New Civs?

Edit; That is a good point, however I do think that the is space in some areas of the map for civs, including ones that had existed in civ 3...

Also here is a suggestion how about adding byzantium and it spawning if rome controls greece in year X, or just if greece doesnt exist in year X?
 
This is just my opinion but I think the Turks should spawn in Central Asia, so that if they want Anatolia they'd have to conquer it. With the system now I don't think they really stand much of a chance.
 
No more civs, I say. Not if barbs are heavily stronger or very much more agressive AI. In my Monarch-games only few nations collapse, if any. And revolutions cause that in 1750 every civ is alive.
 
What about if civs collapse easier andwe add civs but only if others are dead, so it increases variaty and the apponants we must face but without increasing turn times,(e.g. Italy apearing in turn X if rome is dead, Byzantium appearing in turn Y is greece is dead, Timur apearing if persia is dead in turn Z etc...)

The only possible downside to this that I can see is the extra work required to impliment it, as it shouldnt slow the game down any more than the same civ comming back.
 
^^ Nice idea, but it would be better if:
1)For Byzantium Rome must conquer Anatolia, Greece is dead and Byzantium revolts between 200-1000.
2)Even better than Timurid Empire may be Mughal Empire, which would appear if Mongols would conquer Persia and a revolution would cause between 1500-1700.
3)Italy would appear on year 1800--> if Rome is dead and France conquers Italy(France helped Garibaldi to form Italy).
 
While it would be great to see dynamic civs in the way Kairob suggests, it seems a hell of a lot of work for something so minor.

2)Even better than Timurid Empire may be Mughal Empire, which would appear if Mongols would conquer Persia and a revolution would cause between 1500-1700.
Click to expand...
The Timurids and Mughals had very similar backgrounds, so you might as well put them together to create a nice Central Asian empire.

3)Italy would appear on year 1800--> if Rome is dead and France conquers Italy(France helped Garibaldi to form Italy).
Click to expand...

If Italy were included, they should spawn earlier. Germany is represented as a unified nation long before 1871, and 15th century Italy was arguably more influential than 19th century Italy, after all.
 
As I've mentioned elsewhere, I would really like to see the Dutch and the Protuguese. It would make the struggle between the european powers for colonial dominance better and I just think you have a huge hole in world history if you leave them out. Since Portugal was under the Spanish crown for such a long time I'm more keen on the Dutch (if I had to choose between the two).
 
lumpthing said:
As I've mentioned elsewhere, I would really like to see the Dutch and the Protuguese. It would make the struggle between the european powers for colonial dominance better and I just think you have a huge hole in world history if you leave them out. Since Portugal was under the Spanish crown for such a long time I'm more keen on the Dutch (if I had to choose between the two).
Click to expand...


never say never.
After the release of warlords version I'll stress your computers with a load of minor civs (and after a comparison with the current number (3) in terms of speed, make the final cut).
Between these, I could add script-guided Dutch and Portuguese, minor (not playable) civs.
 
then if germany is wiped out before 1930 we could witness a rise of hitler, etc...
It does seam a lot of work just for flavour that was the only downside I could think of :(, but if you could get it so they always spawn if the player chooses one it would add a lot more choice for a very little if any difference in speed.
I cant personally mod for the life of me but I am sure the are plenty of graphics available to use it is just a case of installing them all and choosing UHV/UU/UB et al...
 
Rhye, are you going to input more nations if we, fellow forum members, make LHs and that stuff? I'd like to see Timurid Empire or Mughal Empire.
 
I agree with Lumpthing about the Dutch and Portugese. It would be challenging and fun to run one-city-in-europe empires. Besdies, it gets kind of boring only seeing Blue, Red and Yellow in the Americas. ;)
 
I'm pretty sure it's been discussed before, but I miss the Iroquois from Civ3... They were a challenge to play in Rhye's civ3 mod and they'd be even more so with the spawn of America and the more realistic European colonization...

I'm all for leaving them out though if the Warlords AI still won't invade...
 
I always depict Greece as Byzanium in my games. Even though Byzantium was the eastern front of the old Roman Empire, they adopt the Hellenistic culture.

So...

Greece = Byzantium

But, I would like to see a Iroquois Confederation to give those pesky Europeans some opposition. Even though it wouldn't be an exact match, you could use the Shaka leaderhead. Maybe even mod more appropriate skin to help blend it to the Native American culture.
 
lumpthing said:
woohoo! :D (i'm aware that what you said wasn't a promise of course)

But why not playable civs? I'd love the challenge of building a world empire from a one-city homeland.
Click to expand...

I know it would be fun (a kind of "Rhye's Goal-based Challanges" from civ3), but they would require extra work: UU, UB, UP, UHVs, and a leaderhead
 
NitroJay (from the new independent/minor civ cities thread) said:
About the native american cities... I'm all for the way it is now... Many American cities have native american names, (i.e. Tallahassee, Milwaukee, etc...) but it's not because there was a city there, it's just what the natives called that particular area. (At least that's what I learned in 5th grade...) So the current system works fine with me, you plop a settler down in Winsconsin, you get Milwaukee... I'm fine with it. Having the Europeans made to fight for every inch of the New World wouldn't be too realistic to me, (unless the Iroquois were made into a civ again, that would change my point of view...)...
Click to expand...

I totally agree with what you are saying, but why would the Iroquois be an exception??!!

Please, please, please, no Iroquois (or any other non-urban Native American) civ in RFC. It would totally destroy the historical feel of colonizing the Americas. I do not want to see a massive Iroquois empire full of road, mines, irrigation and massive juggernaut-cities in place of the untamed West. Pleeeaasseee.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

foreverlost
Need help to advance to beating the AI Civs
Replies
4
Views
537
foreverlost
foreverlost
A
What upgrade path would you take for Zulu?
Replies
8
Views
592
looorg
L
A
Preventing AI from choosing certain social policies or ideologies
Replies
0
Views
164
Andrew Harlane
A
jarcast2
Alternative art for some civs for VP
Replies
4
Views
480
pineappledan
pineappledan
livinginaz
[Vanilla] Mediterranean diplomacy music silent in Industrial/Modern age fix for Civ III vanilla
Replies
0
Views
219
livinginaz
livinginaz
Top Bottom