How are those Blender learning sessions coming along?
Civ Selection Criteria for an 8th civ, which may never be designed
- Thread starter Andy P XIII
- Start date
Numidians would be an interesting choice for African missions. Put that Numidian cavalry unit to work.
That’s a great idea. We sorta have them earmarked to go in the Phoenicians, were we to ever make them. So we are holding them in our pocket. We don’t actually have the unit made, either. But we pretty much know everything about them. We even know what their unit portrait looks like.
But the Numidians are definitely one of those minor characters along the fringes of the present world.
Hi all, sorry I arrive late to party xD
I strongly believe some of the listed "Civs" around are in a way present, would be nice to see them as minor enemy faction and to even have "skins", vainity or normal set that gave their appearence.
That said:
Carthigians: (I think we agree, that carthage is the favorite). Could have a nice gameplay, economy based on gold, and gold gathering bonus, trough trade or other activites.
I strongly believe some of the listed "Civs" around are in a way present, would be nice to see them as minor enemy faction and to even have "skins", vainity or normal set that gave their appearence.
That said:
- Gauls & Thracians: Are similiar since they are from the called "celtic" group. And we already have Celts.
- Iberian tribes: Would be nice to see them, but I feel they are somewhat like celtics.
- Germanic Tribes: same as above, we got "vikings" that for many are part of the germanic group, it would work a skin, vanity or set and would be nice.
- Nubians: they are already as enemy minor faction no? They are basically part of the Egyptian, so unfortunatly as a faction would be much difference from egyptian. As above, skin, vanity, etc.
- Xiongnu, Chinese, Japanese: Would be nice but they are pretty far, plus much of the civs didnt contact each other.
- Olmec, Mayans: same as above (xiongnu, chinese, japanese).
- Indians: they could be a civ, not that I personally would like to see them.
- Hititas and Phoenician: For me they are in some way present in the game, since babylon uses 3 person chariots, could be a skin, vanity or set. Plus Persians also dominated the area, thus persian have Babylonian, Hitite and Scythian units. And Phoenician ships.
Carthigians: (I think we agree, that carthage is the favorite). Could have a nice gameplay, economy based on gold, and gold gathering bonus, trough trade or other activites.
- Trade routs: In general, bonuses to trading, buying/selling market/dock.
- Bonus to ships (since they had before Romans beat them, the best navy), had a chain production, in which several people produced parts of the ship and then they assemble it. Ships are build faster.
- Land only maps Penalties: Map/historically, most of their settlements were near coast (their army was crap, thus hired mercs). In other words I would agree to make them weaker if there are no water.
- Greek, Roman & Persian ships: Originally were from "levantine" region, which was lather added by Persian Empire, had ships like greek ones (trirremes), but eventually advanced and Romans stole from them and beat them.
- Had the greek system of levying citizens as hoplites, that to what their conflicts with syracusse show they werent very good. And as athens wealty citizens either were officers or Cavalry.
- Due their surplus of trading (gold) could hire mercenaries constantly. So as bonus, to hire mercs (Celtic/Italians/Iberians/Numidian) that cost gold only and dont use pop.
You make a bunch of untrue claims here and kind of ramble. If you're going to claim that Hittites (or Hititas) and Phoenicians (who are apparently too different from Carthage) are like Babylon (the war chariot has 2 riders) or that Persian has units from ALL those civs you better dang well have a lot of backing evidence, same for Thracians being Celtic even though they were Indo-Europeans with a more horse oriented fighting style. You also call Huns time displaced and separate them from Xiongnu when mashing them together could bridge the way to those Oriental civs.
Also your disdain for India being a person opinion is a weak argument as it is way too biased to be taken seriously.
I respect you taking the time to post your thoughts but I will call out weak, refutable arguments when I see them yet I’ll give you time to provide citations especially for things like Thrace being Celts and Persians being Phoenician yet not Carthaginian.
Hold friend! sheathe your sword, the one who's rambling is you. Lets start with the Persian Empire, which had a large expansion from Egypt to Thrace, thus they did employ locals and mixed with locals, they too held Mesopotamia, the called "levantine" zone where Phoenicians were, and region were hittite and assyrian empires were, had fights with nomads and so on. Phoenicians were known for their navy and trade, which when they were conquered was anexed to the Persian Empire.
Thrace, alright they are not "celts", they did have similarities and had cultural exchanges. But celts had horses too, and were indo-europen, (dont know why both things are import, or why you take them as an argument).
Huns, between Hunns, Xiongnu and Scythians, the obvious would be Scythings by time and geography, dont know what you mean with "mashing them together", but doesnt sound good. And India, is not disdain rather uninterest for me, as stated, its after all a Comment, and if you asked me what would I like to see, I rather pick, thracians, scythians, iberians or many other before indians, and thats it.
And Lastly and more importantly, Carthage: were phoenician at start yes, but how many time passed between, Tyre and the levantine region being under "foreing" control (Egypt, Persia, Greek) and Carthage being independant, culture changes depending on the land and neighbors around.
Now historically speaking the mediterranean sea had a process of Hellenisation, were many cultures adopted, ways of seeing or doing things, warfare and tactics. Phoenicians from Tyre were merchants and colonist mostly, Carthaginians expanded and become a Republic, mixed with the locals, Numidians, Lybians and so. Im not saying to call them other thing, scentialy yes they are "Phoenicians" or "Punics", but if were given a civ within game its region would be around Carthage, not Tyre, since they are way different.
What Im trying to say is like Romans, Rome had several periods Kingdom, Republic, Empire and so and its culture changed too, they were "Romans" yes, but they were not the same, even if they were in the same city.
Thrace, alright they are not "celts", they did have similarities and had cultural exchanges. But celts had horses too, and were indo-europen, (dont know why both things are import, or why you take them as an argument).
Huns, between Hunns, Xiongnu and Scythians, the obvious would be Scythings by time and geography, dont know what you mean with "mashing them together", but doesnt sound good. And India, is not disdain rather uninterest for me, as stated, its after all a Comment, and if you asked me what would I like to see, I rather pick, thracians, scythians, iberians or many other before indians, and thats it.
And Lastly and more importantly, Carthage: were phoenician at start yes, but how many time passed between, Tyre and the levantine region being under "foreing" control (Egypt, Persia, Greek) and Carthage being independant, culture changes depending on the land and neighbors around.
Now historically speaking the mediterranean sea had a process of Hellenisation, were many cultures adopted, ways of seeing or doing things, warfare and tactics. Phoenicians from Tyre were merchants and colonist mostly, Carthaginians expanded and become a Republic, mixed with the locals, Numidians, Lybians and so. Im not saying to call them other thing, scentialy yes they are "Phoenicians" or "Punics", but if were given a civ within game its region would be around Carthage, not Tyre, since they are way different.
What Im trying to say is like Romans, Rome had several periods Kingdom, Republic, Empire and so and its culture changed too, they were "Romans" yes, but they were not the same, even if they were in the same city.
We are on to Civ 8.
Thanks for everyone’s thoughts and discussion. We are looking forward to designing what’s next.
Nothing is confirmed.
Thanks for everyone’s thoughts and discussion. We are looking forward to designing what’s next.
Nothing is confirmed.