Korea

[Tigranes]

Khmer is a much better designed and more interesting civ than Thailand IMO. So I don't understand why Khmer is being replaced whereas Thailand is not.

Vietnam was also a Chinese province (a province, not a Vassal like Korea was) for about half of its entire history, unlike Khmer. Which is the reason why it has been "more Sinicized".

Maybe the North. Champa weren't. Plus don't forget that Vietnam is one of the few nations that can claim a victory over Mongols! Imagine UHV possibilities!

But if we talk seriously, I was always advocating some kind of simple and uniform Global vs Regional approach in civ selection. Why Argentina is in but Australia and Canada are not? Basically if any civ EVER in her history was globally significant (within at least 100-200 turns in game terms) -- it deserves to be represented in Global mod and can be played, enjoyed and deliver victory within reasonably long number of turns. The rest can be much more fun in regional RFCs. The map would require less resources and we could focus on mechanics, not new civs and how give Iron, Food and luxury to all the new participants. Rhye's original idea was to keep the old civs but introduce tons of new revolutionary mechanics, which were never attempted before. Can you please name 1(uno) revolutionary idea which was conceived within DoC? Something like Mongol Camp in Warlord scenario, or stability, or Plague, or mercenaries, or internal politics in HRE from RFCE++, or Provinces, Relics and Wonders with options like in SoI...

Have Korea ever had Global significance? For at least 100 turns? For the last 50 years, maybe. Lots of Nomadic civilizations, represented by Barbarians left deeper scratches on this planet. Global mod could reflect this fundamental difference between civilizations of Abel vs civilizations of Cain. Instead of letting Barbarians to have all the fun... Imagine two different types of civilizations available for rise and fall: with static cities and regular research and dynamic civilizations, with "moving" cities, some kind of dynamic culture and stealing techs. I mean things like these would represent Global history better then another civilization on 13 tiles with 6 resources...

 

[KeeperOT7Keys]

uhv idea; have more tactical nuke than, any other east asian civs in 1980(?)
(except friendly ones, for china may be)

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Culture dominance doesn't seem to represent S. Korea very well

Link to video.

But really, you need to come to Asia to really experience it. South Korea's cultural influence is disproportionately large.

nor does launching nukes for N. Korea (Kim Jong Un is more of a wanabee nuker .)

Many UHVs of many civs are "wannabe"'s. In fact it's quite difficult to find a civ without at least one wannabe UHV.

Some sort of economic goal would represent S. Korea better IMO.

Any late game economic goal would be too easy. An early game economic goal for Korea would be unrealistic.

uhv idea; have more tactical nuke than, any other east asian civs in 1980(?)
(except friendly ones, for china may be)

Already there as "launch 3 ICBMs before anyone else does".

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Why Argentina is in but Australia and Canada are not?

Because for most people Argentina would be relatively fun to play whereas Australia and Canada would be completely boring. I think.

Can you please name 1(uno) revolutionary idea which was conceived within DoC? Something like Mongol Camp in Warlord scenario, or stability, or Plague, or mercenaries, or internal politics in HRE from RFCE++, or Provinces, Relics and Wonders with options like in SoI...

This question is too easy. I'll leave it to somebody else to answer.

Have Korea ever had Global significance? For at least 100 turns? For the last 50 years, maybe.

It has had more global significance than at least 10 civs already included in this game. Don't me ask for a list because I'm not interested in debating each one of their merits against Korea's. If you wish to learn about the global significance of Korea you must consult a different source because I find no joy or purpose in trying to convince you.

Lots of Nomadic civilizations, represented by Barbarians left deeper scratches on this planet.

Not really.

Global mod could reflect this fundamental difference between civilizations of Abel vs civilizations of Cain. Instead of letting Barbarians to have all the fun... Imagine two different types of civilizations available for rise and fall: with static cities and regular research and dynamic civilizations, with "moving" cities, some kind of dynamic culture and stealing techs. I mean things like these would represent Global history better then another civilization on 13 tiles with 6 resources...

If you can persuade Leoreth to do that, by all means go ahead.

I agree with you on one thing though. I hate civilizations on ~13 tiles with ~6 resources.

 

[ales_]

What is the max number of civs that can be alive at any given point anyway? Me here just wondering is there any cap, theoretically?

With the current DLL 41 major and 4 minor civs. Not all major civs can be alive the same time (Greece and Byzantium, Rome and Italy). So 39 major and 4 minor civs. Theoretically, IIRC, the cap is more than 100, but the game will be VERY slow.

 

[Leoreth]

What is the max number of civs that can be alive at any given point anyway? Me here just wondering is there any cap, theoretically?

There is no theoretical cap, only a practical cap as far as turn times etc. are considered.

I'd love to make the Kobukson the Korean UU but that failed back in the day because the only available graphics are just so ugly.

[Also, now is really the worst time to start such a thread and expect something to come of it.]

 

[Civciv5]

Be the largest civ in East Asia in 920 AD.

I don't think this would be accurate, as China was at least 10 times bigger than Korea at that point, also the Tibetan, Khmer and Srivijaya Empires were larger as well.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

I don't think this would be accurate, as China was at least 10 times bigger than Korea at that point, also the Tibetan, Khmer and Srivijaya Empires were larger as well.

At that point China was collapsed into Independents, so it's exactly 0 times as big as Korea.

You do not know Asian history nearly as well as you think, "Grand Emperor".

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Also, now is really the worst time to start such a thread and expect something to come of it.

Most of my threads come to nothing. Their immediate purpose is to record my thoughts so I can move on and think about something else. You can revisit them later. 1 month, 2 months, it's up to you. Put them in Bookmarks if you think they deserve your future attention.

 

[artyom]

the culture flip UHV is ********

 

[Locutus_Morti]

the culture flip UHV is ********

That's a strong word to use. Would you care to explain your reasoning?

 

[Civciv5]

You do not know Asian history nearly as well as you think, "Grand Emperor".

Do I have to see that as an insult? Also, while you are correct that Tang China was no longer around in reality at that time, all the independent kingdoms are comparable to the size of Korea at that time. Still there were many empires and nations that were larger than Korea at that time, such as Srivijaya, Pagan Dynasty of Burma, Khmer Empire. Also China does not collapse until the Mongols usually destroy them ingame, which would make it ahistorical to make Korea conquer China to achieve such a goal.

 

[civ_king]

There is no theoretical cap, only a practical cap as far as turn times etc. are considered.

I'd love to make the Kobukson the Korean UU but that failed back in the day because the only available graphics are just so ugly.

[Also, now is really the worst time to start such a thread and expect something to come of it.]

The DLL breaks down at 48-50 civ slots on one map used.

 

[merijn_v1]

RFC Classical world has 66 civs. (of which 48 are playable)
Sengoku has 70 clans and 56 players.

So it's definetly possible to get more than 50 civs.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

My only qualm is the modern era goals. Culture dominance doesn't seem to represent S. Korea very well, nor does launching nukes for N. Korea (Kim Jong Un is more of a wanabee nuker .) Some sort of economic goal would represent S. Korea better IMO.

You say you're from California?

Then you should probably spend some time in some Asian-American circles.
I can't go to a boba shop or a cafe here without seeing K-Pop blasted 24/7 on the display.
Corean culture, particularly the pop culture of South Corea dominates regionally in Asia and also takes hold of Asian-Americans as well.
It's mostly only apparent between other Asians (and if you're not Asian, you'll probably first think of PSY, Red Dawn or LOST).
There's a reason why China & Japan are the primary recipients of Corean cultural export.

 

[civ_king]

RFC Classical world has 66 civs. (of which 48 are playable)
Sengoku has 70 clans and 56 players.

So it's definetly possible to get more than 50 civs.

Really? I remember where the chronic weakness of the 50 slots DLL was that it could only make games with a max of 48

 

[artyom]

so what you guys saying is that Korean culture >Japanese, chinese, thai, indian, and any other significant asian culture?
thats bs, and who cares what you see in california. What you see in one place doesnt mean you'd see it in another place.
Its also dumb to say one culture is more significant than another, especially when theyre like so similar. Psy is like the only korean guy we all know, while there are tens of chinese or japanese guys we all know

edit: just remembered we all know kim jon il as well

 

[Tigranes]

Do I have to see that as an insult? Also, while you are correct that Tang China was no longer around in reality at that time, all the independent kingdoms are comparable to the size of Korea at that time. Still there were many empires and nations that were larger than Korea at that time, such as Srivijaya, Pagan Dynasty of Burma, Khmer Empire. Also China does not collapse until the Mongols usually destroy them ingame, which would make it ahistorical to make Korea conquer China to achieve such a goal.

I am impressed with your thoughtful answer to the quite condescending and potentially inflammatory remark. Moreover, I agree with you

 

[Tigranes]

so what you guys saying is that Korean culture >Japanese, chinese, thai, indian, and any other significant asian culture?
thats bs, and who cares what you see in california. What you see in one place doesnt mean you'd see it in another place.
Its also dumb to say one culture is more significant than another, especially when theyre like so similar. Psy is like the only korean guy we all know, while there are tens of chinese or japanese guys we all know

Like, I said -- Korean culture is globally significant right now and with a stretch we can make it to sound like it was so for the last 40-50 years. By culture people do not understand just -- culture is anything that civilization creates and influences. Including amazing GDP, Samsung, Hyundai and Unification Church. I mean UN Secretary General is Korean, why point on Psy or K-pop? Korean businesmen bought a land with the size of Belgium in Madagascar for agricultural output, to feed their resource poor but financially rich nation.

This mod simulates the history of Earth for 5000 years. This is the main fact to consider, not how many guys we know right now.

 

[artyom]

UN secretary was an African as well, does that mean they are a significant global culture? There are tens of other significant cultures around the world, whom not only bought land, but conquered it.
And there are hundreds of brand names around the world we all heard of. Just because Korea owns a few of them doesnt mean they are any more special, than, for example, Japan in the brand name-culture industry.

To point at Korea and say it is more significant culture than many others is ignorant

And this is coming from a person who lived for 17 years a few hundred miles off of north korea. Yes, there was korean influence, but to say it had any more influence than like china or japan is plain ignorant