Government: Presidential
Legal: Confederacy
Labor: Emancipation
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Run
Latin-American Socialist Allies
Government: Caesardom
Legal: Internationalism
Labor: Organized
Economy: Communist
Media: State-Run
Saudi Arabia
Government: Caesardom
Legal: Isolationism
Labor: Tribalism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Censored
America
Government: Presidential
Legal: Internationalism
Labor: Organized
Economy: Deregulated
Media: Corporate
China
Government: Technocracy
Legal: Martial Law
Labor: Collective
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Censored
North Korea
Government: Totalitarian
Legal: Isolationism
Labor: Collective
Economy: Communist
Media: State-Run
Russia
Government: Presidential
Legal: Confederacy
Labor: Emancipation
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Run
Latin-American Socialist Allies
Government: Caesardom
Legal: Internationalism
Labor: Organized
Economy: Communist
Media: State-Run
Saudi Arabia
Government: Caesardom
Legal: Isolationism
Labor: Tribalism
Economy: Corporatist
Media: State-Censored
I split both dictatorships and representative democratic governments into two sorts. Caesardome is closer to someone like Napoleon, or of course, Julius Caesar, that is, somebody whose regime is not democratic, but still rose to power because his people wanted him to, and stays in power by continuing his obligations to the people; whereas totalitarian government is more along the line of Kim Jong Il; that is, it doesn't respond to what its people think, it forces them to think how it wants.
Mexico
Government: Presidential
Legal: Darwinism
Labor: Tribalism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: State-Censored
Israel
Government: Presidential/Parliamentary (can somebody look that up for me?)
Legal: Martial Law
Labor: Professional
Economy: Deregulated
Media: State Censored
Government: Presidential
Legal: Darwinism
Labor: Tribalism
Economy: Deregulated
Media: State-Censored
Israel
Government: Presidential/Parliamentary (can somebody look that up for me?)
Legal: Martial Law
Labor: Professional
Economy: Deregulated
Media: State Censored
I think Saudi Arabia should have the more extreme dictaroship, they are in power only thanks to fear and guns. They certainly don't have the same type of government as Cuba.
In regards to the Socialist Allies civ, I'm wondering if we should change it to a more democratic one. Yes Cuba is part, and Castro is the leader, so that certainly cries Caesordom. But the other countries have among the most representative democracies in the world.
First problem caused by our artificial unions. The only things the countries in the union have in common is that they are socialist, and allies. :-(
In regards to the Socialist Allies civ, I'm wondering if we should change it to a more democratic one. Yes Cuba is part, and Castro is the leader, so that certainly cries Caesordom. But the other countries have among the most representative democracies in the world.
First problem caused by our artificial unions. The only things the countries in the union have in common is that they are socialist, and allies. :-(
P.S. I think you are posting these in the wrong thread, this is putting Kai's map thread way off course.
Let's continue in the Final civ list thread, if you don't mind. Or the civics thread.
Plus: I love your button, I'll put the border on it and include it. There are two, which one do you want me to use?
Let's continue in the Final civ list thread, if you don't mind. Or the civics thread.
Plus: I love your button, I'll put the border on it and include it. There are two, which one do you want me to use?
@ Genghis_Kai: just FYI, NikNaks and myself are both aware of and taking steps towards ironing out the errors that were revealed bringing the scenario you sent me into the mod.
Plus we just have to finish updating the SDK, and then I will edit and compile it to allow for 55 civs. Should not be long, early next week at the latest I hope. I will PM you when it is finished.
Plus we just have to finish updating the SDK, and then I will edit and compile it to allow for 55 civs. Should not be long, early next week at the latest I hope. I will PM you when it is finished.
Time for a major bunch of cutting and pasting here! (And was post-stacking like that really necessary?)
You're probably right. Totalitarian may be a good idea to adopt instead of Isolationism to replicate Saudi Arabia, because they certainly aren't isolationists in terms of how they get their money.
Again, you're probably right, although I don't know who exactly is included besides Cuba. If we're making an organization stand in for states, though, we could use a democratic Civic to represent the chairman elected by the member states.
The only difference is that Knowledge.dds is in color, so please use that one.
Darwinism is exactly what it sounds like; a lawless situation where only brute force determines hierarchy. It's necessary to mention that I wanted to draw a bit of a line between truly failed states, which are given to the barbarians, and just very corrupt, backwards and/or troubled states like Mexico, so my means was the first civic in each category. Unlike the core game, all of these are completely free, to emphasize that they result from governments that are too weak to effectively run their countries. Also unlike the core game, they do give some ironic bonuses; usually extra experience, since the people are used to fighting, but the benefits are outweighed by many other detractions that you also wouldn't find in the main game. I'll post all of the current civics and their effects in the Civics thread a little later on.
You're probably right. Totalitarian may be a good idea to adopt instead of Isolationism to replicate Saudi Arabia, because they certainly aren't isolationists in terms of how they get their money.
Again, you're probably right, although I don't know who exactly is included besides Cuba. If we're making an organization stand in for states, though, we could use a democratic Civic to represent the chairman elected by the member states.
The only difference is that Knowledge.dds is in color, so please use that one.
Darwinism is exactly what it sounds like; a lawless situation where only brute force determines hierarchy. It's necessary to mention that I wanted to draw a bit of a line between truly failed states, which are given to the barbarians, and just very corrupt, backwards and/or troubled states like Mexico, so my means was the first civic in each category. Unlike the core game, all of these are completely free, to emphasize that they result from governments that are too weak to effectively run their countries. Also unlike the core game, they do give some ironic bonuses; usually extra experience, since the people are used to fighting, but the benefits are outweighed by many other detractions that you also wouldn't find in the main game. I'll post all of the current civics and their effects in the Civics thread a little later on.
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
The last few days I have look more closely at the scenario, basically down to every individual city. I will now make a more mature suggestion of civ choices. To begin with, let me just say a bit about how I come up with the choices. Starting off from the two principles DVS suggested earlier, these are the principles I have used:
#1 - Not creating artificial unions.
#2 - Not creating any fake superpowers.
#3 - Try to include all those small nations that are very distinct in world politics (Israel, Palestine, Syria, N Korea, Taiwan and Georgia). These nations can have less than 3 cities (the threshold I've set).
#4 - Other than those nations in #3, include those nations that can fit at least 3 cities on GEM.
Note that my decision is mainly based on the number of cities then based on the GDP or the population because in the game ultimately, strength is mainly determined by the number of cities.
So this is my suggestion:
New Civs:
Norway(Split from NATO)
Turkey(Split from NATO)
Mongolia(It occupy 4 cities on GEM easily)
Bangladesh (7th largest nation in population. Too big to miss)
New Zealand(It occupy more than 3 cities and I don't want to merge it with Australia - violating #1)
Deleted Civs:
Permenant Neutrality - combined into Minor nations. Not much point to have them seperate since they should cause the same effect diplomatically. Assuming we are going to make minor nations unplayable and at peace with everyone by default.
Belarus - won't fit 3 cities.
Sri Lanka - won't fit 3 cities.
Venezuela - combined into the Bolivarian Americas
Name changed Civs:
United Kingdom - replace NATO
Morocco - replace Independent African States
West African States (A realistic union - here) - replace Nigeria
Central African States (A realistic union - here) - replace Angola
East African States (A realistic union - here) - replace African Union
South African States (A realistic union - here) - replace South Africa
Arab States of the Gulf (A realistic union - here)- replace Saudi Arabia
Bolivarian Americas (A realistic union - here) - replace Latin America Socialist Alllies
There will still be 48 civ. The civ list is as follow (~number of cities):
The biggest change is the break up of Africa Union into the sub unions. So the largest Africa civ has only 10 cities, down from ~35 cities in Africa Union.
Comments Welcome.
#1 - Not creating artificial unions.
#2 - Not creating any fake superpowers.
#3 - Try to include all those small nations that are very distinct in world politics (Israel, Palestine, Syria, N Korea, Taiwan and Georgia). These nations can have less than 3 cities (the threshold I've set).
#4 - Other than those nations in #3, include those nations that can fit at least 3 cities on GEM.
Note that my decision is mainly based on the number of cities then based on the GDP or the population because in the game ultimately, strength is mainly determined by the number of cities.
So this is my suggestion:
New Civs:
Norway(Split from NATO)
Turkey(Split from NATO)
Mongolia(It occupy 4 cities on GEM easily)
Bangladesh (7th largest nation in population. Too big to miss)
New Zealand(It occupy more than 3 cities and I don't want to merge it with Australia - violating #1)
Deleted Civs:
Permenant Neutrality - combined into Minor nations. Not much point to have them seperate since they should cause the same effect diplomatically. Assuming we are going to make minor nations unplayable and at peace with everyone by default.
Belarus - won't fit 3 cities.
Sri Lanka - won't fit 3 cities.
Venezuela - combined into the Bolivarian Americas
Name changed Civs:
United Kingdom - replace NATO
Morocco - replace Independent African States
West African States (A realistic union - here) - replace Nigeria
Central African States (A realistic union - here) - replace Angola
East African States (A realistic union - here) - replace African Union
South African States (A realistic union - here) - replace South Africa
Arab States of the Gulf (A realistic union - here)- replace Saudi Arabia
Bolivarian Americas (A realistic union - here) - replace Latin America Socialist Alllies
There will still be 48 civ. The civ list is as follow (~number of cities):
Spoiler :
The biggest change is the break up of Africa Union into the sub unions. So the largest Africa civ has only 10 cities, down from ~35 cities in Africa Union.
Comments Welcome.
Genghis_Kai
GEM modder
Some details:
Nation (includes)
European Union (EU excluding UK)
United Kingdom (Jamaica, Belize, Bahamas, Trinidad)
Norway
Russia (Belarus)
Ukraine
Turkey
Georgia
Morocco
Algeria (Tunisia)
Egypt
Sudan
Ethiopia
West African States (Burkina Faso, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Togo.)
Central African States (Angola, Cameroon, São Tomé, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and DR Congo)
South African States (Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa)
East African States (Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi)
Arab States of the Gulf (Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar and United Arab Emirates)
Israel
Palestine
Syria
Iran
Pakistan
Bangladesh
India
Kazakhstan
Mongolia
China
Taiwan
North Korea
South Korea
Japan
Myanmar
Thailand
Vietnam
Philippines
Indonesia
Australia (Papul New Guinea and some pacific islands)
New Zealand (some pacific islands)
Canada
United States (Iraq, Afghanistan)
Mexico
Colombia
Bolivarian Americas (Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua)
Peru
Brazil
Argentina
Chile
Minor Nations (Iceland, Switzerland, Croatia, Albania, Serbia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Libya, Cape Verde, Madagascar, Seychelles, Lebanon, Jordon, Yemen, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Laos, Cambodia, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Haiti, Guyana, Suriname, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay)
Failed States (Mauritania, Guinea, Côte d'Ivoire, part of Mali, part of Niger, Central African Republic, Chad, part of DR Congo, Eritrea, Somalia, Darfur, Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan, East Timor)
Nation (includes)
European Union (EU excluding UK)
United Kingdom (Jamaica, Belize, Bahamas, Trinidad)
Norway
Russia (Belarus)
Ukraine
Turkey
Georgia
Morocco
Algeria (Tunisia)
Egypt
Sudan
Ethiopia
West African States (Burkina Faso, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Togo.)
Central African States (Angola, Cameroon, São Tomé, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and DR Congo)
South African States (Botswana, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa)
East African States (Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi)
Arab States of the Gulf (Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar and United Arab Emirates)
Israel
Palestine
Syria
Iran
Pakistan
Bangladesh
India
Kazakhstan
Mongolia
China
Taiwan
North Korea
South Korea
Japan
Myanmar
Thailand
Vietnam
Philippines
Indonesia
Australia (Papul New Guinea and some pacific islands)
New Zealand (some pacific islands)
Canada
United States (Iraq, Afghanistan)
Mexico
Colombia
Bolivarian Americas (Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua)
Peru
Brazil
Argentina
Chile
Minor Nations (Iceland, Switzerland, Croatia, Albania, Serbia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Libya, Cape Verde, Madagascar, Seychelles, Lebanon, Jordon, Yemen, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Laos, Cambodia, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Haiti, Guyana, Suriname, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay)
Failed States (Mauritania, Guinea, Côte d'Ivoire, part of Mali, part of Niger, Central African Republic, Chad, part of DR Congo, Eritrea, Somalia, Darfur, Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan, East Timor)