1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

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

Discussion in 'Civ3 - General Discussions' started by Illusion13, Jan 10, 2008.

  1. Headbanger

    Headbanger Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    198
    As a Canadian, and thusly a member of the commonwealth, I demand to be re-assured that statement isn't directed at me.
     
  2. Nergal

    Nergal Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    Canada ... thats a vassal state isnt it .... ?
     
  3. Headbanger

    Headbanger Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    198
    Were technically free. We just sorta, asked.
     
  4. Nergal

    Nergal Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    I thihnk its because when we checked the cultural levels of some of your cities there was more French than we liked lol ...

    Back on topic sort of .. I guess the British empire is as close as anyone got to a Domination victory in the real world.
     
  5. D0NIMATRIX

    D0NIMATRIX Full of drivel

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,663
    Location:
    Political incorrectness
    The yeomen were foolish non-royalty peasants carrying whatever bows they could find. The longbowmen should have been their UU since they 1) Introduced it to rest of the world and 2) Pwned the French on several occasions with them–while outnumbered!

    Or the Mongols...
     
  6. Headbanger

    Headbanger Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    198
    ...YET.

    :evil:
     
  7. Nergal

    Nergal Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    Thats why I suggested the Yeoman as the Lb is already present.

    Alexander did a fair amount ... As did Ghengis .. I dont know I guess someone at sometime has worked out who got closest.
     
  8. Headbanger

    Headbanger Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    198
    Ghengis probably would have gotten it if he hadn't kicked the bucket. It's said that his riders were totally wrecking the european knights.
     
  9. D0NIMATRIX

    D0NIMATRIX Full of drivel

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,663
    Location:
    Political incorrectness
    But those Egyptian Mameluke Camels really screwed the pooch for him.
     
  10. Headbanger

    Headbanger Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Messages:
    198
    WHo care about egypt? It's all sand and giant prisms. Phhhht.
     
  11. againsttheflow

    againsttheflow unpolitically uncorrect

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,985
    Location:
    northern CA
    From Wiki: the Mongol empire at its max extent was 33 million km2 while Britain at one point reached 36.6 million. We've just been discussing it in the History forum. :D
     
  12. D0NIMATRIX

    D0NIMATRIX Full of drivel

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,663
    Location:
    Political incorrectness
    Egypt rocks! Pharoahs and chariots are awesome! Plus Pyramids and Sphinxes!

    @againsttheflow

    But the Mongols conquered it all by land, over a shorter period of time, defeated many enormous nations and powerful armies, killed the Caliph, with fewer men than Britain, got all the way to Vienna before their leader died and their traditions stopped them from advancing without a leader. The Brits did, however, hold it together longer.
     
  13. againsttheflow

    againsttheflow unpolitically uncorrect

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    1,985
    Location:
    northern CA
    Yes D0MIN, thanks for the history lesson. I wasn't disputing any of those facts merely saying who was the biggest. ;)(no offence :)) There is something I would like to know though, who was the leader that got them to Vienna? Was he part of the Golden Horde?
     
  14. D0NIMATRIX

    D0NIMATRIX Full of drivel

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,663
    Location:
    Political incorrectness
    Sorry.:lol:

    I think it was Kublai Khan. The different hordes I know little if nothing about. All I know is that the Golden Horde was based in the area north of the Black and Caspian seas.
     
  15. TheOverseer714

    TheOverseer714 Overseer

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Messages:
    5,077
    Location:
    Ohio
    We are forgetting the modern example of a near-domination. The Soviet Union covered a vast stretch of planet earth, covering 11, that's right 11 time zones. Ranging from the arctic north to the desert middle east, the Soviet Union was more territory than the British ever controlled. And let us not forget the vast territories Spain and Portugal claimed in the middle ages.
     
  16. D0NIMATRIX

    D0NIMATRIX Full of drivel

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,663
    Location:
    Political incorrectness
    At its height, the USSR didn't control more than 25% of the world, did it? I find that somehow difficult to believe. Also, Spain's empire seemed larger-than-life because it had footholds almost everywhere, and sometimes large swaths. The same goes for Portugal. Neither had empires over 25% of the world, though, and I doubt that they even approached that.
     
  17. Vampiloup

    Vampiloup Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    158
    Sorry for the bad english. Bad ! Bad english ! No cookie for you !

    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=​

    Roman - Legionary.
    More or less accurate, depend of the Era (Scipio L. are not the same as Caesar L., that are not the same as Trajan L.) : Legions lasted 1000 years, guys.
    Legionary was the standard frontline infantry soldier in roman army.

    Greek - Hoplite.
    A beautifull Sidmeyery. An Hoplit was just the name of heavy non-mounted warriors in greece.
    Hoplites have, basically, a shield, an armor, an helmet and a big lance (and often other protections). The sword is used, but only after the lance.
    Hoplites was WEST mediterranean soldiers : East used sword first, lance only after.
    An hoplite is not really a "defensive" unit. It's all purpose. Better in defense when well used, but not a lot.
    Romans used hoplites first. "Classic" legionaries are an evolution.

    Germany - Panzer.
    The Panzer, or "Panzerkampfwagen" (Panzer go for "armoured", Kampf for "Combat" and Wagen for "Vehicle") is more or less accurate, but only in a "tactical" way. Panzers at the beginning of the WW2 was pitifull in one-vs-one, but the tactic with what they was used was largelly better.
    The "panzers", was just the german "tank". From the ligthly armored and MG armed model I (4 tons) to the legendary Tiger II (70 tons).

    China - Rider.
    I have no idea what was the rider in the real history. I read the Civilopedia, but i don't know this era in chinese history.

    Japan - Samurai.
    Another beautifull Sidmeyery. The Samurai was lightly armored (japanese armors was never good), have "beautifull" but light and simple to break weapons (Japanese city guard can break katana with weapons as Sai), have even less respect for tactic than European knights, etc, etc, etc.
    Samurai from all centuries (Samourai are just the japanese social equivalent for knights) was great against poorly armed peoples, but against good soldiers... Look at the two invasions from the under-average Kubilaï. It was not glorious for the Samurais.
    Eh, a lot of japaneses martial arts origin not from classic Japan, but from Okinawa, where peasants used tools and bare hands for fight the japanese invadere, with enormous loss for samurais. Samurais feared so much the local peasant than even the villages knifes was put on a pole and guarded by samurais !

    Indian - War Elephant.
    Sidmeyery.
    The war Elephant was never good against disciplined armies. Roman know very well how to fight them.
    Elephants are animals, they panic easily, and are more easily woundable than horses.
    Their advantage is moral, and they was used first for this reason : Unprepared soldiers and horses panic before the "monster". But prepared soldiers and horses make hamburgers from them...
    Medieval soldiers probably slaughter entire armies of war elephants.
    Give this unit to India is a good idea, because they was the last to use them in war, but remember Indian armies was on all history the laughing stock of the planet...
    War elephant are ancient era.

    Aztec - Jaguar Warrior
    Sidmeyery.
    1.1.2 for what was the elite warrior force of Aztecs ? EAGLE warriors was armed scouts (as we understand them). JAGUARS was frontline troops, damnit !
    Jaguars was not better armed or armoured than other Aztec warriors, but they was fiercer, more savages. 2.1.1 is probably better for them, or even 2.2.1 with a little added cost (they was elite in a "rage" way).

    Iroquois - Mounted warrior
    I think Sid Meyer needed an UU for Iroquois...

    Egyptian - War charriot
    2.1.2 is not bad. They are strongers than simple warriors, but not than hoplites (who destroyed them, after all).
    And a chariot is not as strong than a horseman : That's why they disapeared. Celts used them only to go to combat (it's the ancient age motorized infantry, if you want).
    The problem here is the "standard" chariot is ridiculous : Celts used it that way (in their late era, at least), and just need to have the "2" in move, but Babylonians, sumerians, Persians and the others used him in combat.
    Ancient peoples used chariot for gain height and speed. When mounted on a chariot, you can choose who, when and where you fight the foot soldiers.
    They used first donkeys, who was numerous in the East-Mediteranean regions where civs appeared first, and then horse when they found them.
    After a (long) time, mens understand the civ progress of "equitation" (how to mount a horse an be obey by him. Remember : Horse is an aggressive animal. In the past, some was even carnivorous) and breed bigger horse that can support a man and his equipment. Chariots can't really compete with true cavalry because of the higher high, the more numerous move points, the bigger agility, and the fact you need only one man by unit for an horse, and two or three for chariot.

    Babylonian - Bowman
    An armored archer, then... I think Sid Meyer just needed an UU for Babylon but, true, Babylon span a lot of centuries. I never hear Babylon had so special archers next to his foreigners.

    Russia - Cossack
    My english is too poor for really explain what the cossacks was. But as for the Legionaries, the Cossack span a lot of time : The firsts was inhabitants of the Ukrainian region just after the mongols invasions. Poor peoples who have their possessions destroyed.
    Their name was given by Turcs, and mean this mens don't have masters because they flee thems.
    The cossaks used by the game seem to be napoleonic era, probably, the famous "Cossacks of the Don", but in that case they don't was frontline units, but skirmishers. Then why +1 in Def and not +1 in move, i don't know.

    USA - F15
    I don't know very well this plane. He was conceived for counter the better communist airforce in the Viet-nam war. Maybe his name is from the illustrious soviet mig15 ?
    But why give a bomb bonuse to what is an air superiority fighter is out of me.

    France - Musketeer
    Pure Sidmeyery. Musketeers was standard troops who evolved from what the game call "musket man". And they was all-purpose units, used in attack. Sid Meyer wanted probably use only cavalry for attack, i don't know.
    Why give a musketeer UU to France ? Hard to say. If not the stupidity of Louis XIV, all Europe, and probably the world by now, can be french. At the musketeer era, french ground troops was the betters.
    But there was two musketeers.
    Maybe what inspired Sid Meyer was the "Mousquetaires du roi" (King's musketeers), an elite force who can fight at foot, at horse, and can attack and defend (they protect the king).
    Theorically, if used as a musket man UU, their stats need to be 5.5.2 : Elite force, then better defense than the original defensive unit, as good in attack as defense, and mounted. freaky, no ?

    Persia - Immortal
    Sidmeyery. The strengh of the immortal was not their combat effectiveness.
    In fact, they was called immortal just because they was the King's guard and all loss was replaced (some say only 1000 of them guard effectively the king).
    What the use in Civ for an unit who don't are better than other and cost a lot (the king give them a lot of richess) ? I don't know. They was too lightly armored for their game stats, but have a bow.
    There is better persian units for an UU (they was GOOD in the bow way).
    I suggest to give them the stats of the Swordman with 1.1.1 in Bombard.

    Zouloulan - Impi
    Impis was a Zoulou elite cast of warriors, raised only for that. Their 2 in move is only justified in a tactical way (they used speed against their foe, often more numerous than them), but the 2 in defense, i don't understand. Maybe because impis was victorious in some defensive wars against other african peoples, but never really conquered lands and was destroyed when attacking entrenched europeans positions ? Who can say.

    English - Man-o-war
    Maybe you can find funny that "man-o-war" is just a generic name for "warship of the line". Sid Meyer just wanted to give better warship to english when they often was (because the most superior dutch needed to fight also on land), and don't know how to name them.

    Spain - Conquistador
    Spanishs (portugueses and other countries have other names) who explored and conquered America was named "conquistadors". You don't need to read spanish for understand why.

    Mongols - Keshik
    Sidmeyrery : The light cavalry from Mongols was called Keshicks. But Sid Meyer choose too create them as CHEAP cavalry with less DEF.
    And the real Keshiks was faster than the standards, and was horse archers. You kinow, the bombard hability...

    Scandinavians - Berserk
    Berserks was soldiers who put themselves in a stat of uncontrolable rage. They don't was specifically amphibious (Water pirates was called vikings), but the rage give them the hability to fight with more ferocity and to ignore a lot of wounds.
    But there is problems : After the fight, a Berserk was able to do nothing at all a long moment, even defend itself. And when in rage, he don't bother to defend.
    Then the game stats are a little tedious. Better give him only 1 in defense but add 1 or 2 HP.

    Celts - Gallic swordman
    I bet you poop against dollars Sid Meyers know nothing of the celts if not the Irish, who was primitives and separated from the main in a lot of ways. And the Civilopedia is funny, too. You can justify the 2 in moves by the fact celts warriors used chariot to move to the combat field.

    Carthago - Numidian mercenary
    Well, Carthago is known to use nearly only mercenaries for war. They used numidians, celts, and so on.
    The powerfull mercenaries used by the game are probably Syphax ones, trained by a roman centurion, Quintus Statonius, but the majority of the numidian mercenaries was not better of worse than the others. And they was more ofter horsemens, by the way.
    I think their stats are a little over the top.

    Ottomans - Sipahi
    The Sipahi was the ottoman equivalent of the knight : Landowner who needed to go in an elite heavy cavalry.
    Why the Sipahi has 8 in ATT (too more than standard cavalry), i don't know. It's totally unjustified, but i bet Sid Meyer need an UU for Ottomans.

    Arabs - Ansar warriors
    SidMeyery !
    The Ansar warriors are from the same era than Carolus Magnus, better known as Charlemagne : VII to IX centuries !
    True, they was an elite cavalry, probably one or the better in the world in that era. They used a lot of weapon, from lance to sword and bows.
    But they disapear when the Arab empire crumble, WAY before the Knight appear. And i doubt they can survive to a fight against the later mongol cavalry or european knights...
    Ansar warriors was recruted, at least at first and then theorically, between the most faithfull muslims (understand : Those who obey without discuss or event think to Mahomet, and then the Coran). Some say the firsts was recruted in the peoples of Medine.

    Korea - Hwacha
    This weapon was created by Koreans. I find funny Sid Meyer think they are more powerfull than canon (with 12, they can easilly be a match for motorized infantry...).
    I don't know a lot of this weapon, but they was probably faster and less powerfull than seen in the game, because they easilly can overpower numerous troops, but was used on the sails of the boats.

    Hittites - Three-Man Chariot
    The Hittites was known for their powerfull chariots. An hittite have a man who attack, a man who defend, and a man who drive. Costly, but effective (fevore the cavalry appear, that's it).

    Portugal - Carrack
    The carrak was not specifically portuguese. It was in this game because they probably build the firsts.
    The Carrak was an evolution from the Cogge. It evolved from the cogge, and evolved itself in the famous Gallion.

    Incas - Chasquis Scout
    The Chasquis was the messengers of the Inca empire. They are accurate in this game because the Chasquis was trained for protect their messages.

    Byzance - Dromon
    We don't know from what the dromon evolved (some say from the bireme, some say from the liburne...), but that was a generic term used for a lot of warships in the Byzantine navire (some say arabs used them after the capture of byzantine harbors, but not interested by the sea and lacking the tolerance for what they don't use, lost the capacity to build them quickly).
    There was little and big dromons, who used fire weaponry against ennemy ships.

    Sumer - Enkidu warrior
    Wow, a great Sidmeyery : Enkidu was a mythological character, some beast-man in the first known saga of the humanity.
    Sumer invented warfare, and a mythological character is all he can found. Here, i help you, Sid : Sumerians used the first chariots, with donkeys.

    Maya - Javelin Thrower
    Nothing to say. I don't know the military might of Mayans.

    Netherlands - Swiss Mercenary
    In the late middle-âge, Swiss was know for their prowess and feared on all the battlefields. Their supremacy was destroyed at the end of the middle-âge by german mercenaries using big swords for cut their pikes, and by frenchs who used... cannons. Pikes don't protect very well against cannons.
    But it's hard to understand why give mercenaries as UU to a civs. I can understand for carthago, who used mostly mercenaries, but Dutch...
    Mmh... Maybe Sid Meyers don't wanted to give them water UU... ;)
     
  18. D0NIMATRIX

    D0NIMATRIX Full of drivel

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    1,663
    Location:
    Political incorrectness
    You suggest some UUs then!;)

    It isn't easy to choose UUs when most are similar.
     
  19. Nergal

    Nergal Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2007
    Messages:
    390
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    Maybe because otherwise the Dutch UU would be a woman selling tulips and cheese ... ok for the bikini babe gambit but not for much else.
     
  20. Vampiloup

    Vampiloup Warlord

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2008
    Messages:
    158
    Kay. Let's see :

    Roma : Kay for the legionary.

    Greece : Spartan, scacred squadron (thebans), alexandrian hoplite, triere, king's companions (cavalry). Or just the hoplite with a better ATT.

    Germany : Kay for panzer.

    China : No idea.

    Japan : A good UU is not simple. Samurai can be an UU, as a cheap knight. But also battleships, fighter (zero), ninja (invisible unit).

    Indian : Don't know. Indians never have a good army.

    Aztecs : Jaguar warrior as a stronger warrior. Eagle warrior as a super-scout.

    Iroquois : Don't know. I know very few of this civ. Just that they was traders.

    Egyptian : Curragh with Galley stats (old egyptians, before to be purelly ground peoples, have a really strong navy).

    Babylonians : Don't know.

    Russia : Cossacks with normal def, but +1 move. Kiev (a cruiser AND a carrier). Submarine.

    USA : Minutemen (scout with arty stats), carrier, or just the F15 with bonus in ATT/DEF and not in bombing, privateer.

    France : Napoleonian arty, napoleonian tirailleur (light infantry with bomb stats), Vieille garde (good infantry), Devastation (ship used for destroy fortifications. very slow, bad in high water, but the armaggeddon with cannons. 1855), corsaire (privateer...), paladin (early knight), legion étrangère (the world better infantry, easily). Or the Mousketeer but as in "mousquetaire du roi" : Good ATT, good DEF and 2 moves.

    Persia : Immortals as a swordman with bomb (archer) stats, archers (they was good), horseman-archers (you can imagine you can do with that...), hoplite mercenaries.

    Zoulouland : Kay for impis.

    English : longbowmen (damnit, even today englishmen - and anglo-saxon in general - cry after their archers. Even the Elfs from Tolkien was english longbowmens. When english peoples wanted to use muskets and no more bows, that was really terrible for them), Ship-of-the-line (aka man-o-war), red coat, early battleship.

    Spain : Kay for conquistador (but maybe with better combat stats ?),

    Mongol : Kay for the Keshik, but please, give him better stats, bomb stats (they used bows), bonus in move, and maybe blitz.

    Scandinavians : Kay for berserk, but with less Def and better HP. Viking (normal medieval infantry, but with amphibious capacity). Drakkar (better galley, with good ATT, can go sea and ocean, allowed at the beginning of the middle-age era), huscarls (bodyguard of scandinavian lords. Better stats than normal medieval infantry, and can launch little axe - bomb stats with 0 range).

    Celts : Gallic sworman => Ambacte, please...

    Carthago : Kay for numidian mercenaries. Better galley.

    Ottomans : Sipahis was only an ottoman knight/cavalry flavour. More disciplined, maybe. Why not the janissaries ? Or the big cannon ?

    Arabs : Kay for Ansar warriors, but not as knights counterpart. Give them early, in the late ancient era. Or Terrorist : Invisible unit with 0 def, 100 att (as in the ground invisible missile, maybe).

    Korea : Kay for the Hwatcha, but with less ATT and better ROF (they shoot arrows, and a lot of them). Or the turtle-ship.

    Hittites : Kay for the chariot.

    Portugal : Kay for the carack.

    Incas : Kay for the scout (that was the only not-very-bad unit they have, after all).

    Byzance : Kay for dromon. Big dromon. Varengue guard. Elite school cavalry (Good heavy knights, if you want. Destroyed at Mantzikert).

    Sumer : Chariot without tech/ressource requirments for the win ! And cheap, too (i'm pretty sure donkeys are cheaper than horses).

    Maya : Don't know mayan military, then i suppose it's kay for the javelin thrower.

    Netherland : Ships, by the love of cookies : Indiamen, by example.
     

Share This Page