The Rise & Fall of The Mughals ~ v2 ~

If I wanted to lock them into Colonialism, would a hidden railroads type tech for all the other civs be required to stop the Euros getting into other govts? (That tech being required for the other govts aside from Colonialism)
 
Maybe you should make an Imperialisim govt after Colonialsim so they do have something to change into.

Colonialisim could represnt the trading companies while Imperialsim could represent the nationalization and take over of the trading companies by their home countries.
 
There is a reason for that Blue. It's to bring the Euro effort toward a more landbased strategy. Idea being that you take to swashbuckling and piracy in the early game but then are encouraged to build your empire on land thereafter.

killercane: Did you get everything to work now?

jonatas: How are you liking the soundtrack? Do you find that the Inquisitor has appropriate settings?

silver: What do you think of giving the Mughals the religious trait for the cheap cultural imporvements?
 
@Ram

The soundtrack is quite good. :cool: The Beastie Boys track was a flashback, haven't listened to that in a while. I was wanting to get the names of the tracks from you actually. The one with the woman's voice, that kind of almost has a bossa nova feel is really nice too. Plus a couple others that were just good music. You could have put in some Zakir Hussain, but that almost might be sacrilege, putting him in a civ game :lol: Overall great idea with the music.

As for the Inquisitor, I used them to build mines and shore up defenses early on in the game. I wasn't building workers early on because I was concentrating on popping out Settlers so fast. I'm not really knowledgable about the Goan Inquisition persay. For war I mainly use War Elephants and Mahouts (plus artillery), as I've developed this unique fetish for Elephant units lol. It got me thinking though, did the Indian armies combine Elephants with Artillery? Could you actually do that, without scaring them? It would be a pretty ferocious combination, that's for sure.
 
The Last Conformist said:
I know elephants were used for transporting cannons, but I find it hard to imagine anyone actually firing cannons from atop a pachyderm ...

No no that's not what I meant. I meant I was wondering if you could use heavy artillery around them without frightening and losing control of them. Maybe they would be terrified by the loud noise and explosions? I don't know... It would be a pretty powerful combination if not: artillery bombardment and then an elephant charge. At least that's what I was wondering at the time.
 
Jonatas:

You are right about elephants getting scared of big bangs from cannons. Many historians point to this as a big reason why the Mughals were so successful in their early campaigns in India, especially at the Battle of Panipat.

The Lodi Sultans, like so many other rulers of Indian lands, fielded lots of elephants at this time. Note that the 'Golconda Guard' wonder describes a 'curtain wall' built in that city, which forced elephants to twist and turn as they approached it, thereby losing all momentum from their charge.

These beasts largely terrorised their opponents' lines on the battlefield, smashing through them, causing destruction and disarray. I haven't read of that many retorts to them, other than getting the hell out the way.

However, the Mughals were one of those early gunpowder empires mentioned in the 'pedia. This meant they had cannons going bang before the approaching elephants. The effect was as you describe. The elephants ran amock, going beserk, and the mahouts (their trainers) were helpless in the face of this. Losing all control of the elephants meant that you had these multi-ton creatures smashing up their own army.

The Mughals must have been chuckling at the sight.


But don't forget, the historians also remind us that Sher Khan came to take those lands back. Humayun, Babur's son, was sent wandering to Persia, with no empire. It was Shah Tahmasp of the Safavids who offered him a warm welcome and an army, which was duly used to take back the north of India and rebuild the Mughal Empire. Many say that Tahmasp was so generous because Humayun had given him a diamond. A bloody big one. The Koh-i-Noor no less, which Humayun had being carrying around in his robes as he trailed his way listlessly through the plains to Persia. That diamond now sits in the Tower of London and is called "The Star of India".

I had originally wanted to have that diamond in game, as a princess type unit. But there was no way to recreate the effect I was after ie. gathering up 'esteem' (VPs) by holding the diamond for longest. The game won't allow it.
 
Rambuchan said:
There is a reason for that Blue. It's to bring the Euro effort toward a more landbased strategy. Idea being that you take to swashbuckling and piracy in the early game but then are encouraged to build your empire on land thereafter.
Makes perfect sense. It does leave the peculiarity however, that Banda can be made virtually unassailable. While my East India Company can certainly win without it, it would be nice to completely wipe out the sneaky back-stabbing Dutch.
 
Rambuchan said:
These beasts largely terrorised their opponents' lines on the battlefield, smashing through them, causing destruction and disarray. I haven't read of that many retorts to them, other than getting the hell out the way.
I'm somewhat curious as to why elephants remained effective much longer in India than in the Mediterranean world. It can't be because the Indian elephant was larger and tougher than the North African ones, because the Indian elephants fielded by the Seleucids did not overcome the counters - fire, pelting with missile weapons, opening "corridors" in the lines to let the pachyderms get in where they could be attacked from the sides - developed against the North African ones.
 
Reagarding Elephants in North Africa.

I am not 100% sure on that, but besides the decreasing effectiveness of elephants in the Mediterranean Area, I would say, they became extinct in that region, just like Lions, leopards and such. Mankind didn't treat the nature well, especially in this area. Further I could imagine the following reasons.

- Indian elephants trainers were much better, then their northafrican counterparts (pure speculation).
- terrain and climate in the mediterranean/northafrica area is not suited well for elphants, and became less so (one reason for extinction).
- Maybe they were used up by Carthago in the Punian wars, or in other words, the Romans killed them all, to avoid future uprisings in their new found Africa province.
- The mediterranean also has one big disadvantage moving those units, the sea. Even huge Carthagenian Triremes would have had some trouble carriing a dozen of those huge beasts. African Elephants are much bigger and wilder then Indian ones, and maybe much harder to tame.
- I have no idea in what terrain Indian elephants were most effective, but I imagine they did quite well on the open field and jungel areas, while mountainous battlefields would be hardly winable for an army that is elphant heavy.
- Regarding elephants in the very successful Hannibal campaign against Rome, I just can say, that they were not very important. They were for intimidation mainly, but didn't make it until roman heartland. In fact not more then 8 made it through the alps, the rest died quick of disease. Hannibals success came with the light numidian cavalry, and a lot of unhappy people all around the italian peninsula. Most Italian provinces quickly joined in Hannibals war against oppresive Rome. Hannibals final defeat was also to be found in deception and lack of serrenity in the Cartaghenian rule. So finally he was unable to pay all the mercenaries and Rome successfully bribed the Numidian riders, ....

To end this thoughts, most things said about the elephants in North-Africa is speculation, but I could well imagine it happening that way.

Edit: One more reason that one should not forget is "Ivory". Maybe the highly prized tusks of the elephants were a main reason for them getting extinct in Northafrica.
 
I remember we had a chat about Elephants a while back in the history forum. There was quite a bit of info that got posted there. If I remember rightly, the North African elephants of war that were most popular were Syrian ones. The sub-Saharan African Elephant is both too big and too wild to be trained as easily. And I'm not entirely certain about the explanation of a certain breed dying out. In that thread, which I can't find, there were many breeds mentioned that were used in North Africa. So they had options. I think that religion also plays a big part in the ongoing closeness between elephants and people in India.
jonatas said:
The soundtrack is quite good. :cool: The Beastie Boys track was a flashback, haven't listened to that in a while. I was wanting to get the names of the tracks from you actually. The one with the woman's voice, that kind of almost has a bossa nova feel is really nice too. Plus a couple others that were just good music. You could have put in some Zakir Hussain, but that almost might be sacrilege, putting him in a civ game :lol: Overall great idea with the music.
I missed this earlier. Funny you mention Zakir Hussain. I wanted to have a soundtrack entirely made up of classical north Indian music. I've certainly got the collection to make a decent soundtrack and it would have seen much from him, Shakti, Hariprasad Chaurasya on the bamboo flute. I've even got a Carlos Santana and Shakti record. That would have been my soundtrack of choice.

This music would actually have been far more fitting and suited to playing civ, with its long, long, slowly building and highly atmospheric tracks. Way more authentic too. However, this stuff just isn't appreciated amongst gamers in general. So I thought I'd take a different approach. :groucho:
Blue Monkey said:
Makes perfect sense. It does leave the peculiarity however, that Banda can be made virtually unassailable. While my East India Company can certainly win without it, it would be nice to completely wipe out the sneaky back-stabbing Dutch.
Ah well you should never underestimate the longevity and usefullness of those Swashbucklers. :nono:

Keep a few handy is my advice.
The Last Conformist said:
I still think the Mughals would do well with a larger starting army - that would encourage the AI to go on the rampage early on, but not increase their long-term potential too much.
Agreed!
 
Ram,

I think Zakir Hussain would have perfect! I would have made the soundtrack just of him for the scenario, including some Shakti so you have Carnatic music as well. That would be awesome. Maybe you should consider making an alternate soundtrack? You'd end up blowing everyones minds indirectly with the music :lol:
 
jonatas said:
Maybe you should consider making an alternate soundtrack?
What makes you think I didn't already?
 
Rambuchan said:
What makes you think I didn't already?

Man if that's the case can you share it with me? Shakti (incl. Zakir Hussain) constitutes one of the more profound aesthetic experiences I ever had. I'm a diehard fan and would like to check it out ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom