Muslim World Enhancements

[iOnlySignIn]

Would it not encourage supercity Alexandria? With the fish, wheat and health issues I often find Alexandria ends up bigger than Baghdad, particularly with Damascus often taking tiles from Baghdad.

IIRC Alexandria does not have as much as Baghdad. is less of an issue when you can farm Floodplains.

Personally I always use Theocracy and Fanaticism as Arabs - helps keep other religions out for stability and has numerous other benefits when trying to conquer Persia and Iberia and kick the Seljuks. Also, not sure happiness is a big issue for the Arabs what with wine, dye, incense and the gold in Egypt.

Other religions won't spread much anyway because no one would like to OB with you.

Happiness is always the issue. It's just hidden before now because of the Arab's abhorrent (and unrealistic) growth. Once their growth is realistic there will be Happiness problems.

I'd say a better UP would be a conditional stability boost of +2 for every city conquers whilst running both Theocracy and Fanaticism. That way you would encourage the Arabs to expand faster and actually reach their full size quickly, rather than at the moment where you need to delay conquering Iberia and Persia to avoid triggering an Egyptian respawn due to instability.

I would like that, except

(1) This effect can be replaced by enlarging the Arab's stability map. In vanilla RFC it was huge - India & Indonesia are all historical, which is why extra stability boost is not needed. Leoreth shrank the stability map of the Arabs for obvious reasons. We can just give some of it back.

(2) It's the same as the Persian UP.

A better idea would be to enable Occupation for the Arabs from the start.

That also applies to the Arabs and Moors. Many Christians in the lands they conquered converted to Islam because they were much more tolerant and it was at the time seen as a more intellectual and cultural, as well as the social mobility benefits of adopting Islam in theocratical society.

Exactly.

I would convert to a religion with real fervor if it means lower taxes.

You know how to convice people . However, I would like to point out that seeing Mesopotamia full of cottages isn't too unrealistic as it would represent how much the region was urbanized during the Islamic golden age.
Also, putting Cairo 1S would be geographically inaccurate and would probably prevent a human player from settling another city in the Nile. Plus, keeping Cairo at it's current place would prevent Alexandria from becoming a bigger city then Bagdad.

Still, economy in Mesopotamia has always been agricultural-based up until modern times. In fact, it's where agriculture is first invented.

The map has always been pretty far from geographically accurate. And from the games I played personally with the city sites mod, Alexandria is incapable of getting to the size of Tokyo/New York/London without corporations - it has only 2 food resources in its BFC and many empty Desert tiles.

Also, a big Alexandria is historical. Currently in game it's not big enough. And Baghdad will be buffed significantly with the Agricultural Revolution modification.

Well the Ottoman's taking of Janissaries wasn't exactly peaceful or intellectual. These were Christian boys who were taken from their families and completely converted to Turkish culture, religion, name etc...

It's all relative of course.

But the fact that the Turks allowed the Janissaries, who are ethnic aliens and recent converts to Islam, to hold such high and vital positions in their empire, is pretty telling of their ecumenical spirit.

 

[iOnlySignIn]

all Islamic Civs, the Arabic one especially, were highly effective at spreading their religion, and converting conquered peoples without much bloodshed/persecution. The exact methodology of this doesn't need to be debated, and I think we can all agree on the overall point.

II.) That said, the idea of this power lasting into the modern era (If modern/19th Century Turkey DoW'ed Orthodox Russia) is a little ludicrous. This property of Islam should either expire over time (perhaps at the end of the IGA?) or only if running Theocracy and/or Fanaticism.

I agree. I think this effect should expire with a late Renaissance tech such as Economics or Rifling.

However, why not just directly steal the RFCE/SoI version? I feel like effects 1 & 2 could be highly manipulable, considering a.) the proposed Islamic Agricultural Changes (now even citizens are +1, +1, +2 in 750AD, with city-states - and priests become scary for Wat-build Mughals) and

I never use City States when I play the game because I feel it's abusive without being clever. But that's not an issue quite relevant to this thread, especially if we tie the Arab UP to running Theocracy.

b.) Lib+Madrassa+Academy+Flood Plains w/ Towns on a size 15 Bagdad. +1 per citizen, maybe

This wonder will expire really early (Gunpowder/Printing Press/Astronomy).

I wish to see it being really impressive for a relatively short amount of time, because that's my impression of the historical Baghdad House of Wisdom.

If the IGA/HoW is implemented, though, the Arab tech-path-preferences probably needs to steer them away from Optics for a little while, and expire before anyone could use it to help research Liberalism/Military Tradition

Education and Optics/Astronomy will be set up as roadblocks for the Arabs. I don't see anything wrong with Military Tradition.

Actually allowing farms to be built on deserts? No way.

But building farms on FPs isn't too game-breaking (I'd rather have cottages), and even stealing improved yields on desert tiles from RFCE++ Alohamids/FFH:FF Malakim mod-mods could be an interesting UP actually allowing Sana'a and Muscat to flourish

I never said allow farms to be built on all Desert tiles. Where do you get that idea from?

What I meant is exactly to allow Farms to be built on Floodplains/Desert and Oasis/Desert tiles.

Oasis/Desert farms would be exactly like it would be with the Morocco UP in RFCE++, except you have to actually build the Farm on it (which is more interesting, IMO).

However, I think a fair, pretty historical, and much more fun way to fix this would be terrain-type improvements as time goes by. Who doesn't love it when that desert becomes flood plains?

Yes, except that the reverse currently happens in the game. Floodplains around the Nile turn into Deserts around Arab spawn.

I also think an interesting idea would be to allow Supreme Council at the start. I know that represents Communism, but I liken it to the electors of the Rightly Guided Caliphs

I was thinking something like that.

But city distance modifiers can be tweaked implicitly without making it an explicit Civic or UP (English UP). The most obvious one is the Mongols, who receive massive hidden discounts in city distance modifiers.

I love the idea of improving terrain in the Middle East between 600-750AD and, say, 1000-1200AD. But in order to make this all work properly, the precise location of resources/floodplains along the entire Nile has to be open to change, or I think it will only end up more of a mess. (though I have to say, 1N Egypt would probably make playing as Ethiopia more fun, even as is.)

The Terrain/Resources adjustments can be done bit by bit. Adding 1 each time and stopping when it's deemed sufficient.

And thanks for bringing up another reason to change Egypt spawn 1N. From the 2 games of Ethiopia that I tried, I find it mandatory to kill Egypt because of the Cultural pressure. That should not be the case.

 

[Pavel Chichikov]

People converting to Islam because it was seen as more tolerant/intellectual???
I'm sorry but... the Turkish Janisseries thing. I don't know how anyone can see how the kidnapping and brainwashing of young Christian children to grow up surving as crack troops in putting down revolts from their own people as possibly representative of an enlightened Civilization. As someone from this area I find this is actually quite offensive. I'm certain you mean good, but this is sensitive territory.

Nothing like the Chalcedonean councils or Papal elections existed in Islamic world, would be unrealistic.
Farms on floodplains wouldn't make any difference, you're whipping so much as those Civs and the sickness level prevents growth anyways.

You know how to convice people . However, I would like to point out that seeing Mesopotamia full of cottages isn't too unrealistic as it would represent how much the region was urbanized during the Islamic golden age.
Also, putting Cairo 1S would be geographically inaccurate and would probably prevent a human player from settling another city in the Nile. Plus, keeping Cairo at it's current place would prevent Alexandria from becoming a bigger city then Bagdad.

Yo, Mesopotamia was absolutely devastated during the Arab conquests, it wasn't reurbanized until much later under the Abassids.
I don't get where this idea of Agricultural revolution comes from, that era was quite similar to the Mongol invasions, nomadic tribes overrunning ancient Civilizations for plunder and leaving administrations in place to exact tribute.

Why should only Islam get UB's? As far as I know the Zarastruthians don't have a [U}single wonder,[/U] and Greek Orthodox Church has like, two.
Does not seem balanced.
It's more AI sucking than anything, I think human player can get Arab domination easier than any Civ except Romans and maybe old Persians.

 

[ius_iurandi]

I agree. I think this effect should expire with a late Renaissance tech such as Economics or Rifling.

Maybe Gunpowder? I don't think the Mughals should be able to make use of this for very long. For both historical and gameplay reasons, I'd be very upset at seeing a Muslim southern India.

I never use City States when I play the game because I feel it's abusive without being clever. But that's not an issue quite relevant to this thread, especially if we tie the Arab UP to running Theocracy.

Well, to be fair, Leoreth can't decide that he can put in a super-powered HoW on the basis that when a particular human player (you) controls Baghdad, s/he won't use City States. That being said,

This wonder will expire really early (Gunpowder/Printing Press/Astronomy).
I wish to see it being really impressive for a relatively short amount of time, because that's my impression of the historical Baghdad House of Wisdom.

This makes sense. Again though, maybe even earlier? The Mongols burned it down in 1258, so maybe even Education or Optics, if they're going to be roadblocks as is?

Education and Optics/Astronomy will be set up as roadblocks for the Arabs. I don't see anything wrong with Military Tradition.

I was just scared of (with the UP proposal) Theocracy+Harmandir Sahib +5xp Cuirassiers in every city, before accounting for Barracks, Stables, ands GGs.

What I meant is exactly to allow Farms to be built on Floodplains/Desert and Oasis/Desert tiles.

Oasis/Desert farms would be exactly like it would be with the Morocco UP in RFCE++, except you have to actually build the Farm on it (which is more interesting, IMO).

My mistake, I love this. More than my idea, since they'll persist even for Indies/colonists, which I like for gameplay reasons.

Yes, except that the reverse currently happens in the game. Floodplains around the Nile turn into Deserts around Arab spawn.

Wow, really! I never even noticed that. That's just...

Weirdly, this happens in SoI, too (later, of course). It's very counter-intuitive. It's not really that these areas got less arable over time (except for documented Natural Disasters, e.g., Mongols) but that other areas of the world got better. In fact, I think Merv was even the Largest City on Earth at one point during this time - fat chance of that the way things are.

But city distance modifiers can be tweaked implicitly without making it an explicit Civic or UP (English UP). The most obvious one is the Mongols, who receive massive hidden discounts in city distance modifiers.

This is me playing Rhye's variants for years, and never realizing how much these modifiers determine.

The Terrain/Resources adjustments can be done bit by bit. Adding 1 each time and stopping when it's deemed sufficient.

And thanks for bringing up another reason to change Egypt spawn 1N. From the 2 games of Ethiopia that I tried, I find it mandatory to kill Egypt because of the Cultural pressure. That should not be the case.

To the second, yeah, especially cause I like to cheat, and build Aksum 1N. But, as for the first, I'm thinking more of a redesign on The Nile-Delta/Gaza area and maybe putting that Gold on a hill before one adds a couple floodplains. That would allow both Dumyat and Aswan or Dongola or Khartoum to be viable cities. Mind you, I could be over-valuing this, but I'd argue they're as historically important as Newcastle/Manchester and Inverness/Glasgow or Hyderabad and Bangalore, which have plenty-decent locations.

 

[ius_iurandi]

Nothing like the Chalcedonean councils or Papal elections existed in Islamic world, would be unrealistic.

One assumes you are not an avid reader of early Islamic history?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_election_of_Uthman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulema
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijma
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_jurisprudence
(I am not going to pull up the text of actual disputes between Islamic scholars, the various councils of war and legal/governmental issues in the early Arab world, or anything like that, because I don't study Sharia, and don't have time. But read a serious history of Islamic governance in the Middle East (see: Bernard Lewis, to start) and the Church fathers in Christianity seem only more hot-headed by comparison)
One could most compare the Chalcedonean councils to the Shi'a/Sunni dispute. The personal divinity of Jesus/Theotokos arguments are akin to Muslim disputes on the passing of the Caliphate.

Farms on floodplains wouldn't make any difference, you're whipping so much as those Civs and the sickness level prevents growth anyways.

Wouldn't whipping actually be an argument for farms on floodplains? You know... so you had more citizens to whip? I don't know, because I never use it, as I am not part of this particular "you".

Yo, Mesopotamia was absolutely devastated during the Arab conquests, it wasn't reurbanized until much later under the Abassids.
I don't get where this idea of Agricultural revolution comes from, that era was quite similar to the Mongol invasions, nomadic tribes overrunning ancient Civilizations for plunder and leaving administrations in place to exact tribute.

Why should only Islam get UB's? As far as I know the Zarastruthians don't have a [U}single wonder,[/U] and Greek Orthodox Church has like, two.
Does not seem balanced.
It's more AI sucking than anything, I think human player can get Arab domination easier than any Civ except Romans and maybe old Persians.

To sort through this:
Yes, the Abassids reurbanized. In fact, they Urbanized to an extent not seen in the classical era. Hence the appearance of new food resources from 600AD-750AD to 1000AD-1200AD. If you want to say that they shouldn't appear until 750 or so, I can support that. But their appearance would make sense for the same reason the "Agricultural Revolution" was theorized: The population of the Super-Cities in the Middle East was much higher than other cities in Europe, for example, at the time. Devastation in a conquest is reflected in loss of pop/buildings on city capture in Civ IV.

The reason Islam gets so many wonders relative to Orthodox Christianity/Zoroastrianism is the same reason one generally considers it distinct from the Nomadic period before Islam and, to a lesser extent, the Mongol invasions that transformed it: because of the many well preserved agricultural masterpieces and works of supreme cultural importance from this time. Being entirely honest, the Byzantines are my favorite Empire in any historical epoch. Outside of the Bulgarian Round Church, and something representing the "Code of Justinian" I don't think they're being short-changed on Wonders. I can go on and on about deserving candidates from the 600AD to 1700AD Muslim world - many of them built in the post-Mongol invasions era, (like the Taj Mahal, built on the command of someone who was essentially Turko-Mongol.) Catholic and Protestant Christians commissioned, designed, and built the preponderance of Wonders in the game, however, so take issue with that, first. I'd be first on line to see a Shahnameh wonder, which I would classify as at least being Zoroastrian-inspired.

Also, the 'AI sucking' is, in fact a great reason to change a game in which most players are AI. That said, I think the idea is to make the Arab game more fun, as the Seljuks, Safavids, and Mughals have already made it, from what I can see, substantially more challenging. IlKhanate-representing Keshik barbs could always spawn to cause wreckage if that's too easy. And anything that results in at least a glimmer of a need for a more dynamic Byzantine/Anatolia makes me happy, because I hate seeing Ilkonion instead of both Attaleia and Sinope on 600AD starts as is, and would love to see a need for an impressive/viable Dyrrachium/Thessaloniki. Again, if better Arabs results in an actual Indian Civ being necessary in 600AD, so much the better - I'll work on Tamil dynamic names.

I think you might be underestimating the contributions to humanity made by Muslims in the IGA and after, which need to recognized, whether or not their present representatives are populaar in your locale. But I apologize if anything written by me offended you.

 

[archcapitalist]

re: house of wisdom. maybe instead of expiring early, it is destroyed upon city conquest?

 

[Lone Wolf]

I am of option that Seljuks should not exist.

 

[alpav]

I'm sorry IOSI and I'm sure you mean well but that comment was actually pretty offensive.
Pavel's points are completely true concenring Janissaries.

 

[Daedwartin]

Yo, Mesopotamia was absolutely devastated during the Arab conquests, it wasn't reurbanized until much later under the Abassids.
I don't get where this idea of Agricultural revolution comes from, that era was quite similar to the Mongol invasions, nomadic tribes overrunning ancient Civilizations for plunder and leaving administrations in place to exact tribute.

Why should only Islam get UB's? As far as I know the Zarastruthians don't have a [U}single wonder,[/U] and Greek Orthodox Church has like, two.
Does not seem balanced.
It's more AI sucking than anything, I think human player can get Arab domination easier than any Civ except Romans and maybe old Persians.

the area's capacity to produce food was still larger then today. the Mongolian invasion is what truely lead to Arabia being unable to support itself food wise. The canals that had been built over the previous 4 thousand years( they started building the first ones a very very long time ago) all got destroyed by the Mongolians. Most of those canals have yet to been rebuilt. 6 hundred years later...which brings us to one more thing: had Mongolia or the seileds not invaded, those areas would produce much more food today.

The Zaratruthians getting a wonder...their is no reason. It stops spreading automatically after 1000 AD. It also had one major issue: only Babylon and Perisia worshiped a religion that could be conceived as this. eastern Orthodox also doesn't have as much supporting it: The Eastern Roman Empire collapsed, most the Baltic conquered. Russia was the only major orthodox nation. Some orthodox wonders are already in as Islamic wonders(some of those were built that's orthodox catherdals and the likes.) most world renown orthodox buildings are represented. Some through graphically mistake. that's not the kremlin, but Saint Basil's Cathedral. The Kremlin is actually a massive complex that does include the Cathedral. The Kremlin itself is 4 palaces, 4 Cathedrals, the walls, and the watch towers in it. A kremlin is actually just a term for a style of citadel, primarily having been used by Russia. Moscow Kremlin is just the most famous. And most people relate St Basil's Cathedral with the Kremlin.

 

[ace99]

With regard to Janissaries I was think maybe you could have them spawn in Istanbul or something along those lines every turn or something maybe tied to a wonder that could help fuel Ottoman conquest of the Balkans and such, with the wonder becoming obsolete sometime around the 1650's. Right now the Ottomans really don't conquer Europe, it's a bit disappointing.

Families often gave their children to the Janissaries since it allowed them a better future and opportunity to rise in the ranks. The whole "kidnap and brainwash" thing doesn't really find a lot of credence in actual history aside from maybe early on in the Ottoman state. By the time of Mehmed the Conqueror or even before him the Janissaries had become institutionalized as a class with expansive privileges, that would increasingly drain the finances and military capacity of the Ottoman state. Starting in 1449 they also began the long tradition of mutinying and going on strike to demand higher wages/more privileges/that the Sultan not reform the military until finally their influence on the Ottoman state was ended during the Auspicious Incident and their barracks burned.

 

[Hippo8085]

Topkapi Palace... Good enough for this, isn't it?

 

[alpav]

I personally have never heard of families willingly giving up their childre to the Janissaries. But they were granted more privileges in the Ottoman state. They did kidnap but not really brainwashed, they raised them as Turkish men. So people who were named Vladimir, Marko, Jovan etc... would get names such as Mehmet, Faruk, Ahmed etc... and would obviously convert to Islam.However a Romanian, Serbian, Greek etc... family would obviously be upset that their son is Turkicised.

 

[ace99]

I personally have never heard of families willingly giving up their childre to the Janissaries. But they were granted more privileges in the Ottoman state. They did kidnap but not really brainwashed, they raised them as Turkish men. So people who were named Vladimir, Marko, Jovan etc... would get names such as Mehmet, Faruk, Ahmed etc... and would obviously convert to Islam.However a Romanian, Serbian, Greek etc... family would obviously be upset that their son is Turkicised.

Well seeing as everyone involved is dead I'm not surprised you've never personally heard of it.

Greek Historian Dimitri Kitsikis in his book, Türk Yunan İmparatorluğu ("Turco-Greek Empire")[6] states that many Christian families were willing to comply with devşirme because it offered the possibility of great social advancement. Conscripts could one day become Janissary colonels; statesmen who might one day return to their motherland as governor; or even Grand Vizier or Beylerbey (governor general), with a seat in the divan, an imperial council common in a number of Islamic states.

 

[J. pride]

Alpav and Pavel, please do read this.

http://history.howstuffworks.com/history-vs-myth/slaves-ottoman-empire3.htm

The following reading from a relatively neutral source suggests that parents did often willingly give up their children to the Janissary Corps. In a perfect world it should not exist but if I was in the 16th century Id rather be a Janissary than a peasant. And the offensive thing is a bit dramatic. I mean we are talking of an era when the empires around the Ottomans did a lot worse. Compared to the Spanish, the Safavids, the Austrians or the Russians; the Ottomans were a lot more humane and allowed Christians and Jews to retain their culture, tradition and a chance to be rich and influential.

 

[alpav]

Well seeing as everyone involved is dead I'm not surprised you've never personally heard of it.

I mean that I have never heard of it from anyone. Obviously I have not discussed it with families living in the 16th century.

The sultan made an elite corps of slave-soldiers out of these captives; they'd later become known as the Janissaries.
By the time Orhan's son Murad I came into power, the empire wasn't raking in the booty. So Murad looked for another way to beef up his troops. He devised a brilliant and diabolical plan to breed and train children to become slaves. From a young age, he'd instill in them an undying loyalty to the sultan. But Murad didn't want to recruit ordinary Muslim children for his slave army -- he believed that Muslim children would remain loyal to their own families and seek favors for them later.
Instead, Murad sought to kidnap Christian children from previously conquered territories to be trained for the Janissary Corps. After conversion to Islam and strict military training, these children would become loyal slave-soldiers. The sultan reasoned that these converted children would grow to despise their Christian families and remain faithful to the sultan

No matter their post, they remained the sultan's slaves and could be recruited back to the palace at any time [source: Halil].
In general, these slave-soldiers adhered to a strict code of conduct, in which obedience and manners were paramount and any violation resulted in harsh punishment. In addition, they were expected to lead a celibate life, never marrying (at least until the 16th century, when some were allowed to take wives).
The total number of young Christians kidnapped under the devsirme system isn't known for sure. Modest estimates peg the number in the hundreds of thousands. But some think as many as 5 million boys were stolen from Christian families and raised to become slaves of the sultan

They bottom line is that they were slaves. The article said some parents willingly gave up, not all and not a lot but just some. The reason Janissaries were completely loyal was because the were taught to despise their families while the Muslim children loved their own families. They had no place to go but to the Ottoman court where they were given good positions due to their loyalty. Kidnapping and slavery by any definition is horrible. Also we are talking about the Ottoman empire on its own here not the other ones. The other countries were bad too but that doesn't mean the Ottomans did well. Religious freedom was not that enforced as the Ottoman soldiers destroyed the remains of St. Sava who was the founder of the Serbian Orthodox Church. I am sure incidents like this have happened in other Balkan areas as well. The reason it is offensive is that Romania, Serbia, Greece etc... have all struggled for freedom against the Turks for nearly 500 years. The sole reason for this was their lack of freedom in many aspects. The Ottomans were not as humane as you state.

 

[Lone Wolf]

Compared to the Spanish, the Safavids, the Austrians or the Russians; the Ottomans were a lot more humane and allowed Christians and Jews to retain their culture, tradition and a chance to be rich and influential.

The Russians had their own version of non-interference. It didn't even try to convert Central Asia, and its efforts to convert the Volga Tatars were very meagre. It was, however, busy high-handedly intervening in areas which were considered Russian by right, but with too much foreign influence.

 

[ace99]

They bottom line is that they were slaves. The article said some parents willingly gave up, not all and not a lot but just some. The reason Janissaries were completely loyal was because the were taught to despise their families while the Muslim children loved their own families. They had no place to go but to the Ottoman court where they were given good positions due to their loyalty. Kidnapping and slavery by any definition is horrible. Also we are talking about the Ottoman empire on its own here not the other ones. The other countries were bad too but that doesn't mean the Ottomans did well. Religious freedom was not that enforced as the Ottoman soldiers destroyed the remains of St. Sava who was the founder of the Serbian Orthodox Church. I am sure incidents like this have happened in other Balkan areas as well. The reason it is offensive is that Romania, Serbia, Greece etc... have all struggled for freedom against the Turks for nearly 500 years. The sole reason for this was their lack of freedom in many aspects. The Ottomans were not as humane as you state.

They weren't slaves in the traditional sense of the word. They were not much different than the Ghulam and Mamluks who came to rule the Abbasid and Egyptian states. Ostensibly they were "slaves" too but the reality was that they formed a religous-military class that acted in their own interests.

Janissaries by the 1600's were capable of deposing Sultan's at will. Osman II when he attempted to reform the Ottoman army by using native Turkish infantry (sekhban) as a way to eventually supplant the Janissaries found himself imprisoned and later murdered. The best comparison to the Janissaries are the Russian streltsy. Sokoullu Mehmed Pasha was either Bosnian or Serb and he rose to Grand Vizier and de-facto ruled as Sultan.

1449 was the first Janissary strike where they demanded higher wages. After this each subsequent Sultan was compelled to give them increased wages and privileges. They ceased being a purely military caste by 1566 when Selim II allowed them to take wives, and bear children. By this point the Janissaries demanded they be allowed to induct their sons as well, with the result the the devirsime system fell into disuse, as being a Janissary become hereditary. In addition their economic power increased as they began to engage in various other trades (prior they had been only permitted to engage in military endeavors) they were able to engage in trade, blacksmithing, and various other crafts, and had established monopolies in certain areas. At the same time the Janissary system become a early porto-welfare program.

Traditionally the Sultan would provide them rations in addition to their wages. Once they began marrying, they would induct their sons into the service, and later they would start signing up family members and friends, grandparents, brothers, sisters, mothers as "Janissaries" so they would all become entitled to the rations and various privileges. By the early 1800's they had amassed such power that a Janissary junta ruled Serbia in defiance of the Ottomans and were responsible for much of the massacres that occurred during the first Serb revolt.

Whatever they may have been for their early years, by 1566 they were a socio-economic class.

 

[Bickerstaff]

== 1. Islam Spread by the Sword ==

I agree that if this mechanic is in the game at all, it should expire during the Renaissance. I don't see any need to extend it to the Ottomans, Moors or Mughals. Islam spread very slowly in most of the Balkans, and I don't think we need an automatically Islamic Athens. Starting missionaries are fine for Istanbul and Anatolia. The Mughals were not notably effective in spreading Islam, and the existing mechanisms cope adequately with Islam in Iberia.

I've already commented on this in another thread, but actually Islam seems to have spread quite slowly, even in regions under 'Arab' rule: according to Albert Hourani, who was a leading scholar on the history of the Middle East, Islam only became a majority religion in the region around the 10th century. What evidence there is suggests that outside Arabia it was the religion of a relatively small minority of Umayyad subjects in 750AD, perhaps less than 10%.

So it's not really a question of whether or not Islam was spread 'by the sword', but rather that the whole idea that it won converts in the region with unusual rapidity is just false. Compared to the Catholic conversion of Eastern European pagans or Iberian Muslims and Jews, it was really very unimpressive. The current Arab UP's removal of other religions on conquest is particularly absurd. The spread of Islam should be handled using the same mechanisms which spread Catholicism in Europe.


== 2. The Islamic Golden Age ==

I'd like to see a better representation of this, too. I think it would be enough to change the Arab UP to automatic construction of madrassas (or libraries, if madrassas are changed so that they replace universities) on city conquest, but the House of Wisdom would be fun too. I prefer the idea of giving beakers for population to beakers for specialists. It's less easy to exploit, and a medieval supercity would be fun.


== 3. Muslim Agricultural Revolution ==

I don't have a really strong view on the farms on floodplains proposal, though I think Baghdad and Alexandria probably have enough food; if we want them to be really big in the medieval era, I think it would be better to tweak Arab growth modifiers. It is currently very hard to get Damascus to a reasonable size, so I'd support an extra food resource there.


== 4. Islamic Civs UBs Adjustments ==

The Spiral Minaret and University of Sankore are already excellent wonders which require Islam. Why do you want to make them even better by making their bonuses apply to Arab and Ottoman UBs? The Ottomans are already a very easy civ to play and often do well under the AI, so I don't see why they need this buff. And that's apart from the absurdity of treating a bathhouse as a religious institution.


== City Location and Terrain Adjustments ==

No comment on Egypt, but I think the Caucasus should stay as it is. For most of the region's history it has been characterised by low population densities and relatively poor levels of state control. Both these things are appropriately represented by poor tile yields in the region.

 

[Bickerstaff]

I don't think this thread has much more to gain at this point from further discussion of the degree of offensiveness of the Janissaries.

 

[teriaky]

The Russians had their own version of non-interference. It didn't even try to convert Central Asia, and its efforts to convert the Volga Tatars were very meagre. It was, however, busy high-handedly intervening in areas which were considered Russian by right, but with too much foreign influence.

Well, good job Russia for making non-religious persecution. It's good to see some originality
Anyway, can I remind everyone that this thread is about improving the Muslim world, not about finding out if the Ottoman Empire was humane/inhumane.