Patria Grande: Civilizations of the Americas

[hangman]

No argument here, I just wanted to add some nuance.

 

[TPangolin]

Thanks for the ideas! How does this sound?

UA: The Phases of Monte Albán/The Cloud People - Defensive buildings are 50% cheaper in cities founded on Hills. Gain a small culture boost when Open Borders treaties are signed

(First part is to represent their resilience to conquering in the face of the Aztecs and the second part is to represent that ""Zapotec quarter" ehecatzin mentioned)

UU: ???

UI: Ceremonial Catacombs (name not final) - Must be built on hills or tiles adjacent to mountains. Provides +1 Culture and +1 Faith and comes at Pottery. +1 Faith after Theology is researched. Can only be built by wounded units with health under 50% (unit dies afterwards). Or just workers. One is morbid and kinda cool, the other makes sense too.

 

[Hoop Thrower]

With such a restrictive condition for the Catacombs I'd up the effects from it. As for the UU name, the only thing I'd been able to find is Lightning Warrior, courtesy of Age of Empires III.

 

[TPangolin]

Not even sure that it's even doable, I'll have to check around though haha (unless it's possible to check if a unit is below -50%, kill it, then spawn a new one in it's place that can build a UI and then remove some health).

I also found the Lightning Warrior but I'm not keen to use it since I don't want to source a unit exclusively from another strategy game.

 

[Leugi]

It's good to see we'll manage to have the Toltecs, Mixtecs and now Zapotecs represented

Anyway, back to Paraguay for a moment, which peace theme works betterly? I personally prefer Option B, but can't seem to get rid of the noise. So I'm undecided.

Option A
Option B

 

[Hoop Thrower]

I prefered option A. Gotta love that Paraguayan Harp.

 

[hangman]

So I have a spread sheet I was using to plan for my (defunct) civ4 mod, but y'all may find it useful. There's also a set of city name maps you could use for city lists. Much of it is pretty unfinished, so if you need help parsing it, let me know.

 

[ubergeneral]

All I pretty much know is what I saw when I looked up Toltecs on wikipedia. The Mixtec article, was about the expansion of the empire and a famous leader Eight Deer Jauguar claw.

When I looked up about the Toltecs it was telling me about their temples and writing goverment system leading me to beleive that they were more cultural. If i'm wrong i'm not trying to be on purpose, I have much to learn about these peoples.

I still think we can blob some of this together, though at this point i'm not sure what.

 

[Reedstilt]

Didn't the Toltecs have some sort of curved short sword that was unique to them?

You're right, and it would make a good basis for a Toltec UU. Here's the relevant excerpt from War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica:

Spoiler :

Known mainly from stone carvings and ceramics, Toltec arms included atlatls and darts, knives, and a curved club that I have labeled a short sword. Toltec warrios also carried round shields and used body armor. Atlatls provided primary projectile fire in Toltec armies, although slings may well have been used for greater distance. Earlier in central Mexico, thrusting spears were used with more protective, though less mobile rectangular shields. However, the round, fringed shield introduced by the Olmeca-Xicalancas was widely adopted in central Mexico: supported by an arm strap, it freed both hands and deemphasized spears, for atlatlists were now more mobile than ever. However, once opposing armies closed with each other, atlatlists were at a real disadvantage and the use of some shock weapon was essential. This need was met by the short sword, whose longer cutting surface and lighter weight greatly added to the offensive capability of Toltec atlatlists. The short sword was the major Toltec innovation in arms. Unlike swords developed in metalworking cultures, the short sword was not merely an extension of knife construction to increasingly larger forms. Instead, this was a major innovation in Mesoamerican stoneworking cultures, though its conceptual foundations were present in other arms. The practice of setting small blades into wooden handles had been developed in the Maya lowlands during the Late Classic and spread into central Mexico with the Olmeca-Xicalancas. The Toltec contribution was to use this technique to make longer cutting surfaces on a light one-handed weapon, which was probably a modification based on unbladed curved clubs brought from the north. Approximately 50 cm long, these curved clubs were inlaid with blades, most likely obsidian.

The short sword had significant advantages and largely replaced bladed clubs and thrusting spears. The clubs used previously had large blades that bore the brunt of the blow, with the wooden handle merely serving as a convenient attachment and handhold. Although their size gave them strength, it also made them heavy, which limited both the number that could be usefully inset and the length of the handle. Moreover, they were essentially crushers, their effectiveness being more a function of weight than of cutting edges. Thrusting spears became more effective by insetting blades along the upper shaft, but retaining a large stone point still limited the weapon as a slasher. Set on the end of the shaft, the point was adequately bound for forward thrusts, but it had no lateral backing and was more easily dislodged when used for slashing. By contrast, the short sword was a major improvement as a slasher over either of the weapons it replaced--it was lighter and carried more cutting surface, and each blade was backed by the wooden base that provided direct support; it was an excellent slasher and yet the forward curve of the sword retained some aspects of a crusher when used curved end forward, as the Toltecs did. Shorter than spears and lighter than clubs, the short sword was considerably more mobile. Its use marked a major shift in singlehanded weapons, away from the weight and crushing power of clubs to the cutting surfaces and lightness of swords.

[...]

It was now feasible for a single soldier to carry a short sword, atlatl and darts, knife, and shield supported by an armstrap. Instead of dividing their forces into mutually reinforcing atlatlists and spearmen, Toltec soldiers could now provide their own covering fire with atlatlists while they advanced and still engage in hand-to-hand combat with short swords once they closed with the enemy. By shifting from projectiles to shock weapons as needed, the same troops were constantly engaged, simplifying combat by eliminating the insertion and withdrawal of specialized troops as needed; combining arms effectively doubled the size of Toltec armies. This did not eliminate specialist fighters, however, for combining projectile and shock weapons was useful primarily when first engaging (and possibly disengaging) the enemy. Thereafter, specialist soldiers could be brought forward to reinforce the front lines, eliminating the need for atlatls to cover their advance and disrupt enemy formations.

The Toltecs' main forces were mobile light infantry, although there are indications that they also relied on more heavily armored infantry, suggesting functionally integrated combat units. There were two types of armor, full body and left arm, both made of quilted cotton. The carved atlantids at Tollan wear quilted cotton padding on their left arms whereas ceramic warrior figurines are occasionally depicted with full suits of armor, including leggings. Helmets are also depicted, although their protective value is uncertain. Most soldiers, even the elite, were not fully armored anddid not carry shields. This is because short swords could also be used defensively, reducing the need for shields, especially when used in conjunction with armored left sleeves.

As at Teotihuacan, Toltec arms and armor reflective standardize weapons suggestive of state ownership and control, a large army, and complementary weapons and units. The Toltecs' combined use of projectiles and swords also demanded battlefield command and coordination to make most effective use of all weapons and to avoid fire from their own side. Moreover, these mass-coordinated battle tactics required drilling, common in a meritocratic society where a command hierarchy can more easily be imposed.

There were military orders at Tollan, probably coyote and jaguar orders, and military imagery in works of art depict types and classes of warriors rather than individuals, indicative of a meritocratic military system. These factors, coupled by the Toltecs' successful expansion, indicate a large, highly organized, and effective army--larger than could have been mounted drawing primarily from elites. Tollan's multiethnic population adds to the evidence for a meritocratic military system. Much of the military establishment appears to have come from the northern Chichimec peoples rather than from more established Mesoamerican groups.

I almost feel tempted to make the Toltecs have Atlatls and change the Mayan UU.

I definitely support replacing the Mayan Atlatlist with a new UU, If you give the Maya a new military UU, it should probably be focused on the hit-and-run melee shock tactics preferred by Classic Maya. However, I'd give the Atlatlist to Teotihuacan rather than the Toltecs, unless you want to give the Toltecs an Impi-like sword-and-atlatl combination unit, like ehecatzin suggested.

Just chiming in here to say: If you guys have any ideas for a Zapotec civ I'd love to hear them. Already have designed some aspects (Phases of Monte Alban, Ballcourts etc.) but I'd like to hear from the experts what they'd include.

Glad to hear it! I agree with hangman about avoiding the Cloud People name for the UA, but for a different reason. "Cloud People" can also refer to the Mixtec. It could get confusing, though if you wanted to go with the Zapotec phrase Be'ena' Za'a, I couldn't complain.

As for ideas for UU units, Classic Zapotec civilization (back when they were based out of Monte Alban and were fighting off the Teotihuacanos regularly) favored spear-and-shield melee units, with few ranged units, again based on War and Society in Ancient Mesoamerica.

Also, it's a shame the Mixe don't fit into any of the Civs people are work on. Their 16-foot long lances would have made a cool UU.

 

[Hiram]

No blobs. Especially not these three civs. These three civs are only related as being Mesoamerican. The Toltecs didn't even share the same geography as the other two (who often fought against each other).

 

[Reedstilt]

While poking around through my sources earlier, I came across something that might help you with the Chichimecs. Namely making sure Tenayuca ends up on their list of Cities, probably somewhere near the top given its historic significance. But it also got me thinking about the Aztec City List and how horrible it is (not as bad as the Iroquois City list though). Will you be including an alternate Aztec City List, removing the cities that belong to other Civs (Teotihuacan, Tlaxcala, Tula, etc.) and including more appropriately Aztec cities? Unless you could be tempted to do a full Tlaxcallan Civ, Tlaxcala should probably be replaced with Ocotelolco, a Mercantile City-State, or Tizatlan, a Militaristic City-State. Personally, I'd go with Tizatlan so the Aztec Civ can have better Flower Wars against the Tlaxcallan City-State.

 

[Carloso]

I'm after hitting a problem with the Toltecs. I can't seem to create a dummy tech to enable the Toltecs to see antiquity sites.

Any ideas how I could achieve it?

As for that Paraguayan music... Option A, the noise from Option B is going to kill me.

 

[Leugi]

Mixtecs are definitively all about the domination of Iya Nacuua (Eight Deer ... ); Toltecs are more like a militaristic cultural civ (hence, artifacts and early archaeology seem like an interesting idea)

I'm after hitting a problem with the Toltecs. I can't seem to create a dummy tech to enable the Toltecs to see antiquity sites.

Any ideas how I could achieve it?

As for that Paraguayan music... Option A, the noise from Option B is going to kill me.

I'd make a Tech that cannot be researched (make the Prereq Tech the tech itself), then assign it to the player through lua.

 

[Scapegrace]

Excellent article Reedstilt. I'll read it in more depth later, but going on what it said, I think I've got a picture of what one of these things looked like:-

Spoiler :

Though it might be a spear point, I don't know.

Anyway, here's my attempt at a Toltec UU:

UU: Butterfly Warrior (replaces Horseman) (Name entirely negotiable; I couldn't find anything specific to the Toltec)
14 Combat Strength. -1 Movement. When attacked in close combat, performs a free ranged attack on the attacking unit. Upgrades to Longswordsman.

The whole thing about the UU being like the Impi really stuck with me, and I wanted to make the Toltec feel like a more infantry-focused force, which has the virtue of being historically accurate. =]

 

[Reedstilt]

Excellent article Reedstilt. I'll read it in more depth later, but going on what it said, I think I've got a picture of what one of these things looked like

That's actually the business end of a weapon that's basically a Mesoamerican halberd.

 

[Scapegrace]

Ah. Whoops. I'm more au fait with African history, I must admit. Still pretty embarrassing, but at least there's an excuse.

A completely pathetic excuse.

 

[Carloso]

I'm after making the tech, that works fine and can't be seen, but how do I make that tech reveal antiquity sites. I inserted into the trait.xml:

	<Resources>
		<Row>
			<Type>RESOURCE_ARTIFACTS</Type>
			<TechReveal>TECH_TOLTEC</TechReveal>
			<Description>TXT_KEY_RESOURCE_ARTIFACTS</Description>
		    <Civilopedia>TXT_KEY_CIV5_RESOURCE_ARTIFACTS_TEXT</Civilopedia>
			<Help>TXT_KEY_RESOURCE_ARTIFACTS_HELP</Help>
			<ResourceClassType>RESOURCECLASS_RUSH</ResourceClassType>
			<ArtDefineTag>ART_DEF_RESOURCE_ARTIFACTS</ArtDefineTag>
			<ConstAppearance>100</ConstAppearance>
			<MinAreaSize>3</MinAreaSize>
			<MaxLatitude>90</MaxLatitude>
			<RandApp1>0</RandApp1>
			<RandApp2>0</RandApp2>
			<Player>100</Player>
			<Flatlands>true</Flatlands>
			<NoRiverSide>true</NoRiverSide>
			<IconString>[ICON_RES_ARTIFACTS]</IconString>
			<PortraitIndex>3</PortraitIndex>
			<IconAtlas>RESOURCE_ATLAS_EXP2</IconAtlas>
		</Row>
	</Resources>

Do I need to add or remove some line or what?

 

[Leugi]

Hmn... since we're working with an existant resource we should use <Update> tags instead of Rows... And, we can't replace that part because it would make digging sites not be revealed with archaeology for other players...

Maybe if we do use a dummy policy, and make it have a:
<PolicyReveal>POLICY_...</PolicyReveal>

 

[Reedstilt]

Ah. Whoops. I'm more au fait with African history, I must admit. Still pretty embarrassing, but at least there's an excuse.

A completely pathetic excuse.

No worries. I only found out about that last night myself, when I was looking up information about these curved, bladed Toltec clubs. That image came up while I was searching for a picture of these Toltec weapons, and I decided to follow up on that lead to see what it led back to.

 

[Scapegrace]

No worries. I only found out about that last night myself, when I was looking up information about these curved, bladed Toltec clubs. That image came up while I was searching for a picture of these Toltec weapons, and I decided to follow up on that lead to see what it led back to.

Righto. I did wonder.

More importantly, what did you think of the reverse Impi UU? I mean, I'm really new to Civ V in general, so I'd appreciate some guidance. It's like when I first tried homebrewing from grain; all I discovered was that eyebrows are not necessarily permanent features of the face.