My suggestions for the new RFCDoC

I wouldn’t say it’s closed to changes (though on the first page of this thread Leoreth said he probably wouldn’t be changing the shape of any landmasses). But changes to the map are likely a low priority for the foreseeable future, the priority right now is game balance and city names. Besides some resource changes and jungles/taigas being removed from resource tiles I don’t think the map has been touched.

There is a map suggestion thread but I would not be surprised of any of your suggested changes aren’t implented for months. I think you should keep posting though, there’s a lot of good ideas here.
I see. Well, I'll continue of course, hoping to see my suggestions implemented one day. I suppose Leoreth meant not changing landmasses globally (like, entire shapes or positions of continents), but smaller changes like adding some land plots to exististing continents is ok, I hope. As you can see, my suggestions include city name lists, that for most part are compatible with existing map (though of course I make them for map with my improvements, particularly regarding rivers). I think it is better that I joined in on this stage, as if I was invlolved in defining the map (like, including global shapes of continents) before I would had created a lot of disputes, so to say, likely trying to push for bigger map. It is much better to have certain premade map to improve on, as it sets certain limitations.
 
Areas and gameplay.
On the map you can see core/birth areas of Poland (partly, in the west) and of potential civ of Lithuania, as desrcibed in the post about Poland.

There are two ways of defining Rus core area. You can see the bigger core area, stretching along the Varangian trade route with such crucial Rus cities as Kiev, Novgorod, Smolensk and Polotsk. Rus birth area is generally the same, extending a bit to north, south and to east. Bigger core area makes Rus very stable. Also, you can see smaller core area - square centered on Kiev. There are two factors that should be considered in favour of the smaller core for Rus. Firstly, historically, alongside Rus as the name for entire region divided into several principalities, there also was region of Rus "proper" (compare to Ile de France in France) on the middle Dnieper, that included Principality of Kiev and cities of Chernigov and Pereyaslavl. More localised usage of term Rus for this region was especially common in XII-XIIIth centuries (attested in documents, alongside the broad usage for all principalities), when whole Rus desintegrated into several warring principalities, and name Rus was used for original domain of the Kievan grand princes. Another reason is gameplay. Historically, Rus was early feudal state (that is, feudals had full power in their domains, while ongoing land colonisation and development inevitably led to emergence of more and more local domains based in these lands), that had strong decentralizing tendencies that resulted in its desintegration into several major principalities in second half of XIth century. Rus civ represents both Kievan and all of its successor principalities. However, bigger core makes Rus too stable, while it should easily collapse with Mongol invasion, making space for Polish (and possibly Lithuanian) expansion-conquest in the west, and later also Russian expansion in the north-east. Alongside Kievan Rus and its successor principalities, Rus civ also represents another of these successor states - Novgorod republic, that existed well until late XVth century, setting control over all of Northern Russia for its fur trade. It can be represented by mechanic that makes Rus, if it loses its capital and only core city of Kiev, to move capital to Novgorod with Rus core area changing into square (or 5x3 space, to include more resources around) centered on Novgorod. However, it should be noted, that Novgorod was most independent among Kievan Rus successors and generally Novgorodians didn't regard themself as part of Rus in relation to its southern and eastern neighbours.

Rus city placement.
Rus starts in 882 in Kiev (it can actually be changed to 862. While Rurik was famously invited to rule in Novgorod, two of his commanders, Askold and Dir, sailed south and established their principality in Kiev, later to be conquered by Oleg in 882. Anyway, it is generally agreed that some polity already existed by 862 in Kiev. Changing starting date to 862 will give Rus a bit more of so much needed turns). Already in my first playtests I noticed that Rus is not really eager to settle Novgorod, so, due to such historical significance (P(le)skov and Ladoga are also historically important, but still overshadowed by Novgorod), Novgorod spawns as minor city in 862, to be quickly flipped to Rus. With Kiev and flipped Novgorod, Rus has 2 more settlers at start (one more than was before). Settling map was made so it most likely settles Smolensk between Kiev and Novgorod. Smolensk also is a crucial city in Eastern European/Russian history. For centuries it was the largest city between Kiev and Novgorod and later Moscow and Wilno (and, according to some historians, the largest among all these cities in first half of XIVth century), right in the middle of Rus lands. Important regional center, it served as capital of one of major Rus principalities and later was focal point of territorial conflicts between Lithuania&Poland and Muscovite Russia, with major fortress built here. Since XVIIIth century its global importance gradually diminished, but it still remained important regional and cultural center just as before. Sometimes, instead of (or rarely along with) Smolensk Rus settles Kursk - another historically important city in Russian history, that always was important regional center, with major WWII battle of Kursk fought in this region. Other historically important cities Rus civ is incentivised to settle early are Minsk, that also always remained important regional center and currently is the capital of Belarus, and Polotsk (Polish: Polock), the oldest and most important Rus era city in modern day Belarus, capital of major principality and later important city in G.D. of Lithuania, before its importance greatly diminished by late XVIIth century due to devastating wars between Poland-Lithuania and Russia. Also, Rus civ usually settles a city in modern day Western Ukraine with its starting settler. This city is usually Lutsk (Polish:Luck), that has optimal position between Warsaw and Kiev. Lutsk also always was very important city, soon becoming main city in the region of Volhynia. Other than Lutsk, Rus often founds Lvov (Lviv, Polish:Lwów) to south-west on border with Polish core area. Though Lvov was founded only in XIIIth century (before that, most important city on this plot was Zvenigorod), it quickly became capital of Galicia region and important center of Ruthenian and Polish culture. Other city to be found in this region is Terebovl (Polish:Trembowla), one of most important, oldest and largest cities in South-Western Rus, capital of one of first principalities that later merged with Galicia. Terebovl remained important regional center until it diminished in XVIth-XVIIth centuries due to Tatar raids and Cossack rebellions, with Tarnopol (Ternopil) superseding it as main city on this plot. Also, among cities west of Kiev Rus can found Volodimer (Vladimir-Volynsky, Volodymyr, Polish:Wlodzimierz) the largest and most important city west of Kiev in Rus era, capital of principality of Volhynia, important regional city until XVI-XVIIth centuries. Finally, south of Lvov Galich (Halych, Polish: Halicz) can be found, important city and capital of eponymous principality of Galicia, another important regional center until XVIIth century, later superseded by Stanislavov (Ivano-Frankivsk, Polish:Stanislawów) in this plot. Another region with several important cities of Rus is in north-east, in Volga-Oka basin, which later served as center of new Muscovite Russia. Oldest cities and principalities here are Rostov and Murom, that were followed by Suzdal, Yaroslavl, Ryazan and Vladimir. Rus is incentivised to found any of them (Murom a bit less, due to Nizhny Novgorod), but all of these cities would be removed with Russia spawning in Moscow, except Yaroslavl (that kept and keeps being most important of all these cities in following centuries as part of Muscovite Russian state. So Russia will keep Yaroslavl as closest city to Moscow ingame) and possibly Murom. Farther north, Rus (now mostly representing Novgorod republic) can found Ustyug, Kholmogory (that later becomes Arkhangelsk), Vologda or Totma, and also possibly Kem and Khlynov (Vyatka), maybe even Kola (->Murmansk) and Pustozersk (even though founded in Muscovite times in 1499, for centuries it was the most important city on Pechora river. With Soviet renaming it can become neighbouring Naryan-Mar).

As noted above, another civ would be nice to have to represent various Turkic nomadic peoples and states in the Volga, Don and Dnieper steppes. Main problem here is the fact that there's no single universal name all of them can be called (perhaps the most universal would be Tartary, as this region and people were called by Russians, other Europeans and in Middle East, but this names is not applicable for pre-Mongol Cumans and Khazars). Regardless of the name, general things about this civ are pretty clear. This civ shoulw start around 650 in Itil/Atil (later (on entering Medieval era?) renamed Saqsin for Kipchaks and Hajjitarkhan/Astrakhan for Tatars. Lower Volga always remained the center of power of nomadic empire in Pontic-Caspian steppes) to represent the first major of Turkic empires in the region - Khazar Khaganate. This civ should settle such cities as Bolghar or Qazan (Kazan) in Volga-Kama confluence and Azaq (Azov) or Tamatarkha/Samkarsh in Don delta to, together with military raids, prevent Rus and especially Russia from easy and early expansion to steppes and Volga. After Khazars diminished in X-XIth century, this civ should represent Kipchaks (aka Cumans and Polovtsy) with capital renamed to Saqsin. While Kipchaks lacked established state being divided into numerous clans, they were powerful force before Mongol conquest. Moreover, even after the Mongol conquest, Kipchak language became lingua franca and basis for written Turkic language used from Carpathians to Altay. It is not clear how relations of this civ to Mongols should be set. Should Mongols conquer it, with this civ respawning as Golden Horde (or, more properly called, Ulus Jochi), or somehow vassalise it? Ulus Jochi clearly should be represented by this civ as heyday of the imperial power in European steppes. Last great nomadic people to be represented by this civ should be Nogai, who dominated these steppes in XVI-XVIIth centuries.

Muscovite Russia coming up next…
Spoiler Rus cities :
Look like you don't like alternative version of history :)
 
I suppose Leoreth meant not changing landmasses globally (like, entire shapes or positions of continents), but smaller changes like adding some land plots to exististing continents is ok, I hope.
No.
 
Straight from the big man himself :lol:
 
Russia.
The first important question about Russia civ is when should it start. Currently it starts in 1263 and in my opinion it is way too early. In this year, Daniel, the youngest son of Alexander Nevsky, Grand Prince of Vladimir, Novgorod and Kiev, inherited small wooden "castle-town" of Moskov as his personal domain. At start, this principality was very small, but started to gradually grow. Still, by Daniel's death in 1303, Principality of Moscow just acquired all of Moskva river course and became notable among other Vladimir-Suzdalian principalities. Only in following decades princes of Moscow started to assert their leadership among other Vladimir-Suzdalian princes, like of Tver and Nizhny Novgorod, by trying to gain title and suzerainity of Grand Principality of Vladimir (that was granted by Golden Horde Khans since the conquest). This title was secured in 1331 and became hereditary in 1363. After that, Prince Dmitry Donskoy managed to forge a coalition of many princes and secured some years of independence from Golden Horde, weakened by inner conflicts, by victory on Kulikovo field in 1380. In my opinion, these are earliest dates to be considered if it was RFC mod centered on Europe, like RFCEurope, as Muscovy became leading principality in north-eastern Rus, but still hadn't unified it, was far from all-Rus influence and global significance. After Tatars reasserted their dominance (albeit much weaker one) in late XIVth-early XVth centuries and Muscovy, now unifying most, but not all, of Vladimir-Suzdalian lands, went through feudal "civil" war over succession between Dmitry Donskoy's scions in 1425-53. Only after this war, as Golden Horde finally desintegrated into dozen of smaller khanates by mid century, Muscovy went to definitive way to become Russia. During these centuries, leading state in Rus was Grand Duchy of Lithuania, that unified most of western and southern Rus, that now constitute Belarus and northern half of Ukraine.
In 1462 Ivan III Vasilievich became Grand Prince of Moscow and Vladimir, for years before being effective regent for his blinded father. His reign is universally considered to be point when Muscovy and remaining principalities of central Russia along with Novgorod unified into what can be called historical core of Russia. That is, before Ivan III Muscovy was just a leading principality in Russian core territory, that still was divided and plagued with internal conflicts, but during Ivan III's reign Russian core was unified and instead of internal conflicts this new polity turned to outer expansion in the following centuries. In 1472, after Muscovite victory on Shelon river, Novgorod recognised itself as part of Muscovite domain (keeping autonomy until 1478), yielding its vast lands in Northern Russia. After that, the rest of smaller principalities gradually became integrated into Muscovite domain. Finally, in 1480, after the Standing on Ugra river and years of defence from Tatar raids, tribute was denied to one of sucessors of Golden Horde and Muscovy became fully sovereign state. Considering himself rightful heir to all of Rurikid principalities of Rus that were "seized" by Lithuanians and Poles, Ivan III claimed title of Sovereign/Lord of all Rus thus setting conflict with Lithuania&Poland to the west. Using diplomacy and his prestige (in contrast to ineffective Lithuanian Grand Prince Alexander) among princes in eastern G.D. of Lithuania, Ivan III managed to get by peace or conquest third of its territory by end of his reign in 1505. By his marriage to Sophia of Palaeologue dynasty, Ivan III also started to claim politico-spiritual sucession to Byzantine Empire, emulating its court and symbols (notably, double-headed eagle), and idea of Moscow and Russia as the Third Rome was born. Though not crowned as such, Ivan III was de facto first Tsar of Russia, and he was often called as such by his contemproraries (notably, HREmperor Maximilian Habsburg in his letters called Ivan III Kaiser, equal to him). Other than territorial and military gains, Ivan III also set unified legal code for all of this new big state, using most advanced codes of Novgorod and Pskov as main basis, and limiting previous feudal rights. Culture also flourished, as Russia somewhat was touched by Renaissance by inviting many Italian artisans and artists who built Moscow Kremlin (and many other kremlins) and many churches and cathedrals, transmitting knowledge, along with setting Moscow artillery yard.
Ivan III's reign is usually seen as start of "ongoing" Russian polity (like Safavids in Iran, or Capetians in France). And, yes, leader Ivan IV should be renamed to his much more successful grandfather, Ivan III Vasilievich.

Thus, I think Russian starting date should be set during Ivan III reign. It can be set either in 1462 (beginning of the reign), 1472 (victory over Novgorod and start of swift integration of Russian core territory) or 1480 (victory over Tatars and full sovereignty). Personally, I think 1472 is optimal as midway date and because by 1480 Russia civ would flip all what is intended as its core and starting territory.
Other than historical reasons, later start date is also better gameplay-wise. Russia civ, in contrast to Rus civ, will have all of historical Russian territory, particularly Siberia, and is meant to be quickly expanding to east and south. Having too early starting date will lead to unhistorical too early colonisation of Siberia and steppe regions. With Russia starting later, it can be better set up for rapid expansion it did in following centuries, while before this starting date borders of Russian principalities stayed more or less the same since pre-Mongol conquest times.
Starting techs: on start, Russia should include 8th tech column + Gunpowder, Companies, Judiciary and Firearms (but no Streltsy in the starting stack composed of late Medieval units like knights and cannons) - all techs are historical. Having Firearms will make Russia start in Renaissance era, helping it with settling new cities for its quick land expansion, and to switch to Streltsy as main foot soldiers to avoid seeing ahistorical crossbowmen and swordsmen being built in XVIth century. With these starting techs, Russia can confidently… lag behind in science, as progress to newer techs was quite slow until XVIIIth century.

Russian core area is defined as territory of Northern and North-Eastern Rus, colonised by Slavs before Mongol conquest, where formation of modern Russian ethnic group and later national identity took place (that is, one of three Slavic peoples descendant from Rus, alongside Ukrainians to south-west and Belarussians to west). From this territory, lands to the north, east and south were colonised by Russians in following centuries, where many Finno-Ugric, Turkic and other minorities live to this date. Western border of Russian core area is generally the same as current western border of Russia and also is more or less the same as the most stable border between Poland-Lithuania and Russian Tsardom/Empire. Southern border is the same as southern limit of forest zone, that was colonised much earlier than steppe zone to south of it. Eastern border is easternmost settlement of Rus Slavs, with Finno-Ugric and Turkic peoples originally living to east of it. Northern border includes Ingria that for centuries was under control (except in XVIIth century) and served as entry to Baltic Sea for Novgorod and Russia, and Sukhona river that was long colonised by Rus Slavs and served as place from which Arctic coast and rivers were colonised in following centuries. Gameplay-wise, this core includes crucial cities of Central Russia.
Russian core area includes such cities that are meant to be founded ingame: Moskva in center, Novgorod in north-west (also Sankt-Peterburg, only tile with sea access in Russian core), Smolensk to west, (sometimes Kursk to south-west), Voronezh to south, Nizhny Novgorod to east, Vologda (or Yaroslavl) to north and Ustyug to north-east.

Russian birth flip area includes all of its core (Smolensk was conquered from Lithuania in 1513, but was besieged during Ivan III reign and represents eastern Lithuanian cities flipping to Russia on its "birth", gameplay-wise, Poland-Lithuania refused to allow this flip), some tiles along south-eastern core area border and all of Novgorod republic lands. That is, it includes Central and Northern Russia, mostly notably without steppes and middle and lower Volga with Kazan and Astrakhan meant to be conquered later, like in real history.

On the maps, Russian core area is indicated by dark red line, while flip area by pale red line.
Spoiler Core/flip areas in Eastern Europe :

1733962792779.png

1733962817991.png

 
Last edited:
Even though, notably, one land tile, realistically placed where Dnieper river enters Black sea, allowed to make entire course of Dnieper river and all of Eastern Europe more realistic and accurate?
What are you trying to say?
 
I don't think it actually matters that much.
 
What do you mean? Like the meme Great Tartary?) Also, you are from Kazan IRL? Welcome from marsh plot right to north-west of you! What do you think about the map and other things so far?
Great Tartary, yeah
I think your map and job is great, but doub that Leoreth will implement it soon. Maybe mauch more later, since your map (imo) don't chang balance much, well, maybe except rivers - lots of rivers - lot of dykes). But there a lot of modmod developers, so maybe they will use your map, after it will be ready.
I was in Yoshkar-Ola last autumn - copy of Saint-Basil Cathedral was amazing.
 
IIRC one of the sticking points with the big map was that Europe is already so enlarged that Leoreth vetoed giving it even more tiles.

The map was also worked on for a long time so new changes, if there are any, are probably going to be relatively minor.

On specific points:
- Russia's spawn being later would be weird since that would leave virtually no time for its wonders being built. It's also probably more fun for the player if they do as much of the territorial expansion as they can.
- Rivers are kind of a problem for this kind of map. Realistically you can find them virtually anywhere, but then you'd end up with every land tile being a river tile. At some point less important rivers have to be ignored for the sake of variety.
 
Great Tartary, yeah
I think your map and job is great, but doub that Leoreth will implement it soon. Maybe mauch more later, since your map (imo) don't chang balance much, well, maybe except rivers - lots of rivers - lot of dykes). But there a lot of modmod developers, so maybe they will use your map, after it will be ready.
I was in Yoshkar-Ola last autumn - copy of Saint-Basil Cathedral was amazing.
Thank you! Hope one day it will be implemented, until then I'll just complete and present it all.
Well, there's also quite some resource changes and many hills in previousy flat areas.
Yeah, this cathedral is one of better looking monuments among all the architectural mess our former governor built during his years.
 
IIRC one of the sticking points with the big map was that Europe is already so enlarged that Leoreth vetoed giving it even more tiles.

The map was also worked on for a long time so new changes, if there are any, are probably going to be relatively minor.

On specific points:
- Russia's spawn being later would be weird since that would leave virtually no time for its wonders being built. It's also probably more fun for the player if they do as much of the territorial expansion as they can.
- Rivers are kind of a problem for this kind of map. Realistically you can find them virtually anywhere, but then you'd end up with every land tile being a river tile. At some point less important rivers have to be ignored for the sake of variety.
Well, one of the points of my improvements is to use existing continents, and not make any global changes (I think adding landplots here and there is different than, for example, moving whole Europe one tile north or south). Despite me wanting to improve the map, I think it is a great work, generally well deailed, with optimal world map size and scale where civs and cities fit well. And Europe is optimally enlargened, fitting all what is necessary. Actually, overly enlargening Europe is not what I personally like in map making. On some world maps that I made over the years (though, unfinished, with parts of America and Siberia being incomplete) I tended to make Europe large enough, but with Africa and other continents proportionate to it (yes, one map ended up very huge), so working on map where creators managed to optimally enlarge Europe is quite nice as I won't really be able to do so myself.

I can't see why Russia would lack time for its wonders. Yes. bulk of the Moscow Kremlin was built right at the end of XVth century (that is, right after 1472 start year), but it was improved and rebuilt over next two centuries. St. Basil's Cathedral was built in mid XVIth century. Both wonders represent Russian architecture before XVIIIth century, so there's no problem if they are built as late as XVIIth century (if there's a problem at all). While St. Sophia is intended to be built by Rus.

Alongside historical reasons stated above (again, what (Central) Russia was before second half of XVth century is better represented by Rus civ or independent cities it shall desintegrate into), later starting date is explicitly to make Russia better suited for its large territorial expansion over whole of Eastern Europe and into Siberia that was done by centralised Russian state from late XVth century onwards as both continuation and in contrast to previous Rus expansion that covered only western part of Eastern European plain. What I am trying to say, in other words, is that, gameplay-wise, Russia and Rus have very different expansion (settler and other) maps and patterns, and difference between the two expansion patterns is evident since late XVth century, when centralised Russian state rose out of principalities of North-Eastern Rus, and not in 1263, when there was no such global change and it all remained territorially as Rus civ. So, with early starting date, Russia for historical reasons should be weakened to prevent its early expansion, that inevitably will cripple its later expansion, while with 1472 starting date Russia can be from start balanced for its subsequent rapid expansion all the way to Pacific ocean. Also, even if earlier starter date is needed, 1263 is way too early, it probably should be 1380, and even still all issues written above apply to this date as much as to 1263. Another reason I forgot to mention, is that later starting date is better for Rus to let it further represent Novgorod republic and Rus principalities after the Mongol invasion.

Yes, rivers are really numerous and a lot more can be included. This is why I try not to include all rivers, but to make realistic good-looking river basin patterns with only large enough and notable rivers and tributaries, with enough spacing between them, to convey real geographic sense. Yes, there's also principle that, if a tile is well-watered (not some arid steppe or desert, to provide realistic fresh water to a city and farms), flatland (isn't hilly or mountainous watershed), not coastal (practically all coasts can have some one-tile long rivers, but that should be avoided unless there are additional reasons for a river) and connected to river system IRL (that is, there's a big enough river for transportation), it should likely be made so ingame.
 
Today is a notable day. I decided to risk it, and dared to just change several starting dates I proposed, in const.py. Fearing before that this will break the mod as it was with CivilizationsReborn 3 years ago, I asked and waited for answers about changing the dates. However, everything seems to work fine, and no UPs or anything got messed up. Maybe I'm missing something and actually mod is now broken, so I still wait if someone will tell if I actually missed something. With changes in civilizations.py to balance the newly changed spawns, I will now autoplay test the game with new starting dates.

Here are dozen of screenshots from previous various test runs to show how Rus and Russia settle cities. Note, that some things still were and are messy (like random European civ, usually HRE, capturing independent Kazan)
Thoughts and suggestions for Rus and Russia as civs (UUs, UBs, UPs and historical goals) coming up next.
Spoiler Screenshots :

1734020328271.png
1734020230255.png

1734020405546.png

1734020615335.png

1734020686012.png

1734021059016.png

1734021228600.png

1734021888829.png

1734022124374.png

1734022181480.png

How Russian core area looks ingame:
Spoiler Russian core area :

1734022294305.png
 
Rus civ.

Generally, I don't have much to suggest for Rus as a civ. Unique unit is usual Druzhina, that is perfectly fitting. Unique building is Volok - that is nice choice, as it fits both historically and gameplay-wise, more than usual veche hall, like in RFCEurope.

Unique power is also good, though I think it should be renamed to the Power of River Trade or River Trade Routes, to be more clear what it is about, because the Power of Varangians sounds like metal band name quite ambiguos in my opinion (Varangians=/=Roþsmen who also came from Scandinavia and gave rise to name Rus. Varangians generally means Norse mercenaries, who served in Rus, but also in Byzantium and elsewhere, so name of UP can suggest it is about mercenaryship or something else, not specifically tied to Rus). +1 commerce in unimproved trade network tiles is nice, though it perhaps should be limited to forests (local furs, honey etc). Alternatively, it can provide +1 trade route in cities on rivers, but that's kinda unoriginal. Importantly, I would add another element to Rus UP along with commerce bonus: rivers serve as roads, maybe limiting it to historical area or regions. This addition will help to quickly develop the pristine lands of Rus with improvements, as Rus civ kinda lags behind compared to how it was historically, and also stimulate colonisation and active defence.

Goals for historical victory are also good, especially the one for 30 Orthodox population by 1200, combining both history of Rus Slavic colonisation and population growth, and spread of Orthodox Christianity. I had a small play test for Rus and with my game improvements it is well attainable in early XIIth century with room for growth still available. Maybe, to make it more challenging, population goal can be increased to 35 or even 40.
Goal for defeating 25 barbarian units by 1250 is perhaps the hardest one as it requires actively pursuing, not avoiding, combat with barbarian units. But this also has historical basis in campaigns of many princes against steppe nomads and against Baltic and Finnic tribes and raiders to west and north.
Final goal of obtaining 4 furs and 3 salts along with gold by 1450 obviously serves to represent Novgorod republic. With Russia starting in 1472 there's no such unhistorical massive confrontation (again, well until second half of XVth century North-Eastern Rus is better represented by Rus civ, not Russia) and this goal will be achieved naturally, by colonising northern Russia (with my improvements, number of furs and salts probably should be increased).

While all historical goals are good and I see no problems with them, I'll just drop idea for historical goal I long had, that is easiest and represents beginning of Rus as a trading hub river network that connected far and culturally different lands: Crossroads of Rivers: have trade relations with 5 civilizations with 3 different state religions (by 1000 AD). Paganism may or may not be counted as separate religion. That is, historically-wise trade routes should be installed with Byzantium (Orthodoxy), Arabia or Turks (Islam or maybe even Buddhism in latter case), Norse (paganism or Catholicism) and Western/Central European civ (Catholicism).
 
Russia civ.
There's much more I have to suggest and discuss regarding Russian civ, its UB, UU, UP and historical goals. Let's begin with unique building and units.

First of all, please, rename Katorga to Ostrog. Katorga conveys very specific and very negative meaning (penal colony, if in the sense of a place) in Russian language, while ostrog is much more neutral, known/accepted and polysemantic word. Main meaning of ostrog is, of course, that of a fort(ress), usually wooden (sometimes main tower was rebuilt in brick or stone. Anyway, current model fits well), many of which were built as points of defence and land control, most famously during exploration and colonisation of Siberia. Some also may remember building of ostrogs in European Russia in defence lines against nomads and during colonisation of the steppe along rivers like Volga. Moreover, one of main reasons why katorga should be renamed to ostrog is because latter, being more polysemantic word, actually includes katorga as one of shades of its meaning, because many, but not all, ostrogs, mostly in Siberia, served as place of katorga, that is as a penal place for sending convicts away from populated areas (like Brits did in Australia, and other European powers did in many of their remote colonies). As such, not commonly today, but word ostrog can be used as archaic synonym to word jail. The point is, ostrogs were much more widespread and common (and iconic for Russia and its expansion) than specific katorga places. It is normal and historical to build ostrogs in Moscow and other Central Russian cities, just as building them in Siberia, while building katorga in Central Russia is rather absurd due to its intended remoteness as noted above. Finally, katorga, unlike ostrog, is not a building, but a place and wasn't really built (though some other UBs, notably Turkic divan for jail, also use places or concepts, not buildings, as their name, so this argument is lesser addition to crucial arguments above).
Now, to actual parameters of ostrog as building. It replaces jail, as such decreasing maintenance cost by 25% and providing +4 espionage points. It's -50% anger duration is tied to Russian UP that will be discussed below, so will be ignored for now. I don't think +4 hammers bonus is really that vital to Russia gameplay-wise, as it already has a lot of forests, hills, along with mineral resources all across its vast territory, already providing solid production. Only place where more such base production might be useful actually, are cities along the arctic coast, that wouldn't be able to grow properly and work many tiles. So, I think, very fitting with its katorga meaning, ostrog should provide +4 hammers only in cities found on tundra tiles (that is, also only on coast), as many famous katorga places were along northern rivers in tundra (especially if by katorga we also mean Soviet labour camps, like on the Kolyma river). As ostrogs served as defensive structures, I think ostrog should provide +25% defence bonus (except gunpowder units, and not any bombardment defence). Considering Russia starting in 1472 already in nascent gunpowder era, this bonus will be useful only against attacks of pre-gunpowder units, most notably against various nomadic barbarian horse archers and knights, just like it was in real history. If any more bonus is needed, ostrog might decrease maintenance cost not by 25%. but by 30%.
 
I can't see why Russia would lack time for its wonders. Yes. bulk of the Moscow Kremlin was built right at the end of XVth century (that is, right after 1472 start year), but it was improved and rebuilt over next two centuries. St. Basil's Cathedral was built in mid XVIth century. Both wonders represent Russian architecture before XVIIIth century, so there's no problem if they are built as late as XVIIth century (if there's a problem at all). While St. Sophia is intended to be built by Rus.
Have you actually tried playing as Russia and going for the UHV? How were you able to tech to Urban Planning by 1550 and build St. Basil's?
 
Russian unique units.
Cossack.
Cossacks, cossacks, cossacks. They truly are iconic for Russia, aren't they? Cossacks "as units" have long history, starting from XVIth century and all the way into World War II. Cossacks changed considerably over almost half-millenium of their existence.
In Civ4 and some other games Cossack unit represents its last historical stage, as modern cavalry of late XIX-early XXth centuries. I suppose, due to their famous role in that era: used to (in)famously suppress popular protests in late Russian Empire, fighting during world wars and revolutions, and especially on both sides during the Civil war, their coverage in Western press and media, along with many famous works of literature, led people in the West to associate cossacks explicitly with modern Russian history in XXth century. Cossacks of this period, however, are both unique and not at the same time. Their main uniqueness is their special social status and (limited) selfgovernance in their hosts. As a military unit, however, they were just typical modern cavalry, combining cavalry tactics from older cavalry types and also trained to fight afoot like dragoons.
Nearly all the same applies to "middle period" cossacks of XVIII-XIXth centuries, that replaced "modern" cossacks in DoC. These cossacks fought as typical light cavalry of the era, and they main uniqueness was, again, due to their special social status and semi-regular character of military formation, not really representable in Civ or RFCDoC.
Likely most unique were "early period" cossacks of XVIth and, especially, XVIIth centuries. These cossacks, with much more turbulent relations with central government, played key part in most of historical events of this era. They were main military force used in exploration and early colonisation of Siberia. They participated in all wars Russia waged during these centuries, and not just as side light cavarly addition to regular army, but often as almost main military force. They also were main force of revolts in steppes from Dnieper to Volga.
There weren't pistoleers units in Eastern Europe. Earliest gunpowder cavalry here were cossacks (later in mid XVIIth century there also appeared trained cuirassier-like units called reitars). Perhaps cossacks' handful adoption of firearms was one of main reasons of their effectiveness in that era, when they initially faced knight-like cavarly and not very well trained infantry.

Thus, I propose making Russian UU Cossack as replacement for pistoleer, not hussar. Another reason for that is that hussars were very famous units on their own, in later Russian Imperial army, especially during Napoleonic wars, when they were generally more important than cossacks of that era.
I think cossacks should become available with Logistics tech. Moreover, I think default pistoliers, as earliest firearms cavalry, should be available with Logistics in general, not with the next tech Combined Arms, that gives historically more advanced Cuirassiers.

There are several "levels" of unique parameters that this Cossack pistoleer may have.
The basic one is that it should get +25% strength outside own territory, both in neutral and in other civs territory. This represents generally higher effectiveness of cossacks in offensive campaigns than in defensive ones, and their hardy self-reliance in operations, often without logistical support. Next, Cossack, just like Druzhina, should have River Combat promotion, negating penalty for attacking across rivers - historically, cossacks, unlike regular cavalry, usually crossed even large rivers with ease, using their own-made boats and other methods, as they usually lived right on banks of large rivers, like Dnieper. Along with that, Cossacks should receive bonuses to their mobility. If straightforward, they should ignore terrain movement cost. This represents ease with which cossacks crossed difficult terrain, and particularly their role in exploration and conquest of Siberia and other areas. Ignoring terrain movement cost is better than giving them Mobility promotion, to underline their adaptiveness to forests and hills, without super mobility that steppe nomadic horsemen had but cossacks lacked.

Next "level" is more nuanced, but still is historically based and can be considered. Cossacks may have Hidden Nationality, and be able to attack without declaring a war. Early cossacks often called land/river pirates for a reason. This represent autonomous military command of early cossacks, who often acted on their own, without approval from central government. Basically, cossacks waged undeclared wars with almost every neighbouring country. As such, Hidden Nationality enables to represent numerous cossack rebellions, most notably by Bohdan Khmelnytsky, against Poland-Lithuania, as well as cossack raids into Ottoman-Tatar territories of Crimea and Northern Black sea coast (they even sailed and raided as far as northern Anatolian coast) with capturing such cities as Azov (that government in Moscow actually had to peacefully return to Ottomans), cossack raids into Safavid Iran (most famously by Stepan Razin before his rebellion), later cossack raids into Central Asia and also undeclared war between Russian cossacks and Qing dynasty on Amur river, most famously around Albazin. Ultimately, though, I'm not sure if Hidden Nationality will play out as intended, especially on closer distances in Europe, as this feature was imagined for a normal, not-RFC mod.

Final "level" is really unnecessary, more like a touch of flavour, and requires some additional coding, I suppose. Early cossacks were really unruly and often were leading force of revolts against the Russian government. As such, when a Cossack unit is inside own cultural borders, it can trigger a special event. It will demand considerable (100-200) sum of gold to pay, or will turn into barbarian unit, likely spawning 2-3 companions. This can be nice representation of many cossack revolts in Russia during XVII-XVIIIth centuries, but I'm unsure if computer player will correctly react to that.

Cossack unit should upgrade to Cavalry (that represents modern cossacks), not Hussar unit, while becoming unbuildable when tech for Hussars is researched. If some special attention can be allowed, Cossack can be upgraded to otherwise unbuildable Host Cossack unit, that may be almost identical to Hussar unit (definitely lacking Hidden Nationality), representing more "tamed" form of cossacks of XVIII-XIX/XXth centuries, organised into several loyal Cossack Hosts, like Don Cossacks.

Streltsy
Another iconic unit, replacing Arquebusier. Historically being first semi-regular units of Russian army, they primarily were used as city garrisons, but generally were just Russian analogue to Western European arquebusiers and early (pre-XVIIIth century) musketeers, not really unique actually.
In RFCDoC they have realistic City Garrison promotion. Their other bonus, +1 to movement speed, isn't really realistic though, as Streltsy units weren't really that mobile, certainly not as cavalry, particularly Cossacks. As I remember and understand, movement bonus is intended for quickier expansion into Siberia, where Streltsy are meant to escort settlers. There's another issue with this bonus though - Siberia is (should be) almost fully covered by forests, as such negating this movement bonus. At the same time, this bonus lets Streltsy be faster where they clearly shouldn't be realistically - in open steppes, often leading to too early conquest of Central Asia. I propose reverting Streltsy to normal speed 1. On the other hand, considering that Streltsy actually were effective defensive unit in open field too, particularly using famous gulyay-gorod ("wandering town") wagenburgs, especially against cavalry, they should gain +20-25% defensive bonus against both heavy and light cavalry, or Formation promotion. By the way, this bonus still will be overruled by huge +50% attack vs. arquebusier bonus of the Polish Winged Hussars

Also, if a modern, Soviet-era UU is needed, I think it should be not often used Katyusha or perhaps T-34, but Red Army Infantry, replacing default Infantry. Its bonuses are simple - has quarter less cost, +15% combat (attack&defence) and +15% defence bonus inside own territory, representing both huge manpower of Soviet Union during WWII and heroic fighting of ordinary Red Army soldiers, who often made invaders pay huge price for each meter of land they take.
 
Top Bottom