It can be changed to wood walls, ir do it simpler. +HP for Palisades, idk
I think the balance can come later after the civ design. In my opinion, the civ design should be a general idea of the playstyle of the civ, its strengths and weaknesses. After all, you cannot make a balanced civ without actually testing the civ in game.
And even then, as we have seen DLC after DLC, players will discover new strategies, so the real balancing is done 5-6 patches after release.
Thank you for including my concepts in your post 
I tried to insert my design civ: the Venetians… tell me if i did everything right… im still a bit rusty with the mechanics of the forum 
Please don’t be angry with me 
1 Like
|[name of civ](link of forum)|@nickname|time like from 1000-1500AD|:paintbrush: 
l think this will help
It looks fine, I made this intentionally with the code.
I only don’t see any artwork in the thread, so I would take away that for now.
Done,
Btw, inside my concept i’m referring at the artworks inside DoctBaghi concept (coat of arms, wonder, photos of UUs, maps for the story of venice…) i simply done this cause i think it is a good work and i’m saying that in my concept, also i think that saying something that someone has already done is repetitive. thats why i had put the brush.
the work i’ve have done is just to create a balanced civ with some interesting not-over-the-top bonuses and it’s still a work in progress but i think we are almost there.
My question is: the brush is in DoctBaghi post, but im referring that post with the souce (i started from here my work). Can i add the brush or needs to be right inside my concept? 
or i just need to write this part of using the artwork inside the comment section? (if yes, there is a specific command for this?
(i’m asking this to give him the right credit…)
thanks for the help in advance! (these are my first days on the forum) 
@anon63664082, requesting pin of this topic please, it will work better as a civ hub if it’s pinned.
I have actualized the pages with the newest ideas.
But there are still a lot old treasures from before 2021 left to be rediscoverd.
I am happy that already some of the older threads have found some new love just by the possibility to find them here (Actually, the newer ones don’t really need this thread 
)
I haven’t posted my Swahili idea yet, but I’m about to. You linked someone else’s.
@casusincorrabil, what do you think about people removing the 
emoji from their civ suggestions if you put it in? Is it against the rules of the civ hub?
1 Like
I think if someone does this like it seems @UnpricedCar9 did with his serbs thread without talking about it - I think it’s a clear indicator that the was set justified.
A reasonable person who is engaging would instead have tried to contact one of us if he would have disagreed with the classification. Instead he tried to get away with just quietly removing it.
We didn’t made rules cause we can’t enforce them. But behaviour like this is in my eyes an indicator for our community to be aware of potential political motivation of these people.
But yeah I’m glad I placed this exclamation mark so if people remove it like this we know what we are on. The thing is the exclamation mark is legit cause indeed the political motivation was questioned and by quietly removing it he/she basically concedes with the accusation.
In my eyes the best way to handle that would to remove the thread and person from the forum.
Do you mean removing them from the civ hub? Advocating for them to be banned seems extreme, especially when nothing is being done by the mods to deal with people like AllergicTable49.
What is political about my thread?
And who gave you the right to place exclamation mark on it without further explanation on why you did it?
I respect forum rules and have never violated them.
I think that you have personal hatred against the Serbs or my thread in general.
2 Likes
@casusincorrabil, I think they do have a point here, I don’t really get what warranted the tag.
I think this might be a good thing to include for civs you tag like that. @casusincorrabil does kind of have the right to do it though, considering they did initiate and primarily run the civ hub.
I don’t think this is correct, especially the anti-Serb accusation.
4 Likes
This kind of stuff. It’s deminishing the other balkan states/cultures.
That’s why I gave the exclamation mark.
Was I too fussy? Idk. But I think when we talk about new civ additions we should be careful. We don’t win anything if we upset some cultures because we disregard them.
What was maybe a bit “unfair” is that this question came up in @UnpricedCar9 s thread and not in others. Cause clearly if passion is on the line it can happen if you are annoyed with this kind of questioning you sometimes say stupid things or act weird.
But it’s nothing wrong about coming to reason later.
I think it is kind of unfair to do that based on later comments in the thread, considering most people who use the link are unlikely to read too far beyond the actual main post, which is why they click it in the first place. If political issues don’t show up in the OP or first few posts, I think you probably don’t need the tag.
1 Like
Yeah agree on that.
But I would have liked to see him reach out to us first instead of just acting on his own without even trying.
Edit: Mostly why I made this exclamation mark is cause we need to be aware of that there are people out there who try to rewrite history and we shouldn’t give them in. The problem is ofc for me as I am not a historian I can’t really check that. So the exclamation mark is the best I can probably do here and I don’t even like it to “brand” threads like this. Maybe now is a good time to discuss all the threads where I gave that branding and if it was legitimated.
Maybe you need a few degrees or variants of it, such as 
or something. You could use them for various needed things, such as:
- Clear political motivation in post or significant political issue like that ()
- Questionable historical accuracy or inspiration ()
- Minor political motivation in post, or something in the comments ()
- Other issue such as degrading civ ideas of others ()
Those are my suggestions.
Maybe you are right.
But I don’t feel versed enough in that matter to judge it. That’s why i kept it somewhat vague.
Maybe someone else here has the expertise required?
TBH I actually always advocated that everybody should make his own opinion that’s why I just said “was questioned”. I didn’t said the questioning was legitimate just it came up at some point.
There are other threads where the questions came up despite there was actually no indicator for any political motivation, at least to me. And an exclamation mark can also attract people to read the thread just for curiosity…
So I think just the mark is a better way to handle it cause it gives space to form your own opinion. But that’s just how I see it.