Illusion13
King
Like, the Chinese Rider... and the Korean... Missile launcher... thingie...
What is the historical basis on some of the UUs??
- Thread starter Illusion13
- Start date
Korean Missile Launcher Thingy (aka Hwacha)
Not sure specifically about the Rider, someone into Chinese history probably would know.
Not sure specifically about the Rider, someone into Chinese history probably would know.
darski
Regent in Training
I did find an article at Wiki about Chinese Knights Errant which could be construed as the basis for the Rider (which is totally useless in Vanilla)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_knight-errant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_knight-errant
PaperBeetle
Emperor
Eh? There's no difference between Vanilla, PtW and C3C riders surely? However you say it, however you see it, it's a punchy unit.
TheOverseer714
Overseer
The civilopedia says something about armored Mongol horsemen called Riders conquering China. Not much of a Unique Unit of China. Not a word about h'wacha(macallits) in the Korea article. A google search directs you to...these forums. I think the historical basis of some UU's is a bit.... sketchy, at best.
darski
Regent in Training
It would seem reasonable that the *inventor* of gunpowder would get a gunpowder UU... just at a quick think 
megistatos
Warlord of Mars
When you google hwacha, without the apostrophy, the Korean cannon comes up, first hit a wiki article.
Google hits:
Hwacha- 7,160
Hwach'a-874
H'wacha-470
It seems Firaxis picked the most obscure spelling.
Google hits:
Hwacha- 7,160
Hwach'a-874
H'wacha-470
It seems Firaxis picked the most obscure spelling.
TheOverseer714
Overseer
Not unusual. Colosseum is Firaxis' spelling, Word suggests Coliseum as the proper spelling. I've seen other mis-spellings, usually on city names.
megistatos
Warlord of Mars
A quick look in my dictionary reveals that Coliseum is the American spelling, while Colosseum is British.
The root is colosseus which is Latin for very very big, which in turn comes from the Greek kholossiaios.
I presume that the developers wanted the true Latinate form(or maybe there was a Brit high up in the team
).
The root is colosseus which is Latin for very very big, which in turn comes from the Greek kholossiaios.
I presume that the developers wanted the true Latinate form(or maybe there was a Brit high up in the team
).
againsttheflow
unpolitically uncorrect
It would seem reasonable that the *inventor* of gunpowder would get a gunpowder UU... just at a quick think
Referring to the Chinese? If so it doesn't appear that reasonable to me. I mean what are you gonna give them, fireworks?
darski
Regent in Training
Referring to the Chinese? If so it doesn't appear that reasonable to me. I mean what are you gonna give them, fireworks?
If you read the article on the Korean unit you will see that they were developing theirs from the one already used by the Chinese.
it is not as if there is no historical basis for gunpowder weapons.
Headbanger
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 198
Referring to the Chinese? If so it doesn't appear that reasonable to me. I mean what are you gonna give them, fireworks?
I'm pretty sure any group of middle-ages era pikemen would make the battlefield run yellow if they saw fireworks.
Sadly, intimidation tactics don't fit so well into civ.
againsttheflow
unpolitically uncorrect
Of course not. I'm just pointing out that the chinese really didn't use it that much militarily.
civverguy
Emperor
I think the historical basis for the UUs is when the civ got their golden age. E.g. China's golden age is in the early middle ages (Tang dynasty) so it has a rider UU when you discover Chivalry which in in the early middle ages.
Headbanger
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 198
THat makes sense since it's almost impossible not to get a golden age from your UU.
darski
Regent in Training
Not if you play as Egypt. That is the most pathetic UU I have ever seen. (Vanilla) I never build them because they are a waste of resources and they die when a warrior on some other continent glances at them.
againsttheflow
unpolitically uncorrect
It's always dissapointed me that chariots never play a major role in civ III. I don't think I have ever built a regular chariot, but the time I need fast units horsemen are available.
Headbanger
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 198
Making chariots 1,1 is a major mistake, considering that they are the ancient world equilvalent of tanks, and were used up until the end of the roman empire.
TheOverseer714
Overseer
I think the horseman should be 1/1/2 and the chariot be the next level up, maybe 2/2/2 like the Hittites 3 man chariot. After all, horseman came before chariots in RL.
Nergal
Prince
Chariots are totally useless, I thought they needed roads to get through jungle and stuff. I never build them , I just like glancing at them so they fall apart. I dont know about the horseman thing, technically the stirrup is a pretty late invention and that defines a horseman and makes it more than just a bloke sitting on a horse trying not to fall off.
