New Civs [Suggestion/Request]

[Leoreth]

What's a Dallal? Did a quick Google search but nothing came up.

 

[KeeperOT7Keys]

in Turkish Dallal means (tellal) a guy who make finance connections and brokering in bazaars
turkish dictionary says town crier-broker

 

[Leoreth]

Interesting, thanks.

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

I think when including Polynesia I would set it as optional with 0 chance of appearance as default value, so it would only appear when selected by the player.

And Swahili is indeed interesting.

I don't know about the rest of the naysayers, but this changes my mind completely.
Could do the same with..others?

 

[Leoreth]

You can edit the appearance rate yourself for most small civs.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

What would the Swahili civ be called, if they are to be included? Do we simply come up with imaginary names for them? They never organized into any independent polity AFAIK. Also, their Historical Area would overlap heavily with that of Ethiopia.

I think instead of adding civs like this, efforts would be better spent on improving the quality and features of Independents.

For example, if you allow Trade Routes/Open Borders to Independent Cities (depending on conditions such as state religion) you'd represent civs like Swahili and Polynesia successfully with Independents. You can even add their UUs/UBs to those Independent cities.

Here's roughly how you can implement this:

- Trade Routes with Independents can always establish (unless running Mercantilism, of course), even if you're at war with the Independents.

- Independents always have Open Borders with all other civs.

- To declare war on any Independents, you would need to order a unit of yours to move towards an Independent city's tile, instead of just a tile with Independent Culture. Upon doing this, all your units are expelled from the Independent's Culture boundary.

- Then you could add UUs such as Dhow and let them spawn at appropriate dates.

 

[Askiya]

What would the Swahili civ be called, if they are to be included? Do we simply come up with imaginary names for them?

Probably names like Sultanate of Kilwa, Sultanate of Zanzibar, etc. It would probably be a civ representing the Swahili city states as a whole.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Such a civ can be added if the map is 4 times as large.

As it is, Swahili city states hardly cover the area of even 1 city on the map, which makes any kind of UHVs for them almost impossible to construct. That is why out of the 3 proposed UHVs, 2 are fantastic and absurd. You can't come up with realistic UHVs for civs like this simply because they never achieved sufficient historical importance IRL.

Their lack of political unity throughout their history is also a good reason why they are better represented as Independents. They were Independents IRL, so to speak, instead of a united polity that achieved (or at least attempted to achieve) a set of impactful historical goals.

 

[JiimBV]

Such a civ can be added if the map is 4 times as large.

As it is, Swahili city states hardly cover the area of even 1 city on the map, which makes any kind of UHVs for them almost impossible to construct. That is why out of the 3 proposed UHVs, 2 are fantastic and absurd. You can't come up with realistic UHVs for civs like this simply because they never achieved sufficient historical importance IRL.

Their lack of political unity throughout their history is also a good reason why they are better represented as Independents. They were Independents IRL, so to speak, instead of a united polity that achieved (or at least attempted to achieve) a set of impactful historical goals.

No, the Sultanate of Kilwa had control of a very large chunk of the East Africa coast, at least 7 tiles I do believe, maybe more. Maybe they weren't direct rulers in many parts, but they were overlord from Melinde to Cape Correntes on this map: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:East_Africa,_c.1500.jpg

They were not of sufficient historical importance perhaps, that is a valid argument. I would definitely enjoy them very much though, just as much as I enjoy the not so historically important Tibet and Mali.

 

[NorwegianSalmon]

Their lack of political unity throughout their history is also a good reason why they are better represented as Independents. They were Independents IRL, so to speak, instead of a united polity that achieved (or at least attempted to achieve) a set of impactful historical goals.

Adding civilizations, who're only being considered because they could be fun to play, as independents is a waste of time. Even more true with Polynesia.

 

[Wondering Kid]

Well, a Boer Civ as a conditional spawn if The Netherland's stability is below stable would do the trick. They'd be fun to play if Congo was beefed up a bit so that they actually become real contenders for Africa. And if there were even more European cities to "liberate", representing South African meddling in other African nations during the Cold War; or even a new African Civ (or respawns) it would make the Boer Civ a good addition.

Also, it'd be good to have South Africa actually have to fight for their Core Cities safe for Cape Town, to represent the Boer Wars, instead of just flipping the whole place for them.

I'd suggest for them to have the following UHVs

-Make South Africa the wealthiest country in the world, the most populated in Africa and have no Europeans in South Africa before 1930.
-Develop a Nuclear Weapon before 1950
-Liberate more than 5 cities outside your Core Area and have more Gems than any other Civ before 1990.

 

[Leoreth]

Adding civilizations, who're only being considered because they could be fun to play, as independents is a waste of time. Even more true with Polynesia.

This.

I would focus on the Sultanate of Kilwa for a playable Swahili civ, whom I could easily see controlling 3-4 cities on the African coast (Sofala, Kilwa, Mombasa, maybe Mogadishu).

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

Poleynesia I get for game-play reasons, but I can't see much merit in yet another 'hoard gold/survive Europeans' civ. If we absolutely have to add another, Boers (or Moldavia) wouldn't be too bad.

 

[Leoreth]

Don't worry, it'll be a spend gold/die from the Europeans civ.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

Adding civilizations, who're only being considered because they could be fun to play, as independents is a waste of time. Even more true with Polynesia.

The Swahili already exists as Independents. There is nothing that needs to be added in this case.

All I'm saying is that making these Independents better would require much less effort than adding a full civ, but yield a significant improvement.

Anyway, the worst that could happen is just one more civ for me to disable with Consts.py. No big deal.

 

[borhap88]

Now that we are caring about this lonely area...why don't you fill empty Madagascar with an indie or native, perhaps not coastal, city in order to represent Merina Kingdom? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merina_Kingdom
It could spawn in 16th century and it could prevent, just like it happened in reality, a too much easy colonization by French or Portuguese.

 

[EndlessPat]

I also feel Independents would be better if they had a little more options. In a perfect world they'd even come with LHs. I'd love to interact with one-city-civs like Jerusalem, Hittites, or Hungary. I know it's probably not feasible (what with two slots of indies) but it would make the game much more immersive.

 

[ales_]

The Independents are a big problem of RFC, IMO. If you're at war with Israel, why are you at war with Hittites? It will be great to split the Independents and make them playable civs. The RFC Civilizations in Abundance mod split them in separated minor civs. This was a good start, IMO.
BTW, it's not so hard to make Israel, Hittites, or Hungary playable civs, because they're already included in the History Rewritten mod which was the source of 1.10 civs.

 

[EndlessPat]

Yeah, it's kinda fun to play as the indies with the CTL+Z trick. If I knew how to program I'd set up UHVs for the Celts and Seljuks.

 

[Linkman226]

What would the Swahili civ be called, if they are to be included? Do we simply come up with imaginary names for them? They never organized into any independent polity AFAIK. Also, their Historical Area would overlap heavily with that of Ethiopia.

I think instead of adding civs like this, efforts would be better spent on improving the quality and features of Independents.

For example, if you allow Trade Routes/Open Borders to Independent Cities (depending on conditions such as state religion) you'd represent civs like Swahili and Polynesia successfully with Independents. You can even add their UUs/UBs to those Independent cities.

Here's roughly how you can implement this:

- Trade Routes with Independents can always establish (unless running Mercantilism, of course), even if you're at war with the Independents.

- Independents always have Open Borders with all other civs.

- To declare war on any Independents, you would need to order a unit of yours to move towards an Independent city's tile, instead of just a tile with Independent Culture. Upon doing this, all your units are expelled from the Independent's Culture boundary.

- Then you could add UUs such as Dhow and let them spawn at appropriate dates.

This is all well and good but:

1. The AI would be profoundly lost.
2. These would constitute some fairly major code changes, especially if you had to program the AI accordingly, which you pretty much have to if you don't want to break the game.

And you wouldn't come up with imaginary names. It's not any different than how every other civ is treated. For example India was never unified until independence, so there's dynamic names like "Indian Mahajanapadas," "Mauryan Empire," "Gupta Empire," etc. Not perfect, but this is Civ IV, not Polity IV.