The "Let's Figure Out Sicily" thread

[cmakk1012]

I, for one, just want as many as civs in this mod as possible to destroy everyone's CPUs--I mean, for accurate representation of Europe

Eventually, Milan should probably be in this mod, probably as a conquest-intensive civ like Denmark, but in terms of gameplay Sicily is better for balance IMO

 

[DC123456789]

Wouldn't a potential Milanese civ be rather cramped though, even if we take it to represent all of the other northern Italian city states (other than Genoa and Venice) as well?

 

[cmakk1012]

Weeeeeell maybe? Yeah honestly it's a low priority from a gameplay perspective; its importance is more historical. Besides, it would require a rework of Genoa that didn't involve it owning anything besides Zeta in Italy but somehow still being viable

 

[The Turk]

Are you aware that the Kingdom of Sicily was always considered to include the area that became known as the Kingdom of Naples (but was always considered one of the Kingdoms of Sicily after its partition)? That's what the Sicilian civ refers to, not just the island.

Yes, and that is why I'm using Sicily AND Naples, so as to avoid confusion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Naples

Naples lasted longer as a political base (as I have already mentioned several times) than Sicily (island). It does not make sense to represent the Norman Kingdom of Sicily, based in Palermo. Sicily should be open to conquest, not the core territory of a foreign civilization.

Again, given how many times this small area passed hands, between Arabs, Egyptians, Berbers, French, Catalonians, Normans, Germans, etc, I think it is safe to say that Sicily should be up for grabs.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Yes, and that is why I'm using Sicily AND Naples, so as to avoid confusion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Naples

Naples lasted longer as a political base (as I have already mentioned several times) than Sicily (island). It does not make sense to represent the Norman Kingdom of Sicily, based in Palermo. Sicily should be open to conquest, not the core territory of a foreign civilization.

Again, given how many times this small area passed hands, between Arabs, Egyptians, Berbers, French, Catalonians, Normans, Germans, etc, I think it is safe to say that Sicily should be up for grabs.

Well, the very beginning of the wiki article you posted:

The Kingdom of Naples, comprising the southern part of the Italian Peninsula, was the remainder of the old Kingdom of Sicily after the secession of the island of Sicily as a result of the Vespers of 1282. It continued to be officially known as the Kingdom of Sicily, although it no longer included the island of Sicily.

So I'm not sure at all what's your point, neither about the name nor about the potential civ's role.

Name:
Medieval Sicily (as in the political entity) at various times included both the island and everything south of the Papal States.
The name of the civ is Sicily, that's independent of what parts (and to what extent) we represent within it.

Role:
As it was already stated, the Sicily civ in RFCE encompasses all the various Kingdoms of Sicily.
It's not either the Norman Kingdom of Sicily or the later Kingdom of Sicily centered around Naples. It's both.

 

[Baron03]

Will dynamic naming always use Kingdom of Sicily, or will a "Kingdom of Naples" be used if its capital is in southern Italy?

And for the AI, how will the spawning start work? Will only cities in Sicily flip, or will it be southern Italy too? Or will there be no flips and the independent cities go into revolt for Sicily to conquer with separate stacks?

 

[Force44]

When reading about the Sicilies on Wikipedia I found it kind of neat that to get recognition for his kingdom Roger III ambushed the pope.

There might be a unique historical victorycondition in that.

Something like gather 1000 espionage points against the pope after which a pope unit spawns that has to be captured.

 

[gilgames]

I dont mind if we have a new civ like this, but i am worried about all game will be the same with it. There is very little variety of city placement/recource/production ect. and if we add uhvs like conquer more island, this pressure will increase further. just compare it with germany or kiev, you can find basically endless option to settle your cities. But having the same setup is boring and uninteresting. correct me if i am wrong....

 

[DC123456789]

Some people prefer seeing historical city setups. I really don't think you should try SoI if that's a big problem for you...

 

[The Turk]

Well, the very beginning of the wiki article you posted:
So I'm not sure at all what's your point, neither about the name nor about the potential civ's role.

Yes, and that is why I'm using Sicily AND Naples, so as to avoid confusion.

We should **not** have a political entity with its "core" territory in Sicily (island), which would be the later Kingdom of Sicily of the Normans. I am saying we should have them spawn in 1282, in Naples, NOT Sicily. This would allow Sicily to remain contested territory, rather than having it flip to the Normans. Sicily can be a border province of Naples in that way.

In fact, considering how short-lived the Normans were, it makes more sense to portray them as barbarians, like the Vikings.

 

[DC123456789]

I'm not sure what the problem with flipping the island of Sicily to the Normans is. Nobody ever owns Sicily by that date anyway. Also, you talk about Sicily being contested and all that, but after the Norman invasion pretty much the only other country that controlled the island Sicily for any significant amount of time is Aragon/Spain.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Naples lasted much longer as an independent political base. Sicily lasts only a century or so. Naples lasts till the end of the game. Again, it makes no sense to have Sicily.

We should **not** have a political entity with its "core" territory in Sicily (island), which would be the later Kingdom of Sicily of the Normans. I am saying we should have them spawn in 1282, in Naples, NOT Sicily. This would allow Sicily to remain contested territory, rather than having it flip to the Normans. Sicily can be a border province of Naples in that way.

In fact, considering how short-lived the Normans were, it makes more sense to portray them as barbarians, like the Vikings.

I find it rather funny that you consider the time from ~1060 to 1282 way too short for any representation, while you think the time from 632 to 750 is more than enough to a very detailed representation of the Umayyad conquests.

IMO Norman influence is way too significant to leave it out completely. What would a Sicily civ look like without the 2 Rogers?
The Kingdom of Sicily (which was founded by 1130 by Roger II, and encompassed southern Italy too) was a direct successor state of the County of Sicily (founded in 1071 during the Norman conquest of Sicily).

Also, we can very easily represent a shift towards the Naples area for AI Sicily. At one point the capital is moved to the most significant city in Calabria/Apulia, province status changes in the Island of Sicily, etc.
If the civ isn't very stable in the late 13th century, there is a chance for a "Sicilian Vespers" event, where cities in the island goes independent or join Aragon for good.
I don't want to get into details yet, but there are obviously many possibilities.
The point is that 1282 is a way too late spawn date for the civ.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Will dynamic naming always use Kingdom of Sicily, or will a "Kingdom of Naples" be used if its capital is in southern Italy?

Not sure, but I guess it can appear in the DCN even if that wasn't the official name. Probably only after a fairly late date.

And for the AI, how will the spawning start work? Will only cities in Sicily flip, or will it be southern Italy too? Or will there be no flips and the independent cities go into revolt for Sicily to conquer with separate stacks?

I need to read more about the exact politicial situation of the various Kingdoms/Duchies of southern Italy in the late 11th century.
Probably a Sicilian start would be more fun for the player.

 

[DC123456789]

There isn't any function for checking for the province the capital is in for DCNs yet, right?

 

[AbsintheRed]

There isn't any function for checking for the province the capital is in for DCNs yet, right?

We can have it indirectly:
First part of the list is if the civ controls Sicily province: various Sicily names depending on the stuff we want to add
Later in the list if it controls Apulia/Calabria (thus not Sicily), maybe after 1282: Kingdom of Naples

 

[DC123456789]

Oh yeah, the workaround you've been using all this time.
Are there any plans to add it as a command at some point? It would be rather useful for a lot of civs...

 

[AbsintheRed]

Oh yeah, the workaround you've been using all this time.
Are there any plans to add it as a command at some point? It would be rather useful for a lot of civs...

Sure, but I have way too many plans for RFCE
The DCN system is fairly complex (it takes a fairly big effort to add new functions to it), and this is rather low priority.

 

[cmakk1012]

There should be a scripted "decline" for Sicily or else it will be ahistorically strong. The easiest solution is to have the island of Sicily declare independence like Serbia, but that's just boring IMO. If you do go with that solution it's reasonable enough.

 

[DC123456789]

I think adding Aragonese conquerers on Sicily would be better. Just having it declare independence would be more frustrating for the player, and this way Aragon might actually create the Mediterranean empire they never currently do.

 

[cmakk1012]

Does RFCE do scripted conquerors that aren't barbs, though? On the other hand making Aragon pull off a naval invasion is never going to work...