I have a problem with your tech tree regarding mounted units. Currently a player can create a cavalry unit (the Horseman) in the prehistoric era! I think that's ridiculous. The earliest use of horses in warfare was the chariot. The chariot was a major weapon in early history, but in the game it is treated as a minor and insignificant footnote.
1st, thanks for the feedback - regardless of my disagreement it's appreciated to understand the views of those playing the game.
That said - are you kidding me? You think we figured out how to hook up a horse to a wheeled vehicle before we figured out how to ride it? Sorry... I take this assertion as ludicrous.
If you approach a wild horse and you don't know anything about horse domestication yet, would you think, "gee... if only I could hook it up to a cart"? Or do you think, "what if I jump on its back... it looks strong enough to carry me! Now THAT could be useful if I could teach him to be friendly and to trust me!"?
Given that chariots weren't in use all over the world (ever heard of a Celtic or Viking or Native American Chariot?)but only in very localized regions where they were put to use - primarily around the middle east and later China - it seems fitting they are a sidenote in the mod just as they were really only influential in SOME areas of the world for a very limited period of time (relatively).
However, I do agree that they could use some more beefing and for that reason I do have planned some further promotion development for those units that take advantage of their wheeled and thus unique nature. While I can't imagine it would've been terribly easy to fight from the carriage of a chariot the usefulness of having a driver and a fighter (in some chariot forms) as well as the convenient ability for chariots to trample down those who stand in their way do have some upcoming combat representations for those who would play with Combat Mod options to come.
And perhaps they could use some extra strength in general.
I think your tech tree should look like this:
"Stirrup" and "Mounted Archery" should both require "Horse Breeding". "Horse Breeding" should require "Animal Riding". "Animal Riding" should require "Chariotry". "Chariotry" should require "Equine Domestication" and "Megafauna Domestication". And "Megafauna Domestication" should require "Elephant Domestication" and "Camel Domestication".
Without really closely looking at how it currently is I can't comment much on this. I'll leave this to Hydro to discuss. Except that to say Animal Riding should require Chariotry to me screams putting the cart before the horse in every literal way.
All of the Megafauna riders should require "Animal Riding", as should the Horseman. In this way the first mounted units a player could use would always be chariots in the Ancient Era.
But there were plenty of civilizations that learned how to ride animals without needing to develop a chariot first. Don't see why it would be a prerequisite of riding itself.
hmm... I'm thinking that if we're basing this presumption about the chariot coming before the horse on any historical material we have to study from the ancients then we should probably consider that it's likely that Charioteering was in high fashion by the time any forms of writing were developed - it was the new 'super weapon' by the time the earliest human recordkeepers can show how our people were fighting. That does not tell me we didn't know how to ride them and even ride them into battle first.
I also have a problem with the Horseman unit itself. It has the characteristics of a cavalry unit, but it upgrades to Mounted Infantry. Mounted Infantry did not fight on horseback. The Mounted Infantry unit should really be treated as a melee unit in all respects except that it has the added speed of a mounted unit. If the Horseman upgrades to Mounted Infantry, it also should be considered functionally equivalent to it, i.e. - as mounted infantry that fights on foot.
I've yet to fully evaluate a true separation of the Mounted but fights Melee from Mounted units but I get what you're pointing at here and do agree that it needs to be sorted out properly at some point.
Again, I don't mean to be harsh or condescending... I just don't understand how we could've possibly developed the mechanical hybridization between horse and equipment before we'd developed a man to mount relationship with the horse that was already mutually beneficial to both parties. It doesn't seem right at all to me but I know that it's the kind of thing taught in schools as if it were fact yet is only weakly substantiated. So if I sound frustrated its with that current dynamic among our education system more than it is with your feedback.
However, if the scholars are correct, it's only further evidence, imo, for humanity having been HANDED technologies during the early days of human civilization rather than actually DEVELOPING those technologies on our own. There's no rational cause for the chariot to have come before mounted warfare.
