Jump to content

Crowd-Sourced Civ: Seleucids


Mythos_Ruler
 Share

Recommended Posts

  On 05/02/2018 at 2:46 PM, Alexandermb said:

someone has considered using the template <GarrisonHolder> <VisibleGarrisongPoints> to allow it have units above? (if planned the garrison holder template needs to have some patch to make the unit obstruction translate from the root to the garrison point height)

image.png.a9b2f13b72384627b36f2baf95de59eb.png

Expand  

I did have patch at some point. That allowed multiple units on a single unit.

@bb_ has taken on it since.

The patch was #2577.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Yes, I'm dusting off this old topic. 0 A.D.'s Seleucids have a great architecture set, but I think it's time to have a critical look at their unit roster, as @Genava55 is doing elsewhere for the Britons and Gauls.

To start with, I think the Seleucid troops should be based on the reign of Antiochus III the Great (r. 222–187 BC), for several reasons:

  • representative for the Seleucid empire (312–63 BC); a century earlier it was founded; a century later it was reduced to a rump state
  • contemporary of Hannibal, Scipio, and Philip V
  • successful general, many victories (and some defeats), reasserting control over various regions
  • texts from several authors (Polybius, Livius, Arrian) have survived

Polybius lists Antiochus' army the Battle of Raphia (217 BC):

  Reveal hidden contents

Livy describes his army at the Battle of Magnesia (190 BC):

  Reveal hidden contents

As does Appian (minor differences):

  Reveal hidden contents

Polybius also describes a parade organized by Antiochus IV (reign 175–164 BC):

  Reveal hidden contents

Currently players have to choose between a traditional army (Silver Shield Pikeman and Scythed Chariot) and a reformed army (Romanized Heavy Swordsman and Seleucid Cataphract). However, the sources make it clear that heavy cavalry was used in combination with pikemen and chariots, so this choice is an artificial dichotomy.

Furthermore, the cataphracts in question are apparently Galatians (Celts who sacked Delphi and settled around Ankara). Perhaps something for a mini-faction?

[more to follow later]

Edited by Nescio
Daphne parade
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 25/05/2019 at 9:36 PM, Nescio said:
  Reveal hidden contents

Currently players have to choose between a traditional army (Silver Shield Pikeman and Scythed Chariot) and a reformed army (Romanized Heavy Swordsman and Seleucid Cataphract). However, the sources make it clear that heavy cavalry was used in combination with pikemen and chariots, so this choice is an artificial dichotomy.

 

Expand  

This decision was made because in the original design every civilization have only 2 champions. Mauryians had 4 as a special bonus, but in the design process of Seleucids, they were make 4 champs, and later the tech was made as an special feature to follow the design.

As you can see, some civs have gotten more than 2 champs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 25/05/2019 at 11:38 PM, av93 said:

This decision was made because in the original design every civilization have only 2 champions. Mauryians had 4 as a special bonus, but in the design process of Seleucids, they were make 4 champs, and later the tech was made as an special feature to follow the design.

As you can see, some civs have gotten more than 2 champs 

Expand  

Yes, I see currently:

  • Britons, Iberians, Macedonians, Romans: 2
  • Carthaginians, Gauls, Ptolemies, Seleucids: 3
  • Spartans: 4
  • Athenians, Mauryas: 4+1
  • Kushites, Persians: 5
  On 26/05/2019 at 12:47 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

The Royal Stoa needs to go.

Expand  

Yes, I agree; not really relevant for the Seleucids, though.

 

Something else, the Seleucids currently have a quinquereme (which uses the Ptolemaic actor); I think it should be removed (and the Macedonians should get one). In Hellenistic times Carthage, Rome, Macedon, Rhodes, and the Ptolemies were the naval powers, but not the Seleucids.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 26/05/2019 at 9:17 AM, Nescio said:

Yes, I see currently:

  • Britons, Iberians, Macedonians, Romans: 2
  • Carthaginians, Gauls, Ptolemies, Seleucids: 3
  • Spartans: 4
  • Athenians, Mauryas: 4+1
  • Kushites, Persians: 5
Expand  

Originally, war elephants were a replacement for battering rams, so they wouldn't count as Champions. That's all changed though. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 26/05/2019 at 9:17 AM, Nescio said:

Something else, the Seleucids currently have a quinquereme (which uses the Ptolemaic actor); I think it should be removed (and the Macedonians should get one). In Hellenistic times Carthage, Rome, Macedon, Rhodes, and the Ptolemies were the naval powers, but not the Seleucids.

Expand  

Certainly, the Seleucids had quinqueremes though (or the technology to build them). You could just put a limit on them, or unlock, or make them more expensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 26/05/2019 at 10:03 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Originally, war elephants were a replacement for battering rams, so they wouldn't count as Champions. That's all changed though. 

Expand  

That something might have seemed a good idea in the past doesn't mean it should be set in stone; ideas can evolve. I'm posting here to have a critical look at the Seleucid unit roster and discuss whether it still makes sense in the current situation.

  On 26/05/2019 at 10:05 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

(or the technology to build them)

Expand  

As did Athens and Sparta. That doesn't mean they should have them, though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that the issue with the Royal Stoa is first of all, why is it royal?  That makes it only refer to one of many stoas built.  Next, it should be redesigned if it will still play a role in the game.  As far as I am aware, there are two functions the stoa could serve, commercial and academic, possibly both.  To outline my rationale, most of the time these were used for trading, and the Stoic school of philosophy was even named after this structure.  I could see it having a purpose of being used to research various technologies based on the aforementioned points, but if it seems like just one more duplicity, then I won't miss its presence in the game.  

As a definite point, the Spartans shouldn't have the stoa.  They resented trade, and as far as I am aware, they never built a single one.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 26/05/2019 at 10:11 AM, Nescio said:

That something might have seemed a good idea in the past doesn't mean it should be set in stone; ideas can evolve. I'm posting here to have a critical look at the Seleucid unit roster and discuss whether it still makes sense in the current situation.

Expand  

Indeed. I was simply supplying context.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm very convincing to use phase progress to customize the tech tree and units specially to face multiple choice factions, where are several units like champions , heroes...etc.

Is suggested to new rts based in history

  Quote

Maybe the new feature is a commander tree type of tech system like from COH2, based off from mythology as you progress in ages, were you could choose from multiple different types generals to customize each nation in various different ways… just a thought

Expand  

 

https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/aoe4-likely-to-have-been-in-production-at-least-since-sep-2016-as-suggested-by-former-relic-dev-cv/38093

 

instead an artificial dichotomy of course. 

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Man, this whole discussion brings me back ;P I remember I tried to make a reformed Seleucid roster a few years ago, but most of the new units I suggested went into the Ptolemaic roster XD.  

  On 25/05/2019 at 9:36 PM, Nescio said:

Currently players have to choose between a traditional army (Silver Shield Pikeman and Scythed Chariot) and a reformed army (Romanized Heavy Swordsman and Seleucid Cataphract). However, the sources make it clear that heavy cavalry was used in combination with pikemen and chariots, so this choice is an artificial dichotomy.

Expand  

This. I agree 2e4% !   I want to use Silver Shield Pikes with Kataphracts. But, I do like the idea of choosing the Silver Shield Swords over the Silver Shield Pikes, because that was a choice that the Seleucids actually made, and it creates an interesting dynamic and slight uncertainty playing against the Seleucids.

 

  On 26/05/2019 at 1:55 PM, av93 said:

The problem is that maybe all civs should be review and have some vision behind

Expand  

Now, quote me if I'm wrong, but the verrrry basic vision behind the Seleucids is that they are a cavalry-based faction.  This is in conjunction with the strength of their main rival, the Ptolemaics, who are infantry based.  This comparison is made on the battle of Raphia I believe, where Ptolemaic infantry (miraculously) beat the Seleucid infantry, but the Seleucid cavalry was sooo effective in that fight, that Raphia was studied by cavalry commanders up into the Napoleonic Wars.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 27/05/2019 at 10:00 PM, Lion.Kanzen said:

I'm very convincing to use phase progress to customize the tech tree and units specially to face multiple choice factions, where are several units like champions , heroes...etc.

Is suggested to new rts based in history

 

https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/aoe4-likely-to-have-been-in-production-at-least-since-sep-2016-as-suggested-by-former-relic-dev-cv/38093

 

instead an artificial dichotomy of course. 

Expand  

What if... what if... at the start of the match, similar to Hyrule Conquest, you choose a hero to lead your civ. That hero gives you different choices at each phase up.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  On 12/06/2019 at 5:23 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

What if... what if... at the start of the match, similar to Hyrule Conquest, you choose a hero to lead your civ. That hero gives you different choices at each phase up.

Expand  

I like the idea. This gives more depth to strategy in general. 

It could be also something unlocked through the choice of a hero in the third phase. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 5 weeks later...

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...