18-08-2001 10:15									#1
	civ specific features - the critique - the eqyptian Inflate your Upload Space

this thread is part of an ongoing series, the purpose being to critique the civ specific features of each civ from the point of view of historical accuracy. Please post comments on these fetaures that deal primarily with strategy and gameplay issues elsewhere.



Egypt - religious and industrious - ok, relgious certainly, industrious, whether they were harder working of better organized doesnt really matter, certianly their "output" was high.
Whether this would have continued had their civ survived is debatable, but i wont make a fuss. Again we see that civ-spec features dont work to badly for a genuinley old civ.

war chariots - well yes, chariots did dominate their armies, in the late bronze, the height of their power. But then chariots dominated EVERY state's armies at the time (Robert Drews, "End of the Bronze Age") and no evidence Egypts were any better. Oh well, I suppose Firaxis can claim that Egypt were earlier, pointing tot he Hyksos invasions, I dont know that anyone has good dates for the first Hittite, Assyrian or Mycenaean chariots.
Was an eqyptian advantage in war chariot inevitable? I think not, even Firaxis attributes the advantage to the Hyksos invasion. Interesting, the barbs take half your cities and you GAIN a tech Didnt work that way in CIv2, will it in Civ3? Suppose I play a civ3 game where i repel all barb attacks, or where the fortunes of georaphy mean I am never subject to any - yet i still get a war chariot advantage - why?

and btw, though it does not impact gameplay, the statement that the chariots gave up their battlefield dominance to cavalry is outright wrong. They gave up their dominance to infantry. Firaxis has obviously not bothered playing "end of the bronze age" by Pual Cullivan, one of the best ancient period Civ2 scenarios.

All in all only fair. No outrageously ahistorical, but not as good as what they did with the babs.


BTW - for all you folks complaining about eqyptian war chariots and bab bowmen having the same stats - what do you think those bab bowmen were doing? fighting on foot? During the late bronze, which seems to be the time when babs actually had "superiority" in bowmen, they were essentially chariot archers. and the egytian charioteers were chariot archers - the reliefs all show pharoah in a chariot, shooting his bow.


LOTM

	18-08-2001 10:55									#2
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I see nothing particularly wrong in Firaxis' selections. Certainly religious is spot on, and industrious, well, maybe that has something with their use of slaves.

If you don't like the war chariots perhaps you should propose something new.

	18-08-2001 11:02									#3
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

War chariots are fine with me. Given that we're pre-tailoring (yes, LOTM, I'll admit that) civs to rise to diminance at certain times, we take the most important weapon of the civ's army during their "golden age". In the Egyptians' case, it was the war chariot.

Besides which, every biblical movie I've seen depicts Ramses II's army riding into battle on war chariots.

	19-08-2001 07:45									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

The exact point I was going to raise myself Krazyhorse!
Whether or not Egyptian chariots were to a significant degree superior than other civilization's at time is irrelevant, the main piece of military equipment that comes to mind in the mainstream gamer's head when they think of Egypt is the chariot. Perhaps they just instantly imagine the chariots of Egypt chasing after Moses in the ten commandments.
And we must remember, this game is targeting the mainstream gamer. That simple fact can explain away many of the ahistorical information Firaxis is giving us.
All in all, another great post LotM, I will be looking forward to the next installment just as I have this one.

	20-08-2001 01:43									#5
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger I see nothing particularly wrong in Firaxis' selections. Certainly religious is spot on, and industrious, well, maybe that has something with their use of slaves. If you don't like the war chariots perhaps you should propose something new.

I presume most people reading these boards know what my proposal was for dealing with this issue in civ3. That proposal was not adopted. I am now only critiquing the way that Firaxis is implementing things. To the extent that there are people left who think civ specific units can be made historically accurate, it is up to them to suggest accurate replacements where Firaxis has been inaccurate, not up to me, since i have always believed that the entire concept is inaccurate in a 6000 yr game.

LOTM

	20-08-2001 10:24									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger Certainly religious is spot on, and industrious, well, maybe that has something with their use of slaves.

Probably has more to do with building the Pyramids without wheels.

	21-08-2001 06:05									#7
	Suffering from ads?

Actually there are some archeologists currently propising that the egyptians used wheels to construct the pyramids by attaching quarter circle constructions on four sides of a block, essentially making it into a large wheel. they are using models found in tombs which had been hithertoo unexplained as their evidence.

neat huh?

	21-08-2001 10:14									#8
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Kc7mxo Actually there are some archeologists currently propising that the egyptians used wheels to construct the pyramids by attaching quarter circle constructions on four sides of a block, essentially making it into a large wheel. they are using models found in tombs which had been hithertoo unexplained as their evidence. neat huh?

Definitely. Had not read or heard that.

But the fact still remains that the Egyptians were probably classified as Industrious for building the Pyramids, Sphinx, and other tombs all over their nation.