era specific civ-packs

sabrewolf · June 12, 2002, 08:00

hey there!

i'm new here and have been reading through a lot of these threads and specially in this forum (Civ3-Civilizations) the topic is always "Civilisation X should be in because of Y".
basically I agree with many people, i too am missing some civs... but which ones to take and drop which other instead?
i just had an idea (for firaxis in XP2 or some mod-creators around here

), how this could be solved fair and square: there should be something like era-packs for civilizations.

- in the ancient era you've got romans, egyptians, babylonians, greek, etc. but also add some others like carthagians, phonecians, cretians, ancient china... just the main 8-12 (mainly extinct) civs.

- in the colonization era there's definetly got to be england, spanish, portugese, french, dutch, etc. for the colonisers and iroquois, aztec, inca, maya, and a lot of other native civs. also some african civs could be added and india of course. i guess 16 civs for this era.

- the industrial pack still should include the english, french, spanish, but exclude the extinct natives and include important industial countries like the americans, germans, japanese, osmans, etc. because in this era, mainly the british and french "colonised" the middle east, arabs should appear too... also 16 nations here.

- in the modern times there should be about 16-24 present world- and regional powers, adding the most powerful nations (so if we take nukes as sign of power, israel, pakistan, india and others could come in question).

basically, the idea would be, that in the beginning you're got culture-based civilizations and towards present time the civs are nations. so even though americans are basicly mainly descendants of european cultures, america as a country MUST be included.

some civs would be there in most eras, but change their attitude. chinese used to be very scientific and cultural in comparison to others, now not any more. germany was extremly aggressive between 1850 and 1950, but since then they're probably the most peaceful power... so in modern times they don't deserve the aggression level=5. japan used to be very isolated, then they opened up and now they are very industrious... and so on and so on... one could bring a lot of these examples.

i admit, that i don't know enough about world history to choose the definite members of each era. we had a lot at school, but as usual it's mainly based on things on the own continent. (btw: my history teacher had some kind of art and literature fetish

... we got to know every painter writer in the medieval times, but he didn't say a word about the second world war

wierd guy...)
so please don't hang me, if i got something wrong or forgot some important races, nations or civs... i think you got my point: different sets of civs so noone can say that X should be there instead of Y. and like this it makes a lot more sence than fighting between babylonians (extict for ages) against chinese (always influential) and america (relatively new).

btw: if you begin with the ancient era, you could still play on into modern times. and the other way round a modern country could be used i older eras, etc. maybe one could mix old and new (like in the present version), but of course having ancient and modern china would look strange

the disadvantage of this idea are the unique units. with my solution all in the same era-pack would have more or less at the same time their UUs and GA.

i hope i triggered an interesting thread

sabrewolf

Fresno · June 12, 2002, 11:25

Quote:

so please don't hang me, if i got something wrong or forgot some important races, nations or civs...

I miss the entire medieval era, but I won't hang you

sabrewolf · June 12, 2002, 11:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Fresno
I miss the entire medieval era, but I won't hang you

well actually i thought of that but don't know if nations would be very representative. afaik regional medieval-warlords (sorry, i don't know a matching word for what i wanted to say

my english-vocab isn't so good) controlled mostly, kings had influence but where more symbolically... think of the jeanne d'arc story. there where burgundians, etc. probably every major city was governed by someone else.... or am i wrong? (again?

)

Purple · June 12, 2002, 18:19

In the Medieval Era you would definitely have to have an Islamic power.

China? India? Vikings? Pre-Columbian American civs?

Imp. Montezuma · June 12, 2002, 19:51

Great idea! Just my own dream...

Early civilizations era: Mohenjo-Daro, Harappa, Hatti, Sumer, Egipt, First Chinese Kings, Etruscan, Creto-Minoan, Zimbabwe, Elam, Biblos, Ieriho, Arkaim

Medieval Powers: Franks, Goths, Rus', Khazars, Mongols, Huwarizm, India, Aksum, Khalifat, Byzantines, Pope, Persia, Ayutthaia

Panag · June 13, 2002, 09:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Purple
In the Medieval Era you would definitely have to have an Islamic power.

China? India? Vikings? Pre-Columbian American civs?

hi ,

why not go a step further , and include "religion" in the game , .....

have a nice day

sabrewolf · June 14, 2002, 05:40

Quote:

Originally posted by panag
why not go a step further , and include "religion" in the game , .....

interesting... i guess all would have the "religous"-flag checked

who would be the leaders?
- the gods? if so: what if two religions have the same god?
- the "founders"? abraham, jesus, mohammed, buddha? but some don't have any
- the "representatives"? the pope, the khameneis, etc?

but the UUs would be fun...

Panag · June 14, 2002, 15:10

Quote:

Originally posted by sabrewolf

interesting... i guess all would have the "religous"-flag checked

who would be the leaders?
- the gods? if so: what if two religions have the same god?
- the "founders"? abraham, jesus, mohammed, buddha? but some don't have any
- the "representatives"? the pope, the khameneis, etc?

but the UUs would be fun...

hi ,

well the point is different religions , a catholic civ should get a cathedral cheaper , a jewish should get the library and the temple , an islam civ should have the tech's like astronomy and navigation cheaper , ...etc , ...

now , this is just an idea , to point out what could be done , and maybe there could be different graphics , like a civ as a different view of the city , so should a temple be , ....

have a nice day

thamis · June 15, 2002, 10:06

Ancient Era:

see The Ancient Mediterranean MOD

or, on Apolyton (less info in the thread)
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=51402

sabrewolf · June 17, 2002, 17:35

Quote:

Originally posted by thamis
Ancient Era:

see The Ancient Mediterranean MOD

or, on Apolyton (less info in the thread)
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=51402

great mod! very similar units for everyone, though.

now if this one would be integrated together with 3-4 other era packs in civ4 or civ3xp2 i'd probably buy it twice

Panag · June 17, 2002, 17:40

Quote:

Originally posted by thamis
Ancient Era:

see The Ancient Mediterranean MOD

or, on Apolyton (less info in the thread)
http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=51402

hi ,

nice , but it could use even 24 civ's , ....

have a nice day

Gangerolf · June 17, 2002, 18:34

Quote:

an islam civ should have the tech's like astronomy and navigation cheaper

why? maybe the arabs were early in the fields of astronomy and navigation, but what's that got to do with their religion?
give them cheap mosques or suicide bombers or something instead.

sabrewolf · June 17, 2002, 18:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Gangerolf
why? maybe the arabs were early in the fields of astronomy and navigation, but what's that got to do with their religion?
give them cheap mosques or suicide bombers or something instead.

please, this isn't another one of these israel-islam-threads. and suicide bombers are a fairly new phenomenon... a new version of saboteurs, now aiming mainly at people and their feeling and not the economy anymore. a better arab UU would be an early ship or something like saladin's riders/knights.

Panag · June 17, 2002, 18:51

hi ,

people , please , lets keep this civ related ,
there is also room enough in the OT .

have a nice day

Coracle · June 18, 2002, 19:51

The Cretans were destroyed by a gigantic volcanic explosion.

The Phoenicians and Carthaginians are pretty much the same thing.

Panag · June 19, 2002, 10:06

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle
The Cretans were destroyed by a gigantic volcanic explosion.

The Phoenicians and Carthaginians are pretty much the same thing.

hi ,

maybe we can find a way to work this into the game , ..

in some games its possible to "swallow" by means of culture an entire civ , and the remains of those civ's in the real word had the same thing , ....

any

's , ....

have a nice day

realn · June 22, 2002, 03:41

Quote:

The Phoenicians and Carthaginians are pretty much the same thing

I'm sorry but the Phoenicians and Carthaginians are not the same thing. Take into look as you were to say England and US are pretty much the same why do we have them both in Civ 3. If you were to center in on just the Mediterranean the Phoenicians and Carthaginians would be separate civs. They have similar cultures and religions but they are not the same people so it should be a different Civilization it if Civ 3 were based on the Mediterranean. Carthage fought Rome not the Phoenicians.

Realn

thamis · June 22, 2002, 05:27

Guys, you're right and wrong about Carthage and Phoenicia. :-)

Carthage was a colony of Phoenicia, the legend says it was founded by Dido, because her husband, a rich man from Tyre, was murdered by the King of Tyre. Her friends told her to leave, so she left Phoenicia with her followers and founded Carthage. It was founded in 814 BC.

Carthage belonged to Phoenicia until Phoenicia was overrun by the Babylonians in the 6th century BC. Carthage was powerful enough to become an independent state.

If you want to be historically accurate, you have to play with either the Phoenicians or the Carthaginians in the game.

But if you want a normal CIV game, it doesn't matter (the America / Europe example was good!).

thamis · June 22, 2002, 05:28

Guys, you're right and wrong about Carthage and Phoenicia. :-)

Carthage was a colony of Phoenicia, the legend says it was founded by Dido, because her husband, a rich man from Tyre, was murdered by the King of Tyre. Her friends told her to leave, so she left Phoenicia with her followers and founded Carthage. It was founded in 814 BC.

Carthage belonged to Phoenicia until Phoenicia was overrun by the Babylonians in the 6th century BC. Carthage was powerful enough to become an independent state.

If you want to be historically accurate, you have to play with either the Phoenicians or the Carthaginians in the game.

But if you want a normal CIV game, it doesn't matter. The only difference between the US / UK example and Carthage / Phoenicia is that the UK co-exists with the US, but Phoenicia was "destroyed" in the instant Carthage became independent.

GhengisFarb™ · July 30, 2002, 16:45

Quote:

Originally posted by sabrewolf
interesting... i guess all would have the "religous"-flag checked

who would be the leaders?
- the gods? if so: what if two religions have the same god?

but the UUs would be fun...

Actually a God Mod might be fun. The Olympians, Jehovah, The Titans, The Egyptian Gods(don't know their group name), Asgard, etc.

Instead of a great leader the battle created unit could be a god or divine avatar, like archangel. Make these units REALLY powerful.

Or, you might have human civs and base their culture group on the gods they worship.