What is the historical basis on some of the UUs??

[againsttheflow]

Agreed, in Roman times cavalry were much more powerful and mobile than chariots. It would be nice to have chariots incorporated in a way that well... incorporated them but that's what mods are for.

 

[againsttheflow]

whoops, thought I forgot to hit submit the first time

 

[12 Bar Blues]

The worst UUs are all these mercenaries in Conquest. Machiavelli would be totally revolted to see that the best of a couple nations are mercenaries, and I also am. Give 'em another name at least.

But in some cases we must remember that civs weren't all war-focused. Does someone have any idea of another special unit for the Koreans?

I've seen other mis-spellings, usually on city names.

The worst being Sverdlovsk for Yekaterinburg.

 

[Headbanger]

The fact that america is a civilization to begin with is revolting. THey are a composite of england, spanish, some french and native tribes. Which is pretty much like canada. Might aswell just make a canada nation, or a brazil nation for that matter.

 

[12 Bar Blues]

The fact that america is a civilization to begin with is revolting. THey are a composite of england, spanish, some french and native tribes. Which is pretty much like canada. Might aswell just make a canada nation, or a brazil nation for that matter.

Romans are a composite of Latins, Etruscans, Greeks and others. France is a melt of Celts, Romans and Germans. India includes hundreds of different cultures. Iros were 6 differents nations. And so forth.

 

[Headbanger]

Well all cultures are essentially composite, but a modern compasite getting an ancient age is an outragous idea, considering that they're compositre were not just smaller local are tribes banded together by a common leader or leaders, but some of the most powerful nations in europe.

 

[Headbanger]

Romans are a composite of Latins, Etruscans, Greeks and others. France is a melt of Celts, Romans and Germans. India includes hundreds of different cultures. Iros were 6 differents nations. And so forth.

Iros are the only native tribe that counts since they were the only one to utilize farming.

 

[12 Bar Blues]

Iros are the only native tribe that counts since they were the only one to utilize farming.

Inaccurate. They ultimately got agriculture from Central America. A bunch of nations in the chain from there to the Iros were farmers.

The Iros are still a questionable choice as one of the vanilla civs, and they have another pretty random UU.

Well all cultures are essentially composite, but a modern compasite getting an ancient age is an outragous idea, considering that they're compositre were not just smaller local are tribes banded together by a common leader or leaders, but some of the most powerful nations in europe.

Still, with your definition, many civs would be excluded. The difference between the US and the other civs is that modern transportations and communications are far more efficient. Before, what a nation would call the world would be very small; smaller than the United States.

Americans call themselves Americans, not British/German/Spanish immigrants. It works.

 

[Mursi lives]

Did you notice that the wiki on hwachas talked about civIII?

THat makes sense since it's almost impossible not to get a golden age from your UU.

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.

Are we playing the same game? The "pathetic" 20-shields horseman is the greatest AA conqueror.

 

[AutomatedTeller]

America has a civ actually does make sense - by the time of the revolution, they were different enough from the english. The industrious trait really reflects some of the amazing feats of engineering and building that the american's pulled off in the revolution, overnight building major fortifications.

You can make a good argument that Byzantium is just rome, later, as well.

 

[12 Bar Blues]

Having the Iroquois in the game pretty much gives any other civ in the game a good defense.

 

[Marsden]

You can make a good argument that Byzantium is just rome, later, as well.

You can also make a good argument that the Byzantines are just the Greeks.

I like when the Romans found Byzantium, the Byzantines found Constantiople and the Ottomans found Istanbul, all in the same game.
Sumer and Bablyon have a lot of overlap, too. And Persia, to a lesser extent.

Regarding the Iroquois, I don't know why the mashed all of the North American tribes into one but still have seprate Maya and Aztecs, which are much closer than Iroquois and Souix. The mounted warrior is a Souix or plains warrior, not Iroquois. Souix were in Civ2 and I think someone switched gears in the middle.

 

[Desertsnow]

I have never (well at least since I became reasonably competent) built a basic chariot, and I build only a few Egyptian Warchariots at most (and these mostly so I can perhaps trigger a GA by attacking a stray archer or stone-age warrior with them). They're the most useless units in the game, and as Nergal said, disappointingly so.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Of course not. I'm just pointing out that the chinese really didn't use it that much militarily.

Just FYI they drove the Mongols back a few times with it.

@Chariot People

They should be 4/2/2. They were beasts back in the ancient age, often being able to incorporate scythes to decimate entire armies. Plus archers and spearmen made them all the more deadly, since each member only had to focus on his/her end of the bargain.

@To America or not to America people

Seeing as America beat every nation it fought in Europe (the powerhouse) at least once, and led the west in the cold war, I think the ethnic backgrounds matter little. It should be a nation.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Definitely agree that chariots are the most understrength units in the game. In the ancient middle east, they were the tanks of the day, the mere appearance of chariots on the battlefield were enough to turn a poorly disciplined army into a fleeing rabble. The Greek phalanx was the only way to defeat them, and that came along well past the chariots prime. The real Hittites laid waste to many neighboring countries during their heyday, even pushing Egypt back. When Greece conquered them all, it was with chariots, and when Persia conquered the same areas, yep, chariots led the way.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Greece (actually Macedon) used cavalry and phalanxes to conquer the middle east, not chariots.

 

[Nergal]

I just read a book called Alexander .. cant remember the author .. He was a big cavalry fan. Its one of my pet gripes. I'm going to do a mod with AC available to everyone with horses and iron

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Horses are controversially more important than iron in Civ3, since they can move way faster than anything else.

 

[Nergal]

I agree, in a way. Its darn near impossible to conquer to large continent without them. Untill you get railroad foot soldiers are useless.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

It takes hundreds of years to travel hundreds of miles in Civ3.