Suggestions and requests

[Andreevski]

Hi Andreevski, I would really like to include a Slavic civ in the Balkans and I agree that historically Bulgaria is the best choice for that. However, the number of civilizations in the game is less of a concern here than creating a viable experience for a new civilization, and I can't see myself pulling that off.

The Balkans have sort of gotten the short end of the stick with Rhye's enlargement of Europe (which is only really an enlargement of Western Europe, since Poland has similar problems). Even removing even more mountains, there just isn't enough space for a proper civilization.

Thanks Leoreth for even considering the proposal. One day maybe... a dream may come true...

 

[Andreevski]

Welcome to the forums !

I agree that it would be nice for Byzantium to face some threat in the west, but don't you think barbarian spawns in the Bulgarian area could be sufficient ?

Well, as long as they are not called Bulgarian Horseman, I am for it A lot of Barbarian attackers were prevented from entering Europe by Bulgaria. It will be sensible to reproduce them somehow - Avar, Hun, Khazar invasions..

I would definitely observe the HRE and Byzantium lose some cities on the Balkans, Ukraine and Romania-Hungary to the Barbarians. Maybe France to the west, Poland to the East and the Arabs to in the Middle East won't choke that much as a consequence.

 

[Leoreth]

They did replaced Chinese, but they replaced Russians and Perians/Iranians too.

That doesn't have anything to do with what I said.

I disagree. Bulgarians were a completely separate recognized Empire on the world map competing with Byzantium. Like French/Spanish, Khmer/Thai, Koreans/Chinese, Dutch/Germans. These civilizations are close neighbors with common past but with separate histories and cultures.

They actually did replace it when the Latins and Seljuks took control over Byzantium. However, Bulgaria remained Bulgaria, defending its own values and interests rather than becoming the 'New Byzantium'.

This is a very strong statement to make given that the Bulgarian Empire has lasted near a Millennia as an independent recognized territory with its own language, culture and goals. It still exists with its own identity of the Bulgarian Republic. You are right that the Balkans/West Ukraine and Karpati shall be presented by a culture, but that is definitely not to be the Byzantine.

I agree with all of these.

Thanks Leoreth for even considering the proposal. One day maybe... a dream may come true...

For an enjoyable Bulgaria experience, I think you are better off playing a mod that focuses only on (medieval) Europe, such as RFCE.

 

[Andreevski]

For an enjoyable Bulgaria experience, I think you are better off playing a mod that focuses only on (medieval) Europe, such as RFCE.

I did play several games of RFCE and generally stick to it and DoC. Stability there is a real pain for the AI to manage. That said, I enjoy the modmod and would definitely recommend to all historical mod players.

 

[merijn_v1]

Well, as long as they are not called Bulgarian Horseman, I am for it A lot of Barbarian attackers were prevented from entering Europe by Bulgaria. It will be sensible to reproduce them somehow - Avar, Hun, Khazar invasions..

That wouldn't be a bad idea at all, I think. DoC already has some "unique" barbarians, like the Farari. Why not having a special Bulgarian one?

In RFCE, the Bulgarian UU is called Konnik. In SoI, the Bulgarian invaders are called Bagatur.

 

[DC123456789]

Don't Bulgarian Horse Archers already spawn in Bulgaria around 700-800 AD?

 

[ales_]

They are just Horse Archers, aren't they?

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

Serbia seems the most logical choice to me.
Bulgaria has it's points, but Serbian history is surely much richer, and they had major importance after the middle-ages, unlike Bulgaria. Survived the Turks longer, 1st & 2nd Serbian Empires, started WW1, and Yugoslavia was essentially centred on Serbia.

It's also situated better mapwise around that empty area, it would be too easy for Bulgaria to expand into Rumania/Ukraine & Serbia. Serbia has had serious conflicts with the Austrians, Byzantines, Turks, Italians & NATO.

But again I'm arguing about something wholly hypothetical.


AI SIDE NOTE

I've found AI Persia performs hugely better if the special AI command in xml is set to ATTACK_CITY rather than just ATTACK. It takes out AI Jerusalum & Babylon immediately after spawning in this case, rather than the usual 10-20 turns.

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

I think the area would do just fine without a Serbian or Bulgarian civilization. Bosnia/Serbia under Holy Roman, Byzantine, Russian, or Independent control pretty much sums up its impact and progression.

Only civilization addition I root for is Kazakhstan, and possible Australia and/or Canada.

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

Someone else mentioned Bulgaria so I chipped in. It's had a lot more impact & progression than Tibet (or Polynesia), anyway.

I really hope you're kidding about the last two.

 

[Leoreth]

It's had a lot more impact & progression than Tibet (or Polynesia), anyway.

Every time I hear this argument I will kill a puppy.

 

[Royal Tenenbaum]

Someone else mentioned Bulgaria so I chipped in. It's had a lot more impact & progression than Tibet (or Polynesia), anyway.

I really hope you're kidding about the last two.

No, I'm not kidding because adding the civilizations would allow something dynamic to happen with two areas as large as continents... I really don't like how easy it is for America to take over Canada, I've said this for years and given a lot of reasons to support it.

 

[mrrandomplayer]

Someone else mentioned Bulgaria so I chipped in. It's had a lot more impact & progression than Tibet (or Polynesia), anyway.

I really hope you're kidding about the last two.

Every time I hear this argument I will kill a puppy.

Leoreth's basic idea (which I mostly support except when it negatively relates to Venice) is that at this point of modding, when there are already so many civilizations, civs should be added because of their playability and fun, possibly taking precedence over historical power. Is that right, Leo?

 

[Leoreth]

That's basically true. But of course the adverse effect on other already existing civilizations as well as the effort required to make them work (which increases if there is conflicts with other civs) should also be taken into account.

Adding civs like Tibet or Congo didn't cost me anything because they were just filling empty space. I think playing as them is fun, if you disagree, you can just not play them or even turn them off.

Stuff like Central Asians or Polynesia would run under similar principles.

Other common proposals like Israel or a Balkan civ (or Venice ) would require their insertion into already crowded areas. That means I don't just have to make them properly fill this area and work, but also adjust all the already existing civilizations in the vicinity. Often to the point where games without this new civ would be very different challenge and performance-wise for their neighbors, which is why I cannot even offer the option of turning them off.

So civ A might be historically more relevant than civ B, but that doesn't automatically imply that A should be included. Maybe the inclusion of A is impossible because of the even more relevant C. But if the inclusion of B is possible and has some merit, then it should be done regardless of the inclusion of the more relevant A.

(This post will not get into the historically arbitrary attribute of "relevance".)

But seeing this kind of argument in such an offhand way mainly annoys me because it always feels like they're trying to rules-lawyer or out-logic me.

 

[mrrandomplayer]

To Venice's defense, it doesn't really hurt any other civs (Venice doesn't spawn if the player is Italy) because the city of Venice is already there in the game, and the fact that Venice never was historically conquered by Germany is better reflected with Venice as its own civ rather than as pushover city for Germany.

 

[Lone Wolf]

It can hurt AI Italy, though. The Italian boot can't carry double. Having Venice alone would be fine (actually, having it alone on the peninsula could be an interesting idea), but including Venice and Italy makes a mess of the peninsula.

 

[Tigranes]

Half of the world (UHV 3) requirement for Iran is a VERY tall order. Iran is very dry and cannot support enough artists to create a city with 20 gran culture in 100 turns. Perhaps UP could be -- capital gets 3/4 of the culture of any captured city (before conversion)? Then captured city will calculate how much culture will stay in that city after Iranian UP deduction. Nader Shah did carry away a lot of culture from Delhi, including famous Peacock Throne.

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

I've won Persia UHV on older builds, but I always used a lot of cheesy tactics. I think Persia could do with some Zoroastrian wonders like Shahnamah.
I edited the different 'Monastery' buildings to have different effects, Islam 2xp, Budhhism +1 happiness, Hindu 1+food, Zorastrianism 10% culture, Confucian 1+ gp ect.

You been to Iran Tigranes?

 

[Tigranes]

No, never! Who is that lady in your avatar, is she Iranian?

Try to win it with current UHV with no modifications. Not even close! How in a world can you milk 20 gran in 100 turns even with cheese? 1 Artist is 3200

 

[NKN]

Whenever you conquer a city, you gain a huge burst of culture. If Baghdad has a wonder or two, it can give you a thousand culture or more. Conquering the rest of the Near East might get you near your goal.