Suggestions and Requests
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
At least research and findings suggest that Dravidian people (IVC) and Tamil people is somehow related. Your comparison of IVC and Mughal, in the other hand.... you do know that Mughal people descended from Afghanistan + Mongol something right? They definitely look differently than the Harappans.
mrrandomplayer
Hopeless Situation Warrior
I think using a Harappa slot for a Maratha civ later in the 1600s would do a lot to make 1600s and 17000s India more interesting (and accurate).
Tomorrow's Dawn
Heroes Never Die
Thanks, Ben.
Yeah, the other important point about making IVC the first iteration of Tamils is that they'll suffer from having no cities in their core, and collapse quicker.
If we make them the first iteration of the Mughals, guess what? The IVC is going to be around for a long time.
Yeah, the other important point about making IVC the first iteration of Tamils is that they'll suffer from having no cities in their core, and collapse quicker.
If we make them the first iteration of the Mughals, guess what? The IVC is going to be around for a long time.
What's the difference to using India's slot?
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,411
I think this map can be used to support TD's idea.
Somebody was living in India when Aryans came. Civilization may have collapse earlier, but some people still been around. Plus we can use some Aryan Barbarians, right before the Aryan India spawns, in case some IVC still around.
mrrandomplayer
Hopeless Situation Warrior
India's slot could be used for modern India. Harappa's slot would never be used after it dies.
Like Mayas are related to Colombians.
IVC and Tamils are civs that belong in different areas and eras. They aren't related. If IVC colonised Tamil, then their relation is similar between England and USA.
IVC and Mughals can at least share the same core. Moreover if IVC is alive at 300BC then it would be weird to see Tamil not spawn but Mughals spawn at 1200AD.
Why can't it be used for both incarnations? It's not like they're supposed to coexist.
That the Marathas are hard to implement is a separate and much more important problem, however.
From the theory of similarity between Harappan people to modern Tamil people; if and only if IVC can survive past 300BC...... why would they migrate to southern India and become Tamil?
Actually I think the theme "destruction of homeland that lead to mass migration" is an interesting one. There has been a lot of civilization whose "golden era" is not where the civilization's origin. Thai are from southern China, Turks are from central Asia, etc. I wonder can it be implemented in-game.
Lone Wolf
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 9,908
Implementing Marathas would, probably, require enlarging the peninsula.
You can, of course, limit the trading companies to Calcutta and Cochin, leaving Bombay and Madras alone, but I doubt even this would work, considering the size and resource disparity between the Mughal and the Maratha lands.
You can, of course, limit the trading companies to Calcutta and Cochin, leaving Bombay and Madras alone, but I doubt even this would work, considering the size and resource disparity between the Mughal and the Maratha lands.
Tomorrow's Dawn
Heroes Never Die
citis, we WANT IVC to collapse on purpose.
If you make them the first instance of Mughals, they won't collapse because that's their core.
We have both a gameplay and a historicity justification for making them the first spawn for Tamils.
The UHV will have to finish before 1300BC and there should be something that block the IVC to settle Tamil core. We could also use the drying of the Sarasvati river to help simulate their collapse.
Probably this is how I thought the IVC would like at their peak:
Probably this is how I thought the IVC would like at their peak:
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,411
They may end up founding Hinduism before collapse! 
I offer very sadistic mechanics to prevent them from that.
1. Spawn Indy Varanasi sometimes early, before Paragon AI can realistically research Polytheism
2. Discovering Polytheism for IVC founds Hinduism in Varanasi (not in IVC cities as usual) AND triggers barbarian Aryan next to cities.
3. Same Aryans appear when Hinduism gets founded regular way we have now.
Those 3 Plots change to Marshes later on like we have them on 3000BC map currently.
The real question is -- what UHVs can you accomplish in 36 turns?
I offer very sadistic mechanics to prevent them from that.
1. Spawn Indy Varanasi sometimes early, before Paragon AI can realistically research Polytheism
2. Discovering Polytheism for IVC founds Hinduism in Varanasi (not in IVC cities as usual) AND triggers barbarian Aryan next to cities.
3. Same Aryans appear when Hinduism gets founded regular way we have now.
Those 3 Plots change to Marshes later on like we have them on 3000BC map currently.
The real question is -- what UHVs can you accomplish in 36 turns?
Believe me, this historicity justification is bad. Why? Because they are in different areas and eras. It is like saying that USA and England is the same civ, or that the celts of Haalstat are the same with Irish. I think the justification (like all such justifications) is part of an ethnogenesis process and not part of history.
IMO if two states share the same area in different eras they deserve to share the same player slot.
But I apart from that I agree adding one more civ.
Tomorrow's Dawn
Heroes Never Die
They may end up founding Hinduism before collapse!
I offer very sadistic mechanics to prevent them from that.
1. Spawn Indy Varanasi sometimes early, before Paragon AI can realistically research Polytheism
2. Discovering Polytheism for IVC founds Hinduism in Varanasi (not in IVC cities as usual) AND triggers barbarian Aryan next to cities.
3. Same Aryans appear when Hinduism gets founded regular way we have now.
Those 3 Plots change to Marshes later on like we have them on 3000BC map currently.
The real question is -- what UHVs can you accomplish in 36 turns?
I didn't intend for the IVC to be playable when I suggested the solution for their existence. It's really just that: A solution for their inclusion.
Which I know is a shame. They are indelible to world history, yet we know so little about them and their struggles and drama that it would be immensely difficult to design gameplay for them.
You're going to hate what I'm about to say, lol.
I firmly state that before the 19th Century, I would wholeheartedly consider America to be English in civilization, and the Celts of Ireland as a continuation and evolution of the Celts of Halstatt.
If we used your PoV for the game, we would have too many "civs", which are really just different points in time of development for different peoples. It's pointless, bloating, and imo a narrow way to look at history.
I take the view of contiguous history, which I understand is anathema to many people here.
But it's infinitely more helpful, because I can rationalize why there is only one Persia instead of a dozen "Achaemenid", "Sassanid", "Parthian"
air quote civilizations air quote or one China instead of "Han", "Tang", "Ming" air quote civilization air quote.
I believe you are misunderstanding me as well.
My suggestion for the IVC is not intending to "add" a new civ.
I am not suggesting any new UUs, UPs or UBs. There's enough bloat in the game as is.
And if we make IVC the first spawn of the Tamils, without any special bonuses like the UUs, UPs or UBs, they will collapse as intended.
The human will still spawn at the same time the Tamils do currently, if they are starting a Tamils game.
However, the very first spawn of the Tamils will be IVC; they will collapse and rebirth in southern India.
Tigranes
Armenian
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 10,411
citis, someone was living in India before Aryans right? It is very reasonably to assume that people speaking Dravidian languages were all around the subcontinent, after migration/conquest of Aryans these people got pushed further and further south. It is also reasonable to assume that Dravidian people had a link with IVC people. Did you see wikipedia map I posted ? What else do you need? Some people still are speaking dravidian language in the very core of IVC, as an isolated island. Think about people not about place they live.
Why can't we depict them with 2 Indy cities than? Which will be razed by barbs the moment Hinduism gets spawn, with Marshes replacing Flood plains. The only justification for stand alone civ would be a new Babylonian UHV goal -- establish a trade with Harrapa before they collapse. Will force human player to discover sailing and scout south Persian coastline.
That would be disadvantageous for Human if they want to play as Harappa not for UHV - maybe Dom or Religious. Imagine the hordes of scripted Aryan invasions or maybe terrain changes. It'll very annoying if you try to play past the supposed collapsed date for other reason than UHV.
I don't argue against connection between IVC and Tamils.
Well, in DoC England, USA and recently Canada are different civs. What you miss here is that "civ" is technical term of DoC and in fact it is equivalent to "state" and strongly tied to a certain area (and era). A DoC civ is different than what the lexicon says. That's why China represents Han, tang, Ming and others, they are tied to the same area. That's why Persia/Iran represents Achaemenids, Sassanids, (well it doesn't in case of Parthians but is should), they are tied to the same area.
But IVC and Tamils aren't tied to the same area. Connecting IVC and Mughals has a meaning, they are tied to the same area in different timeframes. We don't want Mughals to spawn on IVC (especially if he/she is human), do we?
Connecting IVC and Tamils means no Chola Empire if IVC is still alive. We don't want that. Chola empire (or whatever the name would be) could rise, even if they spoke Chinese and were zoroastrian.
That's why I would like to see Italians as a roman rebirth and byzantines a greek rebirth. IMO mutual exclusion means the same player slot. And from what I know, we run out of player slots.
Similar threads
