The Steppe/Nomad Problem

Virote_Considon

The Great Dictator
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
9,453
Location
Skaville UK Reputation: 1
Throughout all of the scenarios representing any time frame from the dawn of man to the early modern era, one problem always sticks out like a saw thumb- How do you go about representing the various nomadic Steppe cultures?

The problem is a persistent one, because Steppe culture has always had a large effect on Eurasian culture, in a big way, and should therefore be represented in a scenario. I mean, what sort of Middle-Ages scenario would it be without the Mongols or the Turks? Unless the scenario is in some fairly "isolated" spot, such as Japan, or Southern India, or focusing on a particular event such as the 100 Years' War,you are going to have the problem of representing these nomadic cultures.

The challenge is hard, because this is a game that treats every player as a sedentary, agrarian culture, with large cities, and stiff borders, whereas nomadic culture is pretty much the opposite- very few permanent settlements which are small, no real borders, and they also generally occupy a much larger territory than their sedentary contemporaries. This means that the scenario creator is faced with two problems- either give the Steppe people large swathes of territory, but with many settlements, or give them very little territory, but with one or two settlements.

Militarily, it is much easier to represent Steppe cultures- cheap, fast units, usually with good offense and poor defense, but Steppe Warfare is much harder, because unlike their sedentary neighbors, nomads are not set on capturing land and settlements, but rather goods. When the resources of the location have been exhausted, they should just try to move on.

I have seen nomadic cultures represented in various ways, from huge, city-filled behemoths (such as the Tartars in MEM, or the Scythians in RFRE), to the polar opposite, being refined to a single city, from which they can launch their raids (such as the Huns were in Anno Domini). Each way has their own merits, and each their own disadvantages.

So, my question to you is, what is your favorite way of representing nomadic cultures?

Hopefully, the outcome of this thread will be a suitable way in which we can 1) find the best "medium" for representation in which 2) the AI can at least sort of cope with.
 
Maybe if you restricted the size of the cities by making aqueducts or hospitals obsolete with a steppe-only tech, so they can only have small settlements compared to the europeans, but still.

this, coupled with cheap, fast units (like you said) that could perhaps enslave a "goods" unit that can be returned to the capital to gain gold

just ideas, i havent tried to implement steppe races in anything :)
 
with disadvantages of rocky, dry desert terrain where they reside (when used in scenarios)

yes, i believe they may have cheap settlers and therefore quite good opportunity to occupy large land masses, yet that their low production and obsolete buildings make it hard for them to grow a great population in settlements,.. units may be cheap (so there's probbably lots of these), but not strong.. yes fast, but sedentary civs should have buildings, that give a good production power and also represent the power to produce advanced weapons, strong armor etc. + sedentary civs should have city defencive buildings that give edge on defending,.. yet in open great number of fast but even when not stronger nomad raiders are a constant threat to every nation near these areas.
 
@LMR!: That's pretty much how I have it in my Greek scenario

and also represent the power to produce advanced weapons, strong armor etc.

Actually, Steppe weapons and armor was often way ahead of their time. They came up with spoked chariots, composite bows, mounted cavalry, the stirrup, heavy-armored cavalry, bronze plated armor, etc. etc!

In my Greek scenario, I too give them disadvantages- Scythia cannot build workers, it can capture them, and some units can enslave them, but it cannot build them. Furthermore, Steppe terrain (LM Plains in my scenario) has been given a high movement cost. This does 2 things:
1. Makes working the terrain very time consuming
2. Makes non-Steppe units painfully slow, pretty much leaving your units in the open if you try to invade the Steppes without Steppe units (Steppe units ignore this movement cost)

They also cannot build much of the improvements that come available to the Greeks and such in the generic tech tree.
 
My mod starts in 1171 CE so my "barbaric" steppe Civ is the Mongols. I allow them to build no improvements (except a pile of skulls - I forget ATM what city they actually did that to) and have the steppe warriors auto-generated. I remove the rivers near Karakorum so that city cannot grow above Size 1 and auto-generate Mongol Hordes ("hordes" was just the Mongol word approximating "regiment"). I haven't got the frequency of appearance down yet, but that's a matter of scale and time-period/turn.

-Oz
 
One of the ideas I've been bouncing around is a mod with only nomadic cultures. That's why I asked this question. They'd have to seek out the resources to make their best units. That combined with limiting their city size might work, although I haven't tried it.
 
I tried some ideas for this sort of thing with the Kanem-Bornu and related civs in my African scenario. Basically: small-sized cities only, few buildable improvements, many specialists, cheap and fast settlers, no workers, stables (=airports) to allow resources to be civ-wide, fast units. It did create a quite different style of play, which was interesting.
 
This is perhaps the coolest thread I've read in a long time. I'm so going to pillage it for ideas...
 
Top Bottom