The people in the groups you mentioned form their own isolated groups within India (especially Muslims-- see Pakistan vs India conflicts). The fact that they really do not fit well into the larger India really just backs up my point.
Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
- Status
The people in the groups you mentioned form their own isolated groups within India (especially Muslims-- see Pakistan vs India conflicts). The fact that they really do not fit well into the larger India really just backs up my point.
fireclaw722
Imperial Guard
Hinduism is included for historicity of the Indian UHV(found Hinduism and Buddhism), and if there was another Islam then it would create some balance issues with the Indian UHV(either too easy or too hard). Most things are the way they are for Balance reasons, but I agree with you, to a point, that RFCDawn is becoming slightly eurocentered(but RFC was sorta that way to begin with), but it is very much playable, and is not in the slightest-bit cluttered(unless compared to vanilla BTS).
Well, first, it's you who has a nationalistic perspective if you associate what I'm doing with where I'm from - just to get that straight.
Anyway, the reason for what I'm doing here is rather to include the civilizations that are included in BtS into RFC, including the HRE civilization, and that in a both playable and historical manner. That's the reason why no one's talking about splitting China up into dynasties. I'm convinced it's possible to make that happen without overcrowding Europe too much - Italy replacing respawned Rome, Prussia replacing/marginalizing HRE, Turkey replacing Byzantium.
If you have any specific suggestions about what to do about the situation outside of Europe, go ahead.
I've already thought the same as you about Hinduism (it being a religion comparable to Greek polytheism), but it's so integral for India's flavour and UHV that I decided to keep it.
The difference between Neo-Confucianism and Confucianism itself seems too marginal to reflect that. Taoism vs. Confucianism has been discussed at length here already.
The only civ that historically was Shi'ite would be respawned Persia, so I'm not sure what the point would be with this.
I just think it's kinda silly when you are playing in Europe with an ancient civ and then from the dirt pops Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Netherlands, Vikings, and France. I can't help but think adding Italy to that mix will only make it worse.
I understand having Hinduism for historicity, but I grudge Sid for including it (and Taoism and Confucianism) as religions in Vanilla. I would be more pleased if Hinduism were a late-game religion founded by Nationalism.
As for the UHV issue, I think the 5 religions criterion just needs to be removed all together. It basically disables India from being able to defend itself and focus only on boring religion techs. That is really not historical. India didn't sit around trying to invent religions. It just happened. What is historical is India developing a very strong military tradition as it attempted to unify the subcontintent and fight off invaders (Greeks, Persians, Mongols, Arabs, Turks... you name it).
A more interesting thing for UHV would be for India to found Hinduism/Buddhism and to keep out everything else until the industrial era. That would be a lot more doable and very unique.
I understand having Hinduism for historicity, but I grudge Sid for including it (and Taoism and Confucianism) as religions in Vanilla. I would be more pleased if Hinduism were a late-game religion founded by Nationalism.
As for the UHV issue, I think the 5 religions criterion just needs to be removed all together. It basically disables India from being able to defend itself and focus only on boring religion techs. That is really not historical. India didn't sit around trying to invent religions. It just happened. What is historical is India developing a very strong military tradition as it attempted to unify the subcontintent and fight off invaders (Greeks, Persians, Mongols, Arabs, Turks... you name it).
A more interesting thing for UHV would be for India to found Hinduism/Buddhism and to keep out everything else until the industrial era. That would be a lot more doable and very unique.
The difference is that Neo-Confucianism synthesizes Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism (the big 3 in Chinese history) and allows for Taoism to be replaced, since Taoism has little historical significance outside the role it plays in shaping the Neo-Confucian thought that dominated China until the 1930s. Standalone Taoist religion is kind of silly, and I think Sid did not do his homework when he included it.
Even if you don't use Shia, you could turn Taoism into Orthodox Christianity, which would be important for Russia, Byzantium, and even Mongols. Even if you do not include Byzantium as a playable civ, it has a major presence at the start of the 600AD scenario and could be filled with Orthodox cities that would screw with Turkish/Arab stability while also preventing the Roman Church from profiting off those lands.
edit:
Also, any plans to add Sitting Bull and Native Americans? Currently no one spawns in the Northeastern US/Canada region around the Great Lakes, and that could be a good site. It would make things more interesting for colonists and spawning Americans, since the Aztecs and Incas typically just sit and rot and pose no threat due to barbarian attacks and the Inca being geographically locked.
KMRblue1027
Deity
Oh ya I forgot to ask is Byzantium allowed to respawn wit nationalism?
jammerculture
Prince
For what it's worth, the addition of Italy really added to the European theatre, not took away from it. I can't wait for HRE.
As far as the game being Eurocentric, and the accusation that people's nationalities are influencing they way they view this game, I'd suggest you tone down your rhetoric a little bit. Currently, the game situation for India and china, imo, adds to the game as it creates new possibilities for game situations. If you want to play an empire building type game where you have lots of pressure form your neighbors etc, you play in Europe. If you want to play a peaceful builder, or culture based game you play as an Asian civ. Granted, this stems from a stereotypical view of the east that is prevalent in the west, but guess what, that's where the game was developed and being modded from. I would hazard to guess that this stems from the people involved using what they know, rather then any kind of bias. As well, if the game had the same detail world wide that it does in Europe, then it would be impossibly large and not much fun to play imo, as all civs would be basically the same.
Keep in mind that this is a mod of a mod of a game, which basically set out the parameters of what types of games each civ would be good at. From day one, India was designed to be a "spiritual" civ for example.
Maybe you should check out RFC Asia and Sword of Islam, which incorporate some of the ideas you are talking about, as they are microscopic games in those regions you speak of.
As far as the game being Eurocentric, and the accusation that people's nationalities are influencing they way they view this game, I'd suggest you tone down your rhetoric a little bit. Currently, the game situation for India and china, imo, adds to the game as it creates new possibilities for game situations. If you want to play an empire building type game where you have lots of pressure form your neighbors etc, you play in Europe. If you want to play a peaceful builder, or culture based game you play as an Asian civ. Granted, this stems from a stereotypical view of the east that is prevalent in the west, but guess what, that's where the game was developed and being modded from. I would hazard to guess that this stems from the people involved using what they know, rather then any kind of bias. As well, if the game had the same detail world wide that it does in Europe, then it would be impossibly large and not much fun to play imo, as all civs would be basically the same.
Keep in mind that this is a mod of a mod of a game, which basically set out the parameters of what types of games each civ would be good at. From day one, India was designed to be a "spiritual" civ for example.
Maybe you should check out RFC Asia and Sword of Islam, which incorporate some of the ideas you are talking about, as they are microscopic games in those regions you speak of.
Overall I really like Penco's ideas, but the problem is that, Leoreth has had to sacrifice historical accuracy with gameplay balancing, which is something which takes a priority. If you remove Hinduism from India, than you remove their religion, and they'll become Buddhist for the rest of the game, which would be correct for the Mauryan Empire, but would look awkward after that. I would suggest therefore, that you have the Indians spawn in Varanasi, so you can have Buddhism and Hinduism spawn in a more historical spot (rather than in Delhi, which makes no sense). I would also recommend that Islam sweeps through Northern India towards the 13th century (or so).
@Leoreth
As for Shi'ite Islam, it could also be an option for the Egyptians (Fatimids), and even possibly the Mongols (if they reach Persia). But I understand that it would still have a minimal impact, therefore as Penco suggested I believe adding Orthodox Christianity should be your next best bet, as it makes the most sense to add, considering that the Catholic Church was not controlling the lands of Byzantium (which will be playable) nor Russia.
Also as for Taoism vs. Confucianism, to be fair, both you and me know that the only reason you added Taoism instead of Confucianism was because you used the base of that other guys mod (I forgot his name
), and because you were too busy working on other aspects of the mod. So could you please reach this compromise, and change it to Ne-Confucianism, something which I did not think of before? Because Ne-Confucianism is something that spread THROUGHOUT Eastern Asia, (ex. Mongolia, Korea, Japan, Vietnam). So will you please change it this time 
PS.
@Penco
Like stated earlier, since you have such a love for Asian history, I recommend you try out Sword of Islam or RFC Asia, which integrate all sorts of different Asian religions.
PPS.
If you want to get rid of unhistorical unified Italy in the Renaissance period, do what I did and you can stop the Italians from spawning then, and have them spawn in the 19th century like they historically did. It allows for a German or French Medieval Italy, which makes the most sense.
@Leoreth
As for Shi'ite Islam, it could also be an option for the Egyptians (Fatimids), and even possibly the Mongols (if they reach Persia). But I understand that it would still have a minimal impact, therefore as Penco suggested I believe adding Orthodox Christianity should be your next best bet, as it makes the most sense to add, considering that the Catholic Church was not controlling the lands of Byzantium (which will be playable) nor Russia.
Also as for Taoism vs. Confucianism, to be fair, both you and me know that the only reason you added Taoism instead of Confucianism was because you used the base of that other guys mod (I forgot his name
), and because you were too busy working on other aspects of the mod. So could you please reach this compromise, and change it to Ne-Confucianism, something which I did not think of before? Because Ne-Confucianism is something that spread THROUGHOUT Eastern Asia, (ex. Mongolia, Korea, Japan, Vietnam). So will you please change it this time PS.
@Penco
Like stated earlier, since you have such a love for Asian history, I recommend you try out Sword of Islam or RFC Asia, which integrate all sorts of different Asian religions.
PPS.
If you want to get rid of unhistorical unified Italy in the Renaissance period, do what I did and you can stop the Italians from spawning then, and have them spawn in the 19th century like they historically did. It allows for a German or French Medieval Italy, which makes the most sense.
I apologize for the nationalist accusations-- I just got a bad taste from the Civ community before Civ 5 launch when everyone was into the "Why isn't my home civ in the game???" craze. I take it back.
There's another option concerning Indian religions. You added Zoroastrianism, correct? You could really combine Zoroastrianism and Hinduism into one called Vedic Religion, Aryan Veda, or Vedanta. Anthropologists have determined that Zoroastrianism and Hinduism (and for that matter Greek pantheism) both have a common root in the religions of the Indo-European Aryans. Both Zoro and Indian Veda are centered around fire sacrifice, and some of the deities/guardian spirits have shared name roots. It is also likely that the same ethnic who settled Persia also conquered the native Cholas of India.
There's enough in common to justify them sharing this religion. Plus, calling it Veda is a lot more historically accurate for classical India than "Hinduism". This allows India to have its early flavor/UHV religion. For the late game when the name Hindu is actually appropriate, a historical India should be running the Free Religion civic anyway, making the problem moot.
More historical info, if you care. Much of classical Indian religion such as the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita come from a synthesis between the Vedic religion and the two dominant strands of classical Buddhist philosophy, Mahayana and Theravada. If India in-game has a combo of Buddhish and Vedic Religion during the classical/medieval period, this would be a pretty good historical representation of the philosophy that spawned what we now call Hinduism.
There's another option concerning Indian religions. You added Zoroastrianism, correct? You could really combine Zoroastrianism and Hinduism into one called Vedic Religion, Aryan Veda, or Vedanta. Anthropologists have determined that Zoroastrianism and Hinduism (and for that matter Greek pantheism) both have a common root in the religions of the Indo-European Aryans. Both Zoro and Indian Veda are centered around fire sacrifice, and some of the deities/guardian spirits have shared name roots. It is also likely that the same ethnic who settled Persia also conquered the native Cholas of India.
There's enough in common to justify them sharing this religion. Plus, calling it Veda is a lot more historically accurate for classical India than "Hinduism". This allows India to have its early flavor/UHV religion. For the late game when the name Hindu is actually appropriate, a historical India should be running the Free Religion civic anyway, making the problem moot.
More historical info, if you care. Much of classical Indian religion such as the Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita come from a synthesis between the Vedic religion and the two dominant strands of classical Buddhist philosophy, Mahayana and Theravada. If India in-game has a combo of Buddhish and Vedic Religion during the classical/medieval period, this would be a pretty good historical representation of the philosophy that spawned what we now call Hinduism.
Sir Tornado
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2011
- Messages
- 13
This is not entirely correct. Specifically these points:
- The word "Hindu" is derived from Sindhu river, with which Indian civilisation was associated during it's beginnings. The word "Hind" that you say is used to refer to geographic location of India actually comes from the word "Hindustan", which was Persian (or Arabic, I forget which) for "land of Hindus". It is exactly opposite to what you say.
- Hinduism was not formed in 19th century. There have been kingdoms in 17th century (Maratha empire) founded specifically as "Hindu kingdoms" in what was then (politically) Muslim dominated Indian subcontinent.
- The subcategories (shiva worship/vishnu worship) are various schools of hinduism. I wouldn't go on and call then schism, just different thoughts about religion. Generally, these divisions aren't too serious. The central beliefs of hinduism for all these schools is usually uniform.
- Partition of India is a very complex event due to various factors, most related to religion, some not... but one point, Nepal is actually a hindu nation and it's existence had nothing to do with partition of India for the reason that it was never actually a part of British India (it was a vassal of Britain). The main reason for split of Pakistan from India was that it was Muslim dominated area.
- Hinduism does not seek to make converts (well, some fundamentalist Hindu organisations do seek to make converts, but that's besides the point) because one of the beliefs of Hinduism is, that Hinduism is not the only path to enlightenment, it is only one of the paths to enlightenment. FWIW, Buddhism doesn't aggressively seek to convert people either (for exactly the same reason). It's spread in East Asia was due to Mauryan Empire's dominance and because it is/was a damn good religion with attractive teachings and philosophy. One of the common threads that links both these religions incidentally (due to the fact that Buddhism has roots in Hinduism) is that both these religions seek "enlightenment" rather than "salvation". Actually quite a few eastern religions have this aspect which explains why they do not aggressively seek converts.
And weaken middle east even more? It can't be good from game balance pov...
5 religions is very hard, yes, especially after addition of protestantism. But this UHV would be very unhistorical rather than historical because just about everyone and their vassal invaded India throughout the last two millennia...
I think current Italy represents Italian civilisation rather than Italian nation. It works pretty well for game balance (and I just love their UP). And it serves to keep Rome out of German/French hands (Rome was never controlled by Germany or France)
Ed: Leoreth, can you include Venice in Italian flip zone? Right now, if Germany captures it before Italy spawn, it does not flip. That city can be defended very easily so all Germany has to do is to build culture there and Italy is permanently crippled once you get their Iron in your borders.
The only ancient civ that should be bothered with it is Rome, and they won't have any problems with Italy because they're a respawn of themselves. Everyone else who has overextended into these areas had it coming
You forgot Poland
Seriously, one thing we also should consider is that the game should seek to provide as many different challenges as possible. India is unique in its religion-related UHV, and turning it into just another military centered one would take something away from the game. I know that Firaxis approach of India = spiritual and Rhye's interpretation of India = religionmonger isn't very historical, but if you want to have a civilization with a religion based challenge, it still fits India best imo.
It would, were the AI more keen on conquering/converting Indian cities. Sadly, it isn't.
My approval is growing towards this change
Honestly, I don't think the Native Americans (especially the great plains indians the BtS native americans seem to represent) are a civilization in the context of this game. They lack urbanization and central organization to make this believable. Like the Celts and Zulus, I think they're better off represented as minor factions.
Spawn in Varanasi and possible capital switch to Delhi has its points, but India is so dependent on micromanagement to be doable that it will be a lot to test to see if it works out ...
Everything's fine then
Interesting ...
It is supposed to be within the flip zone, and in my various test games it always flipped no matter if independent or German controlled. Can you post an autosave of before it happened?
Sir Tornado
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2011
- Messages
- 13
Here it is, 1 turn before Italy spawn
View attachment Bismarck AD-1160 Turn 237.CivBeyondSwordSave
BTW, I am using your last full release, not the release you made on SVN.
ed: Also, I did not actually capture Venice in this game. France captured it, and then because it got sandwiched between cultural boundaries of Vienna and Rome decided to gift it to me. Will this affect the flip?
ed2: In the above save, if you switch over to Italy then Venice flips. If you don't then it doesn't...
You got me on the linguistic point. I contest the Maratha empire Hinduism idea though. In that context, Hindu simply meant "not Muslim," which is just as much an ethnic and cultural designation than an explicitly religious one. Another example of my statement that Hinduism is sort of a reactionist nationalistic term that did not exist until outsiders arrived. You see a similar phenomenon in Japan. When Buddhism spread into Japan in the 600s-700s, as an act of cultural defiance, Japanese conservatives invented the term "Shinto" that grouped together a bunch of beliefs and stories that were previously barely related.
I don't consider Shinto a religion in the same sense of Buddhism or Christianity because it is reactionary and defines itself mainly in opposition to other things. Shinto mainly was just anti-Chinese anti-Buddhist Japanese conservatism. Hinduism in the Maratha empire was just anti-Muslim anti-Arab Indian conservatism. Later on it added anti-European and to a lesser extent anti-Christian to that mix.
Contrast that with Christianity, which from its earliest times had a very substantial and explicit set of beliefs that stood apart from the general culture surrounding it. Same with Buddhism.
Around 800 AD Shankara and contemporaries synthesized a whole bunch of traditions such as Veda, Upanishads, Buddhist influences, Mahabharata, etc and created the Advaita Vedanta school of philosophy. This is the school that says "Atman (self) is Brahman(God/Ultimate Reality)" and that all the gods are really the same. Europeans became a bit obsessed with that school of philosophy because it is the most universal and world-religion-esque Hindu philosophical school they could find. However, it is just ONE small tradition among many. I would guess most people who worship a Hindu god do not have a notion in the back of their mind that all the gods are Brahman. They really are just worshiping different gods. I wouldn't even call it a schism because there was no single unity there to split in the first place. They are just different.
Early medieval philosophy was a time of synthesis experiments. We see this with Advaita Vedanta in India, Neo-Confucianism in China, St. Thomas a bit later in Europe (putting together the Bible, Roman Law, and Aristotelian and Neo-Platonic philosophy), Moses Maimonides in Jewish society, and Avicenna in Islam.
Although these schools were influential, it would be erroneous to equate the ingredients of the synthesis with the result of the synthesis. Plus in most cases (except maybe with St. Thomas) the syncretisms never really went mainstream.
Buddhism continued spreading long after the Mauryan Empire into the rest of East Asia, especially Japan and parts of China. It even had a revival in the USA in the 1960s. It has a universal appeal that Hinduism does not, except in a few texts like the Gita. And Mahayana Buddhists did actively seek to make converts to spread enlightenment to the whole world. That's the whole mission of Mahayana.
Not any more unhistorical than India founding Confucianism or Christianity. UHV 3 for most civs is some sort of non-historical challenge condition. I don't see why keeping spiritual integrity is more non-historical than founding western religions.
Fun discussion! Haven't had this much fun since college.
I definitely think though, that this whole "Found 5 Religions" UHV is crap, and it was just added because it was easy to add. In reality though, I would prefer it, so that India already has some independent Kingdoms to conquer, (especially in 600 AD start). But there definitely should be a UHV change, as it not at ALL adequate.
civ-addicted
King
@The Turk: Don't take it bad, but i somehow get the feeling that you didn't enjoyed playing RFC at all...
Show some love. The UHVs aren't that bad. Look at RFCE, 3miro said that their UHVs are bad, because they follow a certain pattern:
1. Own X cities in A, Y cities in B, Z cities in C etc. by a certain date
2. do something historical in those cities.
3. Do something ahistorical in those cities.
If you want to have that, fine. But it's the exact opposite of what i call "fun to do"
And who the hell started the rumor of "2 historical, 1 ahistorical UHVs"? France only has historical UHVs, while Germany only has ahistorical UHVs. India has two ahistorical UHVs and so does Japan. The above pattern only applies for some civs...There is really no need to narrow yourself in choosing UHVs.
Show some love. The UHVs aren't that bad. Look at RFCE, 3miro said that their UHVs are bad, because they follow a certain pattern:
1. Own X cities in A, Y cities in B, Z cities in C etc. by a certain date
2. do something historical in those cities.
3. Do something ahistorical in those cities.
If you want to have that, fine. But it's the exact opposite of what i call "fun to do"
And who the hell started the rumor of "2 historical, 1 ahistorical UHVs"? France only has historical UHVs, while Germany only has ahistorical UHVs. India has two ahistorical UHVs and so does Japan. The above pattern only applies for some civs...There is really no need to narrow yourself in choosing UHVs.
I don't hate RFC, heck when RFC first came out, I thought it was the sh*t, but now, RFC can't compare to the new modmods that are sprouting out of it. It makes me mad because Rhye could have taken RFC to a WHOLE new level. But overall no, I don't hate RFC, I even play the occasional game on it, becaues I have VD units which makes ANY game much more enjoyable (still waiting for Leoreth to include VD untis *AHEM* *AHEM*)
Yes I know, RFC Europe has a lot of potential, but for some reason (and I believe its a lack of modders and vision), the creators of the mod, do not wish to advance on it, which really sucks. And yes I agree some of the UHV's are bad. Just as bad as India's "Find 5 religions" UHV.
THANK YOU!!
Yes, who did start the STUPID STUPID rumour! You can have all three historical UHV's, and STILL have a great game in my opinion. Heck look at SoI, where most of the civilizations UHV's are historical. It comes down to the fact that "Did the civilization aspire to complete this goal?". So did the Indians aspire or even come close to discovering "5 religions" no, so it can change. Just think about it..., the RFC German UHV's make sense, because Hitler DID have the intention of conquering Russia and England, it makes sense, even if it was never accomplished.
civ-addicted
King
THANK YOU!!
Yes, who did start the STUPID STUPID rumour! You can have all three historical UHV's, and STILL have a great game in my opinion. Heck look at SoI, where most of the civilizations UHV's are historical. It comes down to the fact that "Did the civilization aspire to complete this goal?". So did the Indians aspire or even come close to discovering "5 religions" no, so it can change. Just think about it..., the RFC German UHV's make sense, because Hitler DID have the intention of conquering Russia and England, it makes sense, even if it was never accomplished.
That's...not...exactly what i was trying to say. India's UHV are interesting and unique = Fon to due. I heard a lot of people complaining about India, but what are the alternatives? Independants to conquer: Persia has that. India was terribly rich, but accumulating gold: Mali has that. Culture: Egypt. Avoiding europeans: Aztecs, Inka and Ethiopia has that. Why copy another civ's unique historical victories if you got existing ones that are just fine? Makes no sense to me.
Wait wait wait.... now I'm confused about what your talking about. So your saying your happy with India's goals? I rather have a repeat of certain goals, but in a new setting. IMO asking the Spanish to conquer the Aztecs and Incas is not the same as asking the Germans to conquer France, Italy and Greece. They just don't coincide with each other at all. So coming up with a new UHV for the Indian's would be good, because their current UHV of finding religions is crap.
Anyway, this is all small talk, since Leoreth is busy doing something else other than modding..........
Spoiler :
I would still like to test out Aachen as the German capital and Varanasi as the new Indian capital. But first things first, can ANYONE tell me where you think, Aachen and Krakow should be placed on a map? This will help me A LOT in trying to help Leoreth balance. So if anyone could give me the coordinates for the two cities that would be the best! IIRC someone said they used to build Aachen all the time, so if that person could tell me what the coordinates are, then that would help me a lot.
As for Varanasi, I will figure out the coordinates for that myself.
EDIT: @Opera
Sorry didn't see your post. Yes finally RFCE is back on track, but I they are fixing bugs/balancing issues, than actually adding in new content, which the mod could be rife with (if they wanted). Just think of all the events, barbarian invasions and civilization in general, that are missing, and that could really help the mod. Also I really don't like a lot of RFCE UHV's or UP's in general. BUT... that does not mean I don't like playing it, and yes I continue to update the versions for RFCE, its just that I refuse to participate TOO much, because every time I give a suggestion on how to make the Muslim factions more accurate or dynamic for the game, I'm labelled as an Islamic Extremist/Fundamentalist...
anyway, I rather put my time into mods that actually take my suggestions such as this one, among many others. Spoiler :
civ-addicted
King
Wait wait wait.... now I'm confused about what your talking about. So your saying your happy with India's goals? I rather have a repeat of certain goals, but in a new setting. IMO asking the Spanish to conquer the Aztecs and Incas is not the same as asking the Germans to conquer France, Italy and Greece. They just don't coincide with each other at all. So coming up with a new UHV for the Indian's would be good, because their current UHV of finding religions is crap.
Anyway, this is all small talk, since Leoreth is busy doing something else other than modding..........
Spoiler :
I would still like to test out Aachen as the German capital and Varanasi as the new Indian capital. But first things first, can ANYONE tell me where you think, Aachen and Krakow should be placed on a map? This will help me A LOT in trying to help Leoreth balance. So if anyone could give me the coordinates for the two cities that would be the best! IIRC someone said they used to build Aachen all the time, so if that person could tell me what the coordinates are, then that would help me a lot.
As for Varanasi, I will figure out the coordinates for that myself.
It's not Blasphemy. It's Sparta.
I was trying to say that you shouldn't make stupid rules narrow your creativity. And translating a wikipedia article into CIV isn't all too creative, i'm afraid.
Aachen is (57, 51); 2 tiles south of Amsterdam. The dutch and french flip-zone should be reduced. Varanasi either (93, 39) or (94, 39), whatever you like better. Make sure to remove the jungle, though. Krakow would be at (64, 51); it's hard to tell because central europe is deformed.
@Opera: I'm looking what RFCE is up to. But adding provinces won't make it an excellent mod. Maybe i'll play it again someday when it's worth it again.
- Status
