Wait a minute! (Bronze Working)

[Tyrael]

Maybe have Slavery require Masonry AND Bronze Working?

 

[jason77024]

Just FWIW...

National Geographic (nerd alert) recently had a show on which indicated that the Pyramids were -not- built by slaves. I am certainly not an expert in the field, but you may also wish to read http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/070391.html

 

[frob2900]

National Geographic (nerd alert) recently had a show on which indicated that the Pyramids were -not- built by slaves. I am certainly not an expert in the field, but you may also wish to read http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/070391.html

Indeed. There have been discussions on the forums earlier about this (try looking for threads with slavery in the title). The egyptian system of procuring workers for the pyramids was more like the european feudal system than like slavery (in the sense the word was used in e.g. Rome or Greece).

BTW. You are surfing a forum devoted to the Civilization game, and you feel obliged to issue a nerd alert when referring to National Geographic??

 

[dot]

Just FWIW...

National Geographic (nerd alert) recently had a show on which indicated that the Pyramids were -not- built by slaves. I am certainly not an expert in the field, but you may also wish to read http://www.harvardmagazine.com/on-line/070391.html

Thank you. That's interesting. Another "common sense" prejudice removed. OK, so much for my "the slaves" theory.

Did I say: "'Nuff said." ??? Sorry.

 

[r_rolo1]

Sure. But for the mids, they were used "big style". That's why imho this could be a justification for moving it to masonry. So BW makes sense, too. As much as masonry would.
'Nuff said.

The mids were built by hired craftsman, not by slaves....

But putting slavery in another tech would not be so bad at all: I'm not surely the only one that thinks that slavery comes too early in the game....

 

[slobberinbear]

No way slavery should be tied to religious tech, particularly a religious tech associated with a particular religion. Imagine the hate emails that would follow...

Slavery could be a worthwhile stand-alone tech (like Fascism, Communism, etc.), say with BW and/or Masonry as prerequisites.

Another way to nerf Slavery would be to give it a negative diplomacy modifier vis a vis non-Slavery-using civs.

 

[dot]

Dear rolo, see post #24.

 

[r_rolo1]

Sorry, nevermind that ...

 

[Khan Quest]

Maybe the chopping rate could improve with technology:
Stone - 12 chops/forest
Bronze - 6 chops/forest
Iron - 3 chops/forest

 

[NoMan]

Interesting discussion. Throwing another idea out there. Instead of tying slavery to a tech why not tie it to city or empire size. For example requires a city of size 3, or an empire of size 4.

 

[viinno]

If you push those techs up the tree too far, you will end up having people just do more re-rolls on the terrain generation. People would be restricted from mining a hill early, etc. other wise. So you'd just cause a lot of more hassles. If people can't mine, and have no early mans of production, and can't even chop for christ-sakes, what is it they are expected to do when the game is immortal/diety? lol

You'd also be making initial starts more luck-based than fun-based.

If you bothered to read my post properly you woul have noticed I never even said anything about not being able to build mines, and sorry to pop your over inflated bubble Obselete but Bronze Working and Mining are different techs.

I was infering that Slavery and Chopping be moved back a bit, so next time prehaps consider what other people are saying before you run your mouth.

 

[SevenSpirits]

If you bothered to read my post properly you woul have noticed I never even said anything about not being able to build mines, and sorry to pop your over inflated bubble Obselete but Bronze Working and Mining are different techs.

I think he was pointing out that hills are often forested. If you can't chop early, you can't mine those hills. I think that's a valid concern with eliminating early chopping.

 

[r_rolo1]

I think he was pointing out that hills are often forested. If you can't chop early, you can't mine those hills. I think that's a valid concern with eliminating early chopping.

A forested hill and a mined hill have the same yield unless the mine has a metal ... I'm not seeing the problem

 

[SevenSpirits]

A forested hill and a mined hill have the same yield unless the mine has a metal ... I'm not seeing the problem

Actually, a forest adds +1, and a mine adds +2. So there is a difference.

 

[r_rolo1]

Ok, I stand corrected. I do agree that chopping should be avaliable early (BW is fine, but even Masonry would do ( maybe even BW or Masonry ) ) but Slavery could go elsewhere easily ( maybe even as a new and separate tech ). BW = Cooper + Axes + Chopping + Slavery makes BW a bit stronger than necessary IMHO

 

[jason77024]

Indeed. There have been discussions on the forums earlier about this (try looking for threads with slavery in the title). The egyptian system of procuring workers for the pyramids was more like the european feudal system than like slavery (in the sense the word was used in e.g. Rome or Greece).

Not only were the work gangs very specialized, they only worked part of the year, i.e. when the Nile was flooding and no farming could take place. Interesting stuff.

BTW. You are surfing a forum devoted to the Civilization game, and you feel obliged to issue a nerd alert when referring to National Geographic??

Good point... OK, double-nerd alert.

Great "horde of axemen" sig, btw!

 

[LionQ]

...

Slavery could be a worthwhile stand-alone tech (like Fascism, Communism, etc.), say with BW and/or Masonry as prerequisites.

...

Best suggestion so far.

 

[kniteowl]

The most under used civic in the game in my opinion is Serfdom. I'd like all civics to be worth while.

I'd like to see Slavery and Serfdom switch places

BW opens up Serfdom and Feudalism opens up Slavery.

It makes Serfdom useful now because it becomes a transition civic.

Although this change may lead to the Feudalism Slingshot to occur more often lol.