Rhye's of Europe Civ Discussion Thread

[Disenfrancised]

I don't see the Mongols having this great influence over Europe overall.

I meant Mongols in the normal game.

 

[Úmarth]

While I think Democracy is cool, there should be someone or some way to collect ideas and take decisions or the project won't go anywhere.

I don't see why you or st.lucifer can't take control, you're right we do need someone to just coordinate things and say what will and will not be included. I think there are tons of great ideas being discussed on the various threads, and I'd really like to help out with code. But that won't happen until we move forward.

How about we implement some representative democracy? Decide who has made regular contributions to the process and have them vote on a "leader".

 

[onedreamer]

I can't take control, I'm not diplomatic enough (I'm not at all ).
St. Lucifer looks like the man. And he is the one who actively did something (map). I vote him.

 

[st.lucifer]

I don't see why you or st.lucifer can't take control, you're right we do need someone to just coordinate things and say what will and will not be included. I think there are tons of great ideas being discussed on the various threads, and I'd really like to help out with code. But that won't happen until we move forward.

How about we implement some representative democracy? Decide who has made regular contributions to the process and have them vote on a "leader".

The coding issue is why I'm reluctant to take more of a leadership role; my skills are very limited. But if I'm being nominated, and people are comfortable with it, I'd be happy to take nominal control. I think that most of us (the regular contributors) are on the same page on most things; getting a settled version shouldn't be too hard.

 

[jessiecat]

The coding issue is why I'm reluctant to take more of a leadership role; my skills are very limited. But if I'm being nominated, and people are comfortable with it, I'd be happy to take nominal control. I think that most of us (the regular contributors) are on the same page on most things; getting a settled version shouldn't be too hard.

If I get a vote, I'll vote for you, esp. if you include
the Great Mosque of Cordoba
BTW. Have you finished the basic map/Is there a screenshot?

 

[Zipzapzup]

I'm wondering why you needed that much time to actually vote someone to leader or chief developer or whatever. I proposed it about half a month ago, but noone respond to it. Anyways, i would like to see st.lucifer as the leader of this project too. Also i think it isn't a problem, when you are not very familiar with coding, cause i guess we have many people here, which want to contribute something and have average coding skills (like me).

 

[Ajidica]

St. Lucifer appears good. As long as he has a clear idea of what different people can and can't accomplish, thats fine. Because if I remember correctly, Kael is not as skilled in projraming as some other people on his team.
Also, St. Lucifer appears to have a real interest in this project and has a rudimentary timetable.
If you need anyhelp reasearching, looking for XML spelling errors, or other things, I can do that. My XML skills arn't much above adding a unit though..

Some UPs:
Spain-Power of the Reconquista: All units get combat 1 and 2 while fighting a muslim civ. (Too overpowerd or lame?)
France-Power of the Princes: Every city get 1 cavalry of the best type. Example-If you only have HBR and archery, you have a free horse archer in every city. one you reasearch guilds and have horse and iron, all horse archers upgrade to knights.
Germany-Power of the Empire: Units can't be bribed.(Only used if a 'bribery' mechanic is added, otherwise, use the french one)
Ummayad Caliphate(If added)- Power of the Jihad: All units have an extra move and heal at double rate.
Saxons(If Added)-The Power of the Tribe: If there is more than 75% Saxon Culture in a Conquered city, the city has an increased chance of undergoing a revolt and/or flipping.

Any comments? Also, where is there a difinitive civ list? They have gone through so many different ones, I think the main list is out of date.

 

[st.lucifer]

I'm wondering why you needed that much time to actually vote someone to leader or chief developer or whatever. I proposed it about half a month ago, but noone respond to it. Anyways, i would like to see st.lucifer as the leader of this project too. Also i think it isn't a problem, when you are not very familiar with coding, cause i guess we have many people here, which want to contribute something and have average coding skills (like me).

Again, with nobody in charge, who would respond?

I've been afraid of stepping on other people's toes (particularly VinceG, who is still at least theoretically in charge of this project, and Whitefire, who may have had the original idea/blessing of Rhye. I was hoping that Rhye would weigh in on it at some point, but that's fine. I think that we're far enough along that we can start making some concrete decisions - and if we end up having to change things down the line, that's part of the development process.

On that note, I'm going to try to write up a timeline, a revised/definitive civ list, and a resource list over this weekend. Most of this will be compiled/recycled from existing lists, and some of it will remain open to debate - I'll do my best to indicate what we seem to have full consensus on, general agreement, and some disagreement. I'll probably open a new thread for all of this, so there won't be quite as much clutter - it might be worthwhile to move all of this stuff to a new subfolder, if any of the civfanatics editors are reading this.

I should also mention here that I'm in the process of writing a textbook and working ~60 hours a week for my real job, so I may not respond as promptly to some things as everyone would like. I'll do my best to stay on top of things, but if someone else (onedreamer? ) would like to take charge of smacking down queries about the absence of Prussia and the like, I'd be happy to let someone else handle it.

I'm excited about this project - it'll be good to work on something with people older and wiser than 14-year olds for a change.

 

[jessiecat]

St. Lucifer appears good. As long as he has a clear idea of what different people can and can't accomplish, thats fine. Because if I remember correctly, Kael is not as skilled in projraming as some other people on his team.
Also, St. Lucifer appears to have a real interest in this project and has a rudimentary timetable.
If you need anyhelp reasearching, looking for XML spelling errors, or other things, I can do that. My XML skills arn't much above adding a unit though..

Some UPs:
Spain-Power of the Reconquista: All units get combat 1 and 2 while fighting a muslim civ. (Too overpowerd or lame?)
France-Power of the Princes: Every city get 1 cavalry of the best type. Example-If you only have HBR and archery, you have a free horse archer in every city. one you reasearch guilds and have horse and iron, all horse archers upgrade to knights.
Germany-Power of the Empire: Units can't be bribed.(Only used if a 'bribery' mechanic is added, otherwise, use the french one)
Ummayad Caliphate(If added)- Power of the Jihad: All units have an extra move and heal at double rate.
Saxons(If Added)-The Power of the Tribe: If there is more than 75% Saxon Culture in a Conquered city, the city has an increased chance of undergoing a revolt and/or flipping.

Any comments? Also, where is there a difinitive civ list? They have gone through so many different ones, I think the main list is out of date.

Heard of U.U.s and U.B.s, but whats a unique power (U.P.?)

As far as the Reconquista goes, once the Christians finally got their act together and actually fought the Muslims instead of each other, they were always going to win. With the breakup of the Caliphate into city states, the Almoravid invasion in 1085 and the Crusades, Muslim Spain was doomed in the end. So why would you give the Christian states any help at all?
As far as jihad goes, this has been covered already as a tech in the Middle
Ages scenario giving the extra fast Ansar warrior to all Muslim civs. And a healing tech called Arab Medicine. These should both be in this scenario as well.

P.S. I too would like to see a definitive civ list when it's finished. And the map as well.

 

[Ajidica]

In RFC there are UPs instead of traits. I thought Jihad to show there fast conquest under the Caliphs Umar and Abu Bakr. For the Reconquista, I had no other idea except for something really lame. Something about the conquistadors, but I dont belive the aztecs are in.

 

[mateofuerte]

For Spain's UP, what about the Power of the Inquisition? I believe there's a mod somewhere that has inquisition and this would be a historical trait of Spain during some of this time period.

 

[jessiecat]

For Spain's UP, what about the Power of the Inquisition? I believe there's a mod somewhere that has inquisition and this would be a historical trait of Spain during some of this time period.

Couldn't be just a Spanish trait. Every Catholic country had it.
It originated from the Vatican itself as way of enforcing doctrinal discipline and rooting out heresy. Spain's was just probably a little more bloody than most. In fact the Pope still has a dept. something like it, though can't remember it's name.
The mod your'e talking about has inquisitors as a unit that can eliminate non -Christian religions from any city. Not a bad idea for some of the Christian civs.

 

[Úmarth]

Glad to hear it, st.lucifer. When you post the civ list I'll have a go at putting them into the xml/python.

 

[jessiecat]

Again, with nobody in charge, who would respond?

I've been afraid of stepping on other people's toes (particularly VinceG, who is still at least theoretically in charge of this project, and Whitefire, who may have had the original idea/blessing of Rhye. I was hoping that Rhye would weigh in on it at some point, but that's fine. I think that we're far enough along that we can start making some concrete decisions - and if we end up having to change things down the line, that's part of the development process.

On that note, I'm going to try to write up a timeline, a revised/definitive civ list, and a resource list over this weekend. Most of this will be compiled/recycled from existing lists, and some of it will remain open to debate - I'll do my best to indicate what we seem to have full consensus on, general agreement, and some disagreement. I'll probably open a new thread for all of this, so there won't be quite as much clutter - it might be worthwhile to move all of this stuff to a new subfolder, if any of the civfanatics editors are reading this.

I should also mention here that I'm in the process of writing a textbook and working ~60 hours a week for my real job, so I may not respond as promptly to some things as everyone would like. I'll do my best to stay on top of things, but if someone else (onedreamer? ) would like to take charge of smacking down queries about the absence of Prussia and the like, I'd be happy to let someone else handle it.

I'm excited about this project - it'll be good to work on something with people older and wiser than 14-year olds for a change.

Just to add to my contribution on Muslim Spain, I've just been reading two
excellent articles in Wikpedia i'd recommend to you. One has an very good
description of the Ummayad Caliphate of Cordoba and the other on the
"taifa" emirates following the breakup of the Caliphate in 1031. Both include
excellent maps covering the period 1000 to 1031 and description of the
Muslim emirates relations with the Christian knigdoms. These should be of
some help in the mod and the map, i think. Anything I can do to support
the project, please ask. I've still got a lot of reseach on this period from
my days as a tabletop/ model soldiers wargamer.

 

[st.lucifer]

All right, here goes. I'm tempted to start a new thread, but that would likely be more confusing than helpful - so here's my current version of the civ list, with dates and dynamic names. I'll do proposed UUs, UPs, and UBs in the next post, and probably another after that for UHVs. While none of this is completely set, I'm going to be operating under the assumption that the 22 civs that we've picked here will be the final list. This list will not be perfect, and it will not include all of the important civs in Europe - but it will be the best that we've managed to come up with in a few months of debate. At this point, we're not going to be considering any new ones, and you're going to have to make a really convincing argument for why one of the proposed and rejected civs should be included over one of the ones that's in there. If you intend to make such an argument, please read the earlier posts in the thread (and the other related threads) to see which arguments have been put forward already and the counters raised to them.

I've streamlined the dynamic civ names somewhat, which will detract somewhat from accuracy but make the game easier to follow. If I've taken too much out, it might be worth re-adding - but I'd rather stay away from the more obscure epochs.

The list:


Western Europe - 4
England (500 AD) --> Great Britain (upon control of Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland)
Neustria (500 AD) --> France (1000 AD)
Burgundy (500 AD)
Netherlands (1580 AD) ? I'm not sure what to use for the starting date on the Netherlands. They were a culturally distinct area long before they were independent. My feeling is that they should appear late, but with a strong base.

Iberia - 3
Léon (720 AD) --> Castile (1230 AD) --> Spain (1520 AD)
Portugal (1100 AD)
Al-Andalus (700 AD) --> Caliphate of Cordoba (950 AD)

Northern Europe - 3
Norsemen (Danes) (500 AD) (Initially start with one settler in Denmark and one in Norway?)
Sweden (1500 AD)
Austrasia (500 AD) --> Germany (920 AD)

Italy - 3
Genoa (1000 AD)
Venice (800 AD)
Papal States (500 AD)

Eastern Europe - 6
Poland (970 AD) --> Poland-Lithuania (1570 AD)
Austria (1160 AD)
Magyars (900 AD) --> Hungarian Crown (1000 AD)
Kievan Rus (860 AD) --> Khanate of the Golden Horde (1200 AD) --> Greater Russia (by territory controlled)
Duchy of Moscow (1000 AD) --> Russia (1550 AD) --> Greater Russia (by territory controlled)
Bulgaria (630 AD)

Anatolia and Middle East - 3
Eastern Roman Empire (500 AD) (Might it be better to call this the Byzantine empire for the purposes of diplomacy, at least? I'm thinking of how 'Eastern Roman Empire' is going to look on the stability/diplomacy meter.)
Ottoman Empire (1300 AD)
Umayyad Caliphate (660 AD) --> Abbassid Caliphate (750 AD) --> Fatimid Caliphate (970 AD) (after the Fatimids, I'd rather not transition to the Ayyubids or the Mamluks - neither of those held the title of Caliphate, and I'd rather maintain continuity than perfect historical accuracy)

Dropped from the list:
-Switzerland (geographic balance, fairly passive goals, historical importance/influence on neighbors)

Others previously considered and rejected:
-HRE (to be handled as a title; lands and powers divided among several civs)
-Various UK Celts (minor)
-Moravia (brevity)
-Prussia (time scale, redundancy)
-Aragon (overlap, time scale)



A crude timeline:

Start (500 AD):
England France Germany Papal States E.R.E. Burgundy Danes


630 AD: Bulgaria
660 AD: Umayyad Caliphate

700 AD: Al-Andalus
720 AD: Léon


800 AD: Venice

860 AD: Kiev

900 AD: Magyars


970 AD: Poland
1000 AD: Russia Genoa



1100 AD: Portugal

1160 AD: Austria




1300 AD: Ottoman Empire



1500 AD: Sweden

1580 AD: Netherlands







1800 AD: Mod ends

Thoughts? Should we start a new thread?

 

[Zipzapzup]

Sounds good. But i think its not possible to let two civs raise at the same time because of coding issues so either Russia or Genoa has to spawn a bit later or earlier. And didnt we say the mod ends in 1900 or did i just not get it?

Also i think its not easy to rename civs by certain date. Futhermore i think the player should have influence on the renaming like GB or Russia, so it should base on ingame events (easy with a defined amount of cities or researching a certain tech, i guess).

 

[onedreamer]

My first thought is that we shouldn't start yet another thread ^^
Can I comment some stuff ?

- Arabs/Moors. I'd drop Al Andalus and put in something in north africa instead, if the map allows that. Umayyad should start with a settler and a decent army in Cordoba or Granada.
- Some start dates are a bit puzzling. First, as a general consideration, in 500 AD there will be 7 civs, of which the easternmost and southernmost is ERE, the rest is very very western. This creates a too high concentration in western europe, these civs will meet soon and trade soon, etc. I think it is strategically a bad choice, and even historically. The Papal States should start in 752, or eventually in 728. Both England and Germany can and should start later. I would do this and try and find someone else to start earlier. Kiev is a good candidate. Speaking of Kiev, why should it become a mongolian Khanate when it was called the Mother of Russian Cities ? It should only happen for actual ingame events.
- Like I said I would make one of Umayyad and Al Andalus and make them start at the same time of a spanish kingdom (Asturias ?) if we want to see a balanced conflict in Iberia.
- What about Vikings and Mongols ? They can be represented by huge barbarian waves. It would also be nice to see some Berber incursions especially sea-based. However I think that Mongols should be a civ if we want to see any mongolian Khanate (thanks to the new superb feature of dynamic names).
- Bulgaria: I would make it start in 800 AD to prevent it from having a lot of time to expand in central Europe (ahistorical).
- Byzantium makes more sense of ERE since there is no WRE.

 

[jessiecat]

All right, here goes. I'm tempted to start a new thread, but that would likely be more confusing than helpful - so here's my current version of the civ list, with dates and dynamic names. I'll do proposed UUs, UPs, and UBs in the next post, and probably another after that for UHVs. While none of this is completely set, I'm going to be operating under the assumption that the 22 civs that we've picked here will be the final list. This list will not be perfect, and it will not include all of the important civs in Europe - but it will be the best that we've managed to come up with in a few months of debate. At this point, we're not going to be considering any new ones, and you're going to have to make a really convincing argument for why one of the proposed and rejected civs should be included over one of the ones that's in there. If you intend to make such an argument, please read the earlier posts in the thread (and the other related threads) to see which arguments have been put forward already and the counters raised to them.

I've streamlined the dynamic civ names somewhat, which will detract somewhat from accuracy but make the game easier to follow. If I've taken too much out, it might be worth re-adding - but I'd rather stay away from the more obscure epochs.

The list:


Western Europe - 4
England (500 AD) --> Great Britain (upon control of Scotland, Wales, N. Ireland)
Neustria (500 AD) --> France (1000 AD)
Burgundy (500 AD)
Netherlands (1580 AD) ? I'm not sure what to use for the starting date on the Netherlands. They were a culturally distinct area long before they were independent. My feeling is that they should appear late, but with a strong base.

Iberia - 3
Léon (720 AD) --> Castile (1230 AD) --> Spain (1520 AD)
Portugal (1100 AD)
Al-Andalus (700 AD) --> Caliphate of Cordoba (950 AD)

Northern Europe - 3
Norsemen (Danes) (500 AD) (Initially start with one settler in Denmark and one in Norway?)
Sweden (1500 AD)
Austrasia (500 AD) --> Germany (920 AD)

Italy - 3
Genoa (1000 AD)
Venice (800 AD)
Papal States (500 AD)

Eastern Europe - 6
Poland (970 AD) --> Poland-Lithuania (1570 AD)
Austria (1160 AD)
Magyars (900 AD) --> Hungarian Crown (1000 AD)
Kievan Rus (860 AD) --> Khanate of the Golden Horde (1200 AD) --> Greater Russia (by territory controlled)
Duchy of Moscow (1000 AD) --> Russia (1550 AD) --> Greater Russia (by territory controlled)
Bulgaria (630 AD)

Anatolia and Middle East - 3
Eastern Roman Empire (500 AD) (Might it be better to call this the Byzantine empire for the purposes of diplomacy, at least? I'm thinking of how 'Eastern Roman Empire' is going to look on the stability/diplomacy meter.)
Ottoman Empire (1300 AD)
Umayyad Caliphate (660 AD) --> Abbassid Caliphate (750 AD) --> Fatimid Caliphate (970 AD) (after the Fatimids, I'd rather not transition to the Ayyubids or the Mamluks - neither of those held the title of Caliphate, and I'd rather maintain continuity than perfect historical accuracy)

Dropped from the list:
-Switzerland (geographic balance, fairly passive goals, historical importance/influence on neighbors)

Others previously considered and rejected:
-HRE (to be handled as a title; lands and powers divided among several civs)
-Various UK Celts (minor)
-Moravia (brevity)
-Prussia (time scale, redundancy)
-Aragon (overlap, time scale)



A crude timeline:

Start (500 AD):
England France Germany Papal States E.R.E. Burgundy Danes


630 AD: Bulgaria
660 AD: Umayyad Caliphate

700 AD: Al-Andalus
720 AD: Léon


800 AD: Venice

860 AD: Kiev

900 AD: Magyars


970 AD: Poland
1000 AD: Russia Genoa



1100 AD: Portugal

1160 AD: Austria




1300 AD: Ottoman Empire



1500 AD: Sweden

1580 AD: Netherlands







1800 AD: Mod ends

Thoughts? Should we start a new thread?

Thanks for work. List looks pretty good to me. Couple of thoughts though
about your dates vs. historic dates.

Kingdom of Asturias founded- 718
Kingdom of Leon founded -924 (incorporates Asturias and Galicia)
Kingdom of Castile incorporates Leon, etc. -1072

So, in the game you should really start with Asturias in 720
to take in Leon and Castille later on.

Al Andalus replaces Visigothic Spain - 720
( becomes the Umayyad Emirate of Cordoba)
Umayyads overthrown, replaced by Abbasids (Baghdad)
and Fatimids (Cairo). Umayyad Caliphate of Cordoba -750

My response to One Dreamer to starting Al Andalus in Morocco is OK
in 700, but somehow you've got to have an invasion
of Visigothic Spain on or about 711.
In 700 Visigoth cities like Toledo could be independents, I guess?

Anyway, thanks again, St. Lucifer, for your hard work. Look forward to see the
proposed map with cities.

 

[onedreamer]

well I proposed to start something ELSE in Morocco because Al Andalus is a Umayyad colony that later became independent since the Umayyad were overthrown. But I don't think this makes sense in game terms, so my proposal was to start with Umayyad in 2 locations: Arabia and south Iberia. Or would this cripple them because of maintenance costs ? Yeah, probably a bad idea ^^

 

[jessiecat]

My first thought is that we shouldn't start yet another thread ^^
Can I comment some stuff ?

- Arabs/Moors. I'd drop Al Andalus and put in something in north africa instead, if the map allows that. Umayyad should start with a settler and a decent army in Cordoba or Granada.
- Some start dates are a bit puzzling. First, as a general consideration, in 500 AD there will be 7 civs, of which the easternmost and southernmost is ERE, the rest is very very western. This creates a too high concentration in western europe, these civs will meet soon and trade soon, etc. I think it is strategically a bad choice, and even historically. The Papal States should start in 752, or eventually in 728. Both England and Germany can and should start later. I would do this and try and find someone else to start earlier. Kiev is a good candidate. Speaking of Kiev, why should it become a mongolian Khanate when it was called the Mother of Russian Cities ? It should only happen for actual ingame events.
- Like I said I would make one of Umayyad and Al Andalus and make them start at the same time of a spanish kingdom (Asturias ?) if we want to see a balanced conflict in Iberia.
- What about Vikings and Mongols ? They can be represented by huge barbarian waves. It would also be nice to see some Berber incursions especially sea-based. However I think that Mongols should be a civ if we want to see any mongolian Khanate (thanks to the new superb feature of dynamic names).
- Bulgaria: I would make it start in 800 AD to prevent it from having a lot of time to expand in central Europe (ahistorical).
- Byzantium makes more sense of ERE since there is no WRE.

As I've just posted to St. Lucifer, I agree. The Christians should start with Asturias not Leon in 720. Better then to have Al Andalus start at the same time for balance but with 80% of the land area (historically accurate).

As far as starting in Morocco, that would put the date back 50-100 years,
esp. for the start of the Umayyads in the Middle East (660?)
Better to start Al Andalus in place in 720.
Morocco would be ruled by the Umayyads up to 750,
then by Cordoba until the invasion by the Almoravids in 1086.

So Andalus and Asturias both starting in 720. Nice and simple and accurate.
That'd prob. work OK. Do you agree?