Of Mongols and Slavs

[Crayton]

Everyones cool with Mongols (the perenial arch-rival to China) and the Slavs (Kievian Rus, Muscovy, Serbia)?

 

[rhialto]

Slavics or Slavs are restriced to the countries where a Slavic language is spoken.
The following countries are to be considered Slavic : Belarus, Ukraine, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Moldova, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia & Montenegro, half of Bosnia Herçegovina and Macedonia.

Slight correction: Romanian (or a very near facsimile thereof) is spoken in Moldova, so by your rules it isn't a slavic country.

 

[RCL]

Everyones cool with Mongols (the perenial arch-rival to China) and the Slavs (Kievian Rus, Muscovy, Serbia)?

Slavs are just too large ethnical group to be merged together. It's like merging English, German, the most of Scandinavian nations to a single Germanic civ.

The Slavs are the most numerous ethnic body of people of Europe, totalling about 300 mln people. Just to count the largest nations:

Russians ~112 mln (counting only ppl of Slavic origin) + 20 mln abroad,
Ukrainians ~50 mln + several mln abroad
Poles ~40 mln + about 15 mln abroad (about 10 of them in USA)
Belarussians (White Russians) ~10 mln
Czechs,
Slovaks,
Serbs,
Croats,
Slovenians,



and much more lesser nations.

The difference between all those nations is significiant. Slavs use various alphabetes (Cyrillic-based are in use in the Byzantium-dominated East and South, while Latin-based ones are in use in the West), have different churches (all the kinds of Orthodoxy, Catholicism, Eastern Rite, with one Slavic nation being even Islamic) and I dare to say, the history of The Slavs is a history of permanent internal conflicts as they were split between the two major spheres of influence: Western and Eastern Roman empires (latter one being called Byzantium).

You just can't have a single Civ represent all the Slavs.

 

[rhialto]

Thing is, a lot of those are relatively insignificant. When people talk of one or two civs to represent that area, they aren't talking about an amalgamation of all of them, but rather, about the one or two most distinguihed/famed civs from that area.

 

[RCL]

Thing is, a lot of those are relatively insignificant. When people talk of one or two civs to represent that area, they aren't talking about an amalgamation of all of them, but rather, about the one or two most distinguihed/famed civs from that area.

Don't introduce any civ called "The Slavs", then (as Crayton proposes). There was no single nation like that during the last 14 centuries.

 

[Kyriakos]

you forgot the bulgarians

 

[Phyr_Negator]

RCL, that would be weird option... similar to implementation of Black race, including all African nations ))))

 

[frekk]

Don't introduce any civ called "The Slavs", then (as Crayton proposes). There was no single nation like that during the last 14 centuries.

There was never a single nation called the Celts or the Vikings or the Mayans or Sumeria either. These were all groups of city-states or collections of dozens of small kingdoms and tribes. IMO, doesn't matter if there wasn't a nation called Celt or Slav - there was a Celtic and a Slavic civilization.

It's the name of the game!!!!! Literally !!!!!!!

 

[RCL]

There was never a single nation called the Celts or the Vikings or the Mayans or Sumeria either. These were all groups of city-states or collections of dozens of small kingdoms and tribes. IMO, doesn't matter if there wasn't a nation called Celt or Slav - there was a Celtic and a Slavic civilization.

It's the name of the game!!!!! Literally !!!!!!!

Hmm... agreed that Celts or Vikings weren't a single nation either. But they somehow managed to remain stuck together throughout the history, while the Slavs spread across the world and diversified a lot... Such a civ seems unnatural to me. Whom would you propose as leaders for that civ?

you forgot the bulgarians

No, I didn't Bulgarians is a Slavicized Turkic tribe, that's why I decided not to include them in the list.

 

[rhialto]

Personally, I'd pick Russia and Poland-Lithuania as the two most prominent slavic civs. Russia because, its, well, big, and Poland for its prominent role in European history. It was once teh largest nation in Europe, played an important role in fighting off the mongols, created a unique form of early democracy, and fought the Russians, Ottomans, Swedes, and teutonic Knights to a standstill.

 

[RCL]

Personally, I'd pick Russia and Poland-Lithuania as the two most prominent slavic civs. Russia because, its, well, big, and Poland for its prominent role in European history. It was once teh largest nation in Europe, played an important role in fighting off the mongols, created a unique form of early democracy, and fought the Russians, Ottomans, Swedes, and teutonic Knights to a standstill.

Agreed about Poland - it also has a perfect real life candidate for UU - the Hussar and lotsa Great Leaders like Kosciuszko who was actually not only Polish hero but American too (he was an American general fighting under Washington). Somehow I feel that Civ creators forgot about that nation, which was once a major European power and saved other eastern European nations by defeating Teutonic knights.

 

[rhialto]

Actually, regarding UUs, teh cossack makes as much sense for the Poles. I'd give the Russians that ww2 mass-produced tank instead.

 

[RCL]

Actually, regarding UUs, teh cossack makes as much sense for the Poles. I'd give the Russians that ww2 mass-produced tank instead.

In real life, T-34 was faster and more reliable than German tanks, but no stronger than them (at least in the second half of war). However, Panzer already has the extra speed so T-34 should be given another advantage against a normal Tank. I suggest to (significiantly) lower production costs (that's perfectly consistent with real life as that tank was pretty cheap, stemming from its previous generations and not using any expensive hardware).

 

[arcbulgar(bg)]

Hmm... agreed that Celts or Vikings weren't a single nation either. But they somehow managed to remain stuck together throughout the history, while the Slavs spread across the world and diversified a lot... Such a civ seems unnatural to me. Whom would you propose as leaders for that civ?



No, I didn't Bulgarians is a Slavicized Turkic tribe, that's why I decided not to include them in the list.

The bulgarians is not a turkic tribe and there is nothing "Slavicized" about them.Exept perhaps some words.But i agree that they don`t fall under the slavic group

 

[Gladi]

Hmm... agreed that Celts or Vikings weren't a single nation either. But they somehow managed to remain stuck together throughout the history, while the Slavs spread across the world and diversified a lot... Such a civ seems unnatural to me. Whom would you propose as leaders for that civ?

No, I didn't Bulgarians is a Slavicized Turkic tribe, that's why I decided not to include them in the list.

Bright day
Ahem. at the height of their civilization Celts were spread from Ireland to western Turkey. Some were simple tribesman, but others built large cities...
One can also argue Vikings...

And Bulgarians are mostly Slavs who took name from their Turkic overlords.

 

[Che Guava]

Hmm... agreed that Celts or Vikings weren't a single nation either. But they somehow managed to remain stuck together throughout the history, while the Slavs spread across the world and diversified a lot... Such a civ seems unnatural to me. Whom would you propose as leaders for that civ?

I've read that at the turn of the 20th century there was something of a pan-slavic movement in europe, with Russia as the defender of slavic culture (isn't that why they had alligned themselves with Serbia against A-H anyway?), but I agree that that hardly qualifies them as an cohesive empire.

On the other hand, I think it's easy to call celts and vikings cohesive civilizations because they fit so nicely into current political borders: Ireland as the celtic nation, and Sweden/Norway/Denmark (and Iceland, I guess) as home of the vikings. I guess both of these groups got thier own little "out of the way" regions to call thier own, while the slavs had the misfortune of living on some prime real esate in the middle of europe...

 

[Phyr_Negator]

Actually, regarding UUs, teh cossack makes as much sense for the Poles. I'd give the Russians that ww2 mass-produced tank instead.

I disagree, Ukraine fought agaisnt Poland rule and yes, there were Registry Cossacks(army Ukraine, as a vassal, have to give to Poland), but mostly Cossacks fought in rebellions agains Poland rule. I think Reitar or Winged Hussar will fit much better than Cossack. As for Russian UU - T-34(was stronger due to very successful sloped armour innovation and when first built, it was the tank with the best balance of firepower, mobility, and protection in existence), Cossack, Shocktroopers or NKVD Corps. Choises are many.

 

[Jove]

Personally, I'd pick Russia and Poland-Lithuania as the two most prominent slavic civs.

I'd agree here, for rough game terms. Poland-Lithuania seems to get a little overlooked historically, not only in civ. Is it because it declined so steeply? It sure was a major player for a time...

 

[Dr. Salazar]

I've read that at the turn of the 20th century there was something of a pan-slavic movement in europe, with Russia as the defender of slavic culture (isn't that why they had alligned themselves with Serbia against A-H anyway?), but I agree that that hardly qualifies them as an cohesive empire.

Agreed, otherwise we'd have to count on the much more influencial Pan-Asianist movement too

 

[RCL]

I disagree, Ukraine fought agaisnt Poland rule and yes, there were Registry Cossacks(army Ukraine, as a vassal, have to give to Poland), but mostly Cossacks fought in rebellions agains Poland rule.

That's because Cossacks were (are) Orthodox, while Poles are Catholic. Agreed that Hussar is better choice for Poland.

As for Russian UU - T-34(was stronger due to very successful sloped armour innovation and when first built, it was the tank with the best balance of firepower, mobility, and protection in existence), Cossack, Shocktroopers or NKVD Corps. Choises are many.

Don't forget the also mass-produced Katyusha I guess the Russians were the only nation during WW2 to use rocket launchers on mass scale, often replacing conventional artillery with them. So that makes Katyushas distinctive enough to be candidates for UU (should replace Artillery ).