holy king
Deity
do you really want to cut out the middle east and northern africa? i mean it would be playable but it somehow just wouldnt feel right...
Rhye's of Europe Organized Development Thread
- Thread starter Vince-G
- Start date
Squirrelloid
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 263
First, obviously i'm interested in being involved, at least at the brainstorming and planning stages. My code-fu is existent, but i've never done any modding of civ before, so possibly non-applicable.
Second, with a start ~reign of Clovis I (sometime between 500-600AD iirc), we'd have France as a playable civ for sure. (Clovis I starts the Merovingian dynasty of France). We'd also have the Danes (who should get started about then to be capable of raiding at their historical time - note 550AD start time in RFC), possibly the English (depending on if you wanted England to represent both the anglo-saxons and the normans, otherwise England gets delayed until the 11th century), the Vatican/Papal States/whatever we're calling this, the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantines), and possibly some other of the Italian city-states (not too clear when they became political entities, honestly).
So that's:
France
Eastern Roman Empire
Danes/Norse
English (?)
Papal States
Venetia???
Genoa??? or Firenze??? or Milano???
Which is at least 4 and at most 7. Note that RFC has 4 starting civs in the 3000 BC start, and I believe 4 starting in the 600 AD start. We could possibly squeeze a few more in with dynamic civ names.
Third, from the sounds of things it looks like I'm interested in a far more detailed and altered game than many of the other people. Which i suppose is fine, but it probably leads to me suggesting things from the sidelines rather than participating more directly. But I really would be in favor of a massive revamp/expansion of the appropriate section of the tech tree (including getting some things *right*), and a desire to focus on one or two cultural/technological eras over including the industrial era so we could build a tech tree/units/civics system which has a distinct flavor and isn't just CivIV (or even RFC) writ small.
(I'll also second the opinion that we really need the holy land on the map, because the crusades were hugely important to Europe's political and religious climate.)
Second, with a start ~reign of Clovis I (sometime between 500-600AD iirc), we'd have France as a playable civ for sure. (Clovis I starts the Merovingian dynasty of France). We'd also have the Danes (who should get started about then to be capable of raiding at their historical time - note 550AD start time in RFC), possibly the English (depending on if you wanted England to represent both the anglo-saxons and the normans, otherwise England gets delayed until the 11th century), the Vatican/Papal States/whatever we're calling this, the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantines), and possibly some other of the Italian city-states (not too clear when they became political entities, honestly).
So that's:
France
Eastern Roman Empire
Danes/Norse
English (?)
Papal States
Venetia???
Genoa??? or Firenze??? or Milano???
Which is at least 4 and at most 7. Note that RFC has 4 starting civs in the 3000 BC start, and I believe 4 starting in the 600 AD start. We could possibly squeeze a few more in with dynamic civ names.
Third, from the sounds of things it looks like I'm interested in a far more detailed and altered game than many of the other people. Which i suppose is fine, but it probably leads to me suggesting things from the sidelines rather than participating more directly. But I really would be in favor of a massive revamp/expansion of the appropriate section of the tech tree (including getting some things *right*), and a desire to focus on one or two cultural/technological eras over including the industrial era so we could build a tech tree/units/civics system which has a distinct flavor and isn't just CivIV (or even RFC) writ small.
(I'll also second the opinion that we really need the holy land on the map, because the crusades were hugely important to Europe's political and religious climate.)
NeoT
Nobody
I think it would be better if the Scenario ended in 1920 (or even 1930), after WWI, that's a better date because that kind of marks the end of european supremacy on the world. Also, i would love to fight wars with biplanes and FT 17 tanks at the end of the game.
Úmarth
Megalomaniac
I'm a pretty decent programmer, can't say I've done any serious civ modding before but I'd like to get into it. So if you guys need help then give me a shout.
I'm sure you've already got loads of ideas so you probably don't need any more. I would like to say going up to 1900/1920 even might be a bad idea. There's a reason games like M:TW and EUIII stop in the early modern period (before 1789 definitely), because so many things changed then with the industrialism, nationalism, humanism and all that. Either you change the entire game mechanics or you scale back on the details and it becomes not a game/scenario about one era but about many... which is what RFC vanilla is about.
I'm sure you've already got loads of ideas so you probably don't need any more. I would like to say going up to 1900/1920 even might be a bad idea. There's a reason games like M:TW and EUIII stop in the early modern period (before 1789 definitely), because so many things changed then with the industrialism, nationalism, humanism and all that. Either you change the entire game mechanics or you scale back on the details and it becomes not a game/scenario about one era but about many... which is what RFC vanilla is about.
Vince-G
Chieftain
Again, let's not worry about the end date too much. Whatever it is - within reason - it shouldn't have too much bearing on the civs, which is what we're going to focus on now. I don't think the end date will be moved forward, definitely not to encompass World War I. There's a reason it's called World War I - it involved heavy sending of troops from British colonies, American involvement and other things that a Europe-only scenario can't encompass.
I think we will be including North Africa and the close Middle East, but I can't guarantee anything, as the map will be chosen after we have the other fundamentals laid down.
If you want to help out, then please do! We definitely need a coder.
I think we will be including North Africa and the close Middle East, but I can't guarantee anything, as the map will be chosen after we have the other fundamentals laid down.
If you want to help out, then please do! We definitely need a coder.
mitsho
Deity
So, it seems we need to have a fundamental discussion beforehand. (I would like to answer to you, squirrelloid, again, but I think it wouldn't lead to much before these fundamental things are not clear.)
What sort of Mod is this going to be?
Its working title is "Rhyes of Europe". Please be aware that there already exist mods on Europe. (European Middle Ages;European Empires; and more which I am not willing to search) These already alter the gameplay significantly (sometimes). So, there is already a market/product for these sort of games, isn't there?
What is the beautifulness of RFC? I would put it that way: Historicity, near to the vanilla game concepts (with heavy tweaking from time to time), addition of "unfun" game elements, "whole history", Civs starting at all times. RFC takes a look at the globe. We decided to take it down to one continent. I would opt for keeping the rest the same. Make it as multi-era as possible, use the vanilla tech tree with additions (the bi-planes
although these might not make the cut ), add these fun unfun elements (Plague, Stability, Congresses). Of course, for these things we need coders to "localize" Rhyes code, and everything we talk in here accounts for nothing...
But as I understood, this thread is to democratizise the mod into the most popular choice or the volonté générale... I actually don't think this is possible at large scale, so we need the dictator to decide where this mod shall be going. Keep in mind, we need someone to do the work too....
m
PS: Overviev: Rhyes of Europe
timespan: "Early Middle Ages" - "Consolidated States", roughly AD 600 - 1800, tbd
Map proposal (just a screenshot so far):
or
(cut a bit (lot) on the northern half). The map has to be "small", if we want to have "many civs", also, it makes it easier!
At last, the old project had this: http://wikirhye.wikidot.com/rhyes-of-europe
Quite astonishing what was already done...!
m
What sort of Mod is this going to be?
Its working title is "Rhyes of Europe". Please be aware that there already exist mods on Europe. (European Middle Ages;European Empires; and more which I am not willing to search) These already alter the gameplay significantly (sometimes). So, there is already a market/product for these sort of games, isn't there?
What is the beautifulness of RFC? I would put it that way: Historicity, near to the vanilla game concepts (with heavy tweaking from time to time), addition of "unfun" game elements, "whole history", Civs starting at all times. RFC takes a look at the globe. We decided to take it down to one continent. I would opt for keeping the rest the same. Make it as multi-era as possible, use the vanilla tech tree with additions (the bi-planes
although these might not make the cut ), add these fun unfun elements (Plague, Stability, Congresses). Of course, for these things we need coders to "localize" Rhyes code, and everything we talk in here accounts for nothing...But as I understood, this thread is to democratizise the mod into the most popular choice or the volonté générale... I actually don't think this is possible at large scale, so we need the dictator to decide where this mod shall be going. Keep in mind, we need someone to do the work too....
m
PS: Overviev: Rhyes of Europe
timespan: "Early Middle Ages" - "Consolidated States", roughly AD 600 - 1800, tbd
Map proposal (just a screenshot so far):
At last, the old project had this: http://wikirhye.wikidot.com/rhyes-of-europe
Quite astonishing what was already done...!
m
My first comment: There are so many things so many people will want included in this mod, it's not even funny. The additions to this mod compared to RFC should be limited, as to retain the full Rhye-ish feel. If you tinker with it too much, Rhye's is lost in the ever-growing compost pile, forever forgotten in the depths of molding leaves and broken twigs. I would much prefer for this to be a "specialized" version of RFC, like doing a zoom in on your screen to see parts clearer. (in this case, zooming in on Europe) In conclusion, just add what's needed to make Rhye's work for the different faces and stages of Europe.
st.lucifer
King
I'm no coder either, but my ideas for the scenario fall pretty close to squirreloid's. I'd be happy to write or handle maps, or to do the tech tree - I think that there should be some substantial revisions, to avoid that abbreviated feel.
I'm in favor of the earlier start as well, for several reasons.
First, the original RFC and 600 AD start begin with a handful of civs playable. That seems eminently reasonable, and I think of a civ like France or the Byzantine empire as being like Rome or China in RFC - while you start with significant advantages and spend much of the game in a position of power, the trick is hanging on, rather than building up... Starting with France, the Vikings, England, the Papal States, and the Byzantine empire sems like a pretty good opening lineup. If we're including the Maghreb, the Abbassids or the Caliphate (shaky) should also be included. Eastern Europe should have a heavy barbarian presence for most of that time, but in roving bands; it might be worth adjusting the barbarian code so that they don't build cities (I believe this is the case in RFC anyway).
Second, if we're trying to create a dynamic mod/scenario, the decline of older civs and appearance of new ones is going to be the source of most of our excitement. We don't have to have all of the areas full at a time; most of the emptier areas can be historically represented with barbarians or strong independent cities.
I put in my idea about control of the Apostolic Palace and reworking of great prophets in the other thread; if this were implemented, the value of GPs would be significantly increased - think of the implications for crusades. Alternate ways of handling crusades might be similar to the way plague is done now - crusade spreads to a city; units are removed from your cities against your will, and appear in some state of disarray/damage somewhere in the holy land, back under your control. Is that too evil? It's not that unlike the way the actual things worked... Along the same lines, if crusade spread sort of like plague, you could use GPs to preach crusades in the territory of your rivals (or even against them, as in the Albigensian crusade?), as a sort of espionage tactic.
In any case, I vote for 1800 as the end of the scenario, and 600 as the start.
I'm in favor of the earlier start as well, for several reasons.
First, the original RFC and 600 AD start begin with a handful of civs playable. That seems eminently reasonable, and I think of a civ like France or the Byzantine empire as being like Rome or China in RFC - while you start with significant advantages and spend much of the game in a position of power, the trick is hanging on, rather than building up... Starting with France, the Vikings, England, the Papal States, and the Byzantine empire sems like a pretty good opening lineup. If we're including the Maghreb, the Abbassids or the Caliphate (shaky) should also be included. Eastern Europe should have a heavy barbarian presence for most of that time, but in roving bands; it might be worth adjusting the barbarian code so that they don't build cities (I believe this is the case in RFC anyway).
Second, if we're trying to create a dynamic mod/scenario, the decline of older civs and appearance of new ones is going to be the source of most of our excitement. We don't have to have all of the areas full at a time; most of the emptier areas can be historically represented with barbarians or strong independent cities.
I put in my idea about control of the Apostolic Palace and reworking of great prophets in the other thread; if this were implemented, the value of GPs would be significantly increased - think of the implications for crusades. Alternate ways of handling crusades might be similar to the way plague is done now - crusade spreads to a city; units are removed from your cities against your will, and appear in some state of disarray/damage somewhere in the holy land, back under your control. Is that too evil? It's not that unlike the way the actual things worked... Along the same lines, if crusade spread sort of like plague, you could use GPs to preach crusades in the territory of your rivals (or even against them, as in the Albigensian crusade?), as a sort of espionage tactic.
In any case, I vote for 1800 as the end of the scenario, and 600 as the start.
Squirrelloid
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 263
So, my impression was that this was going to be the same number of turns as a standard game but squeezed into a lesser year span. At which point we either markedly expand content (tech, units, etc...) to match, or it feels sort of half done, since we're going to be using at most half the existing tech tree.
Further, something RFC (and CivIV) have going for them is they get to paint with broad strokes because they have all of human history and the whole world to draw from. When we're dealing with just europe, we're going to end up ejecting some civics choices, for example (ie, caste system doesn't really seem to belong). Further, when we cut the year range down, some civics options don't really seem appropriate. (in a ~600-1800 game, universal suffrage is inappropriate, as is police state. Free speech is questionable. etc...). This can actually be an advantage because you can use this pruning away of appropriate options to develop other civics choices more appropriate to the era. Often the differences between your civics will be smaller than the differences between the standard civics - but thats ok, the scenario is working on a smaller scale.
Its not just that I want a medieval scenario, its that the scope of this project is well suited to a medieval++ scenario. Really, medieval through age of enlightenment is what i've been talking about. (Speaking of which, the Nationalism tech comes too early in standard civ, it should be post-renaissance). But that is an inherently nice timeframe because it has a number of important themes that can be done justice, from social organization to religion, without them being insignificant in scope (compared to if we tacked, say, the industrial age onto the end of it, whose huge social reorganization leaves previous themes looking like unitary entities).
What is the beautifulness of RFC? I would put it that way: Historicity, near to the vanilla game concepts (with heavy tweaking from time to time), addition of "unfun" game elements, "whole history", Civs starting at all times. RFC takes a look at the globe. We decided to take it down to one continent. I would opt for keeping the rest the same. Make it as multi-era as possible, use the vanilla tech tree with additions (the bi-planes
What makes it RFC for me is the UHVs and the multi-era civ spawns. The presence or absence of vanilla game concepts doesn't really bother me - in fact, playing RFC generally means doing things rather differently from vanilla because various factors (stability, plagues, uhvs) mean vanilla strategies are bound to fail. I'm mostly arguing for increased historicity here, and that we can better achieve it by focusing on particular era(s) and by further tweaking the tech tree and unit abilities. The vanilla tech tree is actually pretty awful for the eras we're going to be including. (Knights at guilds when the knight was the entire basis of the feudal system? Muskets at the same time as cannon? Castles so late that it isn't worth building them?)
And I'm strongly in favor of including other unique features that enhance historicity, possibly at the expense of "standard" game play. (See my proposal on the appearance and spread of new technology in the old Rhyes of Europe thread).
PS: Overviev: Rhyes of Europe
timespan: "Early Middle Ages" - "Consolidated States", roughly AD 600 - 1800, tbd
Map proposal (just a screenshot so far):or(cut a bit (lot) on the northern half). The map has to be "small", if we want to have "many civs", also, it makes it easier!
At last, the old project had this: http://wikirhye.wikidot.com/rhyes-of-europe
Quite astonishing what was already done...!
m
That map is notably missing the holy land, which is crucial to the scenario. Arguably, any map for Rhyes of Europe is going to need Jerusalem and Cairo (target of the crusade led by St. Louis (Louis IX of France)), and will probably want to include Damascus as well (admittedly close to Jerusalem in civ tile terms). In fact, for Italian city-states like Venetia and Genoa, a full mediterranean is a good thing, because that was their sphere of economic influence.
And small is probably too small. I'm guessing we really can't get away with a map smaller than large. I could be wrong. But I already hate how close the computer builds cities in RFC, and would like a europe with enough space so that I can have more than one city which can use most of its tiles.
st.lucifer
King
I'll second a vote for a larger map, and work on adapting one of the ones i've already done. Even the one-city civs of RFC (dutch, portuguese) realistically had multiple urban centers; you can make the same argument for the independent Italian city-states (Venice controlled Trieste, Bologna, Verona, and the surrounding area). The one-city challenge is a fun game in some ways, but it really doesn't fit the map very well - without the prospect of real colonies, or room for expansion, the dutch and the like are going to suffer.
The risk of a larger map is having a large amount of open space in Eastern Europe - but there generally wasn't much going on there. A civ like Poland will fill some of that space, but the Ukraine just isn't going to be as densely populated as the low countries, and that's ok. There are going to be different styles of play for different civs and different areas, and the map should facilitate that.
Another map-related question: as there's no silk or ivory in Europe, do we replace them with other luxury goods, or leave them out? Do we leave sugar in, in the form of sugar beets? (in my favorite Euro map, I've put sugar in the Pripet Marshes and parts of Baltic Russia, changing the terrain to tundra/jungle). Do we use the RFC marsh for the Pripets, the fens south of Norwich in England, and much of the Netherlands?
Possible options for European luxuries: Amber (Baltic region); Cotton (Anatolia and Egypt); Beer (redundant with wine? would presumably be concentrated in colder areas); Wool or linen? (linen in swampy areas?) Olives?
Thoughts?
obliterate
Warrior Monk
One thing I'll say is if your going to fish the scenario at 1900 you should fit World War 1 into it. It was pretty much just a European war anyway. I do think late 18th Cenury is a good finish date.
holy king
Deity
idea (way too early for this i know, but i just had it now)
what about simulating crusades by giving all catholic civs a quest derived from that "we need to secure this ressource across the border" quest (giving jerusalem, antioch and cairo a hidden ressource)
the question is if english knights will ever make it to the holy land... whould it be possible to program a crusading stack working similar to the one in m2:tw?
what about simulating crusades by giving all catholic civs a quest derived from that "we need to secure this ressource across the border" quest (giving jerusalem, antioch and cairo a hidden ressource)
the question is if english knights will ever make it to the holy land... whould it be possible to program a crusading stack working similar to the one in m2:tw?
Vince-G
Chieftain
I don't have much time now so I can't reply to all of the comments given just yet. One thing I'll say however is that I agree the map should be made a tad larger, to include the whole of the Mediterranean and some more of northern Africa, to allow a larger Ottoman Empire and Crusades.
Crusades will definitely be included.
Crusades will definitely be included.
Wessel V1
Emperor
I think we should make a poll so everyone can vote for te dates, maybe 2 polls, 1 for the starting date and 1 for the ending date.
Squirrelloid
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 263
My proposed civ list:
Western Europe
France
England
Netherlands
Burgundy
Iberian Peninsula
Spain (Castille?)
Portugal
Andalusia ("moors")
North Central Europe
Norse (Denmark/Sweden/Norway/Iceland)
Teutonic Knights
Poland-Lithuania (yay dynamic civ names!)
Austria/House of Hapsburg
Eastern Europe
Eastern Roman Empire
Russia
Hungary
Ottoman Empire
Middle East
Abbassaid Caliphate (someone check my spelling please)
Italy
Papal States
Venetia
Genoa
Total: 19
I've purposely left a lot of holes in Eastern Europe, in part because I am unsure of the significance of many of the previously proposed civs during various points in this period, and in part because my impression was that they were mostly battlegrounds for the Hapsburgs, Ottomans, and similar powers. There is room for some additional civs (Whitefire was estimating 22-23 including independents in the previous thread).
Which brings us to Independents:
Celts
Occitania
various unallied Balkan cities
Other?
Things I've dropped:
Switzerland - I ultimately decided it wasn't necessary, and I'd rather have the space for something else. However, we seem to have space...
Norway et al. - First, I think if this were to be more than one civ, Denmark and Sweden would be the two to choose. However, they have really distinct periods of dominance, and have strong cultural and historical ties. It makes sense to treat the whole region as one Norse civ. (Iceland of course being a colony).
The Balkans - Along the lines of what I said earlier, having this be independents crushed between nascent superpowers seems perfectly reasonable.
Near Russia - Honestly, except for Poland-Lithuania, none of the Kingdoms up there (Moravia for instance) struck me as anything other than battlegrounds for their more powerful neighbors.
So, I suppose this is looking for 1-2 more civs to add. Switzerland is probably a decent choice, as would be separating Poland and Lithuania. Alternately, we could stick in Firenze in Italy. (I prefer not sicily since that should be captured first by the muslims and eventually be held by England!).
Something that vaguely annoys me is that it would be really nice to be able to play Saxon England as distinct from Norman England. I suppose their could be a William the Conqueror event, in which a bunch of troops land in England and if they take London, England becomes Norman. For the AI, having a switch in civs like this isn't a problem. For the Saxon England player, that's basically saying that they have to hold London or else they're done - i suppose they could be offered control of the Norman England Empire... This could make one of Saxon England's UHV goals "Defeat the Norman Invasion".
I also toyed with making Occitania a playable civ, but they were never really unified politically. A few powerful independent city-states seems better suited.
Western Europe
France
England
Netherlands
Burgundy
Iberian Peninsula
Spain (Castille?)
Portugal
Andalusia ("moors")
North Central Europe
Norse (Denmark/Sweden/Norway/Iceland)
Teutonic Knights
Poland-Lithuania (yay dynamic civ names!)
Austria/House of Hapsburg
Eastern Europe
Eastern Roman Empire
Russia
Hungary
Ottoman Empire
Middle East
Abbassaid Caliphate (someone check my spelling please)
Italy
Papal States
Venetia
Genoa
Total: 19
I've purposely left a lot of holes in Eastern Europe, in part because I am unsure of the significance of many of the previously proposed civs during various points in this period, and in part because my impression was that they were mostly battlegrounds for the Hapsburgs, Ottomans, and similar powers. There is room for some additional civs (Whitefire was estimating 22-23 including independents in the previous thread).
Which brings us to Independents:
Celts
Occitania
various unallied Balkan cities
Other?
Things I've dropped:
Switzerland - I ultimately decided it wasn't necessary, and I'd rather have the space for something else. However, we seem to have space...
Norway et al. - First, I think if this were to be more than one civ, Denmark and Sweden would be the two to choose. However, they have really distinct periods of dominance, and have strong cultural and historical ties. It makes sense to treat the whole region as one Norse civ. (Iceland of course being a colony).
The Balkans - Along the lines of what I said earlier, having this be independents crushed between nascent superpowers seems perfectly reasonable.
Near Russia - Honestly, except for Poland-Lithuania, none of the Kingdoms up there (Moravia for instance) struck me as anything other than battlegrounds for their more powerful neighbors.
So, I suppose this is looking for 1-2 more civs to add. Switzerland is probably a decent choice, as would be separating Poland and Lithuania. Alternately, we could stick in Firenze in Italy. (I prefer not sicily since that should be captured first by the muslims and eventually be held by England!).
Something that vaguely annoys me is that it would be really nice to be able to play Saxon England as distinct from Norman England. I suppose their could be a William the Conqueror event, in which a bunch of troops land in England and if they take London, England becomes Norman. For the AI, having a switch in civs like this isn't a problem. For the Saxon England player, that's basically saying that they have to hold London or else they're done - i suppose they could be offered control of the Norman England Empire... This could make one of Saxon England's UHV goals "Defeat the Norman Invasion".
I also toyed with making Occitania a playable civ, but they were never really unified politically. A few powerful independent city-states seems better suited.
Disenfrancised
Beep Beep
Possible Idea:
Since this will be based on Rhyes and I assume the idea of 'core areas' will be retained I propose some sort of 'Unification' event.
-Modern states like England/Britain, Spain, France, Germany, Russia, and Italy did not emerge fully formed into the world, what happened was that a nation was forged via military might from a group of Feudal principalities, any one of which had a chance for triumph (though some had advantages).
-Thus instead of starting off with England et al I suggest the initial civs should be of those subnational entities each with their own starting date and core area.
-These go about in their normal way, but whenever any Civ gains control of 66% (including those of its vassals) of the territory of a 'Nation Region' then they are now able to build a 'National Wonder' (in the purest sense of the term) of cost X that causes all the cities in that region to have a very strong chance of flipping to them, and adds the national core area to their own area for the purposes of whatever. It may also move their capital, and change/add to their UP, UU, and UB.
-Thus in you have a number of States in england (Wessex perhaps dominant), the 'Normandy' Civ invades, conquers, builds the 'England' National wonder in London causing the capital to move and a Civ with a core area encompassing England and Normandy to emerge and control the isle. However later the Ile-de-France civ has been a-conquering and manages to build the 'France' Wonder wiping out the other French Civs (including the Norman part of the new English civ).
-This also allows the dymanic of having vassal regions in other countries which was very much a feature of medevil europe. Plus the capitals will be in different places each time and give everything a very 'similar but not quite the same' feel you get from Rhyes world map. It also gives an easily chosen UHV for each of the subnationals - unite their country. (It fact a UHV for normandy of Uniting England, Uniting France and having the highest score by X would be really appropriate eh?)
Coding all that could be a bugger I admit, but you're building on already built components.
Since this will be based on Rhyes and I assume the idea of 'core areas' will be retained I propose some sort of 'Unification' event.
-Modern states like England/Britain, Spain, France, Germany, Russia, and Italy did not emerge fully formed into the world, what happened was that a nation was forged via military might from a group of Feudal principalities, any one of which had a chance for triumph (though some had advantages).
-Thus instead of starting off with England et al I suggest the initial civs should be of those subnational entities each with their own starting date and core area.
Spoiler some proposals :
-These go about in their normal way, but whenever any Civ gains control of 66% (including those of its vassals) of the territory of a 'Nation Region' then they are now able to build a 'National Wonder' (in the purest sense of the term
) of cost X that causes all the cities in that region to have a very strong chance of flipping to them, and adds the national core area to their own area for the purposes of whatever. It may also move their capital, and change/add to their UP, UU, and UB.-Thus in you have a number of States in england (Wessex perhaps dominant), the 'Normandy' Civ invades, conquers, builds the 'England' National wonder in London causing the capital to move and a Civ with a core area encompassing England and Normandy to emerge and control the isle. However later the Ile-de-France civ has been a-conquering and manages to build the 'France' Wonder wiping out the other French Civs (including the Norman part of the new English civ).
-This also allows the dymanic of having vassal regions in other countries which was very much a feature of medevil europe. Plus the capitals will be in different places each time and give everything a very 'similar but not quite the same' feel you get from Rhyes world map. It also gives an easily chosen UHV for each of the subnationals - unite their country
. (It fact a UHV for normandy of Uniting England, Uniting France and having the highest score by X would be really appropriate eh?)Coding all that could be a bugger I admit, but you're building on already built components.
Vince-G
Chieftain
OK, I must make something clear. This is a Modcomp and not a Modpack. Whilst it'd be wonderful to have a modpack for this, we're sticking to the RFC mod as closely as possible, meaning some of the ideas here can't really be implemented. This is Rhye's of Europe and not the Big Europe Scenario (or anything along those lines).
Again, we're dealing very much with the question of how many major civs we can reasonably have without the game gumming up (RFC isn't well-known for rapidity in the late game anyway). Also, Squirrelloid, your civ list leaves out most of Germany, but otherwise seems to be the same as the one I've drafted.
Dynamic civ names will obviously have to be a factor in this.
Disenfranchised: Good ideas, but how easy is their implementation, and furthermore, many of those civs would make much more sense as independents.
I hate to sound like a spoilsport but we have to think about ease of implementation and ease of play, as well as the fact that this is made essentially for RFC, and that RFC was not made for this.
Again, we're dealing very much with the question of how many major civs we can reasonably have without the game gumming up (RFC isn't well-known for rapidity in the late game anyway). Also, Squirrelloid, your civ list leaves out most of Germany, but otherwise seems to be the same as the one I've drafted.
Dynamic civ names will obviously have to be a factor in this.
Disenfranchised: Good ideas, but how easy is their implementation, and furthermore, many of those civs would make much more sense as independents.
I hate to sound like a spoilsport but we have to think about ease of implementation and ease of play, as well as the fact that this is made essentially for RFC, and that RFC was not made for this.
mitsho
Deity
@disenfranchized too complicated. I'm sorry
@map my vote for why no Middle East:
- It is called Rhyes of Europe. Adding the middle East would further complicate things (and in differentation, the Maghreb has had "direct" influence on Europe).
- We would need to have at least one civ that was/were mostly more directed away from Europe, these civ would sit at the edge of the map at a black wall and not have much to do.
- Were the Crusades really that important, respectively had a lasting effect (besides with movies) and can be represented in the game (How many turns would the +/- 200 years of Crusades be in the game of 1000+ years?).
This is way I proposed my map as beforehand. I would present a better one if I had time...
@civ list of Squirreloid:
So, what I propose:
Western Europe
France
England
Celts
Netherlands
Burgundy
Iberian Peninsula
Castille -> Spain
Portugal
Andalusia/Cordoba/Almoravids
North & Central Europe
Norse (Danes -> Calmar -> Sweden)
Holy Roman Empire (with vassalised other states to begin...)
Poland-Lithuania
Austria/House of Habsburg
Switzerland
Eastern Europe
Eastern Roman Empire
Russia
Hungary
Ottoman Empire
Serbia
Italy
Papal States
Venetia
Genoa
Independents
Independents
Makes 21 states, and I wouldn't "vetoe" a Middle Eastern civ, although I am no fan of it. 22 would be a fine amount, and depending on the map can be nicely spread out.
@map my vote for why no Middle East:
- It is called Rhyes of Europe. Adding the middle East would further complicate things (and in differentation, the Maghreb has had "direct" influence on Europe).
- We would need to have at least one civ that was/were mostly more directed away from Europe, these civ would sit at the edge of the map at a black wall and not have much to do.
- Were the Crusades really that important, respectively had a lasting effect (besides with movies) and can be represented in the game (How many turns would the +/- 200 years of Crusades be in the game of 1000+ years?).
This is way I proposed my map as beforehand. I would present a better one if I had time...
@civ list of Squirreloid:
Spoiler :
So, what I propose:
Western Europe
France
England
Celts
Netherlands
Burgundy
Iberian Peninsula
Castille -> Spain
Portugal
Andalusia/Cordoba/Almoravids
North & Central Europe
Norse (Danes -> Calmar -> Sweden)
Holy Roman Empire (with vassalised other states to begin...)
Poland-Lithuania
Austria/House of Habsburg
Switzerland
Eastern Europe
Eastern Roman Empire
Russia
Hungary
Ottoman Empire
Serbia
Italy
Papal States
Venetia
Genoa
Independents
Independents
Makes 21 states, and I wouldn't "vetoe" a Middle Eastern civ, although I am no fan of it.
22 would be a fine amount, and depending on the map can be nicely spread out.
Disenfrancised
Beep Beep
I was just throwing an idea out there in response to Squirrelloid's post, I have no idea how hard impliementation would be .
@mitsho:
-I would recommend spliting Russia up into Novgorod, Muscovy and Kiev at least (maybe dropping Serbia). A fills up space a bit more and drives conflict and B all these groups have interesting relations and effect on european history. Plus moscow didn't dominate till at least the 1400s, so having 'Russia' earlier would be silly...
-Replace Celts with Scotland and have the others as independents (not unified at this time, and none were powerful enough)
-Since this period will be starting before the rise of the Ottomans, put the Abbasid Caliphate in as the big scary power in the Mid East. Since during this time frame they are entrenched in egypt, rife in North africa and reaching sardinia and sciliy I think they should be in. They did a lot in the med.
-Genoa, I'd say a generic North italian city would be better (or perhaps 'The Lombard League')
2-3 more Civs
?
.@mitsho:
-I would recommend spliting Russia up into Novgorod, Muscovy and Kiev at least (maybe dropping Serbia). A fills up space a bit more and drives conflict and B all these groups have interesting relations and effect on european history. Plus moscow didn't dominate till at least the 1400s, so having 'Russia' earlier would be silly...
-Replace Celts with Scotland and have the others as independents (not unified at this time, and none were powerful enough)
-Since this period will be starting before the rise of the Ottomans, put the Abbasid Caliphate in as the big scary power in the Mid East. Since during this time frame they are entrenched in egypt, rife in North africa and reaching sardinia and sciliy I think they should be in
. They did a lot in the med.-Genoa, I'd say a generic North italian city would be better (or perhaps 'The Lombard League')
2-3 more Civs
?Similar threads
