Jump to content

Genava55

Community Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2.478

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    88

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Genava55

    A call for umbrella factions

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Genava55

    Another similar idea that could give the game more flexibility on certain factions would be to include certain references to specific tribes. I'm thinking in particular of the Gauls: we could take advantage of the assembly building to include technologies linked to various tribes emblematic of their history, and other tribes with interesting characteristics. The Arverni, Aedui and Belgians, for example, are emblematic peoples, with interesting historical figures and different characteristics. But there are also lesser-known tribes who were mentioned by the Romans and Greeks and took part in historic events.

    It would be conceivable to form coalitions in the assembly building, in order to gain certain attributes specific to certain tribes. Acquire new bonuses or new units. For example, the Treveri were known as the best horsemen in Gaul, or the Veneti had the best fleet of all Gallic tribes.

    We could move the assembly building (Remogantion) to the second phase. Then make certain units dependent on the choices the player makes in creating his coalition. Adding a tribe to your coalition should have a certain starting cost, but with a doubling of the cost for each additional tribe you add to the coalition. For example, 100F/100W/100M for the first tribe, 200F/200W/200M for the second, 400F/400W/400M for the third, and so on.

    - Aquitanians would unlock the recruitment of Soliduroi (champion swordsmen) and give a bonus of hit points to heroes (to represent bodyguards).

    - The Treveri would give several cavalry bonuses to represent their reputation as the best cavalry in Gaul.

    - The Lemovices would give bonuses in metal extraction to represent the numerous gold mines they exploited.

    - The Veneti would give bonuses to all ships, including fishing boats and merchant ships.

    - The Boii would give bonuses to infantry to represent the warriors who fought in Italy and used pilum similar to the Romans.

    - Alpine peoples would unlock the recruitment of axe-wielding warriors and naked fanatics.

    etc.

    This is just a series of examples that I can extend and explain in detail the historical and archaeological points.

    • Like 5

    Hot take: GUI mods are NOT cheats and we should not regulate their use (+ general discussion about cheat prevention)

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Genava55

    3 hours ago, Classic-Burger said:

    How do you avoid that if it is opensource?

    Opensource and linux compatible.

    It is impossible to block all cheaters and too difficult for a small community.

    However it is important to maintain the pure rejection and social shaming of people cheating on multiplayer games.

    Ban them at sight.

    Civ: Germans (Cimbri, Suebians, Goths)

    in Delenda Est

    Posted · Edited by Genava55

    4 hours ago, Obskiuras said:

    About helmets, i don´t know much, could you give us examples of helmets of that time?

    Cimbrian war is 113–101 BC, so at this time those were still used (iron helmets):

    unknown.png?ex=67ddea9c&is=67dc991c&hm=482bc59c1407a630b6238ecedab4ebc2fbfe454625a41cbea4f136c9387c0d3b&=

    Fork_2.png?ex=67dddc47&is=67dc8ac7&hm=d3434a6e394335dcbc4cb633937873ee2b87e6d0ade9d3fb2629d804584e12ed&=

    and those started to appear (bronze helmets):

    image.thumb.jpeg.34b5cd70a3700df742baae4ceb9ca14e.jpeg

    image.jpeg.75ffa76505e4eda8bb4bdb0c1c6ba994.jpeg

    There is also the Roman montefortino, which used by Gauls too.

    image.thumb.jpeg.18d863c771c89d25de755881c14c9b16.jpeg

    • Thanks 1

    Civ: Germans (Cimbri, Suebians, Goths)

    in Delenda Est

    Posted

    The basic units are a bit boring:

    image.png.c7b2facba84b1f1fb532a1355d070f2f.png

    image.png.89cda48dc5e05976f5d4c272700b55c7.png

    image.png.c9c66031892b8a8617718ae116ff8686.png

    The helmets are not compatible with the Cimbrian wars, those helmets are posterior, and the alesia helmet in bronze never existed:

    image.thumb.png.bcb5677d09e6918dc332ba9a2f6f7a7f.png

    image.png.143f019c60deb4cde6ccaa4dc714ddd3.png

    There is a large mix up of shield bosses from centuries much before the Cimbrian war and shield bosses from after.

    image.png.6141b2cc43912129caa321a42919f041.png

    image.png.54094a5821b7de74ae351afce128ca15.png

    Weird wolf warrior, not sure from which source it came from:

    image.png.eae1e397afb04cde5a12459dde73b9d4.png

    Boiorix uses a helmet from the end of the Gallic Wars, so decades later:

    image.png.e79d201133ed974c8f93e68afc1f5f0d.png

    • Thanks 1

    Epilektoi Infantry

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    6 hours ago, Carltonus said:

    The latter is what I suggested as logades on a thread from long ago.

    Logades means almost the same thing than Epilektoi. Logades was the term used during the 5th century BC. In the 4th century, they prefered Epilektoi.

    6 hours ago, Carltonus said:

    I do have, and it is most direct of translations: "Chosen Hoplites".

    Chosen Hoplites is fine. The other possibility could be Veteran Hoplites. Epilektoi were often chosen from people with previous experience as levied hoplites. 

    Classical Iranian Culture and Religion

    in Introductions & Off-Topic Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Veridagorin said:

    Does anyone here have suggestions for books, and online resources that I could check out.

    Amélie Kuhrt's book is very useful but if you want something focusing on the society, I would suggest "The World of Achaemenid Persia", "A History of Zoroastrianism (Zoroastrianism under the Achaemenians)" and "Women in Ancient Persia, 559-331 BC".

    Check the table of contents of "The World of Achaemenid Persia" and see if it could interest you.

    • Like 3

    Epilektoi Infantry

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Genava55

    Epilektoi means "chosen" or "selected", and it was used to designate elite troops. In Athens, it was plausibly a permanent elite force during the 4th century BC.

    City Guards is not a good equivalent for a translation.

    Just curious discussion: The dress of the Thespians

    in General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Genava55
    Corrected a spelling mistake from the original text which has been interpreted as a slur

    On 10/11/2021 at 4:06 PM, Phalanx said:

    I'm just curious about this, we have the Thespian Black Cloak in the game files, are there any actual historical references to Thespians wearing black/having black cloaks? Or is it just based off of that one drawing that became the definitive version of the Thespians?

    I'm not pushing for change here, I'm mostly just curious about the historical facts.

    Seems to have been a modern legend:

    https://web.archive.org/web/20160304023218/http://www.sparta.markoulakispublications.org.uk/index.php?id=133

    Spoiler

    What the Thespians hoplites looked like?

    by Nikolaos Markoulakis, oct. 2007

    It was quite a long time ago that I received the following question from a Σparta’s reader: what the Thespian hoplites looked like? I must confess the question is interesting and should be of importance for a great number of reenactors (sic) and modelists (sic). At the same time the question is difficult to be answered regardless of its easiness and simplicity. It is, thus, a good idea to limit the question’s time broadness to a specific time of period, and we can do that by asking what the Thespian hoplite looked like in 450 to 420 B.C.E?

    As you can realize my attempt to reconstruct the uniform used by the Thespiae’s hoplites starts thirty years later of Thermopylae. It was a time of period in which Thespiae had the right to construct its coins. We have two examples of coins; the one c. 456 – 446 in which the one side represents a Boeotian shield and the other an amphora with a crescent at its lower right. The other c. 431-424 has representations of a Boeotian shield, on its one side, and an inscription ΘΕΣ above a crescent. The question that must be answered before we try to draw some conclusions of the potential and more likely symbols of the Thespian’s shield, is as follows: can we trust the iconography representation available in coins?

    In my opinion the answer of the above question is no. Unfortunately we cannot take in granted and drive into conclusions of the equipment and symbolism used on hoplite’s shield devices from coins’ and pottery’s iconography (see foo.1). However, iconography can generate different conclusions, such as the religious practices, mythological concepts, general artistic attitudes, trade and financial wealth and even political/governmental stability and/or independence. These are also the conclusions that can be drawn from the already mentioned Thespian coins. There is no evidence, therefore, that can support – or definitely discard – that coins portrait shield devices and/or shield shapes. Thus, we cannot claim that a unified common blazon was in place on Thespians’ shields. We can claim that the Boeotian shield design should have been a common shield blazon as easy as to claim that the crescent was a common blazon.

    Most reasonable is to say that the Thespians had in common practice the norm of ‘individual blazons’. We can even suggest that inspiration have been drawn mainly from their allies and neighbors. Most likely, when in the case of the Thespian integration to the Theban governed Boeotian league, in the early 420s, and much later (c.379) with the Spartans, their shield blazon should have been more unified.

    As far as their entitlement as melachites, I must confess that I never heard before this title for Thespiae’s hoplites and/or for any of the hoplites. Once again that is a tendency to stick the element of uniformity and contingency. There is no evidence whatsoever that address the Thespian’s uniform as black and/or dark cloaked, as the term melachites points out.

    Let us see now where we can find it in literature. The term melachiton (μελαχίτων) which means literary the black-cloaked is mentioned at the chorus in Aeschylus’ Persians which seems to be more like an allegorical image of a ‘scared heart’ (Aesh. Pers. 115). The same kind of meaning – the scared and weak – can been seen in Eumenides, the black-robed, μελανείμων, and the bringers of fear and of self-destruction (Aesh. Eumenides 2.38). There is also the μελαμπέπλῳ στολῇ, the black-robe in which Admetor was dressed – as well as the Spartan Tundareos (Orestes 12.43)- for their πὲνθος (Alcestis 258, 425), extreme sense of sadness. It is also mentioned by Herodotus (4.102,1; 4.107.1) as μελάγχλαινος, the back-cloaked, but for non of the Greek armies and hoplites but rather for the nation-tribe neighboring Scythians as they had also the same customs, who they named as such because of their black uniforms.

    For me, thus, it makes more sense to call the Scythians black-cloaked rather than the Thespians. But why, regardless the literary and iconography lack of evidences many believe that the Thespians wore a black-cloak? For some believe that the Thespian army was dressed in black because they worshiped the Melainis Aphrodite, meaning ‘the dark one’ or ‘of the graves’, which was an epithet of the Goddess under which she was worshiped at Corinth (Paus. 2.2.4; ff. 8.6.2, 9.17.4; Athen. 8). I cannot see any mentioned evidences that linked the cult with Thespiae and if indeed there was a cult of Melainis Aphrodite why it became the reason of the supposed black-cloaked Thespians and not of the Corinthians who were so well-known of their cults in honor of the Goddess? And why only the Thespians choose to wear a color so much interrelated with sadness and bad luck? I am sure they did not. It is difficult for me to imagine that only the Thespiae’s hoplites decided to bring with them bad fortune’s symbol at war.

    • Like 1

    Some bonuses for Carthaginians?

    in Gameplay Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Genava55

    Carthage deserves a rework, based on sources that are a little more researched than the usual superficial summaries.

    I don't really understand what the Numidians are doing in the civic center. These were not Carthaginian citizens, but allied troops - in other words, auxiliaries - who fought for Carthage under political agreements. Several Numidian peoples were direct clients of Carthage, so I can see why they're part of the standard roster. But not in the civic center.

    Slightly problematic are the Libyan lancers, who aren't necessarily at their best in the civic center. Carthage may have massively recruited Libyans into its armies, but the status of citizens for these troops was not systematic. In fact, Carthage mainly enlisted peasants from subjugated states. These peasants also worked in the fields of Carthaginian estates. Their status as peasants argues for integration into the civic center, but their status as foreign citizens argues for the opposite.

    I find that it also lacks mention of Libyphoenicians. They made up an important part of the Carthaginian troops and were Phoenician citizens in the other North African colonies. Libyphoenicians were known for their cavalry. In this case they could be recruited in the civic center.

    • Thanks 1

    "Germans"

    in General Discussion

    Posted

    4 hours ago, Classic-Burger said:

    But Han was not the only dynasty, nor were the Maurya the only Indian kingdom.

    For the moment, they are the only representatives of these peoples. But potentially, we could have several representatives of certain civilizations. I am thinking in particular of the Romans, the Persians and the Chinese.

×
×
  • Create New...