Suggestions and Requests
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
phoenix_sprite
King
East Africa feels a bit... empty. I'd love to see either a Swahili kingdom, a Zanzibari sultanate, a representation of Oman's stake in East Africa, or even Madagascar as a civilization proper. Some other suggestions to go with this: were you to make either Swahili, Zanzibar or Oman, you could include them in a Kongo-styled takeover by Portugal. Madagascar could succumb to France.
Ani Taneen
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2015
- Messages
- 278
One other thing (that would probably make people like Imp. Knoedal happy) would be to make ALL New World civs conditional, but to certain degrees. "influential" post-colonial nations like America, India, Brazil, etc. would definitely be a priority and so even if a player is stable, these nations will be born. Other, smaller colonial nations like Peru, Argentina, Canada (maybe), a proposed South Africa, etc. would only spawn when the player is unstable. That way, bigger world powers are still represented to a degree but we could have a cool butterfly effect for our games
I feel that for this to work we would need a system where some stability decisions matter more in one place than another. For example, when a civ discovers democracy, all new world cities get hit with a negative stability for state religion, monarchy, and mercantilism. This represents the fact that after america was founded Spain lost it's colonies in a one-two punch of democratic demands of the Criollo class and the capitulation to Napoleons France.
I concur with the opinions of the above post greatly, but the quoted one is top of my list
The only one I could justify of the top of my head is a Khazak khanate. Mongolia would have to deal with both Iran and Khazaks. Add maybe a Ming respawn. They collapsed in 1847, so the 1700 campaign would start with them there.
I know there is much wish for a civ for that region, the problem is the history doesn't allow for many choices. There is the Scythians, who are not a unified nation by any stretch of the imagination (though your imagination maybe more flexible than mine).
The actual candidates then are:
The Kushan Empire (1st Century B.C.E. - 4th Century C.E.)
UHV
1) The Silk Road: Establish open borders with China, Rome, and Ethiopia
2) Multicultural: Build a Stupa, Mandir, and Holy Fire
3) Winter Palace: Build the Qila Mubarak in India
UU: Look here. Their army had a mix of all things, though they are noted as having both Cataphracts and Tower elephants. I say a cataphract replacement to the horse archer named "Yabgu Guard"
UB: instead of a building replacement, how about a special wonder? The Qila Mubarak, it acts as a second palace.
The other candidates are all post mongol, and extremely short lived. The two best are the Bukhara (Khanate from 1500 to 1785, Emirate from 1786 to 1920). And the Kazakh (1456–1847)
adhiraj.bose
Deity
On that note a useful reference could be the Tocharian civ in RFCA.
caketastydelish
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2008
- Messages
- 9,509
4 civs to add:
1) Zulu. Because we need more Africa civs anyway. Would be fun to warmonger Africa before the Europeans come and ruin everything. Perhaps invading all (or most) of Africa could be a part of Zulu's UHV.
2) Huns. Yes I know, they didn't found cities. So what? Just start them off with a massive army and don't give them any settlers. Perhaps even code it in to where they aren't allowed to build any settlers (and maybe even workers). Playing as the Huns would be fun alternative experience. Would be interesting how western/eastern Rome holds out (if they do) each game. Alternatively you could just make a "germanic tribes" civ which would basically include Huns, celts, visigoths, goths, lombards, Franks, etc. In other words, all of the barbarians Rome was at war with.
2) Venice. Because it would be interesting if you make them similar to how they function in Civ V (start off with just Venice, can't found cities, get a big trade bonus).
3) Israel. The one city challenge would probably also apply here, only they would presumably get some sort of a religious bonus with a religious historical victory, whereas Venice would obviously get an economic one. Assyria, Babylon, Greece, Rome, Persia, Egypt would all be competing to invade Israel. I'm guessing in the majority of the games Israel they would indeed get invaded, although that's historically accurate anyway. Perhaps they can get some sort of religious bonus exclusive to them that makes military units better while fortifying Jerusalem. Just so they don't get predictably slaughtered every single game (although probably still a good percentage of the time).
4) Assyria. Because if you're going to add Israel into the game, might as well add Assyria to. Siege towers are fun! Although I'm thinking they would easily collapse (especially when played by the AI). They would obviously be a warmonger civ. Perhaps their UHV would be 1) capture Jerusalem (if Jerusalem gets buffed with better city defense it would actually be halfway challenging) 2) wipe out Babylon 3) something else. (a lot of options)
And one thing about Israel: I don't want to get political about (some people will either love playing as Israel or hate them just because of how polarizing the country is with current events) so by Israel I mean ancient Israel. Not the modern version. I suppose you could have them respawn in the 1940's although I don't particularly see the point... it would be impossible for them to win their religious historical victory by then and if they respawn while only getting one city, they will easily be crushed by their neighbors as soon as they spawn. Not unless you want to automatically make USA/ European civs allied/defense pack with them. I suppose that in itself would make the likelyhood of war go up between middle eastern civs and western civs. Although that's a lot of trouble for something that wouldn't necessarily make gameplay more enjoyable.
tl;dr: make ancient israel as a playable civ in the game but don't make them respawn any time later than the classical era. If somebody wipes them out middle ages or later, they are gone for good. Ditto for Venus.
Out of all my suggestions I like Israel, Venice and Huns the most because they would be the most unique in the game compared to what's already there. I'm a believer in quality over quantity. Canada for instance is just plain silly. Even if they DO end up winning a historical victory I would just roll my eyes. Knowing that Canada "won" even though they wouldn't be remotely near an important civ on the stage of world affairs. I would also say just have one "India" civ instead of so many.
1) Zulu. Because we need more Africa civs anyway. Would be fun to warmonger Africa before the Europeans come and ruin everything. Perhaps invading all (or most) of Africa could be a part of Zulu's UHV.
2) Huns. Yes I know, they didn't found cities. So what? Just start them off with a massive army and don't give them any settlers. Perhaps even code it in to where they aren't allowed to build any settlers (and maybe even workers). Playing as the Huns would be fun alternative experience. Would be interesting how western/eastern Rome holds out (if they do) each game. Alternatively you could just make a "germanic tribes" civ which would basically include Huns, celts, visigoths, goths, lombards, Franks, etc. In other words, all of the barbarians Rome was at war with.
2) Venice. Because it would be interesting if you make them similar to how they function in Civ V (start off with just Venice, can't found cities, get a big trade bonus).
3) Israel. The one city challenge would probably also apply here, only they would presumably get some sort of a religious bonus with a religious historical victory, whereas Venice would obviously get an economic one. Assyria, Babylon, Greece, Rome, Persia, Egypt would all be competing to invade Israel. I'm guessing in the majority of the games Israel they would indeed get invaded, although that's historically accurate anyway. Perhaps they can get some sort of religious bonus exclusive to them that makes military units better while fortifying Jerusalem. Just so they don't get predictably slaughtered every single game (although probably still a good percentage of the time).
4) Assyria. Because if you're going to add Israel into the game, might as well add Assyria to. Siege towers are fun! Although I'm thinking they would easily collapse (especially when played by the AI). They would obviously be a warmonger civ. Perhaps their UHV would be 1) capture Jerusalem (if Jerusalem gets buffed with better city defense it would actually be halfway challenging) 2) wipe out Babylon 3) something else. (a lot of options)
And one thing about Israel: I don't want to get political about (some people will either love playing as Israel or hate them just because of how polarizing the country is with current events) so by Israel I mean ancient Israel. Not the modern version. I suppose you could have them respawn in the 1940's although I don't particularly see the point... it would be impossible for them to win their religious historical victory by then and if they respawn while only getting one city, they will easily be crushed by their neighbors as soon as they spawn. Not unless you want to automatically make USA/ European civs allied/defense pack with them. I suppose that in itself would make the likelyhood of war go up between middle eastern civs and western civs. Although that's a lot of trouble for something that wouldn't necessarily make gameplay more enjoyable.
tl;dr: make ancient israel as a playable civ in the game but don't make them respawn any time later than the classical era. If somebody wipes them out middle ages or later, they are gone for good. Ditto for Venus.
Out of all my suggestions I like Israel, Venice and Huns the most because they would be the most unique in the game compared to what's already there. I'm a believer in quality over quantity. Canada for instance is just plain silly. Even if they DO end up winning a historical victory I would just roll my eyes. Knowing that Canada "won" even though they wouldn't be remotely near an important civ on the stage of world affairs. I would also say just have one "India" civ instead of so many.
You're talking about Canada not being important in terms of world affairs in the same post where you suggest ancient Israel?
I'm actually interested in all of these civs as a concept though (except Venice, that's just silly). They would all require some sort of unique approach to the game.
I'm actually interested in all of these civs as a concept though (except Venice, that's just silly). They would all require some sort of unique approach to the game.
ales_
Heir
And don't forget about History Rewritten. From what was proposed here, there's Kushan, Zulu, Israel and Assyria.
merijn_v1
Black Belt
The Huns would be quite similar to my barbarian modcomp.
DC123456789
Deity
I feel that for this to work we would need a system where some stability decisions matter more in one place than another. For example, when a civ discovers democracy, all new world cities get hit with a negative stability for state religion, monarchy, and mercantilism. This represents the fact that after america was founded Spain lost it's colonies in a one-two punch of democratic demands of the Criollo class and the capitulation to Napoleons France.
I concur with the opinions of the above post greatly, but the quoted one is top of my list
The only one I could justify of the top of my head is a Khazak khanate. Mongolia would have to deal with both Iran and Khazaks. Add maybe a Ming respawn. They collapsed in 1847, so the 1700 campaign would start with them there.
I know there is much wish for a civ for that region, the problem is the history doesn't allow for many choices. There is the Scythians, who are not a unified nation by any stretch of the imagination (though your imagination maybe more flexible than mine).
The actual candidates then are:
The Kushan Empire (1st Century B.C.E. - 4th Century C.E.)
UHV
1) The Silk Road: Establish open borders with China, Rome, and Ethiopia
2) Multicultural: Build a Stupa, Mandir, and Holy Fire
3) Winter Palace: Build the Qila Mubarak in India
UU: Look here. Their army had a mix of all things, though they are noted as having both Cataphracts and Tower elephants. I say a cataphract replacement to the horse archer named "Yabgu Guard"
UB: instead of a building replacement, how about a special wonder? The Qila Mubarak, it acts as a second palace.
The other candidates are all post mongol, and extremely short lived. The two best are the Bukhara (Khanate from 1500 to 1785, Emirate from 1786 to 1920). And the Kazakh (14561847)
A unified Turkic civilization, to represent everything from the Gokturks and Uyghurs to the Shaybanids, Kazakhs, and the modern Central Asian states.
A Tocharian->Kushan civilization would be interesting as well though.
adhiraj.bose
Deity
Actually considering such a scheme, it would make the Ottoman's spawn and the Indo-Islamic civ's spawn conditional on this civ conquering the relevant areas and spreading islam there.
Though if you ask me, the actual start of an Indo-islamic civilization should begin with the conquest of Sindh and the conversion of the local rajputs to islam creating the very first musilm state in the Indian sub-continent. AI turks should be coded to invade these regions in force with an event similar to what there is for the Greeks and Romans. ( and the Romans never attacked Persepolis. Its stupid to make them do that in the game )
Though if you ask me, the actual start of an Indo-islamic civilization should begin with the conquest of Sindh and the conversion of the local rajputs to islam creating the very first musilm state in the Indian sub-continent. AI turks should be coded to invade these regions in force with an event similar to what there is for the Greeks and Romans. ( and the Romans never attacked Persepolis. Its stupid to make them do that in the game )
caketastydelish
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2008
- Messages
- 9,509
From a religious standpoint, ancient Israel is indeed important. At least they have that going for them...
Imperator Knoedel
Simperator Knoedel
And don't forget that modern Israel has all western nation as vassals and the Jews are really ruling the world behind the scenes.
Imperator Knoedel
Simperator Knoedel
And yet we have neither in this mod...
Big Heb
Warlord
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2008
- Messages
- 266
Very minor point, but in the 1700 AD scenario, the location of "Ciudad de Guatemala" should be 2W of its current position. I recommend either renaming the current city to either "Managua" (Nicaragua) or "San Jose" (Costa Rica). Or move Ciudad de Guatemala to its real position, which leaves more space for eventual settlement of either Costa Rica or Panama.
The discussion was obviously under the assumption that Judaism has been readded.
Make a proposal in WB and I will consider it
caketastydelish
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2008
- Messages
- 9,509
And don't forget that modern Israel has all western nation as vassals and the Jews are really ruling the world behind the scenes.
More seriously I did mention you could have modern Israel have defense pacts signed with western civs in the mod. Although in that case it should also be coded in to where Israel is not allowed to declare war on anyone. Because if they did, that would be extremely annoying to western civs.
But I don't see the point of adding modern Israel in the game because it would essentially be a one city civ, only without the religious importance it had in the ancient era. Sounds boring to me, even Canada is better than that.
Ancient Israel, different story.
Similar threads
