Beyond the Sword Fact Sheet

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
... or for that matter, the Mongolian horde (at least the way we think of cities).

Well, there was always Karakorum, the Mongols' attempt at copying the Chinese idea of an imperial city. It was pretty big too, until it became defunct and disappeared.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karakorum

[Virdrago]

Excuse the speculations; hope I may be correct on some of these...

Originally posted by Solver
New information:

From an IGN interview with Alex Mantzaris.

• Portugese leader - Joao II (Imp/Exp). Portugese UU - Carrack.
• Sitting Bull is Protective/?. Native American unique building - Totem Pole, extra XP for archers.
• Corporations founded by consuming a great person. They provide food, production, commerce or resources in exchange for other resources. The more resources they consume, the more they provide. Mercantilism blocks foreign corps, State Property blocks all.
• There is now an espionage slider. Accumulating enough espionage points gives you information on other players. Spies may be sent on active missions.
• New Great Person type: Great Spy. Can give an espionage boost against a certain rival.
• Spaceship needs to reach Alpha Centauri to win, like Civ2. So you can win by building a faster spaceship that's launched later.
• New unit: Cuirassier. Takes place of old Cavalry in the tech tree, and the latter now requires Rifling.
• New unit: Anti-Tank. An early inexpensive counter to Tanks.
• Statue of Zeus: Doubles War Weariness of other civs at war with you.
• "Civ in space" scenario

Portuguese leader and UU - thought it might be. Knowing Portuguese history, I actually told my brother last week what their traits would be, and I'm surprised to see I was right.

Native American's UB, Totem Pole - Totem Poles are exclusively West Coast Native American, so I'm now waiting to see the "city" of Haida founded

Corporations are founded by a GP? Obviously the Great Merchant needed a better use - which it did.
Consume resources in exchange for other resources - like Iron for steel? Oil for Gas? or something else?

An espionage slider - at the expense of gold? Comes with writing (like Civ 1's diplomat)?

New great person type - Great Spy. Gained through active missions, or born using the espionage slider? Building something like Scotland Yard should increase points gained for the Great Spy, like the Great Wall does for Generals (my opinion only).

Spaceship change - But please, not at the expense of having to take out an opponent's capital to stop the ship arriving.

Cuirassier - Stops the Civ3esque Cavalry rush.

Anti-Tank - probably not the final name.

Statue of Zeus - not too useful, from what I can tell. I've never been overly burdened with war weariness before, but this may be more useful in higher levels than my standard noble/prince...

"Civ in Space" - I'm interested.

[Sirotnikov]

Espionage still suffers....


is the diplomat still alive in Civ IV?

I used to disregard it, but actually it is an excellent unit that is very important.

[onodera]

My prayers have been answered!

http://media.pc.ign.com/media/896/896712/img_4551148.html

It's a self-propelled howitzer!

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
It was indeed residential housing, but one that actually was unique (hell, Haudenosaunee means People of the Longhouses).

So are the Roman villa, the British cottage and the Indian bungalow. Many societies have unique living quarters which often serve some kind of unique purpose. They're still residential housing, not a proper building as it exists in the Civ universe.

It's a far more unique building than say a Mali 'Mint' is.

Just because there are one or two mediocre UBs in the game that's no reason to add more of them. At least a mint is a proper city service along the same lines of a Courthouse, Colosseum or Recycling Center.

Neither did Zulu, or for that matter,

Where have you been the last 7 years? I've strongly lobbied for excluding the Zulus from the game since before Civ3 was released. Almost worked too with Civ4, if it wasn't for that pesky little thing called popular demand

the Mongolian horde (at least the way we think of cities).

Do yourself a favour and google Golden Horde, or Khanbaliq, Xanadu, Tabriz, the Ilkhanid Khanate or the Mughal Empire.

Or an Inca Quecha (which is the name for the Inca language really)? Or an Indian Fast Worker?

Not actually UU's, just named ones.

Again, just because some civs like the Inca and Indians (and Aztec for that matter) have poor UUs doesn't mean we should add more, in fact we should aim to get rid of the ones we have. And for the existing civs it's pretty easy to come up with a proper UU to replace the poor ones they have now (Aztec: Atlatl or Macuahuitl; Inca: Chaski or Slinger; India: some sort of elephant-based unit, like an Elephant Phalanx or a Ballista or Culverin Elephant (though one could argue that War Elephants should only be an Indian UU, not available to all civs)).

For the Iroquois you would have a very hard time coming up with a proper UU.

That's a different use. The Mohawk were known as the most ferocious fighters of the Five (then Six) Tribes. The Keepers of the Eastern Door for the Haudenosaunee.

The German and Celtic soldiers were known as the fiercest fighters in the Roman army, does that mean the Roman UU should be a German Swordsman? Nationality != UU.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Locutus



The German and Celtic soldiers were known as the fiercest fighters in the Roman army, does that mean the Roman UU should be a German Swordsman? Nationality != UU.

One of your best analogies to date Locutus

[LDiCesare]

though one could argue that War Elephants should only be an Indian UU, not available to all civs

In a game where you can play Hannibal, restricting elephants to India would be silly.

[Locutus]

The Mediterranean empires not only simply copied the concept of War Elephants from the Indians, they only employed very small numbers of them in battle (a few dozen at most) -- they were more a tactical ploy to intimidate the enemy than that they had a real impact on the outcome of the battle. And Hannibal's elephants never even survived the crossing of the Alps.

The Indian kingdoms OTOH fielded many thousands of War Elephants, it was very much a key aspect of their warfare basically from Vedic times up to and including WWI (although as gunpowder weapons grew more powerful they were more and more used for auxiliary functions).

But that's a different matter entirely...

[Virdrago]

Though I don't like the Native Americans being lumped together as one, I do appreciate your arguments. You make very good points, Locutus. And though I realize the Zulus were only a "power" for 50 years, I would be one of those "popular demanders". Sorry.

[joncha]

There are plenty of arguments about whether civilization X is a "good" civilization to include. The bottom line, though, is that they did decide to include a Native American civ. In doing so, they should have just bit the bullet and chosen one of the many available. Instead they decided on a cheap amalgam that is as insulting as it is moronic.

[TimeTraveler]

I just realized something: there's what I think are an android and two mechs on the cover (among the various humans on foot). o.o I'm starting to like what I see.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by TimeTraveler
I just realized something: there's what I think are an android and two mechs on the cover (among the various humans on foot). o.o

Welcome to the club...

[Ijuin]

Originally posted by dregor
I'm assuming the Totem Pole replaces the Monument. Extra xp for archers. Wonder if longbowmen are included in that. I'd guess that gunpowder era missile troops won't be tho. Not a terribly exciting UB it sounds like.

If the Totem Poke gives +2 XP to Archers, Longbowmen, and Crossbowmen, then with a Barracks they will start out with 5 XP, for two promotions. Add in that Sitting Bull is Protective, and you can have City Garrison III or Drill III right from the start. It would be neat if the N.A.'s unique unit were an Archer type too (maybe +50% against meelee and mounted?)

[Imran Siddiqui]

[q=Locutus] I've strongly lobbied for excluding the Zulus from the game since before Civ3[/q]

But they are STILL there... doesn't matter if you lobbied or whatnot, the precedent is set.

Again, just because some civs like the Inca and Indians (and Aztec for that matter) have poor UUs doesn't mean we should add more, in fact we should aim to get rid of the ones we have.

Once again, you aren't going to get rid of them. The Incas, for one, don't have a better option really. Unless you want some sort of "Inca warrior". Sometimes you have to make them fit a bit more snug than you'd like.

The German and Celtic soldiers were known as the fiercest fighters in the Roman army, does that mean the Roman UU should be a German Swordsman? Nationality != UU.

If the Germanic or Celtic swordsman were the most feared troops in the army, then yes, it'd be apt. Though for Roman, it was simply the legion that was feared. Not particularly any nationality as a part.

[q=joncha]There are plenty of arguments about whether civilization X is a "good" civilization to include. The bottom line, though, is that they did decide to include a Native American civ. In doing so, they should have just bit the bullet and chosen one of the many available. Instead they decided on a cheap amalgam that is as insulting as it is moronic.[/q]

Exactly! It'd be like calling the Zulu "South African tribesmen" civ.

Civ isn't just about the greatest empires, but about the greatest civilizations in a cross section of the world. That is why there are so many diverse groups in the game (and should be). Every continent and subcontinent had its own amazing civilizations. Just because they don't conform to European notions of what a civilization should be does not diminish them.

[Virdrago]

Originally posted by Locutus


Which brings up another good point: the Iroquois didn't have cities...

Correction: they did not have the European notion of "cities".

The reason the Iroquois and other Native Americans moved their villages and towns around was for crop rotation. If they didn't they'd consume the land, destroying the area and creating drought and desertification, which would ultimately lead to the demise of the people. This happened in Sumeria, Songhay (the Malian area), the Mayans... The aboriginals who built towns in this way did stay in the same place. They didn't move hundeds of miles away, but only two or three. Much Native American trade dealt with crops and foodstuffs. How many abandoned towns and cities have we had in history after the mines ran out or the fields ceased to grow? The Iroquois and others knew this, and so, generally moved a small ways away. They always came back after 20 to 40 years, to the exact spots they had occupied earlier.

Yes, there were exceptions for cities in the Americas (Incas and Mesoameria), but the Mongols (with the noted exception of Kublai Khan) still stayed nomadic, even after conquering most of Eurasia. The only cities they really "founded" were Karakorum (so their captured artisans and scientists had someplace they could live, that seemed like "home"), Serai and Berke (New) Serai (for administration purposes), and Urga, which is still really the only city in Mongolia (again, for administration purposes): today's capital of Ulaanbataar. Should they then not be considered a "civilization", because they largely stayed nomadic? They did control the largest land empire ever.

Overall, Locutus, though you make some good points, the nitpickiness of whether a UU or UB is "unique" enough does make little sense. Many civs around the Mediterranean had a form of Phalanx, Jaguar Warriors were not exclusive to just the Aztecs, and the War Chariot was definitely not only Egyptian; never mind Marines, the Mint, Trading Posts, Obelisks, etc.

Also, when it comes to Native Americans, they are not all the same. Again, I would make the point (since you are from the Netherlands): would you be happy if the Dutch were lumped in with the Germans and English as the "Germanics" because you are all from the same area of Europe and once spoke almost the same language? Dutch is closer to German than Algonquian is to, for instance, Delaware. Yet they, too, lived right next to each other.