Culturally Linked Civs?

[King Kalmah]

I just wanted to ask if anyone else was curious about culturally linked starting points for Civs of similar backgrounds?

Like how in Civ3 European Civs would be closer to each other.Or Japan and China would be nieghbors or what not.I think it would improve on realism WITHOUT taking anything away from gameplay.

Like if city states like Venice pop up near Rome or Greece.

Or if the Vikings get nieghbors like the Russians or Germans

I know its all up in the air...

 

[Churchill's Hat]

It would take away from gameplay. You'd know roughly what your neighbors would be like, games would seem repetitive because you'd always see the same people with the same other people. Plus, somebody will make an earth map mod.

 

[Craxymaxy]

Maybe it would be nice as an option you could chose

Something like "realistic cultural regions" or something

 

[bonafide11]

It would take away from gameplay. You'd know roughly what your neighbors would be like, games would seem repetitive because you'd always see the same people with the same other people. Plus, somebody will make an earth map mod.

Exactly. Why would you always want to have the same neighbor? The fun thing about Civ is that it has so much variety and every game is different.

 

[Snoopaloop]

Wasn't it an option in civ3? ...not a standard part of gameplay

 

[mechaerik]

It wouldn't be bad as a game option, but not as a standard gameplay concept.

 

[awesome]

It would take away from gameplay. You'd know roughly what your neighbors would be like, games would seem repetitive because you'd always see the same people with the same other people. Plus, somebody will make an earth map mod.

let's hope the earth map comes standard and we don't have to wait for a mod. that'd be lame.

 

[King Kalmah]

I didn't mean it had to be same nieghbor always.Cause that would get old fast,but doesn't anyone else think that the Japanese starting next to the aztecs is a little funky?

And yes maybe not a standard feature,but an optional feature would be cool...

 

[orinsul]

It'd be a great gameplay function as itd stop me having to go into the world builder and re-arrange all the other civs onto logical continents and spoil the mystery of the map. ended up beside the aztecs and having your sister civ on a foreign continent is damned annoying.

 

[King Kalmah]

It'd be a great gameplay function as itd stop me having to go into the world builder and re-arrange all the other civs onto logical continents and spoil the mystery of the map. ended up beside the aztecs and having your sister civ on a foreign continent is damned annoying.

I didn't think I had to say it,but I knew i wasn't alone...nine times out of ten I go into the world build and arrange things semi culturally.

I just find it so odd to see Mali next to the Koreans or Russia next to the Mayans or America next to India...

Some times its fun,but a change in pace is always welcomed be it historical or not....

 

[Willem]

but doesn't anyone else think that the Japanese starting next to the aztecs is a little funky?

Not at all , it adds variety. Civ is not a historical simulator so there's absolutely no reason why that kind of situation can occur. If it were an option, I would just turn it off, like I did in Civ 3. If it were standard I would be annoyed.

 

[alanthreonus]

I don't understand why people think it's weird when certain civs start near each other. Civ is supposed to be about alternate histories, not real history.

 

[frekk]

Not really too interested in culturally linked civs, but it would be cool if civs started in the right climate zones.

 

[Wolle68]

Not really too interested in culturally linked civs, but it would be cool if civs started in the right climate zones.

This.

That way they can give advantages to a civilization based on terrain (aztec UU moving faster through jungle) without risking to nerf the civ based on starting location.

We'd also get rid of camel archers in the tundra.

 

[Tomice]

There are mods for civ4 giving you these functions, and I do use "culturally linked starts". But it doesn't work too well, you don't get rid of all the oddities. Maybe they didn't want it as standard feature in Civ4 because it's hard to program and often fails in human perception (although the routine worked properly).

But yes, I'd like both functions as option, no need to force it on everyone.

 

[Koning]

It wouldn't be bad as a game option, but not as a standard gameplay concept.

Totally agree.

 

[Willowmound]

I want this. It was an option in Civ 3. I say, give it to those who want it. If you don't like it, don't tick the box.

In Civ 3 it only worked some of the time, however. For instance, it didn't seem to take oceans into consideration.

 

[Danger Bird]

I don't understand why people think it's weird when certain civs start near each other. Civ is supposed to be about alternate histories, not real history.

We all want alternate histories. No one (that I know of) plays a game so as to replicate real history exactly.

But alternate histories have to be somewhat plausible to be interesting. E.g. 'Persians not being defeated by the Arabians', 'Turkey (Ottomans) taking over Europe', 'Aztecs fighting off the Europeans', 'East Asian civs colonising the whole world', etc. <-- These are alternate histories.

But 'tropical archipelago Mongols', 'Indians who aren't Indian (i.e. Hindu)', 'Germans/Maya on one continent and Dutch/Inca on another', etc. <-- These are not alternate histories.

These are nonsensical, and by that I mean: the Mongols wouldn't be Mongols if they were't plains-dwellers with horses, the Indians wouldn't be Indian if they weren't Hindu, the Dutch and Germans wouldn't be so similar (not just appearance, but late UUs, UBs, etc.) if they weren't near each other.

So, I think culturally-linked starting locations would help to create some great alternate histories, which sadly very rarely occur in random games.

But, sure, I agree it should be an option. We don't have to force plausibility on everyone.

 

[alanthreonus]

We all want alternate histories. No one (that I know of) plays a game so as to replicate real history exactly.

But alternate histories have to be somewhat plausible to be interesting. E.g. 'Persians not being defeated by the Arabians', 'Turkey (Ottomans) taking over Europe', 'Aztecs fighting off the Europeans', 'East Asian civs colonising the whole world', etc. <-- These are alternate histories.

But 'tropical archipelago Mongols', 'Indians who aren't Indian (i.e. Hindu)', 'Germans/Maya on one continent and Dutch/Inca on another', etc. <-- These are not alternate histories.

These are nonsensical, and by that I mean: the Mongols wouldn't be Mongols if they were't plains-dwellers with horses, the Indians wouldn't be Indian if they weren't Hindu, the Dutch and Germans wouldn't be so similar (not just appearance, but late UUs, UBs, etc.) if they weren't near each other.

So, I think culturally-linked starting locations would help to create some great alternate histories, which sadly very rarely occur in random games.

But, sure, I agree it should be an option. We don't have to force plausibility on everyone.

Think about it this way: You're trying to see how would the Mongols be different if they lived on a tropical archipelago or if the Indians hadn't founded Hinduism?

It seems like if someone wants culturally linked civs they should just play an Earth map, because random maps are obviously not Earth, so it doesn't even make sense to say it's unrealistic for the Dutch and Inca to be on the same continent.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

I definitely enjoyed it as an option in Civ3, and as others have said it should return as an option for those of us who want it.

Someone created a similar mod for Civ4, however it modified the DLL and therefore I've never been able to have integrated with the other mods I use unfortunately.