Mangekyou

Now this a good point, I forgot about myself.

If it was a ship meant for riverine warfare, it would make a little more sense in its design

DeliciousTomatoesYay

Weird, I swear I posted a post here but it disappeared???

Ajax_Minoan

I don't think the makers of the game found the weapons in Asia that were similar to that used in Europe or the Ottoman Empire to be interesting, so lances and sabers wouldn't be included.
The Meteor Hammer was a real weapon, and it's known that some heavy cavalry in Asia used strange flails. AOE3 seemed to have looked for unique and interesting things to base their units on.
The Samurai Archives Citadel // View topic - Arms and Armor of the Imjin War
Look down several images in this link, and you'll see a picture of an actual Korean cavalry flail.

DeliciousTomatoesYay

Age of Empires 3 might not be accurate but it is fun, I think the developers found what they thought is cool and put it in for China.

purakjelia

I was not talking about Korea or other places of Asia, I was talking about ancient China. China is a civilization which appears in AOE 3, while Korea does not appear in this game. If you want to disapprove my statement, then you should probably find an actual image of an ancient Chinese cavalry flail, not an ancient Korean one. China and Korea are two different nations, and Korean weapons may not represent Chinese weapons.

According to my knowledge, the ancient Chinese did occasionally use flails. However, they were used as infantry weapons for anti-siege purposes. So far, I never heard about flails being used by ancient Chinese cavalry.

I know that the meteor hammer was a real weapon. However, it was most likely a civilian concealed weapon or an assasin's weapon. It was very difficult to handle this weapon, and it demanded lots of skills. It was almost impossible to wield this weapon on horseback; this weapon was simply not designed for cavalry use. And so far, I never heard of a single account about the meteor hammer being used by ancient Chinese army.

Ajax_Minoan

I wasn't attempting to disprove anything you said, I was defending my simple and very general statement.
I never said AOE 3 was historically accurate, or that I use a computer game as a source for anything. What I said is, "Most of the units of the game are based on something real in history."
I'm sure glad your here to tell me that Korea and China are two different nations though.

purakjelia

Most of the weapons in this game are based on something real in history, however, the units in this game are not so real.

Both the meteor hammer and the flail were real weapons, however, they were never used by ancient Chinese cavalry. Therefore, the two heavy cavalry units that China has in this game, the iron flail and the meteor hammer, are unrealistic.

Ajax_Minoan

Your very passionate about Chinese History, and like accuracy. I can dig that.
I have to rest my brain though, and get my game-freak on once in awhile.
I'm not sure why AOE3 chose to have both Iron Flail cavalry and Meteor Hammer cavalry. It seems kind of redundant to me. I think this was a mistake in creativity as well as accuracy.

Deganawidah

In regards to questions and talk of the Mongols using Chinese-built ships to invade Japan as well as Chinese ships generally being built for riverine warfare, these are both correct and have a tie-in. This is part of why the Mongols failed to successfully invade Japan.

With the exception of the early 15th century during the Ming dynasty (voyages of Zheng He), most of pre-modern Chinese naval history has consisted of riverine and some littoral warfare. Chinese ships generally had flatter bottoms and were top heavy, which works well in shallow water but doesn't stand up well in foul weather on open seas.

The Mongols, who by the time of their invasions of Japan in 1274 and 1281 ruled China through the Yuan dynasty and had the Korean kingdom of Goryeo as a vassal state, used Chinese and Korean help to invade Japan. The Chinese had manpower and resources and some shipbuilding experience, so the Mongols utilized them to build ships and provide some additional forces. This was before Korea developed more advanced shipbuilding techniques which would prove successful in these same waters. The Koreans did have experience sailors, however, and the Mongols employed them to operate some ships. Ultimately, the Chinese-built vessels were unable to withstand the winds and waves of a typhoon and nearly the entire Mongol fleet was wiped out. This is a major source of the Japanese concept of "kamikaze", the divine wind that protects the nation.

purakjelia

It's true that the ancient Chinese navy was primarily built for riverine or littoral warfare. However, during the Song Dynasty, due to the fact that Song had lost its northern territories to the Khitans and Jurchens, therefore the northern land silkroad was no longer controlled by the Chinese, and the Song Chinese relied more on maritime trade. The port city Quanzhou was one of the largest ports in the world at that time. At least, the Song era Chinese probably had some maritime sailing experience.

And also, mind you that the Mongols also used Korean ships and Korean soldiers during their invasions of Japan, not just Chinese.

I don't think that any medieval or even Early Renaissance ships could withstand strong sea storms or typhoons. For example, in 1588, the Spanish armada invaded Britain. Only a handful of Spanish ships were sunk by the British, most of their ships were lost because they encountered strong north Atlantic storms off the coast of Ireland.

Enough with the Korean nationalism. I don't think that medieval Korean ships were better than medieval Chinese ships. Most medieval Korean ships were also built for riverine or littoral warfares.