Expansion Pack Civs Explained: Hebrew/Israelis

[jdd2007]

Why is a 3.2.1 settler unsuitable?

well it would be -really- unbalancing. i dont think this would be historically accurate either, as israel has always been relatively small...

[Gholam]

Um, how is initial conquest of Canaan politically offensive (as that is what I'm referring to with that unit)? As for balancing... if it's a settler upgrade that requires iron working+iron, then it's just a really expensive swordsman with city building capability.

[Solomyr]

it's a shame we can't have a unit that increases the abilities of the units around it. say a priest or a rabbi unit that increases the defense of any unit within two squares of it. IMHO it would reflect the religious connection Jews have felt during the wars, and the fact that hebrews/israeli have never (minus conquering Canaan after the exodus) been a civ that was out to control the world.

so what about a pikeman with an extra movement point? or an extra defense point. could come after monotheism. as far as a name, i am not that well versed in this aspect of history.

and i am reposting my view of the two great wonders proposed:

The Bible: all temples also function as libraries (science and cul. benefits) req. polytheism
The Great Temple: extra trade for every square already producing trade, extra happy for all cities on continent. automatically destroyed if city captured (hence only one civ can every have it). ruins add 2 happy to the city. req. monotheism

thoughts?