RedCourtJester
King
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2024
- Messages
- 777
I have to say, after hearing Andrew's rationale for making Khmer ancient amd sleeping with this knowledge I'm fine with it as an exception due to the misery of finding alternate convincing ancient civ for SEA. Especially if we assume Khmer to embody Funan and Chenla, first incarnations of Khmer culture, which lasted since 1st century AD. After all, Funan *was* the first major civilization in the region, with massive progenitor importance, but as I have personally experienced, it's just enough obscure for there being no sensible way to turn it into a civ while also making Khmer its own separate civ.
And given that this Khmer civ deliberately covers some Funan-Chenla ancient aspects in its flavour and policies, if you simply make the choice to rename it to "Funan" it makes sense - I think it's way simpler than moving Khmer to the era 2
Even if Khmer isn't fully reaching back into Funan, if we are getting a Funan leader then I consider the decision to be fairly sound, not only for Khmer but for setting up all pathways deriving from Khmer. I could reasonably believe that Soma leading Khmer through Burma/Vietnam/(Majapahit) into Siam fairly represents the cultural legacy of that region.
Leader choices are going to help a lot in grounding these historical paths, which I think is why the devs have been framing the progression direction in terms of leaders and not civs. It's not that Ashoka is leading the Maurya; it's that his legacy forms a strong cultural throughline from Maurya all the way to the modern Indian flag. It's not that Confucius is representing Zhou or China, so much as he is representing the Confucian zeitgeist that shaped much of Chinese culture across many Chinese dynasties. Himiko represents the Yamatai and Shinto legacy that shaped the Japanese shogunates. These are the best "person" encompassing the regions, cultures, and polities of "India," "China," and "Japan" across all three eras; the civs, in effect, represent the leaders' legacies. Soma would do the same thing for Southeast Asia, as one could very comfortably view Khmer and everything that followed as her legacy.
If I am correct, it is a very efficient manner for selecting and creating fewer leaders than one-per-civ, as on average leaders are representing the legacy and interconnectivity between at least two and possibly three or more civs. Obviously exploration and modern leaders are held to different standards than antiquity civs, but I think still reaching backward if they are able to.