1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Final Civ List.

Discussion in 'Civ4 - World 2009 Mod' started by DVS, Dec 9, 2008.

  1. Adhesive86

    Adhesive86 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Messages:
    266
    Location:
    Yorkshire, England
    So we're changing all the civs again? After a year on the project and much of the work that people have done now needs to be redone because Mattygerst doesn't like the 'balance'. I've read and re read these posts and what was written on the diplo thread i set up and can only come to the conclusion that they convey a real arrogance and little faith in or regard for other people's work.

    There is absolutely no good reason to be ripping this map up at this stage to save civ space whilst also creating a load of new civs. We could all do new maps. To have argued and better argued about it and now to be changing it within 24 hours after at most 3 people including the new author are in favour seems pretty ridiculous, but hey.

    To tackle some of the points raised in favour of the new map, which I had rather hoped to have avoided doing:

    1) Canada is the 2nd biggest country in the world and a G7 economy. It is far from unreasonable to expect it will feature independently whether the civ count is 48-53.

    2) The EU:

    This has been argued over and over and there are arguments on both sides, but it is not clearly the best thing to split up the EU mainland.

    a) With the exception of the UK and some of the new accession states (e.g. Poland) most of Europe is incredibly ideologically aligned with regard to foreign policy. Granted, with 27 states the EU find it hard to agree much re defence, but to say they have very different distinct policies it not true, most are pretty kantian. The EU has a European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), with the security pillar being in place since 1992 (from memory) and security missions enacted.

    b) The EU is a massive and growing power, a counter balance to the US and China. To remove it and cut it up will emasculate it and is not representative of how EU trade (internal and external) and the EU economy functions.

    3) ASEAN: ASEAN is much less integrated than the EU, but Mattygerst wants to represent this bloc, but not the EU? Doesn't make sense.

    4) EU vs US vs China vs Russia: Why is this a problem? This is quite representative is it not? Having read Kai's city list i would not discount India, Brazil or Japan. I'd even fancied myself with Britain after a swift bit of recolonising. However I really agree with Joecoolyo that there are many factors that are to be taken into account before deciding on 'balance', if we are to decide that balance is more important than realism anyway which seems at odds with the notion of a 2009 mod.

    Ultimately I'm not saying Matty has a bad map, although I don't agree it's quite as great as he's saying. I agree that the important thing is to get a release ASAP and I can't see how changing the map at this stage helps. I won't say anymore on the subject though, my opinion has been made clear.
     
  2. cheesemijit

    cheesemijit Prince

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    362
    Location:
    Eastleigh, Hampshire, England
    I wanted to be able to compare the two properly so i am making the civ list for Matty's Map. after thinking about it a bit i do prefer Genghis's Civ list (but i personally would like a split up europe so i could play say germany and try and conquer the world (but obviously make it so the AI never do this)) We could always keep the XML for all the current civs and then once we have Finished Matty's Map (Most the Civs can just use the leaders/buildings/units from the civs they are made up from. i think once the map is complete and playable then we should focus on making a 60civ DLL (60 so there is room for some revolutions and a map with a plit up EU (could easily have 2)

    Spoiler :
    European Union (EU excluding UK)
    United Kingdom (Jamaica, Belize, Bahamas, Trinidad)
    Norway
    Russia
    Belarus
    Ukraine
    Turkey
    Georgia

    Morocco
    Algeria (Tunisia)
    Egypt
    Sudan
    Ethiopia
    West African States (Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Senegal, and Togo.)
    Nigeria (Ghana, Liberia and Sierra Leone)
    Central African States (Cameroon, São Tomé, Equatorial Guinea and Gabon)
    Angola (DR Congo)
    South Africa (Botswana and Namibia)
    East African States (Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi)

    Saudi Arabia
    Israel
    Palestine
    Syria
    Iran
    Pakistan
    Bangladesh
    India

    Kazakhstan
    Mongolia
    China
    Taiwan
    North Korea
    South Korea
    Japan

    Myanmar
    Thailand
    Vietnam
    Philippines
    Indonesia
    Australia (Papul New Guinea and some pacific islands)
    New Zealand (some pacific islands)

    Canada
    United States (Iraq, Afghanistan)
    Mexico
    Colombia
    Bolivarian Americas (Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua)
    Peru
    Brazil
    Argentina
    Chile

    Neutral States (Switzerland, Turkmenistan and Costa Rica)

    Minor States (Iceland, Croatia, Albania, Serbia, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan, Libya, Cape Verde, Mozambique, Madagascar, Seychelles, Lebanon, Jordon, Oman, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE, Yemen, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Singapore, Brunei, Laos, Cambodia, Guatemala, Haiti, Guyana, Suriname, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay)

    Failed States (Mauritania, Guinea, Côte d'Ivoire, part of Mali, part of Niger, Central African Republic, Chad, part of DR Congo, Eritrea, Somalia, Darfur, Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Uzbekistan, East Timor)


    Spoiler :
    1. European Union (East Balkans, Portugal, Ireland, Finland, Belgium, Netherlands, Austria)
    2. United Kingdom (Jamaica, Belize, Bahamas, Trinidad, Falklands?)
    3. France
    4. Germany
    5. Poland
    6. Spain
    7. Italy
    8. NATO (Norway, Canada, Estonia, Lativa, Lithuania, Denmark, Iceland)
    9. Russia
    10. Belarus
    11. Ukraine
    12. Turkey

    13. Morocco
    14. Egypt
    15. West African States (Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger, Senegal, and Togo.)
    16. Central African States (Cameroon, São Tomé, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Tunisia, 17. Nigeria, Ghana, Liberia and Sierra Leone)
    18. South African States (Botswana and Namibia and South Africa)
    19. East African States (Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi, Ethiopia)


    I Have to go, i will finish later (Or someone else can)
     
  3. Joecoolyo

    Joecoolyo 99% Lightspeed

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,908
    Location:
    茨城県
    Well, the new list looks ok, we can't just change everything. If we switch over to this that means all of Genghis Kai's map work is lost, that means all of the UB's and UU's have to be redone, that mean we're going to have to fix all of the world relations that Adhesive started to work on. A whole years worth of work will be lost without even testing the old map.

    As I've said before (and as Adhesive said above) lets stick with the old map for now, get it into beta and test out how it goes. If we find the EU is too powerful, or that we should reunite ASEAN, then we can change that later (that's the entire point of beta, to make sure everything works and is balanced). For now, too much work would be lost to just switch over on impulse to a new map.

    Mattygerst, I'm not saying your map is bad... its a good map. Just this far into the process its too big of a overhaul, especially since we haven't even started testing.
     
  4. Lord Wolf

    Lord Wolf Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2008
    Messages:
    26
    Location:
    Austria
    I completely agree with Joecoolyo and Adhesive86. Mattygerst your map is great too and maybe it can be used sometimes in the future. But I really don't understand why (after a very long and extensive discussion, a poll and much work for the existing map) we should now change everything. Adhesive86 has brought up a couple of great arguments for the original map. Certainly there are also good argument for your new map, no doubt! But for the moment I think it would be much better to stick to the status quo. Otherwise we could start again to discuss, why and why not some civs (especially the EU) should or should not be implemented, but I think at this point that would be quite useless, because we already have had this discussion at length.
     
  5. civ editor11

    civ editor11 Ruler

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    999
    Location:
    U.S.
    We should just go with the new map so we can move this along faster we need to get version 1 out before 2010
     
  6. NikNaks

    NikNaks Deity

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2006
    Messages:
    2,972
    Location:
    England
    Civ, you've got the right idea. This idea is good, and as far as I'm concerned, it's close enough to our old list to be workable. There are many faults with the old list that are solved with this, but by no means am I saying it's perfect. I'm saying it's good enough, and let's plough on.
     
  7. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    I've not written anything in here for quite a time since I didn't have any time to participate. But I've always been following the discussion on here (at times when there's been one).
    But once I read this I have to say a word or two: I am aghast at these new plans. I completely agree with adhesive, joecoolyo and lord wolf. We have discussed this list over and over for months, balanced with all our combined knowledge. It turned out to be the best way to represent a realistic world. A lot of people spent a lot of effort doing this. And there is absolutely no reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater and completely redo the list.
    Cutting three civs is the right way to go. Anything else means a lot of accomplished work (XML, UBs, UUs, Leaders, Relations...) is thrown away and a lot of new work needs to be done. This will further delay the release without any benefit.
     
  8. Adhesive86

    Adhesive86 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Messages:
    266
    Location:
    Yorkshire, England
    Here's my quick plan to cut civs, discussed in MAP vote thread. I don't think this 'unbalances beyond belief':

    1) Belarus ----> Russia
    2) Sudan -----> Failed States
    3) Angola (DR Congo)-----> Minor States OR Mongolia -----> Minor States

    This isn't difficult, solves our problem and avoids 'throwing the baby out with the bathwater', which is otherwise EXACTLY what is happening. There is no way anyone can seriously argue that the addition of 2 cities in Belarus to Russia is going to unbalance the game or that Sudan or Angola are going to make much difference in failed and minor states either to the game or makeup of Africa. (The aim in Africa was to break it up, and we're still left with 11 civs there so it's still fractured)

    Problem solved, merge GEM with revolutions civ dll (50 civ), which has already been done and shown to work twice by GEM modders...
     
  9. civ editor11

    civ editor11 Ruler

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    999
    Location:
    U.S.
    Lets just do something. If the majority likes the new map go with the the new map. If not don't. Lets just decide on something instead of arguing for days
     
  10. Adhesive86

    Adhesive86 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Messages:
    266
    Location:
    Yorkshire, England
    That's why i've put it to a vote. See here... http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=330516
     
  11. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    Well, arguing is part of the decision process. It doesn't work otherwise. Of course it's delaying. And that is exactly the reason why this box should not have been re-opened in the first place. :shake:
     
  12. civ editor11

    civ editor11 Ruler

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2009
    Messages:
    999
    Location:
    U.S.
    What I'm saying is take a vote like adhesive is doing and which ever one wins go with that instead of arguing for days on what to do
     
  13. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    Why the hell did you cut out Palestine...?????
     
  14. Mattygerst

    Mattygerst Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Okay, now that I've figured out once and for all how to incorporate everything into the map correctly and have the map work in terms of cities assigned to the correct civ, removing all unnecessary units, buildings, and that kind of stuff, we will get to the Final Civ List. A couple of these can be negotiated in and out, but some are staying because its entrenched into the map.

    Civ List - Staying 100%:

    Spoiler :
    West: 7
    USA
    Canada
    Mexico
    Brazil
    Argentina
    Peru
    Chile

    Bolivarian Alliance: 1
    Venezuela
    Ecuador
    Bolivia
    Cuba
    Honduras
    Dominican Republic

    Europe: 10
    United Kingdom
    Spain
    France
    Germany
    Poland
    Italy
    Sweden
    Turkey
    Ukraine
    Switzerland

    NATO: 1
    Norway
    Iceland
    Denmark
    Estonia
    Latvia
    Lithuania

    European Union: 1
    Belgium
    Netherlands
    Ireland
    Portugal
    Greece
    Bulgaria
    Romania
    Czech Rep.
    Austria
    Hungary
    Finland

    Mediterranean Union: 1
    Croatia
    Albania
    Serbia

    N Africa: 4
    Libya
    Egypt
    Morocco
    Algeria

    Africa East/Central/West/AU Alliances: 4

    West: 1
    Sierra Leone
    Liberia
    Cameroon
    Togo
    Nigeria

    Central: 1
    Mali
    Niger
    Zambia
    Angola

    East: 1
    Tanzania
    Mozambique
    Ethiopia
    Namibia

    African Union: 1
    South Africa
    Tunisia
    Senegal
    Ghana

    Middle East: 4
    Saudi Arabia
    Syria
    Israel
    Iran

    Central Asia: 2
    Russia & Belarus
    CACO: - Tajikistan - Kazakhstan - Kyrgyzstan - Turkmenistan - Uzbekistan

    West/South Asia: 2
    Pakistan
    India

    SouthEast Asia: 4
    China
    Thailand
    Indonesia
    ASEAN- Vietnam -Philippines - Malaysia -Singapore

    East Asia: 3
    N Korea
    S Korea
    Japan

    Australia/Oceania: 1
    Australia & New Zealand

    Minor States: 1
    Paraguay
    Uruguay
    Guyana
    Suriname
    Cyprus
    Kuwait
    Oman
    Costa Rica
    Armenia
    Georgia

    Failed States: 1
    African failed states
    Madagascar
    Iraq (US involvment)
    Afghanistan (US involment)


    That list of 100% in the mod totals: 46 (failed states does not equal a civ - and I'm 100% sure of this after learning how to create the map). Those countries, 100%, will be represented in the mod. That leaves us 4 more civs to either add, or break up from conglomerates above. The rest I will leave up to a short debate for those who care. Here are the possibilities/suggestions:

    Add 4 civs:
    Basically, in list form:
    - Break down the EU more (see EU list above)
    - Break down the Mediterranean Union
    - Break down ASEAN more
    - Separate Australia/New Zealand
    - Separate Russia & Belarus (keeping in mind no Vassal States will be used in the mod to avoid major countries vassalizing the world on Turn #1 as in GEM 1940).
    - Add in:
    Colombia
    Palestine
    Jordan
    Lebanon
    Georgia
    Armenia
    or one of the other Minor States
    -Keep 4 civ slots open and play with Revolutions on and chance a civ breaking up under revolution and spawing new civs.
    -Your thoughts/ideas

    This needs to be done by Friday this week. Whatever we do, we have room for 4 more civilizations.
     
  15. Adhesive86

    Adhesive86 Warlord

    Joined:
    May 13, 2008
    Messages:
    266
    Location:
    Yorkshire, England
    1)

    Definitely:
    - Add Colombia

    - Add Palestine

    Should:

    - Add Georgia

    - Add New Zealand

    5th choice would be a Belarus (Russia defence pact)

    Also,

    2) - Change 'Mediterranean Union' to 'Balkan Union'. This is just a better, more accurate name.


    3) - Not happy with South Africa (a nuclear power) in same civ as a north african country, but unless someone agrees i'll leave this as i know you're trying to fragment Africa. Nevertheless South Africa is a large regional power. To change it i would:

    - Merge Tunisia into Algeria

    - Senegal = Minor

    - Ghana = Minor or another union

    - South Africa Independent, incorporating some other southern states e.g. Mozambique.

    Ps also the NATO civ has no teeth whatsoever, so I wonder if there's any point in it? I think they should be split along Scandinavian (Iceland, Norway, Denmark) and Baltic (Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) lines. If no extra civ slots then put the Baltic in the EU, and Scandinavian independent. Or create 5 civ slots by just putting them all in the EU. (yes I know Iceland and Norway are not yet in the EU, but they are in EFTA and are as much EU as Belarus is Russia etc).
     
  16. Arakhor

    Arakhor Dremora Courtier Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    32,757
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    I don't see a problem with a Scandinavian Alliance civ (Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Greenland).
     
  17. Quklis

    Quklis Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2009
    Messages:
    54
    Location:
    Finnish Socialist Workers' Republic
    Nordic Alliance would fit much better, because Finnish people don't usually want to be considered as part of Scandinavia. And it's not geographically correct either.
     
  18. Arakhor

    Arakhor Dremora Courtier Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2009
    Messages:
    32,757
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Nordic then. I'm never clear on other people's names for themselves.
     
  19. Mattygerst

    Mattygerst Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Messages:
    536
    Location:
    St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Some quick reflections along with a couple thought:

    Adhesive:
    We do have 4 civ slots, but we really are pressed for room, obviously.
    Mediterranean Union was used over Balkan Union for the simple fact that it is a name of a union that actually exists that I read about regarding those states. But, doesn't matter to me to change it.

    You mention we 'should' add Georgia. Well, Tbilisi (capital of Georgia), and Baku (capital of Azerbaijan) are both currently "Minor Nations" and play an important role of separating Russia from Turkey thru the Caucasus Mountains. We could add those 2 countries as a "Caucasus Union". And give them good relations with the USA (and probably EU).

    Total Civ count: 46+1 = 47.

    Definitely add: Colombia & Palestine: Total Civ Count: 47+2 = 49.

    Okay, now we get one more Civ. Regarding NATO. I FULLY agree with you that NATO has zero power, whatsoever. The only thing that was having me leave it as is, was giving them the standard defensive pact with EU and USA. That would inhibit countries with attack them. I also know that Norway wants no part of it as I've read. I also didn't want to really make an all-powerful EU for gameplay reasons, but those states are not exactly going to break the bank. Do we leave Greenland as a Minor State? But, we can bite the bullet, and add all of NATO to the EU.

    Total Civs: 49-1 = 48

    Next was South Africa. We simply split up South Africa from the rest of the Africa. We would also move Tunisia from that union and merge with Algeria. Ghana becomes a failed state. Senegal merges with the Central African Alliance.

    Total Civs: 48 (no change, simply shuffling)

    List Form:
    Add: Caucasus Union (2 cities, good relations with USA) = 1 Civ
    Add: Colombia & Palestine = 2 Civs
    Remove: NATO & combine with EU
    Separate: South Africa from AU to make independent
    Combine: Tunisia & Algeria, and Senegal to CAA
    Failed: Ghana

    Unless my counting is way off, this leaves us with 48 civs and room for 2 more slots. Belarus is such a garbage country, its almost better just leaving them in Russia full time. They're like their babysitter anyway.

    Other suggestions/ideas welcome. Adding 2 more civs should not be hard. I'm a bit skeptical to separate New Zealand & Australia simply because New Zealand is not exactly a playable country with world impact, but also is more in union with Australia than being a Minor State at war with everyone. We could use the final 2 civ slots to break down Africa even more, to really fracture it. But, if anything, lets try to stay on track. We've got the bulk of this done and I'm inclined to agree with Adhesive's ideas & plan on incorporating them as of right now as I've written above.

    ***I think, honestly, we should leave these 2 slots OPEN. So that we can use it for balancing in the future if we need to break up a civ for balancing***

    Ideas for the other 2 civ slots:
    -Remove 2 of the EU states and make them independent civs
    -Break up ASEAN by making Malaysia & Philippies fully independent and moving Singapore either into alliance with someone, or making Singapore a Minor State as well as Vietnam.
    -Fracture Africa more

    Non-Official List:
    Spoiler :
    West: 8
    USA - Barack Obama - CHM/EXP
    Canada - Stephen Harper - FIN/ORG
    Mexico - Felipe Calderon - CHM/SPI
    Brazil - Lula da silva - SPI/CRE
    Argentina - Cristina Kirchner - SPI/PRO
    Peru - Alan Garica - PHI/PRO
    Chile - Michelle Bachelet - ORG/EXP
    Colombia - Alvaro Uribe - ORG/IND

    Bolivarian Alliance: 1 - Hugo Chavez - IMP/SPI
    Venezuela
    Ecuador
    Bolivia
    Cuba
    Honduras
    Dominican Republic

    Europe: 10
    UK - Gordon Brown - FIN/PRO
    Spain - Jose Zapatero - EXP/CRE
    France - Nicolas Sarkozy - CHA/PRO
    Germany - Angela Merkel - FIN/IND
    Poland - Donald Tusk - EXP/PRO
    Italy - Silvio Berlusconi - CHA/FIN
    Sweden - Fredrik Reinfeldt - FIN/ORG
    Turkey - Recep Erdogan - PRO/IND
    Ukraine - Yulia Tymoshenko - PRO/IMP
    Switzerland - Hans Merz - ind/fin

    European Union: 1 - Peter Balkenende - EXP/ORG
    Belgium
    Netherlands
    Ireland
    Portugal
    Greece
    Bulgaria
    Romania
    Czech Rep.
    Austria
    Hungary
    Finland
    Norway
    Iceland
    Denmark
    Estonia
    Latvia
    Lithuania

    Mediterranean Union: 1 - Stipe Mesic CHM/ORG
    Croatia
    Albania
    Serbia

    Caucasus Union: 1
    Georgia
    Azerbaijan

    N Africa: 4
    Libya - Muammar al-Gaddafi - AGG/SPI
    Egypt - Hosni Mubarak - PRO/CRE
    Morocco - Abbas el Fassi - PRO/PHI
    Algeria - Abdelaziz Bouteflika - SPI/PHI

    Africa East/Central/West Alliances: 3
    West: 1 - Umaru Yar Adua - FIN/PRO
    Sierra leone
    Liberia
    Cameroon
    Togo
    Nigeria
    Central: 1 - Jose dos Santos - IMP/EXP
    Mali
    Niger
    Zambia
    Angola
    Senegal
    East: 1 - Meles Zenawi - EXP/AGG
    Tanzania
    Mozambique
    Ethiopia
    namibia

    South Africa: 1
    South Africa - Jacob Zuma - ORG/CHM


    Middle East: 4
    Saudi Arabia - King Abdullah - FIN/PHI
    Syria - Bashar al Assad - SPI/IMP
    Israel - Benjamin Netanjahu - PRO/EXP
    Iran - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - AGG/IMP
    Palestine -

    Central Asia: 2
    Russia - Belarus - Vladimir Putin - IMP/FIN
    CACO: - Kassym Tokayev - ORG/PHI - Tajikistan - Kazakhstan - Kyrgyzstan - Turkmenistan -Uzbekistan

    West/South Asia: 2
    Pakistan - Asif Zardari - AGG/SPI
    India - Manmohan Singh - FIN/SPI

    SouthEast Asia: 4
    China: 1 - Wen Jiabao - FIN/IMP
    Thailand: 1 - Bhumibol Adulyadej - IND/CRE
    Indonesia: 1 - Susilo Yudhoyono - EXP/ORG
    ASEAN: 1 - S.R. Nathan - FIN/ORG
    Vietnam
    Philippines
    Malaysia
    Singapore

    East Asia: 3
    N Korea - Kim Yong Il - AGG/IMP
    S Korea - Lee Myung Bak - FIN/IND
    Japan - Taro Aso - ORG/IND

    Australia/Oceania: 1
    Australia - Kevin Rudd - CHM/CRE
     
  20. ianinsane

    ianinsane Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2006
    Messages:
    393
    Location:
    Germany, EU
    Ghana by no means is a failed state!!! In fact it is as far away from a failed state as you can get these days and an emerging local power. It is the most promising democracy in Western Africa.
     

Share This Page