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

[Vampiloup]

As a preface, let it be known certain arabic tribes have only practiced terroist behavior in the last decade or so. (A little more if you count the guns the US gave them to kill soviets).

As a preface... What, "last decade" ?!
Hey, killing civilians with bombs is a little older than the Twin tower end ! We, Europeans, Asians and Africans, suffer from a little more than the "last" decade.
In gaming-time, since a least the half of the fourth age. That mean before at least four other units, maybe more (depend of what you call "modern armor", for example).
And a cheap invisible ground missile can be very effective at this moment, for those like me who play "peacefully", particularly with extended time.

First of all, it's a specific tribe within the arabs who support terrorist organizations, secondly, the same tactics are used by guerilla warriors around the enitire world.

First of all, it's not a specific "tribe" within the Arabs. It's done all around the world, in a lot of countries (even Arabic ones). And when one occur, you think Arabic peoples dance in the streets for nothing ?

Secondly, i don't speak of guerilla warfare, even terrorist one. I speak of a terrorist unit, as an explosive invisible unit. Really different.

And secondly, the arabs produced some of the finest mounted warriors in the history of the world, so go read a book. THe arabs aren't exactly in thier "Golden Age" right now, and thats where these units are derived from. Samurai (Medival Japan), Manowars (THe British Empire), Legionaires (Roman Empire). See a trend? I do.

Who said the Ansar warriors was not fine warriors ? Can you, please, don't put words in my mouth ?

I said : Ansar warriors are not knight counterparts, they are, what, two to five centuries olders and entirely disapeared when the armoured knights was on field. Even if the name was sometimes used for other units, as an other name for "holy warrior" (Ansar is a pretty generic name).

They was good against armies of their time, and even in this case they don't was invicibles : Byzantines cavalry defeat them often after an time for adapt, and :
1° Byzantine cavalry are exactly early knights : Beginning of the tactic used by them with semi-heavy armors.
2° Byzantine army suffered from backstabs from byzantine leaders (it's more or less why Byzantine empire disapeared).

Then, i rest on my point : Ansar warriors was superbs, but in the Early middle-age. Against the other knight-like units (save maybe samurais), i don't think they can win (Saladin used other cavaly for a reason).

Can you, at least, understand what i say ? Ansars warriors are good, but are not units from the era Sid put them in. THAT'S ALL I SAID !

And i'm pretty sure they can be more usable for the Arab Civ at the century where they really was

Thirdly, only certain tribes of arabs actually are open supporters of terrorism. You might aswell say the celt UU is a terrorist too, or that the japanese UU is a kamazee pilot, or even that the german UU is a gestapo officer.

Celts : I'm not really with this "Irish = celts" idea. Even at the roman era, they was really differents from the Gauls, Germans or even Britons.

Japanese : Well, Kamikaze sunk how much chips ? Sixteen destroyers, if i remember (Look here :http://www.combinedfleet.com/) ? And they was used because Japan lacked real pilots theses years.
But true, a Japan Civ player can use them in "desperate" moments : Really cheap missiles (with a cost in population, i think).

Germans : What can do a Gestapo officer ? We are not in CTP. If you want a Gestapo officer, put him as Specialist.

On the matter of four, We have communism and facism, because they exist as viable and historically important governments. How many deaths have despotism and monarchy caused? Hmm?

Despotism : You know pretty well the "despotism" as represented in the game don't really exist. It's just a name Sid Meyer give to a "unknown and primitive" governement.
And player always try to quit Despotism the early they can...

Monarchy don't systematically killed their own people. They very rarelly do, in fact. They most often kill them by war, and even democracies do that (how much irakis killed since Georges invasion ?). Wen they really kill their own population en-masse, it's well remembered as a tragic situation. I know it : We have two "tragic moments" in France (Under Catherine de Medicis and under Robespierre).

It existed good and bad monarchies. I don't think you can give me one country ruled by communism where the dirigeant don't killed their own population en-masse. I repeat : Their own. En-masse.

Fithward bound, slavery is also historically prominent. Every culture, at one point in history, has practiced the enslaving of whole cultures. From the egyptians to the germans. Civilians are also killed throughout history. Crack a history book.

Problem is : Slavery is still largely used by all the civs in the game even at the end of the game. There is very few countries today who support slavery : Some muslim countries in the gulf, some communist countries...

And the Slavery was not the same thing in north American Indian civs (slaves died of exhaustion in few months, even womens), Muslims (slaves was only non-muslim - officially-, with nearly total depopulation of countries where they take slaves, and total extermination of slae families - slaves males was castrated, females babies killed), Greece (few peoples was really free, and slaving was a state accepted even by the slaves and their former families), Roman Imperium (where Slave have more rights than a lot of free peoples), etc.
You see, i read a lot of books.

And if civilians was killed throughout all history, as you say, count the units specifically created for kill civilians ?

And, since the french being pink is such a massive imbedded message, we should obviously point fingures at firaxis for blatant racism. Those monsters.

Yes, burn them !
N.B. That was just a joke, you know ?


=> If the admin think this thread go in the wrong way, just send us a PM.


=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Another American UU : The liberty ship. Imagine what you can do with an ultra-cheap transport...

 

[Headbanger]

I'm not going to wade through your post looking for a specific passage to quote, But the reference to celts=irish is your assumption that arabs=suni. (THe reason being it's usually the suni we end up fighting. Just as the celts can be divided into to different tribes, so can the arabs. I find though, that many people are wholly un-aware of this fact, and tend to group them as such. Different sects dance in the streets. Just like when saddam was executed, half the country danced in the streets while half of them were busy sending threatening messages of retribution.

 

[Marsden]

Good posts Vampiloup, And your English is fine. I think they just wanted to give the civs more difference than just the color.
I remember choosing the Civs in the first two games by color alone, because you could name them anything you wanted so color of the units and towns was the only difference.
They probably scanned some indexes of some books to find the names of the units. Then they had to pick when to put them, so it was all very arbitrary.
An example, the Impi is a man with a spear so they used him to replace "spearman" but the ancient bronze spearhead phalanx the generic spearman is based on is a completely different unit from a completely different time. The timeframe of the Impi was 18th and 19th century, is that the ancient age? But Impi is an ancient age unit.

 

[Desertsnow]

This I disagree with, America has had quite a few firsts in weapon development. The first ironclad warships (invented by both sides at the same time during the civil war), the first automatic weapon (the Gatling, which has design elements still in use), the first nuclear powered submarines, and actually the first military submarine. The nuclear aircraft carriers fielded by the US are unmatched weapons, carrying up to 75 strike aircraft. The nuclear ballistic missile submarines become the 3rd most powerful country(nuclear weapon-wise) when they leave port. If anyone has a modern era UU, it's definitely America. I forgot to mention the Apache attack helicopter, which was pretty much unmatched for some time at destroying tanks (remember the gulf war turkey shoot?)

Actually, ironclad warships are not an American invention. By the time of the American Civil War several European powers already had ironclad ships in service. The Gatling gun was definitely an American innovation, though, and the Americans had the first nuclear submarine, if I'm not mistaken.
A modern UU is probably appropriate for America, as a modern golden age is appropriate. It was around the middle of the twentieth century (around the time of World War II and in the years following) that the American economy really took off.

 

[Headbanger]

They probably scanned some indexes of some books to find the names of the units. Then they had to pick when to put them, so it was all very arbitrary.
An example, the Impi is a man with a spear so they used him to replace "spearman" but the ancient bronze spearhead phalanx the generic spearman is based on is a completely different unit from a completely different time. The timeframe of the Impi was 18th and 19th century, is that the ancient age? But Impi is an ancient age unit.

It was in africa. Remeber, when europe was in the late middle ages, the americas were technically still in the late stone ages and early ancient age.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

Good posts Vampiloup, And your English is fine. I think they just wanted to give the civs more difference than just the color.
I remember choosing the Civs in the first two games by color alone, because you could name them anything you wanted so color of the units and towns was the only difference.
They probably scanned some indexes of some books to find the names of the units. Then they had to pick when to put them, so it was all very arbitrary.
An example, the Impi is a man with a spear so they used him to replace "spearman" but the ancient bronze spearhead phalanx the generic spearman is based on is a completely different unit from a completely different time. The timeframe of the Impi was 18th and 19th century, is that the ancient age? But Impi is an ancient age unit.

The ancient age isn't necessarily limited to the BC years. An Impi in the late middle ages/early industrial ages just might dissillusion the player from using the Zulu.

 

[Marsden]

Well, like headbanger said, it's relative. The ancient mounted warrior of the Iroqouis certainly wasn't in ancient times either.

And your right, the Hittite chariot does sound like a circus.

 

[anaxagoras]

There are any number of good models for an American UU, I think. The F15 is a crappy unit in the game, but is pretty recognizable as an American "signature" weapon. The F-15 in the game is modeled after the "strike eagle" ground attack variant, not the air-superiority type. I'm not sure that was the best design decision.

Other possibilities are: An extra-effective nuclear submarine unit. Perhaps one with improved defense or that can't automatically be seen by destoyers. Of course, we'd want the submarine attack bug fixed first. The Aegis cruiser or stealth aircraft can currently be built by anyone, but either are uniquely American stamps on an existing weapons system. As mentioned by someone earlier, a super-carrier would be a good choice. The U.S. is pretty much unique in it's ability to project air power throughout the globe - perhaps a carrier unit with triple carrying capacity (12 air units) would show this.

For folks that believe the U.S. "came of age" in WWII, the B-17 would make a good model for an improved bomber unit - better bombard AND better defense. Or, my personal favorite, have the M4 Sherman Tank as a UU. It fights marginally less effectively than a regular tank - say, 14.8.2 - but costs only 70 shields to build, so you can have boatloads of them.

 

[Vampiloup]

@Headbanger :
I understand now what you call an Arab "tribe".
Well, we European have concern with Chiites, too. There is no real difference between the two (far less than between Orthodox, Catholics and Protestants, for example).
And Suni are what, 85% of all of them (officially, at least, since it's unallowed to quit Islam in Muslim countries) ?

@Desertsnow :
Not really. First monitors are really build by USA (North, since Virginia/Merrimak was an answer). The inventor, John Ericsson, is Swedish, and wanted to give is idea to the french leader Napoleon III, who refused.
When the US civil war begin, Ericsson is in US territory. You can say what followed...

In fact, there is armored ship before the monitors, but they have no turrets : US Demologos (wood armor), used in the war between US and england (1812-15), or Devastation (french ship used against the Russia, in 1855.
But they are called "armored ship" or "armored battery".

@ Anaxagoras :
That was the german said : "A panther can destroy fifteen Sherman, but the American have Sixteen of them".

@And for the ancien age :
Well, Zoulous, Aztecs and Iroquois was not in Ancient age in the general timeline, but progres saying they was...

 

[Headbanger]

Well atleast we understand each other now. It just really pisses me off when people don't understand the divisions in the middle east. Especially when they're in the top tiers of the american government/military.

 

[TheOverseer714]

Or they have the surface information and ignore the realities. The real terrorists use the religion to their own ends and omit anything that contradicts their views. Hopefully the moderates will eventually decide they have gone too far and stop looking the other way. Our president is reactionary toward the terrorists and has become very much like them, where he feels the ends justify the means. I see nothing but bloodshed if both groups continue their ways of thinking.

 

[D0NIMATRIX]

There are any number of good models for an American UU, I think. The F15 is a crappy unit in the game, but is pretty recognizable as an American "signature" weapon. The F-15 in the game is modeled after the "strike eagle" ground attack variant, not the air-superiority type. I'm not sure that was the best design decision.

Other possibilities are: An extra-effective nuclear submarine unit. Perhaps one with improved defense or that can't automatically be seen by destoyers. Of course, we'd want the submarine attack bug fixed first. The Aegis cruiser or stealth aircraft can currently be built by anyone, but either are uniquely American stamps on an existing weapons system. As mentioned by someone earlier, a super-carrier would be a good choice. The U.S. is pretty much unique in it's ability to project air power throughout the globe - perhaps a carrier unit with triple carrying capacity (12 air units) would show this.

For folks that believe the U.S. "came of age" in WWII, the B-17 would make a good model for an improved bomber unit - better bombard AND better defense. Or, my personal favorite, have the M4 Sherman Tank as a UU. It fights marginally less effectively than a regular tank - say, 14.8.2 - but costs only 70 shields to build, so you can have boatloads of them.

Or maybe they could have planes 1/2 as cheap as normal planes with some other bonuses.

 

[againsttheflow]

Does half as cheap mean the same as twice as expensive or 50% off? (rehtorical question) Ah, the complications of grammar...