Er...Chariot vs Horseman

[Psiwar]

I hope this has changed...because it makes no sense.

Why do you need the Wheel to learn how to ride a horse? Also...humans on horse came first then humans on chariots. And in RL the Chariot (2/1/2 in civ2) was more powerfull (military speaking) then the Horseman (1/1/2 in civ2) but their stats are the other way around.

Look at the tech tree http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3tech_tree1.shtml.
Horseback Riding should be on the same column as The Wheel (lack of space?) like in Civ 1 & 2.

This also affects the UU.

 

[.:KNAS:.]

that link doesnt work.....
btw the chariots stats are 3,1,2 in civ2

 

[Knigget]

The chariot in civ2 is 3/1/2 and the horse is 2/1/2

This doesnt make much sense though, cause historicly horsemen were better than charioteers.

But you're right, it's stupid that we need the wheel to research horseback riding...

 

[.:KNAS:.]

u both are riding horses (avatar), but im the only one riding a cool animal, the scorpion.

the thing about chariots is not just riding in to battle on the chariot poking spears at people, but it was also transported troops into combat in a protected environment (kinda like an apc)

 

[JBearIt]

While horses were certainly around before the wheel, humans learned to fight using chariots before learning how to fight directly on horseback. You'll also note that chariots became obsolete many centuries ago while cavalry were still prominent until WW I.

 

[amadeus]

I think horsemen and chariots both suck. I always build legions

 

[.:KNAS:.]

yeah, legions and knights rock!!!

 

[zandar]

...and apparently Samurai too.

 

[Wuf]

It's not stupid in the least! The wheel was presuambly invented well before horseback riding, in the form of being able to move heavy objects. Probably "rolling with logs" and the like. Though they may not be exactly related, I think the wheel did in fact come first and in no case was developed the other way around.

Heck.... horse riding requires domestication and the ability to break the horse, a far cry from the hunter/gather model. Horse back riding is Neolithic!

 

[CrushSlider]

The new Civ of the week: Japanese... I find it odd that the Japanese are given the Wheel as a free tech... during their history the use of the wheel was outlawed for a period of time...

 

[ChrTh]

Originally posted by JBearIt
While horses were certainly around before the wheel, humans learned to fight using chariots before learning how to fight directly on horseback. You'll also note that chariots became obsolete many centuries ago while cavalry were still prominent until WW I.

Exactly.

An interesting (only to me) note:
Homer (of Illiad fame) apparently did not understand how chariots worked; the heroes in the Illiad rode the chariots into battle, GOT OFF, fought, got back on again and left. In reality, chariots were used for fighting back then. The Greeks didn't use Chariots from the onset of the Dark Ages (~11th c. BC) until Phillip II (Alexander's father) showed up in the 4th century (Phillip II wasn't Greek, he was Mycenaen; Alexander 'united' the Greek people and considered himself Greek as they were a more learned(two syllables) people)

 

[CoolLizy]

Originally posted by ChrTh


Exactly.

An interesting (only to me) note:
Homer (of Illiad fame) apparently did not understand how chariots worked; the heroes in the Illiad rode the chariots into battle, GOT OFF, fought, got back on again and left. In reality, chariots were used for fighting back then. The Greeks didn't use Chariots from the onset of the Dark Ages (~11th c. BC) until Phillip II (Alexander's father) showed up in the 4th century (Phillip II wasn't Greek, he was Mycenaen; Alexander 'united' the Greek people and considered himself Greek as they were a more learned(two syllables) people)

Actually, that's not too far off course. Some poeple did that. Dragoons, I believe, did the same thing. Rode their horse to battle, then go off to fight.

 

[beorhtwulf]

Actually, the Mycenean (pre-Dark Age) Greeks also had chariots, just like the rest of the Bronze Age Mediterranean world. They disappeared after the Sea Peoples overran the Mycenean palaces, and when history started up again, around the time of Homer, horseback riding had replaced chariots in warfare.

There's some discussion in academic circles (read: nobody can agree) whether chariots were used by the Myceneans (the subject of the Iliad) in the way Homer described, or whether they were used more as they were by the Egyptians et al. further south, as mobile fighting or archery platforms. The argument basically is as follows:

"There's not enough flat land in Greece to use chariots in battle."

"Well, nobody would go to all the expense of maintaining a chariot and a team of horses just to parade into battle at the front of their men!"

"You're underestimating the importance of symbolism!"

"You're talking out of you ***!"

"Yeah, well let's see if you ever get tenure!"

"Your mother was a hamster!"

As you can see, academic discussions rarely settle much.

But anyway, chariots were the king of the battlefield, if not in Mycenean Greece then definitely in Egypt, Phoenicia, and Mesopotamia, during the Bronze Age. Homer seems to preserve memories of them being important in Greece as well, and there is documentary evidence of the Minoans and Myceneans having them. But by the start of the Iron Age, after the Sea Peoples, the rider was the top dog, and chariots were relegated to a ceremonial role.

So the chariots first, riders second ordering is correct, though counter-intuitive. You need to talk about gameplay to explain why the wheel is a prereq for horseback riding, though. (Although there is some connection -- as pointed out in Guns, Germs, and Steel there's not much incentive to use wheels if you don't have draft animals, e.g., the Incas.)

Next week: why Writing should precede the Alphabet.

 

[.:KNAS:.]

WTH? laexander wasnt mycenean, he was macedonian maybe we arent talking about the same alexander, im thinking of the great

 

[Mozenwrath]

I see no reason why horse-back riding sould come before the wheel, the wheel was used way before horses I beleive. In any case, Chariots were used in battle before horses so for game purposes, it is accurate.

 

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by Psiwar
Also...humans on horse came first then humans on chariots.

War chariots were common centuries earlier that war cavalry. The use of cavalry for shock attack was very limited before the invention of the stirrup sometime AD. Cavalry before that time was mostly skirmisher type. Its use for shock attack was also limited by the predominate use of spearmen for infantry. The roman legions, not armed with a long thrusting pike of spear were more vunerable to cavalry that hoplites and phalanx, as shown at Andriapole. War chariots could deliever shock charges before the stirrup, but they were use mostly for mobile missle attack.

 

[Mozenwrath]

Exactly, BTW, what a lot of historical knowledge!
P.S. .:KNAS:., what's with the weird name?

 

[.:KNAS:.]

its not weird its a "i dunno whats it called in english" but each letter is the first letter of a word..... and no i wont tell u what it means....

 

[Mozenwrath]

OKAY, I just thought it might be meant to make some kind of picture. For a while I thought it looked quite a lot like an aardvark, if you just squint and tilt your head to one side... Anyways, why is everyone having such an argument? No-one builds chariots or horsemen anyway.

 

[ChrTh]

Originally posted by .:KNAS:.
WTH? laexander wasnt mycenean, he was macedonian maybe we arent talking about the same alexander, im thinking of the great

DOH! My bad. I was thinking about the Illiad when I was typing that, and I forgot to fast-forward my brain the requisite nine centuries.

I humbly beat myself with a three-line Sigma.