Fix the Greeks

[Ranx]

It's long past time to fix the Greek civilizations. This is a relatively simple fix and doesn't require a lot new work although that would be fine.

Currently the Spartan and Athenian hoplites are the same units. In reality the Atheniam hoplites of Pericles era during the Peloponnesian war were not even close to the quality of Sparta. Think about the difference between WWII Sherman tanks and M1A1 Abrams tanks and you have a rough idea.

At the start of Peloponnesian war, Pericles was well aware of that discrepancy and pulled all the people from the surrounding countryside into Athens behind their walls. Meeting the Spartans on the battlefield was suicide.

On the other hand, the Athenians were the masters of the sea. It made for an asymetric war with Spartans. The Spartans roled into the area around Athens and burned thier countryside to the ground every year and were unopposed. But Athens fed itself and maintained its league via the sea.

Two telling incidents show the disparity. In Thucydides book there's a mention of a minor skirmish between a handful of Athenians and Spartans. The Athenians outnumbered the Spartans and defeated them - it was very, very big news!

But the Spartans tired of the asymetric war and built their own flee to take on the Athenians. Big mistake. At the battle of Abydos the Athenian fleet, outnumbered 97 to 74, still won the battle and captured 45 ships. At the follow up battle the Athenians The Athenians destroyed all 80 triremes that the Spartans had mustered while losing none or few.

To make Athens and Sparta into a Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum of the ancient Greek world is really off-putting when playing the game.

Athenians could just skip the galley and get the quadreme if you don't want to make a special trireme icon and characteristics...or just make the Athenian galley a bit more special by creating trade routes and being able to carry military units. Dunno. But it isn't that difficult to make those small tweaks to make the game far more realisitic.

There are other characteristic that could be more pronounced as well if one chose. The Spartans were Dorian and the Athenians were Ionian. The Spartans, as we think of them, were a small percentage of the population they ruled over. Basically an elite class with peasants they'd conquered and ruled - a quasi-feudalism if you like. The Spartans wouldn't have had some Plato's Republic benefit as they were never a democracy like Pericles' Athens was. The Spartans were hamfisted military tyrants with more in common sociologically with the Shoguns of Japan that with the Athenian Republic.

The Athenians built high walls to connect their city to the harbor. So wall building or harbor building benefits might be part of it. Dunno. The point is they were radically different civilizations with little in common. They weren't merely different flavors of one another.

In any case, there are so many interesting characteristics that seperate the two cities and cultures - as great as any two civilizations in the game - that the current set up is odd.

[theguynamedguy]

Within the context of the game, they aren't separate civs; they're different leaders for the same civ.

[Ranx]

That's about like saying that the Chinese and Japanes are the same civilization with different leaders. The point is the Ionian Athenians and the Dorian Spartans are not the same civilization, not the same culture, not the same ethnic group, have different governents, and very different militrary strengths. Even if one somehow lumped them together there isn't a reason they couldn't have different military units and different specialties. It's pretty unreal for a game that's supposed to have a simulacrum of historical flavor to it.

The Athenians had democracy. The Spartans had a militaristic slave state with various ranks of elite, freedmen and slaves (helots).

So if the context of the game is that they are the same because some how they were in proximity then it's pretty baffling. I guess the Normans conqured England so we should just see the French and the English as the same civiliation with different leaders. So they should have the same military units and basic characteristics.

There simply isn't any reason to lump them together as if they were the same. Just because they both fall in the boundaries of modern day Greece doesn't make them the same.

[Duck from State Farm]

Originally posted by Ranx:

That's about like saying that the Chinese and Japanes are the same civilization with different leaders.

Do you realize Sparta and Athens are both Greek ? Comparing Athens And Sparta to China and Japan is just absurd. If Alexander lead Greece the last five Civ games and now he Leads Macedon and now you say Athens and Sparta needs to be split? I'm sorry If you can Handle Alexander leading Greece the last 5 Civ games and yet you can't stand having a Athens and Sparta leader both lead Greece then this game in not for you.

Every Civ game in the Civilization series for Greece is lead by an ancient Greek leader and believe it or not Athens and Sparta are both Greek and they are known to be as Greek City States. If Sparta and Athens were to be split, they would play more like a City State rather than a full Civ, that's why Greece gets a leader from Athens and one from Sparta and if you can't handle that then go back to Civ 5 and wait for Civ 7 to come out.

[Fanstar1]

Originally posted by Duck from State Farm:

Originally posted by Ranx:

That's about like saying that the Chinese and Japanes are the same civilization with different leaders.

Do you realize Sparta and Athens are both Greek ? Comparing Athens And Sparta to China and Japan is just absurd. If Alexander lead Greece the last five Civ games and now he Leads Macedon and now you say Athens and Sparta needs to be split? I'm sorry If you can Handle Alexander leading Greece the last 5 Civ games and yet you can't stand having a Athens and Sparta leader both lead Greece then this game in not for you.

Every Civ game in the Civilization series for Greece is lead by an ancient Greek leader and believe it or not Athens and Sparta are both Greek and they are known to be as Greek City States. If Sparta and Athens were to be split, they would play more like a City State rather than a full Civ, that's why Greece gets a leader from Athens and one from Sparta and if you can't handle that then go back to Civ 5 and wait for Civ 7 to come out.

point is, Athens and Sparta are so radically different in so many ways that giving them mostly same things just leaves something to be desired.

[Grzemek]

Well guess what, Saint Jadwiga never heard of Winged Hussars. Frederik Barbarossa of U-boats or Catherine de Medici about Garde Imperiale. Yet potential alt leaders of their civs will share these features with them. Russia, Germany, France, England and USA all have standard tanks, where French and English tanks were of much better quality than German ones in WWII. You had to set the line somewhere.

Civ never was a game of historical accuracy. Firaxis wanted to have 2 leaders of Greece, they had to decide on some common and some varying featured between Athens and Sparta, without overwhelming one civ with features while leaving others with much less.

It's a game where communist Rosevelt can export Oil to Arabia who: founded Protestantism before anyone has even heard about Catholicism, prays in Gurdwaras and has Jesuit Education, all while Sumeria, as the only civ in Atomic Era, is hoping to go into space before Harald Hadrada, king of Equatorial Norway, makes the world wear his blue jeans and listen to his music.

[SonicCheetah]

Originally posted by Max Payne:

This is a game that has Catherine de Medici as the ruler of France. They clearly don't care about any of what you typed here. Sorry you wasted your money on this because Civ V is far superior and will likely be remembered as the last good Civ game.

This comment gets tossed around each time a new Civ comes out. VI is already better than it was at release and I am sure it will continue to improve as more civilizations and features are added (hopefully the world council soon!).

[Fanstar1]

Originally posted by SonicCheetah:

Originally posted by Max Payne:

This is a game that has Catherine de Medici as the ruler of France. They clearly don't care about any of what you typed here. Sorry you wasted your money on this because Civ V is far superior and will likely be remembered as the last good Civ game.

This comment gets tossed around each time a new Civ comes out. VI is already better than it was at release and I am sure it will continue to improve as more civilizations and features are added (hopefully the word council soon!).

hopefully every luxury doesnt get banned by said world council

[Elliott]

Originally posted by Fanstar1:

Originally posted by SonicCheetah:

This comment gets tossed around each time a new Civ comes out. VI is already better than it was at release and I am sure it will continue to improve as more civilizations and features are added (hopefully the word council soon!).

hopefully every luxury doesnt get banned by said world council

And that is why I hope the world council never comes back! Or atleast let me leave the stupid thing.

[Duck from State Farm]

Originally posted by Fanstar1:

Originally posted by Duck from State Farm:

Do you realize Sparta and Athens are both Greek ? Comparing Athens And Sparta to China and Japan is just absurd. If Alexander lead Greece the last five Civ games and now he Leads Macedon and now you say Athens and Sparta needs to be split? I'm sorry If you can Handle Alexander leading Greece the last 5 Civ games and yet you can't stand having a Athens and Sparta leader both lead Greece then this game in not for you.

Every Civ game in the Civilization series for Greece is lead by an ancient Greek leader and believe it or not Athens and Sparta are both Greek and they are known to be as Greek City States. If Sparta and Athens were to be split, they would play more like a City State rather than a full Civ, that's why Greece gets a leader from Athens and one from Sparta and if you can't handle that then go back to Civ 5 and wait for Civ 7 to come out.

point is, Athens and Sparta are so radically different in so many ways that giving them mostly same things just leaves something to be desired.

Guess What, Athens and Sparta are Greek City States, they may be different but they had Greek culture, they spoke Greek, They have Greek Historians, particapted in Greek Olympian Games and like other Greek City-states they both have Hoplite Armies even though Athens is more naval their army has Hoplites like Sparta. Sparta even though it really never was a Naval City state, every Greek City-State that had a Navy had Triemes. They may be Different but they are both Greek along with other City-States of Greece.

Plus you don't realize if Sparta and Athens were split they would play similar to Venice of Civ 5 and Greece would be forced into a fourth Civ with either an anicent Greek leader that you are going to complain to split or a modern Greek leader and seriously how many Greek Civs is too much ?

[travisdead1]

Well, Ranx, not many are as knowledgable about the Greek city-states as you are...they don't want to be, and they don't care :) Why should Firaxis remake the game just to suit you, if most players don't care? :)

Just the whole idea of a Greek "Empire" is ridiculous. The Greek city-states never came together long. When they did it was for a specific short-term purpose, like to fight Persia ( The Delian League). Whenver Greek speaking people wound up in an empire, it was someone ELSE'S empire. Macadon, Rome. But no one cares. The game is fiction :)

Just assume the Greek empire happened like other empires did (which is, again, ridiculous because all empires happened differently). The game is not for the educated. It's just for people.

[hopsblues]

here French and English tanks were of much better quality than German ones in WWII. You had to set the line somewhere.
TIL-The french had tanks in WWII