22-11-2001 19:59									#1
	2 Strategy Questions Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Hi and thanks for taking a look at this thread. Here they are:

1. How do you get around a lot of the restrictions associated with rush building? It's nice to get stuff done quickly, but not by killing citizens.

2. How do you increase your science rate? I don't mean go to the menu, but get money to be able to get libraries and the such, while not fall behind? Because it seems like the research rate is very slow and I can't get to the library tech quickly because I need to focus on other things or else I get passed by with the military and people start treading on me.

BTW, unrelated, doesn't it seem odd that chariots come before horsemen and have less ability? Wouldn't you think it would take more skill to have a chariot than jump on the back of a horse and ride?

Thanks.

The ANZAC

	22-11-2001 20:16									#2
	Full PM-box? Change here!

1. Switch to an improved form of government. If you're in Monarchy or better, you get to rush build with gold. However, there are times when rush building with people is just fine, like when you've reached the maximum possible population under your current tech level and government.

2. Get more cities, and build roads on all workable squares in the city radius. Roads give you more commerce, which equals more gold, which you can use to increase tech spending.

You know, that was exactly what I thought of the Wheel/Chariot and Horseback Riding/Horseman. Not only are the unit values backwards (horseman or light cavalry is a scout unit, chariot is an early assault unit), but the techs seem to be ass-backwards too. I'd also guess that our ancestors first thought "hey, if I could somehow get on the back of that beastie and make it go where I want it to go, it could do the walking for me" and only then "lemme see... if I could somehow tie a couple of horsies together, I could use them to pull stuff".

	22-11-2001 20:36									#3
	Re: 2 Strategy Questions Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by The ANZAC 2. How do you increase your science rate? I don't mean go to the menu, but get money to be able to get libraries and the such, while not fall behind? Because it seems like the research rate is very slow and I can't get to the library tech quickly because I need to focus on other things or else I get passed by with the military and people start treading on me.

Here is my new thing... In the early part of the game, I trade my techs with anyone who is willing to pay. This allows me to set my research rate at 100% while the other civ's pay for my improvements! Ounce I've established my civ's economy, I then scale back the tech selling and take over any civs in my way!!

This is a great early game strategy if you miss out on the Great Library.

	22-11-2001 21:29									#4
	Re: 2 Strategy Questions Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by The ANZAC BTW, unrelated, doesn't it seem odd that chariots come before horsemen and have less ability? Wouldn't you think it would take more skill to have a chariot than jump on the back of a horse and ride? Thanks. The ANZAC

Well yes and no.
I think it is different to take horses that have to "pull" chariots than to train horses to respond to "orders" that can be given through your legs (remember that the horse rider has often the hands involved with bow/spears+shields while on the chariot the driver has often 1 hand "free" or, there are 2 charioteers: 1 driver and 1 spearman or whatever is called and you "command" with bridles)...
But I'm neither a military expert nor an horse rider...

	22-11-2001 23:58									#5
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

I'm doing the same thing as Wunder, sell my techs to the other civs for lump sums and Per/turn sums. This allows me to set my science rate at 100% and I can then outright buy the advances that I don't get and sell them too. When the other civs buy your advances with the per/turn rate, they have to reset their own tax/research level and thus they slow down. You however are cruising. I am also going straight for monarchy and sending out lots of warriors to scout the terrain and meet other civs.

The deal with the chariots is that they were invented quit early and massed together they were effective. The problem with the horse is that the stirrup was not invented for a long time. This made the horsemen unstable on their mounts and not as effective. I'm not sure when the stirrup or the sadle were invented. I'm pretty sure that sadles came first and really improved the horsemen and then the stirrup came after the fall of the Roman empire. I could be wrong about the timeline, but when the Egyptians rode their chariots into battle it was pretty terrifying.

	23-11-2001 19:38									#6
	Support Apolyton

I believe the stirrup came into existence in the west sometime during the middle ages. Ever wonder why there were no knights in the Roman Empire? No stirrups, no lance, no heavy armor, no knights. I think the origin may have been with the Turkic/Mongol/etc. tribes that constantly came out of Central Asia, but I'm not sure on that one. So that would post-date the horsemen...

	23-11-2001 20:24									#7
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

There was (some time ago) a heated discussion about the chariot/horseman question. The general idea is that, as Messer Nicolo points out, simply attaching something to a horse and making it run is much simpler than getting on its back and having it be your battle partner.

As for the strategy questions, I don't even have the game yet, so I can't make any suggestions...

	23-11-2001 20:25									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

1. That clears up a lot. When you have a more advanced government, can you choose between the two?

2. The science ideas make sense. thanks!

Now the horses: Can you ride bareback? Or is it too hard to fight like that? Also in the movie Gladiator, and I 've read the Romans did have cavalry. Then again it is Gladiator!!

	24-11-2001 08:59									#9
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

ANZAC, I believe you only get one method of rushing production per government type. Population points for Despotism and Communism, gold for the few *sniff* other government types.

Who cares about Roman cavalry? I want one of those fire-spear thingies from the beginning of Gladiator. How demoralizing it must be to be impaled be a huge spear from a great distance and also set on fire!

	25-11-2001 18:37									#10
	Put an end to popups!

Yes, it would be nice if the scorpion was in Civ3!!!!!

	26-11-2001 04:18									#11
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Civ III reflects historical development as inevitable much more than Civ 2 did. In real history, the chariot way predates mounted combat units on the battlefield. The stirrup is generally credited to the Byzantines (Eastern Roman Empire) in the 900s. This permitted heavy cavalry like the knight (called cataphracts by the Byzantines). Light cavalry as an effective battle force (the horseman, if you will) is introduced to history by the nomads that arrived along Rome's border at about the time of Julius Caesar. Of course chariots had long since come and gone. Horsemen were fairly common by the time of Alexander in Asia and are important as mercenaries in the wars between Rome and Carthage. Any way, the chariot came first in actual history, and Civ III reflects that.

	26-11-2001 11:30									#12
	Increase the size of your Attachments

anzac, there is only one way to rush build per government. despotism and communism kill populations, everything else uses gold. if you're communist or despotism, then the pop killer is good for those cities on the fringes that have no production... just irrigate the hell out the surrounding land and rush build your entire army with those cities and let your core cities get fat and rich...

MaSsConFUsi0n

	26-11-2001 14:04									#13
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Blaupanzer The stirrup is generally credited to the Byzantines (Eastern Roman Empire) in the 900s.

Sure about that?
As far as I know, even Charlemagne had heavy knights. And heavy knights are not possible without stirrup. That was about 800 BC.

EDIT: 800 AD!!!! (of course!)

	26-11-2001 14:55									#14
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Der PH Sure about that? As far as I know, even Charlemagne had heavy knights. And heavy knights are not possible without stirrup. That was about 800 BC.

Charlemagne lived from 742 AD to 814 AD. Hard to be the defender of the Church 800 years before the birth of Christ. 8^) Anyway, the paladins of Charlemagne's court wore mail hauberks, scale shirts, or occasionally laminar armor. The plate armor associated with heavy knights was practically unknown until around the 12th century AD.

Stirrups appear to have been invented first in China around the first century AD. It took some time for them to get around to using them in the western world, however.

	26-11-2001 16:24									#15
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Badtz Maru Charlemagne lived from 742 AD to 814 AD.

Sorry!
I certainly meant AD!

quote: Originally posted by Badtz Maru Anyway, the paladins of Charlemagne's court wore mail hauberks, scale shirts, or occasionally laminar armor.

Heavy enough, I think!
What about chain mail?

quote: Originally posted by Badtz Maru Stirrups appear to have been invented first in China around the first century AD. It took some time for them to get around to using them in the western world, however.

That's the info we wanted!
Do you know, in which century th stirrup came to western Europe?

	28-11-2001 13:59									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Nobody is sure exactly when the stirrup started being used in Europe. They were in use by the 9th century AD, and was possibly known of a bit earlier, though it was definitely not in common use. Some believe that stirrups were used by 5th century cavalry in the Byzantine army, but there's no conclusive proof of that. We know that the Goths had very effective cavalry before then without stirrups (they beat the Romans at Adrianople in 378 AD), so it isn't a necessary development for armored and mounted warriors - you can have heavy knights without it, but they would not have been able to effectively wield large lances (which are useful if you want to attack infantry without them cutting your horse's legs out from under you).

As to chain mail, that's the type of mail frequently used by Charlemagne's paladin's hauberks.

One very important technological development that would be interesting to see modeled in future Civ games is the rigid ox collar. Prior to it's invention, oxen weren't used very much for plowing or pulling large wagons because the harnesses would strangle the beasts. An ox could pull about 5 times the load a human could pull without this problem - but an ox also needed about 5 times as much food as a human. Therefore, for the type of labor that animal power was used for in later times it was easier to use humans, since they were more easily trained. Because humans were used in great numbers for stuff like pulling plows and wagons, there was a high demand for slaves, and most of the world's population was basically livestock. The wooden ox-collar allowed an ox to pull twice as much, which made them much more efficient than humans, so slaves were only needed for jobs that required human intelligence and dexterity. This radically changed the nature of society.

	28-11-2001 20:41									#17
	Put an end to popups!

Actually, there's one more thing about why chariots came before horsemen. Horses back then were NOT able to withstand the weight of a human being on their back, at least not common. Those were still pretty wild horses, and were domesticated not too long ago. The reason they use chariots is because nobody can ride them -- the backs break (imagine having someone on YOUR back and you have to crawl at a very fast pace with the guy going up and down). It was not until much later (not sure exactly when) when horses were selectively bred enough times so they can take the human weight.

I'm sure by 200 BC China used calvary extensively, so it must have been before that when it happened. I also suspect different breeds of horses have different devleopment times, so what applies to China might not apply to the West. Stirrup certainly makes things easier, but I doubt if it's enough to stop those determined (and good at) riding horses anyway.

	28-11-2001 21:01									#18
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I'll buy 500 AD rather than 900 for the Cataphracts. Also, the necessity of breeding stronger horses may be true, though horse units were common enough by the Iron Age to make obsolescent the chariots of the Bronze Age. All I was really saying was that chariots came first historically, and that is reflected in Civ 3. The stirrup is not necessary, but enhances the impact power and combat capability of the rider. The plains Indians did quite well without it in small unit actions and the "Germans" on the Roman borders presented quite a challenge to the Empire at its height, also without stirrups.

	29-11-2001 09:41									#19
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Actually, horses were the second animals to be domesticated (after dogs), long before they were used for pulling chariots - they were the first domesticated food animal, in Europe at least. They had already been bred for size by the time they started using them as beasts of burden, to get more meat out of them. There are some modern breeds that are used for riding that are smaller than the early breeds.

Considering that people were much smaller then too, I'm sure that early domesticated horses could have been used for horseback riding - probably the idea you could ride on ones back was overlooked or considered just too dangerous to be practical.