Civ of the Week no. 5: Persians

[lockstep]

http://www.civ3.com/civoftheweek.cfm

Leader: Xerxes
Unique Unit: The Immortal

[ixnay]

Immortal is an upgraded swordsman(3-2-1) with an extra attack

[Tarquinius]

The new about the Persians isn't really shocking IMHO.
The leader and capitol are as I expected, and the Immortal is a bit suprising, but it's stats are not that good that I am going wild (it'll have to be really good if that is gonna happen )

Probably the Roman Legion will have the same stats, there isn't much option, it could be a 3/3/1, but that would be suprising, as the description of Legion in Civ 1 there is said they were strong on the attack, but relatively weak in defense. (they were only a 3/1/1 there)

Any other thoughts?

[The diplomat]

Did anyone notice that Firaxis has tweaked the special abilities. The Persians used to be "militaristic" and "commercial". They are now "Commercial" and "scientific".
Conversely, the chinese are now "militaristic" and "industrious".

So, they switched one special ability between the chinese and the persians.

I guess they did that for play-balancing reasons.

[Steve Clark]

Than I would fully expect that the Romans will be next week's civ, thus we'll find about the Roman Legions at that time.

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by The diplomat
Did anyone notice that Firaxis has tweaked the special abilities. The Persians used to be "militaristic" and "commercial". They are now "Commercial" and "scientific".
Conversely, the chinese are now "militaristic" and "industrious".

So, they switched one special ability between the chinese and the persians.

I guess they did that for play-balancing reasons.

And it can be tweaked again by modifying the rules.txt file. I wonder, though, if changing the civ's attributes, do the trigger for the Golden Age change as well or perhaps, that is something that is editable in the txt file as well?

[mactbone]

The bits of info are getting funnier

[tniem]

Originally posted by Tarquinius
Probably the Roman Legion will have the same stats, there isn't much option, it could be a 3/3/1, but that would be suprising, as the description of Legion in Civ 1 there is said they were strong on the attack, but relatively weak in defense. (they were only a 3/1/1 there)

Or possibly an added movement bonus. It doesn't seem to make much sense but the Romans did take over a wide treck of land and this would require good movement in Civ III.

[Rhysie]

Romans did all those nifty defense formations with the tortoise and all that, I think its highly probably as a result the legions will have extra defence. The civ 1 legion description probably is describing swordsmen in general rather than legions in particular, as legions in civ1 were a general unit.

[Skanky Burns]

COTW Description

Good: The description is factual, interesting, humorous, and did i meantion interesting?? The infrequent jokes add to the piece rather than detracting from it.

Apparently, "Expendables" didn't have quite the same ring to it.

That quote was very funny

Bad: Is it just me, or does that background make the text a bit too difficult to read?? Maybe a shade or two lighter, or a couple of shades darker with light writing

Ugly: As is becoming a standard, the leaders face is, well...

[Transcend]

I'm not too impressed with the Persian Immortals. Its extra attack is pretty insignificant, and Immortals will have trouble overcoming any units with a defense of 2 or better. Also, a Greek Hoplite should be able to stand up to it most of the time.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Transcend
Also, a Greek Hoplite should be able to stand up to it most of the time.

As they should. They did win historically, after all.

I think the Immortals might be too strong; they shouldn´t be 'legions in disguise'.

Also, the Persians were a 'horse civilization'. They should have the 'Chinese' special unit. (Parthian cataphract)

Also, Persians should be religious. Zoroaster was of enormous significance...

[tniem]

I would just like to ask why is Xerxes the leader?

Read this quote from Civ3.com:

Although successful in the pacification of Egypt and suppression of a Babylonian revolt, the Greek city-states eventually got their act together and whipped Xerxes, spelling the beginning of the decline of the Persian Empire. With his pride still stinging from his defeats, Xerxes decided to retire. In his last years, he squandered the once-enormous treasury he had gathered through trade and taxation by launching vast construction programs, but most of these were never finished

So why is he considered their great leader, especially when he follows Dairus I and Cyrus the Great?

[d_dudy]

first, i would like to say I SOOOOOOO FREAKIN CALLED THE IMMORTALS AS THE PERSION UNIQUE UNIT!!!!!!! (in another thread where many people called this idea silly)

to all the history "they were horsy people" weenies. (no offense comrade, i'm really steering this towards the jerks in the other thread who thought there could be no way the immortals were the unique unit.)

i would also like to say i share tniem's reservations about xerxes. he doesn't sound all that great especially next to darius.

[Alexander I]

I concur with d_dudy. I was the first one to even suggest the Immortal as the Persian unit, back when other people were shouting that they weren't in (Sabre2th). In fact, it was my post in the CivIII scenarios thread that got Firaxis to spill the beans that Babylon and Persia were even in!

Immortals were the most reasonable choice. Come on people. Cataphracts? Try Byzantines, please. (Maybe in the expansion).