While you wait for Civ5...

[micbic]

It appears that you greatly underestimate the firing skills of the famous Dutch archers.

This given, the Dutch could wage war at the French anytime, with the Belgians not taking notice, or confusing the flying arrows for shooting stars

 

[Crossphazer]

I think in an RFC-esque mod of Civ V, a collapsed Civ should collapse into a few City States for the important cities, and something like independents for the minor cities. Also, we need to get rid of the silly "can't destroy Capitals or City States" rule and perhaps add a domination type victory in % population/land area, because capturing ALL the world's capitals in a system with stability is going to be very difficult. Also because there aren't any vassals anymore (perhaps add this too.)

 

[nody]

May I now briefly rant about why Civ V seems unappealing? Tactical battles in a grand strategic game. Archers firing arrows across a tile the size of Belgium.

The map should be twice as large as the Civ IV map so an archer in Amsterdam can barely reach Brussel. Also the 1 UPT-rule should be modded out.

 

[Baldyr]

I think that the 1UPT rule is something you simply have to learn to live with. The other versions of Civ have similar non-believable features also - and we adjusted to them, right? (And I am still a big fan of the Panzer General games, which basically use the same combat rules.)

While I'm not getting Civ5, at all, the deciding factor for me in the long run could very well be whether or not the AI has been greatly improved. Almost anything could be overlooked as long as there is a good enough AI, IMHO. This is after all why I'm not playing and modding Civ2 anymore...

The improved graphics I couldn't care less about. They will only serve to make modding more difficult, which pretty much defeats the point of a Civ game for me personally...

 

[Leoreth]

I agree. Better AI would make me play Civ5. Graphics or their questionable game design approach to global strategy? Not really.

 

[nody]

I would buy the game for having nice graphics and beautiful background music, too.

Which are in Civ IV already great.

 

[killerkebab]

I'm sure you don't really need our help to think of city states, that said since Spain/Portugal/Dutch are out I suppose it would be a good idea to have Madrid/Amsterdam/Lisboa as city states, also a whole load of city states in their usual colonial spots, maybe with a randomisation feature so that the game isn't too deterministic and the player can feasibly colonise somewhere ahistorical if they so choose.

Since the Vikings aren't in either we'd need some cities in Scandinavia/Denmark, many of the Independents present in Civ4 RFC should make a re-appearence as city states imo, even if we increase the number of civs. City states such as Seoul, Patna, Samarqand amongst others.

Seeing the Earth map present with the game (in the videos they released) I have a feeling it is smaller than the current RFC map (in terms of number of tiles). I may be wrong but it just feels quite small...

 

[nody]

Seeing the Earth map present with the game (in the videos they released) I have a feeling it is smaller than the current RFC map (in terms of number of tiles). I may be wrong but it just feels quite small...

Of course Rhye will make his own Earth map, which will at least be as big as the Civ IV RFC map. RFC for Civ V should be an improvement on Civ IV, not a step backwards. I hope 'missing' features like certain resources (like corn, pig, copper, rice, crab and clam) can be modded in.

Also, people who will play Civ V already must have a better computer than they needed for Civ IV. So a bigger map shouldn't be a problem if you are worried about loading time. I'm buying a new one within a few weeks. (of course I saved some money to be ready before I buy Civ V and another game that will be released shortly that I want to be able to play).

 

[killerkebab]

Also, people who will play Civ V already must have a better computer than they needed for Civ IV. So a bigger map shouldn't be a problem if you are worried about loading time. I'm buying a new one within a few weeks. (of course I saved some money to be ready before I buy Civ V and another game that will be released shortly that I want to be able to play).

I don't think it is quite so simple. This game has some pretty big system requirements - especially when compared to its predecessors at their time of release.

 

[Úmarth]

Well, getting back on topic. I've taken a stab at selectively combining the suggestions so far, sorted them by period/region and into "necessary" and "less important", and used Wikipedia to get dates. Rather than just "filling up" as before I've tried to pay attention to having cities for each civ to deal with, more than one of that civ is otherwise isolated, and where possible placing independents between two or more civs.

There are way more than 25, so it might have to be pared down. I say might, because I'd like to suggest that a lot more independent cities would be a good for representing the way most Empires were built by conquest and not colonisation, and how minor states constantly rise and fall alongside the major civilizations.

Assumptions:
- There will only be one start, 3000 BC or thereabouts.
- Using the short chronology for the Near East.
- The Greek civ, like in RFC, won't make coastal colonies in the west, so these are independent. Anyway this has an historical basis: they weren't deliberate 'colonial' foundations, but date to a much earlier period, and actually appeared about the same time as the polis back in Greece. They were culturally associated with Greece proper, but not politically subordinate to it. Same with the Phoenician colonies, but since there isn't a Phoenician civ that doesn't matter.
- Germany will be like it is in RFC: just one civ, representing the HRE inc. Austria and then modern Germany (although personally I think this is a great opportunity to represent Germany/the HRE better).
- Colonisation by missing civs (Spain, Portugal, Netherlands), will be handled some other way.
- The Songhai civ will be used to represent the Empire of Mali too, otherwise maybe there is a case for having Malinese cities e.g. Timbuktu as independents before they spawn.
- Siam will cover most of SE Asia.
- The Indian civ will mainly represent northern Indian civilizations and Empires.




ANCIENT NEAR EAST

Necessary
Hattusas (2000 BC)
Babylon (1800 BC)
Troy (1300 BC)
Jerusaleum (1100 BC)

Less important
Knossos (3000 BC)
Tyre (2000 BC - http://phoenicia.org/cities.html)
Salamis (1100 BC)
Antioch (320 BC)


CLASSICAL EUROPE

Necessary
Syracuse (730 BC)
Massilia (600 BC)

Less important
Caralis (700 BC)
Tarentum (700 BC)


CLASSICAL NORTH AFRICA/SPAIN

Necessary
Leptis Magna -> Tripoli (1100 BC)
Carthage (800 BC)
Carthago Nova (230 BC)

Less important
Cyrene (630 BC)
Emporion -> Barcelona (575 BC)
Tingis (500 BC)
Saguntum (400 BC)


MEDIEVAL WEST/CENTRAL EUROPE

Necessary
Edinburgh (600)
Amsterdam (1300)
Warsaw (1300)

Less important
Geneva (400)
Dublin (840)


MEDIEVAL BALTIC/SCANDANAVIA

Necessary
Oslo (1050)
Copenhagen (1170)
Stockholm (1250)

Less important
Nidaros -> Trondheim (1000)
Riga (1200)


MEDIEVAL SPAIN

Necessary
Madrid (1080)
Lisbon (1140, foundation of K. of Portugal)

Less important
Barcelona (From Emporion, or 340)
Cordoba (170 - Roman foundation, 710 - conquest by Muslims)


MEDIEVAL RUSSIA

Necessary
Kiev (800)

Less important
Novgorod (1000)
Kazan (1000)


AMERICAS

Necessary
Tikal (200)
Cuzco (900)
Tlaxcala (1300)

Less important
Tiwanaku (400)
Copan (420)
Quito (980)
Chan Chan (850)


EAST ASIA

Necessary
Wiryeseong -> Namgyeong -> Hanseong -> Seoul (20 BC)
or Pyongyang (400, made capital of Goguryeo)
Lhasa (640)
Hanoi (870)

Less important
Jakarta (400)


SILK ROAD

Necessary
Balkh/Bactra (1700 BC)
Samarkand (700 BC)

Less important
Turfan (?)
Kucha (?)
Kashgar (?)


SOUTH ASIA

Necessary
Pataliputra -> Patna (500 BC)
Kanchipuram (300)
Pagan (870)
(needs expanding, I think, but I know nothing about Indian history)


ARABIA/EAST AFRICA

Necessary
Kerma -> Napata -> Moroe (they'll be on the same tile, presumably) (2500 BC)
Aksum (1000 BC?)

Less important
Aden (100 BC)
Musqat (700)
Mogadishu (900)
Mombasa (?)
Kilwa (1000)


WEST & SOUTH AFRICA

Necessary
M'banza-Kongo (1400?)
Great Zimbabwe (1000?)

 

[LuKo]

Why Warsaw so late? And why Vikings so late? Anyway, great job

 

[Úmarth]

None of the dates are properly researched, just quickly grabbed from Wikipedia. But I figured that was a start, at least.

 

[Sikandar]

Why not include Babylon as a playable civ and just have an alternate made for people who didn't buy the deluxe edition?

 

[Magnificent One]

Spain should be in before Bayblon if any new civs are being created.

 

[Sikandar]

Spain should be in before Bayblon if any new civs are being created.

Spain isn't in Civ V. Babylon is.

 

[Dargoth]

Roman start area (2)
Syracuse (Sicily)
Medolanum (Northern Italy)

French start area (1)
Massillia (Southern France)

Greek start area (3)
Rhodes
Sparta
Pella

English star area(3)
Dublin
Edinbourgh
Cardiff

America area start area (0)
None

Arabia start area(2)
Damascus
Jerusalem

Aztec start area (1)
Tikal

China start area (4)
Hong Kong
Maceu
Taipei
Seoul

Egypt start area (1)
Alexandria

Germany start area (3)
Vienna
Copenhagen
Warsaw

India start area (3)
Karachi
Islamabad
Dhaka

Ottomans start area (1)
Constantinople


Russians start area (1)
Kiev

Siam (1)
Ankor wat

Hopefully you will be able to raise the number of city states over 24

I was rather bemused that we already have a new fan made civ for civ5 up on this site The Celts maybe Rhye will get lucky and somebody will do Spain

 

[onedreamer]

Tactical battles in a grand strategic game.

Civ isn't a grand strategy game. It's a strategy game. Strategy games include tactical battles.


IT:
In spain I would scrap Barcelona (not so important considering History from ancient days till today) and have Cadiz and some other, maybe La Coruna.

 

[SalmonSoil]

This thread gives us a good idea of how the world map turns out for ciV. Apparently this is a standard size map and I would be happy playing RFC on this. (Havn't seen Europe properly yet though.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=380899

 

[Dargoth]

This thread gives us a good idea of how the world map turns out for ciV. Apparently this is a standard size map and I would be happy playing RFC on this. (Havn't seen Europe properly yet though.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=380899

Nah its to small

Apparently theres an Earth map for each map size in Civ 5. Im hoping that the biggest earth map will be at least the same size as the one Rhyes used for his mod in civ4 (ideally it should be bigger)

 

[Jusos2108]

Sad to say this, but that world map looks horrible. Uhh, the rivers...

EDIT: and it needs to be consirable bigger.