Koori (Native Australian Units) - a Formal Request

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

I like how you made his hair less wild than the others Topgun, he's more refined than his ancestors from the Stone Age.

 

[TopGun]

just letting you know... I haven't forgotten these. Just haven't had the time to finish my sketches. (The weather has been too good! LOL)

 

[Supa]

I would be happy to add an Australian Civ. I missed this thread, but I hope some unit creator will be interested.

 

[Mr. Will]

Hmmm...
You have some great sketches there, they're first class. I'd be willing to try to make these units, but it depends on several factors -
1. Sparts ability to model a human. (He's still a beginner, it'll be a while.)
2. My ability to animate the units. (I'm still a beginner, making things walk is still very hard for me.)

Anyway, I'll see if Spart could eventually make a human model, but it may be a couple units of experience down the road. (i.e., after we get some more practice.) Hopefully we'll figure out non-tank units soon. Anyway, good luck!

Has anyone made any Inuit units either? I guess my Arctic Tank counts, but it sucks. Just another civ that has NO units AT ALL.

 

[Supa]

The Inuits haven't got any single unit. :-/ Myself, I mix them with the Canadians for the late eras, but the Inuits themself, nada.

 

[utahjazz7]

Hey, TopGun, those are pretty interesting. Check you PM's. Maybe I could help you make one.

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

 

[Supa]

btw.. Little detail.. but the blowpipe warrior shouldn't have some dingo furs. If set in the Ancient Age, it should be at least a Thylacine. Yup, detail we wouldn't even see in civ scale but I had to say it

 

[TopGun]

hey Supa, is this what you had in mind?

 

[Margim]

I'd still love to see just a standard boomerang thrower as per my original request before fantasy units were created, as suggested in the koori thread, but beggars can't be choosers i guess...

 

[Supa]

Yup, Topgun, exactly this.

 

[Redking]

I'm sorry to be critical, but as you asked for feedback, here's some (hopefully something constructive in it) criticism:

The first thing that occured to me was "great, any more dark skinned units would be a boon", as they might play for Africans or Melanesians. The distinct art and dress of Aboriginal Australians (and Papuans also) would be graphically welcome.

But it brings up the question of what is a civ? Australian Aborigines have left very little in the way of permanent settlement, much less a historical kingdom or empire, which is typically the criteria for inclusion in the game.

If your criteria is looser (fine), so as to include other cultures/subraces that might have projected differently under different historical, geographical, or environmental circumstances, then the omission of iron from their technological horizon makes no sense. Furthermore, the Koori and their Australoid neighbors had upward of 40,000 years to develop "crocodile armour" and other theoretical advancements, but they didn't. If they had had steel, or a domesticable grain in conjunction with the Murray-Darling basin, or any number of other luxuries (like oxen or horses, or neighbors who didn't prefer crossing the Pacific and Indian oceans over saying G'day) they might have progressed technologically into a different realm, and in an Epic Civ game they could, but it would include iron, elephants, horses, and more than the most incipient of agriculture. A Koori without those bonuses is the historical Koori we know - a fine human - but not a maker of empires.

- Redking

 

[TopGun]

Redking, I appreciate your feedback. In fact, I do agree with you about the fact that, had the indigenous people of Australia had a variety of domesticable crops and large domesticable mammals, they sure would have been able to advance technologically. As such, the exclusion of iron for units available AFTER the discover of iron working makes no sense. I think, I'll change should these units become reality.

 

[TopGun]

Margim, yeah... I do think the Boomerang Warrior is indispensable for the Koori civ. But since CivIII is all about the "what-could-have-been-if", it is OK to provide ficticious units for civilizations who didn't do so well in actual history and therefore have no historically correct units. It works as long as these ficticious units follow a reasonable technological trajectory AND incorporate the spirit of the respective civilization. I am all for historically accurate units, but to me that also includes what I've just stated.

 

[frekk]

In fact, I do agree with you about the fact that, had the indigenous people of Australia had a variety of domesticable crops and large domesticable mammals, they sure would have been able to advance technologically.

Well, its a question of necessity, not ability. The only reason one has to go about scratching in the dirt trying to plant things in the first place is because all the other food resources have been used up. As long as people could hunt and forage for food, they didn't bother with agriculture.
It should be noted, however, that the Koori did practice a sort of "farming", as some of the coastal groups built complex canal-type constructions for trapping eels.
I don't think they qualify as a civilization or even necessarily a potential one, though. That's not to say that they weren't innovative or did some remarkable things, I think people are misled into thinking that a Neolithic society is all that simple, when in fact Neolithic societies have been known to build monuments and other complex structures, develop advanced hierarchies, even build roads, mine, and conduct limited agriculture all without ever really becoming a 'civilization' in the sense of having a city and a formal political state. Neolithic society wasn't all that simple as people believe, and the emergence of civilization was a long and gradual process of many small factors developing slowly, not a revolution. Also not all societies are capable of becoming a civilization; the formation of a civilization requires that people not be too individualistic and very much willing to participate in a very hierarchical social model.

 

[Margim]

I'm sorry to be critical, but as you asked for feedback, here's some (hopefully something constructive in it) criticism:

But it brings up the question of what is a civ? Australian Aborigines have left very little in the way of permanent settlement, much less a historical kingdom or empire, which is typically the criteria for inclusion in the game.

Agreed. Which is why the koori haven't been considered in most other peoples mods. I in fact have argued for Australia (post colonization) over a native Australian civ. However, I proposed a Koori civ some time back so people who wanted a geographically balanced spread of civs could have two nations starting on the Australian continent. I started a thread, stating my reasons for why I thought such a civ would be suitable, created a city list, found the great leaders, and asked R8XFT to do a leaderhead, which is awesome for a bit of variety in mods. A quick search will find the thread.

Civ is very Euro focused, most mods have concentrated on expanding the americas (certainly many of the new leaderheads are). The koori merely give credit to a scientifically undeveloped people who nevertheless dominated a continent for thousands of years. They did have some distinct methods of farming and raising livestock - it just wasn't what Europeans considered conventional. There is evidence of stone houses, irrigation systems, and eel farms.

All that being said, If you don't like them, don't mod them. Thats the fun in the choice that modding brings

 

[Margim]

Margim, yeah... I do think the Boomerang Warrior is indispensable for the Koori civ. But since CivIII is all about the "what-could-have-been-if", it is OK to provide ficticious units for civilizations who didn't do so well in actual history and therefore have no historically correct units. It works as long as these ficticious units follow a reasonable technological trajectory AND incorporate the spirit of the respective civilization. I am all for historically accurate units, but to me that also includes what I've just stated.

Point taken, I simply would prefer FIRST to have a real unit for the koori to mod them in just like any other civ. After that, it'd be cool to go as hypothetical as we like.

 

[Redking]

Margim, I'd expect that sort of response from someone who barracks for Essendon.

Just kidding.

Your point is well taken, for the sake of gameplay and variety.

My bigger point was that the Koori, in an alternate Epic game (rather than a historic scenario attempt) should be given the option of using iron and horses to their most. But then, in such an Epic game, isn't a white Australian just a far-flung settlement of the English Civ?

- Redking

 

[Margim]

Margim, I'd expect that sort of response from someone who barracks for Essendon.

Just kidding.

Collingwood supporter?

Your point is well taken, for the sake of gameplay and variety.

My bigger point was that the Koori, in an alternate Epic game (rather than a historic scenario attempt) should be given the option of using iron and horses to their most. But then, in such an Epic game, isn't a white Australian just a far-flung settlement of the English Civ?

- Redking

Possibly... although I'd argue as a island/continent/nation in our own right, we ceased to be a British settlement when we started looking to our own *gasp* rather than 'Empire' interests as the Japanses started pummeling the Pacific in WW2...

 

[Sword_Of_Geddon]

If our respective countries didn't look out for their own interests, both the US and Australia would still be part of Great Britain...