No, it's not.
Suggestions and Requests
- Thread starter Leoreth
- Start date
Then why is there Byzantium? Why is there Prussia? Do you believe USA and Canada are different civs than England or Argentina and Colombia are different than Spain?
I'm speaking about any time. Are you a historian? Have you any definition of the word "civilisation"?
EDIT: If it depends on time, then we speak about states.
EDIT2: Don't stick to plurality. Even if a DoC civ represents many states, it works like a single state, i.e. there is one leader, one capital, one central authority controlling the army, diplomacy etc...
You're just shifting the goal posts of your argument.
And seriously, you're asking me if I'm a historian? Are you?
You're making assertions about what the mod is (again) and then I'm the one who has to justify when I state that they are wrong? It's my mod, when I say you're wrong about it there's not much of an argument left.
Have you paid attention to certain dynamic names? Or hell, civics?
And seriously, you're asking me if I'm a historian? Are you?
You're making assertions about what the mod is (again) and then I'm the one who has to justify when I state that they are wrong? It's my mod, when I say you're wrong about it there's not much of an argument left.
Have you paid attention to certain dynamic names? Or hell, civics?
I'm not a historian. I need you to give the definition of civilisation, so that I can prove that two DoC civs are the same or not. You are the maker of the mod, so you decide.
A DoC civ is de facto a state. There is capital, one leader, central authority etc. This is how all the civilisation series work and you can't change it, (or if you can you are welcome). However, what it represents is a different story. For example:
Italian Maritime Republics: it represents medieval italian city states
However, the player pays maintainance cost from Firenze, he/she controlls production and army of all cities, there is one leader, single diplomacy (if France is at war with Venezia is at war with Firenze too). In other words it is defacto one state. What assertion did I make here?
I already have decided, your proofs are unnecessary.
Regarding CNM of Shenyang:
#Background
The name "Simiyan hoton" is only used since c1625 AD when Nurhaci, a Manchu leader conquer this city from the Chinese. In 1634AD, the Manchus renamed "Simiyan hoton" into "Mukden".
The city was originally founded in 300BC (as correctly presented now in Barbs.py) by Qin Kai, a Yan state general with the name 候城 (Houcheng) that means Hou City. Later era, Houcheng become known as Shenzhou then Shenyang.
#Suggestions/Proposals
1. Rename "Simiyan hoton" in Barbs.py to Houcheng.
2. Houcheng become Shenyang when owned by China.
(Shenzhou is too complicated to be added unless you want to bring Jin/Liao in.)
3. I don't remember whether Shenyang is indie at 1700AD... if so, it shall be called Mukden.
4. Mukden captured by China 1700AD should be called Fengtian
5. Fengtian become Shenyang again if China is at Modern Era.
[ignore the 4 and 5 if that's too much]
Thanks ^^ (that's just some little things that irk me). The references I got from Wiki is written in Chinese tho. I tried to find other sources but isn't maximal.
#Background
The name "Simiyan hoton" is only used since c1625 AD when Nurhaci, a Manchu leader conquer this city from the Chinese. In 1634AD, the Manchus renamed "Simiyan hoton" into "Mukden".
The city was originally founded in 300BC (as correctly presented now in Barbs.py) by Qin Kai, a Yan state general with the name 候城 (Houcheng) that means Hou City. Later era, Houcheng become known as Shenzhou then Shenyang.
#Suggestions/Proposals
1. Rename "Simiyan hoton" in Barbs.py to Houcheng.
2. Houcheng become Shenyang when owned by China.
(Shenzhou is too complicated to be added unless you want to bring Jin/Liao in.)
3. I don't remember whether Shenyang is indie at 1700AD... if so, it shall be called Mukden.
4. Mukden captured by China 1700AD should be called Fengtian
5. Fengtian become Shenyang again if China is at Modern Era.
[ignore the 4 and 5 if that's too much]
Thanks ^^ (that's just some little things that irk me). The references I got from Wiki is written in Chinese tho. I tried to find other sources but isn't maximal.
I'm not sure how much turn-time AI to AI map trading is taking up but I had an idea to replace it:
disable map trading
when you discover printing press, you automatically share your map with all civs you have open borders with, as long as that civ has alphabet (or paper or some other tech)
when you discover mass media you automatically share your map with everyone you have contact with
disable map trading
when you discover printing press, you automatically share your map with all civs you have open borders with, as long as that civ has alphabet (or paper or some other tech)
when you discover mass media you automatically share your map with everyone you have contact with
Tomorrow's Dawn
Heroes Never Die
I care about circumnavigation.
For any pre-1400 civ, missing it is an outcome worse than game over itself to me.
Chep
Emperor
circumnavigation is indeed something I care about (unless I play the mongols, ottomans or someone like them), the +1 to workboats alone makes it worthwhile. 3-move-workboats can get you access to sea resources a turn earlier in most cases.
Similar threads
