DLC 04 anticipation thread

[DJ_Tanner]

I think that for Alexander I'd like to see something that allows you to steamroll extremely fast if you play well with your army. I mean, he is the fastest conqueror in history, beating even Genghis Khan, who needed a lifetime, whereas Alexander only needed 10 years. Maybe something like this:

On conquering a city, Alexander loses 800 points of war weariness (this equals a penalty of 2 amenities) and all troops within 2 tiles of the city heal for up to 35 hp.

Could be the inverse of Australia, a production boost on DoW and conquering a city. But perhaps just on the conquering as DoW abuse may be too easy.

 

[Leyrann]

Could be the inverse of Australia, a production boost on DoW and conquering a city. But perhaps just on the conquering as DoW abuse may be too easy.

I don't think this would be a good representation. Alexander should get instant power from conquering, not delayed over 10 turns.

 

[BornInTheLoo]

On conquering a city, Alexander loses 800 points of war weariness (this equals a penalty of 2 amenities) and all troops within 2 tiles of the city heal for up to 35 hp.

Only if you rename it Alexandria...

 

[Dariush.Z]

I have to say that I disagree, Alexander was a masterful tactician, no doubt about that but the Achaemenid Empire he went against was a barely defended fragmented shadow of it's former self.

In fact if I'm not mistaken Darius III was already killed before he and Alexander even met in battle, Persia/Iran has been historically a kind of empire that once in trouble, no one really puts up a fight, there were patriots here and there but for the most part once you kill the king or capture the capital, it's easy to steamroll through without being bothered that much, that's been pretty much the worst weakness of us Persians through the history...complacency, passiveness and weak historic memory.

We've gone through the Greeks, Arabs, Turks and Mongolians and still celebrate the same New Year's Eve we did 5000 years ago and speak a countinuation of the same language we've been speaking in the same period, that's our strengths though.

Alexander doesn't even compare to someone like Chengiz Khan not because he wasn't gifted but because the challenge wasn't something I'd consider impressive.

 

[nzcamel]

I do admire Temujin more

 

[Dariush.Z]

I do admire Temujin more

I don't admire him, he did achieve something big but it had to do with the savage and brutal barbarian culture of the people he ruled.

That was the victory of uncivilized over civilized, personally, I don't think he should have anything do with the word Civilization.

 

[Leyrann]

I don't admire him, he did achieve something big but it had to do with the savage and brutal barbarian culture of the people he ruled.

That was the victory of uncivilized over civilized, personally, I don't think he should have anything do with the word Civilization.

That's a bit too harsh on Genghis. He was quite a bit more civilized than most of the mongol hordes. That's what allowed him to conquer so much. For example, he didn't murder enemy tribes after defeating them, which granted him their loyalty and eventually allowed him to start conquering. Also, he allowed more freedom of religion than was common during those times, and he worked strongly with promotion based on merit instead of nobility.

 

[Dariush.Z]

That's a bit too harsh on Genghis. He was quite a bit more civilized than most of the mongol hordes. That's what allowed him to conquer so much. For example, he didn't murder enemy tribes after defeating them, which granted him their loyalty and eventually allowed him to start conquering. Also, he allowed more freedom of religion than was common during those times, and he worked strongly with promotion based on merit instead of nobility.

The guy took out 70 percent of central asia's caucasian population for the kicks, Central Asia used to be home to An admixture of Indo-Iranian and Turkic peoples not the Mongoloids that inhibit it now and how do you think that happened?

I'd argue the 700000 people he killed in Merv had a hand it, along his other "civilized" behaviors that you can look up.

 

[Leyrann]

The guy took out 70 percent of central asia's caucasian population for the kicks, Central Asia used to be home to An admixture of Indo-Iranian and Turkic peoples not the Mongoloids that inhibit it now and how do you think that happened?

I'd argue the 700000 people he killed in Merv had a hand it, along his other "civilized" behaviors that you can look up.

I'm not saying he was a nice person you'd want to have tea with. I'm just saying that he wasn't just "barbarian". Most certainly not compared to the culture he was coming from.

 

[nzcamel]

Let's not sugar coat history. The Mongols were brutal conquers. Yet not necessarily more so than many others, in terms of intent. They were just better at it!
As to civilization one reason they succeeded was because they took on board the skills of many of the people they ruled. They weren't so big as to make out that others couldn't do things better than them. Nay, they belong in the top tier of this game for more reason than one.

And I still admire Genghis more than Alexander

 

[Dariush.Z]

I'm not saying he was a nice person you'd want to have tea with. I'm just saying that he wasn't just "barbarian". Most certainly not compared to the culture he was coming from.

Barbarian means uncultured and brutish.

How's wiping out most of Central Asia's population not uncultured and brutish?

Advanced Barbarian? I give you that but He was a Barbarian nevertheless.

 

[nzcamel]

We're all barbarians to someone.
The Mongols also crippled Islam at a point where it could have taken down a large chunk of Europe.

It's impossible to speculate with accuracy what would have happened had history taken another path....but I'm willing to bet the enlightenment wouldn't have happened in a mostly Islamic Europe (yes - Muslims were pretty good back in the day with science n maths etc....but free speech and expression have never been a strong point).

 

[Dariush.Z]

Let's not sugar coat history. The Mongols were brutal conquers. Yet not necessarily more so than many others, in terms of intent. They were just better at it!
As to civilization one reason they succeeded was because they took on board the skills of many of the people they ruled. They weren't so big as to make out that others couldn't do things better than them. Nay, they belong in the top tier of this game for more reason than one.

And I still admire Genghis more than Alexander

I think we agree that He was a better conquer than Alexander but dominance through utter brutality and using the skill set of their subjects in my opinion doesn't make a leader or Empire top tier or great.

Mongols were wildmen, barbarians and they were successful because of that and the moment they started assimilating the culture of their subjects and becoming civilized was when they started to fade away as an empire as culture replaced that brutality.

 

[AvianBritish]

Talking about Mongolia; I would like to seem them in the game but have an ability which allows them to spend turns moving districts and even the city centre around on the map! Simulating the mobility of the people and settlements (although my history may be completely wrong but It would be a cool mechanic for someone).
So you can spend production in a city project to move your city centre to within 3 tiles of it's current position but must remain within three tiles of all wonders and districts it has created, to get around the issue with districts "anchoring" the city in place you may be able to spend production moving districts too or may make it that you cannot move a city once the first district has been built? Wonders will always stay in place however.

 

[nzcamel]

I think we agree that He was a better conquer than Alexander but dominance through utter brutality and using the skill set of their subjects in my opinion doesn't make a leader or Empire top tier or great.

Mongols were wildmen, barbarians and they were successful because of that and the moment they started assimilating the culture of their subjects and becoming civilized was when they started to fade away as an empire as culture replaced that brutality.

In terms of world domination along the lines of Civ victory conditions they're top tier.

This is a little bit abstract, but def has significant meaning: What known male has more offspring than any other in the entire history of the world? I'm sure you know

 

[Dariush.Z]

We're all barbarians to someone.
The Mongols also crippled Islam at a point where it could have taken down a large chunk of Europe.

It's impossible to speculate with accuracy what would have happened had history taken another path....but I'm willing to bet the enlightenment wouldn't have happened in a mostly Islamic Europe (yes - Muslims were pretty good back in the day with science n maths etc....but free speech and expression have never been a strong point).

There is no such thing as "Islamic Enligtenment" if you ask me, you have Arabian Caliphates that ruled over Persia and since Persians had become muslims, Persian Enligtenment got renamed "Islamic Enligtenment".

Take Persia out of the "Islamic Empire" and Arabs went back to the same divided backwards deserts they ruled before that, until Turks came and Rounded them up under the Ottoman Empire of course.

I guess we disagree on Mongols and that's fine but they were barbarians if you ask me regardless.

There's too much historical evidence to support that.

 

[Leyrann]

I would argue that the defining point of a top tier empire would be their influence on history (though they do need to be able to sustain themselves, like nazi Germany, for example, could never have done). The Mongol empire lasted for over a hundred years and is the biggest empire our planet has ever seen.

 

[Dariush.Z]

I would argue that the defining point of a top tier empire would be their influence on history (though they do need to be able to sustain themselves, like nazi Germany, for example, could never have done). The Mongol empire lasted for over a hundred years and is the biggest empire our planet has ever seen.

Over a hundred years in the same league with Nations with over a thousand?

 

[Siptah]

Don't forget that the world got significantly 'smaller' during the 1500 years between Alexander and Genghis. So you can't really compare nothing, not territory, not time they needed to acquire. Fighting in different times against other empires makes every comparison a false approach. Interesting that someone mentioned the sustainability. I wonder (and I've been doing this for quite some years without finding a good answer, maybe because there is none available) how Alexander planned to rule/sustain his empire. There are to my best knowledge only fragments available of what should have happened in the long run. His biggest mistake was the way he appointed his successor, by not doing it himself.

On a side note to the barbarians: Sure, Genghis is a barbarian by definition since he is not speaking greek nor is he by any way *grai or *hell. Even if you expand the original definition of barbarians to fit more modern terms, he wouldn't fit.

That said, I'd love to have Alexander back with a conquering agenda and bonus that make you want to conquer. For example a boost to Science or Culture through conquering through Eurekas/Inspirations or having every foreign city under your control giving you a bonus of some sort to these things. For the Mongols, I'd vastly prefer Timur as a leader, even if some might find that out of place for Mongolia.

 

[Dariush.Z]

Don't forget that the world got significantly 'smaller' during the 1500 years between Alexander and Genghis. So you can't really compare nothing, not territory, not time they needed to acquire. Fighting in different times against other empires makes every comparison a false approach. Interesting that someone mentioned the sustainability. I wonder (and I've been doing this for quite some years without finding a good answer, maybe because there is none available) how Alexander planned to rule/sustain his empire. There are to my best knowledge only fragments available of what should have happened in the long run. His biggest mistake was the way he appointed his successor, by not doing it himself.

On a side note to the barbarians: Sure, Genghis is a barbarian by definition since he is not speaking greek nor is he by any way *grai or *hell. Even if you expand the original definition of barbarians to fit more modern terms, he wouldn't fit.

That said, I'd love to have Alexander back with a conquering agenda and bonus that make you want to conquer. For example a boost to Science or Culture through conquering through Eurekas/Inspirations or having every foreign city under your control giving you a bonus of some sort to these things. For the Mongols, I'd vastly prefer Timur as a leader, even if some might find that out of place for Mongolia.

Genghis killed seven hundred thousand people in Merv and more than a million in Nishapur. these are just examples mind you.

Persia's total population fell from 2 and a half million to 250.000 due to mass extermination and famine and here I am debating you guys on whether or not he was a barbarian.

That's Hitler level genocide, I'm fine with your Genghis Khan fantasies but if you knew even a tiny bit of history and the atrocities he commited, you would've never made light of historical facts by defining barbarian like that.

Go ahead, tell me he wasn't a barbarian. 2 and a half million to 250.000? that's just irrelevant details.