Thenewwwguy
Emperor
- Joined
- May 12, 2020
- Messages
- 1,507
I was excited for Scythia when they were announced, but their city list is such a mess--and the Scythians weren't really a single people. I think their role as "playable barbarians" could be better filled by Parthia, which has a city list as well as better-attested leaders
I’m guessing the main limiting factor from Parthia being in game is them, alongside the Sassanids, Seleucids and Medians is that pre-islamic Iran is blobbed into ‘Persia’ with the Achaemenid leader.
True, I suppose we could have one of each alongside Persia, theoretically and ideally. If we get the Timurid Gurkhani, I suppose we would have both.That's a modern development; historically Central Asia was overwhelmingly Iranian. Tajikistan and Afghanistan still are.
Side note—found out recently that the Gurkhani is also what the mughals called themselves, so if people wanted to theoretically represent both the Mughals and Timurids under one civ without overlapping cities too much into India’s city list, we could have Babur, Akbar or Timur leading the Gurkhani (For akbar, they could add Fatehpur Sikri into the city list and then use mainly central asian timurid cities for the city list)
Indeed. Chiefly I'm saying I'd like Parthia to take Scythia's place as the "ancient Eurasian steppe horse raider civ," but I'd love to see Central Asia get some love.
Agreed.