C2C civilizations

Acctualy seperating near east from the agean/greek civilisations during the bronze age, especaly the later bronze age is not that easy as there are many cultural contacts though trade and colonisation.
I would defenitly place the greek culture under the european tree, while the ancient greek might not be based of europe, europe is based of them.
What we today call european culture is basicly the result of mixing greek/roman infulence with christianity, while what we call near east today is basicly the result of mixing persian/arabian/islam and far east influences.

In fact i do not realy like the way culture works right now, what bugs me is the restriction based on the civ you start with.
If you start with an european civ but end up with a floodplanes/stone start, you cant realy develop the culture that would make sense both historical and gameplayish, all you can do is start looking for terrain that fits your base culture, it would make more sense to just become egypt.
People did not say " Hey i´m spanish, id better go find some cow" they settled near cow and then became spanish(well spanish history might be a bit more complex ;) ) .
I would like to see the culture system reworked in a way, that lets everyone start as a very basic "neutral" culture, and a neutral civ, and as you get your hands on culture wonders you become that civ, granting you access to its UU/UB and leaders.
Of course culture from different parts of the earth would block another, so if you get egyptian culture you can no longer get chinese ect.

Oh dear im babbleing on without end and it aint even on the acctual topic. x.x
 
I would like to see the culture system reworked in a way, that lets everyone start as a very basic "neutral" culture, and a neutral civ, and as you get your hands on culture wonders you become that civ, granting you access to its UU/UB and leaders.

Except I think that will make starting civs even more "generic" than they are now. At least now, with a starting culture, it makes choosing a civ more than just liking how a leader looks. I do think that some cultures should be able to be gained later on even if they don't "fit" your regional culture.

DISCLAIMER---I really don't think adding civs is that important to me, as unless they are given something "new" (ie, like UU or UB like other mods rather than new leaders)they are really now less important than "cultures".
 
Aline: I agree with much of what you said there. Without making a huge project of it, which will probably happen eventually, we have a fairly functional system in place now that does still admittedly need some additional improvement. I have a feeling that Hydro and I will eventually come back to the table on this and develop a more advanced mechanism for social evolution. What we have in place now allows us to openly develop as many of these cultures as possible and for now that's where we need to be I think. But the point you made about the limitations of the baseline culture are valid imo.
 
Acctualy seperating near east from the agean/greek civilisations during the bronze age, especaly the later bronze age is not that easy as there are many cultural contacts though trade and colonisation.
I would defenitly place the greek culture under the european tree, while the ancient greek might not be based of europe, europe is based of them.
What we today call european culture is basicly the result of mixing greek/roman infulence with christianity, while what we call near east today is basicly the result of mixing persian/arabian/islam and far east influences.

In fact i do not realy like the way culture works right now, what bugs me is the restriction based on the civ you start with.
If you start with an european civ but end up with a floodplanes/stone start, you cant realy develop the culture that would make sense both historical and gameplayish, all you can do is start looking for terrain that fits your base culture, it would make more sense to just become egypt.
People did not say " Hey i´m spanish, id better go find some cow" they settled near cow and then became spanish(well spanish history might be a bit more complex ;) ) .
I would like to see the culture system reworked in a way, that lets everyone start as a very basic "neutral" culture, and a neutral civ, and as you get your hands on culture wonders you become that civ, granting you access to its UU/UB and leaders.
Of course culture from different parts of the earth would block another, so if you get egyptian culture you can no longer get chinese ect.

Oh dear im babbleing on without end and it aint even on the acctual topic. x.x

I think this was under 'Progenitor civilizations' initially, eventually it devolved into some insults (I think) that derived (I think, can't recall too much now) from genetic deversity and probably delved into 'race' a bit too much.

Next time around though we should try to stray away from that branch and focus more on environmental and linguistic aspects.

Personally, I think the dynamic trait system and eventually a more robust culture system will make for some interesting games.

I'm looking forward to this just as much as the nomad and multimap system that is currently under focus of the team.
 
I'm looking forward to this just as much as the nomad and multimap system that is currently under focus of the team.

Yeah, so am i, but i believe the Nomad part is going very very slow . . . :popcorn:
 
Oh man I was so pumped for the Nomad start, even more so than multi maps (since i never even get far enough to go into space :eek:). Not them I'm complaining in any way. I know how much work the Mod team does but I was just so excited about Nomad!

Edit:

@Acularius

I loved your idea in the Progenitor Civs thread and I agree it got out of hand really quick. I did like the discussion initially though!
 
Back
Top Bottom