1512-1701 (An Odessy!)

Sorry, my connection went down last night before I could change my post. I read through the whole document and noticed some pretty major problems with the tactics and information in it. I will look around and see if I can find something supporting it. While it would be fun to make units like that, I have some serious doubts as to whether they actually existed.

I mean, the post actually states that the main purpose of the gunpowder units was to scare enemy horses, and then says that they were stuck onto chariots...? Chariots + Scared Horses = Matchsticks.

Are you 100% that this was not for a fantasy game site? (Like I said, internet down. So I could finish reading, but not do any research UUUGH!)

http://www.1421.tv/pages/content/index.asp?PageID=87

ALTHOUGH I had heard of that stuff before in passing, I had assumed it to be another revisionist's spew... but you really cant argue with what he has to say. Its interesting, but (since the Chinese did not establish long, or even short, term links with any of the areas they visited) it seems of doubtful use. However, it really is VERY cool to read how he figured all that out.

Research continues!

After reading the whole gun powder & China article, it sounds to me like an early version of a tank... the chariots are meant as defense for the gunner, with shields and such. The chariot itself appeared to be used to transport the gun troops into formation quicker, they don't participate in any routing of the enemy. The traditional cavalry does that. As to the guns scaring the horses, they should scare horses which aren't used to the noise aka the manchu/barbs. It should be the same concept as cavalries with guns. The horse don't/shouldn't knock the rider off if he fires a shot.

http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0412&L=anthro-l&F=&S=&P=88240

3. According to a 1357 text [see Joseph Needham's volume
on gunpowder, already cited], Zhu Yuanzhang in 1354 had a
Daoist adept supervise the production of state-of-the-art gunpowder
artillery and handguns. [cf a German report that, shortly after 1400,
the "Catholic priest, Berchtold Schwartz" supervised the casting of
cannon and handgun manufacture in that country. The disentangling
of science, technology, and religion was hardly begun anywhere in
this period. - ed]
3. [cont'd] Then, according to other sources, after the victory,
in 1368, he had the gunpowder weapons locked up in state arsenals,
partly for reasons of cost, partly for sheer Paranoia over seizures
of power. According to a Singaporean [woman] military historian,
the Chinese army did not thereafter receive "firearms training" until
"November 1407, at the earliest," when, one presumes, the
Vietnamese fired on the Chinese invaders. Nor, again for reasons
of cost cum paranoia, did the state invest in weapons developme

"Firearms: A global History to 1700", by Kenneth W. Chase, Camebridge, 2003. ISBN 0521822742

Found something useful, but its going to be a bit before I get back to school so I can hunt in the library for it.

Until then I am going to keep hunting for important events for the tech tree.

Thats true of small arms fire, but these are cannons we are talking about. The noises require animals to be dragged off.

I'm not going to argue the guns; seems pretty clear that they did have firearms etc in larger numbers than I had been led to believe (thats ignorance for you ;p). The chariots are just too hard to swallow.

I will get my hands on the text above and come back with a more detailed unit listing because the internet has failed me on this one haha.

http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/tech/cannon.htm

More information!

Wouldn't that means that whenever you have cannons that you shouldn't have cavalries with you? Surely there have been cases where artillery and cavalries were placed together...

Aside from that, how about reintroduce gun powder units/cannons to China after european contact, around the mid 16th century.

"The fire lance was probably the next step. This was a bamboo tube several feet long, drilled through the joints and wrapped with strong twine to keep it from bursting, and attached to a long heft with which to hold and aim it. It was loaded with a deflagrating powder and various projectiles, in fact much like a kind of Roman candle. It was lighted from a fuze projecting from the muzzle, whereupon it would discharge its fire, gases, and projectiles to the front. Turned around so it discharged to the rear, it made a rocket, stabilised by a stick behind it, and perhaps with an iron point on the front. Weapons of this type were used in China by the 13th century, and spread through the Mongols and Tatars to the Arabs and to India, around 1250. One example shows a tray held like a rifle, in which several cartridges, small fire lances, could be exploded one by one."

"The invention proceeded no further in China, beyond incendiaries, fire lances, and firecrackers. European gunpowder and cannon were reintroduced to China under the Ming dynasty by the Portuguese and others."

Excerpts from article above. The more scholarly tone of this article (as opposed to the forum pieces of the ones above) make it more believeable... but that means nothing really.

http://www.du.edu/~jcalvert/

He is lodged on a college site, and is an AP and a registered engineer, but it also seems that he has an interest in history... so thats logical.

Only reason I brought this up is that he has that infamous line: "all your bases are belong to us" at the bottom of the page ;p

Reading continues, although I will have to leave it for a dinner party somewhat too soon...

"Fireworks later gave rise to the rocket, which projected a ball or bomb without the use of a cannon. War rockets had been used in China since about AD 1200, fire lances turned around and called flying rats."

Just another excerpt. And I am sorry that it seems I cannot transmit what I mean (gah... idiot! ;p). Okay, last try:

Cannons are big and loud. So are rockets. A horse next to something big and loud is scared (try using a firecracker next to a horse and you will understand ;p) and tends to bolt.

For chariots, the horses would either have to remain attached OR would have to be somewhere else (ie, inside the already crowded formation). If they are unattached, then the formation loses its mobility and any of the advantages of a mobile platform. If attached... well, you would be shooting a whole lot of really big guns right next to the ear of a few horses. I dont know for sure about horses, but I am 100% certain that I would run... and if the horse does, then there goes the chariot.

Gotta go! This article is really interesting (as were the theories you showed!) but in essence, here is what it comes to: there is corroborating evidence for what I have now in this Calvert article. I cannot find anything to support that post (however cool the ideas were). While the units I gave the Chinese are clearly wrong, and will require major updates, I feel that mainstream history would agree with me in saying that rocket chariots are a bit far fetched as a mass weapon of war.

I could be wrong! In 5 years I could be 100% wrong! BUT (and I hope you understand!) I want to keep this realistic v-a-v mainstream history so that everyone can understand it and I wont look crazy ;p

Thanks for your efforts! You have broadened my horizons with them ;p

lol i guess when it comes down to it the horse drawn chariots were used to transport the gunners faster, and once they arrived in their position/formation, they are stationary. Although ur rite, i can't find any more info about this chariot/gunner either. Better stick to what we do know

I know for a fact that crossbows were popular period weapons (I know for a fact that Hawkins used one at San Juan de Ulloa, and a number of the men with him did as well) so I think I can safely keep them for a while. I just needed a transition, and crossbows=> muskets seems pretty good in that respect considering that it is very unlikely that high quality small arms weapons were in great use before the very late 1500s early 1600s.

As for China, I will do them seperate (like Japan) and work from there.

I think I forgot to explain the rational behind castles, so I will now ;p

I want to make the capture of cities in Europe very difficult, and pre-placed Fortifications are a good way to manage this. However, I think the word fortifications is used for another thing in civ, so I hedged a bit and called them castles. They do become weaker in a relative sense when compared to artillery, but fortifications are still in use today so its not like they became outdated.

As to non-Euros having castles: Japan probably will, and the Turks will get a few too. They will be preplaced if I do use them, and will only be in cities (like those of the HRE, or Flanders) which are very close to enemy cities or were historically diifficult to take, or that I decide should be hard to take ;p

I want this to be difficult, but I dont trust the computer enough to think it is truly capable of MAKING things difficult.

MeaNwhile: I am going to start work on some basic MUnit grafts (Pikes + Knights, etc) using the standard graphics. I like the idea of adding custom graphics over time, so thats what will happen ;p

AND I am going to finish the .biq's cities when I get back to school (left my atlases there) and start thinking about resources. I have a buildings list and an important events list for Europe in general (not much for the specifics yet). Just trying to jump around and do things because I get bored with doing the same thing (and I have had just about enough of research for the moment thank you very much ;p).

Anyhoo thanks for understanding ;p

Hum, where are the ELEPHANTS? SEA armies were all relying on mounted elephants as core shock troops (and are still at some extend as you might have seen in the post-tsunami aid efforts in Phuket). No Elephants, no Siam, remember the good old flag ?

Elephants... ok! They'll come in as a flavor unit to replace the horsemen for Siam! Higher A and D!

Ok?

Haha thanks!

(noticed youre from Bangkok... hmm... ;p)

Wow. That 1421-site was really interesting. But I doubt, that they could sail north of Greenland and Siberia. The climate in the 15th century had already gotten too cold for the Norsemen in Greenland. But I will definitely find and read that book.
Now, I almost feel sorry for all the junks my privateers have sunk.

This is true. However, much of what he has to say is pretty hard to find fault with.

Working on learning how to mix two seperate unit types into an MUnit so that I can start pumping out the basic graphics and getting that dealt with.

Not sure how I am going to go about the ships, but I am sure I will be able to hunt some stuff up.

An idea for the Manchu: You could use the Manchu to keep the Ming down and keep it from conquering the world in a short period of time by putting the two nations in a locked war and giving the Manchu enough of a jump start to keep the Ming and the Manchu constantly grappling for survival at all times.

No worries about that happening, trust me! Take a peek at the unit list

Its more effective to use resources to convince the AI to fight than locked alliances. Besides, the Ming will be crippled with a very corrupt government (to simulate their real life problems with corruption) just like the Spanish will have real difficulty in building up a commercial empire (it will be possible, but since there will be pop requirements for units...)

Some stuff I have written down and figured I would share:

SMALL WONDERS (general):

Govenor's Residence: FP
Naval Academy: <5 ports> <Elite Naval Unit> can build veteran naval units, 1 naval officer x15 (can rush improvements/small wonders)
Military Academy: <5 barracks> <Vict Army> 1 army officer x15 (can build army)
National Bank <5 branch banks> interest, 1 treasure x20 turns
Espinage Academy: Spy missions

Resources (all give 0.4.4 [F.S.C]) (Countries next to name are the only ones it is visible to):
Precious Metals: Spain
Slaves: Portugal
Spice: Dutch
Pelts: France
Tobacco: England
Furs: Russia
Silk: Manchu

Incense: Ottomen, Persia
Christians: Ottomen, Barbary States

Cloth: Spain, France, Austria

Sugar: England, France, Dutch, Spanish
Cinnamon: England, France, Portugal, Dutch

Wheat: Russia, Sweden, Denmark, Austria, France

Bonus Resources:

Cattle 1.2.1
Rice 4.0.0
Gold 0.1.8
Oasis 1.2.1
Game 4.0.0
Grain 4.0.0
Maize 4.0.0
Silver 0.1.8
Dates 4.0.2
Fruit 4.0.0
Fish: 2.0.1

Luxuries (all luxuries give 0.0.4)
Pepper
Mahogany
Tomatoes
Ivory
Rum
Horses
Diamonds
Dyes
Tea
Linens

Base Terrain Values:

Grassland 2.0.1 (Euro Grassland 3.0.1)
Plains 1.1.1 (Euro Plains 1.2.1)
Hills 0.2.1 (Euro Hills 0.3.1)
Forest 1.2.2 (Forest Hills 1.2.2)
Ocean, Coast, Sea 1.0.1

<Impassable to wheeled>
Jungle 2.0.0
Mountain 0.2.0 (Plateau 0.2.0)
Marsh 2.0.0
Desert 2.1.1 (Flood Plains 4.0.1)

<Impassable>
Tundra 0.0.0

Have more to post, but the internet is down soon. Tile improvements offer huge bonus, so no worries!

Shouldn't silk be shared amongst most if not all of the asian nations? Aside from that i really like the variety in your list