about the roman legions

[varus]

i won`t mention anything about the cultural relations between the western civilisation and the roman-greeco civ.
philosophy, arts, architecture ... its obvious to all of us.
but - i want to point your attention to the fact, that there are 1000s of roman constructuctions existing to the present day and some of them even working.

aquaducts supplying fresh water, streets, nearly as good as german autobahnen, bridges, that work perfectly (until blown away like in mostar) etc.

all these building were constructed by legionaries

this fact should have been considered - either by making the romans industrious or by giving the romans legions the capability to build roads ( at industrious worker speed), to chopp wood, to build bridges (if that wasn`t civ3), to build forts and outposts.
a legion, that is stationed in a city should provide one shield per turn, when an aquaduct or colloseum is beeing constructed. (for game balance, the maximum help is one shield, no matter how manny legions you have stationed there).

***

[SIV]

I don't know what the roman legionaries did in your countrey, In my countrey the killed, inslaved and burned cities...

About the game, I thought there was a concept that troops should cost the player mouney (Like in republic) - so there will be a need for a strong econemy.
It's strange to me that large armies will actually be a benefit to your economy.

Even in real history, I believe the legionaries were assigned to build things, not because it's more prodective but rather to have them occupied with something istead of trieng to kill the emperor...

[vmxa1]

Really it is getting very boring to have people keep going about about the traits of a given civ not matching reality.
It is a game, it is not a historical simulation. It does not have to be "real".
If you want to cite all the histry, fine, but do not try to jam it into the game. It is just a game with some sembalance of known history, not a depiction of reality.

[Jaybe]

If you want YOUR legions to build roads, go ahead and enable it in the editor. But understand the AI will not utilize worker functions unless ALL the worker functions are enabled for the unit.

Personally, my legions can build roads and fortifications.

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by SIV
I don't know what the roman legionaries did in your countrey, In my countrey the killed, inslaved and burned cities...
{snip}
Even in real history, I believe the legionaries were assigned to build things, not because it's more prodective but rather to have them occupied with something istead of trieng to kill the emperor...

In my country they did the killing and burning routine, but they built stuff too. eg - there are plenty of straight Roman roads in England, built for swift troop movement for efficient killing, burning and defending. Near Hadrians wall, where mobile defense would have been needed to maintain fortification consistancy, a network of country lanes run straight for miles - rare in England.

I hadn't heard any examples of projects merely to keep ambitious generals busy, but would be interested to hear of them.

btw - Monty Pythons "What have the Romans ever done for us?" scene from 'Life of Brian' springs to mind here.

[Cort Haus]

On the original question - modding a unit or a civ to make it super-powerful is fine if a player wants to do that, but it can unbalance the game and it prevents comparative strategic discussion - if that matters.

Jaybe, I hope you sharply raised the price of your Legions or lowered their stats to balance the mod!

[ChrisiusMaximus]

varus I think you have some good thoughts there but I would imagine that throughout history most nations armies have taken part in construction works of one kind or another, either that or forced their captives into slavery to get the job done. Still though you would always get the job done to a higher standard with skilled trained labour as opposed to forced labour.

In as much as this applies to civ 3 then as pointed out by others it is possible to change aspects of the game you wish to via the editor.

I myself dont bother with mods or with messing with the editor as I cant be bothered to put in the time and I like the game as it is, but if I was inclined I would certainly remember your suggestions and would probably find them an enjoyable new aspect to a game I already enjoy.

Have fun with the editor and keep on civin

[Jaybe]

Jaybe, I hope you sharply raised the price of your Legions or lowered their stats to balance the mod!

When I first added the road/fort abilities to legions, that was it -- but that was soon after the editor came out. I just recently reintroduced the legion changes, but by now MANY things in my game have changed (e.g., MOST slow units have equal attack/defense strengths, but fortifying is +50% defense).

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by Jaybe
... but by now MANY things in my game have changed ... , but fortifying is +50% defense

Ah, Civ 2 nostalgia! Mind you, no taking Inf-defended cities with Cav in your game then

[PLATO]

The legions are already pretty strong. To enhance them you would definately need some sort of balance. UU's already have enough of an advanyage in most cases. The legionaire was a builder, but he was a soldier first and their increased ability in this area fits with history nicely.

[Jaybe]

Originally posted by Cort Haus
Ah, Civ 2 nostalgia! Mind you, no taking Inf-defended cities with Cav in your game then

No, but Rifles can be taken by either cavalry or other RIFLES!
BTW, Rivers are also 50% defense bonus, forests are impassable to wheeled (horse & motorized units are wheeled, of course) ... and mountains -- they are completely impassable!

IOW, it's a rich game.

[ISTANBUL]

Originally posted by varus
i won`t mention anything about the cultural relations between the western civilisation and the roman-greeco civ.
philosophy, arts, architecture ... its obvious to all of us.
but - i want to point your attention to the fact, that there are 1000s of roman constructuctions existing to the present day and some of them even working.

aquaducts supplying fresh water, streets, nearly as good as german autobahnen, bridges, that work perfectly (until blown away like in mostar) etc.

all these building were constructed by legionaries

this fact should have been considered - either by making the romans industrious or by giving the romans legions the capability to build roads ( at industrious worker speed), to chopp wood, to build bridges (if that wasn`t civ3), to build forts and outposts.
a legion, that is stationed in a city should provide one shield per turn, when an aquaduct or colloseum is beeing constructed. (for game balance, the maximum help is one shield, no matter how manny legions you have stationed there).

***

Ooooh Romans, oooooh Greeks
We owe them everything
Let's alter civ such that either Romans or Greeks win each game, no matter what other civs do

[Panag]

hi ,

some info about the Roman legions , ....

enjoy


http://webpages.charter.net/brueggem...-contents.html

http://www.romanlegion.com/

http://www.rlqm.com/

http://www.caerleon.net/history/army/

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_legion

http://www.culturalresources.com/Romleg.html

http://infotech.fanshawec.on.ca/facu...ell/legion.htm

http://www.art-with-attitude.com/vil...n_legion2.html

http://www.quiknet.com/~fifi/index9.htm



have a nice day

[statusperfect]

Civ3 = Fantasy game. I believe most players want it that way.

[Admiral PJ]

I think Legions come to early in civ3, there needs to be more gap between iron working and bronze. My mod makes more of a gap, maybe not enough still.

The romans were fair to the people they conquered in comparison to other nations at the time, allowing religious freedoms. Its wrong for us to think of them as bad because they were not christian before about 300ad. Many romans were good, and didn't like the barbaric violence of war , I think.
In some ways their empire helped to unite europe and the west, and the resulting Byzantine empire afterwards helped stop the Islamic invasion.
Latin continued to be important to this day, its still used in scientific texts.
The romans advanced mechanical and Civil Engineering and developed Politics and governmental science.

[Admiral PJ]

Maybe I was wrong about religious tolerance, but i think they didn't tolerate christianity because it was a threat to their control, but other religions they allowed.

It would be interesting to give the Romans the slaver unit from the new expansion.

I found the romans one of the best civs i'd played, their legion unit is cool - in game. Commercial civs corruption reduction is very useful, and their millitary ability is useful for conquering.

Israel is also guilty of killing people in other nations.. many innocent palistinans have been killed unlawfully.
I know you cannot compare the Romans to Israel, but we should remember our world is not perfect in the same way the Ancient world isn't.

[vmxa1]

I find it unwise to try to lay any modern day norms on previou eras. You do not have to go back to the Romans. Even a 100 years ago will do it. We look at how people behaved in 1800's with a huge misunderstanding of what the norm was at the time.
Just look at how children are treated now and how there were 80 years ago. Working in the mines at 10 or 12. Yeah I know we do not treat them perfectly now either. That is my point. In 300 years, people will think we were barbs.

[Mad Bomber]

Varus makes a very good point here, Rome was first and formost an industrial civ, for them to be comercial & military is simply a travesty. Their traits are a good reason why Rome is typically overrun in the early midieval age while Carthage and Persia live to the modern age.

As for the legions, they were responsible for building the aqueducts, roads, fortifications, bathhouses, villas, as well as most government and religious buildings or anything else that did not need an artisan to complete.

Vmxa1:

Your argument that this is a game is just a little tired. This game is designed to reflect a part of RL. Yes, the results do not end up the same as they have in RL but the traits have been put in place to enhance the historical feeling of the Civ, a feeling that the Romans truely lack.

[SIV]

Originally posted by Admiral PJ
The romans were fair to the people they conquered in comparison to other nations at the time, allowing religious freedoms.

Even compared to their own time, the romans were..."evel".
The persians alowed us Jews to keep to our tredition, so did Alexander the great...they did not inerfer with our way of life and the Jews were quiet.

The romans weren't fair to othre nations at all (only to the greeks)...corrupt governers, taxes so heavy the population starved sometimes...

The romans always interfered with internal affairs...and in 135 AD they started executing people who taught the Jewish holly books...It's not exactly religious freedom.

The romans killed 1 milion in Gaul, killed and inslaved 1 milion (2 times * 500,000) in Judea...tried to destroy any aspect of non-greek/roman way of life.

You should start to view the romans as "evel"...

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
Vmxa1:

Your argument that this is a game is just a little tired. This game is designed to reflect a part of RL. Yes, the results do not end up the same as they have in RL but the traits have been put in place to enhance the historical feeling of the Civ, a feeling that the Romans truely lack.

You may be right, but if that were so, why are so many complaining that the traits do not fit?
My point was that they can not be made to fit all civs as they must have some sort of an attempt at balance. This means no reality. I do not find any reality anywhere in the game.
In fact there are threads about all aspects of the game and how they do not match up to real world.
I am saying here is no reason they should, it is a game, not a simulator.

[Panag]

Originally posted by SIV


Even compared to their own time, the romans were..."evel".
The persians alowed us Jews to keep to our tredition, so did Alexander the great...they did not inerfer with our way of life and the Jews were quiet.

The romans weren't fair to othre nations at all (only to the greeks)...corrupt governers, taxes so heavy the population starved sometimes...

The romans always interfered with internal affairs...and in 135 AD they started executing people who taught the Jewish holly books...It's not exactly religious freedom.

The romans killed 1 milion in Gaul, killed and inslaved 1 milion (2 times * 500,000) in Judea...tried to destroy any aspect of non-greek/roman way of life.

You should start to view the romans as "evel"...

hi ,

all the evil they exported came eventually back and destroyed them , ......

cause ' we ' did not change our language , customs , rites , etc , ..... ' we ' survived , ......

but we learned from them a couple things , .......

some tactics and weapons

Shabath Shalom

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by vmxa1


You may be right, but if that were so, why are so many complaining that the traits do not fit?
My point was that they can not be made to fit all civs as they must have some sort of an attempt at balance. This means no reality. I do not find any reality anywhere in the game.
In fact there are threads about all aspects of the game and how they do not match up to real world.
I am saying here is no reason they should, it is a game, not a simulator.

Yes; Civ 3 is just a game, and it is unreasonable to expect that every civ will perfectly match its real civ traits. But to simply say that it can't be done and thherefore no attempt should be made to do so is misguided. We should expect that Firaxis attempt to get it as close as possible to a historical model. If it should be as you suggest then we should not even play with unique traits and have all civs be the same bland monolithic Civ from the days of CIV 1 & 2. If that were to happen a good deal of what makes CIV 3 a special and unique game will be gone. Then I would just throw my CIV 3 disks in the trash and fire up my good old CIV 2 gold edition (with a working multiplayer)


I will grant you that most of the debates about traits are unimportant. Many Civs could have three of four traits that could apply to them and others you can struggle just to find two that would be appropriate. This is not the case with Rome. Rome ruled the ancient world, not because they were richer, or better fighters, but because they were the most proficient builders and organizers of the ancient world.

It is my sincere hope that when Carthage is changed to Seafaring with C3C that they will change the commercial trait of Rome w/ the industrial trait of Carthage.

[vmxa1]

Me I don't care if the trait are a compelte fanatsy. I also am fine with talking about tweaks to them and I would be please if they matched better. I just get tired of the concept that it must be like reality, it does not have to be. Like I said, if they managed to make them in the way that mets with everyones reality, we could end up with most of the civs having the very similar traits.
But in the it matters not to me. Just tell me what they are and what they do.

[Jaybe]

:snicker:
Civ traits are completely subjective. Civ such-and-such had "trait" strengths of "this" during the years xxxx-xxxy, and of "that" during other years. And then you can banter about examples and counter-examples, demonstrating how they increased, decreased, or never existed!

Rome was commercial, militaristic, industrious, allowed client/subject states (limited) self-rule, ....
Except when they weren't or didn't. Often depends on whose history you read: historians have a knack for putting their own spin on what they write -- they want their writings published, and they want them read/purchased. Leads to some outSTANDING (that is to say, "different") interpretations of source material, sometimes.

(oh -- sorry, end of rant)

[johncmcleod]

Why not make the Romans Industrious and Commercial? Who cares if another civ has the same trait?

[Panag]

Originally posted by johncmcleod
Why not make the Romans Industrious and Commercial? Who cares if another civ has the same trait?

hi ,

mil and comm might be better , .....

have a nice day

[Roggan]

whay is it not in civ3 ?

[Panag]

Originally posted by Roggan
whay is it not in civ3 ?

hi ,

what you mean

if you mean the two traits , well there is always the editor , ....


have a nice day

[Panag]

hi ,

some links can be found at this thread ; http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=93871


http://www.ku.edu/history/index/eur...idges/home.html

http://www.3dcafestore.com/rombridandaq.html

http://www.aitken.demon.co.uk/romanbriges.htm

http://btobsearch.barnesandnoble.co...n=9780521393263

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/cach...s.aspx?ID=35913

http://www.mmdtkw.org/VBridgesSublicius.html

http://www.kultur.gov.tr/portal/def...sp?belgeno=2111

http://clawww.lmu.edu/faculty/fjust/Rome-Tiber.htm

http://www.unc.edu/courses/rometech...port/roads.html

http://directory.google.com/Top/Art...s/Europe/Italy/

http://www.cbel.com/bridges_building_types/

http://www.provencebeyond.com/history/romanh.html

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridge

http://www.karr.net/dir/Arts/Archit...s/Europe/Italy/

http://www.ce.memphis.edu/1101/inte...ish_bridge.html


some more info on the thames bridge , btw , each one of those large bridges was always proteced by a large ( +- 2000 ) force , a legion was never to far away and needless to say that always a small town was founded not to far away , ....

http://www.britainexpress.com/London/roman-london.htm

http://www.lamas.org.uk/abstracts/jones1980.html

http://www.britarch.ac.uk/ba/ba9/ba9news.html

http://www.britannia.com/history/londonhistory/

http://www.britishheritage.com/bhormnlndn.htm

http://www.lobeg.com/lobeg/king.html

http://www.museum-london.org.uk/fra...lierdiscov.html

http://www.romans-in-britain.org.uk..._the_thames.htm


the roman danube bridge ;

http://www.structurae.de/en/structu...ta/str03932.php

http://www.iowalum.com/voyagers/danube3.html

http://www.mtromania.ro/oferta_eng/.../the_danube.htm

http://www.ku.edu/history/index/eur...econdary/SMIGRA*/Pons.html

http://www.roman-empire.net/children/builders.html

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/1994/94.10.23.html

http://www.hdg.de/eurovisionen/html_eng/sitemap.html

http://www.geocities.com/cogaionon/article4.htm

http://cheiron.humanities.mcmaster....+sideofcolumn+3

http://www.vlada.gov.sk/temy/mostst...a_mosta_en.html

http://www.rpi.edu/~grivad/educatio...l/t_roman2.html

http://www.dr-savescu.com/history/Bureb_e.html

http://ancient-coin-forum.com/ancie...s_of_trajan.htm


all those links show an inside in to roman way of live

have a nice day

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by vmxa1
Me I don't care if the trait are a compelte fanatsy. I also am fine with talking about tweaks to them and I would be please if they matched better. I just get tired of the concept that it must be like reality, it does not have to be. Like I said, if they managed to make them in the way that mets with everyones reality, we could end up with most of the civs having the very similar traits.
But in the it matters not to me. Just tell me what they are and what they do.

Then why use historical civ's at all? Just make up fictional Civ's and cive them random traits like in GAL CIV. To me basing the game on history is one of its most appealing features.