triplebassist
Chieftain
Unlikely at least for now because they would be a late-game isolated civ. The focus currently is on civs that will have an impact on others currently in the game, which Australia won't
1.18 Civilizations - Brainstorming
- Thread starter Publicola
- Start date
Dracosolon
King
There's been some discussion here, in a more appropriate thread.
This makes some sense, but only because of the nature of the mod.
Ukraine has a source of statehood and culture from those territories of ancient Rus' that were not captured by Moscow during the time of its rise and unification of the lands of destroyed Rus'. These territories were captured by the Poles and Lithuanians and this created a growing cultural discord with the Russian lands, which became enough for these people to declare themselves separate nations - Ukrainians and Belarusians.
But this means that, obviously, Ukraine is not Kievan Rus. Ukraine is a descendant of Rus', just like Russia. They were just lucky that their capital was the main cultural center of ancient Rus', although the Russian city of Vladimir was also one.
But the meaning here arises from the precedent with the German states. We do not have a separate civilization, Austria, and its role is played by the Holy Roman Empire, after the emergence of Prussia and the formation of the Second Reich. This is remotely something similar to the situation between Rus' and Ukraine. Therefore, you can think about the possibility of the revival of Rus', if the civilization controlling Kyiv has critical problems with stability. This revived Rus' can be called Ukraine with a Ukrainian leader.
But here problems arise. The time gap between the collapse of Rus' and the emergence of the Ukrainian national state is large. Therefore, you also need to think about:
1. The use of the style of naming cities in Ukrainian in the revived Ukraine: Kiev -> Kyiv.
2. Adding Ukrainian leaders to the list of country leaders on the victory screen.
3. Addition of Ukrainian great people.
TsimTsigal
Chieftain
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2023
- Messages
- 52
The problem is that modern Ukraine is very late civ (short-lived republic of Ukraine existed in 1918-1920 iirc and as rule of thumb such states are represented as Independents, and modern Ukraine was formed in 1991, which technically makes it unplayable). Another problem is that Ukraine should appear if its core owner (naturally Muscovy/Russia) is unstable, but i have yet to see a game where Russia collapses without player intervention, and players that have goals to destroy Russia (Prussians, Ottomans to some decree) usually don't want Ukraine to appear, which puts idea of modern Ukraine as Peru for Rus' Incas in an awkward place, being totally reasonable via precedence but sore thumb from gameplay perspective.
However, it would be very reasonable to include Zaporozhie/Cossacks incarantion of Ukraine/Rus'... unless Leoreth decides to make it Independent, because Zaporozhie was regional power at best. However, the idea allows for some fun UHV goals and UUs, like moving Cossack to Rus'/Ukraine and adding Russians some modern UU like T-34.
Regarding exact Rus' UHV - i guess everyones idea is to add famous Varangians-Greek trade route, but the problem is that both Vikings and Byzantine tend to be extremely unstable, and simple trade connection can be solved with a few roads which is simply not satisfying even as part of the goal. Another idea is to make Rus' UP food generation from trade routes (not a good bonus, but every other possible food bonus that won't be broken flat +1
from farms is already used by Chinese, Mayans and so on), with UHV1 being generating X food from trade routes. It should force players to settle/conquer Novgorod, a Black Sea port, and naturally connect all three cities.UHV2 can reflect alt-history where Rus' survives Mongol Invasion as independent power. Could be something about not losing cities to Mongols... but then you probably shouldn't lose them to Polish and Russians as well, which makes it simply "don't lose cities" which is, again, simply not satisfying unless paired with something related to average X of cities to avoid cheesing through purposeful loss of cities. Average food production? Average culture (icons go brrr - Icon Painter as UB Theater, giving Priest and some happiness)? Average trade income (given RNGish nature of trade - probably bad idea)? Maybe something like "control X farms/buildings" to force players to have many cities and defend them all, making it less trivial to not lose them. Also, i sincerely think that adding Rus' "anti-Mongol" unit is a bad idea - Rus' should naturally fall to Mongols and have tough time against them. Druzhina being Lancer with Amphibious is way cooler and more useful in region filled with rivers.
Rus' also weren't above some good pillaging and raiding; Igor famously had his shield nailed to gates of Constantinople (although it might be a myth caused by blending of two separate events); Novgorod's Druzhina pirates were as much vicious as Vikings were. Therefore, raiding/pillaging might be UHV3, but it will directly contradict diplomatic nature of UHV1. Another possible UHV3 might be Novgorod/Kiev winning power struggle against Moscow, represented by controlling Russia at some point (1600 or 1750, reflecting formation of Tsardom of Russia and Zaporozhie submitting to Russia respectively), but it just repeats UHV2. It can be rearranged as "food generation UHV, trade/pillage UHV and territorial UHV", but the trick is to make them not contradictory.
A problematic civ for sure. The only one i presume to be tougher to implement in 1.19 gonna be Kanem-Bornu (due to the fact they are both isolated and historically modernized somewhat faster than other African countries, and i personally find Africa super meh in current incarnation of mod, being bunch of isolated civs which never interact with anyone in ways other than selling stuff for UHVs).
Dracosolon
King
Modern Ukraine should be fine as just a dynamic name, I agree. Realistically it wouldn't appear all that often unless Russia is made to be massively more unstable (I don't think I've ever seen a collapsed Russia).
I saw Russia falling apart, but at the same time I saw it on the easiest difficulty level, and Russia was losing Siberian cities while remaining in the core.
In addition, we will have a new map, and Russia may be completely huge, which will affect stability.
In addition, we will have a new map, and Russia may be completely huge, which will affect stability.
Temüjin VIII
Fluyts, Grand Vizier of Your Mind
But its core will be larger, and Siberia is now generally drier in the big map. I think Russia will be more stable in the new map, although we might encounter bigger problems with maintenance (though Leo will also definitely tune them along the way once playtesting starts).
This is wrong. The core of Russia will be even smaller and will no longer include the territories of Ukraine and Belarus, as well as those territories that were not part of ancient Rus'. You can check this in one of the topics. The core will no longer be able to accommodate more than 4 cities (it is possible, but not necessary). It will be smaller not only geographically, but also in the number of cells.
tangjinfeng
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2022
- Messages
- 70
Hello Leo, I don’t know if you have any new ideas about Burmese civilization uu. I noticed that the Burmese have a powerful but always overlooked artillery weapon - Jingal (this is named by the British after the Indian weapon, I don't know its Burmese name), which makes both Europeans and Chinese Feel impressed and even horrified. Its origin is controversial. The Chinese described this weapon as "arranged at the bow and stern of the Burmese army warship, spinning like flying."（头尾多置西洋大炮，旋转如飞。） They believed that it was so powerful that they mistakenly believed that it came from European colonists. But the British were equally amazed by it, thinking it was light, very accurate at long range, and capable of firing grapeshot.
I think it as Burmese uu replaces Bombard, will help Burmese complete UHV 3
I think it as Burmese uu replaces Bombard, will help Burmese complete UHV 3
Last edited:
Temüjin VIII
Fluyts, Grand Vizier of Your Mind
What Burmese UHV3? There are no final UHVs for the new civs yet.
tangjinfeng
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2022
- Messages
- 70
I'm referring to uhv3 in the current big map version, which I saw in a previous post.
Temüjin VIII
Fluyts, Grand Vizier of Your Mind
You mean, this one?
If so, this is only a suggestion. Leoreth has not yet chosen this as the ones to be implemented. We should wait until Leoreth posts about the UHVs of the new civs in detail before we take UHVs into account.
Going back to the discussion on the Jingal — I also looked into it a bit, and it does look interesting. It seems more like an early Machine Gun though, or as fixed guns on fortifications, which would be better off as a Walls or Castle UB that provides additional defensive strength against infantry. We already have two UUs for Burma (Kyundaw, Cassay), so unless we will have more civs get the new America treatment of >2 UUs, it might be bleak. It would also help if it already has an in-game model to use.
tangjinfeng
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2022
- Messages
- 70
Thank you man. Although a bit late, I'd like to point out that Kyundaw is a mistake, it's like setting "levy" to the British uu. It really cannot be used as a uu, because it is just a social system from the Bagan Dynasty to the early Toungoo Dynasty (we call it the designated service system), or a special kind of slavery. Because Kyun-daw literally means "accessory of the royal family" (or slave of the royal family). However, in ancient Myanmar, almost every Burmese was theoretically a slave of the king, and Kyun-daw even became the first-person pronoun of Myanmar. Specifically, in Kyun-daw, there can be all professions, including farmers, craftsmen, Brahmins, mahouts, riders... They live in the village under the king's name based on their profession to provide military service or labor.
IrishDragon
Legend
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 457
I think a naval unit would make a better UU. I'm not sure how feasible it is, but a naval trade unit that can be sent to foreign cities to establish a Minoan trading post that creates a permanent trade route (while the Minoans live) with Knossos could be an option. And a UP that encourages good diplomatic relations with other civs and open borders so they don't block the Mediterranean. A Greek spawn would probably have to flip, or have a high chance to conquer or raze the city though for balance.
IrishDragon
Legend
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 457
An idea for getting rid of the Minoans inspired by the hypothesized Sea Peoples. From around 1400BC onwards, any city in the eastern Mediterranean area that gets captured generates barbarians at Knossos, either on the island or in transports. The fleeing people would keep the AI busy and eventually cause collapse, while giving the player the unenviable task of maintaining peace in the Middle East
Then we need later Greece spawn cause Mycenaean Greece didn't survive the Late Bronze Age collapse as well. Not talking about that greeks were part of the Sea Peoples.
IrishDragon
Legend
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 457
I don't think so, there's enough continuity between Mycenaen Greece and what emerged from the collapse in a Civ context. The Minoans disappeared and/or were subsumed into Greek culture. Getting conquered by Greece or barbarians works in a historical context imo.
I see the Minoans as a one city challenge civ based on trade and diplomacy, but one ahistorical UHV could be to control all the islands of the Mediterranean.
freethink
Prince
Lets talk more about the Totlecs, how will they effect the New World and what is there interaction with the Maya and Aztec?
freethink
Prince
I think the Mionans would be the island version of Harrapa and have a series of Sea Quests, I am all for it
Similar threads
