Hypothetical Goth antiquity age discussion

[Prester John 2]

Now, here and there a hypothetical Goth civ for the first age has been brought up. We've seen the Mausoleum of Theodoric. While a Goth civ for the base game is ruled out it could very well come in a future DLC. What would be its nature and specifics?

As I see it the Goths are a similar case as the Normans: They influenced European history for some centuries (3rd to 8th), they are a kind of blob civ and they were multiregional: They appeared in the Balkan region, north of the Danube, later settled below the Danube, then conquered Gaul and Spain (the Visigoths) and Italy (Ostrogoths).

Their leader would most probably be Theodoric the Great.
One of his assets could be cultural adaptation: He can gain two unique abilities from the first two civs he meets. Or: he gets more plunder.

The Goths would be militaristic and expansionist.

Their unique unit would be a special warrior or swordsman unit which is either faster than the normal unit or gets plunder upon defeating an enemy.
Their unique improvement would be special temple ('cathedral') or a special burial site ('graveyard'). (Ok, this is silly, I know).

Now, what would your Goth civ look like?

Moderator Action: Moved to I&S ~ LK

 

[AriochIV]

Unless I'm mistaken, Theodoric the Great and his Mausoleum are c.520 AD, which would put them on the Exploration Age side of the line.

 

[dagriggstar]

I think Goths, like Khmer, would be fitting antiquity better than Exploration, from a gameplay standpoint. More conflict with Rome less conflict with Byzantium/Arabia.

I’m not sure about the entire kit, but an ability like gains +10 combat strength during the crisis phase of the era. Oh and uhhh cavalry UU unlike the often critiqued (for historical reasons) infantry focus of their age of empires 2 depiction. The rest of the kit would have to allow them some way of helping them get to that phase alive.

“We are the crisis”

 

[Vitruvian Guar]

Not expecting a Goth leader. But Goth themselves are quite likely to be very early, maybe even on release with Deluxe/Founders edition.

 

[gdr_willter]

Unless I'm mistaken, Theodoric the Great and his Mausoleum are c.520 AD, which would put them on the Exploration Age side of the line.

I think the year a.d. 400 which was seen from the advanced start of the Exploration Age has no meaning for judging someone as the EA civ/leader/wonder. Goth will most likely get the Theodoric Mausoleum for their associated wonder.

But on the other hand, I think Theodoric the great will not appear as the leader himself. We definitely will have a lot of European leaders, so it seems there is not enough room for him. Moreover, building his own grave looks weird anyway.

 

[Prester John 2]

Unless I'm mistaken, Theodoric the Great and his Mausoleum are c.520 AD, which would put them on the Exploration Age side of the line.

Yes, but that was at the end of their historical life (apart from the Visigoths in Spain). As Civ7 is playing loose with exact timeframes it would be suitable to put them in Antiquity.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Unless I'm mistaken, Theodoric the Great and his Mausoleum are c.520 AD, which would put them on the Exploration Age side of the line.

I think we've seen plenty enough to say that to Firaxis, exploration for gameplay and exploration for civ categorisation are two seperate definitions that don't have to wholly overlap, and the latter isn't even purely defined in temporality.

 

[Siptah]

I‘m not sure about expansionist - but I also don‘t think any trait besides militaristic is a must for goths.
I can see horsemen as UU, and flat grasslands as starting bias. Combat bonuses against independent people or in crises seem good. A UI seems more likely than two UBs and a UD, just because there aren‘t too many buildings and districts too choose from. No clue about the civilian unit - maybe something about Arianism, despite religion not being a thing.

 

[dagriggstar]

Honestly was walking the dog and couldn't get the idea out of my head so here goes (roughly)

Civilization Ability - Your units may re-enforce allied commanders (Basically your military units have a button you press, then click on an allied commander, then your unit will travel to that tile) (Foederati reference) (Are alliances still a thing ?)
(Some) Civic Abilities
- Increased combat strength during crisis (Put this in civics because it's possible that as a civilization ability you might not get to use it. As a civic you just don't research it)
- Pillaging costs land units no movement points
- Gain +5 science and/or culture per technology/civic you are behind your enemy when pillaging (Go after whichever player is "ahead", you know like Rome)
- Land bordering another player gains +1 science and/or +1 culture (Settle in your enemies faces, make them nervous)
Military Unit - Not sure about the specifics, but basically extra support bonuses, applies to your allies as well.
Civilian Unit - Settler replacement. Can pillage enemy tiles. The settlement you found with this unit gains +1 population for every new tile you pillage with this unit. Tiles that have been previously pillaged by any of your units do not count towards this bonus.
Buildings/Quarter - I actually think you could do something with like their metal working (like a goldsmith building) and a crypt/church type structure to make a Gothic quarter.

My new theme is "become unsettling"

Of course if they are in the DLC packs I'm sure it's something totally different lol

 

[gdr_willter]

Ah, how about the tradition representing the Gothic arts and architectures? If you played AA with Goth, your "Gothic Style" tradition will grant culture from the happiness buildings. I know it's not really accurate, but it will be interesting to see the successors of Goth claiming their buildings are unique and naming those from their ancestors.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

First point: don't get too wrapped up in specific Gothic attributes. The latest academic consensus is that the "Barbarian Invasions" weren't.

That is, they were Migrations by coalitions of tribes, clans, and peoples, and to try to say that this group was Goths, that one Franks, and other one over there Vandals is simply inaccurate. They may have had a Gothic, Vandalic, Lombard, Burgundian, Frankish, Frisian or Marcomanniac set of Leaders, but the groups were mixtures, and their exact composition varied constantly.

Which means, in game terms, that either Franks or Goths (or Ancient Germans, Vandals, Lombards, etc ) could stand in for Everybody. If (as the game is) we are short of positions for everybody in either Antiquity or Exploration Ages, One Bunch of Hairy Germans is all we need - for now.

The characteristics that all the Germanic groups shared were:

Expansionist - they appear in history precisely because they were looking for New Homes and got them (originally) by migrating into parts of the Roman Empire that had been depopulated by Plague.

Militaristic - they were all pretty much an Armed Host - the primary occupation of the adult males, after getting food by farming or herding, was War. And aside from some peculiarities of weapons, like Frankish throwing axes and short swords, Gothic and Lombardic armored cavalry lancers, and Vandalic sea-borne piracy, the bulk of their common warriors fought with spears, swords and fairly heavy wooden shields. - And, probably the most salient common characteristic, they all charged headlong as a common tactic: the "Furor Germanicus" the Romans commented on frequently.

Adaptable. They were perfectly happy to adopt whatever social, political, economic, technological effects they found: all of the Germanic Kingdoms established after Rome officially fell in the 6th century adopted Roman administrative positions, titles and structures and tried very hard to maintain them for several centuries afterwards. Their leaders learned Latin, and despite their historical identification as 'hairy barbarians' a large percentage were Literate in Latin right down to the establishment of Charlemagne's Empire in the 9th century - and sent their children to schools to make sure their heirs would also be Literate.

So, until we get enough Civ 'Slots' to make room for every variation, a single Gothic Civ can stand in for Franks, Ostro- and Visi-Goths, Lombards, etc for now - and potentially allow a Progression to the Holy Roman Empire, Royal France, or even Castile/Aragon in Spain.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

1. These 'Iron Age Spearmen' mentioned here were also armorless but not without big wooden shields? did iron helmet (or leather helmet with iron frame) optional as well as body armor of any kind?
In Civ7 there appears to be a separatee 'Bronze age Spearmen' (any spearmen in Civ 3-6), and 'Iron Age' Spearmen (or Late Antiquity Pikemen who had shields strapped to their left arms)
What are better depictions of Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages infantrymen? a combined arms host with a mixture of so many spearmen and a no less significant numbers of axemen? (since axes are 'shock weapons' of commoners, some axes might even began as tools of trade and would return to chop woods once war is over).
2. How good Gothic Heavy Cavalry was? did they have specific name? (and that's their UU!)
3. When did the best known 'Gothic Archetecture' takes shape?
4. Are these peoples the core of modern Italians? are Italians today more of Germanics and less of Grecoromans?
5. What were Roman Grade School Systems? were they secular or church operated?
6. Did Charlemagne himself literate?
7. If these Germanic peoples live next to China, would they adopt '100 Clans' systems too?

 

[Zaarin]

Ah, how about the tradition representing the Gothic arts and architectures? If you played AA with Goth, your "Gothic Style" tradition will grant culture from the happiness buildings. I know it's not really accurate, but it will be interesting to see the successors of Goth claiming their buildings are unique and naming those from their ancestors.

Gothic architecture doesn't have anything to do with the Goths, though; it was called that because its (clearly visually impaired) critics thought it was ugly and barbaric. That being said, the Goths built some beautiful Romanesque churches and chapels in Ravenna.

Did Charlemagne himself literate?

He struggled to learn to read. He was able to read a little, like a small child, but I don't think it would be correct to call him literate. (Unlike, say, Alfred the Great, who was not only a patron of scholarship like Charlemagne but an accomplished scholar in his own right.)

 

[gdr_willter]

Gothic architecture doesn't have anything to do with the Goths, though; it was called that because its (clearly visually impaired) critics thought it was ugly and barbaric. That being said, the Goths built some beautiful Romanesque churches and chapels in Ravenna.

That's why I said "not really accurate", but why not? We will have literal Goth-ic Architecture indeed in Antiquity Age, and we also will see their Exploration Age successors calling their whatever buildings as "Gothic Architecture" just like what happened IRL. Cool and exciting irony to me

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

That's why I said "not really accurate", but why not? We will have literal Goth-ic Architecture indeed in Antiquity Age, and we also will see their Exploration Age successors calling their whatever buildings as "Gothic Architecture" just like what happened IRL. Cool and exciting irony to me

I don't think so. Gothic Archetecture still needs Roman archetecture to evolve.
the term 'Gothic' itself was coined in 15th Century 'When Middle Ages is over'.

 

[gdr_willter]

I don't think so. Gothic Archetecture still needs Roman archetecture to evolve.
the term 'Gothic' itself was coined in 15th Century 'When Middle Ages is over'.

Hey, my point is the irony on two different architectural trends in different time. For the real Antiquity Architecture from Goth, we can still name it "Gothic" because it belongs to them. For the wrongly named later architecture (French IRL), we can also name it "Gothic" because they really called it like that regardless their intention or understanding. And I think this situation can be one of the Traditions - even it's not actually delivered from past, anyway they named it after Goth.

 

[Zaarin]

For the wrongly named later architecture (French IRL)

That's a little overly specific. To some extent, Gothic architecture did have its origins in Narbonne and the fondness of French theologians for the mysticism and "theology of light" of the Pseudo-Dionysius ("St. Denis"), but it spread all across Catholic Europe--and is often considered to have found the pinnacle of its expressiveness in the British Isles.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Hey, my point is the irony on two different architectural trends in different time. For the real Antiquity Architecture from Goth, we can still name it "Gothic" because it belongs to them. For the wrongly named later architecture (French IRL), we can also name it "Gothic" because they really called it like that regardless their intention or understanding. And I think this situation can be one of the Traditions - even it's not actually delivered from past, anyway they named it after Goth.

We can always call it "Gothish" so no one gets confused, and apply the word to the Pre-Gothic styles appropriate to the in-game Goths.

Romanesque is the general term, but the off-shoots Carolingian and Ottonian are from the same general period (6th - 12th centuries CE) and are very, very similar: round arches, less external decoration than Gothic, floor plans that can be square, rectangular, or octagonal. It's a shame that it looks like 'Goths' won't actually make it into the base game with iconic buildings, because Romanesque, Ottonian or Carolingian structures like the Basilica of Saint Francis (Romanesque), St Bartholomew's church (Ottonian), or the Lorsch Monastic gatehouse (Carolingian) would be striking structures in-game.

He struggled to learn to read. He was able to read a little, like a small child, but I don't think it would be correct to call him literate. (Unlike, say, Alfred the Great, who was not only a patron of scholarship like Charlemagne but an accomplished scholar in his own right.)

But, like many other Caolinginan and pre-Carolingian elites, Charlemagne was smart enough to hire literate administrators to run things and teach his children. Some of these administrators, like Alcuin, are worth including as potential Leaders: he invented the first miniscule script to allow for clearer scribal documents, taught the Royal heirs, and added Boethius' Liberal Arts to their cirriculum - setting the pattern for University cirriculums throughout Europe for the next 1000 years.

 

[Zaarin]

Romanesque is the general term, but the off-shoots Carolingian and Ottonian are from the same general period (6th - 12th centuries CE) and are very, very similar: round arches, less external decoration than Gothic, floor plans that can be square, rectangular, or octagonal. It's a shame that it looks like 'Goths' won't actually make it into the base game with iconic buildings, because Romanesque, Ottonian or Carolingian structures like the Basilica of Saint Francis (Romanesque), St Bartholomew's church (Ottonian), or the Lorsch Monastic gatehouse (Carolingian) would be striking structures in-game.

Yes, the Mausoleum of Theodoric is a bit of a disappointment--it's thematic, sure, but the Goths built some lovely churches in Ravenna that would have made more striking wonders.

But, like many other Caolinginanand pre-Carolingian elites, Charlemagne was smart enough to hire literate administrators to run things and teach his children. Some of these administrators, like Alcuin, are worth including as potential Leaders: he invented the first miniscule script to allow for clearer scribal documents, taught the Royal heirs, and added Boethius' Liberal Arts to their cirriculum - setting the pattern for University cirriculums throughout Europe for the next 1000 years.

I'd be a fan of Johannus Scotus Eriugena--a man whose intellectual mysticism was so dizzying it took the Church 300 years to figure out it was heresy.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

We can always call it "Gothish" so no one gets confused, and apply the word to the Pre-Gothic styles appropriate to the in-game Goths.

Romanesque is the general term, but the off-shoots Carolingian and Ottonian are from the same general period (6th - 12th centuries CE) and are very, very similar: round arches, less external decoration than Gothic, floor plans that can be square, rectangular, or octagonal. It's a shame that it looks like 'Goths' won't actually make it into the base game with iconic buildings, because Romanesque, Ottonian or Carolingian structures like the Basilica of Saint Francis (Romanesque), St Bartholomew's church (Ottonian), or the Lorsch Monastic gatehouse (Carolingian) would be striking structures in-game.


But, like many other Caolinginan and pre-Carolingian elites, Charlemagne was smart enough to hire literate administrators to run things and teach his children. Some of these administrators, like Alcuin, are worth including as potential Leaders: he invented the first miniscule script to allow for clearer scribal documents, taught the Royal heirs, and added Boethius' Liberal Arts to their cirriculum - setting the pattern for University cirriculums throughout Europe for the next 1000 years.

But then again Charlemagne couldn't keep his Big Empire past him. his Empire fragmented soon after his death.
if Primogenitor system is put in place, his 'Roman Empire' would last much longer.

Even so do you think Paladin should be his UU or UC? Since there was always TWELVES personally Paladins should be 'Commanders' rather than 'Fighting men' as seen in many fantasy games.