The 65-Civ Mod!
- Thread starter Red Door
- Start date
WerBackIII
Jar of the Rotting Brain
CooL IdeA
Very nice, I will help
Very nice, I will help
WerBackIII
Jar of the Rotting Brain
This is my first visit on this thread!
Progress Report:
I have finished America, Arabian, Aztec, Chinese, English, French, German, and Greek civilization info.
That means I put second leaders in for Arabia, Aztec, and Greece. Arabia's I looked up myself. It's going to be a surprise.
Yaotl, I left Monty1 because theres no point in taking him out and replacing him with Monty2 when they have the same name
That target release date is going back. Probably to sometime in February. This is harder than I thought.
I have finished America, Arabian, Aztec, Chinese, English, French, German, and Greek civilization info.
That means I put second leaders in for Arabia, Aztec, and Greece. Arabia's I looked up myself. It's going to be a surprise.
Yaotl, I left Monty1 because theres no point in taking him out and replacing him with Monty2 when they have the same name
That target release date is going back. Probably to sometime in February. This is harder than I thought.
Any comments/questions?
Carewolf
Gammelt røvhul
If you have Sweden in, then remove Vikings and add Danes/Denmark, which represents the major power in Scandinavia during the Viking age, medievil times and up until the 17th century.
Also consider Norway which was united first and an important settler and explorer even if later dominated by Denmark
Also consider Norway which was united first and an important settler and explorer even if later dominated by Denmark
D. Minky
Warlord
Good god please take Hitler and Osama bin Laden out.
If you must include Hitler, make him a German leader, but Osama bin Laden doesn't belong in the game. Not as a leader anyhow... if there was an aspect of the game that deal with guerrila organizations then maybe I could see him included... or if you were really sick he could be great leader status... but I don't think he comes even close to the recognition that any of the leaders have, even barbarian leaders.
In any case, barbarian civs are meant to represent civilizations that just didn't fit into the game. I wouldn't call al Qaeda a civilization at all. If you plan on adding all these civs to the game, the roll of barbarians should become smaller, not larger.
Also, a lot of the civs should be combined. We're dealing with abstracts here, but there isn't a reason to make separate Norway/Sweden/Denmark if we're not differentiating between Mexico/Aztec, Inca/Peru, Bablyon/Sumer, England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland... some things just need to be abstracted for balance. Certainly all of these civilizations are unique and differed in many ways, but a lot of them have enough similarities that for the sake of game balance, they should be combined.
If you must include Hitler, make him a German leader, but Osama bin Laden doesn't belong in the game. Not as a leader anyhow... if there was an aspect of the game that deal with guerrila organizations then maybe I could see him included... or if you were really sick he could be great leader status... but I don't think he comes even close to the recognition that any of the leaders have, even barbarian leaders.
In any case, barbarian civs are meant to represent civilizations that just didn't fit into the game. I wouldn't call al Qaeda a civilization at all. If you plan on adding all these civs to the game, the roll of barbarians should become smaller, not larger.
Also, a lot of the civs should be combined. We're dealing with abstracts here, but there isn't a reason to make separate Norway/Sweden/Denmark if we're not differentiating between Mexico/Aztec, Inca/Peru, Bablyon/Sumer, England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland... some things just need to be abstracted for balance. Certainly all of these civilizations are unique and differed in many ways, but a lot of them have enough similarities that for the sake of game balance, they should be combined.
ImpureHammer
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2005
- Messages
- 7
"Hmm ,thats a good point. Sweden and Norway could be one kingdom...."
God no! the idea of vikings is far better then Norway united with Sweden imo.
Norway should be united with danes instead should they be united with someone here, but i rather not see that happen either.
Hope u really take this in consideration :§.
ImpureHammer - who is really dissapointed with this idea
God no! the idea of vikings is far better then Norway united with Sweden imo.
Norway should be united with danes instead should they be united with someone here, but i rather not see that happen either.
Hope u really take this in consideration :§.
ImpureHammer - who is really dissapointed with this idea
D. Minky said:
Well you obviously didn't read my post. I said that Osama is the leader of the Barbaians! Hitler is evil enough to be included in there also. Norway/Sweden (combined) and Denmark are different civs. Also, so is Mexico and Aztecs. Peru isn't in. Babylon and Sumer are together and England and Scotland are seperate civs.
Carewolf
Gammelt røvhul
AlCosta15 said:
Actually Norway was united with Denmark for 500 years from 1300 to 1800 (and for several shorter periods before then). In 1812 Denmark lost it to Sweden after the Napolian wars. Immediately after that Norway rebeled and first tried crowning the danish crownprince, but when the England and the other allies intervened, they invented constitutional monarchy as a way to have a swedish king with no actual power in Norway (the power was moved to the democraticly elected parliament), Norway even kept an independt army and refused the Swedish army entry into Norway. A 100 years later Sweden recognized that Norway was actually independent. And election was held for reentry into Denmark, but it lost with something like 25% against 75%.
So yes, you could add Norway under Denmark, but it would be like adding Scotland under England. In recent history the old danish empire has been renamed to the Denmark/Norway, but that is ahistoric.
Similar threads
