Incoming long post!
Found this half finished doc file from an older thread post maybe five years ago, and decided to think it through. I am hoping that it will be of some use here, rather than remain unfinished on a PC. This is not a list of demands by any means, but I had time to look over this. I am not sure if this is a good time to start this thread, but here are up to 10 civs that I believe 'could' be included within RFCE in some way, whether playable, or not. I do NOT support all of them becoming playable civs, and I am biased towards some. Generic details are listed first, and the details are in spoiler tabs… By non-playable, I mean a civ that you cannot choose to pay as, like the Zengids in SOI, but they otherwise function as a regular civ in game.
This is separate from the civs already being added: Sultanate of Rum, Sicily/Naples, Tunisia, Khanate of Crimea, Egypt (Fatimids – Mamluks)… Absinthe does all the work, and it is essentially his mod, so whatever he decides is completely up to him. I am thankful for his faithful duty to improving the mod. He doesn't need to add any of these suggestions, but I will make a case for each situation, especially since the timeline will likely be redone.
My Short list: up to 6 playable civs, and 3 non-playable civs...
1. Golden Horde = playable
2. Lombards/Milan = playable
3. Florence = non-playable
4. Navarre = playable or N/A
5. Serbia = playable
6. Latin Empire = playable or N/A
7. Bohemia = playable
8. Moldova = Non-playable or independent city
9. Wessex = N/A [could be playable]?
10. Tlemcen (Zayyanid Kingdom) = non-playable or N/A
**2, 5, and 7 are from RFCE++
On a following post there are five more non-playable civs I considered adding...
11. Brittany = non-playable
12. Croatia = non-playable or N/A
13. Wales = non-playable conditional
14. Bosnia = non-playable conditional
15. Cilicia = non-playable conditional
16. Naples = non-playable
Theme: Smaller states, whether playable or not playable, will be useful for gameplay as vassals (Sicily/Naples, Crimean Khanate, Bohemia, Navarre, Latin Empire*, Florence, Milan/Lombards, and Zayyanids/Tlemcen). One of the civic options allows +3 stability, I think, for every vassal. However, there aren't too many possibilities for vassals, so I don't know any advantage to using Vassalage except for the feudal stability bonus. I am also not worried about including smaller significant civs because they can always be conquered.
For below, "Turns" represents how many turns the civ would be active historically speaking during the current old timeline and the new expanded timeline idea.
Golden Horde (Number 1)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 1240s (1242/1256) – 1502 Significant? Yes Territory: Large
Turns: 87 old / 131 new
Spawn: either 1242 – 1256 at Sarai Batu* (or Tanai/Tana or Azaq, already a barbarian spawn) after main wave of keshiks attacking Kiev. Both dates representing Batu Khan founding the horde and his death respectively.
Leaders: Batu Khan and Tokhtamysh
Spawn stack: 6 or 7 UUs, 2 settlers, 2 guisarmers, 1 crossbowman, and maybe an Islamic missionary (They converted later on).
UB: Kurultai (courthouse) - +1 trade route and +1 culture
Darughachi (manor house) – slightly better wealth bonus without the stability bonus?
Yam (from SOI but replaces market)
UP: The Horde – Barbarian units cannot attack you (is this even possible?)
Total War – Enemies suffer +50% war weariness
Nomad Inclusion – Spawn of extra units from steppe?
Or – Start with 2 great generals
Last Barbarians – Extra wealth gained from pillaging and city capturing.
UU: Keshik, Mangudai, Asud Guard, Khorchin. (Extra movement bonus?)
UHVs:
1. Tatar Yoke – have 2 vassals by 1365
2. Have 4 vassals by 1420
3. Raze 8 cities with a population of “6” or higher.
4. Control 12 cities in 12 different provinces by 1345
5. Control 15 cities in 15 different provinces.
6. Have 1,000 gold from pillaging and razing by 1330
7. Have trade relations with the Genoans and the Egyptians
8. Kill 100 units by 1389?
9. Raze or capture 6 capital cities from 6 different civs
10. Collapse or vassalize the following: Bulgarians, Novgorod, Muscovites, Kievans, and Lithuanians
11. Secure 3 silver resources
12. Control 12% of the world territory
Notes: Add extra barbarian units during Tamerlane’s scripted invasion to invade around eastern Ukraine; as well as extra units to help break them down in the 1380s.
Why: I believe the Golden Horde should definitely be added as a playable civ, despite the focus of RFCE being on Europe, because of its influence on the continent as a whole, specifically Eastern Europe. Of course much of their historical empire, the steppe including their capital at Sarai, is not on the map. However, they controlled plenty of territory in Europe throughout the 13th and 14th centuries. The Mongol yoke doesn’t exactly exist within the game without a Mongol civ. Currently, Russia just kind of appears and has the unrealistic/ahistorical goal of ridding Greater Russia of all barbarians by 1482 (I already made another post about changing Russia's starting situation). Furthermore, they would be a far reaching late conquest civ that only the Ottomans have a niche in. Historical city spawns in Russia (Tver, Murom, Ryazan, Vladimir, Vologda etc.) would create useful obstacles as well. So the NE portion of the map isn’t entirely as empty as it otherwise would be. It will be a good opponent for Muscovy to overcome in general.
Lombards/Milan (number 2)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 568 – 774 & 1098* - 1499 Significant? Yes Territory: Small/Medium
Leaders: Rothari and Francesco Sforza and Gian Galeazzo Visconti
Spawn: Milan (also Respawn)
Data: RFCE++
UU: Urban Militia (replaces Maceman?) – I think this had a city defense or other promotion bonus…
UB: Studio (Replaces X?) – Described as “an early theatre with a free artist.”
UP: The Power of Commercial Centers – Trade Routes give extra food
UHVs
1. The Lombard Kingdom: Control Lombardy, Tuscany, Liguria, Verona, Apulia, and Calabria in 774
2. The Lombard League: Destroy 25 German units
3. The Italic League: Ensure that you, Venice, and Genoa are more powerful than Austria and Spain
Notes: Their existence would influence the new Sicily civ that will be added. Their inclusion may also interfere with France’s 1st conquest victory.
Why: Taken from RFCE++, the Lombards had a significant effect on Italy for the early game, from consolidation and fighting the Byzantines to being conquered largely by Charlemagne (and breaking up). Also, by extension or respawn, they can function as Milan, a powerful city-state in Northern Italy. This would immensely benefit the game versus having a simple independent city just waiting to be conquered by Germany or Genoa. It would be able to fight against its neighbors and revolt/respawn against unstable conquerors, or become a vassal. I believe they should be a playable civ.
Florence (number 3)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 1115 – 1800 Significant? No Territory: Small
Spawn: Florence flipped, small stack of militia units.
Leaders: Cosimo de Medici and Lorenzo I the Maginificent
UP: Florentine Arts – Every building built gives a small boost of culture to Florence (based on hammer cost). OR trade routes give extra culture. OR late medieval techs are 25% cheaper.
UU: Bandeira (translates to flag, but this was the name of organized units under a Condottieri) Replaces guisarme or pikeman. Cheaper unit, but less bonus against cavalry.
Coblnello (mounted sergeant) - +4 strength.
Colonella (like tercio)
UB: Camerata de’ Bardi? (Replaces theatre) – costs more but has double culture effect. Increases city maintenance.
UHVs
1. Control every land tile in Tuscany in 1532
2. Have a greater score than Venice, Genoa, and Milan combined.
3. Have 10,000 culture by year X
4. Have at least 3 companies in Florence
5. Settle 2 great merchants and 2 great artists in Florence
Why/Notes: I cannot think of a decent unique UB for Florence, so maybe it should not be playable. It has a very small territory, Tuscany, and interferes with the independent spawn of Pisa/Firenze. Moreover, as a one city challenge in Italy, it would mostly be turn culture/gold clicking for any human player. The only significance I can think of for including Florence at all would be their effect on larger civs invading Italy, and inter-Italian gameplay. However, I prefer having Florence as a spawning non-playable civ than leaving it as an independent city which can easily be conquered by its larger neighbors. It would give a little bit of flavor and competition to surrounding civs in Italy.
Navarre (number 4)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 824 – 1512* Significant? No Territory: Small
Turns: 225 old / 298 new
Leaders: Sancho the Great
Starting Stack/Spawn: Navarre, 2 skirmishers or UUs, one worker, one missionary, and one archer.
UP: Ecclesiastical Piety: religious buildings costs halved? Or discounted.
UU: Jinete (Ginete/Genitour) replaces mounted sergeant: +25% vs melee and archery units
UB: Baserri (replaces manor house) provides a culture bonus
Garai (replaces granary) provides a culture bonus
Dorretxeak* (replaces tower house) culture bonus
UHVs:
1. Control Castille, Navarre, and Aragon by 1035
2. Control 2 cities in Aquitaine and Spain by 1000
3. Build a Catholic Cathedral by 1180
4. Have friendly relations with 3 other Iberian civs in 1345?
5. Have 6,000 culture by 1485
6. Control 1 city in Normandy, Navarre, Aquitaine, Provence, and Castille
7. Obtain the 1st whale resource (famous whalers)
Notes/Why: This is another difficult civ for me to justify. It has a small territory, and will be little more than a 1 city challenge style. However, it is an underdog civ with larger neighbors all around it (Castile, Aragon, France, and Cordoba). It would be the earliest competitor to Cordoba, albeit, functioning more as resistance. It would help break Castile’s dominance, so Aragon is not captured by them so easily. Overall it will be a good competitor to all other Iberian civs. It will make Morocco’s 3rd UHV even more difficult though.
Serbia (number 5) (Grand Principality to Successor States)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 1091 – 1398 Significant: Yes Territory: Medium/Large
Turns: 99 old / 147 new
Leaders: Stefan Dusan
Data from RFCE++
UU: Vlastela (replaces armored lancer/knight)
UB: Orthodox Hram (replaces X?) produces extra faith points on completion and 1 free priest
UHVs
1. Zakonopravilo. Have a solid stability (20 points+?) by/in 1354
2. Control Serbia, Macedonia, Arberia, Thessaloniki, Epirus, and Thessaly in 1371
3. Have more military units than the Ottomans in 1540
Notes/Why: I think it is fairly necessary to include them in SE Europe to put pressure on all surrounding civs: Venice, Hungary, Bulgarians (if alive), and the Byzantines. This helps fracture the region and give the Ottoman player a new target to conquer. In all, it is a fun conquest civ with plenty of potential.
Latin Empire (number 6) (Latin Empire to Successor States)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 1204 – 1261 / 1204 – 1458 (Frankokratia)
Turns: 19 old / 30 new & 85 old / 127 new Significant: Maybe Territory: Small/medium
Leaders: Baldwin I or Baldwin II
Starting Stack: Outside Constantinople with siege units and galleys
UP: Catholic Buildings produce extra stability? Or building are not destroyed upon conquest? Or cities do not revolt upon conquest (current Bulgaria UP)
UB: Salic Court (replaces courthouse) - +1 culture, and +50& trade route yield?
Garrison (barracks) - +1 happiness
UU: Frankish Sargent (replaces maceman) +25% vs archery units
Flemish Infantry (guisarmier) – Ignores defensive bonuses like firearms units. +1 Strength.
UHVs:
1. Control Thessaly, Morea, Constantinople, and Thrace
2. Survive to the year 1455
3. Control X relics
4. Spread Catholicism to 8 Orthodox cities
5. Control 4 luxury resources
6. Ensure Catholicism has twice or thrice as many followers as Orthodoxy.
Note: I do not know if this is possible, but after the conquest of Constantinople, I imagine a choice of 3 historical cities flipping to the player instead of a regular Greece flip . (Athens, Thessalonica, or Hadrianopolis)? To represent one of the kingdoms established after the fourth crusade. The rest must be conquered manually.
Why: This one is a bit of a stretch even for me, but I am biased to include it. I imagine them functioning like KoJ or PoA in SOI. I like this as a potential civ for the following reasons. It helps fragment the Byzantines, especially in Europe, while fighting an uphill battle to expand into Greece/the Aegean (Principality of Achaea, and Duchy of Athens). I do not like the current “bribe” set up for the 4th Crusade where Venice or Genoa appear outside of Constantinople to conquer it. I think the current crusade mechanic can be improved upon. I prefer a Latin Empire having that task, but if they fail then nothing happens. In other words if the starting stack of Latin units fail to take Constantinople, then they fail to take it, no harm done, the fourth crusade is over. They are gone from the game. If they succeed then it will be a challenge for the Byzantine player. By extension I also see them representing the Frankokratia in Greece. They would linger in Greece assuming Constantinople is retaken until the Ottomans spawn. Byzantine culture, and city capture revolt will be a problem.
Bohemia (number 7)
Spoiler:
Timeline: Moravia (833 – 907) : Duchy (870 – 1198) : Kingdom (1198 – 1526)
Turns: Moravia 19 old / 25 new : Duchy 107 old / 126 new : Kingdom 129 old / 164 new
Significant? Yes. Territory: Small/medium
Leader: Ottokar II
UP: +2 diplomatic relations with all civs?
UB: Orloj (replaces X?) – A small production bonus?
UU: War Wagon (replaces X?) – Strong defensive terrain bonus?
Houfnice (replaces bombard unit?) - starts with shock and collateral I?
UHVs
1. The Iron and Golden King – Control Bohemia, Moravia, Silesia, Austria, and Carinthia in 1271
2. The Iron and Golden Crown – Xx
3. The Bohemian Revolt – Have a larger pop than any HRE state in 1648
Notes/Why: Their territory is small, and medium at best, but they are significant for central Europe in my opinion. They are wedged between Poland and Germany, but also Austria and Hungary. They controlled territory to their south and north respectively for short periods of time. Their challenge will be existing as an independent state between 2 larger powers, or siding with any as a vassal. They will weaken Austria’s starting position, however, which may not be a good thing for their AI gameplay. My big question is when to have them spawn…
Moldavia (number 8)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 1346 – 1498/1800. Significant? No Territory: Small
Turns: 51 old / 76 new (independent)
Leader: Stephen the Great
UU: Hansari/Calarasi (light cavalry replacement) Can be an upgraded horse archer, or mounted sergeant with extra withdrawal chance.
UP: Oastea Mare-The Large Host. Drafting pulls more population and generates more units (representing big historical strain on economy).
Why/Notes: Same reasoning for including Volhynia’s independent city spawn. It would act as a buffer to Hungary et al from expanding eastward. I would like them to spawn as a non-playable civ, since they started out that way, and possibly be used as a vassal for larger surrounding civs. But maybe an independent city would suffice, or maybe that would be too deterministic for the game. I am not sure either way; but I like the idea of the non-playable vassal civ. Maybe they could be a conditional spawn if someone conquers/settles the area?
Wessex (number 9)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 519 – 1016 Significant? No Territory: Small/Medium
Turns: 134 old / 166 new
Leader: Alfred the Great
Spawn: Bristol or Winchester (Winchester would be flipped automatically?). Small group of units.
UU: Fyrd militia or Fyrd Levy (replaces spearman) -
UB: Burh (replaces Walls) - +1 gold and slightly cheaper?
UP: Shires – Cities have improved trade route yields (30%?) OR cottages and farms are built faster?
UHVs
1. Settle 2 great people by 1040
2. Control London, Wessex, Mercia, East Anglia, and Northumbria by 1000
3. Control 12 farms within your borders
4. Have a Catholic Monastery and manor built in each of your cities
5. Ensure there is not foreign culture/territory in England (not Scotland or Wales) in 1055
6. Settle 2 great artists by 1360
7. Have the most culture of any Western European civ by 1030 (or 1500)
8. Have the most friendly relations with the Pope
9. Build 3 Pagan shrines by 650
Notes: Viking UHV challenge and English spawn issue. Extra barb spawns to reenact Vikings and Heptarchy challenge.
Why: I am not really concerned with this potential civ at all. I am ok with England’s status quo, however plain it may be. The purpose of this one would be (for the human player) to expand from a small city and unite England while fending off barbarian Vikings; and ultimately Norman invasion. I think it would be interesting for gameplay, but there are challenges to including Wessex; namely, Normandy/England’s spawn.
Tlemcen/Zayyanids (number 10) – already represented by independent revolt.
Spoiler:
Timeline: 1235 – 1554 Significant: No Territory: Small/Medium
Turns: 115 old / 159 new
Leader: Abu Yahya I bin Zayyan
Spawn: Same area as independent revolt (Tlemcen aka Northern Algeria)
UU: N/A or vanilla Civ4 - Arabia’s Camel Archer
Notes/Why: Will interfere with Morocco’s 1st UHV that occurs on 1246. I am not concerned with adding this civ too much either. I think it would add something to the Maghreb area, even though Absinthe is already adding Tunisia. It would put pressure on Morocco and Tunisia, but also be a possible vassal state for surrounding civs. Historically they were a major trading hub and accepted Jewish refugees from Spain; but I do not see enough purpose to include them as a playable civ. Non-playable or the status quo is good for me.
Leftovers?
Kingdom of Bosnia
Spoiler:
You could technically throw this one in for fun, but there is not a lot of room by the time they historically became a kingdom. For reference, both Bosnia and Navarre have only 12 land tiles. The Kingdom of Bosnia only covered a max of 18 or so tiles anyway.
The only way I imagine Bosnia being present in the game as a civ would be under a conditional non-playable spawn. The rule would be: If there are no cities present in the province of Bosnia, then a trigger would occur in 1353 or 1377 allowing a starting stack with a settler to spawn.
Bosnia: Kingdom 1377-1463
Tvrtko I reign begins in 1353.
1353 or 1377 which would grant 54 or 43 historical turns under the new proposed timeline respectively.
Spawn: tile 1 west of marble resource with a small stack of units. The flip zone would be 3x3 or the entire province.
Leader: Tvrtko I
No UB, UU, or UP
why? Due to their size and short historical timespan, there is not much of a case to include them, unfortunately, like the Latin Empire. However, it would diversify the Balkans historically, chip away at a late Serbia+Hungary, and be a potential vassal for surrounding civs. It also adds a little randomness to the game.
This might be best represented by revolts, independent city spawns, or unit spawns. However, due to the province’s small and odd size, this isn’t easy to replicate, and would all of this effort be worth it?
Khazars – barbarian spawns, or simply not needed.
Transylvania or Wallachia - I never found much reason to add either except for a conditional spawn for when the ottomans conquer into Hungary, but since I like adding Moldavia, it makes me a hypocrite. They were always vassals for the game, unlike Moldavia starting out independent though.
Splitting Germany? I don't think this is a tenable idea anymore.
Splitting France into Franks and Kingdom of France? Still thinking it over...
I hope this eventually helps with something down the road.
Honestly, that one slipped my mind (as well as the Duchy of Brittany, but they already have an independent city spawn)! Although, they would only historically control six land tiles that aren't mountains. Germany settling Freiburg im Breisgau in Swabia would cover five of those tiles. You could change the mountain at the bottom of Swabia to cram Switzerland in, but it would be two tiles north of Milan (across the thin chain of Alps) and possibly two tiles SSE of Freiburg... There just isn't enough room in my opinion.
Here are the potential civ additions I forgot to add in the first thread post: Croatia and Brittany as non-playable; but also Wales and Cilicia after looking through them again. I only see Brittany as a decent candidate to be added as a non-playable civ, but I see potential utility in the others for the mod. My preference would be to include Brittany over Croatia, but both "can" be added. Of course, it is all up to Absinthe. I always prefer an area to be represented rather than left empty or open to settlement from another civ. The detailed information is below.
Brittany: non-playable
Croatia: non-playable or N/A
Wales: non-playable conditional or N/A
Cilicia: non-playable conditional or N/A
Naples: (Duchy) non-playable or N/A
Sicily**
**I also wanted to include notes and thoughts on implementing the new Sicily civ, because I really wanted this civ added years ago
Brittany (939*-1488*)
Spoiler:
Timeline: 939 marks the battle of Trans-la-Foret, where the Bretons freed Brittany from Viking occupation. Significant? Yes Territory small
846 marks the first "Duke" of Brittany, Nominoe. The previous year, a Breton army defeated the Franks and took control of Rennes and Nantes.
851 marks the year Charles the Bald recognized Brittany's independence (when they also captured Nantes).
1488 marks the death of the last independent duke of Brittany.
What Wikipedia/atlas books I own also told me:
Viking occupation (not settlement) 914-939
tributary to Francia 942-952
Independent 952-1180
Union with England 1181-1292
Vassal of France 1202-1491
Total Turns: 183 old / 247 new [939-1488]
Independent turns: 76 old / 89 new
Vassal of France turns: 96 old / 144 new
Spawn: Nantes/Naoned in 939 - I like this date over 846 because there is usually an independent city (Nantes) which spawns early in France. That's a good representation of the early Middle Ages of Brittany until 939.
Leaders: Alan II and Yann IV (John IV the Conquerer)
Spawn stack: A modest amount of units with enough to repel initial French invasions, and also a settler to found a city in the tip of Brittany like Brest.
UU: Breton Bowman (replaces the prototype composite archer unit, or crossbowman) - slightly cheaper and starts with shock promotion
Or - Gwaster (from AoCH, replaces lancer, mounted lancer, or mounted sergeant) - starts with city raider 1 promotion or +1 strength.
UB: The Estate (replaces courthouse) less maintenance bonus but a large culture bonus, say +30%?
Notes/why: They are a Breton civ in mainland Europe, fought the Vikings, maintained independence from the Frankish empire, and shifted between French and English spheres of influence. Brittany could've easily become a much larger duchy/kingdom or achieved some form of lasting independence. For the mod it would be a pivotal point of fighting between France and England, and potentially serve as a vassal for either. They're basically the Scotland of France, which would make interesting gameplay for the human player or AI.
Croatia - Currently represented by independent Sisak
Spoiler:
Timeline: Kingdom (925-1102) - Duchy (7th century - 925)
Significant? No. Territory small
Turns: kingdom 59 turns old as well as new
Spawn: 910 (when Tomislav ascended to power) or possibly earlier with a small stack of units.
Leader: Tomislav
UU: N/A
Notes/why: their spawn would impact Venice as well as Hungary, which eventually took over via personal union in 1102. This could cause some crowding out and other issues with the coast. They didn't exactly have a permanent capital either. I think their potential and utility to the mod would be a barrier to the Venetians, a conquest goal for the Hungarians, as well as a general competitor. They would also be an extra civ to do diplomacy with and be a possible vassal civ to larger neighbors. But the change isn't very significant due to the fact that Sisak spawns as an independent city. So they're basically represented in a small way. I'm not too concerned with their addition into the mod since they would for the most part be no larger than 3 cities at most. However, unlike Brittany, the Kingdom of Croatia had a longer more definitive independence with relation to its neighbors than Brittany did with France/England. Whether or not that is represented with an independent city is up to Absinthe.
Wales - 1057-1282
Spoiler:
Timeline: 108 turns under new timeline
Significant? No
Territory: Small (8+ tiles)
Leader: Gruffydd ap Llewelyn
UU: Welsh Longbow (barb unit)
UB: N/A or Caer (from AND) replaces castle...
Suggesting Wales isn’t necessary, although I like the addition of it as a small minor civ for England to conquer and possibly for Scotland to ally with in its early game. However, I would only want that under a specific condition: only trigger their spawn in 1057 if there is at least one barbarian city in Wales.
Why? Currently, Wales is represented by a random barbarian city spawn within the province. I would prefer a city to represent Gwynedd and Dyfed each on the western most tiles. There would be some interaction with Scotland, Norway, as well as England creating a much more unique political situation in the British isles. England would have to conquer them instead of easily taking a weak barbarian city. They would be a potentially weak ally for Scotland in their early game, or a vassal to England. There’s just enough room for a little alternate history occurring as well. Vassalage of small states isn’t very prominent in the game either. And if Wales is conquered quickly, then that’s the point of history. I think it would add flavor to the game if they could be included this way.
Cilicia
Spoiler:
Timeline: 1080 - 1375 or 1198 - 1375
Turns: 98 old turns - 144 new turns
Turns B: 59 old and 89 new
Significant? No
Territory: small
No Unique facets unless SOI data is desired.
Conditional Spawn: Sis or Tarson and flip the entire province of Cilicia only if the Byzantines do NOT control the province.
I imagine the usefulness or likelihood of this being added is slightly more than the Kingdom of Croatia, but less than Brittany. I am perfectly fine leaving them out.
Why suggest Cilicia then? Including it has a few small potential benefits, albeit at the cost of adding it. With the conditional spawn, otherwise independent cities or unsettled areas are now a far eastern Christian civ that can defend against middle Muslim expansion, offer diplomatic options, and be a potential vassal to other civs. Like other small non-playable civs I recommend adding, I think could provide some extra interaction or flavor for the area.
Naples/Amalfi
Spoiler:
Naples (Duchy: 840 – 1137)* 840 is when the city became de facto independent from Byzantium.
Timeline: 98.5 turns under new timeline
Significant? No
Territory: Small (1-city state)
Leader: Sergius I and Sergius VI
UU: N/A (Neapolitan Galley; stronger galley)
UB: N/A
This is another small potential non-playable civ for the reasons of added diplomacy, vassalage, and a little bit of a conquest challenge for the new Sicily civ when that civ is included in the mod. This would interfere with the random city spawning that occurs in southern Italy (Benevento, Capua, etc.). There are also several other minor cities of importance: Capua, Amalfi, Salerno, Benevento. I am placing this one into the red category due to the few benefits below…
Why? Southern Italy is very empty for the entire mod. However, that will change with Sicily. Byzantium controlled portions of southern Italy up until the Norman Conquest, but some areas were independent, like Lombard areas. Naples shifted back and forth from Greek influence to Roman influence. I believe they would be an interesting non-playable civ for a few reasons: vassalage, shifting alliances between Byzantium and the west, diplomacy, and a better conquest challenge to the new Sicily civ (than compared to an independent city).
This is definitely optional since an independent city works very well for the area already. The main issue I have with even suggesting this one is its name. When the new Sicily civ is added into the mod, the name “Kingdom of Naples” will likely interfere with the “Duchy of Naples” since they are so similar… If it were not for this, then I would place it in the orange category.
If Amalfi is chosen, to avoid the name issue, then everything would spawn as usual with the exception of the city name being change upon conquest.
Sicily
Spoiler:
Southern Italy Timeline: Duchy of Apulia and Calabria gains territory around Melfi by 1052. By 1077 everything in southern Italy except Naples was under Norman control.
Sicilian Timeline: 1061 conquest starts and is completed by 1091.
Turns: 1061 - 1282 (War of Sicilian Vespers, splitting the civ)
Spawn: 1061 to mark the initial conquest of Sicily and formation of a state in southern Italy.
Leader(s): Roger II, and Charles of Anjou
Starting stack at Melfi or Bari: two or three galleys and a small band of Norman units. They receive two workers flip.
Starting stack at northern Sicily (Messina) : One galley and a small band of Norman units.
UU: Norman Knight (SOI) - replaces lancer? +1 strength or gains experience faster (commander promotion)
UB: Norman Chapel (SOI) - replaces X. Reduces non-state religion penalty? And culture bonus.
Or - Palatinate Court - replaces courthouse. +20% culture
Or - Market Gardens/Garden Markets (replaces market) - +1 food and better wealth bonus. Based of accounts of Palermo's city markets, and Sicily's numerous groves.
UP: Jewel of the Sea - Trade routes produce twice as much wealth
Or water resources produce twice as much wealth.
Or Norman Heritage1 - Have better diplomatic relations with Western Europe civs (France, England, Norway, Denmark etc. and they already have contact with them.)
Or Norman Heritage2 - Can hire any mercenary regardless of province it is located in.
Or - Mercenary costs halved (KoJ UP in SOI)
Or Sicilian Heritage - Civic maintenance costs halved?
UHV:
1. Have 2,000 culture by 1200?
2. Conquer Ifriqiya, Malta, Sicily, and Southern Italy by 1172?
3. Sink 15 Byzantine ships or 25 enemy ships.
4. Build one Mosque, Catholic and Orthodox Cathedral.
5. Build 25 religious buildings, i.e. churches, madrasahs, minarets, monasteries, cathedrals, houses of wisdom, mosques, reliquaries, seminaries.
6. Capture three Byzantine cities or Conquer Epirus and Arberia.
7. Be the wealthiest Western European civ
8. Have a larger population than other Italian civs combined.
9. Build seven harbors by 1295
10. Be the first non Islamic civ to discover Arabic Knowledge
11. Crusaders Abroad: Control every island in the Mediterranean (or have your borders cover every Mediterranean island.
12. Control the largest army of any Western European civ in 1300.
Starting scenario: Sicily is a little complex due to varying independent city spawning. For this I am imagining Naples, Palermo, and Syracuse already spawned. Also, I imagine the Sicily civ being "based" in southern Italy with their capital. The double stack set up enables the Norman civ to settle Bari or Melfi first since southern Italy is fairly empty. Naples should not be in their flip zone since it's their only opponent on the peninsula (was annexed in 1137), but the player is able to settle Southern Italy as they wish [absent of a Lombard civ possibly settling Capua, Salerno, Benevento, Brundisium, etc]. I do not know if any other independent city spawns will be added to conquer/flip. Sicily must be conquered as well, not flipping for the human player. For their dynamic name, I imagine having their capital in Naples = Kingdom of Naples.
It's not necessarily a dead horse, I was closely following the discussion about it.
I'm also not satisified with the current representation, but at their latest form, neither solution seems appealing enough.
I definitely want to improve the english start in some form or another.
Yeah, I think there is no room for Wallachia and Switzerland. Gameplay doesn't really warrant their inclusion either.
Moldavia is one level higher compared to these 2, but for me it means something like the representation of Croatia.
It's not necessarily a dead horse, I was closely following the discussion about it.
I'm also not satisified with the current representation, but at their latest form, neither solution seems appealing enough.
I definitely want to improve the english start in some form or another.
When you say “improve the English start“, do you mean the already included England civ that spawns at 1066 or the Pre-Norman Anglo Saxon England starting situation?
When you say “improve the English start“, do you mean the already included England civ that spawns at 1066 or the Pre-Norman Anglo Saxon England starting situation?
Main issues with the England civ: Normandy, conquest/flipping, and independent city vanishing (Ligeraceaster, Norwich, Londinium). It's not as clear cut as changing Russia or Portugal's spawn.
One idea with a small change could be instead of "founding" London, the England civ's starting stack of units spawns outside of London at Hastings, this would work with a Wessex civ or independent London. If England invades and captures London, which should be fairly easy, then it becomes their capital and then York and Normandy both flip as usual. But that sort of conditional thing adds a few steps, and would the other cities representing Mercia and East Anglia automatically disappear?
A larger change: Since England's origins are in the Duchy of Normandy, which was founded in 911, England’s spawn could be moved to an earlier date (for instance, 1035) so they’re based in Normandy and have to “manually” conquer England, however, the main problem I have with this scenario would be the AI figuring this out. It is exactly like Morocco's spawn and gameplay this way. You would still need a “clean” flip up to York though, unless you’re fine with England having to conquer on their own on any given date. However, keeping Norwoch and Ligeraceaster eliminates a lot of city settlement opinions for the player.
I am not sure though. I like the idea of adding Wessex to expand and conquer England on their own before England’s spawn. But their inclusion would complicate Norman England’s spawn anyway...
This might be the case already with Switzerland, as the civs I have played in this mod have not been located near there. But I think the Swiss locality could be best represented as an area you could recruit Swiss Mercenaries from, which were the best soldiers in Europe for a while, particularly around the time of the Italian Wars.
Recapping potential England changes without adding Wessex
Spoiler:
Main issues with the current England situation: Normandy, conquest/flipping England, and independent city vanishing (Liegeraceaster, Norwich, and Londinium). Including Wessex would complicate Norman England’s spawn on top of all this... I still like the idea of their inclusion regardless!
1. Invasion over settlement:
Instead of "founding" London, the England civ's starting stack of units spawns outside of London at Hastings (1 tile SW of London), this would work with a Wessex civ or independent London. If England invades and captures London, which should be fairly easy, then it becomes their capital and then York and Normandy both flip as usual. But that sort of conditional event adds a few steps, and would the other cities representing Mercia and East Anglia automatically disappear?
2. Earlier England spawn:
A larger change: Since England's origins are in the Duchy of Normandy, which was founded in 911, England’s spawn could be moved to an earlier date (for instance, 1035) so they’re based in Normandy and have to “manually” conquer England, however, the main problem I have with this scenario would be the AI figuring this out. It is exactly like Morocco's spawn and gameplay this way. You would still need a “clean” flip up to York though, unless you’re fine with England having to conquer on their own on any given date. However, keeping Norwich and Ligeraceaster eliminates a lot of city settlement opinions for the player.
3. A scripted event:
This takes away from free gameplay and forces events to happen, but if England starts earlier in Normandy, then for the AI, a scripted event similar to the crusades can occur where a large invasion force spawns at Hastings following a prompt.
Including Wessex. There are issues with including them, which I will try to cover below. However, I believe the benefits of adding them to the game are probably worthwhile.
Rough timeline for Wessex:
Spoiler:
519 - traditional founding date.
535? - first expansion?
580* - 2nd early expansion, Wessex expands westward, cutting off Britons from Wales by land.
630's - first baptized Wessex King.
650 - by now Wessex is Christianized.
660s - Mercia attacks Wessex, and dominates kingdom.
680s - Wessex briefly conquers Sussex and Kent.
694 - King Ine enacts a law code
700s - Mercia "overshadows" Wessex and other kingdoms.
750s - Wessex conquers eastern half of Corniu Briton kingdom.
814 - Wessex conquers more of Corniu, leaving only a tiny section as independent.
825 - Wessex defeats Mercia at Ellendun, gaining control of Sussex, Kent, and Essex.
879 - Danelaw controls much of England. western half of Mercia is under Wessex control.
880s - Fortified Burhs are constructed to repel Danish raids.
927 - Repulsion of Danelaw. England unified by Wessex.
Gameplay: Wessex would act as an early civ in AngloSaxon Britain. The spawn day of 519 might be too early, but 535 might work better, or even a latter date like 630 to prevent the civ from growing too much too early.
Historical issue: Despite Wessex's significance, the kingdom of Mercia held supremacy over the other AngloSaxon kingdom for about 200 years (625-825). I think the current independent city representing Mercia (Liegercaster) will be strong enough to resist an early takeover though. I'm fine with that compromise.
Gameplay changes:
Spoiler:
Norway and Denmark's UHVs will become more difficult, Denmark especially, with a Wessex civ to conquer. However, Norway can still raid.
Changes needed for adding Wessex:
1. I imagine adding a Barbarian city spawn representing Corniu (Cornwall/Dumnonia) with unit spawns that invade Wessex until it is conquered. There would probably be more barbarian spawns in England to challenge Wessex, including Vikings to replicate the "Great Heathen Army" in the late ninth century. This may interfere with human Norway or Denmark.
2. Mercia. Their capital city (modern day Tamworth) can be renamed to "Toworthig" and they can spawn in 527 or as late as 626, when their hegemony started. I prefer an earlier date to establish itself against a human Wessex player.
3. Wales. I would almost expect the addition of a barbarism city or two to represent Dyfed and Gwynedd, so Wessex cannot settle Wales. Then they would be a challenge to the English civ later on. However, there should be enough barbarians to prevent this and the random Welsh city spawn may cover this well enough...
Scripted event scenario solution to Wessex and Enlgand: this is one solution I came up with that I like. It can solve the independent cities, flipping, and change over from Wessex to England! It assumes England must conquer London.
After England conquers London, or captured Wessex's capital, all Wessex controlled cities (including independent cities within England's regular flip zone) would flip to England's control. This wild represent the quick change over to Norman control, But this creates another problem. All of the settled/conquered independent cities become predetermined for the England civ. That means the human player has a little less variety in exchange for a more historical gameplay. Is it possible to "install" or "disband" cities that flip just like when barbarian cities currently flip? After England's cities flip, you are given a prompt for each that indicates whether you want to keep the city, or disband it, so you can freely settle the area. I think this is a good idea if possible.
attached below is a photo of how Wessex’s starting situation may look like.
This is to categorize all of the adjustments and changes I have made since creating the first post about potentially adding civs to the mod. I don’t mean to revive a dead thread with this. Again, this is all my opinion, and the reasons are very concise. For more specifics about to each civ idea, refer to above posts…
Green: Likely – Golden Horde, Lombards/Milan, and Bohemia (3)
Spoiler:
Historically significant, regional importance, beneficial to gameplay.
Usage to mod: Necessary/Recommended
Golden Horde: playable civ: Conquest civ through Eastern Europe, vassalage, Muscovy rivalry, diminished by Crimea. Interference with barbarian spawning, half of empire in Asia, represented by barbarians to some extent, settlement issues?
Lombards/Milan: playable civ: Challenge to France, Germany, Venice, and Genoa. Dynamic/accurate Italy. Vassalage. Interfere with existing UHVs. Close city settlements.
Bohemia: playable civ: Competitive with Germany, Interfere with Austria? Diplomacy, Vassalage, Close city settlements. Overlapping culture?
Yellow: Possible – Florence, Navarre, Moldavia, Tlemcen, and Brittany (5)
Florence: non-playable civ: Dynamic/accurate Italy, vassalage, diplomacy, rival to Venice and Genoa.
Navarre: playable or non-playable civ: Interfere with Aragon, Leon, Cordoba, and Morocco. One-City Challenge, Close city settlements, Vassalage, diplomacy, overlapping culture.
Moldavia: non-playable civ: Buffer to steppe from central Europe, vassalage between Poland, Lithuania, and Turks. Independent for more than 50 turns.
Tlemcen: non-playable civ: Morocco and Tunisia challenge, vassalage, diplomacy. Dynamic/accurate NW Africa. Existed for more than 100 turns.
Brittany: non-playable civ: Dynamic gameplay between England and France. A useful vassal and valuable diplomacy. Settlement issue?
Orange: Unlikely – Cilicia, Wales, Latin Empire, Wessex, and Croatia (5)
Spoiler:
Lack overall historical significance to the mod, but regional importance, tedious to add, potential overcrowding.
Wales: conditional non-playable civ: England challenge, Scot ally, diplomacy, vassal. 105 turns under the new timeline before they were annexed completely by England.
Latin Empire: playable civ: Byzantine challenge, fragmenting Byzantines, conditional flipzone issue. Very short main timeline.
Wessex: playable civ?: complicated interaction with England spawn, dynamic Anglo-Saxon gameplay. Accurate Viking challenge. Culture buildup issue?
Croatia: non-playable civ: I moved this from the Red category due to it being an independent state with enough influence to effect Venice and Hungary, be an important vassal, a conquest goal for Hungary; and diplomacy.
Red: Very Unlikely – Bosnia, Naples, Rhodes, Albania, Cyprus, Ryazan, Splitting Franks, Normandy, Khazars, et al. (9)
Spoiler:
Lack historical significance, complexity to code, overcrowding issue.
Usage to mod: Unnecessary/not recommended
Bosnia: Very small space and entirely dependent on a weak Serbia. Would have Bosnia settled though. Short timeline.
Naples (duchy) : non-playable civ, City state, minor, Sicily challenge, unique early diplomacy, vassalage, name issue, independent city.
Rhodes: small island, minor regional significance, city state, Ottoman target, vassal, catholic diplomacy.
cyprus: Small island, crusader aid, challenge to Venice UHV, conquest for Islamic civs, interferes with settlement?
Albania: Ottoman Challenge, insignificant, short timeline, etc.
Ryazan: insignificant, represented by independent city, Russia rival, long timeline, culture buildup.
Franks Split: Complicated, and unsure how to approach this.
Normandy: A lot of waiting for Battle of Normandy, and would have to be scripted for AI.
Khazars: Too insignificant…
In all I like the idea of including non-playable civs to fill the gaps where independent cities are insufficient. Small civs like Florence, Moldavia, Wales, Milan, etc. are much better for gameplay in my opinion than an independent city you can only conquer. Many of them are useful as vassals, regional gameplay, diplomacy, and smaller conquest goals. The main issue is coding, time, and determining whether or not additions would benefit the mod rather than making it more complex for no reason. If my PC did not have issues compiling a DLL file, then I would try implementing the green, yellow, and orange categories to some extent.
Specifically for dynastic Union civs: Wales, Croatia, Bohemia, and Brittany... there is a mechanic in AND where a vassal state, after enough time, can opt to join the master civ. It results like flip of all territory and units to the other civ, which is similar to RFCE++. I do not understand how it works, so am not sure if that is possible for this mod though.
Surely if you had Wessex there would be no England spawn, as they are what became England. By the time Edgar became king, he was king of both what would be considered the English and England.
I guess this has been debated before, so I know that I am .
However the England spawn date in RFC Europe, is wonky, and there are reasons why the original RFC and DOC have England spawn earlier.
I mean 1066 AD is the date of one of the worst defeats in English history, and the Normans went on to commit genocide against the English. The population of northern England was reduced by 75% within a few years of 1066.
Maybe its just me, but 1066 seems a vaguely inappropriate spawn date for 'England!'
Surely if you had Wessex there would be no England spawn, as they are what became England. By the time Edgar became king, he was king of both what would be considered the English and England.
Maybe its just me, but 1066 seems a vaguely inappropriate spawn date for 'England!'
I see England and Wessex as two distinct civs with regards to this mod. Wessex is of Anglo Saxon origin, and England is of Norman (old French/Norse) origin. For gameplay, I believe they are best separate. A Wessex civ would best represent an Anglo Saxon civ, with its focus in the early game of uniting England. “England”, for a lack of a better word, conquered England at the start of the middle game. 1066 is an important date, and it marks when the Normans conquered England.
Having them separate has its own problems of course. There’s other areas of history not represented well due to complexity, space, and AI limitations: Heptarchy, Danelaw, etc. It’s not easy no matter which way one wants to solve it. For simplicity’s sake, I’d prefer changing the current England as little as possible while offering solutions to adding Wessex as seamlessly as possible with regards to the 1066 conquest. It’s not a big area of focus for the entire mod either.
1526 is an important date, and it marks when the Ottomans conquered Hungary. Sounds like the appropriate time for Hungary to spawn.
Still as the splitting of England into Wessex and the Normans is clearly not going happen anytime soon (probably not at all), one potentially simple improvement comes to mind.
Have the dynamic names set so that when England controls Caen they are called "Norman England" and if they do not, then they are called "Kingdom of England." This would reflect the fact that with the loss of French territories the Normans increasingly started to culturally associate with their English subjects. Perhaps could even have an option that if they control Bordeaux they are called "Angevin England" (though as I don't think I have ever seen that happen, it is a mute point).
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
!
