Axmen inacuracy

Discussion in 'Civ4 - Strategy & Tips' started by Ermak-, Apr 12, 2009.

  1. Ermak-

    Ermak- Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    Location:
    MINNEAPOLIS, MN
    There was no such as thing as wondering bunch of axrmen ( who resemble Nacho Libre) in the bronze age. That unit should be replaced by sicle sword unit of the middle east. Would be much more historicly accurate.
     
  2. DMOC

    DMOC Mathematician

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,594
    As long as they take cities for me, I don't mind. ;)

    (Seriously, I do get your point, and I am a little confused at why they put this axemen.)
     
  3. Eat_Up_Martha

    Eat_Up_Martha Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    567
    Location:
    Canada
    If I recall correctly from the 10 minutes of Discovery Channel I watched one day, axes in ancient combat were generally used as shieldbreakers. As in, your biggest guys would go in and, literally, break people's shields with axes.
     
  4. Yeosol

    Yeosol monarch

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2007
    Messages:
    120
    As well as the fact that Axes don't beat swords, it's the other way around. I think the classical RPG formula is Sword -kills- Axe -Kills- Spear -Kills- Sword. Hmm, or maybe nothing kills sword, Bow?
    Well I agree it doesn't makes sence.
     
  5. DMOC

    DMOC Mathematician

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    5,594
    I think you meant to say spears kill cavalry. :goodjob:
     
  6. Zack

    Zack 99% hot gas

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    16,749
    Location:
    insert joke
    It would make more sense if the Swordsman got a bonus against melee units... but I personally don't really care.
     
  7. JonathanStrange

    JonathanStrange PrinceWithA1000Enemies

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2005
    Messages:
    1,306
    Location:
    TThe Dreaming
    Axemen destroyed our shields and our village; ever since then (4000 B.C.), I've pursued them.

    Well ... not so much lately, but I do give the evil eye to anyone with an axe. Needless to say, I hate lumberjacks and the Canada Civ always has to watch its back.
     
  8. Zack

    Zack 99% hot gas

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2009
    Messages:
    16,749
    Location:
    insert joke
    That reminds me of a funny beer commercial. :lol:
     
  9. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    They should had been replaced by spearmen, not by sword bearers ;)
    Spoiler :

    Fragment of Eannatum's Stele of the Vultures, 1st Lagash Dynasty, ca. 2500 – 2270 BC

    Firaxis should read their own civilopedia sometimes ( see entry for Sumeria UU ) ;)
     
  10. Ermak-

    Ermak- Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2006
    Messages:
    313
    Location:
    MINNEAPOLIS, MN
    anyone who is fond of ancient battles- u guys should watch "Battles BC" on www.historychanhel.com . Acording to them most bronze age armies had Sickle Swords,- which is miles away from a standart straight sword- which appeared in iron age, (due to toughnes of iron) Just think of what those egyptian-wolf creatures were carrying in " the Mummy"
     
  11. Spiceweasel

    Spiceweasel Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2007
    Messages:
    150
    Maybe so. But I'd rather have a mildly accurate, incredibly fun game than an incredibly accurate, mildly fun simulation.
     
  12. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    And exactly why would a spear or Sickle Sword bearer would be less fun than a axeman?
     
  13. Gooblah

    Gooblah Heh...

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2007
    Messages:
    4,282
    I think the ancient unit system should be switched from Axe/Spear/Sword -> Slinger/Axes/Spear/Sword, with Archers taking on more of a combat role.

    Something like...

    Slinger: 25% bonus vs Melee, 20% hills defense, 20% chance of causing collateral damage (4 STR)
    Spear: 50% bonus vs Melee, 20% city defense bonus (5 STR)
    Sword: 10% city attack bonus, 50% bonus v Mounted units (5 STR)
    Archer: 10% bonus vs Melee, causes collateral damage, -20% city attack (3 STR)
     
  14. bestbrian

    bestbrian Just this guy, ya know?

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,344
    Location:
    NYC
    Axes are in there for BW, because the Hittites over ran the Egyptians with an army of bronze weapons - particularly axes. The Egyptians expelled the Hittites by copying their weapons, principally Bronze axes.

    Not War Chariots, as you would suspect. :)
     
  15. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    Bestbrian:

    1- You mean copper or iron?
    2-You mean Hitites or Hyksos?

    Just because the sentence you made does not make sense in historical terms.
     
  16. bestbrian

    bestbrian Just this guy, ya know?

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2007
    Messages:
    3,344
    Location:
    NYC
    It would be very easy to understand if I hadn't made a hopeless hash out of it. :) This is what happens when I get lazy and just start bandying about things I saw on History Channel specials without bothering to get a book off the shelf to see if I'm even close to being correct.

    I was initially referring to the Hyksos when I mentioned the upgrading in Egyptian military technology (war chariots, bronze weapons) while under occupation. I then leaped ahead to the employment of these weapons against the Hittites (primarily Kadesh). Although Kadesh is remembered as being mainly a clash of chariots, there were alot of melee troops on the field armed with axes (and much else besides).

    I believe these weapons were constructed of Bronze (derived from copper) as opposed to Iron weapons - isn't that correct? (seems a little early for mass use of Iron to me).

    Feel free to correct any errors, and I apologize for my laziness (but dammit, I'm tired). :)
     
  17. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    Hitite empire was mainly supported by iron weapons ;)

    About the Hyksos... they got control of Egypt ( and not all, to say the truth ) by the use of military technologies that were unknown by the Egyptians, like the composite bow or the war chariot ( and also new types of axes and daggers ). War in Egypt before the Hyksos was mainly based on the use of clubs and spears ( not only, OFC ), so it is not hard to see that native Egyptians had a hard time at first ......
     
  18. Cornhog

    Cornhog Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    160
    Location:
    Nashville
    According to Wikipedia (so obviously take with a grain of salt) "Hittite weapons were made from bronze though; iron was so rare and precious that it was employed only as jewelry."
     
  19. r_rolo1

    r_rolo1 King of myself

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    13,818
    Location:
    Lisbon, Portugal
    In the beginning yes, but their empire was the first in the Middle east to use iron weapons extensively..... not that it saved them form the sea people. Even recently it was discovered strong evidence of a full blown iron forge in Hittite area between 2100 and 1900 BC [source] , and i'm pretty sure that it wasn't to make jewelry...

    Remember that wiki is not, and never pretended to be, the more uptdated ( or even the more truthful ) source :p
     
  20. trafficlight

    trafficlight Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    Messages:
    34
    I think it goes Sword kills -> Axe kills -> Spear kills -> Tank
     

Share This Page