Change Vikings to Danes

[TDK]

I think if the starting location is moved further south then maybe an Iron could be moved from northern Scandinavia to the Copenhagen peninsula so the city could have decent production
(or was it copper? cant remember).

Theres iron beside Nidaros and Copper in Lapland. At least one, maybe both, could be moved to Jutland or Sweden.

Denmark is absolutely flat and green with no resources at all(we are making up for it with 30 million pigs to 5 million pop).
I don't know if there is metal in southern Sweden at all, probably is.

 

[BurnEmDown]

I know it's not historical but it will be for gameplay reasons.
I mean what good would a 1hammer capital be?

 

[Panopticon]

Maybe you should put some Sheep around the Copenhagen fat cross, if you want to give it hammers.

 

[TDK]

They'll just have to workshop whatever production they need. Or use the whip.

 

[dragodon64]

Sheep give +3 +1. Maybe you meant cows, which give +2 +2. I think TDK's suggestion is just fine in terms of practicality, and it really shouldn't strongly affect anyone not doing a OCC.

 

[Panopticon]

Sheep give +3 +1. Maybe you meant cows, which give +2 +2. I think TDK's suggestion is just fine in terms of practicality, and it really shouldn't strongly affect anyone not doing a OCC.

I meant cows, yeah. But a capital with about 5 base production is weak, which may be why it wasn't located in Copenhagen in the first place.

 

[CaptainPuma]

Adding my 2 cents and vote to this discussion:

What should the 'Viking' civ in RFC be called?
1. Vikings
2. Norse

Where should the 'Viking' capital be on the RFC map?
1. Copenhagen
2. Nidaros
3. Uppsala

I have already voiced my opinion on this in the original thread, but I can say here that I disagree with the basic premise that the people called the Vikings by posterity can be equated with the Danes. Norway, for instance, was not as subordinate to the Danes as it was claimed in the original post. Calling yourself a Dane around Harald Hardråde would probably get your throat slit and your farm burnt to the ground. The Swedish Vikings traded and ruled large areas in the east, but suffer from the dearth of written historical sources to portray that part of the Viking expansion. If the point of this whole exercise is to improve "historical accuracy", renaming the civ "The Danes" would detract from it rather than add to it.

In short, "Vikings" just works for me. It is generally accepted as the name for the Scandinavian peoples of the early middle ages (although I'm aware they probably didn't use it themselves), and it's evocative of hairy men with big axes and a fiery disposition. You know, fun stuff!

I would like to see Copenhagen as the capital, though, with settlers and workers on the Scandinavian peninsula. This would, in fact, increase historical accuracy.

 

[scu98rkr]

I'm not really too bothered about the name but I think the start date should be changed.

If I remember correctly the Vikings/Dane are the first european Civ to spawn.

Although obviously there were people/kingdoms in scandinavia at this date.
I think the start point should be when the vikings burst on to the european stage.
Ie the sacking of Lindisfarne, 793 or maybe a few turn earlier.

English,German,French and Spanish cities need to have been given time to at least settle. The vikings should be given some settlers but more importantly they need beskers + ships to go raiding !

What is the point of spawning so early theres nothing to raid in north western europe ?

Also personally I'd make the historical victory's easier but they have to be completed in a shorter length of time.

1. Have so much gold by 1130 (the establishment of the kingdom of Sicily last viking kingdom).
2. Sink a smaller number of ships by 1130.
3. Be the first European civ to found a city in America before the advent of optics.

For number 3 the map would need to be changed so that island hoping would become possible for using galleys.
(without needing to teleport units)