reddishrecue
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,488
I would also like it if they had things from humankind added on to civ 7. Also, the clans could also be hostile if you go in with the wrong unit.
suggestions for civ 7
- Thread starter luca 83
- Start date
Henri Christophe
L'empereur
I like this idea, but I see a problem. Which name should this barbarians cities get? Because if we give names to barbarians, that should be very racist.
Maybe it can have other mechanics, like some civs (when played by AI) don't settle their cities never (but be able to produce units). that should be more intersting to show how nomadic people do it.
For example the Charrua. They can just settle his city in Late game as Montevideo.
They can be called goths. Longobard Franks Vandals. HunsI like this idea, but I see a problem. Which name should this barbarians cities get? Because if we give names to barbarians, that should be very racist.
Maybe it can have other mechanics, like some civs (when played by AI) don't settle their cities never (but be able to produce units). that should be more intersting to show how nomadic people do it.
For example the Charrua. They can just settle his city in Late game as Montevideo.
Henri Christophe
L'empereur
Despite I agree with you theses civilizations are very barbaric. Still an issue use his names.
I still think is better the barbarians don't have names, if they may settle cities, it should be totally random.
I think it will be fine as long as it's similar to the Barbarian Cans mode where they founded random city-states which weren't in the game already.
They were barbarians and then civilized like Angles and Saxons or Slavs. OR . Franks
I have suddenly realized that since civ7 is certainly in production for years, and is probably going to be released next year (imo), it kinda makes little point to discuss revolutionary fundamental changes at this stage... They have conceptualized the most important workings of map/economy/warfare long time ago.
This is true. Though the developers intentionally didn't want to refer to real groups of people in the game as barbaric, so they made up names like "Badger Hill" tribe or "Desert Snake" tribe.
Because of that I don't necessarily expect them to do that in the future.
even in v they did not put the religion then put back in the dlc because requested by the players instead I think it is necessary to discuss, because maybe the developers listen to us
Henri Christophe
L'empereur
Acctually don't make any sense discuss any matter here, because don't have any Fireaxis staff reading our posts.
But we still here discussing because it's funny. At least I like it.
I disagree, I write because I would like to influence the development of the game with other users.
There are like Andrew Johnson [FXS], who lately seems to be the one who is most engaged, and replied to your India ideas.
Anyway the reason we got the Barbarian Clans mode was because they looked at requests from fans that wanted Barbarians to be more dynamic.
Last edited:
Henri Christophe
L'empereur
How this mechanic should work in countries outside Europe?my idea about barbarian civilisations becoming civilisations: all civilisations start as nomads, going forward in time some barbarian tribes encountered in the game: better would be invasions of territory, they can become civilised according to certain steps, not city-states but real civilisations, cities, colonies etc
Because I know all modern European states have their roots in some barbaric civilization.
But how about Brazil? USA? Aztecs? Incas? Mapuche? China? Japan? Korea?
That mechanic is not so easy to draw to them
BuchiTaton
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2019
- Messages
- 1,261
For more interesting and relevant "Barbarians" the first thing is in fact change their name to something without negative connotations like "Nations", based on relocatable one tile Settlements which can exploit adjacent resources and produce units.
Actually most of these nations have some historical city names once urbanized and CIV already use the name of tribes, small and recent settlements for some civs like Cree and Mapuche whose lack any proper city. But the real problem is to ballance the number of Nations and City States.
Mapuche are basically a not urban "barbarian nation".
Japan came from two early cultures the Yayoi (invasors from mainland) and Jomon (kind of "primitive" natives).
Actually most of these nations have some historical city names once urbanized and CIV already use the name of tribes, small and recent settlements for some civs like Cree and Mapuche whose lack any proper city. But the real problem is to ballance the number of Nations and City States.
I think he mean the "minor" non-playable factions.
For older mesoamerican cultures the Aztecs were basically recent Chichimecs (barbarians) from the North.
Mapuche are basically a not urban "barbarian nation".
Japan came from two early cultures the Yayoi (invasors from mainland) and Jomon (kind of "primitive" natives).
Last edited:
BuchiTaton
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2019
- Messages
- 1,261
Thinking about it maybe this could be a good reason to mix City States and Barbarians Clans in one unique concept the Nations, as mutable units linked by their Heritage (culture/ethnicity) which provide a set of unique bonuses (historical/cultural flavor) as part of a more complex population system.
In this system for example Lombards start as one "barbarian" Settlement but later it can turn on a city like say Milan. Any unique Unique Tradition (bonus, unit, building, tech, resource, etc.) Lombards provide will come from being of lombard heritage.
Turn a Settlement into a City could be done by different ways like natural growing and trade with near cities, by conquest and forced urbanization or even when an agressive nation capture a previous city and convert it to their own Heritage.
Also the types of City States and Barbarian Clans could be mixed on a new classification, for example:
- Elder Forerunners: Nations who start already with a city in floodplains, these include early cultures like Elamites, Harappans and Olmecs. Between their traditions are bonus related to early growing like provide free Irrigation and Writing techs, also gives you resources like Maize.
- Horse Lords: They spam in steppe terrain and relocate a lot their settlements, include Scythians, Huns and Comanches. Their traditions provide free Wheel and Stirrup techs, or uniques like Falconry and Horse resource.
- Taiga Dwellers: Of course start with settlements in taiga terrain, include ones like Ugrians, Tungus and Cree. In this case traditions gives you uniques like Skiing, Shamanism, and the Reindeer resource that help a lot to grow in this difficult biome.
In this system for example Lombards start as one "barbarian" Settlement but later it can turn on a city like say Milan. Any unique Unique Tradition (bonus, unit, building, tech, resource, etc.) Lombards provide will come from being of lombard heritage.
Turn a Settlement into a City could be done by different ways like natural growing and trade with near cities, by conquest and forced urbanization or even when an agressive nation capture a previous city and convert it to their own Heritage.
Also the types of City States and Barbarian Clans could be mixed on a new classification, for example:
- Elder Forerunners: Nations who start already with a city in floodplains, these include early cultures like Elamites, Harappans and Olmecs. Between their traditions are bonus related to early growing like provide free Irrigation and Writing techs, also gives you resources like Maize.
- Horse Lords: They spam in steppe terrain and relocate a lot their settlements, include Scythians, Huns and Comanches. Their traditions provide free Wheel and Stirrup techs, or uniques like Falconry and Horse resource.
- Taiga Dwellers: Of course start with settlements in taiga terrain, include ones like Ugrians, Tungus and Cree. In this case traditions gives you uniques like Skiing, Shamanism, and the Reindeer resource that help a lot to grow in this difficult biome.
the hopi culture for example, the pueblo culture of lower california, the guarani, the missisipi culture es, the caribe in and before that the antilles
Last edited:
reddishrecue
Deity
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2009
- Messages
- 6,488
If Barbarians, why not bring back the sudden random appearance of Barbarians in a coast? For example, in civ 1 there would be barbarians that would suddenly appear and land near a city and alarm the citizens with a barbarian leader with them. This could be another type of barbarian than the traditional barbarian that has evolved through civilization during the recent games in civ 4, 5 or 6. The ideal landing barbarian unit will have a warrior and a slinger or whichever unit that's suitable for the era and then the leader that could hide behind the barbarian units. When you finally defeat the barbarians, the leader would try to run away and can run away since its lightly armed and doesn't attack, weaker than a scout and disappears and escapes. However, if your units do capture the barbarian leader before it disappears, you get paid ransom 100 gold maybe more than the usual encampment but it would be a challenge to chase after if you include the traditional barbarian that has the encampment around sending out barbarians at you. Sort of like a raging barbarians with the combination of the 2 barbarian types.
Henri Christophe
L'empereur
What are you trying to say? Try to explain it better.the hopi culture for example, the pueblo culture of lower california, the guarani, the missisipi culture es, the caribe in and before that the antilles
What I understood is, you think theses civilizations are barbarians. (what is a bit racist, because barbarians have a bad conotation).
But let's move on. Let's speak the about the Guarani.
When they settle a city, it should be Assunción? (from Paraguay) or it can be some Guarani settlement of Jesuitic period? (as San Miguel).
SupremacyKing2
Deity
Honestly, civ should get rid of the term "barbarian" completely. My understanding is that it was a pejorative term that the Romans used to describe anyone that was not part of the Roman civilization. I don't think the Gauls considered themselves barbarians.
Instead the game should just have different tribes at the start of the game that each have their own proper name. And these tribes could rise to become full fledged civs or not. So you might encounter a tribe that is still "primitive" or another tribe that has become a city-state. You might encounter a tribe that is aggressive or a tribe that just wants to trade or be left alone.
Instead the game should just have different tribes at the start of the game that each have their own proper name. And these tribes could rise to become full fledged civs or not. So you might encounter a tribe that is still "primitive" or another tribe that has become a city-state. You might encounter a tribe that is aggressive or a tribe that just wants to trade or be left alone.
