Discussion in 'Civilization Design Resources' started by TheTacticalApe, Oct 2, 2010.
Just a note: the thread will not be up until the weekend. Sorry.
My England split:
Anglo - Saxons
Leader: Alfred the Great
UA: Burghal Hidage
During war, anything stationed on farms cost no maintenance and heal 10 HP per turn. 5% of the city's food output will be added to production towards military units and buildings per each worked tile that is adjacent to a Burh least 2 food(up to 50%). When a city starts to construct a new military unit\building, 25% of the food amount that was required for the last citizen is contributed towards it.
Unlocked at currency. May not be built adjacent to another Burh. Automatically pillaged when enemy enters it. Adjacent units receive 50% larger bonus against barbarians, and 20% of the bonus vs. Barbarians while defending(against all enemies). You may move citizen to a Burh, increasing its yields by 1 gold, and allowing it to attack adjacent enemies(at the cost of all unit's movement points). +1 food after civil service. Burh has a ZOC
Replaces longswordsman. Unlocked earlier, at metal casting. Has lower combat strength, but is cheaper. When stationed on a Burh, increases its yields by 1 food and 1 gold. Has a 20% combat boost in friendly lands.
House of Tudor
Leader: Henry VIII
UA: Mon Druit
May cancel DoFs, war commitments, and peace agreements(with no trade) after 50% of the treaty duration has passed. Each embassy established in your capital will give you a lump sum of gold upon the start of a WLtKD. When a hostile* civ loses a city or is denounced by another civ, a WLtKD starts in the capital.
UU: Great ship
Replaces Galleas. Has higher combat strength (18 ), and higher ranged strength(18 ). Has 4 movement(instead of 3). More expansive, and may cross oceans.
Replaces Pikeman. Weaker then the pikeman(15 ). Has bonus against damaged units(33%). After researching steel, receives extra 3 strength, gains the charge promotion and receives a 33% attack bonus(instead of the original bonus).
Leader: Elizabeth I
UA: Elizabethan Era
No unhappiness generated from cultural specialists. During golden ages, naval units have +2 movement and great admirals have double effect. Naval units receive a combat boost in friendly territory.
Replaces Zoo. Costs 1 less gold to maintain, but also provides 1 less happiness. Has a great work of writing slot that provides 1 happiness if filled. Has a writer specialist slot, that also provides 1 happiness if filled.
UU: Sea Dog
Replaces privateer. May enter the territory of other civilizations(but may lose health if ends his turn there, even with a open borders agreement). Combat is 50% more likely to create a great admiral. Receives 50% more gold from pillaging trade routes, and has bonus vs. Naval units. Does not start with the coastal rider I promotion.
UB: Jousting grounds
Replaces the Colosseum. Unlocked at chivalry. Provides 15 XP for mounted units built in the city, in addition to the normal effects of the Colosseum. Also yields 1 culture. However, mounted units trained in the city start with 20 HP less.
Replaces crossbowman. Has higher ranged strength(20), but slightly lower melee strength(12) starts with the range promotion. Has bonus against gun units(25%), and is more expansive.
More to come!(hopefully)
(I used too much icons. XD)
I really like the House of Tudor but the UA seems week. In the end it only benefits one city. Being able to cancel deals and whatnot doesn't seem useful unless a person is in a very particular situation depending on play style. I like the UU since its naval and it seems cool in general. Pikeman are also fun if on a bad upgrade line.
The Anglo-Saxon UA seems like it could be OP and seems a bit complicated (Though that doesn't bother like it does other people). The UI is a really neat idea. The longsword UU seems decent.
Sounds like a very nice and original idea, not to mention it gives embassies a new use, but is it clever to have trade deals start a WLtKD? Since you can simply send another civ a resource or a low amount of gold per turn, you could get a WLtKD at any point in the game -actually you could just go perma WLtKD-. Furthermore, from the way I see it, both treaties canceling and other WLtKD starting options would become fairly unnecessary or situational.
Its an idea I borrowed from a series about the Tudors I watched.D)
I will post more(and will kinda change this).
Eyy guess who's back from Poland
Kontor isn't exactly a marketplace, no, but in the same vein an Ikanda is not a barracks, Chinampa are not watermills and Wats are not universities. Marketplaces make the most sense thematically so a marketplace is what it will stay. Anyway, Jagers aren't strictly Bavarian, but they are very common in Bavaria so mneh.
Thanks, Egypt, alongside Greece, is definitely my favourite split by a significant margin; there isn't anything in the current set that I feel I could make better. Its good to feel totally satisfied - I don't have that with many other sets, I can be a bit perfectionist sometimes.
Re Narmer: Again the lack of a conquest focus comes mainly from our different opinions in whether we're designing civs based off of leaders or polities. I base mine of the entirety of proto-dynastic Egypt, as per the Firaxis precedent, and you tend to focus more on the leaders. I don't think either is any more valid than the other; tis just taste. Also I considered changing most of the food to culture or production bonuses but I kind of wanted Egypt to have the best possible early game imaginable - food is the best way of achieving this imo. So it may be overkill but mneh.
The automatic inheritence of cities is based mainly in gameplay, I felt they needed a Venice-like way of getting new cities, but also saw that most designs based off of Venice-style play use the same mechanic of GP purchase. I looked for a totally different way to do it and voila - auto inheritence via Kontors. That said, its also rooted in history. The civ doesn't represent Lubeck, but the Hanse. Though lubeck itself never owned the other cities in the league - the league did end up with disproportionate influence within certain cities. I choose to represent that through occasionally puppeting a city.
I have two reasons for this design actually
1. This isn't a beer focus - the UA itself uses beer as a means towards the actual focus of the civ, which is cultural great people and tourism. I'd thought of far more offensive and stereotypical applications of a beer-focussed Bavaira, such as trading production for growth when using up Beer resources, but at the end of the day I feel like a Bavaria which excels at creating cultural great people - enhanced by beer festivals and such - is as gentle and fair as could be with that particular focus. Its designed to represent the way Bavarians would meet, discuss new ideas, be inspired and create new traditions in Beer Halls and such. I don't think thats a bad thing at all - its just an attempt to create a new and novel playstyle.
2. I don't think its fair to say that ignoring JFDs design is rude. I am very conscious of JFDs design and love it. If it didn't exist I'd probably have focussed more on mountains and wonders, had Ludwig as the leader and have the schloss as a UB. But I think its way, way more rude, and utterly pointless, to just rip stuff out of his Bavaria. I wanted to do a Bavaria but what is the point of having 2 identical Bavaria designs floating around? If you want me to 'acknowledge' his Bavaria I might as well just link his design to my sig, but that seems pretty odd to me. I went out of my way to avoid stepping on JFDs design.
Again I'm not really sure what I can do here. All of my other splits represent important periods and polities based around the original civ. If I were to just do the civs which hadn't already been done, my German split would miss out all of the most important bits of German history and just be:
The Weimar Republic
Glad to see you back!
You know what? I'll stop commenting your designs of civs/leaders others've done. You can choose to do which you want. Sorry if my comment seems rude. I was tired, and when I'm tired, replying feels like a chore.
But my point still stands: Bavaria is very complicated.
Mneh I welcome the input, and I think a lot of the time its a valid point; I do want to avoid stepping on other peoples toes and if by some miracle any of these got made, I definitely wouldn't want to redo civs that have already been done well. It's just that Germany in particular has such a well studied and amazing history; most of it has already been done. So it was fairly impossible to devise a good split made up of Germanies that haven't been done. That said I'll probably try focus on the polities within the HRE. The Palatinate, Bavaria, Hansa, Brandenburg, Saxony etc. etc. etc. That way it keeps things a little different.
Either way, I don't want you to feel like you have to comment, if you're tired or if you plain don't want to; I really won't mind. Its nice to get feedback but I don't want you to see it as a chore
And yeah, I agree with you that Bavaria is too complicated - it'll get streamlined when I finish the German split. I was just getting a few ideas out, particularly for the Hanse. Notice its not in my sig and is only 2 civs. Its not finished at all.
Either way, the last week or so has somewhat dissuaded me from the Germany split - I'll probably do Poland next. It'll be a big one I reckons, I've got Polish fever:
Mieszko I's Polanians - Plains based conquest and settlement
Bolesław the Brave - Early Kingdom - Building and Conquest
Kazimierz the Great - Piast Kingdom - Tolerance and Refugees
Władysław II Jagiełło - Jagellion Kingdom - Paganism and Defence
Casimir IV Jagiellon - Kingdom of Poland-Lithuania - Teutonic Smashing Badass
Zygmunt III - Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth - Golden Ages and Elections
Władysław IV Vasa - Also PLC - Defence and Counter-attack
Jan III Sobieski - Winged Hussars!
Józef Chłopicki - Congress Poland - Cultural Rebellions, Poets, Painters and Musicians
Józef Piłsudski - Polish Republic - Defence and industrialisation
Władysław Gomułka - Polish Communist Republic - Heavy production focus
Looking forward to your ideas for the Palatinate - they may inspire my design for it, or at least their uniques. Will the leader be Frederick V?
I feel obliged to reply either way. There's nothing to be done there. I guess it's my... politeness? No, that's not the right word...
Probably, I'm not sure who else I'd choose. I'm not sure about the uniques. I kind of want a war/faith design, but I'd also like some bonuses in there for weird disjointed empires. Being able to connect cities to the capital through other civs borders? Automatic city connections if bordering a new civ? Plus bonuses for city connections? É troppo difficile
I know what you mean. Fair enough - I respect that. I'll be sure to reciprocate the forced kindness
double post madness
Almost as big as my Norway list.
Well... I need one more anyway to bring it up to a multiple of 3 for formattings sake.
Ah, if only everything you proposed were actually codeable.
Sobieski, Jan, don't you want to do Sobieski?
Hey get out of here reality, stop ruining all my fun
To be fair, Sobieski is a major badass. And that's coming from of a champion Turkophile...
Was in his crypt yesterday, right next to his bones - sp00ky stuff.
You should see the amount of Chilean civ ideas I have come up with.
Granted though, most of them ain't actually Chile but subsections of it/indigenous groups that happen to inhabit it, but still...
And to think I only ever got up to 8 or 9 Swedens.
Lol, I just looked back at the PM to Urdnot_Scott where I compiled my wanted Norways, and realised I forgot Harald Hardråde, who might be my most wanted... that makes it 15 civs, and I could make that list larger by including i.e. Einar Gerhardsen, Harald V and loads of kings from Snorre's sagas, but I think I'll stop there.
Catherine, Peter, Nicholas, Lenin, Stalin, Nevsky, Ivan IV, Putin, Alexander II, Rurik, Boris Godunav, Vladimir the Great, Paul I. Hah-hah - beat that
Ok, well, you did, but still.
Separate names with a comma.