Input requested - faction naming

[khelvan]

Well, you can see the specific Carthaginian example above. We will of course provide pronunciation guides, but the question remains. Based on the example above, would you go with "Tsorim" or the longer "Safot Softim biQarthadast?"

[Productivity]

I would go with how the people are called.

ie. We have defeated the American forces
We have defeated the forces of the United States of America

We have defeated the Chinese forces
We have defeated the forces of the Peoples Republic of China

While the second variation is more accurate, it also less commonly used today. I would guess (and I have no historical backup here, but a few logicala reasons (efficiency, characterising another group as an enemy/inferior people)) that this would hold true throughout history.

[Krusader]

I myself would definetly go with Tsorim.

But what about "mixing" in some special cases like that one above. I find Tsorim much easier and cleaner than Safot Softim biQarthadast.

[Sheep]

Well, you can see the specific Carthaginian example above. We will of course provide pronunciation guides, but the question remains. Based on the example above, would you go with "Tsorim" or the longer "Safot Softim biQarthadast?"

You can't just call it "Carthage" (or the Punic equivalent of the city name) on the strat map for brevity, and then include the full name in the faction description at the beginning for historical accuracy, immersion, etc?

I would prefer the political unit as the name, if available. I think Temple made a good point:

I would go for the political unit, but thats just me. After all, when you conquer a nation you don't kill all the people. You vanquish their political power, and subsume them (Rome did anyway).

I think the name of the people could be included too, like if the province ever goes rebel (ie, "Lesbian rebels"... so "Tsorim/Ponnim rebels" or something)

[SwordsMaster]

IMO you will use the people's denomination to refer to troops, etc composed by citizens of that faction. To refer to a faction as a political power it feels more reasonable to use their political name.

[Valuk]

Go with the names as a people coz all the names in your previews sounded good and plus i guess if you named them as a political unit the names would be very long as you put in the example for Carthage and Rome...

[cunctator]

I prefer to have the names of political units. It adds more imersion in the diplomacy screens, one of the few occasions the full faction name apears in the game.

[Temple]

"Lesbian rebels"

Hehehehe...

Sorry about that. Couldn't help myself. Last time, I swear..

[jerby]

I voted political unit. since the an 'empire' (dont start again plz) like Alexanders was refered to as "the empire (i know, i know) of alexander" but teh people living in those city's didnt refere to themselves as 'alexanders' people, or whatever. the tought of themselves as people of their city.
Dunno if its the same ebverywhere, correct me if I'm wrong.

[Shrapnel]

I would go for the way that they call themselves as people, it would be like saying 'I'm going to play as Spain' or 'I'm, going to play as the Spanish'.

[bodidley]

In some cases the name of the people is preferable because it is easier to say. In other cases, the political body controls far more than one people. In the cases of the Seleukid Empire and the Roman Empire, the subjects and citizens were not all one people. In the case of federations or confederations of tribes, one wouldn't want to imply that all of the people were from one tribe.

[Big_John]

i voted political unit, simply because when i play this type of game, i tend to see myself as playing the empire, not the people, per se. e.g., i like ponnim and tsorim, but safot softim biqarthadast sounds more important or.. epic or something.. to me. regardless, either convention is a vast improvement to the immersion, so it's not that big a deal to me.