Rhye's of Europe Civ Discussion Thread

[Ajidica]

Is the Mongol Invaision going to be included? Also, what muslim civs are going to be added? I know that the turks and moors/berbers are going to be added, but is the Fatimid Caliphate, the Ummayyad Caliphate, or the Abbassid Caliphate going to be added? The muslim world has to be added and made strong, but divided.

 

[jessiecat]

Once again, the map has its own thread - there's an attached file which unzips into a WorldBuilderSave. Open it up, start a game, open worldbuilder, and that'll show you everything - including tags for civ starting locations and possible independents (although many of those will have to be redone now, which is fine.)

11 independent cities in Iberia is a lot. Granted, there were lots of existing cities in Iberia at the time, but the same can be said of many areas of Europe, and some of the ones that you mention are relatively minor. Can we eliminate Badajoz, Malaga, Cartagena, and Cadiz, at least, and possibly Pamplona or Zaragosa? I'm ok with having that many cities if we're disabling settlers, but that idea has not been received well. I'd rather we focus on a few strong independent cities than a constellation of smaller and weaker ones which leave no open space.

I'd also favor adding Barcelona and possibly Narbonne. That crescent of land between the Pyrenees and Central Massif was generally independent.

Looked for the map in the other thread. Couldn't find one with cities.
And I'm having problems with zip right now, so somebody please post a screenshot version please?
As I said, we have to distinguish between independent cities and independent civs.
You may be right about numbers but I'm not sure about disabling settlers
completely for over 200 years.
But, to simplify things I suggest, to start in 500AD:

Kingdom of the Visigoths;(non-playable civ.)
Toledo (Capitol)
Zaragoza
Valencia
Seville
Cordoba

Independent Cities;
Leon (where Christians start in 720?)
Pamplona (Basques -flip to Christians)
Lisbon (Portugal to spawn here)
Barcelona (orig Frankish then independent city.)

and for the Berber independent civ.-non-playable)
Fez
Meknes
Tangier
Marrakesh
Arabs to arrive about 670 and capture these 4 before
invading Iberia in 720?

How's that? One independent civ. and 4 independent cities in Iberia.
Trying to simplify, but you can only reduce it so much.

 

[jessiecat]

Is the Mongol Invaision going to be included? Also, what muslim civs are going to be added? I know that the turks and moors/berbers are going to be added, but is the Fatimid Caliphate, the Ummayyad Caliphate, or the Abbassid Caliphate going to be added? The muslim world has to be added and made strong, but divided.

I think the Mongols are included already. As far as the Muslim civs are
concerned, I guess they'll be two. One starting in Arabia, becoming the
Umayyads, then splitting into the Abbasids and Fatimids about 750. The
other would start as an Arab invasion of Morocco about 670 then invading
Spain in 720 and becoming the Cordoban Caliphate. More than two would
make it hard to mod, I guess? I agree that both should be strong, however,
as I've suggested already.

 

[Ajidica]

I don't think there was ever a Cordoban Caliphate. If I remember correctly, it was called Ummayad Spain. Although if I am wrong, please correct me.
As long as there is both the Fatimids and the Abbasid Caliphate it is realistic. Once or twice, the Fatimids were tenetive allies with Byzantium. Jessiecat, how far east does the map go? I have horrible internet downlod speeds, so I can't look at the map. If it doesn't go to Baghdad, I think the Abbasid Caliphate can be scrapped and just have it be a re-name of the Umayyad Caliphate.

 

[st.lucifer]

I don't think there was ever a Cordoban Caliphate. If I remember correctly, it was called Ummayad Spain. Although if I am wrong, please correct me.
As long as there is both the Fatimids and the Abbasid Caliphate it is realistic. Once or twice, the Fatimids were tenetive allies with Byzantium. Jessiecat, how far east does the map go? I have horrible internet downlod speeds, so I can't look at the map. If it doesn't go to Baghdad, I think the Abbasid Caliphate can be scrapped and just have it be a re-name of the Umayyad Caliphate.

Basically, there are three Muslim civs - the names-keep-changing Caliphate in the east and al-Andalus in the west, and then the Turks come in late. There should also be about a 50/50 chance that Bulgaria ends up Islamic, and a smaller chance (~10-20%?) that France, Spain, Kiev, Portugal, Venice, Genoa, and Hungary do.

There was a Caliphate of Cordoba for a while (929-1031, according to wikipedia (I don't want to dig through books atm)), but if I remember right, there were serious objections to it being referred to as a Caliphate. Prior to that, it was the Emirate of Cordoba, which seems more resonable.

The map goes to the eastern edge of the Black Sea, which cuts out the Caucasus, Mesopotamia, and the Urals. While those regions are certainly important to Europe, it was generally agreed that they would shift the focus of the mod too far eastward and add another 1000 or so tiles of forestland in Russia that the AI would be irrationally desperate to settle. Baghdad is not on the map - Damascus or Aleppo is the easternmost city.

We've discussed representing the Mongol invasion as a change in the appearance/character of the Kievan civ, or as a massive barbarian uprising. Currently, I think the barbarian plan has more support.



jessicat, I like your revised list of independent cities with a couple of caveats. First, I'm not sure that we have room to do the Visigoths as an independent/nonplayable civ separate from the other independents. While there's certainly an argument for doing that, in that the Visigothic kingdom actually functioned more or less like a unified country, I'm not sure how many slots we want to fill or have active at a given time. If the game runs at a decent speed with the Visigoths in, that's fine. If not, I'd favor putting them under Independent-W. Europe. We're also not going to have Basque or Frankish civs, playable or not, so I'm not sure where that's going, and I'd argue strongly against having a Berber NPCiv. The operative idea for Iberia currently is that al-Andalus or whatever we're initially calling it shows up with armies in both N. Africa and Iberia. If we want to flip them a couple of independents in either place, that's fine, but there's a difference between making them strong and starting them out in ~700 AD with 8 medium-sized partially developed cities.

 

[jessiecat]

Basically, there are three Muslim civs - the names-keep-changing Caliphate in the east and al-Andalus in the west, and then the Turks come in late. There should also be about a 50/50 chance that Bulgaria ends up Islamic, and a smaller chance (~10-20%?) that France, Spain, Kiev, Portugal, Venice, Genoa, and Hungary do.

There was a Caliphate of Cordoba for a while (929-1031, according to wikipedia (I don't want to dig through books atm)), but if I remember right, there were serious objections to it being referred to as a Caliphate. Prior to that, it was the Emirate of Cordoba, which seems more resonable.

The map goes to the eastern edge of the Black Sea, which cuts out the Caucasus, Mesopotamia, and the Urals. While those regions are certainly important to Europe, it was generally agreed that they would shift the focus of the mod too far eastward and add another 1000 or so tiles of forestland in Russia that the AI would be irrationally desperate to settle. Baghdad is not on the map - Damascus or Aleppo is the easternmost city.

We've discussed representing the Mongol invasion as a change in the appearance/character of the Kievan civ, or as a massive barbarian uprising. Currently, I think the barbarian plan has more support.



jessicat, I like your revised list of independent cities with a couple of caveats. First, I'm not sure that we have room to do the Visigoths as an independent/nonplayable civ separate from the other independents. While there's certainly an argument for doing that, in that the Visigothic kingdom actually functioned more or less like a unified country, I'm not sure how many slots we want to fill or have active at a given time. If the game runs at a decent speed with the Visigoths in, that's fine. If not, I'd favor putting them under Independent-W. Europe. We're also not going to have Basque or Frankish civs, playable or not, so I'm not sure where that's going, and I'd argue strongly against having a Berber NPCiv. The operative idea for Iberia currently is that al-Andalus or whatever we're initially calling it shows up with armies in both N. Africa and Iberia. If we want to flip them a couple of independents in either place, that's fine, but there's a difference between making them strong and starting them out in ~700 AD with 8 medium-sized partially developed cities.

Thanks for answering his question. was just about to do that.
As far as your comments, we're 95% agreed.
I didn't mean a Basque civ., just one independent city
which flips to the Christians anyway.
And of course the Berber cities could just be independents.
The question of Barcelona is difficult because it became a
very strong County of Barcelona and a big Med player
that has to remain independent until absorbed by Aragon.
Is there some way we could make it strong enough
not to be swamped either by Cordoba or the Christians?

 

[Ajidica]

Mabey it could just be gotten rid of. One thing I have noticed when making my 300-AD mod is that, if it is creating a headache trying to make it work, drop it untill the mod is more finished. Or it could also be given to spain like in the 1000-AD scenerio that shipped with the game.

 

[jessiecat]

Mabey it could just be gotten rid of. One thing I have noticed when making my 300-AD mod is that, if it is creating a headache trying to make it work, drop it untill the mod is more finished. Or it could also be given to spain like in the 1000-AD scenerio that shipped with the game.

Sorry? What could just be gotten rid of?

 

[Ajidica]

Adding Barcelona. If it is giving that much trouble, it might be easier to get rid of it.

 

[jessiecat]

Adding Barcelona. If it is giving that much trouble, it might be easier to get rid of it.

I think it's too important, historically. But if it started as a strong indep.
city from the start with good defences but settlers disabled that might
preserve for it for awhile. Though if the playable Christian or Cordoban
civs. do capture it in the end, then no problem. Just part of the game.

 

[st.lucifer]

I think it's too important, historically. But if it started as a strong indep.
city from the start with good defences but settlers disabled that might
preserve for it for awhile. Though if the playable Christian or Cordoban
civs. do capture it in the end, then no problem. Just part of the game.

Honestly, starting it with a bunch of longbows and a castle in 500 AD should do the trick - it'll take a while before any AI or human player will get the tech to overcome that, particularly as we're going to be expanding the tech tree to remove some of its more egregious unit imbalances (muskets with gunpowder, etc.) I'm pretty sure that settlers are disabled for the independents (or should be) as a matter of course.

 

[Ajidica]

Okay, thats good. Dors anyone know when we sill start working on a beta release? Weve done alot of talking and not alot of doing.

 

[jessiecat]

Honestly, starting it with a bunch of longbows and a castle in 500 AD should do the trick - it'll take a while before any AI or human player will get the tech to overcome that, particularly as we're going to be expanding the tech tree to remove some of its more egregious unit imbalances (muskets with gunpowder, etc.) I'm pretty sure that settlers are disabled for the independents (or should be) as a matter of course.

I'm satisfied with that solution. I take it we're now all in agreement on Iberia
and Morocco, with the start and the independents, etc.?

I'd echo Ajitica's concerns about the Abbasid/Fatimid split in 750 though.
Based on a 500+ start at Mecca, how could we be sure that Damascus,
Jerusalem, Cairo, Tripoli and Tunis all be conquered by the Arabs in time
so the 750 split could happen as it should, historically?

I think they'd have to be captured pretty quickly from the Byzantines after
650, have some time to consolidate before Tunis and Tripoli then revolt from
the main civ in 750. How would a human player manage that?
Maybe recapture them, so the Fatimids don't really happen in the game?

It's a fair point. How much historical reality do you sacrifice for game
playibility? I'm sure issues of this kind could be brought up everywhere
on the map. I'll bet there'll be people reading this who have their own
concerns. Like One Dreamer with the Italians, for example.
What's your take on this?

 

[jessiecat]

Sorry bout that. Just double-posted.

 

[Zipzapzup]

Okay, thats good. Dors anyone know when we sill start working on a beta release? Weve done alot of talking and not alot of doing.

Guess we can make a first beta version, when we have the civs spawning. I'm currently working on that, but its more difficult then i thought one or two weeks are realistic i think.

But in this time, someone can actually start working on the civs themselves. Anyone how is willing to do that?

 

[Depravo]

Is the map itself finalised then?

 

[st.lucifer]

Is the map itself finalised then?

more or less. there are some tweaks that need to be made to make scandinavia and north africa less city-friendly, and we're going to be adding new resources in (and balancing the ones we have a bit), but it's basically done.

 

[Depravo]

Great. I seem to have lost the link though - can you help?

 

[jessiecat]

Great. I seem to have lost the link though - can you help?

Me too! As I said, I can't do zip right now. How about a screenshot (like,
with zoom?? Come on, you've got the technology.!

 

[Jaja]

more or less. there are some tweaks that need to be made to make scandinavia and north africa less city-friendly, and we're going to be adding new resources in (and balancing the ones we have a bit), but it's basically done.

I still don't think a through-game united Scandinavian civ is a neat solution. How fun will it be for the human player to mess around with a shitload of tundra, really? And the AI will just be like Mali in the big RFC, which I don't think works. Of course, there has to be someone there, but it's still not optimal. Who will own Denmark? In big RFC, german/viking culture usually takes the place without cities. The Dutch sometimes found Gröningen in Schlezwig. In this scenario, this won't quite work (IMO).
My solution would be something that I think someone said earlier, kinda. Make the viking spawn in Denmark, and let them evolve into "Danish Kingdom - Kingdom of Denmark/Norway" (if they have Norway that is) and so on. And make an individual Swedish civ. C'mon, you know it's the best way. Let'em spawn around 1300, or later, around 1500. Either way, making one civ span most of the baltic isn't good.
I know I said Scandinavia should be more barren. But I think they might be worth a bit more. Idonnu.

And also, be careful with North Africa. Don't overkill the desert, remember desertification hadn't gone as far as today back then. =)