AIEND

I think it would be better to allow watchtowers and forts to be built on neutral land, and then players can build warehouses near watchtowers/fortresses to collect resources. The logic is that any economic activity must first be protected by garrison facilities. If the enemy comes, women or Soldiers can enter the watchtower/fortress for evasion.

Wait, I can't understand, how are birds going to scout the battlefield? Can they transmit the information they see to the breeder in human language? If not, then even if they fly over the entire battlefield, they will not be able to tell humans anything. We have no way of knowing what they saw, where they went, birds were used in ancient times, either pigeons were used to carry letters, or eagles were used to capture prey like dogs, but reconnaissance? It can't be done.

Herbs are good because that's what all ancient peoples used and didn't have too strong a religious/regional identity.

The Han people do not judge the status of the soldier by the cost of weapons/armor, because the weapons are provided by the state. It depends on the difficulty of mastering the weapon, that is, the level of martial arts, mastering the spear/Ji is more difficult than mastering the sword, so the soldiers who use the spear/Ji should appear later. Mastering the bow is more difficult than mastering the crossbow, so the archer should appear later than the crossbowman (not absolutely, it depends on the pull of the bow and the crossbow, the soft bow is easier to master than the strong crossbow). Using a sword and shield on a horse is more difficult than using a bow or spear/halberd with both hands off the reins, so mounted archers and lancers appeared later than sword cavalry.

I've often wondered why the Roman armor protected the lower legs and forearms, but left the thighs and upper arms exposed? You must know that there are quite a lot of large arteries in the thigh. When the Chinese make armor, they always give priority to protecting the upper arm/shoulder and thigh, while the forearm and calf protectors are dispensable.

In fact, the paint peeled sculptures cannot distinguish the folds and armor by color, and this problem also occurs on some cavalry and infantry sculptures.

The more problem lies in the shooting action of the ordinary crossbowman. The crossbowman needs to bend down and step on the crossbow arm to pull the string, and then get up and shoot the arrow. Is that the case at present?

I mean, you don't have to make a 3D model, you don't need a soldier to hold it. You just need to give it as an attribute to Han Diaolou and Fortresses, Civic Centers, Warships. Because the crossbowmen of the Han Dynasty did not use repeating crossbows. The repeated crossbow of the Han Dynasty is a large-scale weapon with great pulling force. Soldiers only use it on some fixed facilities. This is why we call this type of weapon a bed crossbow, because it is placed in a bed like a bed where there are no wheels.

In the early days of the Han Dynasty, this helmet with only the eyes, mouth and nose exposed would be used. Judging from the terracotta warriors of the Han Dynasty, it may be the most equipped helmet. This is the Qin Dynasty helmet still in use in the Han Dynasty, they may be different in the shape of the iron pieces, but the general design is the same, and, they are all iron, the Qin Dynasty only has leather and iron helmets, no bronze Yes, bronze armor was eliminated by China a long time ago.

I suggest that you give the winch repeating crossbow to the Han Dynasty as a technology or faction feature to improve the firepower of the city defense, so that you don't have to study the Han Dynasty repeating crossbow that actually has no reference object.

The problem is that this kind of crossbow from Chu State was not unearthed in the Han Dynasty. As far as written records are concerned, the Han Dynasty people used a much larger repeated crossbow than this, and they used winches. That is to say, the Han Dynasty continuous crossbow is largely the winch crossbow that I suggested you to cancel (used to defend the city instead of attacking the city).

Goguryeo armor and Han Dynasty armor are relatives, because Goguryeo armor is largely dependent on the craftsmen on the Han Dynasty land they occupied, so many times we will refer to them when restoring Han Dynasty armor.

Requires towed trebuchet, battering ram and siege tower. For these siege weapons, we can only refer to the pictures from the Song Dynasty and later. I have not found any unearthed objects or pictures from the Han Dynasty.

The armor skirt covering the thigh is wrong, and the protective gear on the forearm and calf is also wrong. The characteristic of Chinese armor is to try not to increase the load on the calf and forearm, which leads to a decrease in endurance. Because we thought shields and spears would protect those parts. This is the first repeating crossbow

In fact, this soldier model is not in line with historical facts, it is just a "cool" thing that some manufacturers have come up with to sell for money.

This kind of repeating crossbow is more like a scorpion crossbow than an ordinary individual weapon, so except for a few generals, such as Li Guang, soldiers will not be equipped with it, because they have a lot of pulling force, and ordinary people can't pull it away. If the repeating crossbow in your mind is this kind of weapon, it only appeared in the Ming Dynasty.

Are you talking about Goguryeo or North Korea? The former uses Chinese armor.

If you want, you can give government ministers long swords so they can fight.

Requires a new helmet, as well as new armor. Some Chinese armors have a “Penling” around the neck, so a helmet that goes with it will look simpler.

1 and 2 go well with A and B andD. 3, 4, 5, and 6 are suitable for matching with C, but it should be noted that the C-type helmet should be iron, and the top is a whole round iron piece. As for the F-type helmet, I don't seem to see a "tongxiukai" that fits with it, the 5-type armor looks like it but is missing something.

More often, the long sword that appeared on the brick carvings of the Han Dynasty is called Banjian, which is a wooden ceremonial prop, which has been recorded in the literature. We haven't seen the use of the long sword in the military establishment. In fact, you should know that the long sword is a very difficult weapon in our opinion. It is heavy but not powerful enough for slashing.

1. But the Roman cavalry controlled the spear with one hand, not the Ji with two hands like the Han army. 2. Chinese court guards use long weapons including Ji. In China, long swords are generally worn by nobles when they wear dresses to show their class status. They are not used in battle, and they are basically not seen on soldiers. 3. I mean, there shouldn't be any protective gear on the calf, there is no such ancient object unearthed.

It's weird that archers look more like spearmen and spearmen look more like archers.

But how did those infantry like archers show that they existed until later? In fact, in the Total War series of games, even in the period of the Parthian Dynasty, they were still portrayed as "Eastern Infantry".

Actually one of the things that puzzles me about some mods and game designs including EB2 is that any kind of Persian infantry they make looks like an archer, where the spear always doesn't have a helmet (but may wear a breastplate ), and only a hood, carrying a large shield that is not suitable for hand-to-hand combat. But in reality, the Athenians captured an Assyrian pointed helmet worn by the Persians. Herodotus' book also contains records of Assyrian infantry in the Persian army. Why not make the Persian spearmen into Assyrians What about people like that?