[C3C] The Final (Replacement) Civ for Epic Mod?

[SayHayKid]

Instead of necroing one of the 20-year-old threads on the options for alternative (aka replacement) Civs, I figured it best to create a new thread. I was getting ready to add flavor units to the mod I have been working on, but before I started that arduous task I needed to finalize the final Civ. As we all know, Europe is very well represented while sub-Saharan Africa is highly neglected. Plus, there are a couple of Civs, added via Conquests, that double up other very similar Civs.

So far I plan to replace:

• Sumeria (Babylon covers the Mesopatamians)
• Hittites (Crowded area and more deserving Civs in the region)
• Byzantine (Greece and Roman have them covered)
• Celts (England becomes Britain)
• Portugal (Western Europe is over-represented and they are the least "iconic")

The additions:

• Mali
• Ethiopia
• Khmer
• Polynesia

That leaves one spot. Civs that I have considered: Nubia, Siam, Brazil, and Poland. Nubia was my initial choice. They rivaled Egypt in power for a time, even ruling Egypt for a stretch and building their own versions of the Great Pyramids. However, the region is pretty crowded including Ethiopia. Not sure if Siam and Khmer both make sense, I went with Khmer to represent the region. If I take Portugal, Brazil could pseudo-represent them in addition to adding a large "modern" Civ in an under-represented region. But .... what major contributions have they made? What would they have as a UU? Poland? I have seen in other mods, While, Western Europe is well-represented, it is wide open between Western Europe and Russia. They were strong for a century or so in the late Middle Ages and have an iconic UU. But otherwise ...

Thoughts? Any other suggestions? The mod is designed for a random map, but I plan on adding a World Map option in the future. I am also debating on moving America to the European group. While geographically they are in the Americas, their architecture, traditions, customs, etc. are primarily European influenced.

 

[Civinator]

Considering a world map, I think the creators of the RAR mod had a good selection (with the exception of Tibet). This means, that the Sioux should be in, otherwise North America is too empty. May be Turkestan (TeTurkan map) instead of Babylon could be another interesting choice.

 

[WildWeazel]

This sounds suspiciously like my reasoning for my own mod, but I suppose there's no such thing as an original idea. We were probably both inspired by the same ancient threads. Anyway, I have slated Siam but not Khmer, and also the Sioux. So I'd second the Sioux (or another major North American nation), or Brazil from your list.

 

[Civinator]

This sounds suspiciously like my reasoning for my own mod, but I suppose there's no such thing as an original idea. We were probably both inspired by the same ancient threads.

Wildweazel, the word "suspiciously" really leaves a very bad taste. The mod RAR is from 2004 and the TETurkhan map (that´s the title at CFC) is at least from 2002 and can even be found in the Civ 3PTW\Scenarios folder. What should I additionally do than to correctly citate both sources ?? I never wrote in my post that these mods were created by me.

As you are writing here about your own mod in context with original ideas, I am very interested to have a look at your mod, that must be older than 2002 (or 2004) to have a look at your original ideas.

 

[templar_x]

@ Civinator, are you sure WildWeazel really replied to your post? and not to the original post by SayHayKid?
WildWeazel might clarify this, but I understood "suspiciously" more like "astoundingly" here.
t_x

 

[SayHayKid]

@Civinator yeah I think something was lost in translation. I think @WildWeazel is simply saying my rationale and ideas for replacement mods are a lot like his own rationale for replacing/adding similar Civs. Probably from reading some of the same old-time discussions on the topic.

 

[WildWeazel]

Yes I was replying to the OP, and being cheeky. After all there are only so many influential civs, and we've all been rehashing this question since the beginning. No offense intended.

 

[Civinator]

Yes I was replying to the OP, and being cheeky. After all there are only so many influential civs, and we've all been rehashing this question since the beginning. No offense intended.

O.k. this is accepted.

 

[Sakharov]

I absoulutely agree. Another point is choosing more or less historical accurate civ traits. In my yet-another-personal-rebalance-mode I decided to replace Celts, Hittites and Sumeria with Vietnam, Brazil and Siam/Thailand.
My Vietnam is somewhat an asian replacement of Celts with the same Agr/Rel traits and Vietcong as UU (guerilla replacement with infantry stats, somewhat Enkidu Warriors of industrial era). I think that agri trait fits well, cause Vietnam has fertile land and most southeast asian country are pretty religious, there are lots of ancient temples etc. And also there are no asian civs with agri trait in stock game, so I think it's good decision.
What about Brazil? Would Exp/Com (like replaced Hittites) look logical? Modern Brazil is the biggest country of South America. What about Brazilian economy? Do they deserve Com trait? It's also largest one in modern South America and Brazil wasn't a poor a country.

 

[SayHayKid]

What about Brazil? Would Exp/Com (like replaced Hittites) look logical? Modern Brazil is the biggest country of South America. What about Brazilian economy? Do they deserve Com trait? It's also largest one in modern South America and Brazil wasn't a poor a country.

That sounds good for the Viets. I pretty much replaced the Celts with Khmer, same traits. I agree with Brazil being a solid replacement for a "modern" Civ since there are so many ancient Civs in the standard game. And they fill a goo spot on the map. I have no clue for a UU. One of the later versions of Civ have it as a Guerilla replacement. The only problem is that it comes so late in the game. Also, if using flavor units I don't think much has been made for Brazil. In the first era do you make them European (Portugal) or do you make them MesoAmerican? What is there identity (traits)? And what significant impact, discovery, etc. have they made on the world as a whole? That is where I am stuck.

Sioux make sense from an underrepresented portion of the world map, but I find the Native American tribes to be not very exciting. They didn't have cities, structures, major inventions, etc. The Mayans and Aztecs, had grand cities and structures, scientific achievements like the Mayan calendar. The Sioux? I don't know. Some tents?

 

[Sakharov]

That sounds good for the Viets. I pretty much replaced the Celts with Khmer, same traits. I agree with Brazil being a solid replacement for a "modern" Civ since there are so many ancient Civs in the standard game. And they fill a goo spot on the map. I have no clue for a UU. One of the later versions of Civ have it as a Guerilla replacement. The only problem is that it comes so late in the game. Also, if using flavor units I don't think much has been made for Brazil. In the first era do you make them European (Portugal) or do you make them MesoAmerican? What is there identity (traits)? And what significant impact, discovery, etc. have they made on the world as a whole? That is where I am stuck.

Sioux make sense from an underrepresented portion of the world map, but I find the Native American tribes to be not very exciting. They didn't have cities, structures, major inventions, etc. The Mayans and Aztecs, had grand cities and structures, scientific achievements like the Mayan calendar. The Sioux? I don't know. Some tents?

I agree about shortage of "modern" civs, but "too late" UUs are just a matter of taste. Yes, it is possible to choose the most optimal civ with early UU and win as soon as possible (Persia, Iroquis in stock game?), but it's game to have a good time, not win-ASAP-competition.
Personally in my case I made them in American culture group, cause there are not much civs there (and I haven't deleted Portugal though).
Still Brazil made some cultural impact in music and movies, but there's no appropriate trait in Civ3. I think it would be OK to retain Exp/Com traits.
I'm still in doubt with Siam/Thailand. As they replace Sumeria, they have to be Agri/Sci. Agri trait is still reasonable, like with most of southeast asian civs, but what about their science?
I also thought about Israel civ with the same traits (it fits well, cause Israel have strong agriculture and science both), but there are too much mid eastern civs IMO.

 

[Sakharov]

Sioux make sense from an underrepresented portion of the world map, but I find the Native American tribes to be not very exciting. They didn't have cities, structures, major inventions, etc. The Mayans and Aztecs, had grand cities and structures, scientific achievements like the Mayan calendar. The Sioux? I don't know. Some tents?

IMO they might be a replacement for Zulu with Mil/Exp traits. Why not?
Maybe they did not have an outstanding culture achievements, but there's not much northern America civs.

 

[SayHayKid]

In a separate "epic" mod I am working on, I have Siam as Agricultural/Seafaring. From Wikipedia, "The Ayutthaya Kingdom emerged from the mandala/merger of three maritime city-states on the Lower Chao Phraya Valley in the late 13th and 14th centuries (Lopburi, Suphanburi, and Ayutthaya).[26] The early kingdom was a maritime confederation, oriented to post-Srivijaya Maritime Southeast Asia, conducting raids and tribute from these maritime states."

 

[Sakharov]

In a separate "epic" mod I am working on, I have Siam as Agricultural/Seafaring. From Wikipedia, "The Ayutthaya Kingdom emerged from the mandala/merger of three maritime city-states on the Lower Chao Phraya Valley in the late 13th and 14th centuries (Lopburi, Suphanburi, and Ayutthaya).[26] The early kingdom was a maritime confederation, oriented to post-Srivijaya Maritime Southeast Asia, conducting raids and tribute from these maritime states."

I think that it's good idea cause there's no seafaring civs in asian culture group and also no agri ones (but my Vietnam is agri also).
What I am aiming is that every culture group should have all traits and all possible trait combinations should be present in game (yep, even exp-sea).
There are 8 traits, so if we calculate we got 28 possible combinations. 3 remaining civs would repeat existing traits. AFAIK, it's Korea-Greece (com-sci), Persia-Ottomans (ind-sci), Zulu-Mongols (exp-mil). Maybe Ottomans would switch to sea-sci? Turkey have access to two seas at once and especially Byzantines should be replaced.

 

[Theov]

Looking back, I would've added Siam/Thailand to my mod - so I'd def do that.

 

[Sakharov]

Looking back, I would've added Siam/Thailand to my mod - so I'd def do that.

Which civ you replace?

 

[Herbert George]

I absoulutely agree. Another point is choosing more or less historical accurate civ traits. In my yet-another-personal-rebalance-mode I decided to replace Celts, Hittites and Sumeria with Vietnam, Brazil and Siam/Thailand.
My Vietnam is somewhat an asian replacement of Celts with the same Agr/Rel traits and Vietcong as UU (guerilla replacement with infantry stats, somewhat Enkidu Warriors of industrial era). I think that agri trait fits well, cause Vietnam has fertile land and most southeast asian country are pretty religious, there are lots of ancient temples etc. And also there are no asian civs with agri trait in stock game, so I think it's good decision.
What about Brazil? Would Exp/Com (like replaced Hittites) look logical? Modern Brazil is the biggest country of South America. What about Brazilian economy? Do they deserve Com trait? It's also largest one in modern South America and Brazil wasn't a poor a country.

I would say Vietnam should have militaristic, in light of their impressive string of victories against France, America and China during the twentieth century!

I would certainly give Brazil agricultural and maybe expansionist/commercial or seafaring (most major cities are coastal; primary contribution in the world wards was naval). Probably not industrious, at least on on an Earth map as the Amazon should be an enduring barrier.

Brazil could pseudo-represent them in addition to adding a large "modern" Civ in an under-represented region. But .... what major contributions have they made? What would they have as a UU?

I think you could ask the same question about broader contribution about all the Civs you've added! Alberto-Santos-Dumont made important contributions to early flight, Roberto Landell de Moura iand Hercules Florence made interesting but overlooked innovations in telecommunications and photography, respectively. In modern times, quite a few in the field of biology and medicine. Even I struggle with a UU, but as most Brazilian wars took place in the 19th century I would suggest Voluntarios da Patria as a replacement for the riflemen (also there aren't many other UUs around this timeframe).