Civ: Macedonians (Macedones, Seleucids, Ptolemies)

[feneur]

Just a note on this:

The Helepolis can or not garrison?

The Helepolis cannot be garrisoned in something else, but it can hold other units garrisoned within itself.

[oshron]

which makes sense; iirc, the historical helepolis was built on-site rather than being shipped there, whole or in pieces

[SMST]

It mainly makes sense because you cannot easily fit a 40 m high siege tower into any kind of fortress or building.

[Gothic]

They could gain some promotion in order to compete against Seleucid and other successor state champion unit, a unique champion unit with cheap price and citizen army status but not to be too strong against other champion unit. As i said before they should be a unit with a special status.

Historically these unit are prone to rebellion and the Ptolemies decided to recruit foreign soldiers than using native Egyptian in large number, by giving a half status to these unit could somehow portray the nature of these unit.

But after all it is you and the team makes the decision, i am but a community enthusiast that wait to play the game after all.

I'm not sure if I'm educated enough to give an opinion on the Ptolemies but didn't they use Galatians and some form of Squadron(Agryspidai/Hypapist as examples) as their elite?

Replace the Pezhetairos for the Ptolemaic player?

Lol, yep. And give the Ptolemaic player more of a choice of mercenaries I guess.

Edited March 23, 2012 by Gothic

[L'ethu]

I found some interesting articles that suggest the Ptolemaic Kings prefer to employ kleruchies (land granters) instead of natives and some of the mercenaries mentioned that the Ptolemaic Kings are the best paymaster in the known world. So i think the team should do more research on the Ptolemaic military structure.

[Moros]

the machimoi would replace the pezhetairoi how? Klereuchoi would be better to replace them as medium phalangitai, while a machimoi version would be a lighter and less reliable version of the same unit. A heavy thyreophoroi unit would be a good elite unit here as well. Note the machimoi shouldn't be an elite unit at all and can also be represented in a more traditional light spear unit as well. Both options work. A unique elite could be Galatian (celts from central Turkey) mercenaries, who were given their own seperate communities to live in and were highly prized on the battlefield for heavy infantry.

A levy phalangitai, a medium land owner phalangitai and agyraspidai (yeah silver instead of bronze shields) would be ideal for the Seleukids. Though they don't need to come in a phalangitai version only.

Makedonians obviously could have some Thracians (phalxes) as uniques, the agrianians are perfect for light skirmishers as they are (just noticed them), but a heavy skirmisher could possibly be added as well.

Other agema and royal units would be the obvious hetairoi and hypaspistai. Though the latter should perhaps not be avaible to the Ptolemaics.

Edit:

Cleopatra VII on a chariot? Isn't that a very heavy anachronistic? Also weird pick for hero, but okay.

Edited June 27, 2012 by Moros

[Mythos_Ruler]

Well, it looks like if the Ptolemies and Seleucids were added to the game, they would be standalone factions, rather than a sub-faction of the Macedonians. So, there would be more room for more accurate unit rosters.

[oshron]

btw, if you haven't decided on one yet (and decide to include such buildings), i'd like to recommend the Library of Alexandria as the unique Macedonian Wonder

[Thorfinn the Shallow Minded]

Why not the Lighthouse of Pharos?

[oshron]

personally, i think the Library is more representative:

1. because it was the greatest store of knowledge in the Ancient World
   
2. it's more awe-inspiring than a lighthouse (it may have been huge, but thats really all that the Pharos Lighthouse definitively was)
   
3. it's named after the most famous Macedonian in history (technically, it's for the city named after Alexander, but same difference )
   
4. in the context of the game and random maps, you could reason that "Alexandria" is anywhere and not necessarily in Egypt, thus whatever city you build the Library in can be considered "Alexandria"
   
5. while it's not one of the Wonders of the Ancient World, it's more evocative of the Ancient World than the Lighthouse is (it would largely be important that alot of the actual Wonders of the World not be included because alot of them either don't fall into the timeframe of 0 AD or the civilizations which built them are not playable, like the Egyptians or Babylonians)
   

[zoot]

in the context of the game and random maps, you could reason that "Alexandria" is anywhere and not necessarily in Egypt, thus whatever city you build the Library in can be considered "Alexandria"

Then I propose using the Lighthouse of Alexandria instead

IMO, the lighthouse is the obvious choice for a wonder. The library would work well as a "special building".

[oshron]

Then I propose using the Lighthouse of Alexandria instead

exactly the same argument i made for the Library *rolls eyes*

[zoot]

exactly the same argument i made for the Library *rolls eyes*

I wasn't making an argument - I was pointing out the flaws in yours

[Mythos_Ruler]

For now, both "Library" and "Lighthouse" structures are slated as special structures for the Macedonians. If we add the Ptolemies, they would obviously then go to the Ptolemies instead.

[Spahbod]

If we have time, I think it is better to work on Ptolemies. We really lack Egyptians.

[Mythos_Ruler]

If we have time, I think it is better to work on Ptolemies. We really lack Egyptians.

Ptomemaic Egypt would be a fantastic choice for inclusion. "If we have time" is definitely the operative word. I'd say we should do it if, and only if, we had everybody on board to get them done within 1 alpha cycle.

wee need Catapractians and Legionaries Seleucdis

The Seleucids wouldn't be difficult to add, as they could reuse many of the generic "Hellenic" assets as well as some Persian assets.

[oshron]

personally, i just hope the design team is prepared to match the number of civs being included in Part 1 for Part 2 so many different Greek civs definitely call for alot of civs in Part 2 with lots of similarities

[Mythos_Ruler]

personally, i just hope the design team is prepared to match the number of civs being included in Part 1 for Part 2 so many different Greek civs definitely call for alot of civs in Part 2 with lots of similarities

Not necessarily. How many civs did AOK's expansion pack add to AOK compared to the original list? How many civs did AOM's expack add to AOM?

Right now, I can only really see adding these civs in Part 2:

Imperial Romans (The "Five Good Emperors" era)

Early Byzantines (roughly AD 500)

Germans (perhaps split these into as many as 3 "Germanic" civs as we split the Hellenes into 3 "Hellenic" civs)

Huns

Sarmatians

Parthians

Dacians

If we did 3 Germanic civs, then that would be a list of 9 factions. Not bad. I can't see adding the Guptas because they'd be extremely similar to the Mauryans (but maybe that's a selling point, as they'd be easier to add). Maybe add the Mayans though... They would add some nice variety.

[MishFTW]

The idea of Mesoamerican civilizations sounds attractive. There has been recent evidence suggesting these guys were more advanced than we think. If you guys get a chance, 1491 by Charles C. Mann is a nice read for history geeks.

[Spahbod]

Not necessarily. How many civs did AOK's expansion pack add to AOK compared to the original list? How many civs did AOM's expack add to AOM?

Right now, I can only really see adding these civs in Part 2:

Imperial Romans (The "Five Good Emperors" era)

Early Byzantines (roughly AD 500)

Germans (perhaps split these into as many as 3 "Germanic" civs as we split the Hellenes into 3 "Hellenic" civs)

Huns

Sarmatians

Parthians

Dacians

If we did 3 Germanic civs, then that would be a list of 9 factions. Not bad. I can't see adding the Guptas because they'd be extremely similar to the Mauryans (but maybe that's a selling point, as they'd be easier to add). Maybe add the Mayans though... They would add some nice variety.

Due to the similarities between Parthians and Sassanids in terms of language and general military, we can have two "Iranic" civs similar to the way celts are now.

[lilstewie]

Guptas because they'd be extremely similar to the Mauryans

In terms of architecture, kinda. Gupta stuff is a later evolution of Mauryan(and its successors) stuff. It's more intricate.

But Guptas relied heavily on things like heavy calvary. And chariots were pretty much gone. It was influenced by Central Asian military concepts.

Gupta coins.

Edited September 9, 2012 by lilstewie

[oshron]

Not necessarily. How many civs did AOK's expansion pack add to AOK compared to the original list? How many civs did AOM's expack add to AOM?

Right now, I can only really see adding these civs in Part 2:

[snip]

If we did 3 Germanic civs, then that would be a list of 9 factions. Not bad. I can't see adding the Guptas because they'd be extremely similar to the Mauryans (but maybe that's a selling point, as they'd be easier to add). Maybe add the Mayans though... They would add some nice variety.

personally, i think another possibility would be to try and "match" civs from Part 1 to ones in Part 2 to try and get an idea about what civs could be included; for example, the "equivalent" of the Spartans could very well be the Huns because of their (at least stereotypically) similar violent cultures. as another example, the AD equivalents of the Romans and Athenians would be the Western and Eastern Romans, respectively

incidentally, i also think it would be easier for future packs to officially rename the current Romans "Republican Romans" and the Persians "Achaemenid Persians" to differentiate those two civs from their later successors (so for example there would be three "Roman" civs in all: Republican, Western, and Eastern)

and its nice to see that someone as high up in the team as you, Mythos_Ruler, is also interested in the inclusion of the Mayans, as unhistorical as it would be

Edited September 9, 2012 by oshron

[feneur]

personally, i think another possibility would be to try and "match" civs from Part 1 to ones in Part 2

I would rather see that part 2 includes civs which complement the ones in part 1, civs which are as different as possible to the ones in part 1. Apart from of course the ones which were the most historically important For them we'll have to make sure they're interesting enough, regardless of how different or not they are compared to the existing civs/other civs to be included in part 2

[oshron]

I would rather see that part 2 includes civs which complement the ones in part 1, civs which are as different as possible to the ones in part 1. Apart from of course the ones which were the most historically important For them we'll have to make sure they're interesting enough, regardless of how different or not they are compared to the existing civs/other civs to be included in part 2

that too

[Ludo38]

Hello eveybody,

I'm a recent new member and am discovering things step by step. What do you mean by part1 and part 2 ? Does it relate to Alpha and Beta, or something else ?..

About the wonder of Macedonians : if we end up choosing the Lighthouse, the map will always need a seashore to place the lighthouse with sense then we will need a Night time to see it in its real glory, bringing light to the night sailors ! (which would surely look extremely cool...)

But yet, like Oshron, I think the Library is indeed another interesting choice too for the Macedonian wonder. This building is as legendary as the Lighthouse, and its burning is as famous as the submersion of Atlantis ! To rebuild the Library (wonder or not), the movie "Agora" might be a very useful reference :

http://swordsandals.blogspot.fr/2010/12/agora.html