Dawn of Civilization - an RFC modmod by Leoreth

[Cethegus]

According to Wikipedia, Qart-Hadasht in ancient Phoenician stands for 'New City'. It's understandable why two places would share the name, especially when they both have the best harbors in their region. It's possible that more cities had or would have been called Qart-Hadasht, had Phoenicians survived for longer in history. (Think of how many Qart-Hadashts we'd have in the New World.)

And Turk, why do you want modders to stuff their mods with so much of everything? We still don't have Korea, Sumer, Byzantines or Native America in the mod, so calm down a little before suggesting custom civilizations, okay? Especially colonial ones. The game ends in less than 400 years for most of which you suggested, while possessing little to no game value. America's the current superpower, Australia and Canada not so much, Argentina more less.

 

[LuKo]

Korea would be as playable as Babylonia (only harder because 3 superpowers are against it in the same time). Sumeria is represented by Babylonia. Byzantium is already in-game (as a minor civ as it's a Greek Rome occupying Turkish territory) and Natives are already in (I can't even comment the idea of "civilization" "Native Americans").

 

[AdrienIer]

Don't throw Samdmonster's idea away. Actually it has always been in Leoreth's mind (or am I wrong ?) to add Prussia as a civ, because Germany in RFC represents more the HRE than real Germany. That's why Leoreth changed the capitol to Wien in the first place. So we would have the HRE in the middle ages and then Prussia spawns in the 18th century with the actual UU and UHV. It would be better, I suppose since currently you have SO much time to complete it. And I also remember him talking about playable Byzantines in the 600AD start. Korea would be definitely interesting, and maybe a Zulu or playable Mughal instead of a respawning India.

 

[mechaerik]

Korea would be as playable as Babylonia (only harder because 3 superpowers are against it in the same time). Sumeria is represented by Babylonia. Byzantium is already in-game (as a minor civ as it's a Greek Rome occupying Turkish territory) and Natives are already in (I can't even comment the idea of "civilization" "Native Americans").

What about the Iroquois? If there was to be another native civ from North America, the Iroquois would be a fine choice.

Not that Im saying to put them in.

 

[Magnificent One]

But by the american spawn the Iroquois would be unplayable.

 

[AOS9001]

The Iroquois and Koreans would be one or two city Civs with very little land, they wouldn't contribute much on a world-scale.

 

[AdrienIer]

Koreans could be a much needed nuisance for China and Japan before the mongol's appearence, as well as a new tech trader for them. And Iroquois could be a challenge for the colonial powers and could become quite big on the east coast. If they are made very aggressive they would have to fight wars against the colonizers which would help make the new world harder to keep (it's a bit lame right now until the USA spawn).

 

[Magnificent One]

There is even a mod-mod with Korea replacing the Maya.So i don't see how Korea couldn't work.

 

[AOS9001]

There is even a mod-mod with Korea replacing the Maya.So i don't see how Korea couldn't work.

Korea could work, I just think there could be a better Civ represented. I mean, it's on a tiny, 8 tile peninsula with 3 big powers next to it. Surely, there could be something better?

 

[Magnificent One]

You could replace them with Byzantium - But the spawn could be hard.

Or replace them with Poland?

 

[Leoreth]

I'll reply to the original post in-depth and try to cover what's been said afterwards as well.

Ok Leoreth, got a few suggestions and comments.
I think it would be great if the Carthage, Mayan, Greek, and Babylonian slots were replaced for better modern civs in the 600ad start (suggested civs Canada, Argentina, Australia, and Prussia).

I think that would be great too, which is why I'm working on the Italy prototype to figure it all out.

My personal opinion on the civs mentioned during this discussion:

Canada and Australia
I think those are best represented as English colonies. They got independent quite late in history, so their game would be short and their overall historical impact wasn't that decisive that it would warrant a reasonable set of UHV. No offense my dear Canadians and Australians, this is actually a good thing

Argentina, Peru, Colombia ...
Basically the same situation like above, but they have a little higher chance just because South America seems so constant currently.

Sumeria
Is represented by Babylonia in my eyes. For the timeline to fit, it would have a ridiculously short time to live and no place to share with Babylon (we even would get problems with the city distance).

Korea
Is among my favorites, actually. A one city challenge along the lines of Babylonia is definitely possible, and could be a lot of fun crammed in between China and Japan, whose interaction I often found too onedimensional. Throw in another civ for the fun

Poland
I am very much aware of Polands significancy for European history, especially in the Late Middle Ages until the 17th century, but again, there's no spare place. Germany is already severely crammed in in the west, and another civ in Europe would mess things up even more. Sadly

Germany, Prussia, HRE, Austria
Why, of course I waste four slots for them
In my eyes, Prussia is identical with (modern) Germany. After the unification, it made up 2/3 of the Empire, and many customs and symbols of Germany have been inherited by Prussia.
On the other hand, there will be a HRE that hopefully collapses before Prussia/Germany spawns (envisioned date: 1701). If its still alive at that point, or respawns later, it simply becomes Austria instead (in actual history, the Habsburgs tried to rescue a little bit of the HRE in continuing to carry the emperor title).
So it will be just like in BtS with two civs: HRE/Austria and Prussia/Germany.

Wien isn't a great historic choice for the Holy Roman Empire. A better choice would be Frankfort/Mainz--plus vienne was at the borders of the empire for a long time.

I've already explained some posts before why I think Wien fits the HRE. But I agree with you that it feels weird to spawn where at that time was only a marcher county, especially when the new flavour text talks about the East Frankian Empire.
So while Frankfurt was never the capital of any form of German state (though it came close in both 1848 and 1949), it may be a fitting capital, both historically and economically (ingame, that is).

Also-- what's up with the babylonian unique power's effect? I know that its Rhye's, but... you've changed others. Maybe the UP should be changed to have whatever capital city you choose to use be considered "Babylon".
--> I prefer to play as the Babylonians and any change to improve would be great. Maybe also make their unique building quicker to build? maybe make it a granary?

I think the UB is fine. The UP needs to be changed, but I think founding Babylon on the spot is an integral part of Babylonia's challenge. Anyone can move some tiles to get more production or food
Babylonia's, India's and France's UP all might get in flux the next days, though.

 

[AOS9001]

I think my activity here is predictable enough for you to know what I'm going to say. Maybe.

 

[Leoreth]

Yeah I know.

 

[civ_king]

What about the Iroquois? If there was to be another native civ from North America, the Iroquois would be a fine choice.

Not that Im saying to put them in.

Actually the Iroquois could be an awesome civ, one goal could be control all of NA west of the Mississippi (not including Mexico) (if the US lost the Revolutionary war they would probably have gone to the west coast), the problem would be stability maps and

 

[KMRblue1027]

I really think if you are going to create a Native American tribe is should be the Sioux. Not for personal preference but for gameplay purposes. The Iroquois are way too close to USA's spawn and will screw up the founding of New York and possibly Washington. The Sioux would not meat an immediate death to the English and French and will possible act as a roadblock to US expansion.

 

[mechaerik]

If the Iroquois are put in game, id expect it would recieve the aztec treatment: an enlarged historical area, one that would likely include New York (and a sizeable chunk of quebec), so it would be founded anyways. As for spawn area, I would probably limit USAs core to the mississippi, and from there to the pacific historical bounds.

 

[The Turk]

How about a playable Sweden? that way the "Vikings" would become Norway-Denmark, and Sweden would take over Finland as well, and act as a fiercer rival to Russia

 

[dcode147]

As if Leoreth needs any more civ suggestions... since you guys are all commenting about this topic, I suppose I'll throw in my two cents .


A: Playable Byzantines in 600AD start replacing Roman slot.

Come up with interesting unique historical victories. Some ideas/possibilities: 1: "continuously have kept Constantinople as your capital city for >1000 years". 2: "Control at least 3 cities in Eastern Europe (including Greece), 3 cities in Asia, 2 cities in Africa, 2 cities in Italy by 1100AD" (Have Constantinople double as city in Eastern Europe and Asia). 3: Build 3 Barracks, 3 Aqueducts, 3 Amphitheaters, and 5 Churches by 1300AD date

B: Rework Rome to represent both Romans and Byzantines.

Currently Rome in RFC only appears to represent the accomplishments of the Western Roman Empire. Maybe Rome unique historical victories could be altered so that it could represent the Byzantines as well. Some ideas/possibilities: 1: "continuously have kept Rome as your capital city for >1000 years and have kept Constantinople as your capital city for >1000 years" (Rome modifiers would be buffed up slightly. AIs would be made more aggressive in fighting for eastern cities. They would be scripted to move palace from Rome to Constantinople at a certain point and spawn with some more units in East to help them.) 2: "Control at least 3 cities in Eastern Europe (including Greece), 3 cities in Asia, 2 cities in Africa, 2 cities in Italy, 1 city in France, 1 city in Spain, 1 city in Germany, 1 city in Britain" (again, Constantinople would double as both a city in Eastern Europe and Asia) by 200AD. 3: Build 8 Barracks, 8 Aqueducts, 8
Amphitheaters, 5 Churches by 1300AD.

Maybe something could be worked out where Romans/Byzantines could have both unique units and buildings.

In both starts, the Romans/Byzantines would be ensured collapse prior to modern Italy spawn if controlled by AI.

Ack, too late... so just gonna get lazy

C: Gran Colombia (replace slot of someone like Mayans)

D: Korea (yes would make area interesting. Resisting Japanese invasion would be fun too, however if Japanese fails, would screw over Japan. If succeed would screw over Korea...)

E: More independents and more powerful independents representing many unrepresented (Especially modern day) civs.

 

[Leoreth]

I don't think the Roman AI can be made to behave Roman-Empire-like.

The Byzantines, on the other hand, are certainly planned in. They will receive the Greek slot (makes a lot of sense to me, not that it matters), and I've already thought of some of their properties (UHV etc.).

I'm not a fan of Native American civs. It just doesn't feel right to start building cities with them and research technology.

Sweden is already in consideration

 

[Magnificent One]

Sweden would be good - More competion for Vikings/Denmark and Russia.