Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth

[J. pride]

Do you ever play as Maya? Or Aztec/Inca? 90% of the time these civs either die without contacting another civ or die to the first civ they come into contact with.

Comparing IVC to the Incas,Mayas, Aztecs is a bit ridiculous. Mexico City today is home millions of people-how many people live in Moenjo Daro? Native American languages are spoken by millions as first language in Ecuador, Peru, Southern Mexico, Central America; how many people speak -----? There are 50 million people that identify themselves as Native Americans in Latin America while the vast majority identify themselves as Mestizo. Also the Native American civilizations have a specific purpose, they not only represent Native American culture but a massive event in human history which was the conquest of the America's.

Harappans can be much more interesting than those three because of its location in the center of Eurasia with potential for both eastward and westward interactions. They can migrate to the Ganges valley and defeat/prevent the Vedic India from spawning. The can expand toward the Persian Gulf/Transoxiana to compete with the Persians.

I have no qualms of civilizations acting ahistorically but you want to add a civilization based on ahistorical situations based on your imagination? Well you know what lets add Israel because they are in a perfect geopolitical situation to conquer the whole of Near East or Sythians because they could have easily conqeured all of Eurasia.

And you're wrong about the lack of historical interactions. Harappans/IVC traded extensively with Mesopotamia and Egypt. Artifacts originated in those areas (as evidenced by their style and make) have been unearthed in IVC ruins.

Im not wrong, as I said "real" interaction (and i did know about the artifacts). And by interaction, I mean how technology was widely transferred between the Egyptians, Mesopotamians and later the Greeks. How the Egyptians fought the Neo Babylonian Empire, how the Mesopotamians fought the Medians and the Acheaminds for land. At the end of the day, the fact remains that the Harappans are supposed to be there for the first few turns and their only real purpose is to open border with Babylon for 5 turns then get destroyed by marshes or barbarians never to be seen again or heard from again.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

^J. pride's post brings up one unrelated thing I've always wanted to address.

...

Do we really need marshes at all?

They're not even like Peaks or Desert (native BtS terrain features and honestly impossible to imagine civ without, excepting CivII)
and they don't serve any purpose but to arbitrarily make IRL decent/population heavy sites suck.

The best example that comes to mind almost immediately is Vladivostok.

I'm proposing that we abolish marshes from the mod for good.
They can honestly be better represented as a forested
flood plain or some other kind of "wet" tile.

Who's with me?

 

[Moshe Dayan]

I'm proposing that we abolish marshes from the mod for good.
They can honestly be better represented as a forested
flood plain or some other kind of "wet" tile.

Who's with me?

But then...the Vikings might make contact with the Aztecs too early! THE HORROR!!!

I actually think removing marshes is a great idea. Even with my limited modding knowledge, I know there are better ways to prevent AIs from settling areas they aren't supposed to. Furthermore, there are more intelligent ways (redistribution of resources for one) to entice human players to settle differently. Let's be honest, is anyone going to settle on the currently marshy areas in the deep south? No. And why? Because New Orleans's resource placement makes it a foolish gambit to do so. Besides, there's already jungle tiles to block movement and city placement, and these can realistically be removed later in the game. At the very least, swamps should be drainable upon researching a late-game tech like they are in A New Dawn.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

But then...the Vikings might make contact with the Aztecs too early! THE HORROR!!!

I actually think removing marshes is a great idea. Even with my limited modding knowledge, I know there are better ways to prevent AIs from settling areas they aren't supposed to. Furthermore, there are more intelligent ways (redistribution of resources for one) to entice human players to settle differently. Let's be honest, is anyone going to settle on the currently marshy areas in the deep south? No. And why? Because New Orleans's resource placement makes it a foolish gambit to do so. Besides, there's already jungle tiles to block movement and city placement, and these can realistically be removed later in the game. At the very least, swamps should be drainable upon researching a late-game tech like they are in A New Dawn.

Actually, New Orleans is a great city site.
Read my China AAR and look at some of the older Domination games in vanilla RFC, and you'll see;
although 1W of the site is a bit better from my own experiments.
But I think a lot of what you said has definitely improved upon my argument.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Comparing IVC to the Incas,Mayas, Aztecs is a bit ridiculous. Mexico City today is home millions of people-how many people live in Moenjo Daro? Native American languages are spoken by millions as first language in Ecuador, Peru, Southern Mexico, Central America; how many people speak -----? There are 50 million people that identify themselves as Native Americans in Latin America while the vast majority identify themselves as Mestizo. Also the Native American civilizations have a specific purpose, they not only represent Native American culture but a massive event in human history which was the conquest of the America's.

Im not wrong, as I said "real" interaction (and i did know about the artifacts). And by interaction, I mean how technology was widely transferred between the Egyptians, Mesopotamians and later the Greeks. How the Egyptians fought the Neo Babylonian Empire, how the Mesopotamians fought the Medians and the Acheaminds for land. At the end of the day, the fact remains that the Harappans are supposed to be there for the first few turns and their only real purpose is to open border with Babylon for 5 turns then get destroyed by marshes or barbarians never to be seen again or heard from again.

Those are not fair comparisons because:

(1) The IVC language is not decoded yet so naturally there is a lack of information. Once decoded, they will most likely show records of tech exchange and wars with other civs. Most of what we know about the foreign trade and wars of the ancient Egyptians come from their written records.

Your suggestion that wars and trade of the IVC with other civilizations do not exist, is of the same mistake as the "Minoan Peace" hypothesis. Civilizations of such wealth and advancement will naturally be involved in extensive trade and wars with foreign powers. It's historical inevitability.

(2) Native American cultures have more of an impact today purely because they are more recent, and we have recorded history of them. There are evidence pointing to IVC having huge impacts on Iron Age India (technological and culture simularities). We do not know the exact extent of it, but there is a distinct possibility that India in its current form would not have existed without the IVC. How can you ignore that possibility simply because we haven't discovered sufficient evidence?

TL; DR that you don't know about something does not mean it's not important or not interesting.

I have no qualms of civilizations acting ahistorically but you want to add a civilization based on ahistorical situations based on your imagination? Well you know what lets add Israel because they are in a perfect geopolitical situation to conquer the whole of Near East or Sythians because they could have easily conqeured all of Eurasia.

Those are great ideas, thanks! And you just proved you have an imagination too. Why not use it more often?

 

[Moshe Dayan]

Actually, New Orleans is a great city site.
Read my China AAR and look at some of the older Domination games in vanilla RFC, and you'll see;
although 1W of the site is a bit better from my own experiments.
But I think a lot of what you said has definitely improved upon my argument.

That was my point, I was saying that New Orleans is such a good site that the marshes next to it are useless because no one in their right mind would settle on those tiles anyway. Hell, I even settled "New New Delhi" on the NO tile in my last India game

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Do we really need marshes at all?

No and we don't need Peaks, Tundra, Desert, and Jungle either.

Every tile should be a Forested Floodplain Grassland River Coast tile. And should have a Resource and a Tribal Village.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

No and we don't need Peaks, Tundra, Desert, and Jungle either.

Every tile should be a Forested Floodplain Grassland River Coast tile. And should have a Resource and a Tribal Village.

/sarcasm.

Oh snap, I think I just got called out for powergaming.
You have to admit that a lot of the regions that Rhye marshed (that's my word for it) are definitely not marshy.
Peaks and desert can certainly stay, I can't imagine the Mojave, the Sahara or the Gobi as just plain old Plains.
And obviously there are mountain ranges in the game. SSX taught me at least that much.
But Marshes are so unnecessary in my opinion. At least give us the option to drain them upon hitting a certain tech.
(While I'm still indulging you, let's say we can level Peaks into Hills with Future Tech)

 

[iOnlySignIn]

You have to admit that a lot of the regions that Rhye marshed (that's my word for it) are definitely not marshy.

Yes, such as Manchuria & New Orleans which you mentioned. But others are appropriately marshed, such as West Siberia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Siberian_Plain

At least give us the option to drain them upon hitting a certain tech.

That I have thought about. It will be like Jungle. The Tech could be Industrialism or Ecology.

Or at least, even if it's not removable, it should be possible to build Forest Preserves on it as we can do on a Jungle.

(While I'm still indulging you, let's say we can level Peaks into Hills with Future Tech)

I think there are futuristic mods of Civ IV that allow terraforming actually. Always a favorite theme of mine among sci-fi.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Yes, such as Manchuria & New Orleans which you mentioned. But others are appropriately marshed, such as West Siberia.

Don't forget some of those odd Canadian marshes.
Some of those should reasonably be Tundra or Forest Grassland.

That I have thought about. It will be like Jungle. The Tech could be Industrialism or Ecology. Or at least, even if it's not removable, it should be possible to build Forest Preserves on it as we can do on a Jungle.

Exactly.

I think there are futuristic mods of Civ IV that allows terraforming actually. Always a favorite theme of mine among sci-fi.

Remember Engineers from CivII? You could replant forests (something I wouldn't mind seeing in DoC, along with other things such as "Plant Nuke" or "Bribe Unit" missions)

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Remember Engineers from CivII? You could replant forests

I remember every instance of Engineers being awesome, real or fictional.

Replant Forests will finally make Environmentalism worth something.

 

[OnlySigurd]

I would like to cast my vote towards draining marshes at some point down the tech tree. (I mean if you can scrub fallout, it seems to make sense that you could drain marshes...but hey, I'm no Ecologist so I could be completely wrong)...though Ecology sounds like a nice tech to drain marshes at.

I also cast my vote towards a healthy mix of SSX and DoC, cause that's basically been my last month ^_^

 

[Depravo]

I realise DoC has always made extensive use of resources appearing after the game start as well as terrain changes, but surely that stuff should be kept to a minimum since it can't be anticipated by any but a veteran player. Changing tiles to marsh in the Indus Valley within a few dozen turns of the start of the game seems pretty annoying, especially since those tiles would then have to change back some time later. For gameplay purposes I'd say the Aryans should be the reason Indus Valley collapsed even if it doesn't line up with history.

No love for the Bulgars?

 

[Lone Wolf]

If we're adding Poland, we really need to buff up the resources of Central Europe more. Even now, the Prussia-HRE situation produces some awkward cities. The mod is already becoming a little bit overcrowded with civs.

How about an Overcrowd the Game challenge just for fun? The criteria for inclusion should not be relevance/irrelevance, but overcrowding. I propose the following civilizations in addition to those which we already have:

Europe:
Aragorn/Catalonia
Aquitaine
Naples
Serbia
Kievan Rus
Novgorod Republic
Lithuania
Scotland
Ireland
Sweden
Finland

Asia:
The Volga Bulgars (can respawn as Kazan Tatars)
Syria/Levant
The Khanate of Astrakhan
The Khanate of Sibir
The Yue/Cantonese (actually this is perhaps one of the most tolerable suggestions on my list)
The Djungars
Kazakhstan
Oman
Baluchistan
Afghanistan
Laos
Philippines
DPRK

Africa:
Ghana
Swahili
Boer Republics
Zululand
Great Zimbabwe
Central African Empire


Americas:
Confederate States of America
The Republic of Texas
Quebec
Canada
Cuba
Venezuela
Moche
Inuit
Iroquois
Sioux
Pueblo

 

[ImNotHere]

Draining marshes has always been something I wish was in the game. Draining marshes should be implemented because:

1) Marshes have been drained since at least Roman times (Trajan's forum was a marsh AFAIK and so was southern England around London). I know it shouldn't be implemented so early in DoC, but I'm just saying it is historical.

2) With today's technology people have been able to divert rivers and hold back the ocean thus draining marshes (parts of my town were marshes pre-1800s until the ocean was held back, now it is the downtown core ).

3) Considering jungles can be cleared, just from a gameplay point of view don't marshes serve a similar purpose? Thus marshes and jungle should be treated similarily.

Personally I don't want to see marshes removed from the game altogether, simply reformed.

 

[Leoreth]

One other thing, as we are widening the way we define a civ that makes sense to represent, how long till we see natives in the USA and Canada?

When hell freezes over.

Seriously: the IVC was an advanced urban civilization. Native Americans weren't, at least not to an extent that would be able to be represented in civ.

I just updated. The Tibetan UU looks as overpowered as hell. I hope they'd be able to take AI China's capital, at least temporarily.

Tibet is going to spawn 630 AD so their UU will be almost outdated by then (even against cities they're weaker than Knights), and I want it to be able to go out and conquer cities without China's consent and OBs.

The Chola UU/UB look underwhelming. Hope they have an awesome UP. +0.5 per Water Tile would be great.

I was thinking more of commerce ...

The UB has a point since I'm thinking about giving them an early culture UHV goal. And imo the naval UU isn't that bad ... you'll rule the seas after Compass instead of waiting for Optics like everyone else, and even then Dharanis should beat Caravels easily. And they can ferry troops.[/QUOTE]

Well at least 15 days, if you trust Wikipedia. Perhaps that could be a UHV
Would be needing more resources in Tibet, make a civilization sustainable and give horses, though that is implied.

Yes, Lhasa will get more resources which will disappear when Tibet collapses.

Iberia would need to change dramatically. Which tile might Qurtubah be on and how to make it not an easy decision raze for the Spanish player despite the wonders. Maybe make it like the Angkor/Ayutthaya exchange.

The current Cordoba tile is the sheeps south of the river. I think that 1S of that could reasonably work as Cordoba as well. Resources and Spain's spawn (I'm even thinking about moving it to later) would have to be adjusted as well of course.

So what's going to happen to "India"? Are they just going to exist alongside the Harappans, Tamils, Mughals, and the trading company civs (although probably not at the same time, obviously)? Wouldn't it make more sense to rename the Indian civ the "Mauryans" or something along those lines? After all, they clearly no longer represent all of India.

Mauryas are not a civ but a dynasty. It's like calling France "The Capets". Since the current India is fine being called India despite the existence of Pakistan and Bangladesh I don't think that's a problem.

Strictly speaking they are the Indo-Aryans now as opposed to two Dravidian civs (if we accept the theory about the IVC).

I am actually quite glad that my Kongolese suggestion is being seriously taken into consideration, by the way.

I don't know about everyone else, but in the absence of being able to chop jungles with Iron Working,
I feel like there should be one group that can at least take advantage of them early on.
And that part of Africa is always notoriously empty save for the odd conquerors of Mbanza Kongo.

Yeah, that's why I decided to add it, because it perfectly fits the criteria of representing a region better than independents. Plus, it's nice for Mali to have a neighbor (that and the Moors are hopefully going to make their game more interesting).

I think a nice UP would be to give jungles the same yields as forests (so +1 production instead of -1 food). Still doesn't make Kongo great, but viable.

No love for the Bulgars?

The Balkans are just too small for an additional civ there, unfortunately.

If we're adding Poland, we really need to buff up the resources of Central Europe more. Even now, the Prussia-HRE situation produces some awkward cities. The mod is already becoming a little bit overcrowded with civs.

I hope you remember my original premise for these civs, that you'll be able to turn them off if undesired? I know that opinions on crowdedness vary, so you'll be able to decide on your own.

 

[Linkman226]

Aragorn/Catalonia

Well in that case I also demand the nations of Legolas, Gandalf, and Frodo.

 

[Depravo]

The Balkans are just too small for an additional civ there, unfortunately.

I was thinking more as an umbrella civ to cover all the Altaian cultures of western Eurasia between the collapse of Attila's empire and the Mongol Conquest - something to give the Russians a run for the money and represent what in some cases were powerful, relatively sophisticated states.

It would include the Kutrigur / Utigur, Old Great Bulgaria, the Khazars, Kipchaq, Volga Bulgars, Pechenegs, Sabirs and so forth as well as the West Bulgarian Empire.

This area was never long politically united, but then nor was India.

 

[Leoreth]

It's still a different level of continuity than say India or China.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Tibet is going to spawn 630 AD so their UU will be almost outdated by then (even against cities they're weaker than Knights), and I want it to be able to go out and conquer cities without China's consent and OBs.

So it should update to Heavy Horseman instead of Knight. Anyway it will still be very funny to surprise attack some lightly defended Chinese cities using your UU, while defending against any retaliation by setting up a Machinot Line in the Hills of Tibet.

I was thinking more of commerce ...

They will have room for at most 3 cities in their core, with very few land tiles to work. It's the same problem as Korea. I would have suggested +1 from water tiles but that's too similar to the Dutch UB.

Another option would be +1 per 2 from Trade Routes, i.e. the Lombard UP from RFCE++.

The UB has a point since I'm thinking about giving them an early culture UHV goal.

Yet another contender for the Borobudur (and Shwedagon Paya Scholasticism Great Artists) appears... >_<

I thought the focus of the Tamils would be naval expansion/conquest vs. India and Indonesia (other than Trade of course). In Europe there are plenty of civs for that: Vikings, Spain/Portugal, England, Netherlands. In Asia you have Japan, and that's it. I was hoping to play the Tamils as the Vikings of Asia (whereas Japan is sort of the England of Asia).

Also, I suggest letting the Tamils/Cholas spawn in 300 BC instead of 850 AD (I'm sure the 1350 AD spawn is a mistake!). A 300 BC spawn is much more interesting for India or China (who are otherwise as bored of each other as an old married couple). 300 BC spawn also means that they won't have to worry too much about being Culture pressed, and have time to build up their cities to have a realistic shot at some Wonders later.

And imo the naval UU isn't that bad ... you'll rule the seas after Compass instead of waiting for Optics like everyone else, and even then Dharanis should beat Caravels easily. And they can ferry troops.

Well then it should have a cargo space of 2. Or maybe even 3. I'm a big fan of navy but it's hard to make them useful in a Civ IV game.