1300-1492

[Kyriakos]

I thought of making a civ3 scenario about this period. The map is huge, and includes all of Europe and almost the entire Asia, along with northern Africa.

This is a pic from the part of the map i have worked on up to now (i only started two days ago)

I have two maps of the world in 1300, but i wanted to ask which 30 civs you consider to be the most important in this vast area. The 31st civ will be a neutral one, consisting of all the remaining, lesser factions.

I decided, for gameplay reasons, to have the Holy Roman Empire, and the Il-Khanate, as part of the neutral civ. There exist three german civs, Brandemburg, Austria and the Teutonic order in the scenario as things are, and the seljuks are being represented by the ottomans.

Your help can make this better

 

[innonimatu]

Dammit, browser crash and I just lost a lengthy reply. Well, anyway, for Europe, just a list:
Scotland, England, France, Portugal, Castille, Aragon,
Morocco, Venice, Egypt, Turks, Byzantium, Hungary,
Teutonic Order, Lithuania, Novgorod, Denmark.

 

[Kyriakos]

Thank you for the suggestion

My own list for Europe (the ottomans are still in Asia at the beginning of the scenario) is:

Byzantine Empire
Serbia
Bulgaria
Castille
Aragon
Portugal
France
Brandemburg
Teutonic order
Denmark
Austria
Sweden
Poland
Hungary
England
Kipchak horde (golden horde)
A russian civ
Georgia
Neutral (the rest)

 

[Dachs]

Why only "a" Russian civ?

 

[Kyriakos]

Because there is no room for more, only 30 available civs there + neutrals...

 

[Dachs]

I dunno, some Muscovite thing seems more important to me than including all of Castile/Aragon/Portugal or Serbia/Bulgaria/Georgia. Actually, Brandenburg makes the least sense of all of those and it should probably be dumped, unless it's supposed to be Generic North German Filler State X in which case I dunno.

 

[Verbose]

About Scandinavia, you could get away with all of it rolled into one Scandinavian civ for the period. There might have been three different kingdoms in 1300, but by 1397 you get the Great Nordic Union. Of course, that wasn't an entirely happy marriage, even if making sense politically (things like a wish to counter the power of the Hanseatic League in the region), but the scope of what you're planning pretty much includes modeling local politics anyway. And even before the Nordic Union, Denmark was pretty much overpowering everyone else anyway. I'd go with "Scandinavia", or "The Great Nordic Union" a bit ahead of its time, and assign two more European civs for a batter model.

And just generally, I feel your posted list seems a little anachronisticalluy skewed towards a "nation state" concept. I might include the Hanseatic League, which might work with lots of cities, since that was what it was, in northern Germany and the Baltic. The Holy Roman Empire of German nation might not have been the sturdiest thing around, but a lot of your "everyone else" for Europe falls into that one. Though if you include a HRE, it might get very much overpowered compared to history.

It looks like Italy is badly served here (how do you figure it)? Not least considering Venice and Genoa huge powers at the time. You've got Aragon there already, and I'm guessing you're rolling all of the Capetingian "empire" into "France" here (France, Naples, even the Papal state perhaps)?

 

[Kyriakos]

Venice will be in, i thought it already was

HRE cannot be in exactly because it will probably ruin the game if it is, unless i make it entirely powerless.
I thought of Brandemburg as a player nation, with which one could try to expand in Germany, but i could take it out, it was there simply for that reason.

If i unite Castille and Aragon, again, it will be unbalanced, but then again there could be an unhistoric war between them, this is a difficult case.

I want Bulgaria and Serbia, for two reasons. One because the balkans, apart from the Byzantine Empire, currently are all part of the neutral civ, which i dislike (i even thought of giving the dutchy of Athens to Naples, although iirc it was a vassal of Tuscany). And secondly because you dont often get to see them in a mod

But i will have to make room for Venice, so one euro civ will have to be out. Unless i take out some asian civ. Here is the list of all civs of Asia and Africa, so you can say if one can be taken out from the rest of the continents:

Africa 2 and neutrals

Egypt
Morroco
Neutral (the rest)

Asia 11 and neutrals

Trebizond
Ottomans
Korea
Japan
Sultanate of Delhi
Bengal
Khmer Empire
Yuan
A chinese civ, to represent rebellion in the mongol chinese provinces (unless they have been liberated, which i am not sure of)
Chagatai
Dai Viet
Neutral (the rest)

Il-Khanate will be there as a neutral civ.

I guess Trebizond can be neutral, but again you dont see it often in a mod...

 

[Tee Kay]

Africa 2 and neutrals
Egypt
Morroco
Neutral (the rest)

I would merge all the North African nations plus Granada as the "Moors". This might make it too powerful, so put them on mostly bad land (mountains and deserts) with only a few coastal strips where towns can flourish.

Asia 11 and neutrals

Trebizond
Ottomans
Korea
Japan
Sultanate of Delhi
Bengal
Khmer Empire
Yuan
A chinese civ, to represent rebellion in the mongol chinese provinces (unless they have been liberated, which i am not sure of)
Chagatai
Dai Viet
Neutral (the rest)

I would make Trebizond and Bengal neutral, and I'd add Siam and maybe Malacca to Southeast Asia. I'd also add a civ in South India (maybe Pandyas or Hoysalas, though it would be a kind of merged position anyway).

The Il-Khanate should be playble. Also, you might also want to add a Timurid civ in Samarkand, which will be quite weak until about mid-game, when it would gain very powerful unique units; alternatively you could make "Tamerlane's Conquests" a wonder available to Central Asian civs, which would give them free units and other military bonuses.

You might want to make use of VP locations to simulate historical conquests. And don't forget the Black Death.

 

[spryllino]

I think you should put Navarre in with France, and Norway in with Denmark, and Scotland in with France (cf the Age of Discovery Conquest).

You should include Burgundy as well as Saxony (which was more important than Brandenburg at the time) and maybe Bohemia, or the HRE neutral state will be far too powerful. Or you could, given that many of the cities in the HRE were in the Hanse, just call the rest of the HRE the Hanse. Remember, too, that the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order was a member of the Hanse, and so you could just give most of Germany to the Teutonic Order. That way, Germany, being a fair way from the Teutonic Order's capital at Riga, would experience a good amount of corruption and waste and would be appropriately powerless.

 

[Verbose]

I think you should put Navarre in with France, and Norway in with Denmark, and Scotland in with France (cf the Age of Discovery Conquest).

You should include Burgundy as well as Saxony (which was more important than Brandenburg at the time) and maybe Bohemia, or the HRE neutral state will be far too powerful. Or you could, given that many of the cities in the HRE were in the Hanse, just call the rest of the HRE the Hanse. Remember, too, that the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order was a member of the Hanse, and so you could just give most of Germany to the Teutonic Order. That way, Germany, being a fair way from the Teutonic Order's capital at Riga, would experience a good amount of corruption and waste and would be appropriately powerless.

Well, that could be a way to use the game mechanics of CivIII.

Could be an interesting design challenge to empower some small nations through the mechanisms of ring city placement, while relatively nerfing technically bigger entities using the same mechanisms.

 

[Masada]

and I'd add Siam

Ayutthaya, not Siam.

Malacca to Southeast Asia

Not really all that important until the the middle of the 1400s. It also kind of sucked even during its Golden Age. Majapahit is a far stronger candidate and actually did stuff and that pains my rabidly Srivijayan thassolocratic heart to admit.

 

[Tee Kay]

Ayutthaya, not Siam.

Actually, Sukhothai, since the scenario starts in 1300.

I use Siam as a blanket term for large Central Thai states prior to 1945. Since Civ3 does not allow you to change the country tag in game, I'd use the name Siam in this case.

Not really all that important until the the middle of the 1400s. It also kind of sucked even during its Golden Age. Majapahit is a far stronger candidate and actually did stuff and that pains my rabidly Srivijayan thassolocratic heart to admit.

Except that the scenario map doesn't seem to include Java, and since I thought the Malays need some sort of representation so I settle for the next best candidate.

 

[Kyriakos]

Some civs/characteristics can be there in the form of resources or barbarian camps/goody huts.

For example here you see the nordic mercenary (although as far as i know the Byzantine Empire didnt recruit any Varangoi after 1204) and a barbarian camp

 

[Kyriakos]

I guess Brandemburg is out, leavign only one german civ, the teutonic order.

Trebizond could be out as well. But i dont want to have three italian civs, Venice and Naples are in already, so i have one spot left

In Scandinavia there is Denmark, which i might unite with Norway (or else leave norwegian cities as neutral) and Sweden currently.

So the final spot could go to Novgorod, and it will be in alogn with Muscovy. Unless someone has a better idea.

 

[spryllino]

I'd say you should probably have Brandenburg, Bohemia, or Saxony in preference to Novgorod, or you'll make the Teutonic order too powerful and they'll have a contiguous block of land running from Estonia to the Rhineland.

 

[Mongoloid Cow]

Out of those three, Bohemia would be the go. You could make it part of a "Luxembourg" minor civ and give them Luxembourg as well. You could also unite Brandenburg, the Palatinate and Bavaria as a "Wittelsbach" minor civ.

Both would be fudging dates a little bit. The Luxembourgs didn't get Bohemia and Moravia until 1310. And the Wittelsbachs Brandenburg until 1324. But its close enough.

 

[Traitorfish]

Out of those three, Bohemia would be the go. You could make it part of a "Luxembourg" minor civ and give them Luxembourg as well. You could also unite Brandenburg, the Palatinate and Bavaria as a "Wittelsbach" minor civ.

Both would be fudging dates a little bit. The Luxembourgs didn't get Bohemia and Moravia until 1310. And the Wittelsbachs Brandenburg until 1324. But its close enough.

Wouldn't naming it "Luxembourg" be somewhat confusing? Most people associate the name with the modern nation, not the House. If there to be included at all, a Bohemia that happens to own Luxembourg seems preferable.

 

[Lord Baal]

Wouldn't naming it "Luxembourg" be somewhat confusing? Most people associate the name with the modern nation, not the House. If there to be included at all, a Bohemia that happens to own Luxembourg seems preferable.

You could solve that by naming the nation "The House of Luxembourg." Not sure how well that would work with more democratic governments though.

 

[Tee Kay]

You could solve that by naming the nation "The House of Luxembourg." Not sure how well that would work with more democratic governments though.

This is 1300 - 1492 we're talking about.