Jump to content

Civilizations and more


Recommended Posts

So I was wondering what other civilizations are planned for the future? The game setting allows for quite alot of civilizations to be introduced but wich one`s will we get to see and how are the civs selected for the game?

In random maps you can freely select your civ. In scenarios they are fixed.

Not sure how many civs to come but for the time being those already in should do.

Moders will surely add further ones if the game is finished (remember it's only in Alpha state yet).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Final official tally may end up at 12.

Athenians

Britons

Carthaginians

Gauls

Iberians

Macedonians

Mauryans

Persians

Ptolemies

Romans

Seleucids

Spartans

We can always release more as DLC (after we release the final game), such as the Thebans, Samnites, Lusitanians, Scythians, Syracusans, or Galatians. Maybe these can be "mini" factions.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the game is set around ancient civilizations and all but it would be nice to explore more than europe and india. We have asia wich would ad a more diversed culture with unique architecture. Yes we had them around this age as simple villages with basic military but they can be implemented as a powerfull economy civ. We had the norse (scandinavian vikings) wich can be implemented as a faction with lowered prices and early game swarming with cheap but weak units while in late game have strong heavy hitting and armoured units and would alos have a unique sea aspect with the longboat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I`d love to see vikings. Also any culture could fit and would benefit to the game ,diversity in gameplay and aesthetics and also variety of civilizations

They fall outside the timeframe for part I (500 - 1BC)

In my opinion, the lack of Chinese, Japanese and Korean civilizations in the base game is a bit of a "flaw"...

Those were rather isolated. Some discussions have resulted that it would be best to keep it to civilisations that have fought with each other. The eastern civilisations didn't fight with the western ones (the Himalayas were too big), so they aren't included.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those were rather isolated. Some discussions have resulted that it would be best to keep it to civilisations that have fought with each other. The eastern civilisations didn't fight with the western ones (the Himalayas were too big), so they aren't included.

Sorry, but that argument is flawed. Britons and Mauryans never fought each other and they are in. Don't get me wrong: they should be. My point is the eastern civilisations didn't fight with the western ones BUT the Chinese and the Koreans fought the Xiongnu, the Xiongnu fought with other steppe people, those steppe people fought Persians, Seleucids, Macedonians, Romans, etc.

Therefore, the eastern civilisations are isolated because, to put it bluntly, the in-game civilisations stop in the steppes.

What do people think? I think that those civilisations should be in. Maybe in a late patch (afterfall, game development does need priorities).

P.S.: Playing a steppe civilisation would be lots of funs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Final official tally may end up at 12. We can always release more as DLC (after we release the final game), such as the Thebans, Samnites, Lusitanians, Scythians, Syracusans, or Galatians. Maybe these can be "mini" factions.
personally, i'd recommend keeping it at twelve. it's a nice round number ;) though going further, i'd aslo recommend adding an additional 12 civs in Part 2 for the 1-500ad period (as i've said before) and maybe an additional six (three BC and three AD civs) as DLC for an even 30 when all is said and done, not counting whatever fanmade civs may be developed
I know the game is set around ancient civilizations and all but it would be nice to explore more than europe and india. We have asia wich would ad a more diversed culture with unique architecture. Yes we had them around this age as simple villages with basic military but they can be implemented as a powerfull economy civ. We had the norse (scandinavian vikings) wich can be implemented as a faction with lowered prices and early game swarming with cheap but weak units while in late game have strong heavy hitting and armoured units and would alos have a unique sea aspect with the longboat.
sanderd already answered this, but the Vikings fall outside 0ad's timeframe no matter what argument you may try to make: the Viking Age started about two centuries after the cutoff date, iirc
In my opinion, the lack of Chinese, Japanese and Korean civilizations in the base game is a bit of a "flaw"...
i agree. the Han Chinese could technically fit into either the current timeframe of 0ad or for Part 2; concievably, i'd say the best option is to find out when the height of Han power was and place them in the appropriate pack, either as a default civ in Part 2 or as DLC for Part 1, depending. the Japanese would fit best in Part 2, as that's when the Yamato dynasty arose. this means that the official Japanese civ would have to exclude Feudal Japanese units like ninja and samurai, but those could always be included as editor-only units (and i would be seriously disappointed if they weren't). i don't know as much about the Korean civilizations of the time.

one possibility could be a total of three different Chinese civilizations representing the warring states of Wu, Shu, and Wei, but i'd say that would only work if they were distinct enough from one another

Those were rather isolated. Some discussions have resulted that it would be best to keep it to civilisations that have fought with each other. The eastern civilisations didn't fight with the western ones (the Himalayas were too big), so they aren't included.
those civs were in AOE and AOK and yet no one really complains about Mongol cavalry riding into battle against Spanish conquistadors or Celtic painted warriors. just because they didn't interact in actual history (incidentally, i don't think the Britons fought the Mauryans, nor did the Spartans against the Iberians) wouldn't compromise the historicity of the civs themselves. besides, half the heroes in 0ad didn't coexist, either: Alexander never met Leonidas, Caesar didn't fight Boudicca, Cyrus didn't ally with Hannibal, and so on.
Therefore, the eastern civilisations are isolated because, to put it bluntly, the in-game civilisations stop in the steppes. What do people think? I think that those civilisations should be in. Maybe in a late patch (afterfall, game development does need priorities).

P.S.: Playing a steppe civilisation would be lots of funs.

i agree: some Far Eastern civilizations (and maybe even a Southeast Asian one, if applicable) should be included, if nothing else than for variety, along with a single New World civilization: the Mayans, which were at the height of their power (or approaching it) during the 1-500ad period. the closest thing to steppe civilizations would probably be the Huns, Parthians, and maybe one or two others. notably, the Mongols fall out of 0ad's timeframe, much like the Vikings, though i'd say they're another case of anachronistic elements which would still work as part of the game, just not as a default part of playable civilizations. maybe there could be an in-game trigger to allow a given player to train anachronistic units (for instance, a hypothetical Japanese civ getting to train samurai even though it would predate them, or even cross-cultural, such as a Greek civ being enabled to train Viking warriors)

incidentally, Vikings coud very well be partly included in the official, historically-accurate parts of the game via the Varangians, who iirc were Norsemen in the service of the Byzantine emperor, but i can't recall off the top of my head if they served him during the 1-500ad period

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is one more civilization that Wildfire Games has technically been considering, the Thebans, who were the other major Hellenic power from the city-states period, openly allying with the Persians during the Second Greco-Persian War after Thermopylae and allying with the Spartans during the Peloponnesian War, both times due to their strong dislike for the Athenians. And if I am not mistaken, a revamping of the generic Hellenes and Celts is also planned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But Scandinavia had some village in time frames or culture? Nobodies live in Nordic land between 500 - 1 BC and 1AD 500.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden

Or Norway

Little has been found dating from the early Iron Age (the last 500 years BC). The dead were cremated, and their graves contain few burial goods. During the first four centuries AD the people of Norway were in contact with Roman-occupied Gaul. About 70 Roman bronze cauldrons, often used as burial urns, have been found. Contact with the civilised countries farther south brought a knowledge of runes; the oldest known Norwegian runic inscription dates from the 3rd century. At this time the amount of settled area in the country increased, a development that can be traced by coordinated studies of topography, archaeology, and place-names. The oldest root names, such as nes, vik, and bø ("cape," "bay," and "farm"), are of great antiquity, dating perhaps from the Bronze Age, whereas the earliest of the groups of compound names with the suffixes vin ("meadow") or heim ("settlement"), as in Bjorgvin (Bergen) or Saeheim (Seim), usually date from the 1st century AD.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree: some Far Eastern civilizations (and maybe even a Southeast Asian one, if applicable) should be included, if nothing else than for variety

But there is! Scion Development is (slowly) working on a Chinese faction. Some of the devs on Wildfire Games is also part of Scion. So you can think of Scion as the unofficial official add-on DLC devs of 0 A.D.
Link to post
Share on other sites

the closest thing to steppe civilizations would probably be the Huns, Parthians, and maybe one or two others. notably, the Mongols fall out of 0ad's timeframe, much like the Vikings, though i'd say they're another case of anachronistic elements which would still work as part of the game, just not as a default part of playable civilizations.

You are forgetting the Xiongnu. They were sort of "proto-Mongols": they had a big emphasis in horse archery and tribal structures. Their confederation was so strong that it took the Han (at its heighest) nearly one century of 'total war' to subjugate them. Thought I'm not certain, I think that the Hun migration was (partially?) caused by the confederation's defeat against the Han.

P.S.: Please correct me if I wrote something wrong. 0 - 500 AD history is a rather 'foggy' subject to me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You are forgetting the Xiongnu. They were sort of "proto-Mongols": they had a big emphasis in horse archery and tribal structures. Their confederation was so strong that it took the Han (at its heighest) nearly one century of 'total war' to subjugate them. Thought I'm not certain, I think that the Hun migration was (partially?) caused by the confederation's defeat against the Han.

P.S.: Please correct me if I wrote something wrong. 0 - 500 AD history is a rather 'foggy' subject to me.

hence "and maybe one or two others" ;)
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Since this is my first post here, I would just like to say hello to everyone! :D

Anyway, if nobody minds me butting into the discussion, I think that instead of Vikings (who are outside the game's timeframe anyway), I think a more suitable addition to the game's civilizations would be their ancestors (at least to my knowledge though they could still very well be related) the fierce Germanic tribes such as the Suebi, Cimbri, Cherusci, etc... Interestingly, it seems that the Suebi and some other Germanic tribes migrated from Scandinavia to modern Germany in order to escape the harsh climate of the land. (Source is admittedly the historical background of the Sweboz faction from the Europa Barbarorum mod for Rome: Total War. http://www.europabarbarorum.com/factions_sweboz_history.html) So basically, they are, in a way, Scandinavian to begin with... I guess. :P In addition to that, the Germanics were pretty formidable opponents of Rome so I think they would make a worthy addition in the future.

Gameplay-wise, they would probably have to play the role of the token 'barbarian' faction, being relatively less sophisticated but more hardened than even the Celts. I am no historian though, so I'm sure someone out there with more knowledge about them would be able to represent them more accurately.

For the nomad/steppe/cavalry-oriented factions, I think some good candidates for new civilizations would have to be the Scythians, Sarmatians, and the Parthians.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...