===[TASK]=== Differentiating Britons and Gauls

[Mythos_Ruler]

Let's discuss ways to visually (and otherwise) differentiate the Britons and the Gauls.

How they are currently different:

• Different Civic Centers
• Britons get slinger at the CC, while the Gauls get skirmisher
• Different Heroes
• Different Champions
• Different Fortresses
• Britons have the Kennel and War Dog
• Gauls have the Rotary Mill

Ideas on how they could be further differentiated

• Britons Civic Center could turn into a Crannog when preview is hovered over the shoreline, then built.
• Britons could have access to two different types of War Dogs, each with slightly different stats and uses: Mastiffs and Wolfhounds.
• Both could have different Wonders. Right now all we have as candidates are Stonehenge and White Horse.
• Britons can keep the round huts for houses, while the Gauls get rectangular "longhouses" to match their rectangular Civic Center.
• Gallic defense tower can remain square, while the Britons get roundish defense towers.
• The Blacksmiths could be slightly different.
• Perhaps some shared special techs and bonuses (for all Celtic civs), but some different techs and bonuses as well.

[Enrique]

Maybe use this as a base for the Gallic market as you suggested too:

http://www.wildfireg...&attach_id=5842

I'd like to get into this ASAP so, suggestions about this task are really welcome.

[Lion.Kanzen]

clothing

During the later Iron Age the Gauls generally wore long-sleeved shirts or tunics and long trousers (called braccae by the Romans).[79] Clothes were made of wool or linen, with some silk being used by the rich. Cloaks were worn in the winter. Brooches and armlets were used, but the most famous item of jewellery was the torc, a neck collar of metal, sometimes gold. The horned Waterloo Helmet in the British Museum, which long set the standard for modern images of Celtic warriors, is in fact a unique survival, and may have been a piece for ceremonial rather than military wear.

Source: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Celts#Gaul

Edited September 4, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

In the fields of architecture, the romans surpassed the gauls, like they surpassed everybody anyway.

But that doesn't means the gauls had a primitive architecture. In fact they had a very unique style.

Again contrary to the popular belief, they did build more than just huts and longhouse. Their cities were fully paved, like their roads, their road systhem was one of the most develloped and well kept of those time, with every roads being made of stone or woods. Only the poorer lived in huts, and most of them had big houses, improved from generations to generations, with fine artwork all around the house, low relief, sculptures, and paintings. The cities had big administrative buildings, again with lots of artwork and decorations, large public facilities (even baths, although not as extended as the romans ones), large central places...

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/archive/index.php/t-141929.html

[Lion.Kanzen]

While I'm not an expert, at the very least I'm an enthusiastic fan of all things Celtic, so here's my semi-educated guess regarding the differences:

GALLIC UNITS:

- Higher percentage of armoured units

- Somewhat better discipline

- More mounted units

- Mostly spears, longswords and javelins for weapons

CELTIC UNITS:

- Closer to the stereotypical image of the bare-chested barbarian warriors

- Less body armour, though not necessarily helmets

- Less discipline, units rely more on a savage charge

- Less mounted units (and probably with lighter equipment)

- More variety in weaponry; shortswords and axes in addition to spears, longswords and javelins

Rhomphaiaphoros in http://www.twcenter....llic-quot-units

Cavalry

Edited September 4, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

the Gauls are more like Romans and Greeks, i mean more sophisticated than Britons.

more artistic props, may be? Finest metalworking.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

Edited September 4, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

Props for Gaulish civ.

Now the Britons

How they Looked

The Celts seem to have had a reputation for being tall (Boudica was no exception) and strong. At about the time the Romans came to Britain, the tribesmen in southern England would probably be wearing long-sleeved tunics and long trousers, which the Romans regarded as barbaric. The women wore long tunics (dresses) and both sexes wore cloaks of wool, thick and heavy in winter and much lighter in summer. These colourful cloaks would be held together with ornamental brooches. Both men and women loved jewellery and wore necklaces, bracelets and anklets as decoration and to show off their wealth and status.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

Iceni Houses

The Battersea Shield probably dates from the 1st century BC or early 1st century AD, though an earlier date is possible, and dates from as early as 350 BC have been suggested. It was dredged from the bed of the River Thames in London in 1857, during excavations for the predecessor of Chelsea Bridge; in the same area workers found large quantities of Roman and Celtic weapons and skeletons in the riverbed, leading many historians to conclude that the area was the site of Julius Caesar's crossing of the Thames during the 54 BC invasion of Britain.

The Battersea Shield is decorated with repoussé decoration and enamel. The decoration is in the typically CelticLa Tène style, consisting of circles and spirals. As a decorative piece it would not have been an effective shield in combat. As it shows no signs of battle damage, it is believed that the shield was cast into the river as a votive offering and was never used in battle. The metal plate of the shield that remains would have been fixed onto a plain, round wooden shield behind it.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

• Gallic defense tower can remain square, while the Britons get roundish defense towers.
  

different to Normand Tower.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[Lion.Kanzen]

The Gauls have a Council.

How the Aedui Confederacy works;

The Aedui and their associates in the confederacy are by and large independent of one another. Each tribal kingdom (of which there are 3 in 272) is free to engage in small-scale wars and conquests, and should not expect help from anyone else. They make their own rules, and set their own policies in their land. They raise troops independently.

Land conquered belongs to the tribe that conquered it. The Aedui, typically, just subjected the land to the confederacy, creating a local semi-independent council, the same as any of the other kingdoms in the confederacy had (these would be type 2 governments). There was also attempts at expansion of land for the Vergobret (the high magistrate, head of the confederacy's council, which I'll get to). Those are type 1 governments. The tribes in a type 1 region still have their own, independent council though. However, the Vergobret is free to enter those territories. I will make this clear; the Vergobret, under no circumstances except for actively being run out, can not leave territories officially designated as his. Those are Type 1 territories only. However, the local tribe in a Type 1 is free to do as they please, and has a seperate council.

However, the Aulerci and Insubres weren't so forgiving, historically. They forced other tribes into submission, and at times wholesale incorporated lands into their domain. In such an instance, they set up a local client, but that client was subject to the conquerors council (so the new land is taken, and all the tribes there-in, become part of the conqueroring tribe). That'd be Type 3 governments. A Type 3 region has no independent council or leaders to play. The region has no vote in the large council.

Type 4 governments are allies. Allies are free to do what they want, and even during a war should not feel compulsed to actively fight the enemy, though they may need to defend themselves. Allies would be quite a seperate bag to play.

Land grabs are a big issue; each tribe in the confederacy is gunning for land of their own. Since the lands they conquer belong only to them (or to whoever they give it to), and they choose how to develop it, there was a lot of racing to conquer and subjugate more neighbors than the other members of the confederacy.

When the confederacy works together;

There are two main instances when the confederacy operates as a single structure.

The high council meetings - Bi-yearly meetings of a senate-like body. Meet at the start of spring and fall. The king of each tribe went in person, or sent a diplomat of some authority (a Gobre; a magistrate), to the lands of the Vergobret. So, each independent tribe would be present, but NOT clients, and NOT non-Celtic allies, except perhaps Germans (given that Germans sometimes worshipped Celtic deities, and the council is directly tied to druidic worship). Each tribe present gets one vote, including the tribe from who the Vergobret comes. The Vergobret himself has three seperate votes for himself (giving, effectively, the tribe who controls the position 4 votes).

So, what does the council vote on?

The heir to the Vergobret; when a new Vergobret comes to power, the first council meeting after he is in power, the council votes to elect his heir. The heir can be any powerful leader in the confederacy, in Gaul. It does not have to be a descendant or relation of the current Vergobret. However, because in 272 BC the Vergobret is an Aedui, it is likely for a while the Vergobret to be will be an Aedui as well. Since the Insubres and Aulerci each only have one vote, even if they both voted for one potential Vergobret (a non-Aedui one), the Aedui have one vote, plus an Aedui Vergobret with three. As more independent tribes appear in the council, the looser Aedui control becomes. However, in such a case, there is a lot of politicking; tribes need to get along enough to select one opposition to out-vote the Aedui. So, subject tribes aren't always the best way to go if you want a non-Aedui Vergobret at any point.

Trade agreements and other treaties; When and who to initiate with, over what.

Treasury allocation; the Aedui maintained a central treasury composed of the 'dues' each tribe paid. While each tribe had their own treasury as well, this treasury existed to provide extra funds to tribes who wanted them for whatever reason. More or less "Will we pay to build something in X region". These votes were extremely important. Pretty simple reasoning; Tribe A supports Tribe B's bid for extra funding to build new things in Tribe B's lands. Tribe B later repays the favor by voting for an initiative Tribe A initiates. Likewise, it's a means for the Vergobret to build up support for his initiatives from outside his own tribe; by handing out the ever important treasure to the tribes, he can gain their support for his selection for the next Vergobret, to go to war, etc.

Large scale war; an enemy of equal or greater size threatens the confederation, or has attacked, or there is a desire to go on a large scale war with a particular enemy. There is a vote at the next council to determine what to do, who fights, etc. Allies have no vote in this, but also have no compulsion to fight. Also, when to sue for peace. In this instance remember that those that voted to not go to war often didn't go to fight until the threat was more or less on top of them. Why? Well, you have political enemies in the confederation, most likely; some one didn't support your initiatives or what not, and you let the war go on till they're defeated. Then you don't need to ever deal with them in the council again. Or, you may just be concerned about how few soldiers you have, and don't want to risk ruining your small local army against an enemy.

Hope that's helpful for the time being.On druids;

Around 8 druids from the Carnutes would go to the bi-yearly council meeting. Sometimes observers from Britain would join too, but they didn't vote, so, no concern there. These 8 druids from the Carnutes DID vote though. Regardless of their number (since it might be more or less), they got 2 votes. These druids would probably not be military leaders, but probably diplomats. Between these men, they would come to an agreement on how to use these two votes.

Diplomats in Gaul would be druids. They would meet in the druidic council in Aulercia (remember it? It's a unique building). While others could sit in on the council (kings, mainly) and offer their point of view, they would have no vote. So, what would the druids vote on? A few things;

Druids raised their own armies, which were not beholden to any of the other councils. They should be the only council capable of raising Carnutes. The Aulerci have no say in that, or how they're used. However, the confederacy's large council can vote to mobilize the druids against a specific enemy. The druids had no appeal against this; it was one of the few times druids could be actively forced to do anything.

But, that's not all druids did. Druids controlled the building of new temples, for example. Building temples was done by the druids paying a local workforce. However, sometimes, to get the support of the druids in the next big council meeting of the confederacy's heads, the people of the region would pay to build new temples themselves when the druids requested one be built there. Druids, however, did NOT control to whom the temple was dedicated; the local high druid of a region would dedicate the temple to an appropriate local deity. Druids recruited for their army in any region with a substantial temple

Druids could, similar to being forced to fight, vote to state an injunction against a member of the confederacy, or anyone in Gaul that followed the druids (not the Arverni). The confederacy, or any other Gaul, could NOT give money or assistance to the tribe that suffers the injunction until the druids lift the injunction. No money, no military aide, not food during a famine, and not allowed to vote in the confederacy. This was typically lifted when the tribe in question gave aide to another tribe that was in good with the druids themselves, or aided the druids. It was the basis of their political power, and it was a huge amount of power.

Druids could also name a geas for a person, as well as a tribe. For a larger body, like a tribe or kingdom, this was typically the conquest of new lands, or uniting a tribe into their lands (more or less reasoning it'd be better to incorporate as many tribes together as possible in certain cases). As such, they give a closer knit, unified goal for the faction, as opposed to the disorganized, 'every man for himself' nature of the intertribal council. They can only exercise a large geas once every 10 years though, but it can be exercised over the whole of the confederacy, or just over a single tribe, or given to a man (for example in game, a specific general might be given a goal to meet like personally conquering a region or defeating an enemy army); giving a geas to a man was allowed at any time though, although a single man could not be given more than three geasa in his lifetime. Failure of a tribe to meet the geas by simply not attempting it may result in an injunction. Not meeting a geas was, at times, grounds on which one justified commiting ritual suicide, as a geas was considered that important.

Local tribal councils;

Each tribe had its own councils. They decided how to arm the levy, what soldiers to raise, what to build, where to fight, etc. Pretty simple. Any major decisions go through the council. More key would be, who would be on this council.

Typically, you have your key nobles (generals, family members, and just lower nobles who potentially wouldn't even have a character in-game at the time), the chiefs and lesser chieftains, who had one vote in all matters. Nobles too low class would lack any votes. The council on average would have 3-12 such men. There'd also be a druid, acting as the king or chieftain's chief advisor. This druid and the king had 1 or 2 votes on matters that required voting, depending on what the matter was, the nobles each had one vote. The king had 2 votes in military matters, the druid had only 1. His druid had 2 votes in all other matters, where the king only had 1. As such, a Gallic tribe is actually run, more or less, by two men; a king and a druid, depending on the situation. Of course, either can be overruled by the other voters in either situation where they've got the advantage.

So, as can be seen, it's a bit complex, lots of various councils, each with their own authority and purpose, and all of them tied together some way.

All taken from tow enter forum.

So we have a Celtic Nation some Greek influenced , so a building like Athenians, Macedonias, Spartans, a Council Chamber?

Edited September 4, 2013 by Lion.Kanzen

[sanderd17]

Ideas on how they could be further differentiated

• Britons Civic Center could turn into a Crannog when preview is hovered over the shoreline, then built.
  

You sure have a tendency to ask for stuff that no developer thought about implementing before.

[LordGood]

hey guys, i made a brythonic tower!

screenshot0014.bmp

[WhiteTreePaladin]

That's a 90MB screenshot! lol

[LordGood]

lol i took the big screenshot xP

Ill take a smaller one once i get the shields on it!

[sanderd17]

With a ladder to reach it! Nice work.

[Ludo38]

That's a 90MB screenshot! lol

Lordgood is an epic guy in every way !!

[Enrique]

I haven't seen yet the sceenshot yet because of its size... (connecting from my phone)

We removed the max. Attachment size because we needed some quick file sharing here in the forums, but we'll appreciate if we you can avoid such file sizes for a single screenshot.

Ontopic: I'm working on new gaul houses and market models. Feel free to give a try to another buildings if you are in the mood. (specially a different barracks would be good)

[Loki1950]

He could just convert it from a .bmp to jpeg or png that should cut the file size down to something reasonable

Enjoy the Choice

[LordGood]

lol took me a while to realize the normals were inside out on the shields

[Lion.Kanzen]

i like, is possibly do more darker the roof in all buildings?

[Mythos_Ruler]

It's not bad, and definitely looks different from the current square ones. I'd recommend the roof be a little shorter though. And the wooden beams mapped to look higher res. Maybe use a different wood texture.

[Enrique]

Hey looking great LordGood!

The top structure looks like it is not very stable though. Celts did not built with such standards as the romans or hellenes, but they made very robust structures.

You can also try to make another variation just for the roof with wood planks making also a cone-shaped roof, but keep also this one, just rearrange the wooden posts where the roof is resting.

[leper]

Can we use that shot for the next dev report?

[Lion.Kanzen]

yeah we can change textures in order to differentiate more easy.