Anyone Else Disappointed in Carthage?

[CivilizedPlayer]

When I found out Carthage was one of the new civs, they immediately went to the top of my "who to play first?" list. They are one of the most underappreciated empires in history, since most people just know them as the guys who got destroyed by Rome. But prior to the Punic Wars, they were a major trade empire with ships sailing all the way to modern-day England and back. So I was a little disappointed to find that Firaxis took easy way out and made a gimmicky civ that is heavily based upon Hannibal crossing the Alps.

For starters, their War Elephant:
Carthage never actually used war elephants very successfully. In the First Punic war, they were badly trained and many just fled the battlefield. And in the Second Punic war, the vast majority died in the Alps, without ever seeing battle. Those that did survive found that the Romans were well prepared with anti-elephant tactics. In fact, Hannibal's reliance on elephants was one of the main reasons he lost in the end. They are in Civ V simply because people know about them.

Secondly, the quinquireme:
It's more historically accurate than the War Elephant, that's for sure. Carthage used them effectively in all their wars. However, I don't like the fact that Carthage has two UU's for their wars. They were historically a very peaceful civ, and I wish that they got a unique harbor building, or something along those lines. Civ's with 2 UU's (America, Japan, Rome, etc.) get those two UU's two encourage them to be warlike. Carthage shouldn't be a warmonger civ, and therefore they have no reason for two UU's.

And finally, their UA:
Crossing mountains? Really? Hannibal was no better at crossing mountains than any other general. He lost a good chunk of his army during that crossing. Again, this bonus is gimmicky and unnecessary (Not to mention unbalanced. Imagine if your scouts could cross straight over mountain chains. They ignore terrain costs already, so there's no way they'd get stuck.). And yes, there is one half of the UA that is actually devoted to sea trade. They get free harbors. That's nice, for sure, but it's also boring, and dwarfed by the sheer amount of needless Hannibal/Punic Wars references scattered throughout the rest of Carthage's Unique Stuff.

What does everyone else think? Are you a fan of Carthage as it is, or do you wish it was a little more historically grounded?

 

[SammyKhalifa]

They're going to be a powerhouse.

 

[BobDole]

What does everyone else think? Are you a fan of Carthage as it is, or do you wish it was a little more historically grounded?

It's a game, so I really don't care about the historical accuracy. Their unique stuff intrigues me (especially moving over mountains), so that's all that really matters to me.

 

[ehecatzin]

I think the problem is you are focusing way too much on the mountain crossing, its rather situational, and only kicks in after generating a Great General, so there's no problem with scouts.

The elephant is there for the flavour, I would have liked more to have Numidian cavarly, but Im ok with it.

The Quinquirreme could very well dominate the sea early game, seems like a very nice UU.

Finally you are underestimating the free Harbor, thats massive, I dont see how its boring, inmediate trade link with capital? trade, couple it with messanger of the Gods for extra science, and the extra hammers you'll get from working sea resources. Its one heck of a UA.

Carthage will be great for stablishing a functional and solid maritime power, Im playing Carthage right after Mayans.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I generally agree that Carthage is based more on the historical identity rather than historical accuracy, but that's mostly just semantics and marketting. It's no biggy.

Having 2 UU's isn't more or less war-oriented. Some warmongering civs have UB's, like the Songhai, the Aztecs, and India when you have evil-Gandhi.

The AFE is gonna rock I think. It combines the CompCav with the Haka War Dance.

The Quin is an up-powered trireme and is melee. That should be good for Carthage to add coastal cities to their empire early.

The Harbor bonus is completely awesome. it makes coastal cities produce more gold as soon as they are built or captured.

The mountain bonus is pretty situational and generally weak. I consider it to be mostly for flavor, and there's nothing wrong with that when the harbor bonus kicks ass.

 

[Gali]

You forget the God of the Sea pantheon with plus 1 production on fishing boats. Instant harbors and that can lead to decent production in coastal cities really early. I really agree about the focus on historical identity rather than reality. Hannibal made an early crossing and paid for it. Without the thousands of angry gauls waiting in the Po region he might not have recovered. He was hardly an expert at crossing mountains.

Combine that with the Celts being basically a British faction based on modern Celtic views and the Dido, Theodora picks and Firaxis did a really poor job of representing a number of civs in this expo. It was all about marketability.

 

[Gucumatz]

I think Carthage is going to be one of the best civs in G & K, primarily to the free harbors. I am assuming Quinquireme or the War Elephant will contain a unique promotion useful throughout the game.

 

[carm3]

I'm generally pretty alright with all of it - the time of the first two Punic Wars represented both the height of Carthaginian power and the period for which they were (and are) best known, so I see no reason why it shouldn't receive a large amount of attention. Also, while I highly doubt that this had any impact on the decision to include two unique units, there's a growing tendency to revise the picture of Carthage as a largely peaceful civ, so it's not especially inaccurate either.

As for the UU and UA - I probably would have slightly preferred Numidian cavalry to elephants, but the elephants are both more distinctive and more natively Carthaginian so I can't really criticise it. Re: the crossing of the Alps, Hannibal's achievement in leading an entire army across the range was famous in ancient times as well as modern (I can't think of any other comparable accomplishment from the Greco-Roman period - the Gauls who occasionally marauded into Italy were completely different), so I think it's pretty deserving.

So all in all I think they've actually done alright from a historical point of view, but my guess is that their choices have less to do with historical accuracy than they do with providing people with something somewhat familiar that is nevertheless interesting.

 

[Liex]

What does everyone else think? Are you a fan of Carthage as it is, or do you wish it was a little more historically grounded?

To be honest, I'm far more optimistic about the Huns. I don't intend to play as Carthage until I've played once or twice as each one of the other civs.

I think they think Carthage is historically grounded as it is. Or they think it was going to be funny to have elephants on the top of mountains, I don't know. I'm not even slightly interested.

 

[Scaramanga]

If elephants weren't the least bit effective I'm sure Hannibal would've dropped them. It is a very Romantic image, crossing the Alps with pachyderms and what not, but I'd find it even more heavy-handed if the game designers tried to suppress that image. They seemed to have tried in Civ 3 and Civ 4 (Numidian units) and it seems a bit arrogant to try and downplay the fun aspect of Carthaginian history. Why so serious? It's a game and it's supposed to be fun.

 

[carm3]

I really agree about the focus on historical identity rather than reality. Hannibal made an early crossing and paid for it. Without the thousands of angry gauls waiting in the Po region he might not have recovered. He was hardly an expert at crossing mountains.

Expert, no, but in the same way that Alexander wasn't an "expert" at transcontinental campaigns. It's not that Hannibal accomplished this without suffering any repercussions, but that he was able to pull off a feat that most thought impossible while keeping his army sufficiently intact to secure several major victories over the Romans (the Gauls around the Po region didn't contribute anything - they actually refused to fight for Hannibal, and had to seek Roman protection when he devastated their territory in response).

 

[carm3]

If elephants weren't the least bit effective I'm sure Hannibal would've dropped them. It is a very Romantic image, crossing the Alps with pachyderms and what not, but I'd find it even more heavy-handed if the game designers tried to suppress that image. They seemed to have tried in Civ 3 and Civ 4 (Numidian units) and it seems a bit arrogant to try and downplay the fun aspect of Carthaginian history. Why so serious? It's a game and it's supposed to be fun.

Precisely! And the elephants did play a major role in the battle of the Trebia, as well as being very effective against forces less organised than the Romans.

 

[chazzycat]

I wouldn't want to be landlocked as Carthage, but otherwise they seem pretty good. The mountain crossing isn't really the strong part of their UA, its more of a side gimick. Its all about the free harbors, which I think is a pretty good approximation of their early trading prowess. Just gotta keep cities on teh coast and should be good to go. The mountain crossing thing will be useful for scouting but I doubt it will be feasible to assault cities over a mountain range, given the 50% damage penalty.

 

[ampmclock]

yeah, I feel like mountain crossing is just a joke, almost, a reference. The free harbors is actually really good.

 

[Calouste]

You forget the God of the Sea pantheon with plus 1 production on fishing boats. Instant harbors and that can lead to decent production in coastal cities really early. I really agree about the focus on historical identity rather than reality. Hannibal made an early crossing and paid for it. Without the thousands of angry gauls waiting in the Po region he might not have recovered. He was hardly an expert at crossing mountains.

Combine that with the Celts being basically a British faction based on modern Celtic views and the Dido, Theodora picks and Firaxis did a really poor job of representing a number of civs in this expo. It was all about marketability.

Save up a bit of cash, buy a Lighthouse in your new city and a Fish tile, send over a Workboat from your capital, and your new city is working a 5 food, 2 hammer, 2 gold tile.

 

[Sharku]

I think Carthage is going to be one of the best civs in the game really.

 

[seasnake]

Save up a bit of cash, buy a Lighthouse in your new city and a Fish tile, send over a Workboat from your capital, and your new city is working a 5 food, 2 hammer, 2 gold tile.

And if you beeline Iron Working to get the colossus, then that tile is even more valuable plus the five gold free. Carthage looks like a lot of fun!

 

[GenjiKhan]

yeah, I feel like mountain crossing is just a joke, almost, a reference. The free harbors is actually really good.

That ability can be good in Multiplayer to attack cities surrounded by mountains . In the end,it seems that it won't be the Romans who'll have nightmares with Elephants . Instead,it'll be the Incans who won't sleep safely when placing cities near mountains .

 

[theguy8882]

If elephants weren't the least bit effective I'm sure Hannibal would've dropped them. It is a very Romantic image, crossing the Alps with pachyderms and what not, but I'd find it even more heavy-handed if the game designers tried to suppress that image. They seemed to have tried in Civ 3 and Civ 4 (Numidian units) and it seems a bit arrogant to try and downplay the fun aspect of Carthaginian history. Why so serious? It's a game and it's supposed to be fun.

I couldn't agree more! It's a game not a documentary elephants going over mountains in the legendary story still romanticized today is a fun addition to the game. Even if it isn't completely historically accurate.

 

[Ianwill93]

If the harbors are [FREE] harbors, then they might as well be a UB. A maintenance free trade route is pretty unique and almost impossible to achieve with the other civs with trade route boni.
Im a huge fan of carthaginian history as well but i think the UA actually does portray their Phoenician trading aspects as well as possible in the constraints of gameplay.
I'd take their current build over the Netherlands' tbh.