Egypt as a full civ

[Swarbs]

To summarise, my proposal for the two civs would be:

Arabs
Spawn date 632AD as currently
UU - Ghazi
UB - Bazaar (Market) - Provides +1 and +1 from desert and semidesert tiles
UP - The Power of Faith - If your State Religion is a major religion it spreads to each newly acquired city, and you incur no stability penalties from foreign religions in your cities

Historical Victory goals
- The Sword of Islam: Control the Levant, Egypt, Cilicia, Ifriqiya, Crete and Sicily by 969AD
- The Golden Age of Islam: Be the leader in tech in 1260AD
- Defender of the Faith: Control the Levant, Egypt, Cilicia and Ifriqiya by 1290AD (assuming Hafsid Tunisia spawns in 1229AD)

Notes: Start with Farriers to enable Ghazis from spawn and support rapid conquest

Egypt
Spawn data 969AD
UU - Zanji spearman (Guisarmer) Same as the mercenary unit. 2 to facilitate rapid conquest and defend against Mongols
UB - Lusterware forge (Blacksmith) +10%, +5% with gold, silver and copper, can turn 1 citizen into artist
UP - The Power of the Nile - Receive health benefits from flood plains instead of health penalties

Historical Victory goals
- The Fatamid Caliphate: Control Ifriqiya, Sicily, Egypt and the Levant by 1050AD
- Jewel of the Nile: Make Cairo the largest and most cultured city in 1250AD
- True heirs of the Prophet: Destroy or vassalise the Ottomans, Tunisia and Morocco by 1500AD

Note: Add a wonder, proposed Cairo Citadel, to give +2 from floodplains to make UHV2 possible.

 

[gilgames]

Not bad, but 2nd and 3rd Arab uhv is too close to each other! You can not benefit from your golden age, and its a bit short term game. Might not be very historical but the third uhv could be extended till the end of the XIV century. Also just a question: how do you take tech lead if you have to fight endlessly? (egypt, crusade, seljuk, mongol ect.)
We all know that arabs can produce huge amount of units if they dont build up the cities, just focus on military, but before we implement these, you should try it

About Egypt: in their current state the Ottomans cannot really vassalized, if they overcome the Byzantines. Also morocco seems a hard nut to crack.
Obviously the map need some change to fit them better. I just replayed RFCE++ to try Rum and i was blured how different the map is/was back then

But in general those seems solid options.

 

[El Bogus]

UP - The Power of Faith - If your State Religion is a major religion it spreads to each newly acquired city, and you incur no stability penalties from foreign religions in your cities

I like that.

UB - Bazaar (Market) - Provides +1 and +1 from desert and semidesert tiles

That would be way to strong, also very redundant with the Moroccan UP.

- The Sword of Islam: Control the Levant, Egypt, Cilicia, Ifriqiya, Crete and Sicily by 969AD
- Defender of the Faith: Control the Levant, Egypt, Cilicia and Ifriqiya by 1290AD (assuming Hafsid Tunisia spawns in 1229AD)
- The Fatamid Caliphate: Control Ifriqiya, Sicily, Egypt and the Levant by 1050AD
- True heirs of the Prophet: Destroy or vassalise the Ottomans, Tunisia and Morocco by 1500AD

Although I like your "Golden Age of Islam" and "Jewel of the Nile" goals, I think that these are principally the same goal which you defied in your previous post.
Also this version of "Cairo Citadel" would be strong enough with +1 .

 

[AbsintheRed]

I like that.

That's the Polish UP though.

 

[gilgames]

No, polish doesn't get any religion in newly acquired cities. So its more, but still sounds good.
Though you can change it to any religion became Islam at conquer/fliip/trade. so it will be different from polish

 

[El Bogus]

That's the Polish UP though.

Oops, haha. No wonder, I thought that it was a very strong UP. Lithuanian and Burgundian UP are similar like that as well, though.

 

[gilgames]

Explain yourself how are they similar????

 

[AbsintheRed]

No, polish doesn't get any religion in newly acquired cities. So its more, but still sounds good.
Though you can change it to any religion became Islam at conquer/fliip/trade. so it will be different from polish

Obviously I meant that it's the Polish UP + the important part of the current Arab UP.
Way too powerful, and not desired at all.

Oops, haha. No wonder, I thought that it was a very strong UP. Lithuanian and Burgundian UP are similar like that as well, though.

Yeah, I'm thinking about making them more distinctive at some point.
Low priority though.

 

[Swarbs]

Not bad, but 2nd and 3rd Arab uhv is too close to each otheYou r! You can not benefit from your golden age, and its a bit short term game. Might not be very historical but the third uhv could be extended till the end of the XIV century. Also just a question: how do you take tech lead if you have to fight endlessly? (egypt, crusade, seljuk, mongol ect.)
We all know that arabs can produce huge amount of units if they dont build up the cities, just focus on military, but before we implement these, you should try it

No, you get a full 10 turns between UHV1 and UHV2 which is plenty of time for a GA. Same as with Kiev and Aragon, both of which are shorter than the 600 years allocated to the Arabs.

About Egypt: in their current state the Ottomans cannot really vassalized, if they overcome the Byzantines. Also morocco seems a hard nut to crack.

That's what makes it a challenge, and why you have so long to achieve it.

That would be way to strong, also very redundant with the Moroccan UP.

The plan is to change the Moroccan UP to make it focused on the Berbers tho. Also not sure how it would be way too strong - flat deserts still can't be improved and the food bonus wouldn't apply on any hills due to the -1 they already have. So the only real effects it would have would be to make Egypt stronger without expanding the map, make oases better and give +1 to desert hills, not really game breaking in any way.

Also this version of "Cairo Citadel" would be strong enough with +1 .

Probably needs testing, but if Cairo is to become the largest city in the world around 1300AD with only half a BFC it is likely to need a lot of food help.

That's the Polish UP though.

Not quite - Poland avoids religious unhappiness and doesn't get the SR spread. If it's too similar, then maybe no instability from foreign religions whilst running Theocracy?

Explain yourself how are they similar????

You don't see how +1 and +2 for Burgundy and +1 and +2 for Lithuania whilst running Paganism are similar?[/QUOTE]

 

[Swarbs]

Obviously I meant that it's the Polish UP + the important part of the current Arab UP.
Way too powerful, and not desired at all.

As I understand it, the main barrier to an early conquest goal for the Arabs has always been the -2 stability for every city with a foreign religion and -1 stability for every extra religion. So with Jerusalem, Tyre, Antioch, Edessa, Alexandria and Cyrenacia they already gain -14 instability, which worsens if other religions spread in the rest of the Magreb whilst they are expanding. So that, imo, should be what their UP aims to address.

If not removing the stability penalties, perhaps adding +1 stability for every city with Islam whilst running a Theocracy?

 

[AbsintheRed]

If not removing the stability penalties, perhaps adding +1 stability for every city with Islam whilst running a Theocracy?

Yeah, the stability relief for the Arabs will be something closer to that.
Tied to civics and/or buildings.

Either Theocracy, or Trade Economy, as they start with those.
There were ideas about Bazaar and Trade Economy.
Maybe to best would be to have some foreign religion instability reduction from state religion temples under Theocracy.
Will have to think about it which direction could work as a general rule, as that would be the preferred solution.

 

[DC123456789]

It should be noted that Morocco also suffers from significant stability problems conquering Iberia, to the point where it's a significantly larger barrier than military ability.

 

[AbsintheRed]

It should be noted that Morocco also suffers from significant stability problems conquering Iberia, to the point where it's a significantly larger barrier than military ability.

Yeah, with a general rule that would also improve a lot.

 

[Swarbs]

It should be noted that Morocco also suffers from significant stability problems conquering Iberia, to the point where it's a significantly larger barrier than military ability.

I've found you can manage them quite well by staging the conquest - taking a few cities with an initial rush and then capturing the rest later once stability is better. But yes, stability issues for Morocco do prevent a rapid conquest.

Thinking about it, the stability bonus for Arabia doesn't need to be that huge if they start with Farriers. That would allow Militarism to be their starting expansion civic, so bonus stability for conquering Antioch, Edessa, Alexandria and Cyrene.

That might be a solution for both Arabia and Morocco - Militarism gives +2 stability per city conquered when combined with Theocracy? Would also reflect the tendency of many theocracies through history to gain stability through expansion and religious wars.

 

[AbsintheRed]

About the UHVs, I agree with El Bogus and we shouldn't have too many conquest goals focused on the very same territories.
Atm I symphatize the most with:

Arab 1st: Historic conquest till 909
Arab 2nd: Golden Age in techs, wonders, etc.
Arab 3rd: Caliph of the Islamic World: dominance over Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Ottomans in some form

Perhaps the 3rd goal is more fitting here than for Egypt, after all they are the ones who had it all united once.
For the 1st goal we can implement huge uprisings in the Maghreb in 909, even if we spawn to Fatimids as a full civ in 969.

Egypt 1st: Historic conquest till 1050
Egypt 2nd: No Christian cities in the Levant and Egypt, with the proposed counter
Egypt 3rd: Culture+trade/commerce goal in one form, probably for all Egyptian cities together (as in the province) not only for Cairo.
E.g. have at least 7 wonders in Egypt, with a base commerce output at least 150 in your cities.

I would like to keep the Crusader goal for the Ayyubids, isn't it more fitting there?
We can make Crusades much harder for the defending human player, with randomly placed armies for example.
If we move the Islam unificitation/dominance goal to the Arab 3rd UHV, the 3rd Egyptian can be focused on the Mamluk wealth and prosperity in Egypt, taking together the best in Swarbs and the Turks proposals - the need for huge and very wealthy cities in their core province.

 

[gilgames]

I agree that stability is bigger issue than military. And for morocco cordoban respawn equals collaps due to unhappiness. The bonus from militariam fade away too fast...

 

[Swarbs]

I agree that stability is bigger issue than military. And for morocco cordoban respawn equals collaps due to unhappiness. The bonus from militariam fade away too fast...

???

The bonus from militarism is permanent. It even stays after you switch to a different civic!

 

[Swarbs]

About the UHVs, I agree with El Bogus and we shouldn't have too many conquest goals focused on the very same territories.
Atm I symphatize the most with:

Arab 1st: Historic conquest till 909
Arab 2nd: Golden Age in techs, wonders, etc.
Arab 3rd: Caliph of the Islamic World: dominance over Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco, Ottomans in some form

Perhaps the 3rd goal is more fitting here than for Egypt, after all they are the ones who had it all united once.
For the 1st goal we can implement huge uprisings in the Maghreb in 909, even if we spawn to Fatimids as a full civ in 969.

Egypt 1st: Historic conquest till 1050
Egypt 2nd: No Christian cities in the Levant and Egypt, with the proposed counter
Egypt 3rd: Culture+trade/commerce goal in one form, probably for all Egyptian cities together (as in the province) not only for Cairo.
E.g. have at least 7 wonders in Egypt, with a base commerce output at least 150 in your cities.

I would like to keep the Crusader goal for the Ayyubids, isn't it more fitting there?
We can make Crusades much harder for the defending human player, with randomly placed armies for example.
If we move the Islam unificitation/dominance goal to the Arab 3rd UHV, the 3rd Egyptian can be focused on the Mamluk wealth and prosperity in Egypt, taking together the best in Swarbs and the Turks proposals - the need for huge and very wealthy cities in their core province.

This all sounds good, particularly if Crusades are made less predictable. Although I'm not a huge fan of late game wonder related goals. There's too much luck inherent in some of them, particularly for a civ like Egypt which will probably have few wonders available when they spawn.

One good option for the third UHV could be to make Egypt the most populous and commercially strongest province in the game. Probably a competition with Saxony, Aquitaine, Novgorod, Kiev and particularly Andalusia, so might need some adjustment of province boundaries to work right given how large Andalusia is. Or just a late game nuke of Southern Iberia

 

[AbsintheRed]

This all sounds good, particularly if Crusades are made less predictable. Although I'm not a huge fan of late game wonder related goals. There's too much luck inherent in some of them, particularly for a civ like Egypt which will probably have few wonders available when they spawn.

One good option for the third UHV could be to make Egypt the most populous and commercially strongest province in the game. Probably a competition with Saxony, Aquitaine, Novgorod, Kiev and particularly Andalusia, so might need some adjustment of province boundaries to work right given how large Andalusia is. Or just a late game nuke of Southern Iberia

I'm not insisting on the wonders, especially if some will also be included in the 2nd Arab goal.
My preference in the proposal is also the province based population and commerce, maybe with some cultural sidegoal also added.

 

[The Turk]

Is it impossible to expand the map a few tiles South? How much work would that require realistically? Due to most of those tiles being either the Atlantic, Red Sea or Sahara desert, it shouldn't be that difficult, right?