 |
|
Free Radical
|
|
Im wondering cause I just hope Firaxis doesn't take up AOE 2 as an example and put elephant cavalry in there since that should be an Indian special unit....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Free Radical
|
|
well, they are known for conquering half of the known world and for being one of the few ancient civilizations that still excist (along with the egyptians, greeks, chinese and a few others).
btw, persians are not arabs...aladin would be (I think) arabic...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
d_dudy
|
|
The Immortals were once a very speacialized part of the Persian army. they were the emporer's (i think Xerxes) official gaurd but they were actually a signifigant amount of troops.
they should be some kind of infantry called the Immortals or Imperial Gaurd
that, of course, raises the question: How do you make them differant from the Roman Legion?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Harlan
|
|
Berkeley, CA, USA
Aug 2005
time: 21:15
|
|
There are a number of Persian possibilities. Elephants do more naturally belong to the Indians (and what else would the Indian unit be, anyways?). The Persians would buy or trade with India to get most of theirs.
One idea could be the Parthian archer, a deadly version of the horse archer. The Parthians specialized in being able to fire in one direction while riding in another, and that was such a powerful advantage that the tiny tribe of the Parthians conquered the entire Persian empire and took it over for several centuries. Few in other civs ever figured out how to do it, so it would be a honestly unique unit.
Another could be the Cataphract which was also used alot by the Byzantines. The Cataphract was a heavy cavalry, with lots of army, including horse armor. Kind of an early Knight.
The Assassins are also associated geographically with Persia but not a normal military unit, so I doubt they'll be in.
The Immortal isn't a type of unique unit, just an elite guard. Special units are not the same as elite guards. Special units you need to be able to build as many as you like, whereas the elite guard by its very nature is limited in number to 1.
And I don't know if it would be particularly Persian, but I hope some civ has a seige tower or seige engine of some kind, cos right now it looks like there won't be any of those. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Stefan Härtel
|
 |
Eddie's best friend
Jul 1999
time: 06:15
|
|
Choosing a unique unit for the Persians depends on what era of history you want to focus on.
If we're talking about the Achaemenid era (550-330 BC) there are some obvious choices:
* Immortals, the royal guards installed by Darius I. and from that point on the legendary part of the persian army (actually they propably weren't called Immortals at all. The Greeks propably got to terms mixed up: Anushiya meaning "followers", prpably the real term and Anausha, meaning "immortals").
* Because the Egyptians already have the Chariot, this one is lost for the Persians.
*The camel was in many battles on the Middle Eastern terrain of vital essence for the Persians, because it was the perfect weapon against the cavalry (their smell). This way, they for example won the battle of Pteria (547 BC).
* Elephants aren't really a Persian unit, I don't really understand why they were included with both AoE games. For the Achaemenids, the only known usage of elephants in battle was their presence in the battle of Gaugamela (331 BC).
The next Persian dynasty was the Sasanid, after ca. 600 years of foreign rule (Greeks and Parthians). Their signifcant units were
*Clibanarii, or Cataphractoi, a heavily armored horserider
*The Sasanids also had a royal lite corps called the immortals (according to roman historians)
In the Islamic age there isn't really much that makes the Persians pop out of the others. Cavalry, yes... but they weren't the only ones.
My pick thus: Immortals, Cameleers or Armored riders.
Immortals are only a elite unit, cameleers aren't just plain Persian, so I'd say include Armored Riders, Clibanarii, Cataphractoi, call 'em what you like.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Harlan
|
|
Berkeley, CA, USA
Aug 2005
time: 21:15
|
|
Korn469,
I still have a strong hunch that the Indians will have Elephant as their unit. Why? The pic for the Polytheism tech in the Civ3 tech tree is an elephant, as it was in Civ2. This is pretty nonsensical, and only makes sense if an elephant unit comes with that tech (for at least one civ, anyways).
Stefan,
If we look at the loose definition Firaxis gives to the Egyptians (including the Greek Ptolemies in them) and Bablyonians (lumping Hittites and others with them) on the official website, surely the Persians will be a lot more than just the dynasties you mention. I'm sure the Seleucids count (see Egyptian example!), as do the Parthians. So that makes the Parthian Archer fair game.
Also, as I mentioned before above, the Immortals don't really count, since royal guards are not a unit type. The game has veteran and crack unit status according to one review, and the Immortals would be better defined in the game as a single crack unit, not a different unit type.
Cameleers make much more sense as an Arab unit, when Firaxis gets around to making an expansion pack.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
d_dudy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by korn469
Harlan
i still disagree about the elephants, because i haven't seen a picture of an elephant military unit anywhere...i know that this is an old picture and Dan said it was just for testing animations but it looks like it has many of the special units on it
no elephants...so until i see an elephant i really don't think they are in the game, especially since elephants are in the game but as a luxery and not a resource |
do you honestly think that picture has every unit on it? there's not even a submarine on that picture
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Harlan
|
|
Berkeley, CA, USA
Aug 2005
time: 21:15
|
|
Korn,
The fact is we don't know if any elephant unit or units will be in the game or not. I have a hunch they will. This is based on the Polytheism pic, plus the fact that there are three blank spaces for that tech. For all we know, there could be a general elephant unit for everyone, and then a special version for India.
Chances are there still are some general units not shown in the tech tree. Look again at that image of all of those units you asked me to see and provided a link for. Look at the topmost land unit standing near the coast. If that's not a diplomat unit then I don't know what (he's holding a scroll), yet there is no such unit in the tech tree, despite Writing having a whopping 4 empty spaces. (The guy standing to the northeast of the chariot also looks like a diplomatic type, again holding a scroll instead of weapon)
That picture is missing many things as well, even in ancient times. Where is the Egyptian special unit chariot, for instance?
By the way Stefan, camels were only domesticated 4000 years ago, and ridden 3100 years ago, first in Arabia. They didn't get to the Sahara until surprisingly late - I don't remember exactly but between 500 and 0 BC. You also have to consider that an Arab civ certainly wouldn't begin only with Islam. They have a long history before that as an advanced civ (in the Yemen area mostly). Cameleers seems like a better match with them, IMHO.
As an aside, where is the info that the Russian special unit is the MiG? I noticed in the tech tree that there doesn't seem to be any space for it. There is one blank space at Advanced Flight for a special unit, not two, and we already know the F-15 is in. Plus, wouldn't having both the F-15 and MiG be too similar to each other?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Stefan Härtel
|
|
Eddie's best friend
Jul 1999
time: 06:15
|
|
Whatever, this little text authored by my humble self is meant to help you get your opinion on a Persian-specific unit (please don't mind any spelling or grammatical errors, I typed this down rather quick).
quote:
In the three truly "Iranian" eras of ancient Persian history -disregarding the short Macedonian rule of the Seleucid dynasty- the change of the army has been shifting, not abrupt.
In the era of the Achaemenids (559/50-330 BC), the army at first was a milita corps, in which significant Persian weapons were used. These may be regarded as more developed versions of those the Indoiranian tribes introduced to the Middle East during their migration. Chariot and Cavalry, the latter mostly being armed with bow and arrow, can be assumed the most typical force. Of major importance to the Persian army later on was the camel, which turned out as the best weapon against cavalry, and even the famed and feared cavalry of the Lydians, a kingdom in western Asia Minor, could not resist the fierce courage of the fighters, but mostly the strong smell of the camels. Best evidence of the early Persian army could be given, if the "Lost Army of Cambyses" would be found in the Libyan desert.
The army was re-organized during the reign of king Darius I. (522-486 BC). Darius divided the army into two main structures- roughly the cavalry (persian "Asabara) and infantry ("Arshtika"). These two main units of course were divided into subsections. In the cavalry, the camels ("Ushabari") were at least as important as horseriders. The infantry was mainly made up of lance carriers. Another important factor was the chariot, to which the Persians often attached scythes. The most important part of the Persian army was of course the archer ("Thanuviya"). The archery regiments were most propably also divided into infantry ("Pasti") and cavalry regiments. Elephants are known to have acted at least at the battle of Gaugamela (330 BC).
Elite- and gurad units were also used. The most famous of these are undoubtly the "Immortal 10,000", of which one thousand soldiers were the direct guard to the King.
The army itself however also consisted of fighter from all over the empire ("Imperial Body"), with their typical weaponry and divided strictly into ethnics.
The battle strategy was simple. Either the battle was decided by the storm of mounted archers, a typical ancient battle strategy, or the 'preparation assault' by archers and slingers, and after that, other units involved striked.
The Parthians of the Arsacid dynasty, who took control of the Iranian plateau from ca. 240 BC on, had a more simple division of forces. Their nomadic origin obviously brought them in to the "mounted archers" concept deeper than the Achaemenids.
Later, the Parthians were forced to make changes to their cavalry, most importantly because of the Roman army that stood against it. Heavily armored horsemen (Greek "Kataphraktoi", Latin "Clibanarii") were not new to the Iranian army, but now introduced as a driving force. In a fake retreat, the Parthian horse-archers were known to shoot from their horses backwards- the so-called "Parthian Shot".
The Persians from the Sasanid dynasty (224-654 AD) did not change much to this; they included mercenaries and light horsemen from all over their empire such as Kushanas, Hephtalites, Turks and Arabs. The heavy-armored riders (Clibanarii) could rightfully be called "knights" as done often by the Romans; According to Roman sources now elephants were more commonly used in the Persian army. The Clibanarii and their horses were now almost entirely covered by scale armor. In siege warfare, the Persians often simply "copied off" the Roman style, but were just as successful.
Only the Arab armies could continuously resist this war machine. |
Sources: J. Wiesehöfer, "Das Antike Persien"
R. Ghirshman, "Iran, from the Earliest Times to the Islamic Conquest"
H. Koch, "Es kündet Dareios der König..."
For further reference, I've started writing a small essay about Iran's history which I plan to publish in the internet somewhere sometime. I've finished it up to the end of the Sasanid era.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexander01
|
|
From what I have seen, Firaxis appears to try to vary the unique units - replacing several units instead of the same one all the time.
For one thing, the Immortal would most likely replace the spearman, chariot or bowman. (From Persian art, Immortals were spear/bowmen, and the CivII Alexander scenario, where they're Chariots.)
So, we see that:
Babylon - Bowman replaces Archer
Egypt - War Chariot replaces Chariot
Greece - Phalanx/Hoplite replaces Spearmen
Rome - Legion replaces Swordsmen
India - Elephant?
Zulu- Impi replaces Warrior
The next logical progression is to the one ancient unit that doesn't have a unique substitute - the horseman.
Perhaps they'll try a mounted Immortal. I don't know. However, I think that a Parthian archer or Cataphract is quite likely, though I disapprove. I personally favor the Achaemanids over the Parthians, Seleucids, Sassanids, Iranians, et al.
I would like to see the Immortal, but we'll have to wait.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
d_dudy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by korn469
i know it doesn't have every unit on it...but it looks like it has all of the ancient units on it and the elephant would be an ancient unit...
i just don't think that firaxis would give the indians their own special unit the elephant, which no other civs would have access to...either all civs will have the elephant or no civs will...and since it's not on any screen shots, and none of the tech chart screen shots have included an elephant i honestly don't think it is going to be in the game |
if it doesn't have all the modern weapons (like a submarine, maybe?) then why would it have all of the ancient weapons?
that's speculation, sorta like talking about a elephant special unit that hasn't been 100% proven true through pictures.
or has it?
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-08-2001 04:11
|