Differentiating Civilizations: Persian

[borg-]

I could be wrong, but some Persian women even led armies at that time. Pantea, commander of the Immortal Guard of Cyrus the Great, Artemisia of Helicarnassus, commander in chief of the Persian navy etc..

[Lion.Kanzen]

12 minutes ago, borg- said:

I could be wrong, but some Persian women even led armies at that time. Pantea, commander of the Immortal Guard of Cyrus the Great, Artemisia of Helicarnassus, commander in chief of the Persian navy etc..

Artemisia was Greek fighting for Persians.

[Lion.Kanzen]

33 minutes ago, Stan` said:

@dmzerocold, @dMAthena, @Genava55, @Thorfinn the Shallow Minded, @Nescio,

Historians unite.

@Nescio still active?

[borg-]

4 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

Artemisia was Greek fighting for Persians.

True tnx,  but I can cite others like Apranik.

I'm looking for information, and although Amazons are part of Greek mythology, there were Amazon women in Persian where they rode horses and participated in hunting. Well, I know it's hunting, but if they had the ability to use a larger bow and arrow than other women at the time, then I think this differentiation is not wrong. Anyway, I'd like the experts' opinion.

[Lion.Kanzen]

1 minute ago, borg- said:

True tnx,  but I can cite others like Apranik.

I'm looking for information, and although Amazons are part of Greek mythology, there were Amazon women in Persian where they rode horses and participated in hunting. Well, I know it's hunting, but if they had the ability to use a larger bow and arrow than other women at the time, then I think this differentiation is not wrong. Anyway, I'd like the experts' opinion.

In fact, a Scythian queen killed the Persian king Cyrus.

Those Scythian tribes can have female warriors.

[Lion.Kanzen]

[alre]

apart from historical justification, what is the gameplay reason?

I can understand "more varied is better", which is true in between bounds by the way, but why in particular would you give persians eco extra defense? I can't see it.

the same claim about some women fighting and even leading armies could be made for many other civs, like celts and numibians.

[chrstgtr]

1 hour ago, borg- said:

We have any expert in persian civ to be able to clear this doubt for us?

It's pretty clear no one really knows...it's just one person guessing versus another.

Even so, all the civs have such deep histories that you can justify almost anything with some historical context. At some point, this is just a game that we all play to have fun. 

Absent any glaring historical inaccuracies, gameplay should be taken into consideration. 

[Genava55]

Two articles about the role of women:

https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/women-i

https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1492/women-in-ancient-persia/

A few pages from The Armies of Ancient Persia: The Sassanians by Kaveh Farrokh:

Spoiler

 

[rossenburg]

@alre i agree. I think the dagger is enough because if we decide to give arrow to Persian women as a defensive mechanism other civs would definitely make the same claims. In ancient Persia, most women was serving as made and workers ( even though there were few champions who were women according to history - Gordafarid ( princess of Persia ) ) and few others. Women in Ancient Persia appeared to have enjoyed power and privileges, The royal Persian women, and non-royal Persian women. But if are to add arrows to Persian women i think it shouldn't have as higher damage as daggers even though they might enjoy a long range bonus. The whole arrow concept isn't a bad idea but i think the Han women were more or less defensive as compared to Persian women. I don't know if its historically accurate 

[Lion.Kanzen]

46 minutes ago, rossenburg said:

@alre i agree. I think the dagger is enough because if we decide to give arrow to Persian women as a defensive mechanism other civs would definitely make the same claims. In ancient Persia, most women was serving as made and workers ( even though there were few champions who were women according to history - Gordafarid ( princess of Persia ) ) and few others. Women in Ancient Persia appeared to have enjoyed power and privileges, The royal Persian women, and non-royal Persian women. But if are to add arrows to Persian women i think it shouldn't have as higher damage as daggers even though they might enjoy a long range bonus. The whole arrow concept isn't a bad idea but i think the Han women were more or less defensive as compared to Persian women. I don't know if its historically accurate 

women as queens had enormous power in Persia.

But they did not have a military role, like most ancient societies.(the common women).

 

PD: The armor looks fancy fantasy.

[Lion.Kanzen]

Women in ancient Persia were not only highly respected but, in many cases, considered the equals of males. Women could own land, conduct business, received equal pay, could travel freely on their own, and in the case of royal women, hold their own council meetings on policy.

 

Women in the Achaemenid Empire

The Achaemenid Empire followed a patriarchal paradigm but, within that framework, women had more rights and responsibilities than in any other ancient civilization except that of Egypt. Women, like men, were defined by social class and rank within that class. The female hierarchy, from the highest to lowest.

https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1492/women-in-ancient-persia/

 

It must be seen from the perspective of these centuries. And not with the idea of modern feminism.

This means that it seemed barbaric to send them to the battlefield.

[AIEND]

1 小时前，alre 说：

除了历史上的正当性，游戏性的原因是什么？

我可以理解“越多样化越好”，顺便说一句，这在界限之间是正确的，但是为什么您特别要给波斯人生态额外的防御呢？ 我看不到它。

一些妇女战斗甚至领导军队的说法也适用于许多其他文明，例如凯尔特人和努比亚人。

Yes, women of other ethnic groups are not incapable of fighting, there is such a thing in the Han Dynasty, seven sisters in a family were armed with JI, shields, bows and swords after their father and brother were murdered by corrupt officials. With Gouxiang (a shield with iron tips and hooks), who ambushed and killed officials to avenge father and brother, the story has been celebrated and sung to this day as a classic case of blood relatives' revenge.

[AIEND]

1 小时前，Lion.Kanzen 说：

事实上，一位斯基泰女王杀死了波斯国王居鲁士。

那些斯基泰部落可以拥有女战士。

In this case, I don't think it is necessary to make a separate Scythian female warrior unit, just make the Scythian soldiers have both male and female appearances like male and female civilians.

[Lion.Kanzen]

9 minutes ago, AIEND said:

In this case, I don't think it is necessary to make a separate Scythian female warrior unit, just make the Scythian soldiers have both male and female appearances like male and female civilians.

I agree.

[alre]

1 hour ago, chrstgtr said:

It's pretty clear no one really knows...it's just one person guessing versus another.

Even so, all the civs have such deep histories that you can justify almost anything with some historical context. At some point, this is just a game that we all play to have fun. 

Absent any glaring historical inaccuracies, gameplay should be taken into consideration. 

I think strong features should have strong motivations. asymmetry in civs should be designed so that players are not confused by features that feel out of place.

For instance, I think it would be immersive and fun to play spartans unlike any other civ, with champs in p1 maybe, and women who can fight, why not, they were actually tought to - not just the men, all the women from spartan family as well.

For Persia instead, the role of women is not associated with war at all. There are exceptions, but it would just play weird to me if they were the only civ where women use bows, that just clashes with the reality of an essentially patriarcal civilization and empire.

[borg-]

How about normal woman and scythian version, cost 60 food and have a bow. This way we have a choice between eco and better defense.

Edited June 22, 2022 by borg-

[borg-]

In aoe4 we have brit villagers attacking with bows, and it is fun to me. I choice brit some time just cuz power of defensive vs agressive civs like mongols.

[AIEND]

15 分钟前，borg- 说：

在aoe4中，我们有英国村民用弓箭攻击，这对我来说很有趣。 我选择英国人只是因为防御力与像蒙古人这样的侵略性文明的力量。

In reality, only men in the UK can practice archery to become archers.
So if we really want to give Persian civilians a bow and arrow to strengthen it, then we can only make a male Persian civilian with a bow and arrow. If we introduce the design of male and female civilians, then we can only delete the Persian women's shape , leaving only one type of male civilian with more fighting power, like the "Coureur des Bois" in Age of Empires 3 France.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

5 hours ago, chrstgtr said:

It's pretty clear no one really knows...it's just one person guessing versus another.

With this reasoning you can basically say anything goes. There's evidence, there's evidence to the contrary, and then there's a lack of evidence.

[chrstgtr]

5 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

With this reasoning you can basically say anything goes. There's evidence, there's evidence to the contrary, and then there's a lack of evidence.

I think we’ve seen people claim all three in this one discussion. That suggests either there are a lot of charlatans or people just don’t know 

[Lion.Kanzen]

there should be formation for this.

The typical tactic of the Persians in the early Achaemenid period was an evolution of the Assyrian tactic used before. The Assyrians would deploy a row of shield bearers and a row of archers behind them. The Persians had one row of shield-bearers known as “sparabara” with nine rows of archers behind them. A unit of 10,000 Persian warriors arranged in this manner could fire 100,000 arrows in a minute and keep up this rate of fire for several minutes. As you may know from the movie “300”, the Persian archery would seem to “blot out the sun” with such high-intensity volleys.

https://archeryhistorian.com/persian-archery/

[AIEND]

31 分钟前，Lion.Kanzen 说：

应该有这方面的形成。

波斯人在阿契美尼德早期的典型战术是以前使用的亚述战术的演变。 亚述人会在他们身后部署一排持盾者和一排弓箭手。 波斯人有一排被称为“sparabara”的持盾者，身后有九排弓箭手。 以这种方式排列的10,000名波斯战士的单位可以在1分钟内发射100,000支箭，并保持这种射速几分钟。 正如你可能从电影《300》中知道的那样，波斯射箭用如此高强度的齐射似乎会“遮住太阳”。

https://archeryhistorian.com/persian-archery/

In my impression, the spabara do not seem to be spearmen in the general impression, they are also archers themselves.
According to Herodotus's account, the Persian infantrymen all carried wicker shields, bows and spears, that is to say, the Persian infantrymen were all archers with shields and spears, except that the archers in the first row did not shoot arrows during battle. It is to cover the comrades behind with shields and spears. If he is killed, the soldiers in the second row can also use their shields and spears to fill the vacancies in the first row.
Of course, the army of the Persian Empire was not only of Persians, but also of many other ethnic groups. Those ethnic groups had specialized spearmen, such as the Assyrians. According to Herodotus, they were still armed as in the late Assyrian Empire. He wears a bronze helmet, linen armor, and holds an Egyptian-style shield, as well as a sword, spear, and mace.

[borg-]

The idea I have for sparabara is that he has an aura that increases the pierce resistance of archers, but I don't know how useful this is in a real game, I don't think it would work very well.

The other idea that I think is more plausible playing, is that he has a pierce armor of 7 and hack of 3. It should be a unit resistant to ranged but weak in melee combat.

[AIEND]

6 minutes ago, borg- said:

我对 sparabara 的想法是他有一个光环，可以增加弓箭手的穿刺抗性，但我不知道这在实际游戏中有多有用，我认为它不会很好用。

另一个我认为更合理的想法是，他的穿甲为 7，破甲为 3。它应该是一个抵抗远程但在近战中较弱的单位。

Actually in my opinion one should do a dedicated Assyrian spearman and then have the sparabara as a switch form of the archer, and then like you said, an infantry that is more resistant to projectile weapons but is more vulnerable in melee combat .