Mechanics discussion in Latin America / South America

[Cacaso]

Spoiler :

Here is a series of screen shots of what South America would look like. IMO for the purposes of gameplay there should be the Civs Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Gran Colombia (which would later be divided into Colombia and Venezuela (playable) and Ecuador) and the Civs Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Ecuador as non-playable.

BRAZIL - It should continue with the same UB, UU and UHV, while colonized by Portugal only the cities of Recife / Olinda (the name changes if the city is reconquered from the Dutch), Salvador, Belém, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo (IMO should be on this tile to be a coastal city and thus represent the strength of the city's trade well) and PortoAlegre should be founded, after the independence of Brazil there should be a priority to found the city of Corumbá (so that the War of Event can take place Paraguay), then cities like Manaus, Belo Horizonte and others.

ARGENTINA - Should continue with the same UB, UU and UHV, start with the city of Buenos Aires, flip Corrientes (so that the War of Paraguay event can take place), and found Mendoza with the first settler.

CHILE - UU ???? / UB ????? / UHV ????? (one of them would be the "war of the pacific" to conquer Antofagasta and Arica) Begins in 1818 with the capital Santiago and a settler to found Valdivia

PERU - UU ???? / UB ????? / UHV ????? starts in 1824 with Lima and flip Arequipa, Arica and Trujillo

GRAN COLOMBIA / COLOMBIA - UU ???? / UB ????? / UHV ????? starts in 1821 in Bogotá, flip Panama, Cartagena, Maracaibo and Caracas

VENEZULA - UU ???? / UB ????? / UHV ????? starts in 1830 with Carracas, flip Maracaibo and Ciudad Guyana

ECUADOR / BOLIVIA / PARAGUAY / URUGUAY - spawning in 1830, 1825, 1811, 1828 respectively (all non-playable), all have only the capital except Bolivia, which has La Paz, Antofagasta, Santa Cruz de La Sierra and Rio Branco.

EVENTS
"War of Paraguay" - AI Paraguay attacks Brazil in Corumbá in 1864, Uruguay and Argentina asked if they enter the war, minor permanent improvement of diplomacy with Brazil if yes, AI Paraguay attacks Corrientes, If Brazil / Argentina captures Asunción tiles around the paraguay go from "contested area" to "historic area", including tile with yerba mate for brazil and argentina.

"pacific war" - In 1879 Peru and Bolivia declare war together if Chile attacks (even without the defensive pact), if Chile can capture Antofagasta, Arica and Lima, the tiles of these 2 cities change from contested to historic areas. Argentina asked if it wants to declare war on chile or agreement and have Patagonian tiles changed from contested to historic (to make sense this would be the only possible time for this transition)

"Question of Acre" - In 1903 Bolivia offers the opportunity to sell Rio Branco to Brazil, which can accept payment or declare war on Bolivia and suffer a diplomatic penalty with the USA.

Make comments with suggestions of UU, UB and UHV for the civs of South America and also of the opportunities of events if you find the idea interesting.

 

[soul-breathing]

We already have Colombia, isn't it?

 

[Cacaso]

We already have Colombia, isn't it?

Currently it is Gran Colombia in version 1.16

 

[Tigranes]

Currently it is Gran Colombia in version 1.16

And now even Civ6 got one

 

[Krieger-FS]

I'm all abord discussing new features for South America and I'm happy that other people like you are also thinking about improving the region and civs there.

Except for few cities slighlty misplaced as I originally envisioned and some additions, your city map is more or less solid in what should South America should look by late game.

I think that we could make some revamp to the existing South American civs in order to improve them both in gameplay and historical aspects. For exemple, while Brazilian UU is useful for the UHVs and land development, it does not represent something unique about Brazil. Likewise, some Argentine UHVs are too much similar to each other and can also be reviewed for something more unique and fun. Not mentioning that both Colombia and Peru deserve being proper civs instead of respawns.

About new additions, I would add only the Chilean civilization. Combined with the existing proper civs and respawns (expected to become full civs), we would have Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru and Colombia. These are the South American "big five", the main actors in the South American historical balance of power system. Other minor powers can be represented (if we implement a late game scenario) as independent cities.

I'm not sure about adding special events in the region. Sure, the wars of Triple Alliance and the Pacific were essential to the nation-building process in South America, however they don't seem to really fit to the world and historical scale of the game. What I mean is that they didn't provoked worldwide and lasting consequences like the scripted conquerors events already implemented, such as Alexandrian, Turkic, colonial and even US ones.

Anyway, being said all that, I think that for now we have to focus on the new map before discussing new civs/mechanics.

 

[BaneFire]

I don't understand what you mean by Colombia and Peru being "proper civs"? It seems to me that if you can condense the number of civs down and maintain historical parity that's two good objectives that synchronise. I guess Maya -> Colombia is silly, but Aztecs -> Mexico and Persia -> Iran seem fine.
I'm unsure about Chile being included, seems to me that even on the big map at most they'd have one or two cities max.

 

[1SDANi]

I don't understand what you mean by Colombia and Peru being "proper civs"? It seems to me that if you can condense the number of civs down and maintain historical parity that's two good objectives that synchronise. I guess Maya -> Colombia is silly, but Aztecs -> Mexico and Persia -> Iran seem fine.
I'm unsure about Chile being included, seems to me that even on the big map at most they'd have one or two cities max.

Leoreth plans to phase out rebirths so we can expect to see Maya, Colombia, Aztecs, Mexico, Persia, and Iran to all become separate Civs.

Peru meanwhile is just a dynamic name for the respawned Inca, rather than a Civ of their own with unique attributes. The only real difference between Peru and the Inca atm is that Peru doesn't have a Unique Power.

 

[Krieger-FS]

I don't understand what you mean by Colombia and Peru being "proper civs"? It seems to me that if you can condense the number of civs down and maintain historical parity that's two good objectives that synchronise. I guess Maya -> Colombia is silly, but Aztecs -> Mexico and Persia -> Iran seem fine.
I'm unsure about Chile being included, seems to me that even on the big map at most they'd have one or two cities max.

Leoreth plans to phase out rebirths so we can expect to see Maya, Colombia, Aztecs, Mexico, Persia, and Iran to all become separate Civs.

Peru meanwhile is just a dynamic name for the respawned Inca, rather than a Civ of their own with unique attributes. The only real difference between Peru and the Inca atm is that Peru doesn't have a Unique Power.

1SDAN got the point with the first question.

About the second, I will try to summarize my point with two points:

1) Chile was historically very important not only in South American affairs (for a brief time it was more powerful and influential than Brazil and Argentina by late 19th century) but also in inter-American (continental) affairs: again, by late 19th and early 20th centuries, Chilean powerful armed forces and political issues with the United States, particularly during Panama crisis, were relevant factors in the US decision to build the "New Navy".

2) Chile certainly will have more than one or two cities in the new map. Looking at Cacaso screenshots, you could easily see four Chilean cities with enough space between them (Santiago, Valdivia, Antofagasta and Punta Arenas). I also recall that a fifth city could be easily held considering that Easter Island is a Chilean territory.

Chile certainly wouldn't be the civilization for those who aim to domination victories or world conquest, but is a historically relevant regional actor that could be fun to play in the larger map.

 

[Cacaso]

I'm all abord discussing new features for South America and I'm happy that other people like you are also thinking about improving the region and civs there.

Except for few cities slighlty misplaced as I originally envisioned and some additions, your city map is more or less solid in what should South America should look by late game.

I think that we could make some revamp to the existing South American civs in order to improve them both in gameplay and historical aspects. For exemple, while Brazilian UU is useful for the UHVs and land development, it does not represent something unique about Brazil. Likewise, some Argentine UHVs are too much similar to each other and can also be reviewed for something more unique and fun. Not mentioning that both Colombia and Peru deserve being proper civs instead of respawns.

About new additions, I would add only the Chilean civilization. Combined with the existing proper civs and respawns (expected to become full civs), we would have Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Peru and Colombia. These are the South American "big five", the main actors in the South American historical balance of power system. Other minor powers can be represented (if we implement a late game scenario) as independent cities.

I'm not sure about adding special events in the region. Sure, the wars of Triple Alliance and the Pacific were essential to the nation-building process in South America, however they don't seem to really fit to the world and historical scale of the game. What I mean is that they didn't provoked worldwide and lasting consequences like the scripted conquerors events already implemented, such as Alexandrian, Turkic, colonial and even US ones.

Anyway, being said all that, I think that for now we have to focus on the new map before discussing new civs/mechanics.

I based it on the map you made, I made some changes :
Brazil
1 - cities like Belém, Salvador, Rio de Janeiro and Porto Alegre are in the right locations looking at google maps, so there's not much to move. these 4 plus Recife / Olinda and São paulo should be the cities that make up Brazil in 1822 independence.
2 - Move sao paulo to the banana tile so that the city was coastal (to be able to build harbor, custom house and lighthouse) and thus represent the vigor of the city's economy. and also to further distance the cities of Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte and Sao Paulo, which are the largest cities in population in Brazil.
3 - Move Olinda / Recife to the left because this is the most important city in that region of the map (fortress would be more to the north), the name of this city should be dynamic because the Dutch burnt olinda when they invaded the sugar northeast of Brazil, the city would be founded as Olinda and if lost and regained it moves to Recife.

Colombia / Venezuela / Ecuador region
First of all I think the most important discussion is whether we will just leave a Civ Gran Colombia or if we will divide it into Colombia and Venezuela (playable) and also whether it is a Civ (not playable) or just another Colombian city, observing the map IMO there is space for the 3 civs. We may also not build Cartagena to have more tiles for Maracaibo (especially if only choose gran colombia) or move Panama City to the left.

Guyana and Suriname region
There I think there will only be room for two cities for France, Holland and the UK to share.

Chile and Argentina
Punta Arenas and Rio Galegos are very close to each other (I think the minimum limit of 1 tile distance to another city, but does this apply if it is a city of another civ?)

Regarding the events they can be changed, for example war of Paraguay changes to a program in Civ Paraguay's AI to be aggressive and attack the cities of Corumbá, Corrientes and Montevideo, changing the schedule to non-aggressive if Asuncion is captured.
The "war of pacific" event can be configured as a Civ Chile UHV and thus events are already occurring naturally without a scripted event.
The question of Acre, may be a simple request from Brazil for the city Rio Branco with a greater chance of being accepted, something similar to new orleans for the USA.

In relation to UU, UB and UHV, we need to have more ideas, I already thought of some things but need more.
if you have any suggestions to move any city, or any opinion regarding the changes I made feel free to comment.

 

[Krieger-FS]

First, I apologize for the late reply!

Anyway, I will give a somewhat long response (I must learn how to answer briefly!) for each of the suggestions bellow:

Cities:

Spoiler :

Brazil:

• I still prefer São Paulo, Olinda/Recife and Belo Horizonte in the locations that I placed initially. São Paulo being 1NE would still be a coastal city (allowing the use of a harbor), still would be alongside the river (enabling building production-related buildings) and additionally would also being able to work the banana (that really should be a citrus resource). Sure, it will have more overlap with Rio, but I feel that we could compensate using more resources while maintaining a more accurate location. Belo Horizonte, in other hand, should be 1SE (or even 1E), because in your placement we cannot have Brasília (founding it should be a nice UHV in my opinion!). I should also note that Belo Horizonte is a very late game city; the same tile should be likely shared with an older city, possibly Vila Rica/Ouro Preto. Considering that (according your profile here) you are from Minas Gerais, you probably know better than me about canonical colonial cities in this state! Either way, cities placed 1-2 tiles away from others occurs in other regions (like Western Europe and US East Coast, so we have some precedents for it. Considering that the historical importance of this area (states São Paulo, Rio and Minas Gerais) and that is the more densely populated region in Brazil, it should be capable of sustaining at least few cities while being somewhat cramped.
• Regarding Olinda/Recife, the first thing that I stress is that I think that Recife should be the canonical city in area and tile. For those who are unfamiliar with Brazilian history/geography, these two colonial cities are located very closely (within the same tile in practice) and were very important during the sugar colonial economy. Nonetheless, I feel that Recife is way more important than Olinda taking account Brazilian history: Recife always was the Pernambuco capital, while Olinda lost much of its importance by 18th century. Being said that, I think that the city should be placed 1SE from where you put, because the current location seems more like within the states of Paraíba and Rio Grande do Norte than Pernambuco. And I agree with you that all this region will have dynamic names should the Dutch conquer it. Nonetheless, at least for now Leoreth asked to help with city names considering the core areas of each civ, so in this case we are mainly discussing Brazilian/Portuguese names.
• I think that Cuiabá (1NE or 2N1E) should be the canonical city instead of Corumbá, giving that it is older and much more important than the former in the Portuguese colonization of Central South America and Brazilian post-independence history.

Argentina/Chile:

• I think that Córdoba (1S from the salt lake) should be canonical, giving its importance in Argentine history and the fact that is the second largest city, behind only Buenos Aires.
• Corrientes should be 1E because it is located in the eastern bank of Paraná river.
• There are a few historic important cities in Argentine NW, such as Salta, Tucumán, Santiago del Estero, Jujuy and Catamarca, for exemple, that I feel that we could likely leave the area without a definitive canonical city, having chances that a Argentine or Spanish civ found anyone of them randomly.
• While I recognize the importance of Mendoza, I think that we shouldn't turn it that canonical (like, appearing in every game), giving the overlap with Santiago and Córdoba and the fact that the region don't have that much of resources available.
• In the far southern Patagonia, I see Punta Arenas (Chile) as the most canonical city for the region. Argentina surely has several relevant cities in Patagonia (like Carmen de Patagones/Viedma, Rawson, Trelew, Comodoro Rivadavia, Río Galegos, etc) that can be founded, but I like to think that this area would be contested hotly by Argentine and Chilean civs (just like in history), giving a more dynamic city placement.
• I consider Concepción (1N) being much more important (in historical, economic and populational) terms than Valdivia.

Peru/Bolivia:

• The challenge here is that we have to take in account the pre-Columbian civilizations when making the choices about canonical cities. For this reason, I felt lack of Cuzco (2N of Arequipa) in your map.
• Santa Cruz de la Sierra should be 1S from where you place it, in the mountain tile (it becomes a mountain pass by ~1550).
• I also don't think that Arica should be a canonical city, giving the large overlap with Chilean, Bolivian and Peruvian cities nearby.

Ecuador/Colombia/Venezuela:

• While I agree that Quito should be the canonical city in Ecuador, giving the fact that is her capital and also a pre-Columbian city, I think that Guayaquil (1SW) should have a somewhat higher settler value and be an alternative canonical city for the Spanish civ, giving its historical and economic role.
• I agree with you about Colombian canonical cities. They overlap a little bit (largely because Colombia is compressed in our map), but we can compensate with a resource-rich area.
• I feel that the only canonical-set-in-stone city in Venezuela should be Caracas. Maracaibo sure is important and can be settled eventually, but the settler value (for both Spanish and Colombian civs) for Cartagena should be higher.

Regarding the Guianas, I agree fully with you.

South American special events:

I'm still unsure that we should do. Besides my previous argument, I also want to make a point that the conditions to trigger such events would be so specific that they unlikely would occur in almost all games. In this sense, remember that DoC's gameplay spams for 5.000 years of history and such it is somewhat impossible railroad these specific late-game events.

Let's take for the sake of example the War of the Triple Alliance. Considering that we do not have a Paraguayan civ and are unlikely to have one, first and foremost we need that the Spanish civ (AI or player) settle Asunción. Honestly, I don't recall ever seeing the AI settling any city in Paraguay (which is actually a shame!). Then, when the Latin American civs spawn, we need a scenario where the Spanish colonial empire collapses, leaving Asunción as an Indy city. If the city is held by Spain, Argentina, Brazil or any other civ in any moment by mid-19th century, we do not have the necessary conditions to trigger the event.

In short, these events are filled with too many "ifs" that may happen only in few games. As such, it would take too much effort to make these special events that require very specific conditions that could be spent elsewhere in the mod.


South American civs:

Being short here, I think I already made my points about possible additional South American civs above. Either way, I think that an eventual Venezuelan civ should only be considered a fairly low priority, perhaps we should even discard this idea. If we look historically, Venezuela wasn't an important regional player during all 19th century and early 20th. The country was plagued by constant political instability to achieve international relevance; the only widely known issue back then was the Venezuelan crisis of 1895 (territorial issues with British Guyana) and then again in 1902-1903 (US intervention under the principles of Monroe doctrine against European neo-colonial intervention). After the discovery of the Venezuelan oil deposits, the country increased its international status, but only in occasional situations achieved a distinct position in South American affairs (notably, during the 1950s under Pérez Jiménez terms and again in 2000s with Chávez government). Taking all in account, I'm unfavorable to add a Venezuelan civ, even though I feel that the Colombian civ (that also represents Gran Colombia) can have the dynamic name Venezuela if their capital is located there.

The unplayable civs probably would be more or less the same that we have right now. If I'm not wrong I recall Leoreth saying that he would add new Indy civs so we have distinct Indy art styles/research modifiers and surely that would mean only few new unplayable Indy civs instead of several modern-world unplayable nations (again, we have to take in consideration DoC's global and historical scale).

About new UPs, UUs, UBs and UHVs for the South American civs, I will leave this discussion for another time. Honestly I think that is in this field that we have more to discuss and improve, but it is probably better to wait the more appropriate moment during the mod's development to increase the likeness of including the proposed chances.

 

[Tab911]

I don't think South America Needs any more civs to be intriguing. I would like to see a Chile+Peru civ as a successor to the Inca, it better fits should the Inca survive Spanish conquest and also works given the similar territories. I took a map of modern South America for reference to look at.

Rather than new civs, most of these countries serve better as contested areas. South America is interesting enough with just Brazil, Argentina, Peru/Inca, and Gran Colombia.

I am excited for the big map and the prospect of new civs, but I think as a general rule we should limit adding new civs as much as possible.

 

[Krieger-FS]

I would like to see a Chile+Peru civ as a successor to the Inca, it better fits should the Inca survive Spanish conquest and also works given the similar territories.

Dude, run to the hills before a Peruvian or Chilean player sees your post! They are natural born enemies here! It is like saying that both modern Britain and France can be represented using the same Celtic civ

Jokes aside, I agree with you that the existing civs in current map make South America interesting enough and as general rule we should limit the addition of new civs. If we were to add new civs right now, I'd much rather include an African one. Nonetheless, once we expand the map and Leoreth solves the issue about the limit of civs, I think that Chile would be an excelent addition. Surely there are other civs that may have higher priority (again, I feel that Africa needs at least two pre-colonial civs and I really hope for an Assyrian civ), but a Chilean game can be quite interesting: increases the contested areas in South America, adds another player to mess around within the region and also adds another player that should be able to influence things in the largely forgotten South Pacific.

 

[1SDANi]

Dude, run to the hills before a Peruvian or Chilean player sees your post! They are natural born enemies here! It is like saying that both modern Britain and France can be represented using the same Celtic civ

Jokes aside, I agree with you that the existing civs in current map make South America interesting enough and as general rule we should limit the addition of new civs. If we were to add new civs right now, I'd much rather include an African one. Nonetheless, once we expand the map and Leoreth solves the issue about the limit of civs, I think that Chile would be an excelent addition. Surely there are other civs that may have higher priority (again, I feel that Africa needs at least two pre-colonial civs and I really hope for an Assyrian civ), but a Chilean game can be quite interesting: increases the contested areas in South America, adds another player to mess around within the region and also adds another player that should be able to influence things in the largely forgotten South Pacific.

So you're saying I should add Andorra to DCR?

 

[Krieger-FS]

So you're saying I should add Andorra to DCR?

What is the point in playing DCR if we cannot lead Andorra, Liechtenstein or Ryukyu to a world domination victory?

 

[Cacaso]

First, I apologize for the late reply!

Anyway, I will give a somewhat long response (I must learn how to answer briefly!) for each of the suggestions bellow:

Cities:

Spoiler :

Brazil:

• I still prefer São Paulo, Olinda/Recife and Belo Horizonte in the locations that I placed initially. São Paulo being 1NE would still be a coastal city (allowing the use of a harbor), still would be alongside the river (enabling building production-related buildings) and additionally would also being able to work the banana (that really should be a citrus resource). Sure, it will have more overlap with Rio, but I feel that we could compensate using more resources while maintaining a more accurate location. Belo Horizonte, in other hand, should be 1SE (or even 1E), because in your placement we cannot have Brasília (founding it should be a nice UHV in my opinion!). I should also note that Belo Horizonte is a very late game city; the same tile should be likely shared with an older city, possibly Vila Rica/Ouro Preto. Considering that (according your profile here) you are from Minas Gerais, you probably know better than me about canonical colonial cities in this state! Either way, cities placed 1-2 tiles away from others occurs in other regions (like Western Europe and US East Coast, so we have some precedents for it. Considering that the historical importance of this area (states São Paulo, Rio and Minas Gerais) and that is the more densely populated region in Brazil, it should be capable of sustaining at least few cities while being somewhat cramped.
• Regarding Olinda/Recife, the first thing that I stress is that I think that Recife should be the canonical city in area and tile. For those who are unfamiliar with Brazilian history/geography, these two colonial cities are located very closely (within the same tile in practice) and were very important during the sugar colonial economy. Nonetheless, I feel that Recife is way more important than Olinda taking account Brazilian history: Recife always was the Pernambuco capital, while Olinda lost much of its importance by 18th century. Being said that, I think that the city should be placed 1SE from where you put, because the current location seems more like within the states of Paraíba and Rio Grande do Norte than Pernambuco. And I agree with you that all this region will have dynamic names should the Dutch conquer it. Nonetheless, at least for now Leoreth asked to help with city names considering the core areas of each civ, so in this case we are mainly discussing Brazilian/Portuguese names.
• I think that Cuiabá (1NE or 2N1E) should be the canonical city instead of Corumbá, giving that it is older and much more important than the former in the Portuguese colonization of Central South America and Brazilian post-independence history.

Argentina/Chile:

• I think that Córdoba (1S from the salt lake) should be canonical, giving its importance in Argentine history and the fact that is the second largest city, behind only Buenos Aires.
• Corrientes should be 1E because it is located in the eastern bank of Paraná river.
• There are a few historic important cities in Argentine NW, such as Salta, Tucumán, Santiago del Estero, Jujuy and Catamarca, for exemple, that I feel that we could likely leave the area without a definitive canonical city, having chances that a Argentine or Spanish civ found anyone of them randomly.
• While I recognize the importance of Mendoza, I think that we shouldn't turn it that canonical (like, appearing in every game), giving the overlap with Santiago and Córdoba and the fact that the region don't have that much of resources available.
• In the far southern Patagonia, I see Punta Arenas (Chile) as the most canonical city for the region. Argentina surely has several relevant cities in Patagonia (like Carmen de Patagones/Viedma, Rawson, Trelew, Comodoro Rivadavia, Río Galegos, etc) that can be founded, but I like to think that this area would be contested hotly by Argentine and Chilean civs (just like in history), giving a more dynamic city placement.
• I consider Concepción (1N) being much more important (in historical, economic and populational) terms than Valdivia.

Peru/Bolivia:

• The challenge here is that we have to take in account the pre-Columbian civilizations when making the choices about canonical cities. For this reason, I felt lack of Cuzco (2N of Arequipa) in your map.
• Santa Cruz de la Sierra should be 1S from where you place it, in the mountain tile (it becomes a mountain pass by ~1550).
• I also don't think that Arica should be a canonical city, giving the large overlap with Chilean, Bolivian and Peruvian cities nearby.

Ecuador/Colombia/Venezuela:

• While I agree that Quito should be the canonical city in Ecuador, giving the fact that is her capital and also a pre-Columbian city, I think that Guayaquil (1SW) should have a somewhat higher settler value and be an alternative canonical city for the Spanish civ, giving its historical and economic role.
• I agree with you about Colombian canonical cities. They overlap a little bit (largely because Colombia is compressed in our map), but we can compensate with a resource-rich area.
• I feel that the only canonical-set-in-stone city in Venezuela should be Caracas. Maracaibo sure is important and can be settled eventually, but the settler value (for both Spanish and Colombian civs) for Cartagena should be higher.

Regarding the Guianas, I agree fully with you.

South American special events:

I'm still unsure that we should do. Besides my previous argument, I also want to make a point that the conditions to trigger such events would be so specific that they unlikely would occur in almost all games. In this sense, remember that DoC's gameplay spams for 5.000 years of history and such it is somewhat impossible railroad these specific late-game events.

Let's take for the sake of example the War of the Triple Alliance. Considering that we do not have a Paraguayan civ and are unlikely to have one, first and foremost we need that the Spanish civ (AI or player) settle Asunción. Honestly, I don't recall ever seeing the AI settling any city in Paraguay (which is actually a shame!). Then, when the Latin American civs spawn, we need a scenario where the Spanish colonial empire collapses, leaving Asunción as an Indy city. If the city is held by Spain, Argentina, Brazil or any other civ in any moment by mid-19th century, we do not have the necessary conditions to trigger the event.

In short, these events are filled with too many "ifs" that may happen only in few games. As such, it would take too much effort to make these special events that require very specific conditions that could be spent elsewhere in the mod.


South American civs:

Being short here, I think I already made my points about possible additional South American civs above. Either way, I think that an eventual Venezuelan civ should only be considered a fairly low priority, perhaps we should even discard this idea. If we look historically, Venezuela wasn't an important regional player during all 19th century and early 20th. The country was plagued by constant political instability to achieve international relevance; the only widely known issue back then was the Venezuelan crisis of 1895 (territorial issues with British Guyana) and then again in 1902-1903 (US intervention under the principles of Monroe doctrine against European neo-colonial intervention). After the discovery of the Venezuelan oil deposits, the country increased its international status, but only in occasional situations achieved a distinct position in South American affairs (notably, during the 1950s under Pérez Jiménez terms and again in 2000s with Chávez government). Taking all in account, I'm unfavorable to add a Venezuelan civ, even though I feel that the Colombian civ (that also represents Gran Colombia) can have the dynamic name Venezuela if their capital is located there.

The unplayable civs probably would be more or less the same that we have right now. If I'm not wrong I recall Leoreth saying that he would add new Indy civs so we have distinct Indy art styles/research modifiers and surely that would mean only few new unplayable Indy civs instead of several modern-world unplayable nations (again, we have to take in consideration DoC's global and historical scale).

About new UPs, UUs, UBs and UHVs for the South American civs, I will leave this discussion for another time. Honestly I think that is in this field that we have more to discuss and improve, but it is probably better to wait the more appropriate moment during the mod's development to increase the likeness of including the proposed chances.

Spoiler :

First of all thanks for the reply.
- In relation to São Paulo I put on the map a double location of the city so that we can visualize how it would look, I still think it should be 1 SW from the location initially suggested since Rio and São Paulo are the largest populated cities in Brazil , they need space to get big.
- Regarding Vila Rica / Ouro Preto / Belo Horizonte, even though they have high historical importance, IMO I don't think they should have a canonical location (which appears every game) the area should have 1 or 2 tiles of higher settler value for AI eventually build the city, now I also think that during the Portuguese colonization there should only be coastal cities in colonial Brazil because the interiorization of the country was slow to occur (however much there were exceptions such as in Vila Rica / Ouro Preto and Manaus, there were exceptions and truly urbanized areas were all coastal).
-Brasilia should have a canonical location not with Portuguese but with independent Brazil
- In relation to Olinda / Recife I think that the city should be built on the tile Campina Grande because if it changes to the geographically correct tile of Recife the city is very cramped with Salvador, besides that it would lose the cotton and crab resource (A city of Fortaleza would not be viable there).
- I agree that Cuiabá should be canonical instead of Corumbá, in the canonical case for Brazil.

-In relation to Cordova and Corrientes I agree with the modifications, along with Buenos Aires should be the canonical cities of Argentina ,other cities Salta, Tucumán, Mendoza, Rawson, Comodoro Rivadavia, Río Galegos have a higher settler value and the choice remains in charge of AI.

-In Chile I agree to remove Arica because the area is very cramped, but I don't think it's very good to change Valdivia by Concepcion as it will be closer to Santiago and will be out of reach of the whale resource.

- In Peru, the cities of Cuzco or Arequipa can be mutually exclusive.

- I agree that Gayaquil is better than Quito. and that a Venezuela Civ is not feasible better to continue with Gran Colombia.

The events I agree that can be forgotten, they would be difficult to do and would add little, we can leave only the Pacific war with Chile's UHV

All of you feel free to comment or discuss

 

[Cacaso]

Spawn: 1818 at Santiago, starts with 1 settller

Leader: Bernardo O'Higgins from 1818 to 1970, Salvador Allende from 1970 to 2020

Unique CIV Power:
"La minería de Chile": Improved Copper, guano and salitre resources produce +1 production and +3 trade. (would represent the importance of mining for the economy of chile)

"la sierra al mar": cities receive +1 food and +1 trade for each mountain tile in range. (it would be an interesting skill because the area has few food resources and would make the competition with Argentina for the control of mountain tiles generate a useful effect)

UU: ironclad class "Cochrane" - His skills could be catching defeated ironclads / + 15% withdraw chance (This was the ironclad that won the Peruvian ironclad "Huáscar" and gave Chile the final naval victory in the war of the Pacific, these skills represent the captured enemy ironclad and the naval battles fought in the war (there was no decisive victory as one side retreated)

UB: ???


UHV1: War of the pacific: Conquer Antofagasta / Arica and the Capital of Peru Lima. Capture at least 1 ironclad in wars. Settle Punta Arena
UHV2: Mining is our gold: Make at least X gold by selling copper, guano, saltpeter and silver.
UHV3: Beacon of liberalism in South America: have X free trade agreements and be the first country in South America to enter the digital age.

 

[Vectors]

As an added way to spice South America up, the US should be using spies to mess up any country that adopts any civics that seem socialist.

 

[Cosmos1985]

"la sierra al mar": cities receive +1 food and +1 trade for each mountain tile in range

That's really quite a lot of bonus food for some cities. How about for every two tiles or something? 1 for each sounds OP.

 

[Krieger-FS]

As I said before, I fully support the addition of a Chilean civ! So I'd like to share my ideas for it (and also for Peru) that I've presented long ago in DoCReborn thread; it is somewhat similar to Cacaso, but I've put more emphasis in the military aspects for historical reasons.

1) Chile
Spawn/Location: 1818 CE/Santiago
Spawn only encompasses the central Chilean area.
Leaders: Bernardo O'Higgins (Renaissance and Industrial ages), Arturo Alessandri or Salvador Allende (if democratic + communist) or Augusto Pinochet (authoritarian) (Global age)
Color/Symbol: Red/ Shield of Chilean Coat of Arms.
Expansion stability: Core: central Chile/ Historical: rest of modern Chile, Easter Island, Southern Peru, Southern Patagonia

UP: Andean Mineral Wealth: Mines and quarries have + 1 production and + 2 gold.
UU1: Infantería Reformada: replaces Rifleman, + 2 base strengh and starts with Drill I promotion but is more expensive.
In late 19th century Chile initiated a large-scale modernization of its army emulating the Prussian Army. As such, Chilean Army became completely Germanized and the country was known as "South American Prussia" by then. Even today many symbols, the uniform (including the Pickelhaube), marching styles and military musics are similar to the ones used by Imperial Germany. Please note that the unit name does not really exist, as they didn't called their military forces differently after the emulation process. It could be Infantería Germanisada if you prefer, by I chose a more neutral expression.
UU2: Esmeralda: replaces Cruiser, + 2 base strenght but is also slightly more expensive.
Besides the well-trained army, Chile had also an exceptionally well equiped and trained (by Latin American standards) navy by the same time, even though it depended of European shipyards. The Esmeralda was a ground-breaking ship with a remarkable Armstrong design that is commonly considered the first modern (protected) cruiser (or "Elswick cruiser"). This and several other Chilean naval acquisitions by late 19th century had continental repercussions, even influencing the US government rebuild its entire fleet as the "New Navy" in the 1880s.
UB: Medialuna (replaces arena, + 1 happiness, + 5% production for mounted units, + 5% gold) or Salitrera (replaces factory, + 1 gold per mine and quarry) or Fonda (replaces warehouse, + 35% gold, + 1 happiness for wine, sugar and tea)

UHV:
1) Por la razón o la fuerza: Have a superior military score (units + their strengh) than the other two more powerful Latin American countries combined while having good relations with at least two Latin American civs in 1914.
In the South American balance of power system, Chile became one of the most powerful countries in the region by late 19th century. The idea here is to simulate this by assuring that the player has the most powerful military force and also have some allies (thus preventing the player to simply conquering all the others).
2) The Pacific coast: have more cities in the Pacific coast than any other American nation in 1902.
The idea is to represent Chilean expansionism, particularly the conflict with Peru, Bolivia and Argentina in South America, and also with the United States. Historically speaking, Chile was an ally of Ecuador and Colombia, even sending a naval force to counter US intervention on Panama.
3) Lights of Santiago: Have more GDP than any other Latin American nation by 1980 and have more commerce on the capital than any other city in the Americas by 2000.
Refers to the Chilean economic growth during the Pinochet's government, when Chile became the first Latin American nation to adopt the neoliberal economic agenda, which was still fully-implemented until the recent protests.

Additional notes: while I liked the Crimean Lord ideas for a economic-guided Latin American nation, I think that Chilean military history is too much important both to the South American and Chilean history, so that's why I included two military-oriented objectives.

2) Peru
Spawn/Location: 1821 CE/Lima
Leaders: Ramón Castilla (Renaissance and Industrial ages), Augusto Leguía or Manuel Ugarteche (Global age)
Color/Symbol: White and Red/ a llama or the Peruvian flag pattern
Expansion stability: Core: Lima and Cuzco regions/ Historical: rest of Peru, Northern Chile, Bolivian Altiplano and Ecuador

UP: The Andean Heritage: Mountains give + 2 culture and + 1 commerce
UU: Húsares de Junín (replaces Hussar, + 10% strengh when attacking hills) or Grieve Cannon (replaces Artillery, 10 strengh but cheaper and 65% chance of withdraw) or Toro Submarino (replaces Torpedo Boat, more expensive, invisible to most units, 14 strengh and 3 movement points).
UB: Museo Andino (replaces Hotel, + 4 culture, + 20% trade route yield per culture, + 20% culture).

UHV:
1) La Confederación: control Peru, Ecuador, Bolivia and North Chile in 1860
Represents the Bolivarian ideals of Latin American confederation and the historical union with Bolivia.
2) The Andine Civilization: have three legendary cultured cities and make Lima the largest city in the Americas by 2000.
Peru is a popular tourist location and her culture is rooted on her Ameridian traditions influenced by the European, African and Asian groups that came to the country. Nowadays, Lima is the second largest city in South America.
3) Fish and ores: spread the Fishing and Steel Industries to at least 5 cities and gain 2000 gold with mineral and fishing resources by 1990.
Represent the Peru's main exports and industries.

Notes: UHV 3 possibly need to be changed, as I don't know if it is balanced. The gold would be calculated considering raw gold obtained by working the resources, by corporation use and trade with other civs.

Please note that my main concern here is that there are not a lot of easily accessible art assets for these civs, so I'm not sure if we can add them soon; in fact, I see even more probable and feaseable right now the addition of another pre-Columbian Andean civ before any of these two. Besides, I think that Leoreth focus in new additions will initially be in the currently largely empty Africa and other obvious civs that are lacking in our mod given map restrictions (such as Assyria). Nonetheless, I'm all abord to see more love/flavor for modern South America in the future!

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

And now even Civ6 got one

Ok, I changed my mind about Colombia now... I now think it should be removed.