Theme Switching #4

[The Beatles]

I looked at the Civ II and Civ III races, and I've pared them down to a sort of Ancient Mediterranean style gameplay. I've given this about an hour's thought, and researched the history of each of the civilizations involved, those too that I didn't include.

Proposed renamings:
* Hawks -> Spies
* Races -> Tribes

Proposed races:
* Egyptian
* Celtic
* Phoenician
* Etruscan
* Greek
* Gallic
* Sumeric
* Germanic
* Persian

I figured there wasn't much point in putting in the Romans, they were too powerful. So our time precedes the Republic by a little.
I would also have included the Arabs, but they were not a significant power until about 400 AD, and they would geographically conflict with the Egyptians and Sumerians.
So now we have 9 races -- the percentages might need to be adjusted to be in line with the attributes of the races. So here are some quick -- general -- proposed stats:

code: Select all

Tribe               Military             Spies             Economy
Egyptian            Fair                 Very Good         Good
Celtic              Very Good            Good              Fair
Phoenician          Fair                 Good              Very Good
Etruscan            Excellent            Good              Poor
Greek               Fair                 Excellent         Fair
Gallic              Good                 Poor              Excellent
Sumeric             Poor                 Very Good         Very Good
Germanic            Very Good            Poor              Very Good
Persian             Excellent            Poor              Good

If you think in terms of Excellent through Poor being 5 through 1, the bonuses add up equally, plus they aren't too similar either. That's just rough race stats, but we could easily extend them for more fine-grained bonuses.

That's all for /this/ post. Please let me know what you think.

[Ruddertail]

I like it. Looks very good.

[Devari]

Looks awesome!

Do ye want to put it to a vote yet, or do you want to work on it a bit more?

[The Beatles]

I thought we might work a bit more on translations, plus let the thread brew a bit with ideas, and when it matures we can vote.

[Devari]

Good idea.

What kind of extra features would you like to see for this? In that other proposal of mine, I listed a few things that could enhance the playing experience. Got any ideas for this one?

Although, translations? I'm confused.

[The Beatles]

I wouldn't like any new features just yet. The title says "Theme Switching", and I'd like it to be just that.

And by translations, I mean things like Hawks -> Spies etc.

[Ruddertail]

You mean like cities, a revamped heros system, etc? I think that would be kind of nice to have.

I really can't think of anything to add at the moment, but I'm sure as some new stuff comes up, I'll think of something usefull to say...

[Tarislarech]

This sounds great. I am not too familiar with the mice, badgers, hawks theme. I think the flavor of civilization would be a much more familiar theme.

I have civ III complete edition and love it. looking forward to getting civ IV and when I do it will probably provide alot more detail we could use for the discussion of what bonuses and disadvantages each race would have.

Keep this one working. It sounds great

[delete the brain]

I think u guys have a very good idea. I'll be happy to get my friends to join once u switch themes.

[bjornredtail]

Don't forget the Basque...

[neobaron]

Hrm.

I suggest you rework the military strengths.

Gallic < Greek for example if you take into consideration early phalanx units versus warrior tactics...

---

The persian military, too was rather weak compared to its neighbors (large, but weak. Focussed mainly on a spear wall.. like the greeks bus disorganized) ... but its spy network was one of the finest in the world at the time, and so was its economy due to contact with the east and west and its ingenious road system.

---

Etruscan military might was less than that of the gallic "states"... they didnt even have swords until greek incursions in ~6-700 BC... their economy was strong though, which is why the Romans wanted to eat them.

---

You nailed the Egyptians i think... their miltary might had decreased substantially since the times of Alexander (oh, depending on the timeline here, you will want to add Macedon) when their rulers became greek, and their economy was focussed on the flooding of the nile (once a year)... but due to the multi-ethnic make up of the nation, they were able to have more arms and hands everywhere in the known world.

---

Were the celts a viable power in the ancient world? Did they even exist as a tribe?

---

Phoenicia is also just aboot right. Peaceful colonial people whose trade income was enormous.

---

Sumeria died before the greeks emerged... might consider replacing them with Syrians/Assyrians.

---

German military might before the coming of the Romans was pretty pathetic. They were limited to the northern areas in and around denmark south to ~Modern day northern Austria, but they were never centralized until ~300 BC... Dont know where you got that one from, but id say switch their military stat with their economy stat and youve nailed it.

---

And dont forget to throw in the Iberian tribes, or the Numidians... both predate the unification/teamwork of greece if i remember correctly.

---

Then again, im a history nerd and am probably reading waaaay to much into this.

[The Beatles]

Finally! A history nerd!

Thanks for your comments. No, the celts weren't a viable power, but I thought it mightn't do, leaving out the island.

Yes, I've messed up a bit with the Sumerians. But your comments blow me away in their depth.

I'll be adjusting my proposal -- but since you seem best qualified, would you mind also drawing up a proposal? Just for the Promisance aspect, the tribes should not be similar, so if two tribes have basically the same characteristics, one should go.

Thanks!

[Freenhult]

Weren't the Numidians more of a minor tribe of larger Carthage? I think the Numidians were most influencial during the 2nd Punic Wars when they assissited Hannible's Campaign across the Pyranese and into N. Italy?

As for the Iberia, they had lots of good tech and all but the celtic culture began to compete with them. The Celts and Iberians mashed cultures and became a new one...Iberia was never much of a military power...just cultural stuff, like the Celts...

[Devari]

Celts:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Celts_800-400BC.PNG

The red area is the extent of Celtic tribes around 400 BC. While they weren't a civilization persay, the Celts were widespread. The Gauls were a Celtic people, as were the Iberians. I'm not sure how good their economy score would be - you have to consider that they were a culturally advanced group, but they were also not particularly established. Maybe a small penalty to food (offset by hunter-gatherer skills), and a small plus to cash (traders, etc.)... I guess that would average out to fair.

[Honest Killer]

Haha, u guys know better than to trust wikipedia
*laughs*
jkjk
as u said, the celts where spread out quite a bit.
how about some renegade vikings as well? they can be those people who like to kill, but are limited with what they can do, so if u are a viking, u sell food for less, everything is more expensive and so on....