[R&F] Chandragupta Maurya/India First Look

[Manifold]

So, Cyrus leads India...

I like more alternative leaders for existing important Civs and this guy Chandra... looks great and gives the Indians another gameplay. You are right, technically his LUA did not add any new.

 

[Kimiimaro]

I don't really get why people think that Cleopatra looks good. Her depiction is sometimes even scary

And to focus on topic... Varu is already stronger than Horseman, and he decreases strenght of adjecent enemy units by 5. Chandragupta's units get bonus for strenght and movement during a war of territorrial expansion... Chandragupta with Varus is going to be a very strong nightmare.

 

[sonicmyst]

Not Alexander?! C'mon!

So now you know why he made a lifelong war campaign to India. He heard of a dark, handsome Indian emperor Chandragupta whose loins he craved!

My profile picture agrees.

 

[Absolution]

Is it that different from anyone leading the Greek civilization, though?

Greece would be better grouped together with Germans and Sumerians, as an ethnicity / culture which had been divided into several rivalling entities throughout most of its history.
India can be grouped with Eastern Europe or South East Asia. Imagine the latter two being unified by an exterior Chingissid Muslim Dynasty, and after several centuries colonised by a Western empire, eventually developing pan-ethnic nationalist sentiments, driving off the colonial empire and establishing a unified state. Would you erase their whole varied and separated history and add Albert of Prussia as an alternative leader of the Eastern European civilisation?

While W Europe is (over?) represented in the game and some of that is due to Eurocentrism or whatever, some of it is also because Europe is broken up into many current political entities while the likes of China or India are more or less united depending on who you talk to. "India" is way more familiar.

That's bad... We are talking about a historical game...
Defining different factions according to their current position is really disappointing and profit-oriented.

 

[Siptah]

I‘m happy to let go of my theory that alternate leaders need to be from rivaling parts of the civ. Gandhi/Chandragupta disprove this. The different capital hypothesis still stands though.

 

[blackbutterfly]

And to focus on topic... Varu is already stronger than Horseman, and he decreases strenght of adjecent enemy units by 5. Chandragupta's units get bonus for strenght and movement during a war of territorrial expansion... Chandragupta with Varus is going to be a very strong nightmare.

I agree the Varu is quite a good unit...if you can afford them. Their +5 combat bonus stacks.
So with Chandragupta's movement bonus you have more chance to flank opponents.

Plus in terms of gameplay it's nice to not always just DoW (formal) or Joint War cos that gets boring.

Although not as convenient as Persia's Surprise War, at least you get a Casus belli for war, which reduces diplomatic penalty, which now is the problem in my games anyway.

 

[Absolution]

I‘m happy to let go of my theory that alternate leaders need to be from rivaling parts of the civ. Gandhi/Chandragupta disprove this. The different capital hypothesis still stands though.

They certainly do not have to be rival entities.
The issue is whether they should be grouped under the same civilisation.

 

[Phrozen]

I‘m happy to let go of my theory that alternate leaders need to be from rivaling parts of the civ. Gandhi/Chandragupta disprove this. The different capital hypothesis still stands though.

Greece still needs Thebes! /sarc sorta

As long as the optimal playstyle is different to distinguish the leaders.

 

[pgm123]

Greece would be better grouped together with Germans and Sumerians, as an ethnicity / culture which had been divided into several rivalling entities throughout most of its history.
India can be grouped with Eastern Europe or South East Asia. Imagine the latter two being unified by an exterior Chingissid Muslim Dynasty, and after several centuries colonised by a Western empire, eventually developing pan-ethnic nationalist sentiments, driving off the colonial empire and establishing a unified state. Would you erase their whole varied and separated history and add Albert of Prussia as an alternative leader of the Eastern European civilisation?

Just to be clear, when I talk about the concept of a historical India, I refer to the Sanskrit term "Bharata Khanda." That seems to have included all of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Myanmar.

I don't think Sumer and the Germans are particularly similar.

 

[Guandao]

Just to be clear, when I talk about the concept of a historical India, I refer to the Sanskrit term "Bharata Khanda." That seems to have included all of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Myanmar.

I don't think Sumer and the Germans are particularly similar.

Myanmar is part of India? Were they considered Indian in ancient times?

 

[magha77]

Just to be clear, when I talk about the concept of a historical India, I refer to the Sanskrit term "Bharata Khanda." That seems to have included all of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, and Myanmar.

I don't think Sumer and the Germans are particularly similar.

Funny, Iranians refer to true Iran as including Afghanistan and Baluchistan portion of Pakistan (among other countries).

 

[Absolution]

You all talk about geographical definitions. Do they matter?

 

[zhivik]

You need a denounce for every kind of war except Surprise War (that's why it's a surprise).

A slight correction - you can also use a Casus Belli if someone else denounces you, which I believe caused the confusion about how these work. Since you are pretty much permanently the object of denouncements from one point onward, it is no surprise that you almost always have some Casus Belli available. If someone only dislikes you, however, you will need to denounce them first before you can declare anything other than a surprise war.

I think this is where a change is necessary, like a lesser warmongering penalty if you are denounced first? I mean, there is a thing in criminal law where being provoked can be considered a mitigating circumstance. You still get punished, but not at the same degree if it was you who started it.

 

[Morningcalm]

Although people have done well to point out differences between Cyrus' and Chandragupta's LUAs, they are nonetheless confusingly similar at first glance.

One thing occurs to me is that Cyrus' LUA may change (I deem it unlikely but it's possible). However even if his LUA changes, his agenda favoring surprise warriors likely wouldn't, as they already recorded all his voice actor's lines.

 

[blackbutterfly]

The Maurya Empire though the largest on the Indian subcontinent, and the one modern India draws its emblem and flag symbol from, was a flash in the pan. It was over by the time of the Romans.
Chandragupta's language is Prakrit, a dead language. So I wonder how Firaxis/2K has Chandragupta voiced?! Not that anyone will probably notice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magadhi_Prakrit

 

[God of Kings]

The Maurya Empire though the largest on the Indian subcontinent, and the one modern India draws its emblem and flag symbol from, was a flash in the pan. It was over by the time of the Romans.
Chandragupta's language is Prakrit, a dead language. So I wonder how Firaxis/2K has Chandragupta voiced?! Not that anyone will probably notice

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magadhi_Prakrit

Chandragupta might end up speaking Sanskrit in-game.

 

[Zaarin]

Chandragupta might end up speaking Sanskrit in-game.

That would be the preferable option, but he could end up speaking a modern language more closely related to Prakrit like Bengali.

 

[pgm123]

Myanmar is part of India? Were they considered Indian in ancient times?

Myanmar is not a part of India, nor was it ever (not counting the British) but it was included in the idea of India (as in Greater India) in the ancient writings. It has more to do with cultural influence and geography. There are Indian nationalists who claim it, but they're fringe groups (and their fringe claims all of Southeast Asia). Pakistan and southern India are more obvious places that fit under the idea of Greater India. Modern India uses the name for Greater India, which is perceived in Pakistan at least as a shot at Pakistan. A neutral name of the country would have been Hindustan, which was historical North India, but that was arguably not unifying enough (since India contains plenty of non-Hindus). The European name "India" meant everything east of the Indus (and sometimes everything east of the Nile, when they were being particularly geographically-challenged).

Funny, Iranians refer to true Iran as including Afghanistan and Baluchistan portion of Pakistan (among other countries).

That doesn't really surprise me. The area spent a lot of time as a part of Iran. What do they think of Tajikistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, etc.? Some of those countries were a part of Iran very recently and it's not just a cultural connection.

Nationalism is very weird. It often barely coincides with reality. The French-German border is one of the more obvious examples.

 

[blackbutterfly]

Chandragupta might end up speaking Sanskrit in-game.

Sanskrit is like Latin, nobody actually speaks it now. Actually the language I speak is very close to Sanskrit, closer than Hindi. Thanks in a large part to Chandragupta's grandson Asoka, who is credited with spreading Buddhism to most of the Buddhist world...and with it language. Monks were the scholars and teachers until colonial times.

What does Trajan speak in Civ VI? (Of course there are a ton of classicists who may be able to speak it).

 

[WillowBrook]

Chandragupta might end up speaking Sanskrit in-game.

I'm pretty sure several people commented earlier in this thread that the little bit we can hear in the first look sounds like Sanskrit, based on their school studies of the language.