Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I'm surprised that people would find Rome an example of avoiding mixing religion and government. What have given you that idea? That they refused the idea of a divinely appointed king? To me they seem like one of the most extreme example of government and religion combined.

Religious rites was a natural part of government and warfare. Decisions was made according to auguries, consulting the sacred chickens and so on. What's interesting with the Republic is that government itself was sacred. There where sacred offices making the elected official sacrosanct (Tribunes, Censors). The constitution and practices of government where venerated like religious rites. The Romans tolerated and even embraced other religions and most saw no problem in holding several contradictory beliefs. But they tolerated no opposition to the sacred rites of the foremost deity of them all: the Republic itself. Later this divinity of the state was transferred to the emperor.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I agree that you have to consider the culture around the religion. I don't know whether Islam or Christianity is the most "pro-women", I've seen people argue for both. But even though they improved women's conditions where they first arouse it becomes problematic when they spread to other cultures.

From my Scandinavian perspective Christianity seems like an "anti-women religion" since here it lessened women's rights. So I don't think it's possible to simply generalise and say that a religion is pro or anti women. It was pro in the Levant and anti in Scandinavia.

I do believe that religions in general are holding back women's rights today, in case anyone was wondering about my opinion ;)

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

I have no opinion on the whole Machaka mess, but I'd certainly like to see a Muspelheim nation.

I'd also like to see a Sumerian nation; maybe a version of Absyia that's more of that style?

A nation based on the Turks might be fun as well.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

We have Abysia, so I doubt we'd get Muspelheim in dom3. They are different nations, sure, but both fire based.

It'd be great to just get what was planned, so 2 more Machakas and Vanarus.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Maybe IW could give us a xmas present with these nations :D

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Muspelheim was planned, actually. Kristoffer's talked about wanting to make it, sometime.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

Maybe it's time to talk Kristoffer into giving LA Mictlan some special units recruitable underwater ?* Rain priests' description mentions they would love nothing more than to return to the sea. Yet player has no particular reason to go there. They use people of Mictlan as means to the goal.

* I've inspired him to add the sleepless infantry and the astral mages to LA Atlantis. So it can be done :>

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

On the other hand, LA Atlantis was arguably underpowered and LA Mictlan is a powerhouse. Giving them anything good in the oceans just boosts them even more.

On the gripping hand, more opposition to R'lyeh in the water is always good. As long as the new units don't add significantly to Mictlan's diversity (either new paths or combinations), I don't think it would be too much. No sacred units.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

What's the lore on Aztecs and the sea? My first wild thought would be to give them a really simple ability to shapeshift into a basic turtle. I like the idea of spellcasters having secondforms, fairly ubiquitously, even/especially if those forms seem to offer little other than increased flavour.

My second thought is that I'd like to see Fomorians, as kings of the drowned dead, have additional powers while underwater. Has anything been done with that, with CBM? Is there a good way to give them the demon priest ability to raise undead while underwater?

Kristoffer is a very nice man, and a wonderful Dev, but my personal experience is that he seems to run away from the idea of player suggestions directly becoming official content, due to concerns about legality and copyright laws (a concern which I don't really understand). So, if you've managed that, my hat goes off to you, B0rsuk.

Re: Vanarus, Machaka Lion Kings etc
 

To be fair, my suggestion was far less specific, I merely highligted the disconnect between nation's flavour and player strategies. That player doesn't want to conquer water. Next thing I know there are some new units recruitable underwater. I think Kristoffer is an amusing developer. Not caring much about multiplayer or balance (although he does make progress), focusing on flavour, yet unstoppable. It's clear he takes his time to make Dominions, and he enjoys it.

I probably shouldn't mention I don't really love Dominions as a game. I like it. I treat it more as a book than a game. It's a game you can explore and study. It has absolutely the best descriptions I've ever seen.

Either way, I'm very curious about Illwinter's new project. I'm almost certain I'll buy it. I can't blame them for not making Dominions 4. The game has some fundamental issues, like balancing of national troops. They are either rush material or forgotten. Deep Ones from EA Atlantis would be okay in late game, I guess, if it wasn't for their awful MR. The "best", biggest forts are actually the worst and people prefer to build in swamps, etc. Anyway, Another dominions game could really feel limiting for a person this creative. Maybe it won't even be a strategy game ? That would make me sad.