1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Civs discussion thread

Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall of the Greek World' started by Rhye, Aug 26, 2009.

  1. Arkaeyn

    Arkaeyn King

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Location:
    nomad, USA
    Rather than debate the merits of individual civilizations, I think that Mishto had the right idea with the map that demonstrated spaces and interactions. We have to look at a few different things when making these decisions:

    1. Which civs were historically important
    2. Which civs interacted with other civs, and when
    3. Where is there room, and where should there be room?

    The map Mishto posted included big open spaces in Asia Minor and to the east. Parthia, Pontus, Lydia, and maybe even Bactria would all fit there, if they would deserve to be in the game.

    Here's Rhye's list:


    Egypt
    Babylonia
    Phoenicia
    Hittites
    Israel
    Celts
    Athens
    Sparta
    Persia
    Macedonia
    Carthage
    Rome
    Huns
    Byzantium
    Etruria (not playable, minor nation)
    Germanic Tribes (not playable, minor nation)
    Independent (not playable, minor nation)
    Independent2 (not playable, minor nation)

    It's based on the 18-civ limit. Are we sticking with that?
     
  2. The Turk

    The Turk Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,210
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    I also wouldn't mind seeing the Celts in the game (saxons is a later term) as either a minor or playable faction
     
  3. Úmarth

    Úmarth Megalomaniac

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,184
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Erm, the Saxons weren't Celts and the Celts are in there anyway.
     
  4. The Turk

    The Turk Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,210
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    oops I didn't realize the celts were already added, so if they are already added why have the saxons? Plus you associate Saxons with the dark ages while this is more the Ancient/Classical period.
     
  5. Bonci

    Bonci King

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    752
    Location:
    Tridentum - Italia
    but 476-600 actually are dark ages...
     
  6. The Turk

    The Turk Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,210
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    But I would still have to say that its too small of a time frame. If we were going to add in the Dark Ages of Europe (which I think would be SUPER cool) then we could add the Saxons and the Muslim Caliphate at 633 AD, but since it ends so soon there is no point.
     
  7. Bonci

    Bonci King

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    752
    Location:
    Tridentum - Italia
    yeah but there are the huns so why not one or two other german "barbarian" civilizations?
     
  8. Arkaeyn

    Arkaeyn King

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Location:
    nomad, USA
    When designing a game, the question shouldn't be "why not?" so much as "why?"
     
  9. Bonci

    Bonci King

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    752
    Location:
    Tridentum - Italia
    for the same reasons why huns are in I guess :)
     
  10. Arkaeyn

    Arkaeyn King

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Location:
    nomad, USA
    The Huns came much earlier, and interacted with the other civs in the game significantly more than the Saxons did.
     
  11. Bonci

    Bonci King

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2005
    Messages:
    752
    Location:
    Tridentum - Italia
    I am not talking only about saxons...i talk about franks,goths,vandals...

    Huns according to the wikipedia entered Europe around 370 a.d.
    The Frankish confederation probably began to coalesce in the 230s.
    Goths began to migrate to the Black Sea from the mid-2nd century.
    Vandals attacked Rome for the first time in 271 a.d.
    In 441/442, Saxons are mentioned for the first time as inhabitants of Britain.
     
  12. The Turk

    The Turk Deity

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,210
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    except out of all the other "barbarian" groups (I hate calling them that) the saxons are the least known. Why should we have them instead of a bigger group like the Huns for example. The thing is that there is very limited space for civs and we can't add a minor one which only had made its mark on history towards the dark ages/ middle ages.
     
  13. Arkaeyn

    Arkaeyn King

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Location:
    nomad, USA
    The Goths are a possibility, I'd say. But I still haven't received an answer as to whether there's an intentional 18-civ cap.
     
  14. Metal Alloy Man

    Metal Alloy Man Back in Black

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    761
    That was the original idea, though you could probably convince Rhye to think about changing it.
     
  15. Omega124

    Omega124 Challenging Fate

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    7,047
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Albany, New York
    Then call them Germanic tribes. ;)

    But honestly, the Saxons were important during the fall of Rome. They were the main force behind the fall of Brittina (But they did have help with the Angles and Jutes), and ruled it for SEVEN-HUNDRED YEARS. That's longer than the actual Roman Empire! Not saying that they weren't important is like saying Persia wasn't important in Greek affairs after they tried to invade it!
     
  16. Arkaeyn

    Arkaeyn King

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Location:
    nomad, USA
    I'd be much more interested in changing the end-date. While ending at 600 CE may match up with RFC:E, it just doesn't make a lot of gameplay sense. It allows eliminating the Huns and Byzantines as well, freeing up more space in the 18-civ soft limit.
     
  17. BurnEmDown

    BurnEmDown Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    1,718
    Actually 500 AD ending date would be more matching-up.
     
  18. Omega124

    Omega124 Challenging Fate

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2008
    Messages:
    7,047
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Albany, New York
    I think making a larger DDL is easier than you guys think. The World 2009 Mod is using a 50 DDL, for a point.

    As for a hypothetical situation where we do use the Saxons, the Spawn date would be exactly 356, or turn 249 (The first usage of the word to disribe the tribe we're talking about). The game ends at Turn 300, or the year 600. This would give them exactly 51 turns to do everything.

    The Vanilla game ends at Turn 500, or 2020. This is where I have a problem. The Saxons were a lot more important then you think they are. Without them, Brittina would be left alone as none of the Germainic Tribes (This includes the Goths), Huns, or any major group had plans to attack that Island. By not including them, Rome can survive as long as they re-locate to Brittina..

    As for the "Not enough turns" debate, you could change the game to be 500 turns like the vanilla Civ and vannila RFC.
     
  19. Wessel V1

    Wessel V1 Emperor

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2007
    Messages:
    1,443
    Location:
    Hamlet south of Amsterdam
    The whole point about the 18 civ limit is that more civs increase loading times, and in RFC (GW) it increases loading times a lot. I also rather have 300 turns, since 500 turns based on one or two eras makes the game feel a bit slow, especially compared to the quick advance in RFC.
     
  20. Arkaeyn

    Arkaeyn King

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    Messages:
    936
    Location:
    nomad, USA
    Oh yes, I know that the limit helps with game speed, and I'm all for that. I was just wondering if it could go to 19 or 20 if need be. If we're sticking with 18...

    Rhye's list again:

    Egypt
    Babylonia
    Phoenicia
    Hittites
    Israel
    Celts
    Athens
    Sparta
    Persia
    Macedonia
    Carthage
    Rome
    Huns
    Byzantium

    Etruria (not playable, minor nation)
    Germanic Tribes (not playable, minor nation)
    Independent (not playable, minor nation)
    Independent2 (not playable, minor nation)​

    Here's what I'd change. By-and-large, civilizations in Civ4 and RFC are at some level expansionists. That is, they put pressure on or took over their neighbors. Most of these are, but not anywhere near all. Israel in particular stands out as a civ that should be an independent. I'd replace them with Assyria, a major power in the ancient middle east.

    Etruria, especially as unplayable, just makes so sense. Well-defended Independent (or barbarian) cities in northern Italy would accomplish the same thing. I would replace them with an unplayable Sumerian faction, to build up cities for the Babylonians, Egyptians, Hittites, Assyrians, and Persians to pick off.

    As I've said, I'd prefer an earlier end date that eliminates the need for Byzantium and the Huns. Parthia would be the most welcome addition in such a case. They take an important part of the map, and if the game works well, would be Rome's primary rival in the end-game.
     

Share This Page