Wilhelm Meister
Warlord
But I think it's really necessary to enlarge Europe as to give it the importance it had. I agree with you Lone Wolf, but if it's so hard to do, so probably it'll never happen 
Venice and Piedmont instead of Italy?
- Thread starter mrrandomplayer
- Start date
mrrandomplayer
Hopeless Situation Warrior
Spain is already really cramped. In Italy, there would just be Venice, Turin (either on the rice or change the stone plot from Genova to Turin), Rome, and Naples. It would be basically the same setup as before, except with actually less overlap in Italy.
Think of it this way: every civ has three underlying map types (settler/stability map, AI wars map, city name map) that have to be synchronized with the actual terrain map. That means I have to adjust 3 * 41 maps even when only inserting one column.But I think it's really necessary to enlarge Europe as to give it the importance it had. I agree with you Lone Wolf, but if it's so hard to do, so probably it'll never happen
This excludes all other sorts of coordinates like cores, normal areas, capital locations, special event locations (like conquerors), respawn areas etc.
mrrandomplayer
Hopeless Situation Warrior
I meant Iberia.
mrrandomplayer
Hopeless Situation Warrior
And Italy is supposed to conquer the Indie cities and eventually Venice. Venice would usually only have one city in Italy (like Portugal) and because the nearby cities are Independent, Italian culture will quickly take the contested tiles.
mrrandomplayer
Hopeless Situation Warrior
Also, Venice founding a city or two on the Adriatic will give Austria more cities and keep it viable when Germany spawns.
Lone Wolf
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 9,908
Venedig and Salona/Dyrrachium already exist often.
If Venice is supposed to be conquered soon, then why include it at all? Keep in mind that Central Europe already suffocates under three civs, we don't need a fourth one. If everything that Italy conquers needs a separate civ, then why don't we include Naples?
Which would be awful cities, we already see enough awful cities. Italy is already a dubious addition since when it is present it makes the Euros seriously suck, or disappears as fast as it appeared under a hail of HRE/French troops. Venice would add nothing, not a single iota of improved gameplay, and this is a game first off, not a historical simulation.
Logical consequence: Italy needs a buff. Maybe it should respawn more often...
Maybe as a compromise Italy could represent both modern Italy and Venice/Genoa/etc. Adjust the stability map to give them Cyprus, Crete, and the Crimea as contested territory, give them a UHV relating to maritime republics. Maybe something along the lines of "Have X amount of gold by 1600", about the time Venice started declining as a power. Also, to show the commercial role the maritime republics played, allow Silk Road spread to their cities on Cyprus, Crete, Crimea, etc. to show how the maritime republics acted as western termini for the Silk Road. It helps that Italy already has "Italian Maritime Republics" as a dynamic name.
Already the case.
By making them represent both Italy and maritime republics, I meant with a commerce related goal, and a stability map that includes Cyprus and Crete if that isn't already the case. Right now, Italy mostly just starts with Italian Maritime Republics as a dynamic name, and doesn't do much else with it.
NerfCothons
Warlord
It is frustrating how rarely I see Italy respawn playing 600 AD games. Is the trigger still at least one indy city on the peninsula?
clark k
Chieftain
Yeah, but that almost never happens
I'm strongly with you!
I'm not so into game mechanics, but what about a scripted high instability for foreign powers to keep Italian tiles / high inclination for Italian AI to become a vassal in order to keep a sort of independence, which historically has always been kept even if not by the same city (for example, Republic of Venice until Napoleon) ?
