Feedback: Civilizations

Are we? I can think of worse ideas than to use "modern Israeli army" unit art for the civ's advanced units, and stick Golda Meir or someone in as a leader...

I'm supportive of this. Whether modern Israel is or is not a continuation of the ancient civilization, it certainly sees itself as at least its progeny.

The real challenge, IMO, is to get a good 'rebirth' mechanism built into a standard, open-ended Civ game. RFC got it nearly right, but had to go the deterministic route to do it.
 
Question:

If someone else has created a mod civilization that is not intended for History Rewritten, can that civilization be inserted plug-and-play style into the History Rewritten mod? If so, how? If not, why not? I don't know enough about how the code works to foresee the problems with doing that.

Take a look at the file structure of the civilization mod. If most everything is contained in <ModName>/Assets/Modules/ then it stands a chance at working. Just copy the contents of that Modules folder into History Rewritten/Assets/Modules/. Odds are there'll be a few errors thrown due to the module looking for elements that have been renamed or removed in HR but hopefully nothing so bad that it would cause a crash or failure to load.

Try it out and see. If you post the text or screenshot of any errors you might get I'll let you know how fixable they are.

I'm supportive of this. Whether modern Israel is or is not a continuation of the ancient civilization, it certainly sees itself as at least its progeny.

The real challenge, IMO, is to get a good 'rebirth' mechanism built into a standard, open-ended Civ game. RFC got it nearly right, but had to go the deterministic route to do it.

Under the definitions I use for a civilization in HR modern Israel can certainly be considered the continuation of ancient Israel and Judah, just with the presumption that there was no large gap in between.

In game terms a civilization survives as long as they have one city left - obviously this wasn't the case for the Jews in real history. The best way to emulate that in game terms would possibly be via a culture system where the culture of a defeated civilization doesn't necessarily disappear and can somehow thrive or even reassert itself over the years. It's an intriguing concept but would be very challenging to implement effectively without the SDK.
 
Take a look at the file structure of the civilization mod. If most everything is contained in <ModName>/Assets/Modules/ then it stands a chance at working. Just copy the contents of that Modules folder into History Rewritten/Assets/Modules/. Odds are there'll be a few errors thrown due to the module looking for elements that have been renamed or removed in HR but hopefully nothing so bad that it would cause a crash or failure to load.

Try it out and see. If you post the text or screenshot of any errors you might get I'll let you know how fixable they are.

I'll give it a go.

Update:

I used the australian civ from civ gold. The civ does work as normal in civ gold.
I put the australian civ folder in History Rewritten/Assets/Modules/Civilizations
It didn't work in History Rewritten. It came up with these error messages when History Rewritten was loading.

Screen shot 2012-04-01 at 8.14.51 PM.png

Screen shot 2012-04-01 at 8.16.11 PM.png

Screen shot 2012-04-01 at 8.15.48 PM.png

Screen shot 2012-04-01 at 8.15.14 PM.png

I clicked OK with all of the messages.
it got me into the mod. I went into custom mode.
The civ showed up in the menu but the leaders didn't.
 
Take a look at the file structure of the civilization mod. If most everything is contained in <ModName>/Assets/Modules/ then it stands a chance at working. Just copy the contents of that Modules folder into History Rewritten/Assets/Modules/. Odds are there'll be a few errors thrown due to the module looking for elements that have been renamed or removed in HR but hopefully nothing so bad that it would cause a crash or failure to load.

Try it out and see. If you post the text or screenshot of any errors you might get I'll let you know how fixable they are.



Under the definitions I use for a civilization in HR modern Israel can certainly be considered the continuation of ancient Israel and Judah, just with the presumption that there was no large gap in between.

In game terms a civilization survives as long as they have one city left - obviously this wasn't the case for the Jews in real history. The best way to emulate that in game terms would possibly be via a culture system where the culture of a defeated civilization doesn't necessarily disappear and can somehow thrive or even reassert itself over the years. It's an intriguing concept but would be very challenging to implement effectively without the SDK.

If have once thought about this for the Revolution DCM.
But the issue with the Israeli citylist is that the modern civilization is not one you would put in the game. Israel around 1000-900 BC was a power, at least one of the top seven of the whole world. Modern Israel isn't even close to it.
A modern art defenition is reasonable, but the citylist doesn't have to include modern cities.
It is based on the assumption that in your specific game, the Ancient Hebrew civilization wouldn't be "defeated" in first place, so they would keep with their old culture and their major cities untill the modern era.
For example, Arabia doesn't have the modern cities of Saudi Arabia. They have the most important cities of the Caliphates. Of course many cities are still important nowadays, but the reason they are included is their importance in the Caliphates' culture.
Another possible example is Persia. Teheran, Shiraz and Isfahan are out of the citylist, which includes the greatest Achaemenid and Sassanid cities.
 
Most of the civilizations in the game were never more than regionally important. I mean, when was Hungary or Poland or Mali for that matter the Khmer in the top seven? Not for long- part of the point of the mod is to provide diversity.

Also, what else would we use for modern Israelite armies, if not the Israeli military of today? It makes more sense than giving them some kind of shared artwork that all the other "Middle Eastern" civs use, in keeping with the idea of unique art.

Plus, nitpick, I am rather dubious of the idea that Israel c. 1000 BC was one of the seven most powerful civilizations of its age...
 
I would vote for a jet fighter replacement, with double movement, or a marine replacement. The jet replacement would not be as powerful as a land based uu, but would make Israel unique, and would be historically accurate, since the idf is among the best air-forces in the world today, in part because of their pilot's ability to fly up to twice as many missions per day as NATO pilots.

While I disagree with jester, Israel and Mali for that matter, dominated the Salt trade, making them the richest civilizations in their day, all things considered I think a modern Israel is more significant than the ancient one.
 
Of course there are some regional empires. The Khmer have been more than that, but the Maya and the Koreans are good examples.
And I didn't object the modern military art, I just said that modern cities shouldn't be included in the citylist.
 
I'll give it a go.

Update:

I used the australian civ from civ gold. The civ does work as normal in civ gold.
I put the australian civ folder in History Rewritten/Assets/Modules/Civilizations
It didn't work in History Rewritten. It came up with these error messages when History Rewritten was loading.

View attachment 317732

View attachment 317734

View attachment 317733

View attachment 317735

I clicked OK with all of the messages.
it got me into the mod. I went into custom mode.
The civ showed up in the menu but the leaders didn't.

Having a closer look at the error's the problem seem to be the civic and with the anzac the tech. All that is changed in this mod. Always something so simple.

I am nervis on getting into the file and changing things. Question. Assuming that i am right what do I need to change?
 
[…]I just said that modern cities shouldn't be included in the citylist.

Should a neither old nor new capital city like Madrid be removed from Spain's city list, in your opinion?

Puny little villages that played no role in history, became important cities through industrialization and the demographics of the 19th century.

Why can't Tel Aviv just be listed at the the bottom of the city list, and the very latest Jewish settlements at the very bottom?
 
Because it's not exactly the same civilization.
Do you think Teheran should be included in the Persian citylist?
And should the Khmer citylist include modern Cambodian cities?
 
Having a closer look at the error's the problem seem to be the civic and with the anzac the tech. All that is changed in this mod. Always something so simple.

I am nervis on getting into the file and changing things. Question. Assuming that i am right what do I need to change?

Yep. You'll need to go into the file that each error message refers to and replace problematic tags with ones from HR. For Australia_CIV4CivilizationInfos.xml you'll need to use this block of xml in the appropriate place:

Code:
			<InitialCivics>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_DESPOTISM</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_BARBARISM</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_TRIBALISM</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_RECIPROCITY</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_MILITIA</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_PAGANISM</CivicType>
			</InitialCivics>

All the others will just require renaming of the individual tag. For example, in Anzac_CIV4UnitInfos.xml search for TECH_INDUSTRIALISM and replace it with TECH_LABOUR_UNIONS, so that the Anzac unit unlocks at the same time as regular Infantry (I'm assuming that's what it replaces).

The errors in the CIV4LeaderInfo files are related to the each leader's favourite civic. Just change them to whichever HR civic you think is appropriate.
 
It might help if I post an example of how I like to construct citylists. Here's Mali and Greece:

Code:
MALI

	<City>Djenne</City>
	<City>Awkar</City>
	<!-- Wagadou -->
	<City>Koumbi Saleh</City>
	<City>Walata</City>
	<City>Awdughast</City>			<!-- Tegdaoust -->
	<!-- Manden/Mali  -->
	<City>Kangaba</City>			<!-- Ka-ba -->
	<City>Niani</City>
	<City>Mema</City>
	<City>Kaniaga</City>			<!-- Kirane/Sosso -->
	<City>Timbuktu</City>
	<City>Tadmekka</City>			<!-- Essouk -->
	<!-- Songhay -->
	<City>Kukiya</City>
	<City>Gao</City>
	<City>Surame</City>				<!-- Say -->
	<City>Takedda</City>			<!-- Teguidda -->
	<City>Agadez</City>
	<!-- Sahara -->
	<City>Chinguetti</City>
	<City>Wadane</City>
	<City>Arouane</City>
	<City>Taghaza</City>
	<City>Taoudenni</City>
	<!-- Western Lands -->
	<City>Takrur</City>
	<City>Djolof</City>				<!-- Wolof/Linguere -->
	<City>Kansala</City>			<!-- Kaabu -->
	<!-- Minor Cities -->
	<City>Kita</City>
	<City>Toron</City>
	<City>Krina</City>				<!-- Kri/Kirina -->
	<City>Do</City>
	<City>Djedeba</City>
	<City>Kouroussa</City>
	<!-- Later Cities -->
	<City>Segou</City>
	<City>Mopti</City>
	<City>Sikasso</City>			<!-- Kenedougou -->
	<City>Nioro</City>				<!-- Kaarta -->
	<City>Hamdallahi</City>			<!-- Massina -->
	<City>Bamako</City>


GREECE

	<!-- Bronze Age -->
	<City>Mykenai</City>
	<City>Tyrinthe</City>
	<City>Argos</City>
	<City>Pylos</City>
	<City>Athenai</City>
	<City>Thebae</City>
	<City>Orchomenos</City>
	<!-- Iron Age -->
	<City>Sparta</City>
	<City>Korinth</City>
	<City>Megara</City>
	<City>Helike</City>
	<City>Olympia</City>
	<City>Delphi</City>
	<City>Chalkis</City>
	<City>Eretria</City>
	<!-- Aegean -->
	<City>Miletos</City>
	<City>Ephesos</City>
	<City>Phokaea</City>
	<City>Smyrna</City>
	<City>Mytilene</City>
	<City>Samos</City>
	<City>Halikarnassos</City>
	<City>Rhodes</City>
	<!-- Western Colonies -->
	<City>Epirus</City>
	<City>Syrakuse</City>
	<City>Gela</City>
	<City>Akragas</City>
	<City>Rhegion</City>
	<City>Tarentum</City>
	<City>Kyme</City>
	<City>Massalia</City>
	<!-- Eastern Colonies -->
	<City>Kyrene</City>
	<City>Salamis</City>
	<City>Abydos</City>
	<City>Byzantium</City>
	<City>Chalkedon</City>
	<City>Sinope</City>
	<City>Trapezus</City>
	<!-- Macedonian Empire -->
	<City>Aegae</City>				<!-- Vergina -->
	<City>Pella</City>
	<City>Pergamon</City>
	<City>Alexandria</City>
	<City>Ptolemais</City>
	<City>Seleukia</City>
	<City>Antioch</City>
	<City>Apamea</City>
	<City>Laodikeia</City>
	<!-- Later Cities -->
	<City>Thessaloniki</City>
	<City>Patras</City>
	<City>Kalamata</City>

The comments to the right are alternative names for some cities, to help me keep my research organised and prevent double ups. As you can see I list cities in sections, based on the civilization's evolution. In the case of the Mande, there are several distinct kingdoms or empires to categorize cities by. For many other civs I organise by dynasties (e.g Egypt), eras or ages (e.g Hatti), and some I organize by geography - to represent probably order of expansion (e.g Polynesia). Others are a mix of these but the overall idea is that the main part of the city list is ordered chronologically.

However, within each section I'll often place important cities such as capitals at the front, even if they're known to be founded (or rose to city status) later. For example, Sparta is the first city in the Greek Iron Age section even though it rose to prominence later than the overall less important Eretria. Sparta still come behind all the important cities of the Bronze Age though. I find this a very useful way of giving prominence some weighting without messing up chronology too much.

You'll also notice I have a 'Minor Cities' section. This is useful to add more entries to the list and might contain very ancient cities but ones that were never that important. For example, Nina is a very ancient Sumerian city but there's no value in placing it and other such minor cities chronologically or important cities like Akkad and Eshnunna may never get founded in a game.

Some civs have a section called 'Other Cities' or similar. Mali's 'Western Lands' section is such an example. This is for cities that were important but were on the periphery of an empire, perhaps never a formal part of an empire but still culturally or politically associated. Other examples are Singapura in the Indonesian list and several Tuareg cities in the Berber list.

Finally, there is sometimes a 'Later Cities' section which is basically for cities that are significant in the modern day but were not for most of the civilization's history. Some other examples are Khartoum, Nairobi, and Kuala Lumpur.

Sounds a bit complicated and I certainly tailor the system for different civs but overall I'm pretty happy with the results. Note though that due to the rest of the mod keeping me busy I haven't been able to overhaul many citylists in this way yet. Citylists that I consider 'done' are: Germany, Greece, Phoenicia, Berbers, Egypt, Nubia, Mali, Swahili, Sumer, Amurru, Assyria, Hatti, Kushan, Indonesia, Polynesia, and the Aztec. Everything else still needs work, ranging from a few tweaks to a complete overhaul. What I would love to do is tie advanced starts and choice of leader into where a civ 'starts' on it's city list. I'm not sure it's possible though and it's certainly not a trivial task.

If have once thought about this for the Revolution DCM.
But the issue with the Israeli citylist is that the modern civilization is not one you would put in the game. Israel around 1000-900 BC was a power, at least one of the top seven of the whole world. Modern Israel isn't even close to it.
A modern art defenition is reasonable, but the citylist doesn't have to include modern cities.
It is based on the assumption that in your specific game, the Ancient Hebrew civilization wouldn't be "defeated" in first place, so they would keep with their old culture and their major cities untill the modern era.

We could add a 'Later Cities' section to the list and add some of the important modern cities to it. Most games they wouldn't get founded but if we wanted to shift them up the list a bit more, we could do so by shifting some cities to a 'Minor Cities' section, placed after the 'Later Cities' section.

For example, Arabia doesn't have the modern cities of Saudi Arabia. They have the most important cities of the Caliphates. Of course many cities are still important nowadays, but the reason they are included is their importance in the Caliphates' culture.
Another possible example is Persia. Teheran, Shiraz and Isfahan are out of the citylist, which includes the greatest Achaemenid and Sassanid cities.

Both the Arabian and Persian citylists are unchanged from BTS and are in serious need of an overhaul. Some poorly considered inclusions in both lists. I've started working on both but haven't had time to finish them yet. China and India are other lists needing a serious overhaul.

Most of the civilizations in the game were never more than regionally important. I mean, when was Hungary or Poland or Mali for that matter the Khmer in the top seven? Not for long- part of the point of the mod is to provide diversity.

Mali was pretty much the world's leading commercial and educational hub for a time. Angkor was also the largest city in the world for a while too. They'd both fit in a top 5 for their era.

Also, what else would we use for modern Israelite armies, if not the Israeli military of today? It makes more sense than giving them some kind of shared artwork that all the other "Middle Eastern" civs use, in keeping with the idea of unique art.

I use Israeli looking modern units when I can find them.

I would vote for a jet fighter replacement, with double movement, or a marine replacement. The jet replacement would not be as powerful as a land based uu, but would make Israel unique, and would be historically accurate, since the idf is among the best air-forces in the world today, in part because of their pilot's ability to fly up to twice as many missions per day as NATO pilots.

I'm not planning to change the Hebrew UU. If I ever added a second UU to each civ (not a high priority) a modern Israeli unit would be ideal though.

Should a neither old nor new capital city like Madrid be removed from Spain's city list, in your opinion?

Puny little villages that played no role in history, became important cities through industrialization and the demographics of the 19th century.

Why can't Tel Aviv just be listed at the the bottom of the city list, and the very latest Jewish settlements at the very bottom?

I think my system described above handles such considerations fairly well.

Because it's not exactly the same civilization.
Do you think Teheran should be included in the Persian citylist?
And should the Khmer citylist include modern Cambodian cities?

I think there is easily enough continuity between the ancient and modern incarnations of Israel to consider them the same civilization. Same with Persia/Iran and Angkor/Cambodia. Their important modern cities should be in their citylists, just near the bottom.
 
Because it's not exactly the same civilization.
Do you think Teheran should be included in the Persian citylist?
And should the Khmer citylist include modern Cambodian cities?
What does "the same civilization" even mean? Israel today is probably about as recognizable a descendant of classical-era Israeli as modern Britain is of Anglo-Saxon England, and yet we don't hesitate to lump both modern Britain and Anglo-Saxon England in as "the same civ." Japan, China, and a few others have continuity from the Bronze Age to today, despite enormous shifts in technology, ways of life, government, and culture. Why should Israel be any different?

Mali was pretty much the world's leading commercial and educational hub for a time. Angkor was also the largest city in the world for a while too. They'd both fit in a top 5 for their era.
Hm. My impression was that Mali's role, while impressive, was far from unique compared to other world centers of its era. Perhaps I am mistaken.

Angkor, yes, largest city in world- but in itself this doesn't prove much. "Preeminence" of the sort Absolution was talking about implies things like having military and economic weight that is feared or at least respected in foreign lands, in having cultural impact well beyond one's own borders, things like that.

Or I'd think so, anyway.
 
Yep. You'll need to go into the file that each error message refers to and replace problematic tags with ones from HR. For Australia_CIV4CivilizationInfos.xml you'll need to use this block of xml in the appropriate place:

Code:
			<InitialCivics>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_DESPOTISM</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_BARBARISM</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_TRIBALISM</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_RECIPROCITY</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_MILITIA</CivicType>
				<CivicType>CIVIC_PAGANISM</CivicType>
			</InitialCivics>

All the others will just require renaming of the individual tag. For example, in Anzac_CIV4UnitInfos.xml search for TECH_INDUSTRIALISM and replace it with TECH_LABOUR_UNIONS, so that the Anzac unit unlocks at the same time as regular Infantry (I'm assuming that's what it replaces).

The errors in the CIV4LeaderInfo files are related to the each leader's favourite civic. Just change them to whichever HR civic you think is appropriate.

I sorted out all of the codes but then it crashed as soon as i clicked on the australian civ at the menu.
 
I think you would rather make Joshua a great general, not a leader.
Joshua have never ruled any state, or a country.

In the time of Joshua, the Israelites were just some tribes of foreigners in Cnaan.
When he captured cities, he didn't organize them under the rule or authirity of a state or a country.
The capture has just made these cities be populated by Israelities.

In those times, most of cnaan was in disorder, and every city was held on its own.
But those cities haven't been city-states really.

Joshua was just the leader of the Israeli community in Cnaan.
Once in a while, he capture a city, so that Israelites would populate it, but it haven't been under any Israeli rule.
Therefore a great general is a perfect title for him.

If you wan't a different third leader - it should be David.
 
Absolution, that would make sense, but there are a lot of "early" rulers of various societies who fall under the same heading. Most of the Celtic rulers, for example, are the leaders of large coalitions of tribes who are famous because they fought against the Romans, the Greeks, or the English. They might hold a king-like title, but they didn't have the kind of uncontested power that, say, a Persian emperor would have.

The "leader" of a civilization doesn't have to be an emperor or president. They can be a spiritual figurehead (like Ghandi), or someone who controlled that civilization's resources in war (like Hannibal).
 
There are quite a few leaders in HR that were never political leaders, but are included because they are some combination of iconic, influential and/or interesting. I like each civilization to have a reasonably diverse selection of traits, and also to avoid leaders that are too close to each other chronologically so that different periods of the civilization's history are represented. Joshua was chosen over David for both those reasons.
 
Does the "Turkic Empire" really refer to all of the Turkic peoples?
Turkic is much more than Turkish, and it isn't a civilization or a culture at all.

I think you should at least split it into Turkish and Uyghurs.
The Turkish can include Atatturk and the Ottomans, with the Anatolian cities.
The Uyghurs can include Alp Arslan the Seljuq, and maybe the Mamluks in addition..?

Turkic can not be a term in civilization. The same way the Semitics can not be called a civilization.

I'd love to have them splitted. It will be much easier to integrate many new leaders and cities that way.
 
Does the "Turkic Empire" really refer to all of the Turkic peoples?
Turkic is much more than Turkish, and it isn't a civilization or a culture at all.

At the moment it pretty much refers to all Turkic peoples but many aspects, the city list in particular, have not yet been changed. It's a civ that still needs a lot of work.

I think you should at least split it into Turkish and Uyghurs.
The Turkish can include Atatturk and the Ottomans, with the Anatolian cities.
The Uyghurs can include Alp Arslan the Seljuq, and maybe the Mamluks in addition..?

The Uyghurs are one of the major Turkic groups that remained on the steppes, it makes little sense to consider the Seljuq part of them. There are definite cultural and political links between the Seljuq and Ottoman Turks though.

Turkic can not be a term in civilization. The same way the Semitics can not be called a civilization.

Neither can the Ottomans, Seljuks or the Mamluks. These were dynasties. 'Semitic' and 'Turkic' are ethnolinguistic terms, but so are 'Celtic', 'Chinese' and 'Indian'. What constitutes a 'civilization' is not something that's easy to define or apply consistently, nor should it be. I don't disagree with you in this particular instance though.

I'd love to have them splitted. It will be much easier to integrate many new leaders and cities that way.

I may split them in some way, I'm not sure yet. At the very least I'll redefine them a bit. The history of the Turkic peoples is pretty convoluted though and I need to do a lot of research to find a configuration I'm happy with. Probably won't happen for a while, but it definitely needs to happen.
 
Neither can the Ottomans, Seljuks or the Mamluks. These were dynasties. 'Semitic' and 'Turkic' are ethnolinguistic terms, but so are 'Celtic', 'Chinese' and 'Indian'.
I didn't mean that Ottomans or Seljuks should be a civilization.
But Turkic is almost a race, which is splitted into various groups of people, which has no connection to each other.
Chinese peoples shared the same cultural life, and were relatively united through their history.
Same thing with indian peoples, which weren't really united politically, but were culturally indentified together, and centered on the same peninsula.
But Oghuz, Turkish, Kipchak or Uyghur people can be treated as seperate groups of people. However, most of them are not so historically important, so there is no need to include them in the game.
Only the Turkish are.

And if you want, Alp arslan can be considered an Oghuz leader.
 
Back
Top Bottom