China and Persia...!?

=DrJambo= · August 21, 2002, 05:56

Anyone get the feeling that they mixed up the starting traits of these two civs?

Take China for example... aggressive setting of 2 yet militaristic, has science as build often in their categories list and yet aren't scientific?

Then Persia, aggressive level of 4 and no build often for science, although they are scientific and not militaristic?!

Go figure?!

=DrJambo= · August 21, 2002, 06:00

Title of poll should be "Are China's militaristic and Persia's Scientific..."

Doh!

Nubclear · August 21, 2002, 06:08

Also, forgive me if I'm not too knowledgable on these things, but wasn't China the leading country in technological advance for quite a few years?

Galvatron · August 21, 2002, 06:11

Yeahh you got the point your theory is proofed by history:

The Chines were in the middle-ages the most technologically advanced nation but military very weak where Persia was a more or less militaristic state in the antic but scientifically behind the standard of that epoch.

vondrack · August 21, 2002, 06:13

Missing the banana option...

Seriously, I have read somewhere that the Chinese traits were changed very shortly before the release, so they got mangled, the internal settings not correctly reflecting their advertised traits... what you say makes sense, but perhaps the aggressiveness and building preferences should be adjusted accordingly instead of the traits?

Firebird · August 21, 2002, 06:24

I agree: History says China should be scientific and Persia militarisitc. I don't think China was ever the great conquerors, where as Persia had a period of military expansion. If they had not been stopped by the greeks history might have looked very differently.

GeneralTacticus · August 21, 2002, 06:38

Didn't they change the Chinese traits so they'd get a GA from the Great Wall?

Panag · August 21, 2002, 06:59

hi ,

in order for it to be truly correct there should be the ability that it changes over time , ....

it should also be dependent more on the type of government

have a nice day

Arrian · August 21, 2002, 11:18

I'd agree that China should be scientific, especially once PtW comes out and has the Mongols (the justification for changing them to "militaristic" giving them "riders" and having their first great leader be Ghengis Khan was to represent the Mongols). But ironically enough, despite (or maybe because of) the oddities caused by the last-minute changes to China, they usually end up being a strong AI civ, and I love playing them. They're a really powerful civ.

I'd also agree with a shift for Persia to militaristic/industrious. But, to sum up my feelings on the matter: whatever. The game will work fine either way.

-Arrian

Lord Merciless · August 21, 2002, 12:32

China was supposed to be Scientific/Industrious, but Firaxis changed it just before the game shipped. They even didn't have the time to tweak it in the Editor.

Back then, Rome was supposed to be Militaritic/Industrious, and Persians Militaristic/Commercial.

They based their switch on the fact that Great Wall should trigger a GA for China. Well, historically speaking, none of the really strong and powerful Chinese dynasties ever bothered with the Wall. Chinese historians have always considered the wall-building as a sign of weakness.

Arrian · August 21, 2002, 12:36

Rome as militaristic/industrious did strike me as more appropriate (and would have, in conjunction with the Legionaries, made Rome a powerhouse civ. Oh well).

-Arrian

Hagbart · August 21, 2002, 13:04

Well it can't be changed now.

=DrJambo= · August 21, 2002, 13:10

...but it can....

just maybe not officially.

Dida · August 21, 2002, 18:10

How is Persia more scientific than China? What contribution did Persia made to the advance of science? I know the Chinese were technocally advanced civ for very long time. Even now, Chinese students seems to be doing quite well in science and math.