1.18 Civilizations - Brainstorming

[FishFishFish]

Perhaps the Swahili pagan religion should be called "Mila"?

The Swahili themselves have the words "Dini" and "Mila". Dini is usually translated as "religion" but refers to orthodox Islamic belief; "Mila" is usually translated as "traditional customs", which is often associated with pre-Islamic faiths.

 

[Steb]

That should not be so. Rodnovery is an artificially created pseudo religion, introduced in 19th century.

What other name would you use to refer to Slavic paganism? Several of the pagan religions use anachronistic names (e.g. Asatru), I think because it's often difficult to find good, short names to describe the historical faiths

 

[Kott]

What other name would you use to refer to Slavic paganism? Several of the pagan religions use anachronistic names (e.g. Asatru), I think because it's often difficult to find good, short names to describe the historical faiths

What do we have for Poland? I cannot check right now unfortunately.

 

[Steb]

What do we have for Poland? I cannot check right now unfortunately.

Same, Rodnovery. Also used for Russia.

 

[MrCassata]

Hi. First of all, great mod! However, there are a few things I'd like to see changed:


1. When an AI civ collapses, it would be great if instead of becoming solely independent city-states, it would become a rump state limited to its core and non-contested historical areas, with conquered civs rising up from their own core areas. That would align more closely with the behaviour we offer the player. It would make things more realistic (for example the Soviet Union didn't just become a bunch of independent city-states), and the endgame a bit less lonely. It would also mean someone would be there to trade items from wonders such as Graceland and Hollywood.

2. I noticed that some civs won't vassalize with "You've grown too powerful for us" as a stated reason. Make that stop please. I like vassals.

3. Add a "liberate city" mechanism when conquering; automatically granting open borders in order to keep your troops where they are. If the given civ is dead, revive it as your vassal. That way, you can roll back an enemy without losing stability points.

4. Settling a great person into a city adds GP points of that GP's type.


PS: This post is based on one I made in the suggestions thread, with some additions. Pardon the cross-posting.

 

[brett0007]

I've been ruminating on the Kushan civ for a while and I need some clarification/opinions, Should a Kushan civ represent the BMAC/Oxus civilization? It does help fill in the rather empty bronze age world.

 

[freethink]

I've been ruminating on the Kushan civ for a while and I need some clarification/opinions, Should a Kushan civ represent the BMAC/Oxus civilization? It does help fill in the rather empty bronze age world.

I know this isn't exactly what you are talking about but what do you think about an Armenian Civ with Kurdish elements?

 

[DC123456789]

I've been ruminating on the Kushan civ for a while and I need some clarification/opinions, Should a Kushan civ represent the BMAC/Oxus civilization? It does help fill in the rather empty bronze age world.

Probably makes more sense to represent it with an independent city, I think.

 

[freethink]

I've been ruminating on the Kushan civ for a while and I need some clarification/opinions, Should a Kushan civ represent the BMAC/Oxus civilization? It does help fill in the rather empty bronze age world.

While looking for a possible independent city name I ran into more and more problems

While oftentimes the Kurds connect themselves to the Medes a Persian offshoot Kurdish language as conceptualized today does not start forming until the 10th century.

I think if one wants to include the Kurds, one could make a unit called 'Kurdish archers' as they seem to have had encounters with Romans (if these archers really were the ancestors of modern-day Kurds)

However, if the goal is to add more societies in the area, then Armenia is a good candidate, unfortunately, its not really a bronze-age candidate but the long history of Armenia supports an early start (8th century BCE) and a potentially long play through

EDIT:
Don't forget we should be getting the Assyrians

 

[freethink]

This thread reminds me of a proposal I wrote on the map thread.

This might neither be here or there but ill repaste the proposal since civilizations are being discussed here:

Out of all of these, I think I would be most excited about Nubia, Saba, and Armenia. Nubia and Armenia especially could be long-term games, a bit like China where they can struggle to survive to the early-modern period or later. For Units and attributes, one can look at Sword of Islam for inspiration. Nubia will struggle to be caught between Egypt (or whoever controls Egypt and Ethiopia. Saba would facilitate to a much greater degree the ancient Indian Ocean trade routes, and Himayatie barbarians will be a constant struggle for the Sabean player. An alt-history goal would be for them to survive until the rise of Islam.

Saba or Yemeni goals
Friend of the Emperors
-Send a great merchant to Europe, India, and China by 300 CE

Abu-Kariba
-Build four Jewish synagogues and monasteries by 500 CE

Dhu Nwas
-Ensure there are no other religions except Judaism, and to conquer/vassal Ethiopia before 630

 

[DC123456789]

While looking for a possible independent city name I ran into more and more problems

I think it would make the most sense to use a city in the region that might not have been the most important at that point, but remains relevant into the classical era at least. The obvious choice under that criteria would then be Merv, though you'd want to check how close it is to the Kushan capital (which I'd think would be either Balkh or Kapisa).

 

[freethink]

I think it would make the most sense to use a city in the region that might not have been the most important at that point, but remains relevant into the classical era at least. The obvious choice under that criteria would then be Merv, though you'd want to check how close it is to the Kushan capital (which I'd think would be either Balkh or Kapisa).

I think these cities usually show up in the game already to the best of my knowledge.
EDIT: I am so sorry, I thought the previous post was talking about the Kurds, not the Kushans... I must have some kind of brain/reading comprehension problem and I apologize.

It seems to me that within the game the Kushans would fill the role of a pre-Islamic Pakistan/Tarim Basin civ which comes with its pros and cons, like the Phoenicians and the Turks I think it would be possible to simulate migrations from one core to another. However my biggest problem with a Kushan Civ is its longevity, it seems the empire fragments after a century, and much of its culture is already gone by 380. If a civ was to be made I think RFCA (Rhyes and Fall of Asia) would be great to consult with its Tocharian Civilization.

EDIT: I just read the OP again, it reminded me that the Kushans are in fact going to be included in the game

Right now the Kushans are represented as barbarians which is good because it simulates the problems states in the region faced, the Indo-Greeks were overrun after all but also problematic because I don't think barbarian-controlled cities participate in trade. In reality, we all know that the Kushans was a primary beneficiary of the Silk Road.

Indeed independent cities could help, and Taxila could be one of them.

TLDR: Sorry everyone I confused the Kushans/Kurds because I had not slept enough and wrote in error, but there is potential for a Kushan Civ if its development is stretched to the more distant past.

 

[freethink]

Some basic ideas from the Tocharian Civ with a unique unit and building. Now the barb Khushans already use a cataphract like unit- the Asvaka, but maybe the Yagban archer could be a second unique unit that represents their early devlopment?

 

[DC123456789]

I think these cities usually show up in the game already to the best of my knowledge.
EDIT: I am so sorry, I thought the previous post was talking about the Kurds, not the Kushans... I must have some kind of brain/reading comprehension problem and I apologize.

It seems to me that within the game the Kushans would fill the role of a pre-Islamic Pakistan/Tarim Basin civ which comes with its pros and cons, like the Phoenicians and the Turks I think it would be possible to simulate migrations from one core to another. However my biggest problem with a Kushan Civ is its longevity, it seems the empire fragments after a century, and much of its culture is already gone by 380. If a civ was to be made I think RFCA (Rhyes and Fall of Asia) would be great to consult with its Tocharian Civilization
EDIT: I just read the OP again, it reminded me that the Kushans are in fact going to be included in the game

Right now the Kushans are represented as barbarians which is good because it simulates the problems states in the region faced, the Indo-Greeks were overrun after all but also problematic because I don't think barbarian-controlled cities participate in trade. In reality, we all know that the Kushans was a primary beneficiary of the Silk Road.

Indeed independent cities could help, and Taxila could be one of them.

TLDR: Sorry everyone I confused the Kushans/Kurds because I had not slept enough and wrote in error, but there is potential for a Kushan Civ if its development is stretched to the more distant past.

It's been discussed before but I'm pretty sure the Kushan civ is meant to encompass the Hephthalites and Hunas as well, which would put its historical end well into the 7th century (and arguably longer if you're willing to include the Turk Shahis as well).

Some basic ideas from the Tocharian Civ with a unique unit and building. Now the barb Khushans already use a cataphract like unit- the Asvaka, but maybe the Yagban archer could be a second unique unit that represents their early devlopment?

While the actual UUs/UBs are probably fine, I think it's better to think of the Kushan civ as a Bactrian/East Iranian civ (with a nomad ruling class) rather than a Tocharian civ - it lets you include the Hepthalites and Hunas much more coherently, and it fits much better with the actual Kushan heartland in Bactria and Kabulistan (as opposed to the Tarim Basin, which was only ever a peripheral region controlled during their imperial eras).

 

[freethink]

I've been ruminating on the Kushan civ for a while and I need some clarification/opinions, Should a Kushan civ represent the BMAC/Oxus civilization? It does help fill in the rather empty bronze age world.

Sorry I kinda missed (more like completely missed the point of this post at first)

 

[freethink]

It's been discussed before but I'm pretty sure the Kushan civ is meant to encompass the Hephthalites and Hunas as well, which would put its historical end well into the 7th century (and arguably longer if you're willing to include the Turk Shahis as well).



While the actual UUs/UBs are probably fine, I think it's better to think of the Kushan civ as a Bactrian/East Iranian civ (with a nomad ruling class) rather than a Tocharian civ - it lets you include the Hepthalites and Hunas much more coherently, and it fits much better with the actual Kushan heartland in Bactria and Kabulistan (as opposed to the Tarim Basin, which was only ever a peripheral region controlled during their imperial eras).

Could the core area change over time? From the Tarim Basin to Kabulistan?

 

[brett0007]

It's been discussed before but I'm pretty sure the Kushan civ is meant to encompass the Hephthalites and Hunas as well, which would put its historical end well into the 7th century (and arguably longer if you're willing to include the Turk Shahis as well).

If your going to include unrelated people like the Hephthalites and Hunas why not the Sogdians, Khwarazmanians, and Tajiks? They were all influential in the region up until the Mongol invasions. Heck you can have them start alongside Persia with the Sogdians and Alongside Harappa as the BMAC. Im beginning to think calling the civ "Kushan" is the issue here. What is this civ meant to be? An earlier Turks for late antiquity? Or a more broad representation of the Iranian/Indo European peoples that populated the area?

 

[freethink]

If your going to include unrelated people like the Hephthalites and Hunas why not the Sogdians, Khwarazmanians, and Tajiks? They were all influential in the region up until the Mongol invasions. Heck you can have them start alongside Persia with the Sogdians and Alongside Harappa as the BMAC. Im beginning to think calling the civ "Kushan" is the issue here. What is this civ meant to be? An earlier Turks for late antiquity? Or a more broad representation of the Iranian/Indo European peoples that populated the area?

I was thinking it was about the East Iranian peoples but now I am not so sure.

Edit: On further thought, I am leaning toward the Turks not being included here. Besides the White Huns should still be barbarians.

 

[brett0007]

I was thinking it was about the East Iranian peoples but now I am not so sure.

Edit: On further thought, I am leaning toward the Turks not being included here. Besides the White Huns should still be barbarians.

The Turks should be a separate civ that coexists/replaces a hypothetical east Iranian civ.

 

[DC123456789]

If your going to include unrelated people like the Hephthalites and Hunas why not the Sogdians, Khwarazmanians, and Tajiks? They were all influential in the region up until the Mongol invasions. Heck you can have them start alongside Persia with the Sogdians and Alongside Harappa as the BMAC. Im beginning to think calling the civ "Kushan" is the issue here. What is this civ meant to be? An earlier Turks for late antiquity? Or a more broad representation of the Iranian/Indo European peoples that populated the area?

I would argue that the Hepthalites (and other Hunas) were sufficiently Bactrianized that it makes sense to include them in an East Iranian civ, even if they were originally Turkic (which is not entirely certain either). There's just a lot of cultural and geographical (read: gameplay) parallels with the Kushan Empire that you don't really have with the most of the other polities that are considered to be under the Turkic civ.

I think it would be perfectly reasonable for an East Iranian umbrella civ to include any Sogdian or Khwarezmian polities as well, though I'm not aware of any that were notable enough to be represented - you could say that the Kushans and their successors were the only (classical) Bactrian(ized) polities big enough to represent. IIRC Tajiks are much more closely related to Persian and so I would put them under Persia (or Iran) - for medieval/modern successors, if we're going to have any at all, it might be better to look at the Pashtuns.