They're going to call the Sumerian UU "Enkidu Warrior". "Enkidu Warrior"?!? Please.

If they can't think of anything distinctive for the Sumerians, they could at least done something along the lines of the Rider - an improved version of the thing with a generic name. There could be a Sumerian Maceman or Sumerian Slinger or whatever. Anything but an Enkidu Warrior!

enkidu warrior?

The Sumerian UU is going to be called that. Sucks mightily.

Last Conf. maybe you should have erased the ''that. " from you last sentence.



The Sumerian UU is going to be called Sucks mightily

Huh?

The Sumerian Unique Unit is going to be called an Endiku Warrior

This unit is (to the best of my knowledge) completely fictional

They should have made thier UU the Phalalnx. It should be 1.2.1 with 10 cost instead of 20 (replaces Spearman)

Enkidu was a warrior, and a fictional one at that. It's as if the Americans got "Superman" as their UU ...

Taken from http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/MESO/GILG.HTM...

The account begins: Gilgamesh, two-thirds god and one-third human, is the greatest king on earth and the strongest super-human that ever existed; however, he is young and oppresses his people harshly. The people call out to the sky-god Anu, the chief god of the city, to help them. In response, Anu creates a wild man, Enkidu, out in the harsh and wild forests surrounding Gilgamesh's lands. This brute, Enkidu, has the strength of dozens of wild animals; he is to serve as the subhuman rival to the superhuman Gilgamesh.

So not only was Enkidu one man, but he was a rival to the king...Not the kind of UU I'd want.

If you read on, you'll discover that Gilgamesh and Enkidu became friends. Not that that's any excuse for Firaxis.

Originally posted by Louis XXIV
Huh?

The Sumerian Unique Unit is going to be called an Endiku Warrior

This unit is (to the best of my knowledge) completely fictional

They should have made thier UU the Phalalnx. It should be 1.2.1 with 10 cost instead of 20 (replaces Spearman)

calling a single unit a phalnx is like calling a man a crowd, even if that unit represents a larger formation, as the centurion represents a whole century/cohort in civ3

also, the name "phalanx" is misleading, yes, the sumerians did used massed spearmen, but it was not as refined or orderlly as what the greeks, who perfected the formation, had.

Originally posted by Xen


calling a single unit a phalnx is like calling a man a crowd, even if that unit represents a larger formation, as the centurion represents a whole century/cohort in civ3

also, the name "phalanx" is misleading, yes, the sumerians did used massed spearmen, but it was not as refined or orderlly as what the greeks, who perfected the formation, had.

Looks like someone's been reading about Kryten's Phalangite unit...it's amazing what we learn in this forum. :D

They still invented the formation

And it is better than the Endiku Warrior

Originally posted by Rabid Pop Tart


Looks like someone's been reading about Kryten's Phalangite unit...it's amazing what we learn in this forum. :D

Go to the history forum and read some of my articles on ancient armies, youll find that even though I rever kryten for his knowledge and uniy making skills, I know enogh to hold my own on most military subjects...

Originally posted by Louis XXIV
They still invented the formation

And it is better than the Endiku Warrior

better units might an early mounted unit, or some sort of mace man

Originally posted by Xen


Go to the history forum and read some of my articles on ancient armies, youll find that even though I rever kryten for his knowledge and uniy making skills, I know enogh to hold my own on most military subjects...

Wow...Didn't even know the forum was there. And you do know your stuff...my apologies. :)

My only thing about where they place the Enkidu Warrior is that I hope it's not a spearman replacement. I think they've beat spearman replacements to death. The only thing that haven't done is give it an extra attack (well, extra attack only, like 2.2.1), and I hope they don't do that because then the unique units' stats would be the same as the Bab bowmen. The best options for unique unit stats and replacements are:

Warrior:
- 2.1.1 (A cheap archer basically, that comes from the start)
- 1.2.1 (Early spearman that's cheap. Seems unbalancing, but they couldn't upgrade to pikes)
Archer:
- 3.1.1 (I think that if you're going to have a 3.1.2 horseman, you should have a 3.1.1 archer)
Horseman:
- 2.2.2 (Perfect balance...I'd like a unit with these stats)

The Enkidu warrior should be one of those 4 options. That way, the cost doesn't have to be tweaked at all and it seems fair to me.

I would love the 2/2/2 Horseman and the 3/1/1 archer best. BTW, Enkidu Warrior doesn't sound that bad to me...

2/2/2 is a bit late for the sumerians,they were a power when the chariot was still being refined from a transport cart pulled by @sses (the animal...;) ), but they emploeyed mounted scoutes, and early cavalry regiments as well, pesonally, I think a seige archer would be very nice;
Now what this Xen, a seige archer, never heard of it...

Well, using that nifty little trick they used with conquests to make the conquistador with hound, they make an archer in a long robe, with a shiled man with a 9 foot wicher shield standing in front of him, with a slit in the middle of the shield so the archer can fire, while still be protected

now the stats- 2/2/1 WITH a bombard equal to that of a catapult

edit- replaces standerd archer, double the shields more then the bab archer, I know that may sound like alot, but ypur essentially getting two in one, with perhaps only the legionary surpassing the "bang vr. buck" ratio in the game

The Sumerians hardly had mounted scouts - horseback riding wasn't researched in their days!

Yes, they did, the reson cavalry didnt take off until the mid Assyrian period is because most domesticated horse were not not strong enough to support the weight of a man, but thaos e that could were utilized for the task, and bred together to make stronger breeds

Hm, looking thru some books, it appear the domesticated horse turned up in Mesopotamia in the late 3rd millennium BC, so I guess there might've been indeed mounted scouts in the armies of the kings of Ur III.

Edit: Some further searching turns up ~1350 BC as the date of the earliest known depictions of men on horseback. That presumably puts some doubt on the existence of Sumerian mounted scouts.

Mid Assyrian cavalry? Do you mean the middle of the Neo-Assyrian period (ie, ~800 BC)? That would seem more compatible with what I've read on the subject than the Middle Assyrian period (late 2nd millennium).