I'm reading James C. Scott's Against the Grain: A Deep History of the Earliest States (Yale, 2017) and while a lot of its premises are familiar to me, I was surprised about two things that I thought would be cool to add into an epic mod (i.e., mine).
First, Temples were production enhancers:
Secondly, early warfare was geared more towards the capture of slaves than the acquisition of territory:
Any thoughts?
First, Temples were production enhancers:
"There is, moreover, abundant evidence of substantial work gangs mobilized for agricultural and nonagricultural tasks by temples, as well as thousands of standardized bowls used, most judge, to distribute food or beer rations." (p. 120)
That wouldn't be hard to change, and shouldn't break the early game by any means.
Secondly, early warfare was geared more towards the capture of slaves than the acquisition of territory:
"Warfare in the Mesopotamian alluvium beginning in the late Uruk Period (3,500-3,100 BCE) and for the next two millennia was likewise not about the conquest of territory but rather about the assembling of populations at the state's grain core." (p. 154)
"A sure sign of the manpower obsession of the early states, whether in the Fertile Crescent, Greece, or Southeast Asia, is how rarely their chronicles boast of having taken territory. ... The conquerors were on the lookout for generic manpower and, simultaneously, for the craftsmen and entertainers who would enhance the luster of the conquerors' courts." (p. 171)
I know Steph's mod way back when -- at least at one point -- made all or most military units require a population cost, and I assume that worked without breaking the game? I'm wondering about adding that alongside giving virtually every unit in the early game -- maybe up to the medieval period, at least for European units (but who knows)? -- the enslavement ability, and then making worker units extremely expensive and hopefully unnattractive to build. So essentially a civ can only really exploit its territory with irrigations, roads, or mines with slaves taken from raids (maybe by creating hidden-nationality raider units) or wars. I wonder if this might break the game, though!"A sure sign of the manpower obsession of the early states, whether in the Fertile Crescent, Greece, or Southeast Asia, is how rarely their chronicles boast of having taken territory. ... The conquerors were on the lookout for generic manpower and, simultaneously, for the craftsmen and entertainers who would enhance the luster of the conquerors' courts." (p. 171)
Any thoughts?