|
Author
|
Topic: Civilizations Current Date/Time:
April 20, 2000 06:03:39
|
WarVoid
Chieftain of Otis, Mass., U.S.A., born Apr 2000
|
 |
posted April 15, 2000 20:23
   
|
 |
|
The Carthaginians should be replaced by the Phoenicians. After all the Phoenicians invented writing, glass and were known for Tyrian dye. The Phoenicians also founded cities all over europe; including Cornwall(England), Carthage (Tunisia), Cadiz & Granada (Spain), Sidra (Libya), Marseille (France), Monaco, Palermo (Italy), Cyprus and many other cities. This civilization should definately be included. |
Yuvo
Settler of Australia, born Feb 2000
|
 |
posted April 15, 2000 21:06
|
|
|
Diodorus:
I too would like to see various winners, I especially like the "Cradle of Civilization" thing.
Instead of the score at particular times, I think a civ's historical importance should be added into the score aswell. Any ideas on how historical scores could be calculated?WarVoid:
I agree, the Phoenecians should be in. But I'd like to see the Carthaginians aswell, they were still historically important.
|
WarVoid
Chieftain of Otis, Mass., U.S.A., born Apr 2000
|
|
posted April 16, 2000 16:51
|
|
|
In answer to Yuvo's question. Civ3 could use and epoch type score. Say for instance if you play as a very old civilization such as the Hittites you get a large bonus since they were founded so long ago. If you play as a newer civ like the Americans which is only 224 years old the bonus will be less.Another idea would be endurance. Like the Romans lasted a very long time so the bonus score would be big. Where as the Hittite empire was old but didn't last long and fell to Greece, so their bonus would be small. The question I have is how would this affect the customized civs. |
Sirotnikov
Chieftain of Israel, born Feb 2000
|
|
posted April 16, 2000 20:03
|
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by WarVoid on 04-15-2000 08:23 PM
The Carthaginians should be replaced by the Phoenicians. After all the Phoenicians invented writing, glass and were known for Tyrian dye. The Phoenicians also founded cities all over europe; including Cornwall(England), Carthage (Tunisia), Cadiz & Granada (Spain), Sidra (Libya), Marseille (France), Monaco, Palermo (Italy), Cyprus and many other cities. This civilization should definately be included.
|
Actually, If I remember my history lessons correctly (and I should 'cause I love history) the Phoenicians are basically ancient Carthagians. And the Pheelistins (i have no idea how to spell that) are also descendants of Phoenicians. |
WarVoid
Chieftain of Otis, Mass., U.S.A., born Apr 2000
|
|
posted April 16, 2000 21:22
|
|
|
I almost forgot. Siberians. Theres almost no civs that start in this area of the map. After the breakup of Batu Khan's Golden Horde the khanates (states) of Sibir (Siberia), Astrakhan, Crimea and Kazan came into existence. Sibir lasted until 1583 when Russian cossacks conquered the capitol city also named Sibir.For you history buffs. Try finding that city on any map. I've only been able to find it on one. The city is located just north-east of Tobolsk on the Irtysh river east of the Urals. An easy way to find it is locate Omsk first then look a little further north. |
Sir Shiva
Chieftain of Bangalore, INDIA, born Mar 2000
|
|
posted April 17, 2000 02:20
|
|
|
The phoenicians should definitely be in..
But they don't have to replace anyone.. As was said before, Firaxis should include as many civs as possible and make others available for download later on..------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980 |
Sir Shiva
Chieftain of Bangalore, INDIA, born Mar 2000
|
|
posted April 17, 2000 02:33
|
|
|
Maybe each civ could have its own directory,
eg:- c:\Civ3\Civs\RussiansThis way, different civs can have different techs and units.
For example, Indians could have the elephant while English have the crusaders. The units could be equivalent..
It is strange to see the Arabs use Crusaders against French elephants after all..
In this way, cities, units, tech names, improvement names and pictures etc. could be civ-specific.. Of course, they must be customisable too... ------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980 |
Yuvo
Settler of Australia, born Feb 2000
|
 |
posted April 17, 2000 03:59
|
|
|
WarVoid:
But the in a civ game, Americans wouldn't always start at the same time, in fact they could start at any time, couldn't they?
You might have misunderstood my question, I was talking about the civ's historical imortance in the game you're playing. Sorry for not making myself clearer.But I think that you could get points for the amount of years your civ lasts. If the "Rise and fall of empires" is included, and if not all civs start at the same time, this could be very important to your final score.
[This message has been edited by Yuvo (edited April 17, 2000).] |
WarVoid
Chieftain of Otis, Mass., U.S.A., born Apr 2000
|
|
posted April 17, 2000 17:33
|
|
|
Yuvo:
So your saying base part of the score on the civs historical importance. I get you now.
However, history is re-written by the players in the game AI or human.
So the historical score could be based on what part that particular civ played in a single games history.
Such as if the Americans build so many wonders. Or contact other civs first. Or make certain discoveries first. Rating each player on their rankings in discovery, diplomacy, improvements, etc.. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th. Barbarians don't get rated.
Is this what you meant? |
tniem
Chieftain of GR, MI USA, born Apr 2000
|
|
posted April 17, 2000 21:47
|
|
|
WarVoice-Yes that is what he meant. But if you stay on the forums long enough you will quickly learn that most people feel that we should go beyond 7 civs plus barbarians. Instead many feel larger games plus minor civs and rise and fall of empires. Take a look around if you don't understand and welcome to the forums. |
Yuvo
Settler of Australia, born Feb 2000
|
|
posted April 18, 2000 03:33
|
|
|
Exactly.
I think a score could be added for 'firsts', like you said, and maybe a score for how long a civ dominates the world. For example, in real life, China would get a very good score for this, because they have been a world power for many centuries. While maybe a civ like the Inca would get a low score, because for centuries they were a very small tribe before they began to dominate South America in the 15th century.By the way, what do people think of the current civ colours? Do they need to be changed?
|
WarVoid
Chieftain of Otis, Mass., U.S.A., born Apr 2000
|
|
posted April 18, 2000 18:00
|
|
|
I think the current color scheme is good. But if you want more than seven civs. Which of course I would LOVE. Then some more colors would be needed. Some could be:
Black
Pink (maybe)
Brown
Sky Blue
I don't know of anymore that are different enough from the others to make them easily distinguishable??? |
MidKnight Lament
Prince of Melbourne, Australia, born May 99
|
 |
posted April 18, 2000 22:40
|
|
|
A few people have mentioned before that civs should have shields with a combination of two or three colours. That would allow for plenty of combinations.- MKL |
Yuvo
Settler of Australia, born Feb 2000
|
 |
posted April 19, 2000 03:01
|
|
|
How about these: White, Yellow, Orange, Red, Dark Red, Purple, Dark Blue, Light Blue, Light Green, Dark Green, Brown, and Black.(12)Yes, I agree, civs should have a combination of colours, but I think two would be enough, especially with 12 colours.
[This message has been edited by Yuvo (edited April 19, 2000).] |
ivorgrubisic
Settler of Ljubljana, Slovenia, born Apr 2000
|
|
posted April 19, 2000 08:28
|
|
|
I think they should include stripes and ESPECIALLY FLAGS. So then you wouldn't have too worry about not enough distinction of the colors. Flags should of course be customisable. |
Sir Shiva
Chieftain of Bangalore, INDIA, born Mar 2000
|
|
posted April 19, 2000 12:10
|
|
|
quote:
And Patriqvium, congratulations.. Your idea for evolving civ names is excellent..
Civ names could change just as leaders/governments do...For example, the chinese could become Song, Ming, Qing etc..
The germans could start out as goths and pregress thru Teutons, Prussians into germans..
Etruscs into Romans into Byzantines into Venetians or Pisans or whatever (randomised) and finally into Italians... Sometimes, a civ name could revert to an older one. For example, Russia could become the Soviet Union if communists come to power, and become Russia again if democrats seize power.. And for civs coming with the game, these guys should be in it for sure:- Phoenicians (evolve into Carthaginians)
Polynesians
Hittites
Hebrews (evolve into Israelis?)
Siamese/Burmans/Vietnamese/Indonesians?
Goths (evolve into germans) Can't think of anymore right now.. Another idea:- Certain 'colonies' could become independent civs..
For example, a British colony could become the Americans or Australians or Canadians (to keep you Aussies and Canadians happy), a Viking colony into Iceland, an Indian colony into Cambodia/Siam/Burma, a Phoenecian colony into Carthaginians etc. etc. etc. The possibilities are endless.. Firaxis is gonna have a tough time.. 
|
------------------
-Shiva
Email: shiva@mailops.com
Web: http://www.crosswinds.net/india/~shiva
ICQ: 17719980 |
Andz83
Warlord of Cottbus, Brandenburg, Germany, born Mar 2000
|
|
posted April 19, 2000 16:00
|
|
|
Do you really think there have Civs to be replaced by other ones, only because of the relation/relativeness (don't know the known, the fact for "relative") ?See, the French are descendants of the Franks, who were a GERMAN tribe. So the French have to be removed from the game, only because they're relatives of the Germans? Hmm, i think that will cause many misunderstandings and hostilities... ------------------
"The more I know, the more do I know that I don't know anything" - forgotten who said that...
"Within the peace, enemy attacks us..." - Kaiser Wilhelm II, August 1914
"Hell, yeah!" - James Hetfield, while singing "Master Of Puppets" on Metallica-S&M-concert in spring 1999 in San Francisco |
WarVoid
Chieftain of Otis, Mass., U.S.A., born Apr 2000
|
|
posted April 19, 2000 18:42
|
|
|
I'm not saying replace civs because of their relations. Technically, Carthage was still ruled by Phoenicia when Hannibal attacked Rome. This is what I have read.
I like the evolving civ names idea.
Etruscans, Latins, Romans, Ostrogoths, Byzantines.
Egyptians, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Israelis (maybe), Lebanese.
Five for every civ.
Not a hard task. |
ivorgrubisic
Settler of Ljubljana, Slovenia, born Apr 2000
|
|
posted April 20, 2000 06:03
|
|
|
Who would Americans evolve from?If you want exact history, go to the library. Civ3 is supposed to be a simulation of the history (it has to be that way if you're going to go through 5000 yrs in 2 weeks), not its copy!! Don't make this (potentially) great game too complicated and hard to follow. The fact is that if our desires about the number of civs are implemented you won't meet the great majority of them for a half of the game (as it should be!!). But by then most civs would change their names 2 or 3 times! Don't like the idea, sorry. | |
Apolyton Civilization Site Forums
