Lolz I can name at least five major empires that were on the Italian peninsula.
Obviously I know what you are referring to, but if you want me to agree with you on that then you have to agree that we should give France, Spain, England etc... a Legion UU
I think everyone is so convinced of it, they don't feel it is worth discussion anymore without further details. There are only so many pages of arguing over potential leaders that we can handle.
My 4 haven't changed much:
Morocco
Venice/Italy (prefer Venice)
Eastern Native North American (anything from Mississippian to Cherokee to Shawnee)
Indonesia/Vietnam (prefer Vietnam)
I think everyone is so convinced of it, they don't feel it is worth discussion anymore without further details. There are only so many pages of arguing over potential leaders that we can handle.
My 4 haven't changed much:
Morocco
Venice/Italy (prefer Venice)
Eastern Native North American (anything from Mississippian to Cherokee to Shawnee)
Indonesia/Vietnam (prefer Vietnam)
Italy is more interesting, it's not enough that we argue about whether they're in, we must also argue about whether they're worthy and which version of Italy will be in!
My current list is the same, although I've no preference between Italy and Venice and I'm hoping for Indonesia: there's currently no representation of non-mainland SEA.
I'm not going to get drawn into anything here I just think that Greeks vs Persians (anachronistically) and the Golden Age of Athens is what they were going for in Greece in the game. That's really all that needs to be said about an in-game Greece IMO.
I don't really think they're representing Athens. The leader and the Companion Cavalry are Macedonian, The Hoplite is more Spartan than Athenian (they'd be represented by naval warfare, culture or democracy) and the Hellenic League is just Greece/Macedon in general. Although with Alexander representing Greece, this is very appropriate, a focus on warfare.
Out of interest, would anyone welcome a cultural element in the Greek Civ?
I agree. Any civ that gets labelled "Italy" is going to be a temporal conglomeration in the same vein as Germany. Cherry picking UAs, UUs, leaders, and whatever else from different eras.
For what it's worth, I favor the Venice ideas over Italy. But if they had Mussolini as the leader, I think I would get 100% behind Italy. The idea makes me giggle. I picture him as Montezuma in a overly decorated general's uniform, theatrically exaggerated gesticulations and all.
But if they had Mussolini as the leader, I think I would get 100% behind Italy. The idea makes me giggle. I picture him as Montezuma in a overly decorated general's uniform, theatrically exaggerated gesticulations and all.
I agree Lorenzo seems quite likely, but I would also keep Vittorio Emanuele II, Garibaldi and Cesare Borgia in the race for leader position.
Then there's also the possibility of a female leader as well.
A wild suggestion, largely driven by horror at the thought of Lucrezia Borgia being roped in as a female leader for Italy - Joanna I, Queen of Naples 1343-82. Genuine regnant monarch of Italy's largest kingdom, at that time still a political powerhous and cultural centre.
There has been the odd bit of Naples knocking on these threads, but I'd also remind everyone of the kingdom's leading role in intellectual life in the eighteenth century - Vico, Galiani, Genovesi - which goes some way to explaining the course of the Neapolitan Revolution of 1799.
Or if you want a Renaissance patron of the arts less horrifying than Lucrezia Borgia, may I suggest Isabelle d'Este, Marquesa of Mantua.
My personal preference is Lorenzo or Garibaldi, but I could see Vittorio Emanuele II, Cavour, one of the Borgias, even Matilda of Tuscany if hey wanted a female leader.
I'm fine with Joanna as a candidate. Naples was the height of Italian culture for quite a bit of time, but it was then surpassed by the north (it's the cities of the north that tend to look down on the Mezzogiorno contribution to Italian culture, imo). However, by the time the Kingdom became Spanish, it started to decline in power and influence. It was poorer than the north, which was a big problem, and the autocratic regime didn't help.
That being said, Casserta is absolutely beautiful, so they could contribute when given the opportunity.
The game already handles the Rome situation, though. Give both civs the same capital, Rome. If both are in the game, the city goes to whoever builds it first and the other's capital starts at their second city. It's absolutely no big deal. Rome would never be in the game twice.
Two solutions:
1. Make Rome the capitol of Italy and if the Roman civ is in game, then whoever founds the city first gets it.
2. Make Rome the second city on the Italian city list, if the Roman civ is in game then they'll found the city and Italy won't get it. There's something similar going on with Polynesia and America right now. Honolulu is on both civ's city lists, but America doesn't found it because it's Polynesia's first city if both are in game.
I agree Lorenzo seems quite likely, but I would also keep Vittorio Emanuele II, Garibaldi and Cesare Borgia in the race for leader position.
Then there's also the possibility of a female leader as well.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
?????
).
