Arabia: 3000 BC vs 600 AD Start

[The Q-Meister]

Maybe I missed this in an earlier patch as I don't play 600 AD starts too often, but I was very surprised to see the differences between playing Arabia in 600 AD vs 3000 BC.

First off, why is the Middle East so barren and empty? I'm not talking about Persia or Babylon not being there, but no hint that any civilization settled in those areas! Mesopotamia is an open space of land.

You have the Byzantines which are a nice addition but it's a bit annoying how you are unable to make peace/contact with them/attempt to convert them peacefully.

Lastly 600 AD Arabia does not start with Code of Laws or Sailing which they do in the 3000 BC game which I don't understand since the classical era civs provide much more opportunities for trading techs than the isolated 600 AD start does

For instance in the 3000 BC game I'm playing right now in my first 10 turns I was able to:

Vassalize Egypt
Take Babylon, a size 10 city with infrastructure, 2 Wonders and terrain improvements intact.
Convert Persia to Islam.
Trade for Calendar, Literature, Aesthetics.

Compare that with the 600 AD start where there is little to no possibility for trading techs early on, have no pre-built cities or even terrain improvements in Mesopotamia and can't make contact with the only civ you can see.

Even from historical non-gameplay perspective the 3000 BC start just feels much more like playing real-life ancient Arabia with the ability to vassalize civs, trade, peacefully convert Mid-East cities along with making your conquests.

At the very least I think there should be large, independent cities in Mesopotamia and Persia. And I would really like to be able to contact Byzantines or if that's not possible have a automatic peace after 5 turns of neither side attacking the other.

 

[blizzrd]

I believe that the Arabian flip area includes Jerusalem in 3000BC but does not in 600AD. This has always struck me as strange.

 

[Power_of_Beer]

Strange, I always thought the 600AD start is easier. Two pre-built shrines and two of the best wonders in Alexandria. Babylonia and Persia can be a pain to conquer without siege weapons, especially if they didn't get the plague.
It's just a matter of how the game develops until they spawn.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Yeah. AI Arabia is much more strong in 600AD then in 3000BC.

 

[Chiyochan]

i always considered arabia pretty weak, they never try to up and conquer spain. but then, there aren't any crusades in Europe either. the time you get on turns would make it nearly impossible i'd think.

 

[zbelg]

600AD Arabia has much more potential than 3000AD and does not need a buff at all. No cities leaves it free to colonize (which personally when I'm playing I actually kind of like, I prefer building Baghdad and Dubai), but most significantly, essentially being able to grab The Great Library, The Great Lighthouse, The Pyramids, The Temple of Solomon, and the Church of the Nativity right off the bat gives the Arabs a massive advantage. When against the AI, I usually have to wage my own crusade to keep them from outdoing Europe.