Rhye's and Fall RAND: Preview #2

^ As far as Fort Laperrine is concerned, I still have never heard about it. Do you know anything about how important it was in French history?

fort names (as often in French) are sometimes hyphenated sometimes not (like Fort Détroit), so I'm afraid it's highly irregular.

Now as for having lists over 10 names, I see a major inconvenience: if we follow the chronological order as Rhye suggested, it means some historically very important cities will go way too down the list, and we might never see them in the actual game. Actually, I think it's very unlikely one found more than 10 colonies in RFC random, unless you're AnotherPacifist. ;)
So I think we should concentrate one the 10 most important ones, especially in lists 3 and 4. But that's just my opinion.
 
Laperrine's importance was that it protected the main Trans-Saharan trade route. I don't believe that it was the center of a conflict, but it was created by the French. It would definitely go at the bottom of the list, as it was apparently constructed in 1927.

I don't see any harm in going beyond 10. If there's a problem with a 'less-significant' city ending up at the top of a list, I say we just re-arrange the list a little to reflect order of importance....
 
Here's the Indian 3+4.;)

Category Three

1.Badulla(Ancient Times)
2.Galle(1400 B.C.)
3.Anuradhapura(400 B.C.)
4.Kurunegala(1200's)
5.Kandy(1300's)
6.Ratnapura(?)


Category Four

........,
1.Male(ancient times)
2.Sri Jayawardenapura-Kotte(ancient times)
3.lle(1400 B.C.)
4.Kolon thota (0 A.D.)
5.Trincomalee(400 B.C.)
6.Jaffna(?)

Constructive criticism is welcome.
 
I think the most important is to find cities that are big today and lots of people has heard of. So you get the dejavu of building a city you have heard of before. That's more important than finding old cities no one has heard of.
 
Thanks for the Russia comments everyone! Lots of neat thoughts and ideas :)

Responses:

Re: Kiev: You're all right, it should be in the game. I would have supported with its placement in the Viking list, but if it's out of there, then it's out. After reading peoples' posts on why it should be Russian, I guess if I can rationalize Samarqand/Tashkent/etc. as being on the Mongol list, then there's absolutely no reason Kiev should be not be on Russia's list. Your various reasons for why Kiev should be on Russia's list are much better than my reasons for why the Central Asian cities should be on Mongolia's :) . However, if Kiev's in, Minsk should be too, so I'll add that one also. However, I draw the line in the sand at the Baltic States capitals. Those should absolutely not be Russian.

Re: Yalta: After reading the Byzantine vs. Not and Late-Incorporation discussions, I went ahead and removed it. I now agree with the argument that it's too small and hasn't been that big of a deal in world history (other than a few days in 1945), so I think we can probably just ignore it entirely. List II is kinda small, but 8 is a good number as is.

Re: Okhotsk: Sounds good to me! :)

Re: Antarctic Stations: As you can see, there are no less than seven. However, the earliest was founded in 1956, after the founding of even Magadan, the last city on List IV, which itself passes the 10 City Mark. Also, they are all really really tiny. The suggestion is a creative one, but I don't think we need to include these stations.

Other changes: Removed many notations. Changed 10 City "Limit" to "Mark," pursuant to the emergent debate on that topic.

Note: Where cities have no "archaeologically-verifiable" (quotes intended, because it's all fuzzy) date of foundation, I went with what seemed like a good idea to me and me alone, based on stuff found in Wikipedia. Examples include Minsk, Kiev, and many others that I didn't point out (bad me) the first time around.

The actual lists are inside the "Spoiler." Comments/Suggestions/Criticisms?

Spoiler :

List I – Non-Coastal Home Continent
1. Moskva –1147 (Landlocked Capital)
2. Kiev - Really Damn Old
3. Rostov – 862 or so
4. Smolensk – 863 or so
5. Pskov – 903 or so
6. Novgorod – 950s or so
7. Jaroslavl – 1010 or so
8. Suzdal - 1024
9. Kursk – 1032 or so
10. Minsk - 1067
--Past the 10 City Mark--
11. Vladimir – 1108 or so
12. Tver - 1164
13. Nizhnij Novgorod – 1221
14. Tula – 1300s
15. Voronezh – 1585
16. Samara - 1586
17. Volgograd - 1589
18. Perm - 1647
19. Izhevsk – 1760

List II – Coastal Home Continent
1. Sankt Peterburg (Coastal Capital) – 1703
2. Arkhangelsk – 1584
3. Sevastopol – 1783
4. Rostov-na-Donu – 1794
5. Odessa – 1794
6. Novorossijsk (Black Sea) – 1838
7. Sochi – 1864
8. Murmansk - 1916

List III – Non-Coastal Other Continent
1. Tobolsk – 1585
2. Tjumen – 1586
3. Tomsk – 1604
4. Krasnojarsk – 1628
5. Jakutsk – 1632
6. Irkutsk – 1652
7. Krasnojarsk – 1628
8. Omsk – 1716
9. Ekaterinburg – 1723
10. Barnaul – 1730
--Past the 10 City Mark--
11. Cheljabinsk -1763
12. Khabarovsk – 1858
13. Novosibirsk – 1893
14. Kemerovo – 1918

List IV – Coastal Other Continent
1. Okhotsk - 1643
2. Petropavlovsk–Kamchatskij – 1740
3. Pavlovskaja Gavan' - 1792
4. Voskresenskaja (Seward, under the USA) – 1793
5. Konstantinovsky – 1793
6. Slavorossija – 1796
7. Port Chichagov – around 1800 (?)
8. Novo-Arkhangelsk – 1804
9. Krepost' Ross (intentionally deviated from RFC spelling, since both Rhye and Lone Wolf are right: Krepost’ means Fort, and Ross is short for Rossiya. It should be renamed appropriately on capture by anyone.) – 1812
10. Vladivostok – 1860
--Past the 10 City Mark--
11. Magadan – 1930s
 
I'd galdly done Russia, but the question is, Russia didn't have many offshore settlements, so categories 3 and 4 are problematic. Same with most un-western-european nations like India or China. First 1 and 2 are easy:

1.

[...]

hmm, no Tver ?
 
2) Coastal cities:

Ostia founded 633 b.C.
Antium (Anzio) annexed V century b.C.?
Capua founded 800 b.C., annexed 343 b.C.
Rhegium (Reggio Calabria) founded VIII century b.C., annexed 341 b.C.
Neapolis (Napoli) founded V century b.C., conquered 326 b.C.
Tarentum (Taranto) founded 706 b.C., conquered 272 b.C.
Brundisium (Brindisi) founded ?, conquered 267 b.C.
Genua (Genova) founded XX century b.C., refounded 203 b.C.
Pisae (Pisa) founded VI century b.C., annexed 180 b.C.
Ancona founded 387 b.C., annexed 113 b.C.

Pinco Pallino, sicilian and sardinian cities are notably missing. In particular Syracusae.
 
Portugal

Category 4

1.Ponta Delgada
2.Funchal
3.Bissau
4.Luanda
5.Lourenço Marques (Maputo in Moçambique)
6.Porto Seguro
7.Rio de Janeiro
8.Díli (in Timor-Leste)
9.Goa (pangim/panaji/panjim in India)
10.Damão (Daman in India)

Also on Edungeon list castelo branco should be replaced by Guimarães, also guimarães should be the first city in the inland list
 
Here's the Entire Greek List.:)

Category One

1.Sparta(1100 B.C.)
Larisa(400 B.C.)
Trikka(?)

Category Two

1.Athina(1000 B.C.)(Capital)
Patras(3000 B.C.)
Thessaloniki(315 B.C.)
Arta(295 B.C.)

Sorry, Gotta go, just ignore this list becuas I'll finish it later, sorry!
 
no its Díli the capital of Timor and about Macau i will replace it, also Macau was found in 1553 and was portuguese until late 1999
 
If Wikipedia is to be believed, Macau may have been a harbor used by locals, but its heyday occurred under Portuguese rule, and it's hard to argue with 400 years of ownership.

I'm not sure about Goa and Damão, though -- it sounds as though Goa may have been a significant city in India prior to Portuguese rule (as opposed to a location like Macau or Hong Kong, which became significant largely because of foreign rule). Damão and Diu sound like they never really were important, so I could go either way on that one.

Agree with Dili, as it appears to have been founded under Portuguese rule.
 
3 non-coastal cities in another continent:
Juneau (alaska) 1881
I have nothing... I can easily expand the initial continental cities by another 5-10 if people would like.

Juneau is most definitely a coastal city. In fact, it's impossible to reach the place by land.

That said, Alaska should be a rich vein of category 3 American cities.

4 coastal cities in another continent:
These are drawn for current and past American territories, as well as Hawaii and Alaska:
San Juan (Puerto Rico): ca 1501
Havana (Cuba) ca 1515
Manila (Philippines) ca 1574***
Charlotte Amalie (U.S. Virgin Islands): ca 1657**** (Saint Thomas is the name of the island, and perhaps a better name)
Guam ca 1668***
American Samoa: ca 1830s
Honolulu: ca 1898 (Hawaii was annexed as a territory in 1898, although was arguably influenced/claimed by America earlier).
Anchorage: ca 1914
Obviously, the Hawai'ian cities should fill a lot of coastal cities. To be a purist, a lot of those cities should probably be excluded as they predated American rule, but since Hawai'i is a state, and since cities such as Honolulu have traditionally appeared on the American civ lists, I don't see any reason to change that.

I'm skeptical on including Manila -- its founding predated Spanish rule on the Islands, let alone American. If any Philippine cities make the cut, they should arguably be limited to exclusively American military enclaves (such as Subic Bay or Fort Stotsenberg (later known as Clark Air Force Base)) or those places that had a large percentage of American nationals during the colonial era (such as Angeles City).

I strongly disagree with including Cuban cities in the American list -- it experienced direct American rule for, at most, four years. The only true American enclave on the island that I'd say might qualify for inclusion would be Guantanamo Bay, which has been under U.S. control for over 100 years. (And, for the love of god, please let's not start a discussion about the merits of Guantanamo Bay....)

I agree with the use of some Caribbean Islands and Hagåtña (the capital of Guam). I'd also think that use of San Juan is also appropriate, for the same reasons as use of Hawai'ian cities.


EDIT: several category 3 and 4 American cities can also be obtained from the Panama Canal Zone. There were many towns established and settled by Americans in the Zone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_Canal_Zone

Spoiler :

A partial list of Canal Zone townships and military installations:
 
hmm, no Tver ?

I was wondering the same. Also, no Suzdal?

If Wikipedia is to be believed, Macau may have been a harbor used by locals, but its heyday occurred under Portuguese rule, and it's hard to argue with 400 years of ownership.

I'm currently reading a book about visiting Asia, and this is mentioned about Macau in the Chinese article. So I can vouch for the authenticity of Wiki on this one. It should be Portuguese.
 
Here's another list - Ethiopia. No-one's attempted this, so I will:

Category 1:

Aksum - capital of the ancient country of Aksum (coincidentally).
Yeha - may have been the capital of the D'mt kingdom (8th century BC).
Hawulti - evidently an important city of the Aksumite kingdom.
Qohaito - may have been Aksum's summer capital.
Matara - major Aksumite city.
Lalibela - either originally Roha or Adefa. Renamed after King Lalibela, who was born there. Second-holiest city in the country to Ethiopians after Aksum.
Asmera - founded in the 12th century during Solomonic dynasty.
Debre Berhan - founded by Zara Yakob as his capital (1456).
Gonder - capital from 1635 until 1855.
--------that was 10----------
Adowa - gained importance in the 17th century as a trade route between Gonder and the coast.
Makale - founded 13th century, not important until the 19th.
Addis Ababa - founded 1886 by Menelik II.
Dessye - founded 1882.
Diredawa - founded 1902.

Category 2:

Adulis - main port of Aksum. Now capital of Eritrea.
Avalitis - modern Assab.
Massaua - also spelled Massawa. Overshadowed by Adulis most of its history.

Category 3:

Saphar - Zafar, Yemen. Part of the Aksumite Kingdom at its height.
Harerge - also Harar. Capital of the Islamic kingdom of Adal.
Bonga - capital of the kingdom of Kaffa, 14th to 19th centuries.

Category 4:

Muza - site in modern Saudi Arabia. Part of ancient Aksum.
Zeila - capital of the sultanate of Ifat.
Suakin - in Sudan.
 
Whilst a major port, London isn't a coastal city - though the Thames does give it navigable access to the North Sea

Remember that in civ, a tile is a very large area so a coastal city doesn't necessarily have to be right by the sea. I think the fact that, as you point out, London was, until several decades ago, a thriving international port for seafaring vessels, should qualify it as a coastal city in civ terms. However the same goes for Bristol, as others have pointed out.

Not sure Blackburn would be considered a major city. Derby, Leicester, Coventry and Wolverhampton would be better choices for inland cities. Warwick, Worcester, Stratford and Stoke are other options.

Southampton is a major port that your missing, Grimsby is another alternative. Sunderland would be another good option for a coastal location

I agree with all the above. Blackburn seems a very odd choice. All I know about it is that has a football team.
 
Back
Top Bottom