How would you design Russia?

[BuchiTaton]

I think another great reason to use Streltsi instead Cossacks is that the later are also very Ukranian so is better reduce the implications of ukranian units for a russian civ.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I think another great reason to use Streltsi instead Cossacks is that the later are also very Ukranian so is better reduce the implications of ukranian units for a russian civ.

The earliest Cossacks that make an impact are the Cossack Host of the Don which were originally refugees from the Russian city states to their north, and the Zaporozhe Cossacks which were similar refugees and runaways from Kiyev. Technically, they were very different groups, but since all Cossacks (Don, Volga, Zaporozhe, Kuban, Terek, Siberian, etc) share more similar characteristics than different ones, there is no reason to go out of our way to make them separate in the game.

Mind you, given that they were Anti-Russian/Ukrainian groups originally, I could make a case for them being 'successors' to the steppe pastoral groups, possibly a sort of Middle Game Barbarian Camp/Minor Civ (however Civ VII handles Less Than Playable Civ Entities) as a separate group, which can be absorbed/hired/converted only with effort.

Of course, that could result in Industrial Era Mayans with Cossack Cavalry Units - but I think I could live with that . . .

 

[Phrozen]

We usually get progressive Russia under Peter or Catherine. I wants Ivan III or Aleksander I.

 

[Murloc777]

It is necessary to combine the religious and industrial/technological components of Russia. And then we will get a concept that is popular in modern Russia - "Orthodox Communism" or "Orthodox Socialism". And of course, Vladimir Putin the Great should be the leader of such a Russia.

Spoiler :

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Federation of Russia flag is 'Imperial Eagle' Russia. even itself a republic. Imperial symbol now means a 'Mighty Nation' of Russia as a whole and not Monarchy anymore.

Vladimir Putin rules 'Federation of Russia'. and his policy is continuing legacy of Imperial Russia including Orthodox Supremacy, and warship naming conventions now included Pre-Bolsheviks characters. like Kirov Missile Battlecruiser (the biggest 'combat ship' still active as warship on Earth) now renamed to 'Pyotr Velikuy' after Russian 'Greatest Leader of All Time'.

Onto civ theme musics. Which ones do you like or should be chosen?
1. Orthodox prayer like Byzantium
2. Kalinka (Civ6); actually Kalinka is relatively 'new' folksongs invented in 19th Century.

And one of Russian's many attempts to 'export culture' against bigger rivals like Sweden, Brits, Americans, and Koreans
3. any 'Enlightenment Era' Russian folk songs or symphony that invented there (Pete or Katie)
4. Kate's theme song in Civ5

5. Other pre-Pyotr Velikui Russian folk musics.

 

[Krajzen]

Not all of them.

I know, my post was meant to be provocative tongue in cheek

By "city development" you responded with low urbanization of imperial Russia, but I have thought about city centers of medieval Rus being really big for medieval deep interior of Eastern Europe (Novgorod, Kiev, several others, Moscow since 14th century). As I said, especially in comparision with cities in other medieval Slavic lands and this entire half of Europe in general.

I have forgotten how streltsy haven't actually been in civ series before, but I got tired of them being repeated by all fans everywhere; still much better than exhausted cossacks (who were technically Ukrainian)

You may be right with territorial expansionism, although medieval Rus didn't seem to expand much until 15th century adventures of Muscovy.

I've seen definitely enough of Peter, Catherine, Stalin (shudders), Cossacks, winter stereotype and Russia always revolving around either westernized 18th century or Soviets. Some more of medieval Rus would be nice

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

By "city development" you responded with low urbanization of imperial Russia, but I have thought about city centers of medieval Rus being really big for medieval deep interior of Eastern Europe (Novgorod, Kiev, several others, Moscow since 14th century). As I said, especially in comparision with cities in other medieval Slavic lands and this entire half of Europe in general.

That's because all the Cities that made it to city status in Russia were the result of long distance trade - the same mechanic that contributed to mega-cities further west like Alexandria, London, Paris, Antwerp, etc. What was 'unique' about the Russian situation was the near-total reliance on the great rivers of Russia as trade routes. Even today there are a dozen rivers in European Russia that have stretches over a kilometer wide - talk about Highways! AND European Russia is remarkably flat: all the rivers, except in the spring and autumn thaw and rain-driven flood stages, are slow moving so you can sail or row in either direction and the land between them is flat enough to roll ships from river to river in portages. One major reason that Moscow ended up as the center of Russia and not the nearby city states of Tver, Vladimir, Suzdal, or Kazan is that unlike the others, Moscow is almost exactly equidistant to the Volga, Dnepr, Dnestr, Dvina and by tributaries (Oka, Dnestr) the Don. That means from Moscow you can float from Stockholm to Merv, from the Baltic to the Black Sea or Caspian Sea - a huge trading area with contacts as far as London (the Muscovy Company was one of the first trading companies formed in England), Constantinople and China (Merv is one of the terminal points of the "Silk Roads")

I have forgotten how streltsy haven't actually been in civ series before, but I got tired of them being repeated by all fans everywhere; still much better than exhausted cossacks (who were technically Ukrainian)

The first Cossacks, sure: they were the Zaporozhe, but really were Ukrainian, Lithuanian, Russian, Polish, and anybody else who could run away fast enough to make it south of the "Dnepr Rapids" (which is what "Zaporozhe" means, after all). Later, the largest Cossack 'Hosts' were the Don, Volga, and Kuban Cossacks, all well to the east of the Ukraine, and the modern regions of the North Caucasus and Volga.

You may be right with territorial expansionism, although medieval Rus didn't seem to expand much until 15th century adventures of Muscovy.

That's largely because they were technically all vassals of the Mongols, Golden Horde and Great Horde until Dmitrii Donskoy beat the 'Tatars' at Kulikovo Field in 1380 - and after that all the city states were busy fighting each other for primacy in central Russia until Moscow gained the upper hand under Ivans III & IV and immediately began expanding northwest, west, east and south.

I've seen definitely enough of Peter, Catherine, Stalin (shudders), Cossacks, winter stereotype and Russia always revolving around either westernized 18th century or Soviets. Some more of medieval Rus would be nice

Amen. In fact, let's make a case for giving Russia a special bonus for settling cities in tropic conditions as long as the settlement is connected by land to the Russian start and they never get a starting position in the tropics. That would give Russia an excuse for its long march south that's been going on since the Early Modern Era!

 

[Zaarin]

Amen. In fact, let's make a case for giving Russia a special bonus for settling cities in tropic conditions as long as the settlement is connected by land to the Russian start and they never get a starting position in the tropics. That would give Russia an excuse for its long march south that's been going on since the Early Modern Era!

SAZONOV: Trying to conquer Iran and Central Asia? No, we're not trying to conquer Iran and Central Asia. *shoves plans under desk*

 

[Petr Milovanov]

Unique ability - North Arcting Trade. Russians could make trade routes throw ice. Tripple income of this routes after researching Fussion.

 

[Sirsquier]

We could also go for a Rus, led by the Rurikid Dynasty. Olec would be interesting, or maybe Olga.

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

the first two things i thought

1. russia an expansionist civ, gobbling up land nobody wants
2. russia the defensive civ, the one that you struggle to invade due to your units taking attrition

so they take over the polar and subarctic areas of the map, making their empire massive and extremely hard to invade

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

the first two things i thought

1. russia an expansionist civ, gobbling up land nobody wants
2. russia the defensive civ, the one that you struggle to invade due to your units taking attrition

so they take over the polar and subarctic areas of the map, making their empire massive and extremely hard to invade

Russian expansion occurred in the same conditions that other peoples' expansions took place: having a lot of land nearby that was relatively empty or populated by people you had a significant technological edge over: see the Greek expansion in the 9th - 6th centuries BCE, the Teutonic Knights' expansion into Prussia/Lithuania in the 14th - 15th centuries CE, or the European expansion into the Americas in the 16th - 19th centuries CE.
A possible way of giving a Russian Civ an 'advantage' in this would be, perhaps, to give them an Attribute that when they destroy a Barbarian Camp, the Barbarian Camp immediately becomes Russian territory along with the tiles around it (7 -tile block) and they can expand into unoccupied tiles more cheaply, reflecting the Siberian Land Hunger - which only works if Siberia is not already occupied by another Major Power: see the Russian retreat versus Ming China in Siberia and the lack of any Russian interest in expanding into the Ukraine as long as it was part of the Mongol Golden Horde.

Russia only appears historically to have a 'defensive advantage' against Europeans. Scythians, Sarmatians, Pechenegs, Turks, Mongols, all invaded from central Asia and had no trouble controlling all of southern Russia right up to and (briefly) including Moscow, both before and after any Russian State was formed. What Russia has after the formation of the Russian state - conveniently located almost dead center in European Russia, is lots and lots of land that was thinly inhabited and therefore provided no supporting infrastructure to an invader after the 16th century CE. That's an accident of geography rather hard to include a game - extra starting tiles around your cities doesn't quite manage it.
A bias for a starting position as far as possible from any other Civ's starting position might do it, which would both result in some of the Russian geographical defensive advantages, and also the Russian historical problem of being somewhat isolated from the Hot Spots of historical events in the Mediterranean, Middle East, northwestern Europe or central China . . .

 

[civilizationfanatic2000]

Russian expansion occurred in the same conditions that other peoples' expansions took place: having a lot of land nearby that was relatively empty or populated by people you had a significant technological edge over: see the Greek expansion in the 9th - 6th centuries BCE, the Teutonic Knights' expansion into Prussia/Lithuania in the 14th - 15th centuries CE, or the European expansion into the Americas in the 16th - 19th centuries CE.
A possible way of giving a Russian Civ an 'advantage' in this would be, perhaps, to give them an Attribute that when they destroy a Barbarian Camp, the Barbarian Camp immediately becomes Russian territory along with the tiles around it (7 -tile block) and they can expand into unoccupied tiles more cheaply, reflecting the Siberian Land Hunger - which only works if Siberia is not already occupied by another Major Power: see the Russian retreat versus Ming China in Siberia and the lack of any Russian interest in expanding into the Ukraine as long as it was part of the Mongol Golden Horde.

Russia only appears historically to have a 'defensive advantage' against Europeans. Scythians, Sarmatians, Pechenegs, Turks, Mongols, all invaded from central Asia and had no trouble controlling all of southern Russia right up to and (briefly) including Moscow, both before and after any Russian State was formed. What Russia has after the formation of the Russian state - conveniently located almost dead center in European Russia, is lots and lots of land that was thinly inhabited and therefore provided no supporting infrastructure to an invader after the 16th century CE. That's an accident of geography rather hard to include a game - extra starting tiles around your cities doesn't quite manage it.
A bias for a starting position as far as possible from any other Civ's starting position might do it, which would both result in some of the Russian geographical defensive advantages, and also the Russian historical problem of being somewhat isolated from the Hot Spots of historical events in the Mediterranean, Middle East, northwestern Europe or central China . . .

Makes sense. thank you