Ancient Innovations

[Tanit]

Hey, I started this thread because I've noticed that one thing all history games never take into account is the ingenuity of the ancients. Rare and unique tactics that would pop up from time to time but are never available for players as a way of doing things. I'm talking about such things as the Helepolis at Rhodes, the early Gastrophetes crossbows used by the Makedonians, early siege equipment such as the Sambuca and the fire raiser, Roman innovations like the giant ram used in the Jewish rebellion and the unique siegeworks at Alesia. Also, things like Hannibal's use of Cows with burning bundles tied to them to make the Romans think that they were the Carthaginian army, and the defences of Syracusa invented by Archimedes. There are hundreds of other examples, but I think that perhaps at least a few of these should be made available in some way in EB.:book:

[Shigawire]

the early Gastrophetes crossbows used by the Makedonians

Cool topic. Though, I don't see Makedonians having anything to do with this one. The gastrophete was invented by unknown person in Syrakosion during the reign of Dionysios ca 398 BC. The invention was a direct reaction to the Carthaginian onslaught on the Greek settlements of Sicilia. The agressive siege warfare pressed on by the Punic forces was entirely alien to the Greeks, who were more than enough prepared for passive sieges.

Dionysios was deeply affected by this and was soundly impresed with the negative aspects of passive siege defence.

The gastrophete (belly-bow) was meant to be a "katapeltikon" (shield piercer). It had 25% more range than similar huge handheld bows, thus more power and penetration. It was first put to use when Dionysios besieged Carthage's main supply base in Sicilia, namely Motya. Its use was that of providing covering fire for the siege engineers who were either digging, getting ladders up and so on.
Motya fell, Dionysios razed it. It was never rebuilt. Carthage relocated their main supply base to Lilibeo/Lilybaeum.

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/Graphics/gastraphetes.jpg

In ca 350 BC, a Zopyros of Tarentos, while livingin Cumae, invented a stationary version of the gastrophete. One with a crank. This tremendously increased accuracy and range. The potential energy stored inside was still using the old "flexion" (that of bending wood). But having it stationary allowed it to be of different sizes without being limited by the firer.

You are on the right track, though, in that it was the Makedonians who first made the torsion variant of this device. It was the torsion device which revolutionized artillery, and allowed the production of proper mural artillery. Phillip I was beaten in 354 BC by stone projectors using flexion power, and this prompted Phillip II later to press hard on this technology allowing the torsion technology to take shape. Torsion was naturally best and most powerful when using intestines and sinews of animals..


Among monumental things (allegedly) created, we must not forget the huge warships:
the Leontophoros of Lysimachos. According to Photius (820 AD), it had a crew of 2802 people on board. 1600 rowers, 1200 fighting on upper decks and 2 helmsmen. http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~murray/classes/navsem/leontophoros.pdf

An even more staggering account is of the "Tessarakontese" of Ptolemy IV Philopator. 129.5 meters long.. 4000 oarsmen, 400 officers/ratings/deckhands, 2850 marines. This ship, had it existed, has been speculated to have been mostly for show, because its use for battle has been questioned. The Leontophoros on the other hand was given rave "reviews" in how it handled the sea battle.
http://luna.cas.usf.edu/~murray/classes/navsem/forty.pdf

Size comparison

1: Bus
2: HMS Belfast
http://www.kolumbus.fi/j.m.heikkila/size-comparison_tiedostot/slide0001_image003.gif

modern times
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
antiquity

1:Triere/Trireme
2:Pentere/Quinquireme
3:Seven
4:Leontophoros of Lysimachos
5:Tessarakontese of Ptolemy IV Philopator
http://www.kolumbus.fi/j.m.heikkila/size-comparison_tiedostot/slide0001_image001.gif


While I understand the monumental nature of many of these mechanical wonders, I feel they were far too rare for us to implement in EB. We are trying to portray the "average" overall picture. Dotting this picture with all the rare extremes of technology would be excellent if we could, but we can't do it without making it some kind of standard. And so we must only take into consideration the things which were common enough to warrant a space in EB. Standard stuff. Unfortunately. :wall:

[Geoffrey S]

Edit: double post.

[Geoffrey S]

Perhaps things like the giant ships can be mentioned in messages once a faction passes a certain budget, and can presumably afford to build them?

For instance, if playing as the Romans and the Ptolemaioi pass the 50000 mnai, a message pops up along the lines of:

"The extravagance of those decadent barbarians of the Nile knows no bounds! Why else should they augment their fleet with such a leviathan as their Tessarakontese? Although it's debatable if such a beast should ever be useful in battle it is worrying that the effeminate descendants of Ptolemy believe they have the money and the manpower to fritter away on such luxuries.

Historically, in the summer of 204 Ptolemy IV Philopater laid his eyes upon what may have been the largest ship the ancient world had ever seen, the Tessarakontese. Measuring over 400 feet from prow to stern, and containing over 7000 men as crew, it would surely have dominated the view of all present at its unveiling. Its size would have rendered it too unwieldy for battles, where a ship is better served by being quick to manoeuvre, and therefor would likely have been used as the flagship during naval reviews rather than for any practical military use, but it was a clear sign of the financial power the Ptolemies could present."

Would this be viable?

[Shigawire]

If it was a catamaran, it is certainly viable from an engineering point of view. The only problem with the sheer size of this thing, up until recently, was the material used for the hull. If it was made from wood, of which Ptolemy had in abundance being in control of Lebanon, then a standard hull design would not have survived the stresses induced. However, a recent find suggests that the hull did not need to be your average wooden hull. The scrap of an ancient wooden hull find suggests a tendon-like frame design, similar to the one found in samurai armor. We have seen these in ancient reliefs many times, but without figuring out what they were. If these sort of wooden hulls were used, then the stresses could have been tolerated much better hypothetically by a design like the Tessarakonterese. The ride would have been made much more nauseating however!

Maritime historian Lionel Casson interprets the forty as a catamaran warship made up of two twenties with a raised platform deck spanning the two hulls. The dimensions given by Athenaeus (who wrote in the second century ad) seem fantastic but credible. It is also likely that thirties, and possibly some smaller vessels, were also twin-hulled.

Such vessels weren't complete rarities. The only catamaran galley known by name is Demetrius’s eight, the "Leontophoros", of the early third century bce, but the 336 vessels in the fleet of Ptolemy II Philadelphus (r. 308-246 ad) included two thirties and a twenty.

The forty would look like this in cross-section. Note 20 on each side = 40 :
http://home-3.tiscali.nl/~meester7/teksupergalei.gif


I think you're right that it would have been a great political weapon. Symbols usually are. Imagine seeing something as daunting as this. It would invoke awe in whoever saw it, and reinforce his position as the supernatural being he was supposed to be (Pharaoh). The pyramids didn't have much practical use either, did they?

[Geoffrey S]

But would more messages such as I suggested be possible in EB? If so, I'd love to help out by writing more, or even building/unit descriptions. It's the one thing I can actually help out in, and it seems they need doing.

[Red_Russian13]

But would more messages such as I suggested be possible in EB? If so, I'd love to help out by writing more, or even building/unit descriptions. It's the one thing I can actually help out in, and it seems they need doing.

I dig your idea. It's definately cool to have more neat descriptions; I like getting them. I imagine the scripting would be a lot of work. Good job on your decription though, very interesting.

[Malrubius]

But would more messages such as I suggested be possible in EB? If so, I'd love to help out by writing more, or even building/unit descriptions. It's the one thing I can actually help out in, and it seems they need doing.

Hmm, I can give a trait-message to a faction member if his treasury is above a certain value. I could do them similar to the "271 BC - Year in History" trait though. In a certain year, I can deliver a message to various faction leaders telling them about some wondrous new invention or something.

A caveat could be to require the faction to have a certain number of settlements to make sure they're not getting eliminated or something:



I_NumberOfSettlements numidia > 10


I like putting these sorts of things in. :2thumbsup:

[Geoffrey S]

Hmm, I can give a trait-message to a faction member if his treasury is above a certain value. I could do them similar to the "271 BC - Year in History" trait though. In a certain year, I can deliver a message to various faction leaders telling them about some wondrous new invention or something.
So it wouldn't be possible to use things like the advisor, or a seperate menu popping up at the start of a turn as in the original RTW?

Still, these little details are what I like about EB; even if something can't be included as a usable item (such as rare types of units, or events) references can be included to inform players that they did exist. Things like this ship, or the construction of unique buildings, that kind of stuff.

[Tanit]

Cool topic. Though, I don't see Makedonians having anything to do with this one. :wall:

In the sources I have, the Gastrophetes was quoted as being used by Alexander and his Makedonians in their conquest of the persian naval bases as a mobile light artillery almost.:inquisitive:

[Shigawire]

The devices used by Alexandros were pure torsion devices.
Not gastrophetes. Read what I wrote about the history.

However, in one sense, you are not mistaken. You see, they kept calling it a "gastrophete" even long after it had become a stable firing platform. The first gastrophete (bellybow) required the shooter to put his bodyweight on top with his belly to push it down, gastro = belly (gastronomical = food stuff)..

[Tanit]

There are hundreds of other examples, but I think that perhaps at least a few of these should be made available in some way in EB.:book:

As I said, I only think that some of the more likely inventions should be included. Think on the fact that if these devices had succeeded in their first attempts more admirably then they would most likely have been copied by others. Like the Helepolis of Rhodes. It was a great siege engine, even though it didn't work too well the first time. It could have easily inspired a later general to do something very similar. Perhaps unique siege engines/units could be available for recruitment/building if the general has a certain trait or ancillary like an inventor or a trait called 'creative ideas'.

Other than that, the other ideas, like the ships, could be easily and very interestingly depicted by those pop-ups


In a certain year, I can deliver a message to various faction leaders telling them about some wondrous new invention or something.:book:

:juggle2:

[Dayve]

The defence devices made to defend Syracuse weren't all that impressive to be honest... And Archimide's death ray is a myth...

[O'ETAIPOS]

Dayve, how could you know they weren't impressive?

We save so general info that probably saying that he had built "something" is the only we say without doubt.

This is not invention but I think fit here - if they would start to use coal instead of wood for heating they were able to sustain roman economy and maybe even start industrial age. They had one of the needed techologies - steam engine, and production organisation was on almost industrial level in Roman empire.

[QwertyMIDX]

Carthage was a hell of a lot closer to starting an industrial rev than Rome, they had factory production by the 1st Punic War.

[O'ETAIPOS]

Carthage was a hell of a lot closer to starting an industrial rev than Rome, they had factory production by the 1st Punic War.

Sorry! i forgot to say I mean empire period for those statements :embarassed: ,
still they needed coal to get it going, as there just arent enough trees to burn.

economical problems I mention are that ceramics industry in the imperial period was moving north as the forests were destroyed.

[King of the dutch]

But they didn't need it. They had slaves...loads of 'em. Thats (one of the) reaseans no Industrial revolution ever happend in ancient time. For instance the byzantine empire (i know its further on but anyway) used steam to open doors automaticaly. My medieval history professor told us (although he wasn't sure it was true) that when the byz. emp. invited the Kievans for an alliance they used an hydraulic sustem (!) to lower the emp. from the ceiling (throne an all). The kievans that he was Jesus after that and said: where do we sign for this alliance thingy

grtz kotd

[Tanit]

The defence devices made to defend Syracuse weren't all that impressive to be honest... And Archimide's death ray is a myth...

I wasn't talking about the death ray. And to say that the defences were unimpressive is propably without taking into the account RETROSPECTIVE. You have seen, read and know a lot more than the those who had to face the inventions of Archimedes.

And about the Gastrophetes. My source does describe the 'belly bow' and that is what I was referring to. It must just have been mistaken in saying that Alexander used it. It also listed all of the other Torsion powered siege engines used by Alexander. The fault doesn't lie in my interpretation as far as I can tell but rather in the source.

It would be interesting to have a small unit of siege specialist Eleuthoroi for Syracusa with Gastrophetes, but that's probably outside the time frame.

[GeneticFlea]

could it be possible through scripts to maybe give one unique unit to a ruler at a certain time? for example, if the grastrowhatever thing was present at a certain battle, in the appropriate year, couldnt a message appear for that faction saying your inventors or whatever have come up with a device that might be useful in battle, then your given one unit of that type and no ability to build more...this would simulate that they werent a commonly produced unit or something and that they were only one or two of such a unit. Then youd value you them very much because you only have one, and they could turn the tide of a battle or help with their unique roles, but not be a common part of the army?

[QwertyMIDX]

We dont have a lot of space model of unit space to be screwing around with this sort of thing.

[the_handsome_viking]

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/Graphics/gastraphetes.jpg


Is that the forerunner to the medieval crossbow?

[Shigawire]

No, that is the Gastrophete (belly-bow), forerunner to the catapult. Or rather, that IS the catapult. Katapeltikon = means "shield-piercer" , pelte = shield

The name katapeltikon has remained ever since, even for the mural artillery, which job was not to pierce shields.

Remember, the chinese invented the crossbow seemingly independently.. between 400-200 BC.
But I do see a slight similarity, except the crossbow uses a winch.

[the_handsome_viking]

No, that is the Gastrophete (belly-bow), forerunner to the catapult. Or rather, that IS the catapult. Katapeltikon = means "shield-piercer" , pelte = shield

The name katapeltikon has remained ever since, even for the mural artillery, which job was not to pierce shields.

Remember, the chinese invented the crossbow seemingly independently.. between 400-200 BC.
But I do see a slight similarity, except the crossbow uses a winch.


Thats why I asked, I've seen a lot of people say that the Chinese invented the crossbow and it spread to Europe, however it would appear that the basic idea and design of the crossbow was around anyway and it would seem logical that thats where the European crossbow came from.

[Simetrical]

But they didn't need it. They had slaves...loads of 'em. Thats (one of the) reaseans no Industrial revolution ever happend in ancient time. For instance the byzantine empire (i know its further on but anyway) used steam to open doors automaticaly. My medieval history professor told us (although he wasn't sure it was true) that when the byz. emp. invited the Kievans for an alliance they used an hydraulic sustem (!) to lower the emp. from the ceiling (throne an all). The kievans that he was Jesus after that and said: where do we sign for this alliance thingyHydraulics was definitely known to the ancient Greeks, most notably Hero. Take a look at his Pneumatica (http://www.history.rochester.edu/steam/hero/index.html): he designed stuff like vending machines (http://www.history.rochester.edu/steam/hero/section21.html) and steam engines (http://www.history.rochester.edu/steam/hero/section50.html), as well as the steam-powered temple doors (http://www.history.rochester.edu/steam/hero/section37.html) you mention. I don't know if all of this was used, however. Hero lived around 10–70 CE, well before the Byzantine Empire.

[QwertyMIDX]

The greeks did in fact build a working steam engine, it was used as a children's toy.

[Tanit]

So will any of this innovative information make its way into EB through intriguing pop-ups that add to the game's historical feel and make it just a little bit more unique?

[the_handsome_viking]

So will any of this innovative information make its way into EB through intriguing pop-ups that add to the game's historical feel and make it just a little bit more unique?

Hopefully.

It would be cool if they included a picture of the thing that had been invented too.