1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

New Civilization: Vikings

Discussion in 'Civ4 - New Civilizations' started by CivArmy s. 1994, Nov 20, 2005.

  1. Craig_Sutter

    Craig_Sutter Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2002
    Messages:
    2,753
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Calgary, Canada
    A possible UU would be a longboat/galley that gives the amphibious promotion, temporarily, to units it carries... I'm not certain how possible this is, but someone else has developed forts that give promotions, in another thread.
     
  2. MRM

    MRM Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2005
    Messages:
    518
    Location:
    Hamburg, Germany
    Hm - isn't the galley a bit to late for the vikings ? Wouldn't a trireme that can cross ocean and is a bit stronger and/or faster a better sea UU for the vikings ? AFAIK galley came with the late medivial era, the viking era was already over at this time ...
     
  3. SoCalian

    SoCalian Deity

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2003
    Messages:
    2,901
    Just a suggestion CivArmy, why don't you use Seafaring as a trait for the vikings. I made a mod for it, link in my sig under added traits.
     
  4. Dennis_Moore

    Dennis_Moore Unholy Roman

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2005
    Messages:
    275
    Location:
    Nerike
    First of all, I do appreciate the effort put in to making mods in the first place. However, I do have som historical facts regarding Scandinavia that I would like to share. First of all, the only time in history when there was something resembling a united Scandinavia was the Kalmar Union with Denmark as the dominant power, between 1397 and 1520, ie long after the Viking era.

    Second, during the Viking era there was only the nations of Norway and Denmark, while the Swedes were only a bunch of different tribes. Sweden was however a superpower during the 17th century.

    So my suggestion is to fashion the different Scandinavian nations after the eras when they were most influential and powerful (when selecting leaders and UUs), thus Denmark could be a Viking civ and/or a late medieval civ, Norway a Viking civ and Sweden as a 17th century civ. (However, Denmark and Norway were united for part of the Viking era, so they could be made into a single civ with Harold Bluetooth or Canute as leader.)
     
  5. Uluk

    Uluk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2005
    Messages:
    53
    Actually, the whole term "Scandinavia" is ambiguous. Nevertheless, that doesn't have to keep somebody from making a mod out of it.
     
  6. kroshnix

    kroshnix Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1
    Dennis_Moore, since you are pointing out who was nations and not nations... Well, in fact there were no scandinavian nations at all during the period of 800AD to 1050AD which is the time the Vikings were Exploring and plundering. Also, from the list of towns that is meantioned in the MOD pack, I don't know if any of them existed in the Viking era. Norway become some kind of nation in 1035AD when all the kings in Norway united under "Magnus I the Kind". But at that time the Viking era was really about to end.

    A few examples of Viking towns was, Birka, Sigtuna (Swea/Sweden), Oslo (Norway) & Ribe (Danmark). The biggest town from this era was Birka. The main difference between "Danish, Norwegian and Swedish" Vikings, were the way they were exploring. Danish and Norwegian vikings traveled west (Iceland, England) and south, were the swedish traveled east (Russia) and south. One famous Russian leader "Rurik" was in fact a Swedish Viking called "Helge".

    Anyway, I think it's great that there is work made to get a working Viking MOD! It certainly is an important part of european history.
     
  7. Funkin

    Funkin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    26
    I think you're confusing Rurik with his brother-in-law Oleg (Helge in Old Norse) who became the ruler of Novgorod after Rurik. He wasn't really a Russian leader since Russia didn't even exist back then and his actual origin has never really been established (Although most agree that if he did exist, then he was most likely at least partially Nordic. Some speculate that he was from Jutland). In fact the whole existence of Rurik is considered somewhat legendary...
     
  8. starbolt

    starbolt Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    76
    I *really* like this concept, but it seems more appropriate to Templars/Crusaders/Conquistadors than Vikings.

    Along the same lines, I've come to dislike the Horse Archer unit for European cultures. I'd rather see a pre-knight mounted melee unit or something (same stats, different attributes).

    ---

    Back to the Vikings, any ability that support marauding seems viable. Amphibious, First Strike, and Ability to Retreat/reduced terrain cost strike me as valid. Negates First Strike is also reasonable, but having First Strike partially offers this benefit. I like the Axeman best as a template

    If you decide upon a naval UU, there's no real evidence that there's any combat value so +1 movement and caravel abiltiy seem fine.

    However, I'd consider stealth. The ability to drop 2 ordinary land units in the early game upon an unaware enemy totally captures the essence of vikings to me. That alone conjures up the "spirit of the times".
     
  9. Clifford

    Clifford Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    26
    Location:
    Sweden
    Exactly my thoughts. Anything that can simulate fast raids is appropriate, especially when combined with landing forces only to raze and plunder. I like the idea of making cash by just going about plundering. It is a welcome tactical alternative to always go for the cities themselves.
     
  10. CivArmy s. 1994

    CivArmy s. 1994 Deity

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2004
    Messages:
    3,641
    Location:
    Campinas, Brazil
    many topics about the "Viking" history, well, I'll just rad and learn, I don't know so much about this history and will be a pleasure learn more :)

    thanks for the suggestions of UUs and them powers BTW :)
     
  11. Balzac

    Balzac Chieftain

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2005
    Messages:
    10
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    Well.. My national history is a bit hazy (at best) but... Denmark "Dans Mark" means The field of Dan. Dan was according to the legend the first danish "king". As an infant, he arrived in a boat filled with treasures and grew up to become the leader of "the Danes" I have no idea when this is supposed to have been...

    The first know danish king is Gorm den Gamle (Gorm the Elder) who ruled in appx. 900 AD. but according to a net-dictionary the danish-nation predates him...
     
  12. Dane

    Dane Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    Interesting discussion. As a Danish historian, I feel I should come with some facts here.

    I have never heard the legend about king Dan. But the name Denmark is origined form "the field of the Danes" (Mark is the danish word for field). It was used for the first time around 900 AD, but at this time Denmark was not a country.

    Gorm the Elder (officially the first Danish king) were king of Jutland (approximately half of todays Denmark). It was his son, Harald Bluetooth, who in 958 AD united Denmark.

    Harald Bluetooth's son, Sven Forkbeard, gained control of Danmark, Norway and half of todays Sweden. In 1013 AD he conquered England, but died same year. His son Knud (Canute in English) the Great contolled an empire consisting of Danmark, Norway, England and half of todays Sweden. England were lost 1043 AD.

    To use the name Viking for game purpose is ok, but there were never a Viking empire. It was Danish. The viking is just a name for the explorers/conquerors, who came from North Europe. And they were more explorers than conquerors.

    For a mod, I think the leader should be expansive/organized (or seafaring), and the UU should be a longboat, which can cross ocean (the vikings did cross the Atlantic Ocean in longboats).
     
  13. Dennis_Moore

    Dennis_Moore Unholy Roman

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2005
    Messages:
    275
    Location:
    Nerike
    kroshnix, well I suppose the term "nation" is somewhat ambigous, just like the term "scandinavia". But enough with the Rudbeckian revisionism here, there are so many false statements in your post that I'm not even going to point them all out. I'll give you some examples though, Norway was unified in 872 by Harald Hårfager (Fairhair) and as Dane pointed out Denmark was unified in 958. So just because there was no Swedish nation, doesn't mean there was no scandinavian nation (Do I detect a hint of nationalist pride there kroshnix?).

    Dane, even though I'm not Danish myself, I still agree with you that the Danes are the most qualified to represent the Vikings as a civ. They are also the scandinavians (in the wider sense), with most historical continuity as an independent nation.
     
  14. mik_bakunin

    mik_bakunin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    i would really like to object to the idea of a "viking civilization" being purely danish. i would call it scandinavian or danish/norwegian. for example, the norwegian Eirik Blodøks, at one time ruler of Jorvik(York) was son of Harald Hårfagre (albeit with his danish queen). i would say that any viking civ should be represented by both danish and norwegians, as their role in conquest of england is completely intertwined. norwegians ruled in denmark, and danes in norway during the whole period. there is also some merit to the swedish argument, seeing as they were a major power during the 16 and 17 hundreds.

    anyway, i'm currently working on a norwegian civ, to be followed by a swedish and danish civ. this to enable a truly scandinavian scenario. also i'm thinking of a purely norwegian scenario set in the 10th century with the unifying of norway under harald hårfagre as the theme. any thoughts and ideas would be most welcome.

    i have to add that there are some serious misconceptions about vikings in this thread, and alot of facts that are just ridiculous. when i get the time i'll try to put together a viking/scandinavian FAQ :)
     
  15. €l Gordo

    €l Gordo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2002
    Messages:
    19
    it's a great misunderstanding that the vikings were barbaric or uncivilkised. They were amazing warriors for the time, and semi-nomadic at times but wandering marauders is far from the truth.


    Canute isn't a great choice. Sone of a descendent of vikings, and a pole, and after the invasion of england and the declaration at sea of his being king he ceased to be viking, but anglo saxon as he wasn't king of any viking tribe or kingdom in the truest sense, more a descendent of nobility - but he was a king of England (or as such, Angle Land)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canute_the_Great might help clarify this a bit.

    A better option for a viking leader may be Erik the Red, Guthrum, Ivar the Boneless, Ragnar Lodbrok, Rollo, or possibly best of all Skagul Toste.

    they were expansionist and mystical too, that's for sure as well as incredibly commercial. There's goods from all over the known world found in their villages including exotic seeds, materials, dyes and so on.


    Other cities for them (mostly the slightly anglicised versions to avoid the need for special characters).

    Major settlements in the English Danelaw
    Jorvik,
    Selby,
    Whitby,
    Grimsby,
    Gainsborough,
    Skipton,
    Keswick,
    Eastoft,
    Axeholme,
    Jarlshof

    Minor settlements in the English and Scots Danelaw
    Felthorpe,
    Lound,
    Sandvik
    Stenhus
    Ravndal
    Hulgade
    Kirkeby
    Thurso
    Wick
    Sutherland
    Kirkwall
    Lerwick
    Dingwall

    Minor settlements in the Normandy Danelaw (Bear in mind it was Rollo who founded much of Normandy).
    Miquetuit
    Dieppedale
    Nez de Jobourg


    Other settlements and towns including the Civ3 pack cities

    Birka
    Trondheim
    Bergen
    Copenhagen
    Reykjavik
    Oslo
    Stockholm
    Birka
    Aarhus
    Stavanger
    Odense
    Hareid
    Molde
    Alesund
    Bodo
    Karasjok
    Tromso
    Vadso
    Farsund
    Risor
    Fauske
    Karistad
    Batsfjord
    Hammerfest
    Honningsvag
    Svolvaer
    Haugesund
    Sarpsborg
    Lillehammer
    Elverurn
    Falun
    Helsinki
    Keflavik
    Thunderfall



    The last bit is a rather simplistic list though historically speaking, For example, Copenhagen wasn't founded by "The Vikings" - it was established by a bishop as a safe haven, and built around and traded from by norse traders and settlers. Similar is true of other names on the list, i.e. not viking settlemnts but viking names for other people's settlements and ones they annexed.


    But for the purposes of the game, it'd do I suppose.



    Best of luck getting the pack where you want it to be though, with or without busy-bodies like me poking their noses in :D Have fun!
     
  16. €l Gordo

    €l Gordo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2002
    Messages:
    19

    And of course not to forget the vikings of single and mixed descent who rarely went to the old homelands, and lived in exile or were born in exile. Lief Eriksson for example iirc was raised mainly in the Faroes and Iceland due to his father's (Erik the Red) 3 year exile and resulting determination to settle away from Norway, and settlement of Iceland (or Snowland as was named), and of course the subsequent moving on to Greenland undeer Lief, Greenland so named to make it sound all nice and lovely and try to encourage others to follow.

    again, rather simplistic of me but hey, I'm short on time before work ;)
     
  17. Dane

    Dane Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2005
    Messages:
    17
    I totally agree that Norway paid as big as part as Danmark during the age of the Vikings. It was Norweigens, who discovered Island and Greenland. And by the time Norway became part of Denmark, the age of the Vikings were coming to its end.
     
  18. €l Gordo

    €l Gordo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2002
    Messages:
    19
    don't forget their major presence across Northern Russia across to Kiev in the Ukraine, as well as mixing with the Slavik tribes all the way down to the byzantine lands.

    A truly far-reaching civilisation, if not an imperical one.
     
  19. mik_bakunin

    mik_bakunin Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    8
    Location:
    Oslo, Norway
    the "viking age" was over long before the union between Norway and Denmark began. the kalmar union didn't come before 1397. the viking age ends with Harald Hardrådes defeat at Stanford Bridge in 1066, following which the middle ages begin, in norway at least. we operate with different definition of middle ages. whereas in the rest of europe the middle ages is said to be from ca. 500 AD onwards, in Norway they don't start until after the vikings.
     
  20. €l Gordo

    €l Gordo Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2002
    Messages:
    19
    though the vikings lived on in the 'new world' until the 15th century, when taking into consideration the settlements on the "wrong side" of the atlantic.

    Simply not in the commonly recognised sense, but vikings none the less.
     

Share This Page