Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Alexandermb

===[TASK]=== Civ: Persians Assets

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Nescio said:

Presumably because chariots are currently still statistically identical to cavalry

Crossing fingers for D1958 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the matter of chariots being trained at one place compared to another is more a matter of taste.  Yes the frame would have been made by a carpenter or the like, but that doesn't account for the horses.  It's roughly the same logic as having infantry trained at the blacksmith, where their weapons and armour would be manufactured.  I prefer the stable since it gives a more intuitive logic to the game compared to a building that's generally used for making siege.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, we have a reliable eye-witness account describing Persian scythed chariots at the battle of Cunaxa (401 BC), Xenophon Anabasis I.8.10:

Spoiler

πρὸ δὲ αὐτῶν ἅρματα διαλείποντα συχνὸν ἀπ᾽ ἀλλήλων τὰ δὴ δρεπανηφόρα καλούμενα: εἶχον δὲ τὰ δρέπανα ἐκ τῶν ἀξόνων εἰς πλάγιον ἀποτεταμένα καὶ ὑπὸ τοῖς δίφροις εἰς γῆν βλέποντα, ὡς διακόπτειν ὅτῳ ἐντυγχάνοιεν. ἡ δὲ γνώμη ἦν ὡς εἰς τὰς τάξεις τῶν Ἑλλήνων ἐλῶντα καὶ διακόψοντα.

In front of them were the so-called scythe-bearing chariots, at some distance from one another; and the scythes they carried reached out sideways from the axles and were also set under the chariot bodies, pointing towards the ground, so as to cut to pieces whatever they met; the intention, then, was that they should drive into the ranks of the Greeks and cut the troops to pieces.

— translation by Carleton L. Brownson (Cambridge, MA 1922)

I.e. scythes on the axles and below the cart. In 0 A.D., however, Persian chariots have forward-pointing spears at the beams between the horses, scythes at the ends of the yoke on top of the horses, and scythes at the axles. It would be nice if 0 A.D.'s actors could be corrected to match Xenophon's description.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

I'd say the matter of chariots being trained at one place compared to another is more a matter of taste.  Yes the frame would have been made by a carpenter or the like, but that doesn't account for the horses.  It's roughly the same logic as having infantry trained at the blacksmith, where their weapons and armour would be manufactured.  I prefer the stable since it gives a more intuitive logic to the game compared to a building that's generally used for making siege.  

Though in ancient texts chariots (and elephants) were always mentioned separately from cavalry. The pawn, knight, bishop, and rook in modern chess correspond to the foot-soldier, horseman, elephant, and chariot in chaturanga, representing different divisions of Indian armies. Introducing chariot stables would be great, but I don't really expect that to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Nescio said:

I.e. scythes on the axles and below the cart. In 0 A.D., however, Persian chariots have forward-pointing spears at the beams between the horses, scythes at the ends of the yoke on top of the horses, and scythes at the axles. It would be nice if 0 A.D.'s actors could be corrected to match Xenophon's description.

Could ask @Alexandermb before he is done with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nescio said:

Though in ancient texts chariots (and elephants) were always mentioned separately from cavalry. The pawn, knight, bishop, and rook in modern chess correspond to the foot-soldier, horseman, elephant, and chariot in chaturanga, representing different divisions of Indian armies. Introducing chariot stables would be great, but I don't really expect that to happen.

The differentiation is valid, but I'd say primarily from a practical military perspective.  As I'm sure you're aware, they had massively different roles in the battlefield.  Having chariots, which required different housing than the typical horseman's, trained at the same building as horsemen is an abstraction but an abstraction I don't mind.  Probably, assuming that chariots would have a viable enough role to justify it, the chariot stables as you mentioned would be the best option for making a decent marriage of sensitivity to historicity and gameplay.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Done the advanced version. Elite version will have to bake a bronze metal :

Missing Javelin bag on the sides and grips.

 

Spoiler

image.pngimage.png

Probably make an scaled one for xerxes and darius.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Alexandermb said:

Done the advanced version. Elite version will have to bake a bronze metal :

Missing Javelin bag on the sides and grips.

 

  Reveal hidden contents

image.pngimage.png

Probably make an scaled one for xerxes and darius.

Would u do add this chariots to basic rank units without armor wearing horses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Thorfinn the Shallow Minded said:

The differentiation is valid, but I'd say primarily from a practical military perspective.  As I'm sure you're aware, they had massively different roles in the battlefield.  Having chariots, which required different housing than the typical horseman's, trained at the same building as horsemen is an abstraction but an abstraction I don't mind.  Probably, assuming that chariots would have a viable enough role to justify it, the chariot stables as you mentioned would be the best option for making a decent marriage of sensitivity to historicity and gameplay.

Yes, historically chariots often served as a vanguard, whereas cavalry was typically for harassing, raiding, chasing down fleeing opponents, etc. There also appears to be different functions for quadrigae (heavy four-horse chariots), which were positioned in front of the main infantry formation (like elephants), and bigae (light two-horse chariots), which were positioned on the flanks (like cavalry).

Currently in 0 A.D., chariots are functionally indistinguishable from cavalry, because they're statistically identical. But if they would have, say, twice the health and population cost and more armour, then chariots would have their own rôle. Also, I think scythed chariots ought to become melee units.

18 hours ago, Alexandermb said:

this kinda match the scythes below the cart you mention:

You mean the scythes under the chariot bodies, pointing towards the ground? Yes. Xenophon doesn't mention blades attached to the yokes on the horse backs, though.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What should be done for the basic version of the chariot? Remain as it is or be replaced with the new chariot having only the horse blankets and peytrals as difference?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Alexandermb said:

What should be done for the basic version of the chariot? Remain as it is or be replaced with the new chariot having only the horse blankets and peytrals as difference?

As I wrote earlier, I think it would be best to give the Persians a champion chariot instead and replace their b/a/e chariot archers with horse archers (take the Seleucid's). Chariots weren't that common; at the battle of Cunaxa (401 BC), Cyrus had 1600 horsemen and 20 chariots (i.e. 80:1) and Artaxerxes 6000 horsemen and 150 chariots (i.e. 40:1).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nescio said:

As I wrote earlier, I think it would be best to give the Persians a champion chariot instead and replace their b/a/e chariot archers with horse archers (take the Seleucid's). Chariots weren't that common; at the battle of Cunaxa (401 BC), Cyrus had 1600 horsemen and 20 chariots (i.e. 80:1) and Artaxerxes 6000 horsemen and 150 chariots (i.e. 40:1).

if everyone agrees for me thats the most acceptable option. Charioth shouldn't promote and neither should gather meat.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Option C: Make chariots "tech up" from light (the little chariot) to medium to heavy with technologies. 

Also agree with just making them Champion class, but have them tech up as suggested. The game is missing progression stuff like this IMHO.

Edited by wowgetoffyourcellphone
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Nescio saw you made a patch for replacing the cavalry archer with proper cavalry and left the chariot as elite or champion unit, would it work as replacement the model done or it need adjustments?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Alexandermb said:

@Nescio saw you made a patch for replacing the cavalry archer with proper cavalry and left the chariot as elite or champion unit, would it work as replacement the model done or it need adjustments?

Yes! The Persian chariot actors do need to be redesigned (also those of the heroes). While the current version might be justified for the Seleucid scythed chariots used at the Battle of Magnesia (190 BC), they do not match Xenophon's description, who was an eyewitness at the (Achaemenid vs Achaemenid) Battle of Cunaxa (401 BC). I already pointed this out years ago: https://wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?/topic/21393-committed-seleucid-champion-chariot/&tab=comments#comment-342149

What should be done for the Persian chariots:

  • the back of the cart should be open
  • keep the scythes at the ends of axle
  • add scythes below the cart
  • no forward-pointing scythes
  • no horizontal scythes on the yoke
  • the yoke shouldn't be a horizontal, straight beam
  • ancient chariots tend to have a single, central beam (between the inner horses)
  • the central horses should yoked by arcs extending from the end of the chariot beam (see Amanirenas' chariot)
  • the outer horses were probably not yoked, their function was secondary, and they were tied to the other horses with rope (see the Alexander mosaic)
  • add reins to the chariot driver
  • the mail curtains tied around the horses's necks, protecting their front, is something Hellenistic, therefore probably inappropiate for the Persian chariot

Maybe this screenshot makes it easier to visualize things: pers_chariot.thumb.png.768b8089a87494f0aa1c5a373a71c71b.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...