Forums
-
Welcome
-
- 5,3k
- posts
-
- 38,5k
- posts
-
- 16,7k
- posts
-
-
0 A.D.
-
- 51,1k
- posts
-
- 28,1k
- posts
-
- 47,9k
- posts
-
- 30,1k
- posts
-
- 44,4k
- posts
-
- 148
- posts
-
- 600
- posts
-
- Who Else?
- By AlexHerbert,
-
-
Who's Online 5 Members, 2 Anonymous, 594 Guests (See full list)
-
Topics
-
-
Posts
-
By ittihat_ve_terakki · Posted
I didn’t fully understand your message, what exactly is not supported by evidence? Most of the buildings in the game are fictional. Most of the decorations are fictional. The soldiers clothing in the game is also fictional and it has to be, even if you take inspiration from examples in various museums you still have to design it fictionally because there’s no other choice. Historically, we don’t have precise knowledge about things from thousands of years ago. That’s why I strongly disagree with the statement, “If we want to add objects and decorations, there has to be a meaning to it.” It’s completely incorrect. If we are going to make a historical correction about the Kurgan above, first of all, the grassy green hill is not accurate. That vegetation is something that formed naturally over time due to neglect after these structures were abandoned. When you look at them today, that’s what you see now but they were not like that when they were originally built. If a mound was constructed while the structure was in use, it would likely have been covered with stones or decorated in a way that gave it a more structured appearance. If historical accuracy is a concern, then it’s a problem for both cases anyway because we simply don’t have enough historical data to achieve complete accuracy. If I’m playing a game and I have to choose between a visually engaging example and a boring one, I will definitely choose the first. -
@Henry852 It's working again now, by the way, so you can now open the link I sent. -
.thumb.jpg.b21ca1d0c15fb56b42c39b25a0a40815.jpg)
A kurgan is a tomb. I understand your reasoning, but it's not supported by evidence. It was very common for tombs and burial sites to be looted or damaged a few generations after their construction. These kinds of monuments weren't venerated by the whole of society; it was a form of ancestor worship. It is, in a way, an expression of power. If the ruling clan changed, the monuments associated with the previous clan weren't maintained. I understand the criticisms regarding the aesthetic aspects; they are valid. However, any historical or sociological interpretation must be supported by facts and observations. If we want to add objects and decorations, there has to be a meaning to it. -
Ok, I'll do and see if it still happens.
-
The first one doesn't seem to be based on real-world examples from the Scythian period. But in your mod, you can do whatever you want. Do you have any suggestions for improving the second one?
-
