• Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .

Suggestions for Dynamic Names

Also, I found something while looking around through your code:
def isDemocratic(self, iPlayer):
pPlayer = gc.getPlayer(iPlayer)
iCivic0 = pPlayer.getCivics(0)
iCivic1 = pPlayer.getCivics(1)

if iCivic0 == con.iRepublic:
return True
if iCivic0 == con.iAutocracy and (iCivic1 == con.iRepresentation or iCivic1 == con.iUniversalSuffrage):
return True

return False

So if you are running Autocracy but you have representation or Universal suffrage, you're a democracy? This doesn't seem quite right to me...
 
Most "democratic" names are better described as Republican, and many autocratic regimes have still styled themselves Republics.
 
Anybody else finds Rhomanian republic weird(Byzantium when republic)? I think something like New Roman republic would be much more cooler, as it would represent the return of democracy to Roman empire.

Kind of a delayed answer here, but since (as far as I recall) I'm the one who suggested it, I figured I'd explain it. 'Rhomanian' simply means Roman, and is the adjective the Byzantines applied to themselves historically (Rhomioi if you want to get particular). 'New Roman Republic' isn't a bad name, but I think the current name suits it better.
 
Catholic/Protestant/Orthodox Dynasticism Egypt: Koptic Kingdom (of Egypt).
 
Oh, only just saw this thread. I posted my thought for some England names in the suggestions thread a couple of weeks ago, are they worth it?
 
Catholic/Protestant/Orthodox Dynasticism Egypt: Koptic Kingdom (of Egypt).

I think Coptic should only refer to an Orthodox Egypt. See history...
 
There are catholic Copts too.
 
A Catholic dynastic Phoenician civ with a capital in Lebanon should be Maronite Kingdom and Catholic dynastic Phoenician civ with a capital in Syria should be Melkite Kingdom
 
City States represents literally independent cities, not any loose political association of any kind.

Yes, city states generally don't influence your name unless you have a historical precedent for actually running the civic.

In that case:

==China with City States==
Ancient: Spring and Autumn States
Classic: The Three Kingdoms
Medieval: Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms

==Japan with City States==
Sengoku Japan

==India with City States==
The Princely States

==Russia with City States==
Rus' States
 
In that case:

==China with City States==
Ancient: Spring and Autumn States
Classic: The Three Kingdoms
Medieval: Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms

==Japan with City States==
Sengoku Japan

==India with City States==
The Princely States

==Russia with City States==
Rus' States

Should be Warring States actually.
Sengoku is just the name of the period if I'm not mistaken.
 
Except how the city states civic works, it is more like a league of cities (you don't go around destroying your own units). In that case, it could be capital dependent -- if your capital is Kyoto, it could be the Kyoto League or Kyoto Alliance.
 
Except how the city states civic works, it is more like a league of cities (you don't go around destroying your own units). In that case, it could be capital dependent -- if your capital is Kyoto, it could be the Kyoto League or Kyoto Alliance.

I think it should be capital dependent if the capital is the only city. However, when there are multiple cities, city states counts all the cities your culture engulfs, thus giving it a different name than 'Kyoto League', which I am sure Edo would not agree with. :nope:
 
If I remember correctly, throughout Japanese history, especially in the Kamakura era from what I recall, despite having a centralized government and singular capital, oftentimes samurai and different clans would directly war against each other for favor of the emperor. I think that this personifies city-states best for Japan.
 
Top Bottom