Rhye's of Europe Organized Development Thread

mitsho · Oct 30, 2007

The Almorahid and Almoravid power bases went over to both continents. Although the Emirat of Cordoba did not control the Morroccon cities (these were sometimes independent or incorporated into Maghrebinian Emirats who had close ties to Andalusian courts), the area (MAghreb & Al-andalus) was one area of "culture" and trade. So it makes sense to group them together. The area should nevertheless not be too large...

This way, the Andalusian civ remains and will not ressurect ahistorically

(Please let's have a rather small map)

m

Squirrelloid · Oct 30, 2007

So, as some posts have appeared since i started my quest to try to put start dates on all the civs... its done now, with lots of notes. Go, look, comment, yell at me for being stupid. But that should be a reasonable framework to start a discussion.

say1988 · Oct 30, 2007

I agree about not having the HRE. German States is better in my mind (sure they weren't unified, but neither was Ancient Greece) or just German Nation.

Tuetonic Knights could be a forerunner of Prussia, if you want to include them, and want to see them nice and early.

Celts, maybe as unplayable, but they had little impat and a grand scale, and I suspect Great Britain would be unified very quickly.

The Papal States I would make un-playable, and if possible give them near absolute control over the AP. Another thing I would make it so that if a nation attempts to invade The Papal States a state of war is created with all Catholic civs, or at least completely destroy their relations. At the same time I qould heavily discourage the Papal States starting wars.

Would you want to include the Seljuk Turks or just Ottomans?

What about the Mongols? Just hordes of barbarians, of a civ?

Squirrelloid · Oct 30, 2007

mitsho said:
With assembly I meant making the vassal relationships more easy so that we have one "state" with some states. Another way would be permanent alliances, but we need to be able to break them up again... ;-) The same problem exists if we have Austrasia and Neustria...

A problem with Burgundy: It starts as the "third" part of the Frank Empire, then gets integrated into the HRE and restarts after the Staufer ceased to exist, but a little bit to the North. We can still keep it though

So, here's my thoughts on Charlemagne's empire:

At the appropriate point everyone gets an event announcement that Charlemagne has unified the Franks. For Neustria, Austrasia, and Burgundy this means that peace is immediately declared between them, and war cannot be instigated again until the end of the Charlemagne event (presumably lasting until 840 AD). Alternately, the event could give those three a choice, peace (Charlemagne and his son rule uncontested), or war with both other Carolignian provinces (support a son in rebellion). That would basically establish Charlemagne as overlord of three civs, which is mildly historically accurate (he did give his sons kingdoms within his empire). It might also lead to other events (Charlemagne declares war on the Emirs of Al-Andalusia -> you're forced to declare war; Charlemagne asks for aid in defeating the Lombards -> you can give troops (lose units), or you can send your own army (reward for capturing an (independent) Lombard city, relations penalty with other Carolignian civs if you fail to have at least one combat with an independent unit in Northern Italy), or possibly other options). Basically make Charlemagne a series of scripted events for the relevant civs.

mitsho · Oct 30, 2007

Spoiler :

1) I like your set up

2) If I look at your dates, I wonder wether 500 AD really makes sense. REal Action just starts at ~750 Ad which would be a fair compromise, wouldn't it?

3) Netherlands: Wikipedia (yeah) says the HRE lost influence in the 11 and 12th century, which also corresponds with the rise of these trading cities there (Antwerpen, wool, etc. ...) if I recall correctly. They then get conquered by Burgundy. Perfectly fine to start them around that time 1050 as for example "Flanders" which goes in the same direction of generalization as before seen.

4) Burgundy really needs an interesting part of transition: Being founded 870 as part and then central and surviving part of the middle empire, around 1000 AD it gets (finally) corporated into the HRE (= vassal status), loses more and more territorry and then reemerges in different fashion as the house of Burgundy with a bit different territorial basis (including the lowlands). Though worthwile!

5)If we have RFC, we can see Novgorod as a predecessor of Moscovy... I just saw that we need to make the Norse really strong if they should first be a larg player in the West (Britain, Normandy, Raids) and then or at same time expand also to Russia (and Sicily and constantinople) and afterwards into Germany and Poland... Perhaps a separation would make sense nevertheless?

6) Austria: first date! Switzerland 1290 &1650 are perfectly fine Hungary: Please no Avars...

"Arabs": Agreed -> Question of Maghreb (esp. Fatimids?) Venetia & Genoa: Agreed, though Venetia could start a bit later; Milan/Firenze (aka Lombard League) about same time as Genoa.

7)@say 1988 Papal States were a state like any other, it fought wars, suffered Saracenic attackers, grabbed land et al... Canossa is a good example or lather Julius II. Read a bit about that "pope". The Sacco di Roma was not for nothing... I say, make them playable... ; Mongols: They were too little time on the stage of European history, although they had a huge impact they can be represented by Barbs (culturally

) same goes with Timurs/Tamerlanes hordes. ; Ottomans are sufficient for our scenario, Seljuk turks would be the same, and we already have Turks with the Mamluckes.

Squirrelloid · Oct 30, 2007

Non-quoted points are well-taken. I just wanted to comment on a few of them.

mitsho said:
2) If I look at your dates, I wonder wether 500 AD really makes sense. REal Action just starts at ~750 Ad which would be a fair compromise, wouldn't it?

500 AD is really the start of a european identity separate from Roman culture. I mean, we have the start of the Saxon invasion of England in that ballpark, the very earliest beginnings of what will eventually be France and Germany, and the Eastern Roman Empire at arguably the height of its power, which is plenty of action for the early game. I mean, we'll get to see a rise of Islam and an "Invasion" of Visigothic (Independent) Spain with a 500 AD start, something a 750 AD start misses. Heck, with 7 starting civs at 500 AD, that's a lot of possible action. And another 3 civs would join the fun before 750 AD ("Spain", Al-Andalusia, "Arabia"). And 750 is a really arbitrary year, as it doesn't really correspond to anything, and is after important formative events in medieval europe like the Battle of Poitiers (which checked the islamic advance in what would become France, 732 I believe). 500 AD approximately correlates with Clovis I unifying the Franks. (It'll fall apart in like 1 civ turn worth of time, but hey, it was an important formative event in european history).

Besides, if you want "Real Action" by 750 AD, you need to start people out ahead of that - most games feature the early turns as relatively boring as people tech and build infrastructure, or possibly prepare for war. But the "real action" really does start in 500 AD with Clovis conquering rival Frank tribes.

4) Burgundy really needs an interesting part of transition: Being founded 870 as part and then central and surviving part of the middle empire, around 1000 AD it gets (finally) corporated into the HRE (= vassal status), loses more and more territorry and then reemerges in different fashion as the house of Burgundy with a bit different territorial basis (including the lowlands). Though worthwile!

Burgundy is actually a separate mostly autonomous province going back to before the reign of Clovis I. Clovis I fought a number of wars with them. Yeah, it gets eventually incorporated into the Frankish Empire, see previous post on how I think Charlemagne should be handled. Outside the Eastern Roman Empire and Papal States, it may actually be the oldest identifiable political entity we're considering for the scenario.

mitsho · Oct 30, 2007

sounds good. both of your points taken. battle shall continue tomorrow on new grounds. What is next? UHV/UP/Starting date or the map so that we can start to work and stop to talk? (In the end, the details don't matter all that much, it's the game)

Good night,

m

Squirrelloid · Oct 30, 2007

mitsho said:
sounds good. both of your points taken. battle shall continue tomorrow on new grounds. What is next? UHV/UP/Starting date or the map so that we can start to work and stop to talk? (In the end, the details don't matter all that much, it's the game)

Good night, m

I think that before we start talking about UHVs and UPs we need to hammer out some game concepts. In particular:

(1) How do we want the AP to work?

(2) How do we want the HRE title to work?

(3) What role do we imagine for religion in this mod? What religions do we want and what changes do we want to make to how religions operate?

(4) How exactly do we want colonies to work? How many colonies should we have?

(5) What possible victory conditions should be available? (I believe I made suggestions previously.)

(6) Do we want to use the current civics options? Are there substitutions we'd like to make? (Choices that are inappropriate to the eras/region of the scenario?)

(7) Other?

Some of those might suggest UHV goals or UPs. It would certainly make the game presentation feel more unified rather than feeling like various elements were just tacked on.

The only thing I do know about UHVs is I want one of the Netherlands be to control England by 1700. Because they did! =) (William III of England = William III of Orange).

st.lucifer · Oct 30, 2007

the teutonic knights were one suggestion for handling 'germany', but were rejected as being too small, not much of a nation per se, and too far east, right? would it make sense to represent them as a militarily powerful independent state around danzig/gdansk, with maybe one or two other cities under their control?

if germany starts as austrasia/east francia, that's in effect centering it about the rhine valley, which was historically more of a confederation of minor states. i agree that the holy roman empire should be unplayable, and like the idea of it being a title awarded by the AP. to reflect its status through most of the middle ages (a loose collective of small german baronies), what about the idea of having an unplayable HRE civ which suffers a preordained collapse into strong independents at around 1050, upon which germany appears as pomerania/prussia? this might shorten the game prohibitively for the german player, but it sets the goal of unification (rather than settlement of empty territory) up rather nicely, and makes it something of a challenge. it also means that the german player ends up with developed cities rather than a patchwork of small and underdeveloped ones. if pomerania is too location-specific, calling it the hanseatic league might work, although that was historically a little later and that's been mentioned as a possible wonder.

other ideas:
- i agree that civics need to be adjusted. squirreloid suggested getting rid of caste system as being historically inappropriate - what about replacing it with guilds/apprenticeship? same workshop bonus; similar effect? high upkeep?

-i feel like most of the government civics available are unrealistic for the era. can we shade 'feudalism' into several different, more specific civics, or would it be better simply to have fewer options available?

-i had originally envisioned colonies as projects or wonders, but the lack of luxury resources in europe (and the role that colonies played in bringing those to the home country) made me rethink it a bit. if we're not going to add in additional eurocentric luxuries such as amber or olives or linen, why not make certain luxuries available through colonies by coding colonies as corporations? just as standard ethanol gives access to oil, can we have 'east india company' give access to silk and tea (i'll suggest replacing one of the hits with tea and the other with tobacco, regardless of whether we add eurocentric luxuries or not)? 'virginia' give access to cotton, tobacco, indigo (dyes)? 'peru' or 'mexico' give access to gold, silver, and spices?

-if we run colonies as corporations, that gives us a logical limit to the number, and possibly even different historical incentives for each country based on resources or effects. as in BTS, access to colonies would flow from one tech (either colonization or joint stock company (we could even keep this as corporation!)) and specific colonies would become available upon the discovery of subsequent techs. this might make later tech races more interesting, particularly if we stick colonies into techs that the computer might otherwise find undesirable.

thoughts?

Squirrelloid · Oct 31, 2007

st.lucifer said:
the teutonic knights were one suggestion for handling 'germany', but were rejected as being too small, not much of a nation per se, and too far east, right? would it make sense to represent them as a militarily powerful independent state around danzig/gdansk, with maybe one or two other cities under their control?

if germany starts as austrasia/east francia, that's in effect centering it about the rhine valley, which was historically more of a confederation of minor states. i agree that the holy roman empire should be unplayable, and like the idea of it being a title awarded by the AP. to reflect its status through most of the middle ages (a loose collective of small german baronies), what about the idea of having an unplayable HRE civ which suffers a preordained collapse into strong independents at around 1050, upon which germany appears as pomerania/prussia? this might shorten the game prohibitively for the german player, but it sets the goal of unification (rather than settlement of empty territory) up rather nicely, and makes it something of a challenge. it also means that the german player ends up with developed cities rather than a patchwork of small and underdeveloped ones. if pomerania is too location-specific, calling it the hanseatic league might work, although that was historically a little later and that's been mentioned as a possible wonder.

Of course, the Teutonic Order is basically where Prussia would be... I don't know man, I'm not the one who objected to it originally. I do sort of like having "germany" be as early as it being Austrasia to start with makes it, as i'm sure many people are unaware of Germany's origins in the early medieval period. (And of course there should be independents for the rest of Germany to start - Saxony is especially notable as having been a thorn in the Frankish kingdoms' sides.)

other ideas:
- i agree that civics need to be adjusted. squirreloid suggested getting rid of caste system as being historically inappropriate - what about replacing it with guilds/apprenticeship? same workshop bonus; similar effect? high upkeep?

-i feel like most of the government civics available are unrealistic for the era. can we shade 'feudalism' into several different, more specific civics, or would it be better simply to have fewer options available?

I want to think about civics some more before commenting definitively. One of the things I'm definitely unimpressed with in CivIV is how the categories don't really match up with what's in them. Ie, why is free speech not in the same category as police state (which is not a government mode but a comment on the freedom of information)? And so forth.

-i had originally envisioned colonies as projects or wonders, but the lack of luxury resources in europe (and the role that colonies played in bringing those to the home country) made me rethink it a bit. if we're not going to add in additional eurocentric luxuries such as amber or olives or linen, why not make certain luxuries available through colonies by coding colonies as corporations? just as standard ethanol gives access to oil, can we have 'east india company' give access to silk and tea (i'll suggest replacing one of the hits with tea and the other with tobacco, regardless of whether we add eurocentric luxuries or not)? 'virginia' give access to cotton, tobacco, indigo (dyes)? 'peru' or 'mexico' give access to gold, silver, and spices?

-if we run colonies as corporations, that gives us a logical limit to the number, and possibly even different historical incentives for each country based on resources or effects. as in BTS, access to colonies would flow from one tech (either colonization or joint stock company (we could even keep this as corporation!)) and specific colonies would become available upon the discovery of subsequent techs. this might make later tech races more interesting, particularly if we stick colonies into techs that the computer might otherwise find undesirable.

thoughts?

I had actually envisioned colonies as wonders that provide luxury resources. Its not like we don't already have those in the game as it is.

Corporations is also an interesting idea, but I was actually thinking of possibly using corporations as knightly orders. So you could found the Knights Templar, or the Teutonic Knights (which I suppose works better without the Teutonic Order civ), and I know there's at least one more. We could possibly add major monastic orders to that as well, like the Benedictine Monks. These were major non-government organizations in the high medieval period, and should appear somehow.

Edit: While i'm thinking of cool alternative features, how does this sound?

Preach a crusade: Req Great Prophet. When you preach a crusade you declare war against a civilization with a different state religion than your own. During that war, your population suffers no war weariness, and you receive +2 happiness in all of your cities that have your state religion. Other nations with your state religion as their state religion may also join the crusade. The crusade lasts until you make peace with that nation, or after XXX game turns, at which point its benefits end for everyone. (Possibly penalize nations for making peace before the crusade ends). The Preach a Crusade option only becomes available after the Pope preaches the first crusade (set event triggered at the historical time) for Christian nations. (Islamic nations should start with a 'crusade' (jyhad?) under this theory, and thus have "Preach a crusade" available from the get-go).

st.lucifer · Oct 31, 2007

Squirrelloid said:
\
I had actually envisioned colonies as wonders that provide luxury resources. Its not like we don't already have those in the game as it is.

Corporations is also an interesting idea, but I was actually thinking of possibly using corporations as knightly orders. So you could found the Knights Templar, or the Teutonic Knights (which I suppose works better without the Teutonic Order civ), and I know there's at least one more. We could possibly add major monastic orders to that as well, like the Benedictine Monks. These were major non-government organizations in the high medieval period, and should appear somehow.

I like this idea a lot. Having luxuries like tobacco or tea appear from wonder colonies would be an easy bit of coding, and makes a lot of sense, and I will agree with you about the importance of the monastic/knightly orders. Seven possibilities:

military:
-Templars
-Hospitallers
-Teutonic Knights

monastic:
-Benedictines
-Dominicans
-Franciscans
-Jesuits? Not really a monastic order, but important - could allow for production of inquisitors?

Given the concentration of knowledge and research in monasteries in the dark/medieval ages, I would be in favor of greatly increasing the importance of monasteries in the game - increasing the research bonus, build cost, and possibly introducing 'monasticism' as its own tech. I'd also suggest adding Cluny as a wonder, replacing one of the Asian ones such as Shwedagon Paya, which increases the gold or science output of one's monasteries. Alternately, it could replace Sankore or Spiral Minaret, neither of which have any place in a Eurocentric mod.

Squirrelloid said:
\
Edit: While i'm thinking of cool alternative features, how does this sound?

Preach a crusade: Req Great Prophet. When you preach a crusade you declare war against a civilization with a different state religion than your own. During that war, your population suffers no war weariness, and you receive +2 happiness in all of your cities that have your state religion. Other nations with your state religion as their state religion may also join the crusade. The crusade lasts until you make peace with that nation, or after XXX game turns, at which point its benefits end for everyone. (Possibly penalize nations for making peace before the crusade ends). The Preach a Crusade option only becomes available after the Pope preaches the first crusade (set event triggered at the historical time) for Christian nations. (Islamic nations should start with a 'crusade' (jyhad?) under this theory, and thus have "Preach a crusade" available from the get-go).

This is along the same lines as the idea I suggested in the other thread about crusade being a power of the AP (control of which would rotate with great prophets, which would lead to similar outcomes). My reasoning behind that model is that the obligation to crusade was often pressed upon reluctant monarchs, and the results were not universally popular (and often economically disastrous). I had the idea of using the plague model for the spread of crusades, where units are whisked away to the holy land from your cities, but that might be too evil. Crusades should definitely have some positive benefit to the civs involved - in particular, I think that capturing and holding foreign cities through crusade (perhaps capturing and holding a city for 5-10 turns) should lead to tech acquisition. Certainly, many of the technological advances of Europe during that period were from captured Arab technology.

onedreamer · Oct 31, 2007

Squirrelloid said:
Also, from Wikipaedia:
"Austrasia formed the north-eastern portion of the Kingdom of the Merovingian Franks, comprising parts of the territory of present-day eastern France, western Germany, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands"

In geographical terms, this means that the greatest part of their domains was in the germanic area. You should note that the germanic area pre 1000 AD is not the same as nowadays. Also we do know where the Franks originated from (there were 2 biggest tribes), we may not know the exact address and postal code, but we do know the area.

Civ List:

it seems that none really cares of what I write (except Squirelloid), so I'll make it a last comment on the list, you are really making several big errors in the civ list regarding the italian area:
- The Lombard League only existed for less than 1 century, and it wasn't even a totally independent entity, but sponsored by the Papal States. Lombardy has always been under the influence of some foreign powers, it makes no sense to list them as an independent civ. You may add Genua or Savoy in northern Italy. Also part of Lombardy was under the influence of Venice for great part of the scenario's timeframe.
- You are leaving out the Kingdom of Naples & Sicily (later called of the Two Sicilies), which has been one of the longer lasting and biggest independent entity in Italy.
- I wouldn't make the Papal States playable unless you want to develop loads of special rules for their gameplay...

holy king · Oct 31, 2007

I will agree with you about the importance of the monastic/knightly orders. Seven possibilities:

military:
-Templars
-Hospitallers
-Teutonic Knights

monastic:
-Benedictines
-Dominicans
-Franciscans
-Jesuits? Not really a monastic order, but important - could allow for production of inquisitors?

maybe we could have them as corporations?
templars, hospitalers and teutonic knights could grant the ability to build knights with autopromotions, the monastic ones give a research bonus?

Squirrelloid · Oct 31, 2007

@Onedreamer: I'm glad someone else likes Genoa, because that's my preferred option for an additional Italian City-State.

Was the Kingdom of Naples and Sicily really independent? I thought it was variously possessed by the Arabs, England, "Germany" (HRE), and eventually Spain over the course of its existence. I'll admit, the Italian peninsula is not one of my strong suits.

@holy king: Yes, making knightly orders/monks be corporations was exactly the idea.

I think we want to make the knightly order bonuses based on reality. So, for the Knights Templar, I was thinking that they could make barracks and stables give +15% gold from commerce, to represent their being the first (allowed) banking institution in Europe. Now, the Knights Hospitaller or the Teutonic Knights should probably be more martial in bent. But exactly what they do can be decided later, for now it'll be enough to reach a consensus that they should be our corporation-like entity.

I'll need to refresh my memory on the role of the various monk orders before I even suggest anything for them.

@St.Lucifer: The preach a crusade option struck me as I was thinking about Bernard of Clairveau (who definitely needs to be a Great Prophet in this game), who was instrumental in motivating the 2nd crusade, iirc. Declaring a crusade isn't enough, the clergy then went and preached to their martial subjects about the glory for god and personal piety of going on one.

Finally, a thought on a UHV/UU/UP:

France:
(1) Capture Barcelona by 800 AD.
(2) Preach a crusade and found the Knights Templar in Jerusalem by 1300 AD.
(3) Control the territory recognized as modern France and control or vassalize England by 1500 AD.

UU: Chevalier (Knight) - actual abilities subject to what we do with military units.

UP: The Power of Decentralized Authority (no instability from losing cities other than your capitol), OR Let Them Eat Cake (you may always whip your populace to hurry production, regardless of labor civic), OR The Power of the Sun King (You have no maintenance costs for distance from the palace).

Notes:
France, as a starting power, should probably finish its UHV before the colonial period in this mod. Yes, it made colonies, but it was more of a key player in the middle ages than the colonial era. (Notably, Louisiana and Quebec were never especially major colonies. Rather, it was their fur traders who were their major colonial legacy in the new world. Possibly their most important colonies geopolitically were Senegal, Cote D'Ivoire, and Vietnam, none of whom were especially important economically).

Barcelona was captured by the Franks in ~800 AD from the Muslims in Al-Andalusia. That civ should found Barcelona in the game.

#2 does in fact require taking Jerusalem. I'm thinking of making a similar UHV goal for England and Germany, thereby prompting 3 major powers to actually go on the crusades. (Germany would of course want to found the Teutonic Knights instead). For France, #2 should perhaps ask them to capture Cairo as well, as Louis IX led that crusade.

#3 represents the historical territory ambitions of the Kings of France. The year could be pushed back some if people thought that was too tight.

France is so diverse over this period, its hard to choose one aspect to decide on a UP. I've listed a couple options. Let Them Eat Cake was named for the famous quote, but is really meant to indicate the treatment of the French peasants since at least the 100 years war, and possibly older. (Note the "french longbow" was never effective (ie, nonexistent term) unlike its English 'cousin' because the nobles were afraid to let the french peasants have weapons outside of conscription, and thus they weren't experienced in the longbow's use. This fear stemmed from the resentment the french peasants often felt for their lords). The Power of Decentralization is a nod towards the rather weak hold the monarchy had on France's nobles for much of its existence. On the other hand, France would eventually create one of the strongest monarchies ever seen in Louis XIV, hence the last one. I really don't know...

Zhuge_Liang · Oct 31, 2007

Did you add the berbers?

Squirrelloid · Oct 31, 2007

Zhuge_Liang said:
Did you add the berbers?

That would be Al-Andalusia, which was invaded primarily by Berbers initially. The goal is not primarily to add racial groups but 'national' groups. Al-Andalusia ultimately encompasses a number of islamic racial or tribal groups, and is thus superior to a "Berber" civ.

holy king · Oct 31, 2007

I think we want to make the knightly order bonuses based on reality. So, for the Knights Templar, I was thinking that they could make barracks and stables give +15% gold from commerce, to represent their being the first (allowed) banking institution in Europe.

but they didnt pay taxes, thats part of why they got so rich...

onedreamer · Oct 31, 2007

Squirrelloid said:
@Onedreamer: I'm glad someone else likes Genoa, because that's my preferred option for an additional Italian City-State.

Was the Kingdom of Naples and Sicily really independent? I thought it was variously possessed by the Arabs, England, "Germany" (HRE), and eventually Spain over the course of its existence.

I don't think that England or HRE ever had claims on that area, but it was part of the Borbon (I'm unsure of the english spelling) possessions and of the Anjouine (sp ?) dinasty. At least the rulers were granted the title of "King", you can't say the same about Lombardy AFAIK, and the land extension is a lot bigger (the whole south Italy, south from Rome, and Sicily).
A competition between Genua and Venice would be interesting. They are essentially the same as Netherlands and Portugal, before Columbus and subsequent discoveries proved that the Earth is round and you can circumnavigate it. Actually Genua and Venice started declining exactly at that time, because the mediterranean trade routes lost much importance while new lands were discovered accross the Atlantic. I think it's a bad joke of destiny that Columbus was Genuan and that he was dreaming to reach the lands Marco Polo (Venetian) first reached through the land route

Squirrelloid · Oct 31, 2007

holy king said:
but they didnt pay taxes, thats part of why they got so rich...

Well, that's part of why they got rich. The major reason they got rich is because they were the only bankers in europe. People going on crusades would give the Templar chapter near them as much wealth as they wanted available in the holy land, and would get a "receipt". They could then show that receipt at any templar chapter and receive funds until they exhausted their deposit. This was a vital service because no one wanted to cart expensive objects and pounds of gold/silver to the crusades. Of course, this translated into cash for the templars because anyone who failed to collect (died, etc...) effectively donated the remainder to the Templars. Given the life expectancy of a crusader, this was a great business model.

(I doubt they actually called it receipts, but that's what it was).

Squirrelloid · Oct 31, 2007

Based on recent comments, here's the amended civ list that I support. Changes or additions are underlined and italicized:

Western Europe (4)
Kingdom of Neustria (500 AD) -> West Francia (840 AD) -> France (990 AD)
England (500 AD) -> Great Britain (1700 AD or by cities held?) ->
Netherlands (1050 AD)
Burgundy (500 AD)

Iberian Peninsula (3)
Kingdom of Asturias (720 AD) -> Leon (920 AD) -> Crown of Castile (1230 AD) -> Empire of Spain (1520 AD)
Portugal (1100 AD)
Al-Andalus (700 AD)

North & Central Europe (5)
Norse: Danes (500 AD) -> Calmar (?) -> Sweden (?)
Kingdom of Austrasia (500 AD) -> East Francia (840 AD) -> Kingdom of Germany (920 AD) -> Germanic States (1260 AD)
Lechia (970 AD) -> Poland (???) -> Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth (1570 AD)
Austria/House of Habsburg (1160 AD or 1280 AD)
Old Swiss Confederacy (1290 AD) -> Switzerland (1650 AD?)

Eastern Europe (5)
Eastern Roman Empire (500 AD)
Republic of Novgorod (860 AD) -> Grand Duchy of Moscow (1150 AD?) -> Russia (1500 AD)
Magyars (900 AD) -> Kingdom of Hungary (1000 AD)
Ottoman Empire (1300 AD)
Umayyad Caliphate (660 AD) -> Abbasid Caliphate (750 AD) -> Fatimid Caliphate (970 AD) -> Ayyubid Dynasty (1170 AD) -> Mamluk Sultanate (1250 AD)

Italy (2)
Papal States (500 AD)
Republic of Venetia (800 AD)

Additional Candidates:
Kiev (860 AD?) -> Ukraine? (???)
Republic of Genoa (1000 AD)
Kingdom of Sicily (1000 AD)

+Independents

That's 19 whose identity I'm certain of, + Independents is at least 20. If we only need one independent, we can add all three of my additional candidates based on Whitefire's guesstimation on how many civs we can have.

Notes:
Kiev moved to "additional candidates" because I'm seriously lacking information to justify including them outright. Actually, I'm pretty unclear about start time/transitions for "Russia" as well, so someone who knows that area will need to help here.

Republic of Genoa and the Kingdom of Sicily strike me as the strongest Italian candidates after the obvious ones (Republic of Venetia and Papal States).

The Kingdom of Sicily is the Norman entity that was fait accomplit as of 1150, but gets its start (ie, arrival of Normans in southern Italy) sometime around or before 1017. As such, it might be amusing to have them start with no settlers or cities, and a military force with which they'll need to conquer a city to get started. It would certainly be historical. Note that the Kingdom of Sicily included both the island of Sicily and all of Italy south of the Papal States basically.

Rhye's of Europe Organized Development Thread

Deity

Warlord

Deity

Warlord

Deity

Warlord

Deity

Warlord

King

Warlord

King

Dragon

Deity

Warlord

The greatest strategist

Warlord

Deity

Dragon

Warlord

Warlord

Similar threads