[Freeciv-Dev] Re: Alternative nation dialog

[aliaga <aliaga@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 28-02-02 17:53 -0800, you wrote:
> Nothing is going to stop you installing modpacks.
But the more flexible the rules, the better/funnier modpacks can be made.


> Nah, it's pretty much the nearest civ to me or on my island/continent is dead.
As long as they are not the Mongols!  ;-)


> Realism.
Many faceted word, that one is. Specially when used in the kind of game 
that Civ is. A matter of taste, I'd say.

> I do agree with you on the Phoenicians. But still, if a Civ cannot stand 
> the test of time ...
Well, have a look at your keyboard, unless you have it in chinese, there's 
Phoenicians winking at you.
And the next time you eat in a plate or drink in a glass, remember who made 
fortunes and History selling them all around the Mediterranean sea.
It's just a matter of how do you define the test of time. You cannot be too 
sure that Cocacola will make it better.

> There are a lot of nations that are almost unknown. But that is what the
> Ancient Era modpack is for. And total accuracy is very dangerous.
Yes and yes, of course.


> Consider China and India. In Freeciv terms, they would start with 
> catapaults, elephants,
I'd prefer to start them with a model of their environment and their 
mindset, and then see if I can evolve them to those "inherent" advantages 
you point out, or even if I can evolve them to different things or not. Two 
different challenges, are those.
It would be interesting to have greater chances of that old funny one "the 
citizens of insert_poor_city_here grow admirers of your wealth and luxuries 
and jump on your side". That would allow some real counterbalance to purely 
militaristic and despotic leaders (and even smallpox).

> maths, early writing, construction, and in prime agricultural areas. China 
> at least
> would also have magnetism,  and gunpowder. There'd be no way these nations
> would not totally dominate in Freeciv.
Well, the Mongols could make them suffer, right?

Besides, there's the little matter of scale and economy. If the Chinese, 
with their advantages, set out to conquer the ancient world, would they be 
able to integrate everybody in the "greater china"? Or would the risk of 
losing themselves as well as their new subjects be too great? And what is 
the chance of some neighbour having the time to copycat those advantages 
and resist them, or even beat them? the game is open, let's play...  :-)

> Really? I presume this is based on maps of the coastline. I can't believe they
> managed that in triremes.
Hard to believe, yes, but there was the legend, the maps, and a stunning 
discovery recently in the red sea of Phoenician ships likely to be the ones 
which did it. Even if it turns out to be false hopes, the undeniably fact 
is those Phoenicians were very well able to do that, and more, with their 
puny ships. Puny for our standards, awesome for those of their neighbours, 
of course.

> You are writing alternative history. After all, no civ in the world today is
> dominant over all others.
Ah, that would be fun to achieve in a real game. Unless for the risk of 
utter boredom, would it not be a real test of the quality of a simulation 
game like Civ, to be able to reach that complex state the real world has 
achieved?

> It's a sensible criteria. Any nation that succeeded in conquering a huge chunk
> of the world is clearly a civ to be reckoned with. They had a solid world
> domination chance.
Well, some "minor" nations achieved a status where their powerful 
neighbours and allies would be very willing to defend them against others, 
the whole mixed affair having good portions of diplomacy, economy, and 
science involved, thus allowing the lesser powers to achieve dominance in 
those areas. Kind of nice, come to think about it.

> > Navigation.
>
> Chinese did more and much sooner. Arabs were actually the ones who invented
> instruments to navigate at sea.
Sorry, I was referring to massive shipbuilding and crossing the bigger Oceans.


> What? I don't know of any famous spanish mathematicians ...
Neither do I off the top of my head. But it's more of a "cultural wave" 
before the Renaissance than the work of a single man. Come to think about 
it, there's as least one: Al Jwaritzmi (spelling may vary)

> Warfare.
>
> Yes, the Spanish Armada was very successful ;).
Indeed, and so were the Armadas that stopped the mosleem empires in the 
Mediterranean.
But my main point was the Galleon, that massive ship with so many firepower 
and cargo capacity.

> Diplomacy.
> ???
Heh, not as funny as real war, but talk to the englishmen, frenchmen and 
germans of the era. James Bond IS an apprentice. :-)
Besides, those international treaties are real jewels indeed.


> Literacy.
> ???
Chivalry books, adventure books, travel books, satire books... just before 
Shakespeare and the like...

> Religion.
> ??
The idea of "king by the grace of God".

The idea of "State + church = absolute power"

The think tank of the countermovement against Martin Luther...


> You know very well that Russia and America had and still have solid world
> domination chances. Russia has controlled a huge land mass, along with 
> America,
> they make it on that Criteria alone. Russians have also contributed a lot to
> science. Check out the list of noble prize winners.
So had the Portuguese and the Carthaginians. Remember that the size of the 
world was much smaller then ;-)

> I really know nothing about them. Amateur historian, I'm really interested 
> only
> in civs that used ingenious weapons and/or coming close to taking over the 
> world.
I started that way. Now I often wonder on the other tribes who did also 
have weapons and leaders but did not "make the test", or even those who did 
never even attempt it (or so we believe).

> > >The Mongols are a standout as an otherwise crap civ, but they changed the
> > >world.
> >
> > They changed Europe. The Portuguese changed the world when Magellan
> > circumnavigated it.
>
> The world goddamn it. They smashed everyone in their path, almost 
> conquered the
> japanese, built the largest empire the world has ever seen. Introduced the 
> black
> death due to their great roadworks, gunpowder and lots of trade between 
> east and
> west happened due to the mongols.
Whoa, that's more than just a bunch of cavalry men, right?

But all the same, other tribes did about the same even without waging war 
to do it, so again a matter of taste.

> Indians and Chinese civs, bizarrely, never made a bid to take over the 
> world. I
> cannot explain why.
Read the stories about the Four Kingdoms. Anyway, that's why it's 
interesting to play with the idea.

> Cool, innit ;). I still think Hannibal made the best use of animals in war.
> Snakes in baskets, he had his soldiers toss them at enemy ships. They panicked
> and he won easily. Why didn't I think of that?
Too sneaky for me ;-)


> Difficult to tell what they actually accomplished.
Their own half of the Mediterranean sea. The legend of Hannibal. To be 
feared by the allpowerful Romans until the very end. Some other minor 
things for sure, like their own fashion of government. The most important: 
they could have been Rome instead of Rome. And that "could have" is the 
heart of the Civ games.

> Heh. Weird, I cannot imagine dinosaur tech. Sharp teeth, spikes on tail ...
Yep, and hard sells for eggs, scales, feathers, beaks, war cries... Weird 
and truly fascinating.

> > first hand-portable cannon,
>
> Turks were probably first with battlefield use of cannon. The little matter of
> constantinople.
I said Hand-portable. Clumsy, ugly, heavy antecessors of the musket. A 
scary idea for the time.

> >the pikemen,
>
> Switzerland surely?
I don't know about exact dates and refinements of the idea. Spanish armies 
deployed pikes en masse agains horsemounted foes and everybody else liked 
the idea.

> >the Galleon,
>
> Ripped off arab and chinese civs.
And extensively used and armed, so much as to evolve the astounding idea of 
"naval power" in the Middle Ages.

> >spies,
>
> I think spies predate any civ.
Heh, true. I was thinking on deeds of spionnage and treachery and slippery 
uses of diplomats in foreign embassies.

> > Guerrilla warfare, the first Great Depression, the first serious studies
> > about those tiny endangered species called neurones and the accoustic
> > guitar. :-)
>
> Wuh??
Just folklore, hehehe. Anyway, if the spanish kings had known modern 
economic theories, things would have been different. The neuron studies won 
a Nobel Prize for a country that has very little of those, and the 
accoustic guitar remains one of the highest achievements of the human 
race.  :-)

> You know, if Brazil was the undisputed leader of South America, instead of
> second fiddle to the U.S, I'd say you were right.
Well, being second to the mighty USA is not small achievement. Besides, 
there's the whole bunch of Portuguese colonies all over the world. Maybe 
smallpoxers, were they?

> > And mathematics and manuals of love-making, too...
>
> That's just not as cool.
Think better catapults and enhanced rapture-times ;-)


> Israeli civ had no impact. Their religion on the other hand did only 
> indirectly.
Religion and philosophy and political concepts. Indirectly, so what? 
Huuuuuge impact all over the place.
And remember the Diamond trade and craft, too.

Besides, Jewish players could like playing it. They achieved some nice 
military victories against powerful foes, and had superweapons nobody else 
ever dreamed of.  ;-)
My 0.02E