Historic dates for Civ3 ages

[Andrew Cory]

Originally posted by AJ Corp. The FAIR


Especially since you'll have to dive into the editor to make it actually kill/destruct something.

Aren't missiles referred to as 'weapons of (mass) destruction' in real life?

AJ

Well, "weapons of destruction" is reduntant, unless someone can point out a weapon that builds a house (although in the wizard of oz...). So, the question becomes "mass". Well, I personaly don't find the stinger to be that big a threat to entire city blocks, so I would say no. If you mean "cruise missles", I would think that depends on their payload. But by and large, a tomahawk cruise missle is not considered a weapon of mass destruction...

[PhoenixPhlame73]

Weapons of mass destruction are nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons becuase they can do massive damage and don't cost nearly as much to biuld as conventional forces.

[White Pine]

Thanks to Coracle for your comments on trebuchets, war elephants, and guerrillas. Trebuchets were super-catapults which operated via counter balance. The range of a trebuchet was much farther than that of a traditional catapult. Trebuchets were capable of hurling missiles over castle walls. One intersting use of a trebuchet demonstrates an early form of biological warfare. The carcase of a diseased cow would be thrown over the castle wall. Unfortunately, the trebuchet had the same basic flaw as the catapult in attacking a stone wall intself. Stones thrown from the trebuchet would fly in a steep arc and hit the castle wall on the descent. These stones would easily richochet off the wall. Imagine skipping stone across a calm pond. If the stone comes in at a steep angle it will sink, but if it comes in at a very narrow angle it will skip. Cannon balls were able to hit the wall at nealy a 90 degree angle, and eventually bring down the wall. I agree with you that cannons were not used effectively until later in the 14th century. The successful siege of Constantinople by the Ottoman Turks in 1453 definately signaled a new era in fortresses for European powers.
I would very much like to see the Civ3 creators do more with guerrillas. If Civ3 creators want to simulate late 20th century warfare anywhere near accurately then guerrillas combined with war weariness should be able to win a war.

[Random Passerby]

I think your cut-off for ancient is waaaaay too late. Although you can beeline to Metallurgy fairly quickly, I think cannons were intended to show up in the middle-to-late Middle Ages--instead of looking at something that comes in six techs into the age (assuming you ignore everything else, which actually isn't a bad strategy but probably wasn't intended to be so effective), look at the starter techs instead. Monotheism was definitely "in" in Western culture by the time the Roman Empire dissolved, and feudalism grew out of that fairly quickly. Engineering is a bit sketchier, as I'm not sure exactly what it's supposed to represent, but given its placement in the tech tree I think it's fair to place it as falling under the same general period as the other two techs. You could place the cutoff on these criteria as early as 400-500 A.D., though things get muddled once you get past the age's starter techs--Longbowmen appearing at the same time as da Vinci, for example, and I'd say that Education should probably be a couple centuries before the Sistine Chapel (universities weren't widespread that early, of course, but then it takes a while to get the things built anyways). The Middle Ages in general make for sloppy bookkeeping of this sort, because at that point in the game time is still moving in large chunks per turn and the tree has a lot of variation possible. Still, I'd say around 800 A.D. or maybe 1000 at the latest for the cut-off between ancient and medieval in game terms.

The start for the Industrial Age does bug the heck out of me; I really don't think Steam Power should be a starter tech. One second you're playing with lodestones and getting bonked on the head with falling apples, the next you have ironclads. Still, I think your cut-off there is about as good as you can get. 1945 also seems fair for Industrial to Modern; yeah, a year or two earlier into WWII would make sense, but 1945's a nice round number and a much more clear-cut date.

[White Pine]

Thanks to Random Passerby for your edifying remarks. I think you are right about setting back the date for the ancient to medieval transition. You mentioned the three starter technologies for the medieval age: monotheism, feudalism, and engineering. I don't understand monotheism as being a medieval technology. Abraham, the father of monotheism, lived about 2000 B.C. The Civilopedia refers to feudalism as a social heirarchy based on fealty. The baron owes fealty (alliegance) to the king, the knight owes fealty to the baron, and the serf owes fealty to the knight. The civilopedia mentions feudalism as starting with the breakup of the Carolingian empire, c. 9th century. The civilopedia refers to engineering as military engineering including building roads, bridges, and fortifications. Military engineering existed well into antiquity, so it is hard to hang your hat on a date for medieval military engineering, but the 11th century might work. After conquering the holy lands, most of the crusaders went home. This meant that only a few unlucky crusaders stuck around for the thankless task of defending the holy lands. Their answer was to build some of the largest castles to date. The castles didn't hold off the moslem armies, but they did improve the castle building technology of Europe.
I prefer the feudalism date as the starting point for the medieval age. It just feels more medieval. The Carolingian empire was divided into three parts (roughly France, Germany, and Italy) at the treaty of Verdun in 843. That year might work for our purposes.
A final comment on the medieval tech tree. The cannon can be gained after five tech advances, while the musket man can be gained after only three, but historically the cannon was developed about 100 years before the infantry gun, aka hand cannon.

[GeneralTacticus]

I'd say that Education should probably be a couple centuries before the Sistine Chapel (universities weren't widespread that early, of course, but then it takes a while to get the things built anyways).

Just because you get the tech for a wonder doesn't mea you've built it yet. Just assume that while they were building the Sistine Chapel they were researching Education. Of course they hadn't really started yet, but how realistic is it that it can take thousands of years to build a wonder?

[Tingkai]

Yoru timings are all Euro-centric. How do you fit these ages into a global picture?

The industrial age starts earlier than 1845. I would suggest 1839, the year the Opium War started. British industrial power is able to defeat the Ching dynasty. Then again, the Napoleanic Wars reflects European nation's abilty to supply large armies on a scale not seen before.

[Nym]

Date system

Well, I'm not sure it's a good idea to try separating eras by dates. In fact I think the christian date system is not adequate for such a game. It could be a good reference mark, but each game is different from the others and from our History. IMHO it would be more interesting to count years from the foundation of our first city (like the Romans in real History) or more simply from the beginning of the game.

[AJ Corp. The FAIR]

Originally posted by White Pine
... I prefer the feudalism date as the starting point for the medieval age. It just feels more medieval. The Carolingian empire was divided into three parts (roughly France, Germany, and Italy) at the treaty of Verdun in 843. That year might work for our purposes.

In Belgian education (I suppose same goes up for most European colleges) Medieval era is/has always been determined by the fall of the Western Roman Empire (AD 476) and the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire (AD 1453, Constantinople) -->

5th --> 15th century

You're right about feodalism: firstly introduced by Charles Martel
(didn't have money, so lent grounds to knights to build up first European knights army that defeated the Arabs in AD 732 at Poitiers), it became a tradition during the 9th and 10th centuries (dangerous times in Western Europe caused by the repeated attacks bu Vikings, Arabs and Hungarians) and started vanishing in the 11th century, as trade revived and the Crusades took off.

AJ

[cephyn]

Originally posted by AJ Corp. The FAIR


In Belgian education (I suppose same goes up for most European colleges) Medieval era is/has always been determined by the fall of the Western Roman Empire (AD 476) and the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire (AD 1453, Constantinople) -->

5th --> 15th century

You're right about feodalism: firstly introduced by Charles Martel
(didn't have money, so lent grounds to knights to build up first European knights army that defeated the Arabs in AD 732 at Poitiers), it became a tradition during the 9th and 10th centuries (dangerous times in Western Europe caused by the repeated attacks bu Vikings, Arabs and Hungarians) and started vanishing in the 11th century, as trade revived and the Crusades took off.

AJ

Here at my university (university of California at Santa Barbara) my prof this quarter is making a strong, strong case for the middle ages starting not with the "fall" of Rome (in 476) but much later, with the rise of Charlemagne and the rise of the Carolingians in the 700s. Much of the world was still very tied into the old Roman way of life, trade and infrastructure until the mid 600's to early 700's, when full shifts towards a more European Middle Ages model finally solidified. Charlemagne and his reign was the capstone on that shift.

As for the end of the middle ages, in europe it happened much earlier than in other places...for example, i'd say that in Japan, the middle ages ended in 1868 with the fall of the Tokugawa and the Meiji Restoration. In Europe, its hard to date, but I wouldnt put it as early as 1453. I much better like the date of 1517, the date Martin Luther nailed the 95 theses to the door in Wittenburg.

[Akka]

The "official" end of the Middle-age is still subject to discussions.
Some says it's 1453 because Constantinople fell.
Some argue that it should be 1453, but because of the Castillon battle which marked a turn in warfare with the massive use of artillery.
Finally, a last group think it should be 1492, because of the discovery of America by Colombus.
I suppose it's each one his choice

[Signa]

The ancient era ended with the final fall of Rome. Feudalism developed from Charlemagne, etc...

Middle ages ended with Napolean. He spread nationalism and enlightenment ideals and spurred industrial growth in all world powers...

Industrial ages ended with the dropping of the bomb. Plane and simply here.

[cephyn]

Originally posted by Signa
The ancient era ended with the final fall of Rome. Feudalism developed from Charlemagne, etc...

Middle ages ended with Napolean. He spread nationalism and enlightenment ideals and spurred industrial growth in all world powers...

Industrial ages ended with the dropping of the bomb. Plane and simply here.

yeah i just take issue with your end of hte ancient era. Fall of Rome (476) and Charlemagne (800) is a long time in between. And many of the intermediate rulers, as well as lifestyle, was still very Roman oriented -- Theodoric, for example, continued building in the Roman style. And trade was still very centered around the Mediterranean.

Middle Ages end with Napoleon? thats AWFULLY late, and i think most would agree -- by that logic, the United States was founded during the Middle Ages....

No problems with your industrial age end. 8) as a good a time as any.

[Giovanni August]

The problem of ending the Medieval Age and starting the Industrial Age is that there is a huge gap in between.

In my book the Medieval Ages ended in 1492 with the discovery of America.
But after that there is no "Industrial Age" but there is the "Reinessance Age". Than there is the Illuministic Age.
I would guess that the first one fall more into the Medieval Age style.

Therefore I would start the Industrial Age with the American or the French Revolution.

Just my two cents.

Saluti

[Nym]

In France it would be somehing like that:

• -> 476 AD (Fall of Rome) : Ancient Era
• 476 AD -> 1453 AD (Fall of Constantinople) : Middle Age
• 1453 AD -> XVII century (not very clear) : Renaissance
• XVIII-XIX centuries : Industrial Era
• XX century : Modern Era

But of course it can then subdivided.