Outis

Ardashir I: progenitor of the Sasanian dynasty, reinvigorated the idea of a Persian empire as a successor of Achaemenid Persia. May have an aura or tech about adding vigor to the civ, for example increases building construction speed. Maybe enables Immortals (Zhayedan). Shapur I: tolerance for religions other than the prevailing Zoroastrianism such as Manichaeism or Judaism may present an interesting opportunity. Especially Manichaeism as a potential world religion in a what-if scenario perhaps? May give increased influence over the map such as increased territory bonus. Maybe also enable some Armenian unit via his conquest of Armenia and governorship of his son and successor. Shapur II: counter to Shapur I, something about religious doctrine, such as stronger priests or temples? Also enables or strengthens war elephants. See the references in this article for reference: https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/elephant-ii-sasanian-army/ Khosrow I: tax reform giving increased resources per resource obtained from sources, and bonuses to noble Aswaran cavalry. See: https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/kosrow-1-parent/kosrow-i-ii-reforms/ Khosrow II: not sure, he appears to be partly responsible to bring the empire down? Why not something to represent quick expansion and loss, such as globally reducing building capture, or to make it a bonus, reduce own building capture and while reducing capturing enemy building even more.

If i remember correctly, Age of Mythology had this, and it looked pretty well. So ranking up does not impact visually except the rank icon right?

I am rather fond of techs. In fact, i recommend to check this mod for unit specific upgrades. I think it is a great way to differentiate civs. Some civs may need to research some upgrades, some civs could have the upgrade for free, some civs could be missing some completely.

My opinion: why differentiate shields only for spearmen? If you are going that route, i would base movement speed on the complete gear. However, keep in mind: this will be complex for both the team to balance as well as for casual player to notice the nuances. I say go for it and let's see how it works .

This sounds good to me . Meaning, as the game progresses, you need to keep them alive somehow. Im curious why you have this though. Just to counteract the fact you will have less champions and consequently less helots?

What i meant was: you can make hoplites, Macedonian phalanx, Roman infantry etc benefit from auras, and make tribal warriors a bit beefier and not benefit from auras so they pack a punch in single combat but lose to formations in similar group numbers. But, of course, the differences should be small enough so as not to break the game.

I agree with @Thalatta, idea is to only restrict Champion spearmen for Spartans additionally. And balance the stats so they kick backsides even in low numbers.

Maybe have a look at DE? @wowgetoffyourcellphonehas aura-based formation bonuses such as shield wall for hoplites and massed pikes for Macedonian phalanx.

This looks like a great way to restrict Spartan econony. One question: are Perioikoi completely unlimited?

Not sure about this. What would be great if made correctly: tribal societies have units which are strong when fighting one to one, but no or very little formation bonuses, whereas infantry from city-states, republics etc have better formation bonuses in such a way bigger formations are either equally matched or favor city-states and republics.

Are they able to defeat other fully-upgraded champion spearmen one to one? Maybe Will To Fight could be differentiated for every civ or every civ category. Maybe have a big expensive tech common for city-states that alter stats in one way, then another for empires etc. Again, just riffing. Agreed. One on one, they should be able to beat infantry from other civs, but be lacking in other ways like economy, cavalry etc.

One other idea: Spartans were very wary of foreigners and heavily restricted their entry into their lands. In fact, they thought foreign influence would corrupt their youth. Maybe restrict their ability to trade as well as their allies' ability to trade with them? I also remember reading they used iron ingots rather than coins of precious metals as currency, but it sounds a bit like a myth. One thing is certain though: not a lot of Spartan coins are found in archeology. Another reason to penalize trade? What's on your mind

Very true. We can have their citizens be more productive but penalize the economy another way. Perhaps withhold some economic upgrades? I'm just riffing here On the other hand, maybe this is a good enough bonus for city-states. Maybe it can be adapted a little with a name change like civic pride.

Im throwing ideas around Sparta had manpower issues with respect to other Greek city-states. This was mainly due to their idea of a full citizen having the obligation to enter a Sysition with a regular donation, much like a membership fee. Over time, the number of upper class which could maintain this cost diminished. I guess, an ancient form of enshitification was in works . All Greek city-states had restricted manpower compared to empires. Considering both arguments, my proposal is: - Athenians and Thebans as well as Spartans have more restrictive population limits. - Spartans have a further limit on their champions which have excellent stats already. It does not have to be a hard limit, one idea is to have it as a percentage of current population.

Agreed, i these should be stone building category with different durability as opposed to wooden buildings which are pretty much the rest for most civs.