For a New Faction: Lusitanian.

[Ardworix]

11 hours ago, Genava55 said:

 

 

Você alegou isso várias vezes, mas os relevos que usou como referências são aqueles:

Esses relevos são datados de períodos agosanos e tiberianos. Esses tipos de monumento geralmente misturam as armas de vários inimigos e a confiabilidade é baixa. Por exemplo, vários monumentos gallo-romanos retratam a pele da Amazônia ao lado de outras armas. Além disso, mesmo que fossem de fato armas tiradas das guerras cantabrianas, eu não diria que os romanos tomaram a esquamata lorica dos lusitanos.

Before, to be clear, I'm not talking about anything new. Archaeologists and historians, such as Conde de Clonard, in his work "Album de la Infanteria Española" of 1861.... in this way he already portrayed the "lusitanians" (Celtiberians and turdetanos).

Clonard's main source, as well as that of other historians and archaeologists, to portray the Lusitanians, Celtiberians, Cantabrians, as I mentioned earlier, are the records on Roman coins depicting warriors and weapons used by them, in addition, of course, to classical texts. The "recent" archaeological discoveries, such as Celtic ceramics, statuary, ex vows, etc... are also important sources, and that corroborate others, for the representation of Celtiberian clothing and by desideratum of the Lusitanians, since they use the same weapons and costumes.

Here are the images that follow representations expressed, in Celtiberian ceramics, of warriors wearing scale armor:

Even more expressed, in particular the Lusitanians use of the lorica scale, is a coin from Servilia dated to the year 127 BC, which depicts the fight between two knights. The use of a double-edged sword, of the "antenna" type, denounces that he is a warrior from the Celtic area of Iberia. Even more representative in this are the traditional side braids, and wearing scale armor:

As for the squamata loric being of Roman origin or not, I maintain that it is of Celtic origin. In any case, ad argumentandum tantum, even though it was of Roman origin, its use by the Lusitanian and the Celtiberians has been proven, as is the case with linothorax (this one, yes, of Mediterranean origin).

The portico I referred to, as far as I remember, is from the Augustus period, in reference to the victory in the Cantabra War, and for that reason it bears weapons, such as the caetra, and the gladius hispaniensis, undoubtedly of Galaic origin, other weapons are in reference to other conquests, and that can correlate the squamata loric among which, it is a possibility.... as well as galaic, it is something that cannot be discarded. Even though it is the victory of another people, it denounces and corroborates, once again, that the squamata loric is not of Roman origin, but of Celtic origin.

 

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Ardworix

[Genava55]

4 hours ago, Ardworix said:

Even more expressed, in particular the Lusitanians use of the lorica scale, is a coin from Servilia dated to the year 127 BC, which depicts the fight between two knights. The use of a double-edged sword, of the "antenna" type, denounces that he is a warrior from the Celtic area of Iberia. Even more representative in this are the traditional side braids, and wearing scale armor:

Gaius Servilius Vatia minted coins about his experience against the Macedonians or about the experience of his ancestors during the Punic Wars. The coins you are referring have been reused several times by Servilius family.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcus_Servilius_Pulex_Geminus

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Servilius_Vatia

I think you have confused him with Quintus Servilius Caepio that fought against Viriathus. But actually the two of them are unrelated (Servilii Caepiones vs. Servilii Gemini) or only from a very distant ancestor.  There is no reason to believe Gaius Servilius Vatia minted anything about the Lusitanian Wars.

4 hours ago, Ardworix said:

The portico I referred to, as far as I remember, is from the Augustus period, in reference to the victory in the Cantabra War, and for that reason it bears weapons, such as the caetra, and the gladius hispaniensis, undoubtedly of Galaic origin, other weapons are in reference to other conquests, and that can correlate the squamata loric among which, it is a possibility....

You are confusing three friezes/reliefs, one you mentioned with a caetra and a very plausible sword from the Iberian Peninsula but is located in Rome at the porta flaminia. The two others are from Molise and Abruzzo in Italy. Distant from hundreds of kilometers.

5 hours ago, Ardworix said:

There was a museum exhibition on this vase, as the publication of the museum said:
 

Quote

 

La calidad artística del Vaso de los Guerreros con Coraza[1] de Edeta (Tossal de Sant Miquel de Llíria) supera la de cualquier otra pintura cerámica indígena del tardo-helenismo mediterráneo occidental. La época a la que pertenece, sin embargo, asiste al desplazamiento de las narraciones escenificadas de formato mediano o pequeño a soportes distintos a los vasos cerámicos.

[1]El término coraza, utilizado en la primera publicación de este vaso, se mantiene aquí sin presuponer que sea técnicamente o militarmente adecuado, dado que podría tratarse de una simple cota textil.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322687039_La_obra_maestra_de_la_pintura_iberica_EL_ENIGMA_DEL_VAS

 

The artistic quality of the Vessel of the Warriors with Cuirasses [1] from Edeta (Tossal de Sant Miquel de Llíria) surpasses that of any other indigenous ceramic painting of the late-Hellenic western Mediterranean. The period to which it belongs, however, is witness to the displacement of medium or small-format staged narratives to supports other than ceramic vessels.

[1] The term cuirass, used in the first publication of this vase, is kept here without assuming that it is technically or militarily adequate, since it could be a simple textile coat.

 

I am also reporting the account of the user Trarco, which translated this quote from Quesada-Sanz on the matter:

<<The passive defensive weapons depicted on the Vessel (armour, helmets) present other problems. The horses on this vessel are represented using a conventional filler pattern to indicate their coat, which was previously misinterpreted by A. McBride, a great foreign artist but one with little knowledge about Hispanic archaeological realities, as scale or mail armour. His magnificent drawings were later imitated by others (for example, Alcaide and Vela) and have created—above all among amateurs— the idea of a cataphract “armoured” cavalry, which never existed in Iberia, nor in all the Mediterranean region in this period. Even in the far-off Persian world, during this period there was only some much lighter barding in use.
All the figures on the Vessel wear a type of "coselete" (light armour vest), perhaps with sleeves made from another material. The part which covers the chest (sometimes down to the diaphragm, sometimes to the belly) is covered with a scaled pattern which has caused many to think of metallic protection. Moreover, the lower abdomen is covered with what, without doubt, appears to be pteryges, hanging strips of organic material (usually leather or linen) which gave the wearer a certain degree of protection without restricting their movement. They seem to be wearing some type of metallic armour of which there were a great variety in use from Greece to the south of Gall via Italy. The majority of those who support this theory – including the aforementioned artist – believe that the Vessel depicts scaled armour (see the majority of the references already cited). This type of armour was usually made up of small plates, normally made of bronze, sewn onto a textile support. It is a type of armour well-known in the western Mediterranean and Asia from the Bronze Age, and to a far lesser extent in Greece during the Iron Age. However, in Iberia (as in the Celtic world) no scaled armour of this type is known, nor represented on other media (sculptures, offerings, or even other ceramics). It was rare even in Italy, and in the classical Greek world it was used only occasionally as a complement to a type of textile armour (linothorax). But at the end of the third century neither the Carthaginians nor Romans appear to have used this type of protection; the legionaries in particular, as Polybius says (VI, 23, 14 15), wore a small bronze square on their chest at the most, and only the most affluent wore a coat of iron chainmail. This second option — the coat of mail — has also been suggested for the Llírian warriors, but these coats of mail from the 3rd to 2nd centuries BCE did not have pteryges and were furthermore an absolutely rarity in Iberia (in fact, not a single piece from a coat of mail is known to have existed in Iberia before the Caesarean period, in the middle of the 1st century BCE). Moreover, the decorative pattern used on the Vessel does not seem to be that for ring-woven mail, which is usually depicted in a different way in the visual arts (Quesada and Rueda, 2017). Finally, other authors have suggested armour made from bronze sheets, small rectangular plates sewn together, of which there is no iconographic or archaeological evidence in Iberia and which was not used – or barely used – in the central Mediterranean region in this period. Moreover, plate armour is normally depicted in a much simpler way using a pattern of small squares or rectangles. Only the penultimate infantryman has his entire torso covered by a pattern of crossed lines forming small diamonds (which only cover the abdomen and belly of the rest of the figures), but the diagonal lines would not be adequate to represent plate amour, whose lines are clearly vertical and horizontal, and are represented in this way on some small Etruscan offerings, for example. The most probable explanation is that the Llírian warriors are wearing a type of quilted protection, more likely made from textile than leather. In fact, the scale pattern was, for example, used on Greek ceramics to represent both metal scales and organic protective wear (the aegis or skin of Amalthea’s goat which protected Athena) and even the wings of deities such as Thanatos and Hypnos, such as on the famous vessel decorated by the painter Euphronios. In fact, Anderson explained many years ago that the scales in Greek black-figure paintings were normally used to indicate “hair on a hide... or even as a decorative motif on cloth.>>

https://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?797309-Iberian-Linen-armor

[Ardworix]

I know that the fragments of the portico in question, are found in Rome.... it does not contradict that the weapons presented are in reference to the Roman conquests. And I reiterate, they are dated from the Augustus period, with the considerations I have already explained above.

As for the reference to currency, there are others, with different dates and themes, the one I referred to is from the year 127 BC. , original from Hispania/Iberia, which clearly depicts two local knights. That once again, as I explained above, a double-edged sword, using side braids, and therefore scale armor (it is hardly credible for someone to hypothesize that it is a knight from other parts), the other knight, sporting on his shield a Celtiberic letter (M), as by itself, clearly indicates its origin, as it also makes use of a buccula (mask) and Montfortino helmet, as later coins from the Augustus period in allusion to the Cantabrian Wars will portray. The image of this second knight is also repeated in other coins of Celtiberian origin, which reinforces that it is a Hispanic knight.

coin | British Museum

About some points that you report, it seems to me to be an elucubration that contradicts the express mentions of the classic authors, corroborated in the ceramics of Liria. Diodorus Siculus expressly says that the Lusitanians used coats of mail....!

In any case, if anyone is willing to theorize new interpretations of Liria pottery, good luck! I suggest to write a scientific article about it and hold academic conferences on your theses. For now, let us base ourselves on what is consensus. 

And once again, so as not to miss the nerve-racking point at hand, the squamata loric, whether or not of Roman origin, was demonstrably used by the Celtiberians.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Ardworix

[Genava55]

2 hours ago, Ardworix said:

the one I referred to is from the year 127 BC. , original from Hispania/Iberia, which clearly depicts two local knights

It is not from Hispania and does not represent two local knights.

2 hours ago, Ardworix said:

sporting on his shield a Celtiberic letter (M)

For you this is a Celtiberian letter ?

Interesting. Completely wrong but it is interesting how some people can made up things with great imagination.

Maybe you should read more about Gaius Servilius Vatia

[Ardworix]

2 hours ago, Genava55 said:

It is not from Hispania and does not represent two local knights.

For you this is a Celtiberian letter ?

Interesting. Completely wrong but it is interesting how some people can made up things with great imagination.

Maybe you should read more about Gaius Servilius Vatia

The type of coin in question is not a single period and theme....

Imagination is seeing a Latin "M" in a knight wearing a mask.... did the Romans already wear a mask in their cavalry 127 BC?! Like the other knight, wearing a loric squamata, which will only come to be used by the "Romans", in the imperial period, almost 2 centuries later! Yet by auxiliary troops, read: iberians (lusitanians, celtiberians, cantabrians, etc...). 

 

 

Celtiberian coin, displaying the same letter, celtiberic, "M":

Edited September 18, 2021 by Ardworix

[soloooy0]

I have been testing the mod, I like how the Lusitanians are thought, it is well thought out, the last defense of women, the Vetons mercenaries can give quite fast support, now come the bugs found. 
1: you start with javeliners and swordsmen, but in the cc you can make: slingers and spearmen, something is wrong.
2: in phase 1 you have access to all infantry, is it too much?
3: precision bolt technology in the arsenal, but they can't have catapults, or rocket launchers.
4: the phase 2 KAI darsena (Phoenician allied) only costs 200 wood, it should cost some metal or stone more...
5: in barracks you can't make elite swordsmen and for their special building you have to use that technology and the same with the elite cavalry.

 

soon it will be a big faction and I need it in the game, the equipment bonus could be something related to mining or lowering the cost of metal, troops, technology or both. 
depending on how it's done, could any unit of champions be upgraded to phase 2?

 

[Genava55]

20 hours ago, Ardworix said:

Imagination is seeing a Latin "M" in a knight wearing a mask....

This is a Roman coin right? This is not an indigeneous coin right?

So why a Roman would mint a Celtiberian letter? 

Especially, why Romans would mint in Rome a denarius with a Celtiberian letter? And again this is NOT a coin found exclusively in Hispania, this is a widespread denarius minted by someone that was in charge of the official mint. In Rome. 

The academic litterature is clear on the matter, the letter M on this coin is a reference to an ancestor of the minter. This is what is explained on the reference book on Republican coinage written by Michael H. Crawford.

All the things you see, the braids, the mask helmet and the antenna pommel are the products of your imagination. No expert describes the coin in such way. I don't see the mask, I see a face. A face minted in a similar way in other coins from Servilius family. The pommel of the sword is similar on another coin representing a Roman facing a Macedonian.

Edited September 19, 2021 by Genava55

[Genava55]

On 18/09/2021 at 9:20 AM, Genava55 said:

There was a museum exhibition on this vase, as the publication of the museum said:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322687039_La_obra_maestra_de_la_pintura_iberica_EL_ENIGMA_DEL_VAS

The artistic quality of the Vessel of the Warriors with Cuirasses [1] from Edeta (Tossal de Sant Miquel de Llíria) surpasses that of any other indigenous ceramic painting of the late-Hellenic western Mediterranean. The period to which it belongs, however, is witness to the displacement of medium or small-format staged narratives to supports other than ceramic vessels.

[1] The term cuirass, used in the first publication of this vase, is kept here without assuming that it is technically or militarily adequate, since it could be a simple textile coat.

I am also reporting the account of the user Trarco, which translated this quote from Quesada-Sanz on the matter:

<<The passive defensive weapons depicted on the Vessel (armour, helmets) present other problems. The horses on this vessel are represented using a conventional filler pattern to indicate their coat, which was previously misinterpreted by A. McBride, a great foreign artist but one with little knowledge about Hispanic archaeological realities, as scale or mail armour. His magnificent drawings were later imitated by others (for example, Alcaide and Vela) and have created—above all among amateurs— the idea of a cataphract “armoured” cavalry, which never existed in Iberia, nor in all the Mediterranean region in this period. Even in the far-off Persian world, during this period there was only some much lighter barding in use.
All the figures on the Vessel wear a type of "coselete" (light armour vest), perhaps with sleeves made from another material. The part which covers the chest (sometimes down to the diaphragm, sometimes to the belly) is covered with a scaled pattern which has caused many to think of metallic protection. Moreover, the lower abdomen is covered with what, without doubt, appears to be pteryges, hanging strips of organic material (usually leather or linen) which gave the wearer a certain degree of protection without restricting their movement. They seem to be wearing some type of metallic armour of which there were a great variety in use from Greece to the south of Gall via Italy. The majority of those who support this theory – including the aforementioned artist – believe that the Vessel depicts scaled armour (see the majority of the references already cited). This type of armour was usually made up of small plates, normally made of bronze, sewn onto a textile support. It is a type of armour well-known in the western Mediterranean and Asia from the Bronze Age, and to a far lesser extent in Greece during the Iron Age. However, in Iberia (as in the Celtic world) no scaled armour of this type is known, nor represented on other media (sculptures, offerings, or even other ceramics). It was rare even in Italy, and in the classical Greek world it was used only occasionally as a complement to a type of textile armour (linothorax). But at the end of the third century neither the Carthaginians nor Romans appear to have used this type of protection; the legionaries in particular, as Polybius says (VI, 23, 14 15), wore a small bronze square on their chest at the most, and only the most affluent wore a coat of iron chainmail. This second option — the coat of mail — has also been suggested for the Llírian warriors, but these coats of mail from the 3rd to 2nd centuries BCE did not have pteryges and were furthermore an absolutely rarity in Iberia (in fact, not a single piece from a coat of mail is known to have existed in Iberia before the Caesarean period, in the middle of the 1st century BCE). Moreover, the decorative pattern used on the Vessel does not seem to be that for ring-woven mail, which is usually depicted in a different way in the visual arts (Quesada and Rueda, 2017). Finally, other authors have suggested armour made from bronze sheets, small rectangular plates sewn together, of which there is no iconographic or archaeological evidence in Iberia and which was not used – or barely used – in the central Mediterranean region in this period. Moreover, plate armour is normally depicted in a much simpler way using a pattern of small squares or rectangles. Only the penultimate infantryman has his entire torso covered by a pattern of crossed lines forming small diamonds (which only cover the abdomen and belly of the rest of the figures), but the diagonal lines would not be adequate to represent plate amour, whose lines are clearly vertical and horizontal, and are represented in this way on some small Etruscan offerings, for example. The most probable explanation is that the Llírian warriors are wearing a type of quilted protection, more likely made from textile than leather. In fact, the scale pattern was, for example, used on Greek ceramics to represent both metal scales and organic protective wear (the aegis or skin of Amalthea’s goat which protected Athena) and even the wings of deities such as Thanatos and Hypnos, such as on the famous vessel decorated by the painter Euphronios. In fact, Anderson explained many years ago that the scales in Greek black-figure paintings were normally used to indicate “hair on a hide... or even as a decorative motif on cloth.>>

https://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?797309-Iberian-Linen-armor

On 18/09/2021 at 2:55 PM, Ardworix said:

About some points that you report, it seems to me to be an elucubration that contradicts the express mentions of the classic authors, corroborated in the ceramics of Liria. Diodorus Siculus expressly says that the Lusitanians used coats of mail....!

In any case, if anyone is willing to theorize new interpretations of Liria pottery, good luck! I suggest to write a scientific article about it and hold academic conferences on your theses. For now, let us base ourselves on what is consensus. 

By the way, the two opinions I shared about the Llírian warriors depicted on the ceramics were made by scholars. One is an excerpt from the publication made by the museum and the other is made by Quesada-Sanz on his Phd thesis.

https://www.uam.es/ss/Satellite/FilosofiayLetras/es/1242658885099/1242658430666/persona/detallePDI/Quesada_Sanz,_Fernando.htm

But I am not surprised by your attitude. 

Edited September 19, 2021 by Genava55

[soloooy0]

how @Ardworix I believe that the three Lusitanian heroes should be: Cauceno, Viriato and Sertorius.

 

with Sertorius, you could add Roman siege engines and Roman ships in phase 3.
also the "Lusitanian ambusher" champion of phase 2 would be very interesting and useful, also the Frisian field (for Iberians and Lusitanians) created by @Duileoga

for equipment bonus I can think of 3 options:
1: that the cost in metal be reduced to champion troops. (less op)
2: that the technologies and phase change have a reduced cost. (more op)
3: regular troops and mercenaries should have a lower metal cost. (regular
it would be interesting to add some mention to rio tinto, or in the name of the equipment bonus or some bonus/technology, unique to the faction. 

 

Edited September 19, 2021 by soloooy0

[Ardworix]

8 hours ago, Genava55 said:

Esta é uma moeda romana, certo? Esta não é uma moeda indigeniosa, certo?

Então por que um romano cunharia uma carta celtiberiana?

Especialmente, por que os romanos cunhariam em Roma um denarius com uma carta celtiberiana? E novamente esta não é uma moeda encontrada exclusivamente em Hispania, este é um denarius generalizado cunhado por alguém que estava no comando da casa da moeda oficial. Em Roma.

A ninhada acadêmica é clara sobre o assunto, a letra M nesta moeda é uma referência a um ancestral do minter. Isto é o que é explicado no livro de referência sobre cunhagem republicana escrito por Michael H. Crawford.

Todas as coisas que você vê, as tranças, o capacete da máscara e a antena pommel são os produtos de sua imaginação. Nenhum especialista descreve a moeda dessa forma. Não vejo a máscara, vejo um rosto. Um rosto cunhado de forma semelhante em outras moedas da família Servilius. O pommel da espada é semelhante em outra moeda representando um romano enfrentando um macedônio.

Your own reference says "it is in any case clear"..... the other coins feature other representations that are not Roman either, or at least not just roman, as you yourself mention.

As for not seeing, or ignoring, the figure of a "barbarian" in the representation on the left, we see that someone has problems with their eyes.... of all sorts, even if they ignore everything that has already been said, specifically about the currency in question . Liria's ceramics are even clearer.

Although, in all tribes of Celtic origin, scale armor is registered, but in the Celtiberians and Lusitanians they are not.... they are some kind of cloth armor.

The reference you make:

Quote

"This second option — the coat of mail — has also been suggested for the Llírian warriors, but these coats of mail from the 3rd to 2nd centuries BCE did not have pteryges and were furthermore an absolutely rarity in Iberia (in fact, not a single piece from a coat of mail is known to have existed in Iberia before the Caesarean period, in the middle of the 1st century BCE)."

It expressly contradicts Estrabon, as I've already said, but you completely ignore it.

Quote

"They arm themselves with a dagger or a gladius. Most have linen breastplates; others, but in small numbers, wear chain mail and the triple summit helmet;" - Estrabon, Book III, Capt. 3.

Between Estrabon and these "exotic" theses, to say the least, I take Estrabon.

or.... let's figure the Celtiberians and Lusitanians no longer with lorica squamatas, but with some kind of cloth armor... !

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

@Lopess @Duileoga

Been trying out the mod some more. Some great stuff here. Hope you don't mind my thoughts and suggestions!

 

Textures

• Since the gray "stone wall" texture is used so often (on nearly every building), it would be worthwhile to create a larger section in the texture sheet (or a whole new texture sheet) with various sizes and resolutions, so that you don't have to keep stretching and compressing the texture in the UV mapping. This will help with "texel" size.
  • This is the most obvious with the City Walls, which uses the same texture, but with UV mapping attempts to make 3 distinct sections of different size. In the end, it just looks stretched.
• Same goes for the hay roof texture.
  • This texture needs the most improvement. Probably replace.
• Same goes for the stone texture use for such buildings as the Wonder and the Temple. 
  • Textures already in-game that you could use
    • \textures\skins\gaia\
      • slab_medit.png
      • stone_aegean_01.png
        • stone_india_01_norm.png
        • stone_india_01_spec.png
      • stone_scandiv_template.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
      • temp_stone.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
      • temp_stone_b.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
• I thought the look of the floor tile texture could be improved. Either UV mapped to be smaller (thus increasing its apparent resolution) or just replaced with a higher resolution texture.
• A lot of the unit textures don't have player color enabled. This is important.
• The roof tile texture for the Sauna is too low resolution. Again, this is all about trying to make every texture look the same resolution in the final product (texel size).

Buildings

• I suggest to remove the wall from the Farmstead. Just have the 3 round huts, plus Farmstead props and the farmstead decal all the other civs use. It'll look nice.
• Castro
  • I think this can be a Wooden Fortress (400 Wood), but available 1 phase earlier, in Town Phase. It can then be upgraded to a Stone Fortress (+300 Stone) in City Phase.
• The Mercenary Dock, aka Punic Port
  • Model needs fixed for some reason, it looks very weird in-game. 
  • The model is a bit overly complex. Could be toned down a bit with so many structures.
• Archery Range
  • Could use one. lol That's all.
• Houses
  • Could use smaller dirt decals.
• Stable
  • Could maybe follow the "horse butts" convention. 
• Walls
  • Maybe both Iberians and Lusitanians could get free walls?
  • Need to animate that Wooden Gate.
• Wonder
  • Perhaps more like a sanctuary rather than building a "mountain"? Same for the Temple.

 

 

 

 

Attached is a texture sheet sample idea, sourced from legit sources (cc0 or from the game):

Spoiler

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by wowgetoffyourcellphone

[Genava55]

11 hours ago, Ardworix said:

Your own reference says "it is in any case clear"

"It is in any case clear..." means basically "em qualquer caso, é claro..."

 

11 hours ago, Ardworix said:

As for not seeing, or ignoring, the figure of a "barbarian" in the representation on the left, we see that someone has problems with their eyes.... of all sorts, even if they ignore everything that has already been said, specifically about the currency in question.

You claimed it is a coin from Hispania, but this is not. You never replied to my argument so I assume you know I am right and you were wrong. The coin is minted in Rome. It is a widespread denarius, mostly found in Italy.

 

You see a barbarian figure, it could be the case but it could be any kind of barbarian. Thracian for example, from which we know they used lorica squamata. Thracians fought for the Macedonians against the Romans, so it would be much logical for a coin minted by Gaius Servilius Vatia.

All depictions from the coins minted by Servilius familly suggest icons and images from the Eastern Mediterranean regions. Not from the West.

11 hours ago, Ardworix said:

Between Estrabon and these "exotic" theses, to say the least, I take Estrabon.

Because it contradicts you, you label them exotic? That's not helping you.

 

11 hours ago, Ardworix said:

It expressly contradicts Estrabon, as I've already said, but you completely ignore it.

You said Diodorus Siculus not Strabo, but whatever.

Strabo's account actually confirms that the chain mail is rare. And Quesada-Sanz is entirely correct on pointint out that none have been found yet (predating the Caesarean era). The point of Quesada-Sanz is to say it is more probably a linen or quilted armor.

Strabo's Geography, Book 3, chapter 3.6:

At any rate, the Lusitanians, it is said, are given to laying ambush, given to spying out, are quick, nimble, and good at deploying troops. They have a small shield two feet in diameter, concave in front, and suspended from the shoulder by means of thongs (for it has neither arm-rings nor handles). Besides these shields they have a dirk or a butcher's-knife. Most of them wear linen cuirasses; a few wear chain-wrought cuirasses and helmets with three crests, but the rest wear helmets made of sinews. The foot-soldiers wear greaves also, and each soldier has several javelins; and some also make use of spears, and the spears have bronze heads. Now some of the peoples that dwell next to the Durius River live, it is said, after the manner of the Laconians — using anointing-rooms twice a day and taking baths in vapours that rise from heated stones, bathing in cold water, and eating only one meal a day; and that in a cleanly and simple way. The Lusitanians are given to offering sacrifices, and they inspect the vitals, without cutting them out. Besides, they also inspect the veins on the side of the victim; and they divine by the tokens of touch, too. They prophesy through means of the vitals of human beings also, prisoners of war, whom they first cover with coarse cloaks, and then, when the victim has been struck beneath the vitals by the diviner, they draw their first auguries from the fall of the victim. And they cut off the right hands of their captives and set them up as an offering to the gods.

 

And this account is specifically about the Lusitanians. You like to rely on other tribes to make up a Lusitanian roster but the ceramics you are relying on are from Valencia in Spain.

Edited September 20, 2021 by Genava55

[Genava55]

9 hours ago, Ardworix said:

That's depicting a roman cavalryman from the end of the western Roman Empire facing two Picts.

9 hours ago, Ardworix said:

You really think the bottom part is a chain mail?

[Ardworix]

A "thracian", which makes use of a gladius hispaniensis... it's an evolution, for those who said there was no barbarian.

"Roman" auxiliary troops in Britannia were essentially "Iberian". It is not by chance that they used lSquamat loric, as the use of will be repeated in all events after the incorporation of "Iberian" bodies into the Roman army.

Lusitanians and Celtiberians, like the Cantabrians, Galaics, etc... used the same weapons...

The thesis that you encompass as almost non-existent the use of mail coat.... however, once again, Estrabon mentions the use by Lusitanians of both light and heavy armed:

Quote

"They also hold contests, for light-armed and heavy-armed soldiers and cavalry, in boxing, in running, in skirmishing, and in fighting by squads."

"You really think the bottom part is a chain mail?"

The upper part yes, without a shadow of a doubt.... and I repeat what I said initially, I'm not the one with innovations, if not you. Nothing I have exposed here is new. So much so that they are reproduced by all those who portrayed the Lusitanians and Celtiberians.

 

 

Edited September 20, 2021 by Ardworix

[Genava55]

4 hours ago, Ardworix said:

A "thracian", which makes use of a gladius hispaniensis... it's an evolution, for those who said there was no barbarian.

I don't see the gladius.

By the way you initially said that it was an antenna sword, not a gladius hispaniensis. That's two different weapons. Try to be coherent with your own interpretation.

Edit: a xiphos could be the source

Some xiphos, especially those from Hellenistic era have different hilt and pommel that could match those from the coins above:

 

In comparison, a Gladius Hispaniensis:

Or an antenna sword:

 

I think the xiphos is the one that matches best the shape and the length of the blade. Which is also supported by the similarity between the two coins, one is obviously depicting xiphos swords.

Edited September 20, 2021 by Genava55

[Lopess]

8 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

@Lopess @Duileoga

Been trying out the mod some more. Some great stuff here. Hope you don't mind my thoughts and suggestions!

 

Textures

• Since the gray "stone wall" texture is used so often (on nearly every building), it would be worthwhile to create a larger section in the texture sheet (or a whole new texture sheet) with various sizes and resolutions, so that you don't have to keep stretching and compressing the texture in the UV mapping. This will help with "texel" size.
  • This is the most obvious with the City Walls, which uses the same texture, but with UV mapping attempts to make 3 distinct sections of different size. In the end, it just looks stretched.
• Same goes for the hay roof texture.
  • This texture needs the most improvement. Probably replace.
• Same goes for the stone texture use for such buildings as the Wonder and the Temple. 
  • Textures already in-game that you could use
    • \textures\skins\gaia\
      • slab_medit.png
      • stone_aegean_01.png
        • stone_india_01_norm.png
        • stone_india_01_spec.png
      • stone_scandiv_template.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
      • temp_stone.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
      • temp_stone_b.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
• I thought the look of the floor tile texture could be improved. Either UV mapped to be smaller (thus increasing its apparent resolution) or just replaced with a higher resolution texture.
• A lot of the unit textures don't have player color enabled. This is important.
• The roof tile texture for the Sauna is too low resolution. Again, this is all about trying to make every texture look the same resolution in the final product (texel size).

Buildings

• I suggest to remove the wall from the Farmstead. Just have the 3 round huts, plus Farmstead props and the farmstead decal all the other civs use. It'll look nice.
• Castro
  • I think this can be a Wooden Fortress (400 Wood), but available 1 phase earlier, in Town Phase. It can then be upgraded to a Stone Fortress (+300 Stone) in City Phase.
• The Mercenary Dock, aka Punic Port
  • Model needs fixed for some reason, it looks very weird in-game. 
  • The model is a bit overly complex. Could be toned down a bit with so many structures.
• Archery Range
  • Could use one. lol That's all.
• Houses
  • Could use smaller dirt decals.
• Stable
  • Could maybe follow the "horse butts" convention. 
• Walls
  • Maybe both Iberians and Lusitanians could get free walls?
  • Need to animate that Wooden Gate.
• Wonder
  • Perhaps more like a sanctuary rather than building a "mountain"? Same for the Temple.

 

 

 

 

Attached is a texture sheet sample idea, sourced from legit sources (cc0 or from the game):

  Hide contents

 

Thanks @wowgetoffyourcellphone and @soloooy0 for the feedback some things have already been modified (some like the unit textures is still a work in progress) and others I will wait for a response from Duileoga mainly regarding the design of the buildings.

[Genava55]

4 hours ago, Ardworix said:

"Roman" auxiliary troops in Britannia were essentially "Iberian". It is not by chance that they used lSquamat loric, as the use of will be repeated in all events after the incorporation of "Iberian" bodies into the Roman army.

I missed this one. This is your reply to mine pointing out you have used an illustration depicting a late roman cavalryman against Picts?

[Genava55]

On 08/09/2021 at 6:28 PM, Duileoga said:

(Bandolero lusitano);

-Hice dos ya que la unidad tendrá dos jinetes. Las texturas de arriba para el jinete de atrás y las texturas de abajo para el jinete de enfrente.

 

Referencia;

 

I am skeptical of this kind of illustration depicting a bronze cuirass of the 6th century, a Monte-Bernorio dagger of the 4th century and a Montefortino helmet of the 3rd century BC. Furthermore, if the issue is that the Iberians are currently mixing everything from the Iberian peninsula, doing the same for the Lusitanians will simply be doubling the problem. 

Edited September 20, 2021 by Genava55

[Ardworix]

Specifically regarding the coin, you convinced me to be a Thracian, the sword really seems to me to be of Thracian origin and not a gladius hispaniensis as I said.

Anyway, we have a "barbarian" dressed in a 127 BC loric squamata. Which corroborates the heart of all this quarrel, the loric predates the Romans. Yet this point is a paltry mention of how many others have already been made and ignored....

And back to the main point, almost celtic people have a registered of the use of loric squamata, but according to the article you cover, the Lusitanians and Celtiberics do not! Making assertions bluntly contrary to classical authors. In addition to the express representation in Celtiberian ceramics... and therefore widely represented in the historical portrayals of Celtiberian and Lusitanian warriors.

I don't understand why polemic about this.

[Duileoga]

On 17/09/2021 at 4:20 PM, Ardworix said:

Si, bueno, pero, colocaría como la 3a fase, guerreros doblando armaduras más pesadas, como la malla quota y la lorica squamata, bien como cascos de bronce (montfortinos y calcídico celtibérico).

Otro bueno modelo es este:

Una observación personal que noto es que muchas de las representaciones, en términos de apariencia, retratan a los lusitanos con barbas, pero los pocos hallazgos arqueológicos, registran a los lusitanos con bigotes, trenzas laterales y cabello largo.

Buenos días/tardes/noches;

-Por la nueva información que aportan (muy buena por cierto) ahora tenía pensado que las unidades de infantería no campeonas tuvieran en fase 3 ;

1)Unos cascos de madera y o de cuero coronados con un penacho además de cubiertos con algunas pieles o capas con textura de pieles que taparían parcialmente los patrones y símbolos de las ropas , sin olvidar unas caetras simples de madera o cuero con algún símbolo regional y unas grebas de algún pelaje.

a diferencia de las unidades campeonas ;

2)Que tendrían cascos de metales diversos y estarían reforzados con cotas de malla en algunos casos ligeramente tapadas con capas de textura de lana o lino con algún patrón y unas caetras de madera o cuero con refuerzos de diferentes metales en el centro y laterales además de llevar algún símbolo regional junto a unos zapatos de cuero.

 

(sigo investigando y combinando diferentes posibilidades)

Disculpen las molestias*

[Duileoga]

On 19/09/2021 at 1:43 AM, soloooy0 said:

I have been testing the mod, I like how the Lusitanians are thought, it is well thought out, the last defense of women, the Vetons mercenaries can give quite fast support, now come the bugs found. 
1: you start with javeliners and swordsmen, but in the cc you can make: slingers and spearmen, something is wrong.
2: in phase 1 you have access to all infantry, is it too much?
3: precision bolt technology in the arsenal, but they can't have catapults, or rocket launchers.
4: the phase 2 KAI darsena (Phoenician allied) only costs 200 wood, it should cost some metal or stone more...
5: in barracks you can't make elite swordsmen and for their special building you have to use that technology and the same with the elite cavalry.

 

soon it will be a big faction and I need it in the game, the equipment bonus could be something related to mining or lowering the cost of metal, troops, technology or both. 
depending on how it's done, could any unit of champions be upgraded to phase 2?

 

Buenos días/tardes/noches;

-Gracias por probar el Mod además de notificar críticas y sugerencias. Aunque yo sólo puedo limitarme al diseño y creación de edificios , texturas , mapas ... son buenas ideas que me gustarían implementar para probarlas.

-Siga así .

 

Disculpen las molestias*

[Duileoga]

On 20/09/2021 at 3:23 PM, Lopess said:

Thanks @wowgetoffyourcellphone and @soloooy0 for the feedback some things have already been modified (some like the unit textures is still a work in progress) and others I will wait for a response from Duileoga mainly regarding the design of the buildings.

 

On 20/09/2021 at 7:12 AM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

@Lopess @Duileoga

Been trying out the mod some more. Some great stuff here. Hope you don't mind my thoughts and suggestions!

 

Textures

• Since the gray "stone wall" texture is used so often (on nearly every building), it would be worthwhile to create a larger section in the texture sheet (or a whole new texture sheet) with various sizes and resolutions, so that you don't have to keep stretching and compressing the texture in the UV mapping. This will help with "texel" size.
  • This is the most obvious with the City Walls, which uses the same texture, but with UV mapping attempts to make 3 distinct sections of different size. In the end, it just looks stretched.
• Same goes for the hay roof texture.
  • This texture needs the most improvement. Probably replace.
• Same goes for the stone texture use for such buildings as the Wonder and the Temple. 
  • Textures already in-game that you could use
    • \textures\skins\gaia\
      • slab_medit.png
      • stone_aegean_01.png
        • stone_india_01_norm.png
        • stone_india_01_spec.png
      • stone_scandiv_template.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
      • temp_stone.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
      • temp_stone_b.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_norm.png
        • stone_scandiv_template_spec.png
• I thought the look of the floor tile texture could be improved. Either UV mapped to be smaller (thus increasing its apparent resolution) or just replaced with a higher resolution texture.
• A lot of the unit textures don't have player color enabled. This is important.
• The roof tile texture for the Sauna is too low resolution. Again, this is all about trying to make every texture look the same resolution in the final product (texel size).

Buildings

• I suggest to remove the wall from the Farmstead. Just have the 3 round huts, plus Farmstead props and the farmstead decal all the other civs use. It'll look nice.
• Castro
  • I think this can be a Wooden Fortress (400 Wood), but available 1 phase earlier, in Town Phase. It can then be upgraded to a Stone Fortress (+300 Stone) in City Phase.
• The Mercenary Dock, aka Punic Port
  • Model needs fixed for some reason, it looks very weird in-game. 
  • The model is a bit overly complex. Could be toned down a bit with so many structures.
• Archery Range
  • Could use one. lol That's all.
• Houses
  • Could use smaller dirt decals.
• Stable
  • Could maybe follow the "horse butts" convention. 
• Walls
  • Maybe both Iberians and Lusitanians could get free walls?
  • Need to animate that Wooden Gate.
• Wonder
  • Perhaps more like a sanctuary rather than building a "mountain"? Same for the Temple.

 

 

 

 

Attached is a texture sheet sample idea, sourced from legit sources (cc0 or from the game):

  Hide contents

 

Buenos días/tardes/noches;

-Intentaré ir por partes ,primero , cuando tenga tiempo terminaré las texturas para las unidades y después remodelaré los edificios , para tener al menos una base para la facción y partiendo de ahí ir puliendo errores o añadir mejoras.

Muchas gracias @wowgetoffyourcellphone por las texturas .

 

Disculpen las molestias*

[Duileoga]

On 20/09/2021 at 6:34 PM, Genava55 said:

I am skeptical of this kind of illustration depicting a bronze cuirass of the 6th century, a Monte-Bernorio dagger of the 4th century and a Montefortino helmet of the 3rd century BC. Furthermore, if the issue is that the Iberians are currently mixing everything from the Iberian peninsula, doing the same for the Lusitanians will simply be doubling the problem. 

Buenas;

-Creo que cometí un error al usar esa imagen como referencia total de un soldado lusitano pleno , pero si tiene elementos que usaron los lusitanos que se pueden extraer(como la decoración de la vestimenta , el puñal ...). Disculpen el error.

 

Disculpen las molestias*

[Ardworix]

2 hours ago, Duileoga said:

Buenos días/tardes/noches;

-Por la nueva información que aportan (muy buena por cierto) ahora tenía pensado que las unidades de infantería no campeonas tuvieran en fase 3 ;

1)Unos cascos de madera y o de cuero coronados con un penacho además de cubiertos con algunas pieles o capas con textura de pieles que taparían parcialmente los patrones y símbolos de las ropas , sin olvidar unas caetras simples de madera o cuero con algún símbolo regional y unas grebas de algún pelaje.

a diferencia de las unidades campeonas ;

2)Que tendrían cascos de metales diversos y estarían reforzados con cotas de malla en algunos casos ligeramente tapadas con capas de textura de lana o lino con algún patrón y unas caetras de madera o cuero con refuerzos de diferentes metales en el centro y laterales además de llevar algún símbolo regional junto a unos zapatos de cuero.

 

(sigo investigando y combinando diferentes posibilidades)

Disculpen las molestias*

Las unidades de infantería, con sus subdivisiones: espadachines, piqueros y dardos, en su fase 3 creo que ya podían hacer uso de cascos de bronce (montifortinos y calcidico), además de cota de malla y armaduras de escamas. Las unidades actuales de los Ibericos, en el modo actual 25, en su tercera fase ya hacen uso del casco calcídico, y en el modo de los juegos anteriores 24, 23, etc ... la infantería piquera ya hizo uso de armadura escalada .

En la fase 2, podría utilizar armadura de linotórax, con cascos de cuero. Recuerdo que los modos anteriores 24, 23 ... tenían una buena variedad de cascos de cuero. A menos que me equivoque, la infantería espadachín actual, en su fase 3, todavía usa casco de cuero.

En la fase 1, infantería, ropa ligera.

En cuanto a las Unidades Campeones, podían utilizar completamente la armadura pesada, incluido el uso de bucculas (máscaras). Especialmente en caballería. Además del uso de bucculas, el uso de bipene (hacha de doble filo). 

Creo que también sería interesante hacer uso de la espada tipo "la tene" (espada larga/lejos), plenamente documentada arqueológicamente, por la infantería en general, además de las tradicionales gladius hispaniensis y falcatas. La espada de la tene, ya tiene en los Britones, basta agregar. 

Recuerda también que las capas no solo estaban hechas de pelo de cabra, sino también de lana. Hay capas negras en otras unidades del juego ya hechas, sería suficiente agregar.

 

[Genava55]

9 hours ago, Ardworix said:

And back to the main point, almost celtic people have a registered of the use of loric squamata, but according to the article you cover, the Lusitanians and Celtiberics do not!

As far as I know, there are no evidences that the other Celts (Britons and Gauls) used any sort of armor made of scales.

If you know evidences for such armors in a Gallic or a Brythonic context, I would be really interested.

9 hours ago, Ardworix said:

In addition to the express representation in Celtiberian ceramics...

Do you have a reference?

10 hours ago, Ardworix said:

Making assertions bluntly contrary to classical authors.

Is there an account from classical authors mentioning armor made of scales on the peninsula?

10 hours ago, Ardworix said:

I don't understand why polemic about this.

First, because I am an annoying nitpicker and because I am genuinely interested to seek the truth.

But also because I don't want to see the Lusitanian faction suffering the same issue than the Iberian faction.

If both the Iberians and the Lusitanians use the same references, then there is no point in creating this faction.