Mainly because "cultural importance" is an imaginary and unquantifiable construct.
By the way, I've renamed Vorkuta to Obdorsk.
1700AD Scenario Development Thread
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
By the way, I've renamed Vorkuta to Obdorsk.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,410
Stop getting so nervous
Prussia could start with Berlin (with no Konigsberg on the map), Indies with two (Hamburg and Frankfurt), Poland with 2 (if one has no Konigsberg Warsaw could fit somewhere), Austria with 3 (Wienna, Bedapest, Milan and Belgrade replaced with, say, Sofia or Bucharest to make space for Budapest). We start with 2 German civs -- isn't that enough? Starting with small Prussia and big Poland and getting bigger after partition of Poland and conquest of Indy Germans -- doesn't it bring more glory to Prussia
?Wilhelm Meister
Warlord
I didn't understand your point...whatever. "Cultural importance" is what we call worldwide importance of events and stuff, it's more important to study the french revolution for a history teacher for example than to study the native american's tribe war in south america in the 16th century...world impact is the very thing...things that affect and change the world as it is, that's what I mean.
The thing is that independent cities in civilization doesn't have diplomacy and are at war with everyone and everything, then to be "realistical" Leoreth would have a great deal of work to create a civilization representing Frankfurt and Hamburg etc.
Second point, Königsberg should be part of Prussia as well and the last thing some people here doesn't seem to understand is that this 1700 scenario was primally made to please the people that like to play with later starting civis as Prussia. You can play with Poland in the 600 a.d scenario and found warsaw and crush Prussia when it spanws very later...
Wilhelm Meister
Warlord
And I didn't mention the fact that the years passes very quickly in civilization so you probably wouldn't have time to conquest all of these territories in time and would probably have a very ahistorical europe by the 19th century...btw belgrad is very important too as it in the game marks the Turkish presence in Europe. And I'm not nervous...lol just tired of people's complaints...
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,410
So here is how more accurate Europe should look like. Main importance of Prussia in 1700 was her Army -- its much more fun to unite Germany with blood and iron rather than recieve a free cookies from Leoreth. It will take you no time to crash Indies and Poland!
Here is more accurate Europe: from historical point of view and for the gameplay sake:
Here is more accurate Europe: from historical point of view and for the gameplay sake:
Spoiler :
Attachments
Wilhelm Meister
Warlord
It's possible yes, but that would require a good starting stack of troops to conquer these lands and also there would be no Königsberd and it would suck just as when we played the 600 a.d scenario and Poland founded dumb cities that sometimes we had to deal with...
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,410
There is only one way to find out -- running few playtests. Indies go down fast with AI.
Look, Poland disappeared in 1795, lot's of turn even for our turn interval. On the other side unification of Germany happened in 1871. So there. Prussia has almost 170 years to unite Germany and Poland can live for 100 years or so. If Prussia gets to own Hamburg in 1700 -- unborn USA gets to own San Francisco (in case AI America wont be able to make there).
DC123456789
Deity
My only worry would be that some of the other surrounding civs might take those independent cities.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,410
You can raze Warsaw and found Königsberg, which would represent the idea that in given region the importance of Königsberg surpassed the one of Warsaw (which never happened in history of those two cities). Or just rename Warsaw to any East baltic German city you want upon conquest!
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,410
I mean ... they did! Remember that short guy from Corsica? He did more for German unification (albeit unknowingly and indirectly) than all the years of existence of Holy Roman Empire, which he abolished.
We cannot reprogram the history with 100% determinism. If one gives Prussia more initial troops than others -- there would be more probability for them to get there. 'More probable" is the only thing we can possibly expect from a well made scenario.
Wilhelm Meister
Warlord
The unification of Germany under the same government u mean...because all of the german states had an alliance even before, the difference is that the Austrians influenced some and the Prussians others, I've played Pride of Nations and Victoria 2 for a loong time and I know that it's impossible to emulate that in civilization, so I think your idea makes little sense when talking about the mod...as I said you have the others scenarios to play with Poland and do u want to compare the situation i the Usa to that of Prussia!? Prussia hardly get to be able to build ironworks and things like that since they have few cities...
SheaferDaDawg
Intelligent Canine
I think his argument is that:
1. Those cities were not under Prussian control in 1700
2. Making them independent would reflect history better
3. The Prussian starting stack should be large and advanced to reflect history, allowing them to capture the cities with little difficulty, especially if they are encouraged to pursue those cities.
4. Ultimately, the outcome would be roughly the same, with Prussia in control of them all by 1750 (which is still historically early).
The alliance between the German states was....questionable, at best. His comparison with the USA is that the sole reason for Prussia starting with such cities would be for gameplay, and that as such the comparative difficulty in AI America settling California should be lessened by an auto spawn, something which is not currently existing (apart from a quasi-tc/railroad event). As such, the precedent should be followed, which is not giving such a crutch to Prussia.
Finally, I believe the idea is that all civs present on the map at start should be playable, and there should be little to no distinction between the value of Poland and Prussia in terms of the starting situation favoring one or the other. IMO, a Poland with one city might as well be independent, and Warsaw has long been the more historically important city.
1. Those cities were not under Prussian control in 1700
2. Making them independent would reflect history better
3. The Prussian starting stack should be large and advanced to reflect history, allowing them to capture the cities with little difficulty, especially if they are encouraged to pursue those cities.
4. Ultimately, the outcome would be roughly the same, with Prussia in control of them all by 1750 (which is still historically early).
The alliance between the German states was....questionable, at best. His comparison with the USA is that the sole reason for Prussia starting with such cities would be for gameplay, and that as such the comparative difficulty in AI America settling California should be lessened by an auto spawn, something which is not currently existing (apart from a quasi-tc/railroad event). As such, the precedent should be followed, which is not giving such a crutch to Prussia.
Finally, I believe the idea is that all civs present on the map at start should be playable, and there should be little to no distinction between the value of Poland and Prussia in terms of the starting situation favoring one or the other. IMO, a Poland with one city might as well be independent, and Warsaw has long been the more historically important city.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,410
Prussia in 1700 AD scenario is like Rome in 3000 BC scenario, they start small but have big ambitions. If we make Prussia more likely to succeed (with troop balance) -- that's good enough. If worst comes to worst one can make those two cities flip to Prussia around 1850s -- which will be renamed Germany.
Which influence were Saxony and Bavaria under? Culturally Saxony would rank higher than Prussia in 1700! Before there was a united Germany -- there was a Napoleonic Europe -- why don't you worry about insuring that will happen? Very often you see France Indy during early modern era for both 600 and 3000 scenarios.
If you sacrifice definite accuracy in the beginning for sake of probable accuracy in the middle of the game -- why does it make more sense?
Wilhelm Meister
Warlord
I don't think Warsaw is more historically important at all...and I think the scenario is getting good by now and people seem to want to ruin it...
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,410
The city you are posting from would be something like modern Sarajevo if not for the guy from Warsaw saving it just thirteen years before the scenario starts. Nothing is being ruined yet
, lets wait for Leo first 
Compared to Krakow or compared to Königsberg?
Wilhelm Meister
Warlord
The city you are posting from would be something like modern Sarajevo if not for the guy from Warsaw saving it just thirteen years before the scenario starts. Nothing is being ruined yet
Is that a joke?
Comparing Wien to Sarajevo is really funny...
I really hope this scenario won't be ruined by your ideas btw...
Similar threads
