Xens' criteria for what makes a good civ

[Xen]

In my opib=nion, there are several things which makes civs an obvious choice for being a good civ pick for the gmae they are-

-UU that is really Unique
-Fun to play
-have obvious civ traits
-have good historical merit for great achievments, and big roler on the political arena
-and have a unique culture

as such. I would like to see people post civilisations that meet the criteria

I'll start with an example


Byzantium

-Cataphract, replaces knight, one more point of attack

- well the cataphract would be fun to play with, i think every one can agree on that

-Religious (need I explain) and commercial (as even after almost all territory surrounding constantinople had been taken it was able to have a much larger influence then it could have other wise due to its favorable position on the trade routs) or Religious, and scientific (they held much classical knowledge, and often put it to good use)

-Hagia Sofia was a mighty monument, but more importantlly, they were the most important nation in the eastern med for a good deal, if not most of the middle ages

-except for the nations they directlly influenced (like Russia) Byzantine culture is very unique, particurally from that of classical Rome....

 

[Gainy]

Scotland

-Jacobite, replaces musketman, two more points of attack, costs 10 more sheilds

-You could run around killing all the English you want, fun fun fun!

-Scientific/Industrious/seafearing. The Telephone, Television, and Penecillin were all Scottish creations. By 1900, 20% of the worlds boats were made in Scotland(this applies to seafearing and industrious). Scots were also quick to take to the seas in mass emigrations to Canada...(the US and Australia too)

-Adam Smiths trading company was Scottish...

-Who else wears kilts and drinks lots of whiskey!

 

[pawpaw]

Originally posted by Xen
In my opib=nion, there are several things which makes civs an obvious choice for being a good civ pick for the game they are-

they can call themselves by anyname as long as their secret name is byzantium, they can be militarlisic, regilous, comerical,whatever as long as they know they started in rome. finally they have to have cataphracts

 

[Xen]

not just any Cataphracts- byzantine cataphracts. like so-

 

[Gainy]

How are the horses supposed to move if they have their legs attatched to a platform though!?
You wouldn't find a Jacobite like that

 

[Xen]

good question, we'll leave it to Atari to figure it out while they make the Byzantine Civ, and Cataphract

 

[Hygro]

that cataphract looks explicitly Roman.

 

[Xen]

It should- The byzantine military organization, and equipment was firmlly based on that of Rome

 

[Louis XXIV]

My criterea, in this order. They really only need one, but should have all 3. The civ with the most choices (or the higher choices) would be better picks

#1. Have contributed greatly to history (through building an empire, scientific advancement, cultural acheivement, etc)

#2. Having had one of the greatest influences on the region of that time (Byzantine had great economic and cultural influence, even if it wasn't the greatest civ of that time and region)

#3. Are very famous (The Celts are famous)

#4. The best civ in an underused region (The Zulu were not the best civ of the time, the Iroquois, although better than the Zulu, were technologically backwards. But both are in an underused region. More importantly, both were the best of the region)

In addition to those requirements, the civ should be able to resonably add traits and UU to. This is a little difficult becuase sometimes the trait, or UU stats are taken, and a better idea has to be thought of.

I feel this applies to any civ at all. And, while an Ethiopia would get some of the requirements, an Assyria, Byzantine, or probably Israel would get more, and be chosen first.

 

[Xen]

Mid Imperial era Rome that is

 

[Xen]

but your leaving out FUN, this is a game after all, and coolness certainly has to count, along with how fun a civ would be to use

 

[Louis XXIV]

I figure most civs are cool because they are either well known, or fit well into the gameplay

For example, many like Rome, that's because they are well known. Their UU isn't bad, which helps a lot.

Many people like Persia, even though their Immortals are way overpowered compared to real life. Persia qualifies for other reasons, but it is popular just so it can fit into the game.

I wouldn't pick a civ just because it is fun, I will pick a civ and make it fun.

EDIT: I hope you could understand what I was saying, I'm confusing myself.

Persia is popular because it is powerful. Its UU is more powerful than real life's equivalent. But that was how it was made in civ3. Civs are "cool", either for what they are like in Civ3, or because they are well known. (Now I'm just rambling )

 

[Xen]

my criteria for a good civ pick defentaley has Persia in the game- they meet all the criteria, I would however change that UU A LOT though....

 

[pawpaw]

Originally posted by Xen
I would however change that UU A LOT though....

why just because the only recorded time they went into battle was thermopylae-and got their butts kicked

 

[Louis XXIV]

Pretty much

Immortals were the body guards of Xerxes. They were the only unit that came closest to the armor of the Hoplites. But they weren't close. They couldn't win either.

They were used to win the battle, though (after that Greek who betrayed everyone showed the Persians the mountain pass, Immortals were sent to go through it. The undisciplined Phoecians assigned to guard it fled, and Xerxes surrounded the army of 300 spartans and a few thousand Thebains and Thespians.

The strength of the Persian army was its archer and mounted units (epsecially mounted archers). At the end of the third day, the Greeks were surrounded at a hill. Unwilling to loose any more men, the Persians simply shot them to death in a sea of arrows.

At Platea, the final defeat of the Persians, the Persian cavalry cut up the Greeks. But in the infantry charge, they lost decisively, and left Greece.

 

[Mrogreturns]

Originally posted by Xen
not just any Cataphracts- byzantine cataphracts. like so-

Why does this ..... thing..... deserve one more attack point than a knight?

 

[NHJ BV]

Holland

UU: Perhaps a faster and/or better Frigate, say one movement point, one extra attack point.

Fun: because....uh...well...it's fun

Traits: Seafaring & Commercial, because Holland is seafaring and commercial Holland was both the commercial and maritime center of the world in the 17th century. Dutch ships traded with anyone from the Mediterranean up to the Baltic states.

-Holland has made numerous scientific advancements, and was the #1 power in the 17th century.

-No unique culture, so what

 

[Dom Pedro II]

why just because the only recorded time they went into battle was thermopylae-and got their butts kicked

well, come on now... let's try to keep in mind the circumstances... they were charging a wall of metal in a space only about fifty feet wide and they were going up against one of the most well-trained military machines ever to have marched across the earth... they weren't exactly starting off with good odds.


Louis XXIV: Interesting. So you think that they should maybe have some kind of mounted archer as their UU? What would these be called?

But also I personally think having the Immortal, even if it is overpowered compared to history, is alright. I mean, Civ is fictional. Fictional world. Fictional wars. Fictional timeline... Basically, I could see changing it, but I'm not up-in-arms about it either.

 

[Xen]

Originally posted by Mrogreturns


Why does this ..... thing..... deserve one more attack point than a knight?

This..."thing", just happens to be the best cavalryman of its age, created to fight the Sarmatians, Parthians, and Persians, and then refined to take on the Mongols and Huns & Co., the Cataphract was the most versatile fighter of its time.

Now then, with this super-soldire in hand, why did Byzantium still fall? simple, even though such troops help evewn out the odds, the simple numbers of enymy troops from jealouse nations were simply to much,combined with the failing of the Thematic system due to greedy rich men (It's always is there falt for these things...) and Byzantium was skrewed.

and some proof that the Byzantiens deserve a unit, as descisive and important for so long as the knight? well the proof of the matter comes from the fact that even though the Mighty Generals Belisarius and Narses (general and superp command under non-emperors being the other big equalizer in the Byzantine empire, also another thing which had begun to wain by the fall of the Thematic system) had reconqoured so much old Roman territory, yet -relativly- soon after there deaths a good deal of the land was lost, making me think that the Cataphract was a unit better for offensive actions (which the few time the Byzantines did do it was done with great success, just ask Justinian, or Basil II) while the rest of the Byzantine milatary was more primed for deafense- in civ terms, a army of Cataphracts (more powerful knights), and pikemen.

 

[pawpaw]

Originally posted by Dom Pedro II


well, come on now... let's try to keep in mind the circumstances... they were charging a wall of metal in a space only about fifty feet wide and they were going up against one of the most well-trained military machines ever to have marched across the earth... they weren't exactly starting off with good odds.

true but it IS the only recorded use of them in battle and 100 years later they are never mentioned again in any persian battles-hence the don't deserve to be the baddest unit in the ancient era of civ 3