Suggestions and Requests

[CaterpillarKing]

For these names to be viable there would have to be a new mechanic. It would allow for things similar to the EU, NAFTA, and the Commonwealth of Independent Nations. Not sure how it would work but it would be cool.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

There is no Russian Commonwealth. There is only the Soviet Union. I do not acknowledge the rebel scum from Gorbachev and beyond as the legitimate government of the Russian people and its socialist brother peoples.

 

[Genghis_Khaiser]

Here are my ideas:
1. Making either Burma or Vietnam one tile fatter, and moving Thailand's or Khmer's spawn one tile away from the other, so Thailand and Cambodia can exist at the same time. I suspect this may compromise Thailand's UHV, though.
2. Was Belgium historically relevant enough to have them spawn in Brussels and Congo?

 

[citis]

2. Was Belgium historically relevant enough to have them spawn in Brussels and Congo?

Gameplay wise it is Congo with a capital in Europe that you must defend to avoid collapse. But why not?

 

[The Diocletian]

Still not enough room on the map.

 

[Shadow Warlord]

Still not enough room on the map.

Any representation of the Belgian Congo i feel should fall to either France or the Netherlands for simplicity's sake.

 

[CaterpillarKing]

On the note of Congo, Portugal is the holder in the game, and I think Congo should be represented by a new leader for the modern age, along with Peru

 

[ales_]

And Greece.

 

[CaterpillarKing]

How often do they survive into the modern era? Regardless they should get one too but aim just curious. It isn't often I think, because of the Romans, Persians, Byzantines, Turks, Austrians, Germans, and stability constraints.

 

[ales_]

It may be reborn.

 

[citis]

They spawn if Turkey is unstable, which should be more often .

And I agree, Alexander isn't a modern day figure head for Greece. The best would be Venizelos, but unfortunately there isn't any appropriate leaderhead in forums (bald old man with monocle).

 

[ales_]

It's not even Alexander, usually it's Pericles.

 

[Civciv5]

I noticed that the Maya sometimes found Chichen Itza, however, this is not the native name of the city. Its native name is Uuc Yabnal or Uuc Habnal, could we change it to that?
Also Niwt-rst would better be named Waset, which it was called most of its history. Also, I think it sounds better. Inbu-Hedj should also become Men-nefer by 1500 BC.
Ur should be called Uru (its Akkadian name) and it was a coastal city once, could it be possible to make the tile east of it a coastal tile, later changing to a land tile, reflecting the shift of the coastline in real life?
Also, could Egypt's city placement be made better? It's really annoying to raze useless cities like Siwa or something. In general, the AI city placement is quite horrible, could this be fixed?
And Leoreth, sorry for last time. (I don't know if you read my apology)

 

[Leoreth]

And Leoreth, sorry for last time. (I don't know if you read my apology)

I don't even remember what you mean, so no apology required I guess.

 

[Civciv5]

I don't even remember what you mean, so no apology required I guess.

Well, you seem to be very busy, so you may have forgotten. It was some unconstructive thing I said, I felt really bad about it.
So what do you think about my suggestions?

 

[Leoreth]

Nah, there's really no reason to feel bad even if I gave a more emphatic reaction. That's usually when I consider the issue over with no hard feelings.

And yeah, the city name suggestions sound reasonable.

 

[Big Heb]

Some ideas for early middle ages Italia.

When playing 600 AD, Venice and Rome nearly always get sacked by Holy Rome. In history, Rome has been sacked post-600, notably by the Byzantines, but Venice was historically independent during the Middle Ages as a Byzantine vassal. I reckon they ought to receive far more initial defensive units, or Holy Rome AI ought to receive fewer offensive units, as Venice falling under Holy Rome so early on is not very historical.

Naturally, the logical fix would be to allow for vassalizing specific independent cities, similar to the Civ V city-state mechanic, but that would mean an independent "civ" for each independent city state, which...probably isn't good for performance. The other option is to make Italy an always-spawn to undo the damage.

Yet another idea is to have Italy spawn in 804 AD, with Venice as its capital, as the Republic of Venice, if Venice had not already been conquered by the Byzantines or the French. Then, if still Venice is still controlled by Italy, have Florence spawn and script-move the capital there.

Also, for history-sake and to fill a huge gaping hole in western Italia, if Italy doesn't spawn, perhaps Genoa should spawn as an independent city in place of Florence.


I also second the idea of Belgium. If there isn't enough room to put Brussels, the role of Belgium should pass to Netherlands. Upon finishing Trading Company, I also suggest that Leopoldstad should be auto-spawned in Congo under Dutch control. For being such a massive city in the modern era, it's weird to not see it represented.

 

[citis]

Analysing the situation with Turkey I found these:

Turkey isn't hit by nationalism as much as it happened historically. Even if a nation respawns, Turkish military reclaims it in a couple of turns. There are some ways that can be countered:

*(AI) Turkey recieves a scripted severe territorial crisis when it enters industrial era. It solves the problem, but who likes scripted events?
*Nationalism increases instability much more. Totalitarianism counters this kind of instability, instead of autocracy.
*Reduce research modifiers after industrial era. They won't become tech leaders, and when other nations respawn they will survive.

The best seems to be:
*Turkey won't adopt autocracy before the industrial severe territorial crisis. It's more historical. It lets nationalism instability work, and prevents stability from wars.

 

[calad]

About civs: why dynasticism is complitely inferior to theocracy? 2exp and double priest vs 2 unit based happiness is not balanced at all.

 

[Fresol]

For cities with non-tolerant non-state religions, Dynasticism is better than Theocracy.

Edit: I shouldn't say "better than", it's more like "not inferior to".