Cognomens

[Brutus66]

I was reading a Wikipedia article today about Charles Martel. He was a Frankish leader who, at the Battle of Tours, saved western civilization from being overrun by Arab Muslim invaders in 732.

Charles was given the cognomen (originally a kind of a nickname that was used by Romans that later became hereditary) "Martel", for the merciless way he hammered his enemies.

I got to thinking of all the leaders who were given these nicknames throughout history- the Hammer, the Great, the Lionhearted, the Meek, and so on, and thought it would be a cool mod idea that a player might receive a cognomen based on some kind of exceptional gameplay achievement. For example; build x number of libraries before x date, and you get the title "the Learned" appended to your leader's name for the rest of the game.

Only one per game and they should be a challenge to get.

Any thoughts?

[dregor]

An interesting idea. I like the concept of having little "sub-goals" to aim for in the game. Perhaps titles for getting Liberalism first, or circling the globe.

[Unimatrix11]

Or if you loose 10 battles at 99+% at odds in one game, you become "the bold" (from plugging your hair - maybe we need bold versions of all leader-portraits then, too, tho)...

Or if you have only one city in 1000AD, you become "without land"...

(both names above are historical)

No, but seriously, sounds like a nice addition to me.

[Supr49er]

Well, you could wind up with a title like Ethelred the Unready or John Lackland.

[wodan11]

We kind of already get this, with the victory screen where it goes from what Dan Quayle up to Caesar or Alexander, whoever's at the top.

Wodan

[Heraclitus]

I don't think that's exactly what he means woodan.

[wodan11]

I know that's not exactly what he means, that's why I said "kind of".

Anyway, the intent of the "Dan Quayle" screen is pretty much the same as his intent here... it's just a slightly different "spin" on it.

From a gameplay / design point of view, they're identical.

Wodan

[Heraclitus]

Well, there is a small but I think important difference. The "Dan Quayle" screen is only a judge of score, this proposed feature encourages different types of play.

[wodan11]

Yeah, I agree. Score is crap. It has some really poor assumptions and valuations built into it.

Wodan

[Heraclitus]

That is certainly true, maybe this kind of supplementing thing could alleviate this?

[Blaupanzer]

You can rename your leader at anytime in the "your game" portion of options on the in-game menu. So feel free to reward yourself as appropriate. The AI will not admire your title. They will use it tho, when addressing you.

[tedge20]

Should the titles also include specific bonuses for that civ as well? For instance, using the previous example, if someone was the first to build ten libraries, thus becoming "the Learned," should they get a production bonus on future libraries, universities, etc? Now, if you're evil, there could also be negative ones--for instance, first civ to lose five cities becomes "the Meek" and requires additional time to produce military units (since a civ on the losing end of so many battles might have more trouble recruiting people to fight). In both cases, it would allow the game to reflect specific strategies and events IN THAT GAME, as opposed to the default settings. To make it fair, there could be a time limit on the bonuses to make sure that the rewards/punishments do not go too far in affecting the outcome of the game.

[The Priest]

I like this. A bit like, but far better, than the palace screen in Civ 2. A bit naff maybe, the the sub-goal and little pat on the back was fun. Not sure we need it to give bonuses in game, the events do that already, unless we tie the names to the events, though an anouncement to everyone and perhaps a +1 relations bonus for 10 turns might be nice.

[Brutus66]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
The AI will not admire your title.

The AI isn't impressed when I beat the stuffing out of them, either, but it's a fun thing to do just the same.

[Yosho]

Originally posted by The Priest
Not sure we need it to give bonuses in game

I donno...if it's something you have to work to do, and perhaps change your stratagy a bit to do it, then it should give some minor advantage, just so it's not actually hurting you to get a title. It wouldn't have to be much, though.

It should also be limited so that only one leader per game can get the same title...so if you manage to become "the great", and get some kind of advantage from that (-2 war unhappiness or something), then no one else will be able to get that title. (It would be silly if everyone was "the great", right? )