Civilization Request Thread

Ooo! I have one too!

Spoiler :

Seleucid Empire
leader: Antiochus III

UA:Seleucid Dominance
+33% combat bonus against cities civilizations who you have been in war with more then once. +25% combat boost against occupied cities. Upon signing a peace treaty, there's a chance you receive a unique unit of the civilization you signed the treaty with.

UU: Argyraspides
Replaces spearman. Slightly more expansive, but has extra combat strength(12), and receives bonus in friendly lands.

UI: Komai
May only be built in your territory, never adjacent to another Komai or to a city. Provides +1 culture and production. Until the Medieval era, melee units may spawn on komai during war, occasionally.

And... for the "beloved" Epiphanes:

Seleucid empire

Spoiler :

UA: Katoikoi
Each citizen you raze increases military unit production during war by 5%. Military buildings increase city's border growth rate by 15%. Occupied cities expand their territory faster.

UU: Thorakitai
Replaces composite bowman. Unlike the composite bowman which it replaces, the thorakitai is a melee unit, that performs a ranged attack before engaging in melee combat. When attacking a melee unit, performs a stronger ranged attack(stronger by 50%).

UU: Katoikoi camp
May be built by military units before the Industrial era. Claims all adjacent tiles, and increases the unit's strength by 25%. On the outbreak of a war, The camp is destroyed and contributes production towards military units, and also boosts the hit points of adjacent units by 15HP. Yields 1 culture.

 

This is infinitely worse than a regular composite bowman.

 

But... but what's with the Co-operation?
(Why am i using this cry thing so much?!?!?!!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?)

 

I'm not saying its badly designed, its definitely interesting, its just if I were playing this civ, I'd feel seriously penalised when composites come around. As for the rest, I can't really comment as I'm neither particularly interested in, nor knowledgeable on, the Seleucid Empire.

 

That's... a shock. this(and other Hellenistic empires) have a very interesting history(not a long one, though).
They were... formidable empire. Only Rome were waaaayyyyy more formidable.

 

Not quite. They were too unstable and overextended and quickly lost the eastern provinces, which is something that should be represented (Not exactly negatively) in a civ about them.

 

What you mean "not exactly negatively"?

 

There are means of representing their overextension without making it so negatively, such as bonuses from annexed cities without courthouses. But since that is rather extreme, any bonuses related to such effect could also be applied to a minor extent to puppeted cities.

 

Leonidas and the spartans!

 

Oh god, please no.

 

Sukritact already released the Sami here

And my World According to Modders scenario has Whoward, and the update to come will have a decision allowing his disciple Lord Gazebo to take over as leader of the Celestial Empire.

 

Yes, the Sami are pretty terrible. Just look at the directly translated lyrics of a Norwegian song/rant about the Ministry of Justice:

 

(What's the problem with the Sami? I used them in Anno Domini. Great civ.)
And... what will be my rule in the scenario. After all, i do have an effect on modders.

 

Barbarian leader?

 

LS has one out, and More Civs' one is coming relatively soon.

 

Who? When? What?

 

Greek Split. I mean, who other than Leonidas will lead the Spartans? It's too obvious.

 

Eh, personally I'd have picked Agesilaus II over Leonidas; the only thing of note he did was die at Thermopylae.

 

Anyone who knows much about Sparta probably would, but its all about dat name recognition.

 

Overextended...well the Seleucid I find were very much so. Frankly the only great rulers of the Seleucid realm were Seleucus I, who inherited and ruled over Alexander's empire in Persia, and Antiochus III who reconquered a sizeable majority of said land after it was lost by the rulers between Seleucus Nicator and Antiochus Megas.

Unstable...oh very much so, though in a bit of a misnomer, the instability was surprisingly benign during the early Seleucids, it wasn't until after Antiochus III's death that that instability caused the proverbial crap to hit the fan hard.