AIEND

If resistance with any weapon is justified, or that's the problem, other peoples also hunt with javelins or boomerangs, so why not add these weapons to them for self-defense? Why not give them a chopping axe so they can chop down their enemies? In addition, when mentioning this kind of education in ancient times, the default is to refer to men, unless women are specifically mentioned, the Han Dynasty also recorded that Xiongnu people learned to ride horses and bows and arrows since childhood, but they only refer to men, and women of nomadic people may ride horses for herding. , but with the exception of the Scythians, they rarely fought with bows and arrows. And the Persians are not nomads. Their men practiced combat skills from a young age in order to serve the king in the military. Therefore, the king gave the Persians tax-free, and the Persians who were recruited into the army were also men, so women did not need to learn these. Skills that have nothing to do with economic production.

Yes, there is no need to construct an anti-reality stereotype in order to design a "national trait" for the Persians in the game.

Daggers are a special case, because daggers were tools that people would carry with them when they went out, whether it was for self-defense or for cutting food. This has not changed in the Middle Ages, just like people in modern times will carry their mobile phones with them when they go out. And even if they didn't carry a dagger, they would pick up roadside branches and use them as clubs, or pick up stones from the ground and throw them at the enemy.

But the reality of the Han Dynasty is like this. If you feel that it is breaking the balance, then don't make this faction at all. Moreover, the variety of soldiers destroys the balance, and the game makes the advantages of swordsmen and sword cavalry too obvious, and I think they should be made less important.

Even if you join the male and female civilians, I do not recommend letting civilians use bows and arrows to fight soldiers, because bows and arrows are just hunting tools for civilians, not weapons, otherwise why don't they use logging axes, pickaxes, and hoes to fight?

In reality, the crossbow cavalry is weaker than the archer cavalry, so there is no need to do it. I don't know why some people are obsessed with this unit. It is necessary to know that the Han Dynasty is played in the game, not the Qin Dynasty.

Chariots use bows and arrows. High-strength crossbows cannot be used on horses or chariots, so the Chinese feel they are inferior to bows and arrows.

You have to realize that the Chinese do not like to use crossbows on horses or chariots, because it is very inefficient. Although chariots and cavalry were equipped with crossbows in the Qin Dynasty, that was because the Qin army recruited many to expand the size of the army. Caused by people who are not good at riding and archery. The Han Dynasty controlled the army within a certain size and preferred to use a small number of elite soldiers.

Elite crossbowmen use high-strength crossbows, called "蹶张Juezhang" in ancient times, so champion crossbowmen should keep it. Xiongnu's advantage lies in their cavalry archers, their infantry archers are not as good as the Han Dynasty, and the Xiongnu soldiers who surrendered to the Han army in reality only have cavalry.

No, they converted to Buddhism, which is somewhat similar to Manichaeism, and were finally driven by the Mongolians who believed in Islam to Gansu, China, which is now the Yugur. The Uyghurs that China now defines are not really Uyghurs, but the settled indigenous people of the older oasis, who cannot leave their homeland like the nomadic Uyghurs, so they can only be conquered and believe in Islam.

I don't recommend deleting archers and spearmen, because JI is not equal to pike, and it is often not used with shields, but I am in favor of putting crossbowmen in P1, Han should have crossbowmen and spearmen to combine in P1, and archers should shoot Faster and placed in P2, JI should have stronger attack but weaker protection against projectile weapons. Abolish the crossbow cavalry, although there are such units in reality, it is rare, because the use of crossbows on horses is considered to be poor equestrian and not good at using bows and arrows. The cavalry should be sword cavalry for P1, spear cavalry and archer cavalry for P2. Champion I don't know why the chariot should be cancelled. It should be a spearman, a crossbowman, a spear cavalry, and a chariot.

The conversion of the Khazars to Judaism is similar to the conversion of the Uighurs to Manichaeism.

I think it's better to have a field with a barn that takes up a lot of land, and let 8-10 civilians work on it, which can be placed independently from the CC, just like Age of Empires 3.

I have to remind you that it is a stereotype to think that there are few fat women in Asia. And as mentioned earlier, because strong men and women often have thick waists, loose armor is suitable for both men and women.

For example, such a set of armor, there is basically no difference in the wearing effect of men or women.

Most of the time, the bust of women is not larger than that of men, so they can directly wear the same armor, especially the ancient armor is like a straight tube, and the wearer does not care about the chest to waist ratio at all.

As far as China's experience is concerned, there is no "female armor" that highlights women's sexual characteristics, especially in ancient times, bras were not used to support the breasts. Most of the time women's clothes are the same as men's, and the same is true of armor.

Ah, I remember that. does Goguryeo now have a mod too?

What era of Japan? Yayoi period？ Kofun era？

With the advancement of agriculture, millet was gradually replaced by rice and wheat in China, just as wheat replaced oats, rye and barley in Europe. People in the Han Dynasty generally ate millet as a staple food, but now we only use millet to cook porridge.

It was mentioned earlier that the paddy fields should be handed over to the Indians and Han's main crop is millet.

As a kind of memorial building, "paifang" was roughly formed in the Song Dynasty, before it was just the gate of an ordinary residential area. During the Han Dynasty, many of the current Chinese religions were immature, so there was a lack of buildings that could provide aura buffs.

I always don't want to leave what I already know to the next version, we can make Han Dynasty perfect enough in Alpha 26.

The faction of the Han Dynasty is still in a state of incomplete design. Only when the design is formed based on history is it suitable for a balanced discussion of the content. Otherwise like "laozimen", it doesn't make sense to include it in the balance discussion if we end up removing it, I'm stressing that.