Wasn't this title for Dido suggested by someone in one of these threads?
[GS] Gathering Storm General Discussion Thread
- Thread starter bite
- Start date
Wasn't this title for Dido suggested by someone in one of these threads?
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,941
They announced the livestream for tomorrow, in case anyone was concerned about that.
Leathaface
Emperor
Denis Shirk said 3 weeks ago in a Dev stream that Firaxis would be discussing new modding tools in a future stream, well tomorrow is the last stream before GS. I hope Firaxis keeps their word.
Phoenix1595
Lord of the Two Lands
- Joined
- Nov 3, 2005
- Messages
- 1,022
I am sure they will, since Eleanor’s mechanic is suppose to be the big deal modwise. I hope they address the WorldBuilder. Firetuner is just too complicated, especially compared to the WB from Civ5. I wonder if the Civ6 engine is too difficult to manage with map editing.
Did he really said "discussing new modding tools" or just "discussing modding" ?
Well, even the later would be interesting from my perspective, as they've been really quiet on that front since launch.
IDK, they've not made one leader available for two civilizations, they've made an alternate leader then duplicated it with some art changes for another civilization.
I may be wrong, but it seems that technically they've just added an alternate leader for France and another one for England, nothing new on the modding ability here.
Boris Gudenuf
Deity
Not true. Assyrian tablets specifically mention needing 'large horses' to pull chariots containing armored men with spears and other 'melee-type' weapons, in other words Heavy Chariots.
That horses were not big enough to pull chariots or for men to ride until some later date is a Myth. I posted this before with references, but put simply, there were four distinct types of horses ranging from modern Mongolia to northwestern Europe, and except for the type in Europe, which was pony sized (but not pony skeletal configuration) the other three ranged from 13 - 14.5 'hands' and up to 800 - 900 pounds weight, which means they could carry up to 220 or so pounds (Rule of Thumb: horse can carry 1/4 of its body weight). Plenty for a grown man as a rider, but NOT enough for a grown man, heavy saddle, full metal body armor and metal weapons. It was the fully-armored knight and his equivalent that required bigger horses than what was 'naturally' available in 4000 BCE (actually, going back to 5000 BCE, when horse skeletons have been found with 'bit wear' in the teeth - they were being controlled by some form of bridle/harness already, well before Start of Game in 4000 BCE).
The requirement for a 'big horse' to pull a heavy chariot was, of course, as much a product of really inefficient horse harness as size of horse: if they had had in 2000 BCE the same efficient pulling harness that was invented in the Medieval Era, they could have had much faster and heavier Chariots, but by the time they had the harness, they also had efficient saddles, tack and stirrups and the Chariot would have been an object of derision on any battlefield.
Done right, all Heavy Cavalry units would require Horse Resource, which would model the 'special breeding' required to get suitable horses for them. Light Cavalry traditionally could use whatever horses were available, and so didn't put such a serious 'dent' in Horse resources and availability. While the professional cavalry of the Napoleonic Wars and later may have ridden fine, sleek, semi-thoroughbred horses, that was NOT the norm throughout history.
By the way, the 'chariot' used by the Britons and Gauls in northeastern Europe was another peculiarity: they were technically not combat machines at all, but simply Transport for Heroic Warriors, who jumped out of the chariot to fight on foot, then jumped back in and raced away to find another target or escape when things went 'pear shaped'. That meant the chariots were very light - wood and wicker, in fact - and only carried an unarmored driver and the Big Man with his weapons, and didn't have to move very fast - just outrun a man on foot, which isn't too difficult for any horse of any size.
In other words, a possible Unique Unit: Heroic Warrior, for a Briton or Celtic Civ . . .
Aristos
Lightseeker
¡Me hiciste reír súper fuerte! / You made me laugh so hard!
Mi especialidad / my specialty
Leathaface
Emperor
It's past midnight in Ireland right now. Officially less than a week to go until I get my hands on GS 
jddods
Prince
It's released on the Friday here in NZ
TheMarshmallowBear
Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
It's past midnight in Ireland right now. Officially less than a week to go until I get my hands on GS
IRELAND! IRELAND!
Do you kno if it's midnight that it's releases for us? (Galway here)
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,941
It'll probably be midnight on the US east coast. So like 5am for you guys.
acluewithout
Deity
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2017
- Messages
- 3,470
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
I’m going to leave aside the whole “did chariots really use “horses”” question, and just talk game balance.
Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
Chariots are too powerful without a resource constraint. And no resources, and Knights needing only iron, means you can still Knight rush and crush the AI.
Knights need to be stopped. I’d rather Knights require two resources, but failing that, having Chariots requiring horses would have at least slowed Knights down a little.
Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.
Last edited:
Boris Gudenuf
Deity
It is the prime example of something I've said several times before: IF you design a purportedly 'historical' game without knowing the history, you make Stupid Mistakes.
Like, designing Heavy Chariots and Knights which massively dominate the battlefield without including their historical constraints, such as the inability of the Heavy Chariots to maneuver on other than flat land (Combat penalty on hills, forests, rainforest, and marshes) and the need of both units for heavy, expensive-to-raise horses. For example of how expensive, the Tang Dynasty China's prime combat force was a 1000 man unit of Heavy Cavalry - classic armored lancer/bowmen on half-armored horses: 1000 of them was all they could get the proper Heavy Horses for, and at that they had to convert hundreds of acres of farmland into pasture to do it. By comparison, the average Tang army was 30,000 - 100,000 men so, basically, they could afford about 1 - 3% of their army as 'Knights' - the rest were mostly infantry with a few light cavalry, and most of the light cavalry were 'hired' from the nomads 'barbarians' to the north.
I mentioned this in the other thread, but I love this achievement so much it's worth mentioning twice.
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2004
- Messages
- 4,535
I do love it, it was the one little joke I put into the features threadI mentioned this in the other thread, but I love this achievement so much it's worth mentioning twice.
And it‘s a so much better song than the residents‘ one which is Constantinople!I mentioned this in the other thread, but I love this achievement so much it's worth mentioning twice.
So after seeing a bit of the live streams, I have one easy-to-do suggestion to add to GS that would make sense imho: each City State should be able to name a river when the City State is located directly at that river.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 16,941
Topics for today's livestream:
https://twitter.com/EdBeach23/status/1093559606855565312?s=19
Noticeably absent: modding
https://twitter.com/EdBeach23/status/1093559606855565312?s=19
Noticeably absent: modding
Aristos
Lightseeker
Why would they know history if most of their audience doesn't? If you have kids, have you checked what they "learn" as "history" in their classes lately?
Yeap.
Home-schooling history or they will vote the likes of AOC or JT the moment they turn 19...
Or buy Civ 7 without questioning anything...
Brian B'Shar Sharon has the same profile picture as I do on Facebook and it's creeping me out.
Similar threads
