I was referring more to the name itself. Manifest Destiny enthusiasts favored colonialism as long as it wasn't called as such. 
Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
- Status
fireclaw722
Imperial Guard
Yeah, look at the "liberation" of Cuba, during the Sp-Am War(or before rather) the United States's President had a brilliant idea to buy Cuba from Spain, and try to get it joined in as a state. See the Ostend Manifesto.
Edit: When I came back to add a link I realized that the Ostend Manifesto was long before the Sp-Am war.
Edit: When I came back to add a link I realized that the Ostend Manifesto was long before the Sp-Am war.
Hitities or Poland are interesting choices but a Moorish Civ is really needed. An empty Maghrib in the beignning of the game(600 ad) looks unrealistic. And the Arabs dont settle that land until late 1300 ad and even when they do they dont settle important cities like Tunis and Algiers (usually settled by france).
The Moors should not start in Iberia because it is already overcrowded and would mess with Spain. I thnk they should start in either in Fez, Al-Rabat or Marrakesh. They should probably spawn in 900 ad; this was around the time the Berber Zirid Dynasty broke away from a central Caliphate. Due to their short history and the little space available in Europe; i dont think we can have a Cordoban Caliphate. And for the people that dont want Moors to mess up Spain; a weak independed Morrocon kingdom shouldnt be problem for Spain as it would be confined to North Africa but on the other hand it would be interesting to have a jihad or reconquista especially since there are no Crusades
The Moors should not start in Iberia because it is already overcrowded and would mess with Spain. I thnk they should start in either in Fez, Al-Rabat or Marrakesh. They should probably spawn in 900 ad; this was around the time the Berber Zirid Dynasty broke away from a central Caliphate. Due to their short history and the little space available in Europe; i dont think we can have a Cordoban Caliphate. And for the people that dont want Moors to mess up Spain; a weak independed Morrocon kingdom shouldnt be problem for Spain as it would be confined to North Africa but on the other hand it would be interesting to have a jihad or reconquista especially since there are no Crusades
I disagree with your Moor idea. The best way to implement them would be to push back the Spanish spawn till 1085, when King Alfonso VI conquered Toledo, therefore allowing Toledo to become the Spanish capital (later in the 16th-17th century Toledo's name can be replaced with Madrid, like Edo becoming Tokyo). And therefore we should also push back the Portuguese spawn, therefore allowing the "native" Moors to spawn in 711 AD when Tariq ibn Ziyad invaded Spain from the Visigoths. To make up for this both the Portuguese and the Spanish will start off with extra units/techs, to make them a bit more buff allowing them to start exploring the New World instantly (well almost). Basically once the Spanish spawn, the Moors will be slowly beat back to Morocco, where they will stay, until conquered by the Spanish/French/Portuguese. Therefore good placement of cities in North Africa is important. For example we could have Fez and Marrakesh, those two would be good for Morocco.
As for Poland, it can be represented by two heavily defended cities (both militarily and culturally), one Krakow and perhaps another one Warsaw? I'm not sure. But there definitely should be some presence of a Eastern European civ OTHER than Russia.
PS. A heavily independent Christian Santiago in the North West of the peninsula would be a good idea, so that the Moors don't capture EVERYTHING. And if the Muslim Moors could even challenge the French, that would be great!
As for Poland, it can be represented by two heavily defended cities (both militarily and culturally), one Krakow and perhaps another one Warsaw? I'm not sure. But there definitely should be some presence of a Eastern European civ OTHER than Russia.
PS. A heavily independent Christian Santiago in the North West of the peninsula would be a good idea, so that the Moors don't capture EVERYTHING. And if the Muslim Moors could even challenge the French, that would be great!
fireclaw722
Imperial Guard
As to the topic of a new minor civ, I'd say that a moorish/islamic N. Africa should start in Spain(at beginning of 600AD start), and then be pushed out of Spain when it spawns(through flips). This would also be good to see a later Spanish start, and a bigger start for Spain and Portugal both. They should start with some sort of a plus toward the Arabs, as they were both largely Muslim, and also would require Islam to be founded before Arabia's spawn and would have to flip to Arabia.
Wow wow wow, the Moors would not flip to the Arabs, the Arabs would have to conquer it on their own time. The Moors also would not spawn in 600 AD as that would make no sense. They have to spawn in 711 with Fez and Southern Spain at their command. Let them expand a little then in 1085 Toledo (one of their cities) its flipped to the Spanish spawn, and the Spanish will drive them out, with the help of Tech/military bonuses'
Just read my comment below for extra details.
Just read my comment below for extra details.
Turk I totally agree with u on the moors starting in 711 ad; i metioned 900 ad becuz i though ppl wont like 700 ad idea. But I dont like the Moors starting in Iberia becuz:
1. Moors were from North Africa and the reason i want moors is to fill North Africa
2. Europe is too crowded
3. Cities like Tunis, Fez, Al Jazair are just as important as Cordoba and Toledo if not more important.
I think the moors should not have settlers but have cities spawn like they did with the celts. Ai is not good at choosing cities. Moors cans span with 3 cities in Africa and 2 in Iberia.
IN N. Africa they can have any 3 of these cities: Rabat, Marrakesh, Fez, Al- Jazier, Tunis, Oran
In Iberia they should have 2 cities that were not only important at the time but were also important later under spainish and Portugese rule. Maybe from on of these cites: Toledo(name changed to Madrid later), Valancia, Barcelona, Cordoba, Libson.
Even though five is alot maybe we can balance it by placing restrictions on moorish military and research
Totally on a side note (if u guys like it)
Moors as a minor faction should be a must but I wud really like them to be added as a playable faction maybe like a rebirth of carthage with everything changed (like rebirth of Italy). It wud increase religous conflict between Muslims and Christians; maybe even declare jihad or crusades with a religous vote (from St. Peter BAssilica and muslim version of it) to declare war. But if that cant be done, we should do the first idea
1. Moors were from North Africa and the reason i want moors is to fill North Africa
2. Europe is too crowded
3. Cities like Tunis, Fez, Al Jazair are just as important as Cordoba and Toledo if not more important.
I think the moors should not have settlers but have cities spawn like they did with the celts. Ai is not good at choosing cities. Moors cans span with 3 cities in Africa and 2 in Iberia.
IN N. Africa they can have any 3 of these cities: Rabat, Marrakesh, Fez, Al- Jazier, Tunis, Oran
In Iberia they should have 2 cities that were not only important at the time but were also important later under spainish and Portugese rule. Maybe from on of these cites: Toledo(name changed to Madrid later), Valancia, Barcelona, Cordoba, Libson.
Even though five is alot maybe we can balance it by placing restrictions on moorish military and research
Totally on a side note (if u guys like it)
Moors as a minor faction should be a must but I wud really like them to be added as a playable faction maybe like a rebirth of carthage with everything changed (like rebirth of Italy). It wud increase religous conflict between Muslims and Christians; maybe even declare jihad or crusades with a religous vote (from St. Peter BAssilica and muslim version of it) to declare war. But if that cant be done, we should do the first idea
Although J. pride I like your enthusiasm, I don't think the Moors need to play a "stuffing the map with cities" role. Not to mention the Moors in 711 did not control all those cities, especially not Tunis (Zirids =/= Moors/Al-Andalus). The Moors should start off with Valencia, Cordoba, Toledo and Lisbon.
Also Leoreth I would recommend giving these "celts", the Arab settler map.
Also Leoreth I would recommend giving these "celts", the Arab settler map.
Its really not that much city stuffing, all im asking for is 5 cities.
3 in the Maghrib (dosnt matter which 3): suppose the 3 are Fez, Al-Jazair and Tunis
1 or 2 in Iberia (again doesnt matter which): suppose its Cordoba and Toledo
On spanish spawn the Iberian cities switch to spain and we are left with 3 cities. if small areas like Italy and Iberia are filled with 4-5 cities, then all of Maghrib deserves atleast 3 cities.
And for the map filling, currently the arabs have to fill out all of Middle east and North africa. An area bigger than Europe with left with one civ.
Turk: Tunis and all of the other areas were under the control of the Almoravid and Almohad Berbers; plus if we are trying to represent berbers or moors in general than Tunis should be added (arabs dont take it so the morrocans moors are the closest thing and it is historically accurate under some morrocan dynasties)
3 in the Maghrib (dosnt matter which 3): suppose the 3 are Fez, Al-Jazair and Tunis
1 or 2 in Iberia (again doesnt matter which): suppose its Cordoba and Toledo
On spanish spawn the Iberian cities switch to spain and we are left with 3 cities. if small areas like Italy and Iberia are filled with 4-5 cities, then all of Maghrib deserves atleast 3 cities.
And for the map filling, currently the arabs have to fill out all of Middle east and North africa. An area bigger than Europe with left with one civ.
Turk: Tunis and all of the other areas were under the control of the Almoravid and Almohad Berbers; plus if we are trying to represent berbers or moors in general than Tunis should be added (arabs dont take it so the morrocans moors are the closest thing and it is historically accurate under some morrocan dynasties)
My 2 cents on minor civs
- Don’t care if minor civs are playable or not. Their main purpose should be to improve the gameplay for human controlled civs and to improve the AI of major civs, even if that means giving some of these minor civs use incredibly stupid AI scripts or have severe restrictions in builds depending on which minor civ they are (ex: don’t build wonders, almost never build settlers, no culture buildings etc… )
- I think most, if not all, should be made so that they can interact with major civs. (ie: you can contact them, they contact you)
- Their spawns must not in any way interfere with major civs
Since Jarkov found a way to break the limit on number of civs, maybe multiple minor civs could be included?
It would be awesome if a couple (2 to 4 at most) of these minor civs could be included. They would mostly function as much, much weaker versions of Mali, Ethiopia and Khmer major civs. Mostly they’re included to add fun elements in gameplay.
Possible ideas
1) Celtic minor civ (representing Celtia, then Scotland and Ireland),
2) Berber minor civ (representing the Numidian Kingdom, then Vandal Kingdom, then the Berber dynasties)
3) Italian states minor civ (representing Lombard League, Papal, and Venice, until major civ Italy spawns in 1821)
4) Zulu minor civ (representing Zulu Empire, then generic post-colonial souther/central African states)
5) Korea minor civ (representing Silla, Goryeo, Joseon and modern-day Korea)
6) Manchuria (representing Jin, Liao, Khitan and Manchurian empires)
There can’t be too many minor civs added, so current independents such as Kiev would remain independent since that area of the world is fun enough already. A lot of other independents were not significant enough in history.
- Don’t care if minor civs are playable or not. Their main purpose should be to improve the gameplay for human controlled civs and to improve the AI of major civs, even if that means giving some of these minor civs use incredibly stupid AI scripts or have severe restrictions in builds depending on which minor civ they are (ex: don’t build wonders, almost never build settlers, no culture buildings etc… )
- I think most, if not all, should be made so that they can interact with major civs. (ie: you can contact them, they contact you)
- Their spawns must not in any way interfere with major civs
Since Jarkov found a way to break the limit on number of civs, maybe multiple minor civs could be included?
It would be awesome if a couple (2 to 4 at most) of these minor civs could be included. They would mostly function as much, much weaker versions of Mali, Ethiopia and Khmer major civs. Mostly they’re included to add fun elements in gameplay.
Possible ideas
1) Celtic minor civ (representing Celtia, then Scotland and Ireland),
2) Berber minor civ (representing the Numidian Kingdom, then Vandal Kingdom, then the Berber dynasties)
3) Italian states minor civ (representing Lombard League, Papal, and Venice, until major civ Italy spawns in 1821)
4) Zulu minor civ (representing Zulu Empire, then generic post-colonial souther/central African states)
5) Korea minor civ (representing Silla, Goryeo, Joseon and modern-day Korea)
6) Manchuria (representing Jin, Liao, Khitan and Manchurian empires)
There can’t be too many minor civs added, so current independents such as Kiev would remain independent since that area of the world is fun enough already. A lot of other independents were not significant enough in history.
And is it possible to enlarge the chinese respawn zone? Usually in most of my games china collapses under the pressure of the barbarians or mongols, and never respawns to a normal power, only as a vassal of somebody with 2-3 cities 
(same with egypt)
IMO moors would be too much for an already crowded europe/iberia, maybe poland would be a better choice to stop germany being a superpower in most of my games
(same with egypt)IMO moors would be too much for an already crowded europe/iberia, maybe poland would be a better choice to stop germany being a superpower in most of my games
Haha, wow this really got me thinking. Here's expanding a bit on my idea.
Every civ is now capable of producing the following units
Each of these units cost slightly less production than regular units but require purchasing an expensive resource from their respective minor civ who only accepts lump sum or per turn gold for payment. Each minor civ only has 2 units of their respective mercenary resource to offer. After 10 turns, the treaty is automatically renegotiated.
1) Celtic Warrior, good hill combat, national unit maximum of 3 produced, high upkeep, the "Celtic Mercenaries" resource
2) Numidian Cavalry, no movement penalty in desert, national unit 3 max, high upkeep, requires "Berber Mercenaries" resource
3) African Warrior, same as Impi, national unit 3 max, high upkeep, requires "African Mercenaries" resource
4) Slave, functions as a worker, no upkeep, low chance of escaping, starting a city slave revolt, or changing into a barbarian unit, cannot be built if civic is emancipation, requires "slaves" resource - this resource may be obtained from some minor civs by trading gold, demanded as a "favor" or may be demanded when the minor civ is vassalized
5) Korean Hwacha, same as Hwacha, national unit 3 max, high upkeep, requires "Korean mercenaries" resource
6) Venetian Galleass, early ship capable of bombardment, , national unit 2 max, high upkeep, requires "Italian mercenaries" resource
etc...
Every civ is now capable of producing the following units
Each of these units cost slightly less production than regular units but require purchasing an expensive resource from their respective minor civ who only accepts lump sum or per turn gold for payment. Each minor civ only has 2 units of their respective mercenary resource to offer. After 10 turns, the treaty is automatically renegotiated.
1) Celtic Warrior, good hill combat, national unit maximum of 3 produced, high upkeep, the "Celtic Mercenaries" resource
2) Numidian Cavalry, no movement penalty in desert, national unit 3 max, high upkeep, requires "Berber Mercenaries" resource
3) African Warrior, same as Impi, national unit 3 max, high upkeep, requires "African Mercenaries" resource
4) Slave, functions as a worker, no upkeep, low chance of escaping, starting a city slave revolt, or changing into a barbarian unit, cannot be built if civic is emancipation, requires "slaves" resource - this resource may be obtained from some minor civs by trading gold, demanded as a "favor" or may be demanded when the minor civ is vassalized
5) Korean Hwacha, same as Hwacha, national unit 3 max, high upkeep, requires "Korean mercenaries" resource
6) Venetian Galleass, early ship capable of bombardment, , national unit 2 max, high upkeep, requires "Italian mercenaries" resource
etc...
Further expanding on 2 of the minor civ ideas. Praying to gods of Protestanism, Catholicism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Taoism and of the pagan temple that Leoreth actually looks over these ideas and comments on what he thinks 
Celt minor civ
- Has current cities plus one city in Eastern Europe and one city in Spain.
- Very aggressive. Loves declaring war on Romans. Roman AI adopts total war behavior against Celts, and hence can expand to Spain and Eastern Europe more easily.
- After AD600, Celts become nerfed even more
- Before English spawn, they get two cities spawned, Dun Eideann (Edinburgh) and Aith Cliath (Dublin). Both cities are autorazed upon conquest.
- English (major civ) gets only two settlers when they spawn. They are very aggressive toward the Celts and adopt total war behavior when fighting them.
Berber minor civ (Numidia/Mauretania -> Vandal Kingdom, geographically same area and can function similarly as weak minor civ-> Berber Kingdom)
- Spawn at one city, Cirta in 202BC.
- Aggressive, alternates between loving and hating Phoenicians and Romans. Easily vassalized by Phoenicians or Romans.
- In AD450, if there are cities in southeastern Spain (5 tiles along the coast) and Tunisia (block of 4 tiles around Carthage) are not controlled by human player or by a civ with good stability, they flip to Berber minor civ(Vandals). Berber minor civ also spawn a settler on Carthage so they can found the city if it’s been destroyed.
- Byzantines and Arabs are very aggressive toward the Berber minor civ and would fight them with total war behavior.
- Berber minor civ cities very receptive to Islam, very friendly with Arabs, aggressive toward Spain, and easily prone to being vassals of Arabs or Byzantines.
Celt minor civ
- Has current cities plus one city in Eastern Europe and one city in Spain.
- Very aggressive. Loves declaring war on Romans. Roman AI adopts total war behavior against Celts, and hence can expand to Spain and Eastern Europe more easily.
- After AD600, Celts become nerfed even more
- Before English spawn, they get two cities spawned, Dun Eideann (Edinburgh) and Aith Cliath (Dublin). Both cities are autorazed upon conquest.
- English (major civ) gets only two settlers when they spawn. They are very aggressive toward the Celts and adopt total war behavior when fighting them.
Berber minor civ (Numidia/Mauretania -> Vandal Kingdom, geographically same area and can function similarly as weak minor civ-> Berber Kingdom)
- Spawn at one city, Cirta in 202BC.
- Aggressive, alternates between loving and hating Phoenicians and Romans. Easily vassalized by Phoenicians or Romans.
- In AD450, if there are cities in southeastern Spain (5 tiles along the coast) and Tunisia (block of 4 tiles around Carthage) are not controlled by human player or by a civ with good stability, they flip to Berber minor civ(Vandals). Berber minor civ also spawn a settler on Carthage so they can found the city if it’s been destroyed.
- Byzantines and Arabs are very aggressive toward the Berber minor civ and would fight them with total war behavior.
- Berber minor civ cities very receptive to Islam, very friendly with Arabs, aggressive toward Spain, and easily prone to being vassals of Arabs or Byzantines.
Although I like the idea of having more minor-civs who you CAN contact, I think representing historical kingdoms would be better than representing nations of people who often did not live in the same political entity or state. Therefore having a berber or celtic nation sounds kinda silly.
BUT.... we can use the Celts to make a Scottish Kingdom, which would be a good idea. As for the "Berber's", we can have Numidian Cavalry for the Moorish UU, rather than having a "Berber" nation with ahistorical cities. Also Poland should be represented as a minor civ, and let them be torn up by a hungry Germany and Russia. But as for some of the other "nations" you mentioned, I think they are better off being represented by independent city-states.
As for Ireland having one independent city represent them, is far enough. The Irish were never as politically unified as lets say the Scots or Polish were, and succumbed to the English first. (No offense to any Irish people
)
BUT.... we can use the Celts to make a Scottish Kingdom, which would be a good idea. As for the "Berber's", we can have Numidian Cavalry for the Moorish UU, rather than having a "Berber" nation with ahistorical cities. Also Poland should be represented as a minor civ, and let them be torn up by a hungry Germany and Russia. But as for some of the other "nations" you mentioned, I think they are better off being represented by independent city-states.
As for Ireland having one independent city represent them, is far enough. The Irish were never as politically unified as lets say the Scots or Polish were, and succumbed to the English first. (No offense to any Irish people
)Well in the case of the Berbers, there were so many dynasties (Zirid Dynasty, Almoravid Dynasty, Almohad Dynasty, Saadi Dynasty, Alouite Dynasty), all of whom reigned an empire that is distinctively Berber in culture. Berbers consider the kingdom of Numidia an integral part of their history just as in RoC
oC, the Xia Dynasty is considered to be part of China and a 3000BC Indian kingdom is considered to be part of Indian history.
The purpose of having personalities is not only so human players can talk to them, but it's also so that they the minor civ to interact with major civs for trade and war.
For instance: Romans would be able to team up with Berber minor civ (under Kingdom of Numidia dynamic name) to take on Carthage,
-Japan can vassalize Manchuria minor civ (becomes puppet state of Manchuokko) to use as a launch-board for its invasion of China proper
-European civs will no longer have the luxury of staying from beginning til the end of time without a worry in Africa. The Zulu minor civ (representing budding African nation states) will gain a lot of bonuses ~1950 to be able to start pushing weaker European colonizers out of southern Africa.
oC, the Xia Dynasty is considered to be part of China and a 3000BC Indian kingdom is considered to be part of Indian history. The purpose of having personalities is not only so human players can talk to them, but it's also so that they the minor civ to interact with major civs for trade and war.
For instance: Romans would be able to team up with Berber minor civ (under Kingdom of Numidia dynamic name) to take on Carthage,
-Japan can vassalize Manchuria minor civ (becomes puppet state of Manchuokko) to use as a launch-board for its invasion of China proper
-European civs will no longer have the luxury of staying from beginning til the end of time without a worry in Africa. The Zulu minor civ (representing budding African nation states) will gain a lot of bonuses ~1950 to be able to start pushing weaker European colonizers out of southern Africa.
Look into Barbarians.py, all the other independent cities are defined there as well. You should be able to figure out the details on your own from then.
On the new minor civilization, it should be used that:
1. only exists in the 600 AD scenario (we still need them for the Celts in 3000 BC)
2. makes no sense as playable civ
3. can't be represented by independents
If it's the Moors, I'll likely place Isbiliyah in Iberia, that shouldn't interfere with Spain too much. Spain's spawn won't be moved though. At least not as far as 1035 AD.
Poland is another great alternative that's worth being tested.
Sir Tornado
Chieftain
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2011
- Messages
- 13
Nice Leoreth, thanks for the new version release!
I tried doing this modifying resources.py and adding iForest = con.iForest variable and changing a few jungle areas to forests in SE Asia at 1700 AD. This has worked for me when I do it in vanilla RFC, but in this case, there is some error and I get a popup saying I have lost the game when I start the game. I noticed that Leoreth has made changes to Resources.py file from the original RFC resource.py file, so is this why I am getting the error? If so, is there a way to make this work and convert jungles into forests in some areas?
I tried doing this modifying resources.py and adding iForest = con.iForest variable and changing a few jungle areas to forests in SE Asia at 1700 AD. This has worked for me when I do it in vanilla RFC, but in this case, there is some error and I get a popup saying I have lost the game when I start the game. I noticed that Leoreth has made changes to Resources.py file from the original RFC resource.py file, so is this why I am getting the error? If so, is there a way to make this work and convert jungles into forests in some areas?
Leoreth are the moors confined to Isbiliyah or are they going to have cities in Africa, cud u elaborate
On Poland, In my opinion Europe is already overrepresented and the middle east/North Africa is way too underrepresented. It wud be better to focus on other parts of the world, other than Europe. There are many important civs in the Middle East/Central Asia/India/Sub-saharran Africa and the Maghrib that arent represented in the game.
Maybe Poland can be represented by a heavily fortified independent Warsaw
On Poland, In my opinion Europe is already overrepresented and the middle east/North Africa is way too underrepresented. It wud be better to focus on other parts of the world, other than Europe. There are many important civs in the Middle East/Central Asia/India/Sub-saharran Africa and the Maghrib that arent represented in the game.
Maybe Poland can be represented by a heavily fortified independent Warsaw
It's likely a typo or something similar. I suggest you enable Python error messages (the first post of this thread can tell you how), they'll tell you where exactly the error occured.
No, they would of course get some Berber cities as well, like Marrakesh or Fez.
- Status
