Thorfinn the Shallow Minded 598 Posted October 24, 2018 Report Share Posted October 24, 2018 This isn't a suggestion or argument for any specific issue. Rather, it comes from thinking about the game's original design and how the current Alphas have diverged from it. For those not aware, there were initially six civilisations in 0 A.D: The Persians, Carthaginians, Hellenes, Romans, Celts, and Iberians. The Celts were eventually split into the Gauls and Britons while the Hellenes... kind of went crazy, going from just that one simple option to five: the Athenians, Spartans, Macedonians, Ptolemies, and Seluecids. The Iberians on the other hand have remained untouched when they could just as well be divided into the Celtiberians and the Lusitanians just to give an example. Why was this decision taken for the other cases and not for the Iberians? Granted, I don't mind the current civilisation lineup, but on principle, I think that it is a valid question to answer. Do you think that the Iberians should remain as one civilisation or not? 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Stan` 6.844 Posted October 24, 2018 Report Share Posted October 24, 2018 4 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said: Why was this decision taken for the other cases and not for the Iberians? I guess artist manpower as well of lack of interest added to lack of references that would have made them significantly different. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
wowgetoffyourcellphone 6.205 Posted October 24, 2018 Report Share Posted October 24, 2018 55 minutes ago, stanislas69 said: I guess artist manpower as well of lack of interest added to lack of references that would have made them significantly different. This is important as well as lack of someone to come along and create 2 distinct civ profiles (Celtiberi vs. Lusitanians). 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sundiata 3.173 Posted October 24, 2018 Report Share Posted October 24, 2018 (edited) It would be complicated, but not a bad long term goal... Currently the Iberians are an amalgamation of the entire Iberian Peninsula. The Wonder and Temple are Tartessian... The rest of the architecture seems Celt-Iberian (Numantia). The units are a mix of Lusitanian, Iberian and Celt-Iberian... To date, nobody on the forum has been able to provide a full set of architecture- and unit-references for any one of those 4 distinct cultures (and there are other candidates as well, all minor players on the international stage). Separating them would make fleshing out each civ very difficult and make any semblance of historically accurate balancing nearly impossible from what I can tell. Tartessian architecture could potentially be done (there's a few interesting archaeological sites). Units are impossible, I think. Lusitanian units lack diversity, architecture would be underwhelming, and they lack a navy. Celt-Iberians and Iberians are more doable, I think, but would also be the least distinct (Without those iconic Tartessian structures, and the addition of Celtic, Phoenician and Greek influences, they would be rendered a little generic looking, compared to the already existing civs). And then we haven't even mentioned siege, and language.. Edited October 24, 2018 by Sundiata 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Genava55 1.170 Posted October 24, 2018 Report Share Posted October 24, 2018 Personally I think it should be great to use regional and cultural diversity among a faction to give more depth. Unlocking cultural buildings and units could be synonym of strategic choices for the player. Otherwise, I don't think it is a good idea to illustrate each cultures by a faction because it will increase exponentially. Dozen of Greek cities and Hellenistic kingdoms, Thracians, Dacians, Przeworsk culture, Illyrians, Celtiberians, Lusitanians, Picts, Armenians, Pontic cultures, Numidians, Dozens of nomadic tribes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Genava55 1.170 Posted October 25, 2018 Report Share Posted October 25, 2018 The Iron Age in western Spain (800 BC–AD 50): an overview https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1468-0092.00100 Warfare, redistribution and society in western Iberia https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/2051314/Warfare__redistribution...__BAR__2005_.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1540473846&Signature=vouylUZ8R3oEstGz%2FkPypNhPsn8%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B filename%3DWarfare_redistribution_and_society_in_W.pdf 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lion.Kanzen 4.685 Posted November 5, 2018 Report Share Posted November 5, 2018 @soloooy0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
soloooy0 58 Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 coming ad other info iber. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Lion.Kanzen 4.685 Posted November 10, 2018 Report Share Posted November 10, 2018 I'll link to art department. Voy dejar un enlace para la referencia visual. On 10/24/2018 at 3:00 AM, Genava55 said: Personally I think it should be great to use regional and cultural diversity among a faction to give more depth. Unlocking cultural buildings and units could be synonym of strategic choices for the player. Otherwise, I don't think it is a good idea to illustrate each cultures by a faction because it will increase exponentially. Dozen of Greek cities and Hellenistic kingdoms, Thracians, Dacians, Przeworsk culture, Illyrians, Celtiberians, Lusitanians, Picts, Armenians, Pontic cultures, Numidians, Dozens of nomadic tribes. No because game wise. Many don't have enough requirements. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.