What other Civs would you like to see added to DoC

[Ani Taneen]

Wikipedia says that the Papal States were not controlled by Italy until 1870. Settling the "prisoner in the vatican problem" that was brought about by the 1870 conquest was actually a big accomplishment of Mussolini's 1912 Lateran Treaty, which granted sovereignty to the Vatican City State.

*1929

I get that, but then we have what? A civ representing Venice/Genoa and a Civ representing the Papal State? I feel crowded just thinking about it.

 

[borhap88]

I get that, but then we have what? A civ representing Venice/Genoa and a Civ representing the Papal State? I feel crowded just thinking about it.

I'm aware of it. I think that the Apostolic Palace mechanism represent the role of the Papal States as well.

 

[1SDANi]

I get that, but then we have what? A civ representing Venice/Genoa and a Civ representing the Papal State? I feel crowded just thinking about it.

The Papal State is a very important and distinct nation from Italy.

The Papal State became an official power around 800 AD, and while they were still technically part of the Byzantines, the Dutchy of Rome was, in practice, an independent state.

Italy however rose following two events, first a campaign funded by the Byzantines to remove the Holy Roman Empire from Italy, thus allowing Italy to rise as a quasi-independent land of city-states and second the Norman occupation of Southern Italy, leading to Emperor Manual I Komnenos of the Byzantine Empire to attempt and fail to reassert control of Italy, failing and leading to the formation of a number of governments controlling Italy: The Northern Maritime Republics, the Kingdoms of Naples and Sicily in the South, and the Papal States in central Italy.

Now, having so many separate nation in such a small area would be annoying, especially as their history would be better represented through a single nation like with the warring city states of early Greece, like Italy is currently represented. But I would like to make a special case for the Papal States. Unlike the other states which were born from the secession of the Byzantines from Italy during the 12th century, the Papal State became an independent nation 300 years before that because of their unique influence.

Because of the unique conditions that let to their rises, the time between each of them, and the historical importance of the Papal State during the period from 800 AD onwards, I would suggest that the Papal State be added as a separate nation with a spawn around 800 AD so that they are no longer represented by an independent nation for so long, and so that we can better represent what is one of the most influential nations that would have but a single city on this map.

Also, give every Italian city but Rome to Italy's flip zone.

 

[Darnokthemage]

The papal states could also represent the crusader states and the latin empire.

 

[Ani Taneen]

I don't know, I kind of feel like the crusaders should be their own civilization. And besides, the island states of the crusaders fell under Venetian rule in the 12th and 13th century.

 

[Caesar Augustus]

So first of all I'm just now coming back to this mod after a while away and I'm continually impressed by the work that has and continues to go into it. This mod strikes an amazing balance between the open-ended potential of a 4X and the immersion of a historical sum. Keep it up!

I do have one suggestion for a civ that I haven't seen: the Muscogee. Also known as the Creek, and including the tribes that would later split off into the Seminole, they are the among the descendents of the Mississippian civilization. They held a considerable amount of territory, at least 2 cities worth (especially as they'll be representing the Seminole as well), possibly 3 on the new map. They're nicely positioned to pressure the colonial powers and prevent too much European intrusion into North America and then transition into a real rival for a rising America.

As for the other civs that have been suggested, the only one that I'm gung-ho about is the Swahilis. The Assyrians* are definitely a solid add but should wait for the bigger map. Burma might add some interest to SE Asia but I don't really see much that would suggest fun or unique gameplay. I could see adding the Manchus if that helps China follow a more historical course. Sweden and modern Italy are reasonable but should probably be conditional, or perhaps in the latter case only available in the 1700 start.

I'm not a big fan of adding Israel; at most should only exist with a human player like Harappa. South Africa and Australia feel like unnecessary nerfs to England and the Dutch. Maybe if they can spawn in as vassal that'd be ok but at that point is it worth the effort? I feel like the Hittites don't add a lot that isn't accomplished with the current setup. Similarly I don't see the benefit of another Balkan civ.

 

[Ani Taneen]

I'm not a big fan of adding Israel; at most should only exist with a human player like Harappa. South Africa and Australia feel like unnecessary nerfs to England and the Dutch. Maybe if they can spawn in as vassal that'd be ok but at that point is it worth the effort? I feel like the Hittites don't add a lot that isn't accomplished with the current setup. Similarly I don't see the benefit of another Balkan civ.

I'm not a fan of adding Israel either, though I could see an argument for a human player Israel (or as a release captured territory). I'd argue that South Africa and Australia make sense for any collapsing colonial power. Though, isn't the Boer wars a major contributor to South African independence?

A civic change can also be used a precursor to decolonization. Or researching a certain technology. I feel that the release as vassal is important for certain civilizations, England being chief among them.

 

[Darnokthemage]

I could see Sweden spawning 1200 or 1500, could be earlier depending on the stability of the Vikigns.

 

[JudgeJudy2020]

I think it would be interesting to see the US civil war play out. Some mechanic where the cities south of the Mason–Dixon line could secede and get free units. You could even have cities in certain geography have a chance to go either way depending on stability. Just a thought.

 

[Ani Taneen]

I think it would be interesting to see the US civil war play out. Some mechanic where the cities south of the Mason–Dixon line could secede and get free units. You could even have cities in certain geography have a chance to go either way depending on stability. Just a thought.

Didn't the war last 3-4 years? Granted, this game does little for historical realism, I mean Alexander's campaigns only lasted 7 or so years.

What would be the trigger? USA starts with slavery and when it changes the civic, the war starts?

 

[1SDANi]

I mean, I can easily the American civil war and other brief periods of instability being represented by a sudden drop of stability citing "rebel sentiment" (the handful of decades building up to the war), and on the next stability calculation if it's below a threshold, troops spawn outside your cities and attacks (the civil war). If they capture a city you'll get a dialogue asking how you wish to respond. If you decide to attack units from your nearest cities will teleport outside it and attack, if you decide to fortify your cities they will get a new unit in every city they control and move to attack, and if you decide to negotiate a diplomacy screen pops up for arranging a peace treaty. At any time they could propose a peace treaty also.

Would be a lot of work but would represent an entire civil war in the span of a single turn. Probably not gonna be implemented, just wanted to see how I'd handle making a war take 1 turn.

 

[JudgeJudy2020]

I mean, I can easily the American civil war and other brief periods of instability being represented by a sudden drop of stability citing "rebel sentiment" (the handful of decades building up to the war), and on the next stability calculation if it's below a threshold, troops spawn outside your cities and attacks (the civil war). If they capture a city you'll get a dialogue asking how you wish to respond. If you decide to attack units from your nearest cities will teleport outside it and attack, if you decide to fortify your cities they will get a new unit in every city they control and move to attack, and if you decide to negotiate a diplomacy screen pops up for arranging a peace treaty. At any time they could propose a peace treaty also.

Would be a lot of work but would represent an entire civil war in the span of a single turn. Probably not gonna be implemented, just wanted to see how I'd handle making a war take 1 turn.

I thought by then (1860) the turns were 6 months each or so. As such, it could last longer than a single turn. Also, since the idea is more or less historical with some deviation then the idea should be a civil war that could end with a confederacy surviving. I don't know much about the work involved, but it would be quite novel, since there is so much speculation about alt-history revolving around the US civil war. My thought would simply be that at a given date, unless stability is really high perhaps, that southern cities declare independence, and the Union player has the option to let them go or fight. It could also be the turn that leader changes to Lincoln. You could even incorporate a victory condition for the Union winning by a certain turn. If turns are 6 months each my then it could be eight turns to end the rebellion and switch to emancipation or whatever the corresponding civic is in this mod.

I'd say keep it simple, but might be doable...

 

[JudgeJudy2020]

Didn't the war last 3-4 years? Granted, this game does little for historical realism, I mean Alexander's campaigns only lasted 7 or so years.

What would be the trigger? USA starts with slavery and when it changes the civic, the war starts?

I would say have the date of 1860 switch the US leader to Lincoln, for nomenclature sake, then southern cities declare independence. If you chose to prosecute the war with the south maybe there is a victory condition for winning in "N" number of turns. If you chose to prosecute the war there could be an auto switch to emancipation for the Union too. A few little things could encapsulate it quite well.

 

[Leoreth]

Alexander's conquest had lasting historical impact, traitorous slavers had not, unless you count cheap statues built 60 years later out of scrap metal.

 

[Caesar Augustus]

I think the American Civil War, if it's going to be represented at all, can absolutely wait until after a more general civil war mechanic is implemented. Then we can see if maybe the US needs to be nudged toward one or not.

 

[Imperator Knoedel]

Alexander's conquest had lasting historical impact, traitorous slavers had not, unless you count cheap statues built 60 years later out of scrap metal.

:battlehymnoftherepublicintensifies:

 

[JudgeJudy2020]

Alexander's conquest had lasting historical impact, traitorous slavers had not, unless you count cheap statues built 60 years later out of scrap metal.

Perhaps its not worth the effort, but I would say the civil war had a big and lasting impact on the US historically.

 

[AtlantaMarty]

As much as I'd like to see the Confederacy finally get its day in an RFC mod, I think that it, as well as Israel or the Papal States, just don't fit with the scope of the mod.
Israel and the Papal States would have 1 city cores, and unlike the Dutch, wouldn't have large historical areas to colonize.
The Confederacy would last less than a dozen turns regardless of speed, which makes crafting good historical victory goals nearly impossible.

I like the idea of adding the Swahili, Swedes, and Tamerlane/Turkic Central Asian civ. A Nubian civ (like Makuria in SoI) could be interesting, as could more Amerindian or African civs. (Zulus? - with the bigger map it might actually work)

 

[1SDANi]

As much as I'd like to see the Confederacy finally get its day in an RFC mod, I think that it, as well as Israel or the Papal States, just don't fit with the scope of the mod.
Israel and the Papal States would have 1 city cores, and unlike the Dutch, wouldn't have large historical areas to colonize.
The Confederacy would last less than a dozen turns regardless of speed, which makes crafting good historical victory goals nearly impossible.

I like the idea of adding the Swahili, Swedes, and Tamerlane/Turkic Central Asian civ. A Nubian civ (like Makuria in SoI) could be interesting, as could more Amerindian or African civs. (Zulus? - with the bigger map it might actually work)

For Jerusalem and the Papal State, I would argue that 1 city civs should be allowed if they are sufficiently important in world history, such as Jerusalem and the Papal States.

Jerusalem especially is a civ I want as our current number of 3000 bc civs is quite low. It's also why I'm highly receptive to 3000 BC civ suggestions in general. Papal States is born more from a hatred of important cities being represented by independent cities. Whenever I find that something like Jerusalem, Rome, etc is supposed to be independant and not part of a major civ, a bit of myself dies inside. If I knew more about Native American/Asian cultures I'd probably be hurting even more tbh.

 

[Leoreth]

I think modern Israel is interesting because it would be different. I don't think ancient Juda is all that interesting. But I agree that there is a lot of potential still for African and Amerindian civs, as well as Central and South East Asian ones.