Actually, I think having a different city name map for every era would be a lot more inefficient than explicitly adding the renames to the renaming method. Also, if the Romans keep Mediolanum, why should its name suddenly change?
Suggestions and requests
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
Because I think that renaming one by one is tiring and they don't always built the same city..
(Even though usually cities in Italy are only Mediolanum, Roma, Panormus/Pompeii, Firenze, Venezia
)
On mediolanum thing,
It's because Rome has collapsed long before, the city is independent; Have reached the Industrial Era but the name is still Mediolanum.. Just sound strange
P.S
Also about Mediolanum
I often sees that when Italy spawn on Firenze, Mediolanum is wiped out to give space for Firenze?
Could you please develop a method that whenever a new civ spawn, the cities there do not evolve to City Ruin but to Town?
[It's funny to see that 'City Ruin' is a tile Improvement lol]
(Even though usually cities in Italy are only Mediolanum, Roma, Panormus/Pompeii, Firenze, Venezia
)On mediolanum thing,
It's because Rome has collapsed long before, the city is independent; Have reached the Industrial Era but the name is still Mediolanum.. Just sound strange
P.S
Also about Mediolanum
I often sees that when Italy spawn on Firenze, Mediolanum is wiped out to give space for Firenze?
Could you please develop a method that whenever a new civ spawn, the cities there do not evolve to City Ruin but to Town?
[It's funny to see that 'City Ruin' is a tile Improvement lol]
Setting up an if-clause for a rename is just as much effort as putting it into a map, but you have to maintain 6 maps for much more names then usually needed in that case.
And also, it wouldn't even help in your case, because there are no city name maps for independents.
Yes, the respawn mechanic is still a little crude currently (although it should flip Mediolanum instead of killing it in this case). Don't know if I find time to fix that in 1.8, though, because I'd like to have that one finished soon.
And also, it wouldn't even help in your case, because there are no city name maps for independents.
Yes, the respawn mechanic is still a little crude currently (although it should flip Mediolanum instead of killing it in this case). Don't know if I find time to fix that in 1.8, though, because I'd like to have that one finished soon.
Hmm..
I am aware that Independent don't have city name..
But I'm unaware that you need they to have it to have their city name changed -_-"
Can some name assigned by tiles then?
For certain tiles, make it that when onTechAqcuired will change the name to something?
Umm..
I think if you want to keep Mediolanum in, you won't get Firenze built. Because Firenze is next 1 tile south of Milan, IIRC..
That's why I suggest "improve" it to town rather than city ruins~
P.S : Just wondering. 1.8 is Asia or Europe?
You can do it later when reforming Europe.. It's not really important right now (And not located in Asia lol)
I am aware that Independent don't have city name..
But I'm unaware that you need they to have it to have their city name changed -_-"
Can some name assigned by tiles then?
For certain tiles, make it that when onTechAqcuired will change the name to something?
Umm..
I think if you want to keep Mediolanum in, you won't get Firenze built. Because Firenze is next 1 tile south of Milan, IIRC..
That's why I suggest "improve" it to town rather than city ruins~
P.S : Just wondering. 1.8 is Asia or Europe?
You can do it later when reforming Europe.. It's not really important right now (And not located in Asia lol)I don't get while you insist on a tile based rename. If I can rename Mediolanum to Milan, why instead rename the city on Mediolanum's plot to Milan, when that city is always called Mediolanum anyway?
And 1.8 is Asia.
And 1.8 is Asia.
AOS9001
Slightly over 9000.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2009
- Messages
- 1,299
Speaking of Asia, is the great increase of barbs coming at China intentional? I actually needed the Great Wall in my last game with them. Also, do you plan to implement the India terrain changes I posted a while back, or do you think it's fine as it is?
Because if the tile is not built by those whose have city name entry there, it won't be Milan...
With naming per tiles, whatever built there will be called Milan at certain turn..
Same goes to some other obviously good tiles that often settled by other cities...
[I saw Greek built a city in the plot of Lugudunon long before, etc..]
Anyway, I got what you mean by NOT using 6 city name per era per civs..
There are like 6 x 31 = 186 city name block oh my! o.O
Btw,
How about adding a Islamic block city name?
Whenever Islam is the sole religion there, the city name are changed according to that block..
For example :
Bhagyanagar > Hyderabad;
We need more mechanic so that the old religion become obsolete and gone by the wind (IIRC there's no Inquisitor in DoC, did it?)
For example :
Buddhism was great in Bamiyan, but as time flown, Islam become the majority there and Buddhism is almost not practiced anymore there..
And also,
If you don't mind,
I'd like to have a new thread for developing the CityNameManager.py purpose only~
P.S : Please change Hux Witik to Oxwitik (Hux Witik is the Italian name for that city)
With naming per tiles, whatever built there will be called Milan at certain turn..
Same goes to some other obviously good tiles that often settled by other cities...
[I saw Greek built a city in the plot of Lugudunon long before, etc..]
Anyway, I got what you mean by NOT using 6 city name per era per civs..
There are like 6 x 31 = 186 city name block oh my! o.O
Btw,
How about adding a Islamic block city name?
Whenever Islam is the sole religion there, the city name are changed according to that block..
For example :
Bhagyanagar > Hyderabad;
We need more mechanic so that the old religion become obsolete and gone by the wind (IIRC there's no Inquisitor in DoC, did it?)
For example :
Buddhism was great in Bamiyan, but as time flown, Islam become the majority there and Buddhism is almost not practiced anymore there..
And also,
If you don't mind,
I'd like to have a new thread for developing the CityNameManager.py purpose only~
P.S : Please change Hux Witik to Oxwitik (Hux Witik is the Italian name for that city)
IrishDragon
Legend
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2006
- Messages
- 522
I think it would be a good idea to add more unique units, particularily some of the modern military tanks and hardware, and allow units like tanks, aircraft and battleships to be bought and sold
Exactly!
That's a good idea. The next version project might also include putting the CNM on completely new feet.
Again, that's something I've scheduled for another version (If you think that sounds like an impending release, you're right
).Don't even know which city that is, but I will.
And you're free to open any thread you like! I think that CNM development is a good idea where many people can contribute, but I don't want to open all the threads here because it feels like I'm dictating you what to talk about
Hux Witik is in Mayan CNM
Okay.
Thanks for the permission
<Edit>
How about adding a new civic, City State ?
This civic give a civilization no Capital Cities, and so there is no distance between palace to the city..
This way, Greek wouldn't afraid to attack Persia because the maintenance city cost that could collapse them.. they might went to Massalia and Empurias as well
Historically, there never been capital city too for Greek (Delian League), Phoenician, etc..
Okay.
Thanks for the permission
<Edit>
How about adding a new civic, City State ?
This civic give a civilization no Capital Cities, and so there is no distance between palace to the city..
This way, Greek wouldn't afraid to attack Persia because the maintenance city cost that could collapse them.. they might went to Massalia and Empurias as well
Historically, there never been capital city too for Greek (Delian League), Phoenician, etc..
hoplitejoe
Top fun-poster
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2010
- Messages
- 5,470
Dead civs should be removed from the list at the side.
Qiu
Warlord
Began at the very old visions of RFC, the dynamic civ name changes to "Tributary XXX State" when it is vassalized by an east Asia civ. I guess that idea originated from the Chinese tribute system, which dominated the east Asian international relationships for centuries. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tributary_system) In fact, the civ names was converted to an ancient Chinese style, ex. Gaomian for Cambodia, Wo for Japan, Meng for Mongolia, which could support my deduction.
However, the Chinese tribute system clasped after the Age of Discovery, because the European power began to dominate this area, and brought in the idea of nationalism. I think it is strange to see a chieftain-style "Tributary XXX State" in a nationalism-dominated industrial age. So could some new dynamic civ names for the east Asians be introduced in 1.8?
Generally, I think the Japanese practice could give a considerable example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_East_Asia_Co-Prosperity_Sphere (the part of "The Land Disposal Plan")
"Government-General" or "Government Office" in general ,and historical names for historical ones.
Beside those introduced in Wiki, as far as I know, the historical Japanese puppet state names are "Mengjiang United Autonomous Government" for Japanese vassal Mongolia, "Governor-General of Chōsen" for Japanese vassal Korea, and "Reorganized National Government of China" for Japanese vassal China. Moreover, although the Japanese seems decided to keep the name of Thailand as "Kingdom of Thailand", according to the WIKI. But I think it would be confused with the independent Thailand kingdom. So maybe it could be changed to something like "Co-Prosperous Kingdom of Thailand" . The Khmers and the Indonesians could be the same.
By th way, I think the name of the German vassal China, "China-Nanjing", is inaccurate. "China-Nankin" refers to the Japanese vassal Chinese government in WWII, not the German, and its formal name was "Reorganized National Government of China".
For China, I think the Chinese vassal Mongolia should be "Outer Mongolia". And in nowadays, Tibet and Xinjiang are named "XXX Autonomous Region". Maybe it could be helpful in deciding China-related dymamic civ names.
And, before the age of discovery, the Chinese vasallized Korea should be "Tributary Chaoxian State" rather than "Tributary Korean State" , if the former ways of naming are intended to be kept.
In addition, for the special naming of USSR vassals... I think "Chinese Soviet Republic" could be better than "Soviet China", because it did exist for several years in 1930s and actually was guided by the USSR.
At last, if Japan become a American vassal in modern age, should its name be change to "GHQ" (General Headquarters of Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers", SCAP)?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Commander_of_the_Allied_Powers That is a famous name for the occupation period in Japan (and Douglas MacArthur was thought to be the King, ahaha).
Finally, thank you for reading. Maybe my suggestions are too many, but please, even the simplistic names of "Protectorate of XXX" are better than "Tribute XXX State" in the occasions of modern east Asia, in my opinion.
However, the Chinese tribute system clasped after the Age of Discovery, because the European power began to dominate this area, and brought in the idea of nationalism. I think it is strange to see a chieftain-style "Tributary XXX State" in a nationalism-dominated industrial age. So could some new dynamic civ names for the east Asians be introduced in 1.8?
Generally, I think the Japanese practice could give a considerable example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_East_Asia_Co-Prosperity_Sphere (the part of "The Land Disposal Plan")
"Government-General" or "Government Office" in general ,and historical names for historical ones.
Beside those introduced in Wiki, as far as I know, the historical Japanese puppet state names are "Mengjiang United Autonomous Government" for Japanese vassal Mongolia, "Governor-General of Chōsen" for Japanese vassal Korea, and "Reorganized National Government of China" for Japanese vassal China. Moreover, although the Japanese seems decided to keep the name of Thailand as "Kingdom of Thailand", according to the WIKI. But I think it would be confused with the independent Thailand kingdom. So maybe it could be changed to something like "Co-Prosperous Kingdom of Thailand" . The Khmers and the Indonesians could be the same.
By th way, I think the name of the German vassal China, "China-Nanjing", is inaccurate. "China-Nankin" refers to the Japanese vassal Chinese government in WWII, not the German, and its formal name was "Reorganized National Government of China".
For China, I think the Chinese vassal Mongolia should be "Outer Mongolia". And in nowadays, Tibet and Xinjiang are named "XXX Autonomous Region". Maybe it could be helpful in deciding China-related dymamic civ names.
And, before the age of discovery, the Chinese vasallized Korea should be "Tributary Chaoxian State" rather than "Tributary Korean State" , if the former ways of naming are intended to be kept.
In addition, for the special naming of USSR vassals... I think "Chinese Soviet Republic" could be better than "Soviet China", because it did exist for several years in 1930s and actually was guided by the USSR.
At last, if Japan become a American vassal in modern age, should its name be change to "GHQ" (General Headquarters of Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers", SCAP)?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Commander_of_the_Allied_Powers That is a famous name for the occupation period in Japan (and Douglas MacArthur was thought to be the King, ahaha).
Finally, thank you for reading. Maybe my suggestions are too many, but please, even the simplistic names of "Protectorate of XXX" are better than "Tribute XXX State" in the occasions of modern east Asia, in my opinion.
Tomorrow's Dawn
Heroes Never Die
I agree with the above post for Japan in particular.
But not for China with the exception of the Mongolian suggestion.
There's quite a few political/economic articles & journals floating around that postulate that Beijing is building up a
network of a "modern tributary state" system. While it is for the most part economic,
I think it's undeniable that some of their diplomatic approaches resemble the character
& attitude of their ancient diplomatic past with tributary states.
Basically, I'm conflating:
Ancient/Imperial China's relationship with Tributary States
Modern China's relationship with Developing Nations
But not for China with the exception of the Mongolian suggestion.
There's quite a few political/economic articles & journals floating around that postulate that Beijing is building up a
network of a "modern tributary state" system. While it is for the most part economic,
I think it's undeniable that some of their diplomatic approaches resemble the character
& attitude of their ancient diplomatic past with tributary states.
Basically, I'm conflating:
Ancient/Imperial China's relationship with Tributary States
Modern China's relationship with Developing Nations
Qiu
Warlord
I am not willing to engaged in politics discussions, but the "Outer Mongolia" does be "special" for some radical nationalists. Even recently now the Republic of China government refused to acknowledge its independence. I think the name would make the game more realistic feeling, but if is thought to be insulting or of no interest, please just ignore it.
And I agree something like "modern tributary state" for other vassals, while XXX Autonomous Region for neighbouring civs.
Great post Qiu, thanks for that. I don't know anything about the vassal/puppet government names in eastern Asia so most names there turned out to be pretty formulaic. I'll definitely keep this post in mind when the civ names are overhauled.
However, most of that can't be implemented immediately, due to the fact that currently all east Asian civs share the same vassal names, which can't be split apart that easily. I think it's possible to at least disable the "Tributary" names in the industrial era and turn them into the generic "Protectorate" ones. Everything else wouldn't be worth the effort when I want to completely change the system later on anyway.
However, most of that can't be implemented immediately, due to the fact that currently all east Asian civs share the same vassal names, which can't be split apart that easily. I think it's possible to at least disable the "Tributary" names in the industrial era and turn them into the generic "Protectorate" ones. Everything else wouldn't be worth the effort when I want to completely change the system later on anyway.
Similar threads
