Proposed new independent cities

Cork (or whatever Celtic city in Ireland)
Kanem-Bornu empire (in Chad/Libya)--to buffer the barbs/impis
La Coruna (Celtic)
a city in Dacia for Romans to conquer
some central Asian cities to represent the khanates (Kazakh, Oirat, etc)
Khotan (on the Silk Road, near the oasis)
Sri Lanka (instead of jungle)
Hawaii (should be at least a city by 1700, to be "conquered" by America or Japan)

Palembang on Sumatra to represent Srivijaya and to hinder Khmer or Chinese expansion into the area.

Kanem-Bornu would probably just get overrun by barbarian raiders immediately.

I don't think Dacia had cities in the Roman age. At best roman forts or villages... I'd also say no to La Coruna. Let Spain expand as she sees fit.

I'd only add something in the Khanates. Problem is that they will be conquered by barbs.

Agree with Dacia and a celtic city in spain. Rome needs more cities to conquer. Also there needs to be at least one city in indonesia

IrishDragon said:

Agree with Dacia and a celtic city in spain. Rome needs more cities to conquer. Also there needs to be at least one city in indonesia

Click to expand...

Hmm, Rome needs to gather plunder from 'barbarian' races. This was done most often by selling the entire population off as slaves and moving 'tame' barbs into the area to control it.

Rome rarely found a city to attack, indeed they usually built the first 'city' in the territories they subdued.

Perhaps barb pop 1 cities could have more gold to represent the slave sales?

Rhye has removed some cities and won't add anymore. I asked him before why he's doing this, and not spotting the world with independent cities and... well he said because the AI is scared of them, and can be very unpredictable. Some city he removed that was in Africa was preventing the AI from touching that entire area for the entire game, and also this is why the Byzantium Empire seems to hold out for longer than it should if the player doesn't attack it. This is also why southern China seems to hold out for long in the 600 AD start, despite it being easily conquerable by China and Khmer.

He's not going to add any of these ideas.

onedreamer said:

I don't think Dacia had cities in the Roman age. At best roman forts or villages...

Click to expand...

From Wikipedia:

Dacians had developed the Murus dacicus, characteristic to their complexes of fortified cities, like their capital Sarmizegetusa in today Hunedoara (Romania). The degree of their urban development can be seen on Trajan's Column and in the account of how Sarmizegetusa was defeated by the Romans. The Romans identified and destroyed the water aqueducts or pipelines of the Dacian capital, only thus being able to end the long siege of Sarmizegetusa.

If they have walls and aqueducts they have OK cities. Later it says Decebalus' treasure was captured by Trajan which revived the Roman economy so they must have markets too.

well he said because the AI is scared of them, and can be very unpredictable. Some city he removed that was in Africa was preventing the AI from touching that entire area for the entire game

Click to expand...

It depends. Zinbabwe, the city in question, was a Native city (a subtle difference from Independent). But in my games the Japanese have no problems with capturing Singapura, and collapsed empires are gobbled away quite nicely.

Somehow the Mongolians, Chinese and Turks need to be "reprogrammed" to take their adjacent "indy" cities sooner (Byzantium, Guangzhou and Hangzhou)

AnotherPacifist said:

From Wikipedia:

Dacians had developed the Murus dacicus, characteristic to their complexes of fortified cities, like their capital Sarmizegetusa in today Hunedoara (Romania). The degree of their urban development can be seen on Trajan's Column and in the account of how Sarmizegetusa was defeated by the Romans. The Romans identified and destroyed the water aqueducts or pipelines of the Dacian capital, only thus being able to end the long siege of Sarmizegetusa.

If they have walls and aqueducts they have OK cities. Later it says Decebalus' treasure was captured by Trajan which revived the Roman economy so they must have markets too.

Click to expand...

wow, if they have markets I'm sure we can call them cities then.
This discussion is dangerously similar to the one where Native Americans had cities too (and "larger" than Europeans), hence they should have been there and independant.

AnotherPacifist said:

From Wikipedia:

Dacians had developed the Murus dacicus, characteristic to their complexes of fortified cities, like their capital Sarmizegetusa in today Hunedoara (Romania). The degree of their urban development can be seen on Trajan's Column and in the account of how Sarmizegetusa was defeated by the Romans. The Romans identified and destroyed the water aqueducts or pipelines of the Dacian capital, only thus being able to end the long siege of Sarmizegetusa.

If they have walls and aqueducts they have OK cities. Later it says Decebalus' treasure was captured by Trajan which revived the Roman economy so they must have markets too.

Click to expand...

You remembered to cite your source, in this case Wikipedia. Not too many do!

You are correct, the Dacians certainly did have settlements that would easily qualify as pop 1, 2, and perhaps 3 'cities'. However if the modder does not want them in the mod the argument is over.

As a suggestion.... add them to your modded mod. easy enogh done and means you can have it your way.

I proposed a indipendent/native city in the Easter Island. The "big Face was" built in.

[QUOTE="<-_Danny_->";6594557]I proposed a indipendent/native city in the Easter Island. The "big Face was" built in.[/QUOTE]

Ah, yes, since the Moai Statues can't be built in the 600 AD start, maybe the Easter Island city should have it. (And they'll probably build a fleet and conquer Micronesia)

AnotherPacifist said:

Cork (or whatever Celtic city in Ireland)
Kanem-Bornu empire (in Chad/Libya)--to buffer the barbs/impis
La Coruna (Celtic)

Click to expand...

Woo! I suport. I also spport a celtic London with stonehenge considering the myth that celts were chased off to Scotland and Ireand is just that, a myth. 70% of real Brits are celtic.

I also, to a lesser extent support easter island as a native city for the Incas to get or anyone else with Maoi statues, making it a pretty good city. I also to an even lesser extent support some independants in Siberia although I'd rather the Mongols expanded like crazy, ignoring stability, and collapsed, leaving a rich legacy of cities behind and not remaining a superpower in the 2000's.

More Russian-Mongolian wars would be nice too.

Actually I've changed my mind about independants in Russia bt not at all the Mongols.

Theodorick said:

Rhye has removed some cities and won't add anymore. I asked him before why he's doing this, and not spotting the world with independent cities and... well he said because the AI is scared of them, and can be very unpredictable. Some city he removed that was in Africa was preventing the AI from touching that entire area for the entire game, and also this is why the Byzantium Empire seems to hold out for longer than it should if the player doesn't attack it. This is also why southern China seems to hold out for long in the 600 AD start, despite it being easily conquerable by China and Khmer.

He's not going to add any of these ideas.

Click to expand...

Celtic England and la Coruna wold not hurt anyone. Easter island could even be invaded automatically by whoever discovers them as a kind of conqueror event. I don't really want more independants either.

Rome never colonises Britain, Celtic stonehenge city in London won't hurt them. They might even invade it. (I think some barb chariots should spawn to represent Boudica. Celtic London would represent that the land was lived on before Englands spawn and give them a minor boost having perhaps a farm or two built by the celts, (if still around.)

AI does fine vs celts in my experience. La coruna I have already expressed my view on ages ago along with Easter island, although I just thought of the conqueror event. Whoever discovers easter island should get it so it doesn't just stay there alone.

AnotherPacifist said:

Somehow the Mongolians, Chinese and Turks need to be "reprogrammed" to take their adjacent "indy" cities sooner (Byzantium, Guangzhou and Hangzhou)

Click to expand...

My thought was that the southern Chinese cities should flip at some point. After all, shortly after 600 CE, all of China reunified under the Sui, not just north China (although presumably the southern cities are supposed to represent the southern dynasties). That might make the human player a bit strong, but probably not too much.


For the Byzantines, shouldn't it be possible to have them locked at war with the Turks, and maybe the Arabs? The Arabs never conquer past Cairo in the games I've seen, and in my most recent game as France, the Byzantines actually retook Cairo and Jerusalem.

I've always wondered why the Byzantines weren't just added as replacing the Greeks, allowing them to participate in diplomacy. After all, Greece wouldn't respawn historically unless the Byzantine Empire was gone anyway.

Verily said:

For the Byzantines, shouldn't it be possible to have them locked at war with the Turks, and maybe the Arabs? The Arabs never conquer past Cairo in the games I've seen, and in my most recent game as France, the Byzantines actually retook Cairo and Jerusalem.

Click to expand...

This doesn't match my experience. In my current game as Germany, Arabia had conquered along the north African coast to just before Tunis (which was still independent), and was rocking along nicely in first place and about 4 techs ahead of everyone else.

Impressive to say the least compared to some very dismal Arabias that I have seen under previous patches.

I would really like if there could be independent Kazan, Astrakhan and other Tatar and Cossack Khanate Cities in Russia. Russia could be locked in war with them from the beginning.

The struggle against the Tatars was really an important part of Russian history. Russia did not only settle an entirely uninhabited East but overtook many sites. (Yakutz, Tjumen etc. are another examples).

Regarding new setup:
I am playing Emperor on 600 AD Start.
Arabia was doing good in my current game as well. But they were locked in a desperate war with Turkey. (and I was astounded how hot the war was raging) I play as Russia and soon after Turkey spawned it just went : Rasht taken by Arabia, Yerushalem taken by Turkey, Bagdat taken by Turkey, Badgat taken by Arabia ...

Unfortunately this kept Turkey from conquering Byzantine before 1700 and the Arabians finally collapsed and only slowly Turkey is taking over the territory.

But in general it was nice to see some action that kept the Turks occupied.

The current game as Russia is both good and bad and unusual. Normally as soon as I spawn as Russia I always try to get open borders with Germany instantly by gifting a tech.
This did not work this time. So I decided to go for a little bit of worker napping and pillage. I sent a couple of Horse Raiders into German territory fully relying on instant retreat into my territory and then General Winter whenever the Germans decided to retaliate.

They hardly did and when I just declared war second time to nap a couple of unguarded workers near my borders, the Germans just decided to roll over and die .. Germany collapsed. (this was certainly not only because of my worker napping, but maybe these small additional losses tipped the can over the edge)

Well , this is both good and bad. Naturally the Germans are aggressive and not the most pleasant neighbours, but so are the Turks, and in return Germany is a natural tech leader. Whenever you manage to get open borders with them you can be sure to get significant boni on your research and not to mention the trade income.

When the Germans collapsed the whole territory became independent, that means no trade and no research bony. I decided to get only Riga for myself out of the dead corpse and to raze Lemberg because it was affecting my borders around Kiev but i did not touch Berlin nor Wien or Frankfurt. This was part because I had no army to speak of, just my few Horse Riders, but it was also because i did not want to ruin my economy so early and there was lots of Russian territory still to be settled.

I still wonder whether I was right. Later the Netherlands took over Frankfurt and Copenhague. The Spanish took over Rome, Venetia and Reggio and the Vikings conquered Berlin and Wien.

But the world is developing quite slowly now. I am in 1712, I am holding Moskva, St. Peterburg, Vologda, Kiev, Riga, Rostov na-Don, Samara, Kazan, Ekaterinburg, Tjumen, Omsk, Samarkand and Krasnoyarsk (that means territory-wise I am ahead of schedule), but technology wise I am quite concerned.
I have successfully raided the Germans, fought off the Vikings, survived the Plague of the 14th and the 17th century and I am currently driving the Mongols of my new Siberian Homeland.
But I am doing this with Curassiers, Cannons and Musketmen. Rifling is not even close (I have Chemistry, Banking, Military Tradition, Gunpowder, Education, Drama and Optics and I am working on Liberalism with maximum 8 turns left but that its) and I am frankly quite far away from Rocketry that I am supposed to get by 1935 around .. I mean I also have to BUILD the program you know and I can not just BUY it.

See 1712 is quite little time left till 1950.

I am remember my last game in the old version when I was building the Kremlin in 1650 (because I had to otherwise somebody else would beat me to it). But in this last game it was still no easy ride towards the Industrial Age .. there is just very very much space to be covered and the late techs are so damn expensive !!!

Off topic:

I managed to invade all of Russia with my initial German soldiers + 2 pikemen I got free in Frankfurt, helping v.s horse archers. I don't know if this is unusual or not, I did win a lot of chance battles (30% or something.)

AnotherPacifist said:

Cork (or whatever Celtic city in Ireland)
Kanem-Bornu empire (in Chad/Libya)--to buffer the barbs/impis
La Coruna (Celtic)
a city in Dacia for Romans to conquer
some central Asian cities to represent the khanates (Kazakh, Oirat, etc)
Khotan (on the Silk Road, near the oasis)
Sri Lanka (instead of jungle)
Hawaii (should be at least a city by 1700, to be "conquered" by America or Japan)

Click to expand...

Hi ,

great idea indeed , just add them true worldbuilder before you start the game , include easter island , make hawaii barbarian , ' ceylon ' has a barbarian navel base , madagascar is the capital city of the barbarians where they spit out ships sometimes loaded with very strong units that provide a nice way to ' earn ' experience points , a native city at vladivostok to make sure the russians get in the pacific , just capture it and give it to them , nice for tensions with the russians and the mongols or chinese , ....

the port of ' suez ' is not to be forgotten so that who ever has it has easy transfer beteen the med and the indian ocean

the same for a native or even barbarian city of ' panama ' , this last one gives a real tactical advantage when having loads of sea battles going on in both the pacific and the atlantic , ....


Have a nice day