Extra Pack Finalization Project (part 2)

[molly bloom]

I think both Lindisfarne and Jarrow need to be removed from the list of Viking settlements; Jarrow still retains its Anglo-Saxon origins in its name and Lindisfarne is either Celtic or Anglo-Saxon or a combination of the two, and both are more associated with the Celtic Church and Anglo-Saxon kingdoms than with the Vikings, saving for the Viking raids upon them.

One possibility for the list is Leixlip in Ireland, which Scandinavian posters should have little difficulty in deciphering...gravadleix, anyone? Oh, and Aldeigjuborg in Russia.

[Dr. Nick]

waab, about your sig (which I like ), it's "victoria"

[Gangerolf]

About the Viking city list:
I think Jorvik (York) should be higher up.

possible additions:
Vedrafjord (Waterford, Ireland)
Fyrkat (in Denmark)
Kjönugard (Kiev)
Holmgard (Novgorod)
Jomsborg (Wolin, Poland)
Nonnebakken (in DK)
Lade (in Norway)
Borg (in Norway)
Vinland (in lack of a better name for the settlement in Newfoundland)

One possibility for the list is Leixlip in Ireland, which Scandinavian posters should have little difficulty in deciphering...gravadleix, anyone? .

Got smth to do with salmon? I'll try and find out

[Gangerolf]

That was easy...
http://www.kildare.ie/leixlip/lvt/hi...ng-vikings.htm

Viking incursions began in 795 A.D. For 300 years these intrepid sailors and warriors terrorised much of Europe and the Middle East, from Baghdad to Iceland. Dublin was a key Viking settlement. At Leixlip the Battle of Confey was fought in 917 A.D. circa. Battles waged back and forth between the natives and the invaders until a comprehensive Irish victory by Brian Boru in 1014 A.D. In addition to their legacy of fighting, trading, and craftsmanship, they left the site of the two rivers with a name, "Lax-hlaup" or "Salmon Leap," the only inland Norse place name.

[Wernazuma III]

kIndal: Greek Abdera was founded ~650BC. That's still later than spanish Abdera maybe, but greek Abdera was home of a number of important people like Protagoras, Democrit, Leucipp...

[Harlan]

Vikings:
The Longship (or Drakkar) should NOT be able to go on ocean. That's a very powerful ability, and not consistent with what the Vikings did. The Vikings hopped from island to island, even when going to America, and didn't cross the Atlantic in one go. This is consistent with the ability to cross "sea" terrain, which would still be a major boost over the Trireme. Instead, give their unit an offensive bonus.

As mentioned in the part 1 thread, I would advocate having only one SA for them: militaristic, and making up for that with an extra powerful UU.

Turks:
You aren't really doing the Turks here, you're doing the Ottomans, or even just the modern country of Turkey, judging from the city list. The Turks go way back, and had empires in Central Asia hundreds of years before the Ottoman Empire was ever formed. I would recommend making their capital something like Samarkand, or Bactria, and basing the city list around places like that. Otherwise, on a real world map, what civ would be starting in that vast area? Much better than having them bunched up with all the other Med civs. Definitely DON'T do Istanbul!

Even today, the Turks are as much a Central Asian civ as anything. Think countries like Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, where the language is so similar to Turkish that they can understand each other without translators.

I would also recommend the Bombard as their UU, just for something different. I don't know of any civ that has a seige weapon as the UU, that would be an interesting thing to play.

Phoenicians:
Quinquireme (check your spelling) should definitely be an offensive unit: +1 offense. Think of them as the battleships of ancient times. Definitely not an extra move - as pointed out already, if anything they moved slower.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Harlan
Vikings:
The Longship (or Drakkar) should NOT be able to go on ocean. That's a very powerful ability, and not consistent with what the Vikings did. The Vikings hopped from island to island, even when going to America, and didn't cross the Atlantic in one go.

Yes, but:

' "The Vikings who came to America were not the warriors," Hodding insists. "In fact, one of the reasons they didn't stay in America once they got there was because they were outfought by the native Americans who were living along the Canadian coast at the time. The Norsemen who came to America were looking for lumber and for better land, for grazing and for farming.
"But they were certainly adventurous, going out on the open ocean at a time like that as they did. For example, when the Vikings went from Iceland to Greenland, it's known there were 25 ships that set out, but only 14 made it. Some turned around, sure, but others were lost at sea." '

www.viking1000.org/lore/lore1.html


The knorr would have often replaced the drakkar for these voyages. Also:

' The Gokstad replicas
The Gokstad ship is the largest find to date - about 80 feet - and was a war ship. It was recovered from a burial mound. It is sleek and fast. Replicas have made ocean passages and weathered hurricanes at sea, so this was a fairly capable vessel. It is clear, though, that the war ship is not a good general trading ship with its relatively low freeboard and limited cargo carrying capacity. '

www.digitalnorseman.com/vships/shpintro.html

Also:

'The perilous voyages across the North Atlantic to the Orkneys, Shetlands, Faroes, Iceland and Greenland testify that the shipbuilders of the Viking age not only could build ships which were swiftsailing and capable of attacks in the North Sea area, but extremely seaworthy vessels as well.'

&

'The Viking ships were clinchbuilt. The ships used for travelling to distant shores were a result of a thousand years of experience in the Nordic area. Shipbuilders strove to construct lightweight and flexible vessels, pliant to the forces of sea and wind - working with the elements instead of against them. The hull of the Viking ships is built on a solid keel, which together with a finely curved bow, forms the backbone of the vessel. Strafe after strafe was fitted to keel and stem and these were bolted to each other with iron rivets. This hull shell provided strength and flexibility. After the shipbuilder had given the shell its desired shape, ribs made from naturallycurved trees were fitted and these gave additional strength. To increase flexibility, strafes and ribs were bound together. Cross supports at the waterline supplied lateral support, and extra solid logs braced the mast.

The ships sailed were squarerigged on a midship mast. In a calm, or against a strong headwind, the crew could man the oars.

As the Viking period progressed, different types of ships were developed. There were ships intended for battle which were built for speed and a large crew. There were also ships built for commercial trade, where speed was less important. These had a greater girth to permit more cargo. Trade ships did not have a large crew, and they were better suited for sailing than for rowing. '

http://odin.dep.no/odin/engelsk/norw...000-b-n-a.html

[molly bloom]

Almost forgot- Leif Eiriksson sailed along the 60 degree parallel for 2897 km without sighting land, opening up the trade route between Greenland, Scotland and Norway.

[Dr. Nick]

Harlan, I disagree with offensive bonus. The reason why Alfred put such a stress on the British navy, was because he knew that the vikings were defenceless on their ships. The reason he kept the Vikings at bay, was because he went out to fight them at sea, where the longship was useless. It was a transport ship, and fighting on warships was impossible.

If anything, give it extra movement (they were faster than anything before) and extra hold space (reflect the transport ability, allows to put more troops on it when invading).

[molly bloom]

From the Smithsonian:

www.mnh.si.edu/vikings/index2.html

[molly bloom]

'Sailing directions from western Norway to Greenland
reads like this:
From the west country sail west but keep far enough north of the Shetlands so that these islands are barely visible in clear weather.
One should stay far enough south of the Faeroes so that their steep and high mountains are just halfway up over the horizon.
In addition one should stay far enough south of Iceland so that you can't see land but just the coast-bound birds.
When you reached the east coast of Greenland you should keep a lookout for landmarks and follow the current west around Cape Farvel to the villages on the south-west point.


This description can be found in Landnáma, the chronicles of Icelandic settlements, Hauksbók, 2nd chapter. A different version can be found in Landnáma Sturlubók, 2nd chapter.'

viking.no/e/travels/navigation/e-no-gre.htm

[Harlan]

Regarding the Longship's ability to sail over ocean. I'm not saying the Vikings weren't good sailors who could sail long distances away from land occasionally. But a lot of that was sheer chutspah and bravery, not the intrinsic quality of the ship (though they were good for their time). The stat that 25 ships set out for Greenland but only 14 made it is indicative.

The game allows ships with the "sea" ability to go out into open ocean, but there's a chance of sinking, if I recall. That would fit perfectly, instead of being able to sail anywhere without drowning.

Also, if you look at it from a playbalance perspective, having the "ocean" ability is a balance breaker. The ability for ships to sail early onto ocean was taken away from the Lighthouse wonder in the patch for the same reason.

Regarding adding offensive power to the Longship, I realize the ships themselves weren't offensive weapons. But if you abstract it out, and consider the ship to be the whole package of Viking raids, then I think that is fully justifable. Otherwise, give them a second UU, that would be an early Marine type unit. If I recall, Age of Kings did this, making the Vikings the only civ with two UUs in the game (my knowledge of the game is sketchy though, I could be wrong).

[Dr. Nick]

Harlan, I was going to propose the same thing yesterday... give them two UUs, as one alone wouldn't make any real difference.

A berserker unit, with marine abilities (could be a plain swordsman with amphibious landing ability) and the longship (extra hold space/movement)

About the movement, I'm doing it based on the fact that the drakkars were much faster than the average ship at the time.

[Wernazuma III]

Harlan/ El Awrence:

I don't think it would be a good idea to give a civ 2 UUs. At first this would double the golden age probability and too much benefit.
After reading the posts I changed ocean to sea ability. Sure, Vikings did sail on ocean but not completely freely. The Sea ability together with an additional movement point allows them to move over 3 ocean squares anyway.
About the additional attack point: I really think that we should not give 2 bonuses without testing the pack. If one UU in the end turns out to be too poor, we can still change it.

[Dr. Nick]

Well, maybe take away a civ attribute.

[molly bloom]

I feel that the attack aspect of the longship really reflects its protean military nature- although the Vikings sensibly preferred to stay within sight of land a majority of the time, the longship could, when necessary, venture into the open sea, out of sight of any watchers on the shore. Combine this ability with its speed, and more importantly its shallow draught, and you have a ship that has amphibious landing class capabilities, and that can when required also sail open sea. The early chronicles express surprise at the seemingly magical appearance of Viking ships from out of nowhere, the difference between the Viking raiders and their opponents, being that the longships could be beached and also sail up deep and shallow estuarine reaches, and be moved overland:

'The longship was the thoroughbred racing warship. It was usually about 25m/ 80ft long. Each gunwale was pierced with holes for oars, and a single mast stepped amidships carried a large, square sail. This gave the longships speed and manoeuvrability and their shallowness of draught allowed them to penetrate rivers They needed no harbours for they were designed to be beached on any shelving sandy shore. '

http://viking.no/e/travels/evikingships.htm

[Yasko]

Cool that you will put the turks in game. I would prefer to have Suleyman I as Ruler. Mehmed II should be the first leader turkish civ. gets, since he is No 1 when it comes the most able turkish ruler, but Suleyman was the most powerful one in turkish history.

I would prefer to have; Mehmed II, Atatürk, Selim I, Murad II, Alp Arslan, Bilge Kagan, Tughril Beg, Koprulu Pasha, Sokolli Pasha, Piri Reis as leaders in given order. Couple of cities from Central Asia should be in the list like, Samarkand, Taskent, etc. and some of the minor cities from todays Turkey could be removed such as Bitlis, Ayas, Silifke....

I prefer Sipahi as a special unit, it could represent the fact that turks has been nomads......

Turkish civ should be Expansionistic and militaristic. Capital should be ISTANBUL

Shunned/Favored Gov.: Communism, Monarchy

[Wernazuma III]

Yasko: Thanks for the leader names. The UU and the ruler however should not be changed anymore IMHO, we've discussed this at length by now.
And we already have too many Civs shunning Communism (everyone it seems wants to shun them for THEIR civ ), so I'd say we keep it as is.

T also want to let the central asian cities to remain mongol cities, even if they're inhabited by turk-people. Otherwise no mongol cities would be left. And furthermore, we shouldn't make the Turks a "pan-turk" civ, just like we don't have a "pan-slavic" russia etc.
Anyway, thanks for the input, I'll update the leader list.

[Optimizer]

The Viking favoured government could be Republic since Iceland is the world's oldest continuous republic. The title should be "godi", the Viking equivalent of a consul.

[Graeme the mad]

IM realy worried that there are no modern UU's in this mod-pack so how about making the turks have one? - The modern turkish army is exceptionally good so possibly an upgraded marine (+2 attack possibly)

[Yasko]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
Yasko: Thanks for the leader names. The UU and the ruler however should not be changed anymore IMHO, we've discussed this at length by now.
And we already have too many Civs shunning Communism (everyone it seems wants to shun them for THEIR civ ), so I'd say we keep it as is.

T also want to let the central asian cities to remain mongol cities, even if they're inhabited by turk-people. Otherwise no mongol cities would be left. And furthermore, we shouldn't make the Turks a "pan-turk" civ, just like we don't have a "pan-slavic" russia etc.
Anyway, thanks for the input, I'll update the leader list.

About "pan-turkish" issue, you have right about it better keep it like it is. Originally i suggested militaristic and expansionistic civ type for the turks. But maybe militaristic and religious is a better choise. Turks did build many mosques around modern Turkey and have some "good" architects like Sinan and religious "leaders" like Mewlana and his sufis which was the one of the biggest reasons that turks could convert a big part of the original population to Islam in Anatolia.

"IM realy worried that there are no modern UU's in this mod-pack so how about making the turks have one? - The modern turkish army is exceptionally good so possibly an upgraded marine (+2 attack possibly)"

To be honest Turksih army sucks compared to the US army. IMHO US are the only civ who deserves UU in modern age(1950-2002)

[Willem]

Originally posted by Rosacrux


Longboat (or Drakkar - I too like that name better) is a fine UU and I think you should keep the "can cross ocean" ability (after all they did cross the ocean ) and drop the extra movement.
And I guess you mean "shunned democracy, favored monarchy", am I right?

But they did so by more or less staying close to the coastlines of Iceland and Greenland.

[Patroklos]

A few note on the Phoencians. Using Hannibal as the leader is not at all historically accurate. Phoenician civilization existed for a thousand years before the founding Cathage, probobly more. Hannibal has the advantage of bieng the only Phoenician the lay-man knows about, but after all he was just a general, not even a Sufet (unlike Roman consuls Sufets were not necessarily military leaders). We probobly want to use a leader that had something to do with their rise to power. No thought should be given to Dido, she was by no means a great Phoenecian leader, her only claim to fame bieng the founding of a dimunative trading colony. Cathage was nothing is history for hundreds of years after her death and she had nothing to do with it's rise to power. I will consult the history books for a better leader name.

Another note. I don't know if you have taken care of this or not but a few of the Persian city names are Phonecian, most notable Tyre. This should be the capital as it was the seat of Phoenician power for a thousand yeas, and is about that much older than Carthage as well. Cathage only became a principle Poenician city because the rest of their domains were captured by the Assyrians.

Last point. With the existance of the Arabs, Egyptians, Persians, Babylonians, Turks, and Phoenicians in the same general area there use on a real world map would make for a very crowded Middle East. The Phenecians would have to start in present day Lebonan, North African expanion was very late in their history. However, since Egytian and Persian power were crushed in the ancient era, and the Phenicians were completly destroyed I guess having an early fight to the death in the Middle East would be accurate.

Choice of an improved naval unit is a good choice, few of Hannibals elephants made it over the Alps, Romans knew how to deal with them from Prryhus of the Greeks long before fighting Carthage.

sorry for any spelling errors

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
Mayas

Names: Maya, the Mayas, Mayan

Should be the Maya, without 's'.

Ruler/Title: Pacal/ Bacab

I take it that's Pacal II?

Leaders: Nachi Cocom, Cecilio Chi, Hunak Ke’el

B'alaj Chan K'awiil, Yuxum Balam (IV), Ahho'bak, Chak Kimi, Chac Balam

UU: Balam Warrior (1/2/1); replaces Warrior

Balam is the Mayan word for Jaguar, the right choice. It's the Aztec who should have another UU, the Dragon Warrior!

Cities:

Nakbe, El Mirador, El Baul, Abaj Takalik, Naranjo, Machaquilla, Lagartero, Piedras Negras, Cuello

[jasev]

Originally posted by Ribannah
Balam is the Mayan word for Jaguar, the right choice. It's the Aztec who should have another UU, the Dragon Warrior!

Did dragons really exist in Aztec myths?

Nakbe, El Mirador, El Baul, Abaj Takalik, Naranjo, Machaquilla, Lagartero, Piedras Negras, Cuello

What about Palenque? I think it was the religious capital of the Maya.

By the way, I'm not sure about that "Maya/Mayas" topic. Of course, it's your language so you know it better than me (at least, I hope so ), but in spanish we say "Mayas" as plural from "Maya".

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by jasev
Did dragons really exist in Aztec myths?

Whatdya mean, myths?
There are still dragons about on the earth today.

What about Palenque? I think it was the religious capital of the Maya.

Palenque is already in the list as it is, a decent choice for the capital.

By the way, I'm not sure about that "Maya/Mayas" topic. Of course, it's your language so you know it better than me (at least, I hope so ), but in spanish we say "Mayas" as plural from "Maya".

I'm not Maya myself, so I'm not a 100% sure, but the 's' to create plurals is originally a Celtic thing, I think. Amerind people don't call themselves "a" Maya or "an" Apache at all, so there is not really a singular form.
Btw, did you know that Tuareg (Sahara nomads) is actually the plural of Taugari?

[jasev]

Originally posted by Ribannah
Whatdya mean, myths?
There are still dragons about on the earth today.

Where? I thought I killed the last one last month

Palenque is already in the list as it is, a decent choice for the capital.

OK, sorry, I should have seen it.

I'm not Maya myself

Well, I was talking about english language. After all, we're writing in english here. But now I realized I don't really know where are you from, so when I assumed it was your language it was my mistake.

Btw, did you know that Tuareg (Sahara nomads) is actually the plural of Taugari?

Of course.

[Wernazuma III]

Ribannah: Dragon Warriors? I guess Eagle Warriors (Nahuatl for Eagle: Cuauhtli) would have been better for the Aztecs, but since we try to evade changing existing civs it is best to keep it as it is.
About your additional cities: I kept those with spanish names from the list, not because they're not important but I didn't want to give mayan cities spanish names. This creates the illusion of an already hispanized civ. I'll add Nakbe and Abaj Takalik though. Pacal btw. is the famous Pacal with the mask, of course. About your leaders: I'm no Maya-specialist, so I guess it's best if you write a few words who they were and why we should consider to include them.
Thanks, Wernazuma