1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

The "Let's Figure Out Sicily" thread

Discussion in 'Rhye's and Fall: Europe' started by TheMulattoMaker, May 19, 2017.

  1. DC123456789

    DC123456789 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,935
    Location:
    Canada
    The Crusades kind of are? Still quite different though, I'll agree. It looks like AbsintheRed is favourable towards some sort of scripted event to give Sicily to Aragon anyway though, since we all know it's never going to happen naturally.
     
  2. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,008
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    Well, that's an option. Not yet sure what will be added for it when we get there, I only wanted to point out that there are many possibilities.
    Btw adding a conqueror event is actually easier to code.
     
  3. cmakk1012

    cmakk1012 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    Conqueror events are neat because there's a chance you can defeat them as the defender as opposed to a predetermined loss. How much fun would SoI be if the Mongols just flipped Persia? Not very
     
    DC123456789 likes this.
  4. gilgames

    gilgames Priest-King

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    Budapest, Hungary
    I did, dont like it, meh
     
  5. cmakk1012

    cmakk1012 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    SoI is fascinating to me in examining a historical period that's really overlooked in the West along with its depth and strategy. I'd give it props for plausibility too but I just won an Armenia domination victory so I'm not so sure about that part ;)
     
    gilgames and QManNL like this.
  6. The Turk

    The Turk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    I'm not sure how you are comparing a civilization with a UHV. Further in 1060 the Normans were little more than mercenaries, so its not as if they can't be portrayed as mercenaries or barbarians in game.

    It would look like Sicily without the 2 Rogers. What would "Normandy" be without the Rollo and his successors? The territory is literally named after them, and yet we don't depict the Duchy of Normandy, even when it was nominally independent within the Kingdom of France.

    Needless to say, this does not need to clash with my stated aims. If you want to portray the Normans, have them spawn in Apulia, and have them try to conquer the rest of Southern Italy, including Sicily. They shouldn't simply flip the entire territory. Sicily should remain up for grabs by a variety of actors.

    The Normans, who you claim you want to represent, didn't begin in Sicily, they began in Apulia (as mercenary barbarians - as their neighbours considered them).

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

    They were counts, and then became Dukes. Something you might want to explore in the future is a "title" system, where you can "upgrade" your title. You can use the base of it from SoI, to be able to claim the "Kingdom/County/Duchy etc. of X", based on territory held, which would give you certain bonuses (and even perhaps some malus').
     
  7. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,008
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    Ehh, this is getting annoying... I already told you like 5 times that the Norman Kingdom of Sicily does not equal the Sicily civ, it's only part of it.
    Thus I'm comparing the first UHV (or maybe first 2 UHVs, not yet sure) of the Sicily civ to the first UHV of the Arab civ.

    I would even argue that representing the period up to the Sicilian Vespers in 1282 is even more imporant for the Sicily civ than representing the Umayyad conquests for the Arab civ. (from a gameplay point of view)
    There is not that much to portray after 1282 for Sicily, you want to take out the most interesting part.
    What are you talking about? How can you consider this a valid example, or relevant in any ways? :dunno:
    Sicily is planned as a full civ. Normandy is not.
    If we would have a Normandy civ, it would surely start with Rollo and the Duchy of Normandy.
     
    Last edited: May 22, 2017
  8. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,008
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    Sure, but in my example I only meant that mechanics for an AI controlled Sicily.
    Whatever will be chosen for this in the end, I definitely don't want to make it a predetermined loss for the player
     
  9. cmakk1012

    cmakk1012 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    Oh, for AI Sicily a flip is perfectly fine. That's a historical change that needs to be modeled IMO
     
  10. cmakk1012

    cmakk1012 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    Just to bring this subforum back to life, and on a topic relevant to 1.6, I'm curious what the stability map for Sicily would be. Core of Calabria and Apulia, Sicily itself either Core or Historical, mayyybe Historical on Arberia as well? Otherwise Contested on Ifriqiya, Arberia, Epirus, Morea, Malta. Given Charles II tried to march on Constantinople (but failed), should areas farther East like Thessaly, Macedonia, Thrace, and Constantinople be Contested also?
     
  11. AbsintheRed

    AbsintheRed Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2009
    Messages:
    8,008
    Location:
    Szeged, Hungary
    Probably something like that.
    Didn't start working on Sicily yet.
     
    cmakk1012 likes this.
  12. cmakk1012

    cmakk1012 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    From reading the minor civs thread I’ve been reminded of my ideas for the Byzantine situation in Southern Italy which tie into Sicily. Unnecessary, I promise, but this could help historical accuracy.

    1. Syrakousai/Syracuse should start at AD 500 under the Byzantines with Orthodox faith. Additionally, the Indy city in Apulia should be Orthodox.

    2. “Muslim” barbarians should spawn on Sicily in the 800s and will take Syracuse unless the player ferries units over to hold it (in other words, AI will lose it but player can keep it). Islam can spread to it then as well.

    3. Eventually, the Kingdom of Sicily spawn should be an invasive one that the Byzantines could fight off, but until then it should just flip the provinces and get Catholic missionaries or autospread faith.

    4. The Byzantine UHV2 should include Southern Italy and Sicily. It’s a tight fit time wise, but with the Cataphracts the player has to build to fend off the Seljuks you can probably conquer the KoS before th Mongols arrive.
     
  13. The Turk

    The Turk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    1. Rome should be Orthodox from 500AD if we are going to be honest. Until the 800s the Pope in Rome was essentially a Greek speaking Byzantine puppet.

    2. Aghlabids from Tunis launched the invasion of Sicily, not just random "Muslims". I think a Tunis civilization is in the works? In my opinion an unplayable Aghlabids would make most sense, and have the AI try and invade all of Southern Italy. On the barbarian side however, Muslim pirate ships would be nice, and on the reverse Christian (Italian - Pisa, Genoa, Venice specifically) pirate ships would also be nice.

    3. The Normans came as roving bands of mercenaries first, not conquerors. If they could be represented as mercenaries and/or even barbarians that would be neat. The de Hauteville's eventually started to seize territory (staring north of Naples), but they were extremely fragmented. A unitary Norman state in Southern Italy only begins with Roger II (1130) who proclaimed himself King. But the Byzantines weren't alone, there was also Lombard princes, independent Greek states, and of course the Muslim emirates. Until 1130 the Normans would best be depicted as independent/barbarian armies, and then in ~1100 spawn in Sicily, and have to unite Southern Italy. But given how fragile and transitory the state was, it is still bizarre why they are a fully playable civ.

    4. Having a Byzantine goal to defend your Italian possessions would be neat; especially since the game begins in 500.
     
  14. cmakk1012

    cmakk1012 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    1. Yeah, but that would require a Papal rework and it’s not *that* important...

    2. In a perfect world with the DoC uncoupled civ slot thing, yes Aghlabids should invade (and there should be unplayable Ostrogoths and Visigoths and Frisians and Suebi and—). For now, Aghlabid barbarians could attack Sicily and Southern Italy. Definitely agree about barb pirates for both sides, though; maybe they could be mercenary black-flagged War Galleys for Genoa and Venice to buy?

    3. You could have it be like the SoI Sultanate of Rum and have barbarians precede a flip of the region?

    4. The game beginning in 500 kind of makes me wish there was even more to do with the Byzantines. This was the era of Belisarius—honestly I’d love if UHV1 was some kind of crazy early conquest spree of all Italy, southern Spain, North Africa, etc. but it could never be balanced properly...
     
    Publicola likes this.
  15. The Turk

    The Turk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    For sure, I was just stating a fact. In 500 the Pope in Rome was extremely marginal. The Archbishops of Ravenna and Milan were far more powerful.

    Isn't there already a Tunis civ? Aghlabids were far more important than the Hafsids. Have the Aghlabids spawn, even if they are not playable (although they would make for a great player civ).

    Exactly my thinking. The Normans were well known for their brutality, violence and torture, unseen before in Southern Italy. But as I already wrote, they did not created many small counties. It wouldn't be until Roger II that a "Kingdom" of Sicily would be born, and Southern Italy united. But then his descendants quickly got dethroned first by the German Emperor, and then by Charles of Anjou, and then by the Aragonese. So again... what is "Sicily" representing exactly?

    Anyone want to make an Early Medieval Europe mod? lol.
     
  16. cmakk1012

    cmakk1012 Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    185
    Maybe Egypt could start as the Aghlabids, transition into Fatimids, and then go conquer Egypt itself?


    I actually really, really want to make an extremely detailed RFC Italy mod that would delve into medieval flavor more. It would probably start in the same era but end sooner, and would cram in all kinds of cool little duchies and republics and stuff. If only I had the patience to code...
     
    jekke and Publicola like this.
  17. The Turk

    The Turk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    Well I said the Egyptians should begin with the Fatimids. The Fatimids overthrew the Aghlabids in 909, and only conquered Egypt in 969. It would perhaps be better if the Fatimids spawn in 969 in Egypt with most of North Africa. Hence the Aghlabids being an unplayable civ would make sense, so you can negotiate with the Aghlabids, but then inevitably they will collapse.

    Alternatively we have the Egyptian civ (Fatimids) spawn in Tunisia, and then have the player conquer Egypt, and give the AI a strong army to invade Egypt.

    But no, Egypt should NOT start as the Aghlabids, keep them seperate. But anyway the Aghlabids are only in power for a little over a century so them being a scripted non-playable civ makes the most sense.

    Unfortunately Embryodead was planning on making a RFC Medieval (Western) Europe mod, small extended timeframe, very detailed. Its just a shame that this mod has to cover the entire history from 500-1800, it means nothing gets any detail as a result. Which reminds me, is the 1200AD start date playable?
     
    cmakk1012 likes this.
  18. merijn_v1

    merijn_v1 Black Belt

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    4,806
    Location:
    The city of the original vlaai
    Yes, the 1200 AD scenario is playable, but it still requires tweaking in several aspects.
     
  19. The Turk

    The Turk Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,156
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    By the way, to consider making a new tile type called: "Mediterranean island" which gives +1 base of gold, on top of whatever other bonuses the terrain would get.

    Frederick II & Charles of Anjou, both of whom ruled Sicily were the richest monarchs in Europe. (See Chris Wickham, Medieval Europe (2017), pg. 336).

    And control of Cyprus, Crete, even Malta gave control of trade patterns. So in lieu of a complex trade system, it would be neat to have Mediterranean Islands actually worth seizing.
     
  20. gilgames

    gilgames Priest-King

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2012
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    Budapest, Hungary
    This is actually a very Good idea.
     

Share This Page