[Part II] Faction: The Chinese (Song Dynasty)

[Ayakashi]

@Wolflance:

Hey dude noticed you updated the unit roster again. So the nest of bees got removed coz it was cart mounted, that's cool. But IMO don't remove handheld rocket launchers alltogether. If you go to chapter 126 of Wubei Zhi you get an illustration of men with handheld rocket launchers called "Fire Dragon Arrows" (火龍箭). Ming Rocket Launcher infantry are so iconic and awesome we have to include it!

Edited April 16, 2015 by Ayakashi

[wolflance]

@Wolflance:

Hey dude noticed you updated the unit roster again. So the nest of bees got removed coz it was cart mounted, that's cool. But IMO don't remove handheld rocket launchers alltogether. If you go to chapter 126 of Wubei Zhi you get an illustration of men with handheld rocket launchers called "Fire Dragon Arrows" (火龍箭). Ming Rocket Launcher infantry are so iconic and awesome we have to include it!

Don't worry, it is just temporary. At the very least 九龍筒 was in use (in 1464AD). Edited May 7, 2015 by wolflance

[Ayakashi]

No Zhanmadao!? (Lol only just noticed now!)

Perhaps we could have Zhanmadao wielders as a champion infantry for the Song reform to even the numbers with the Ming? Or as a 'normal' infantry that upgrades to some kind of Changdao swordsmen for the Ming upgrade? Whatever works best.

Loving the new reference pics! Where did you find all these replicas? Especially the costume, ships and firearms.

Edited May 12, 2015 by Ayakashi

[wolflance]

No Zhanmadao!? (Lol only just noticed now!)

Perhaps we could have Zhanmadao wielders as a champion infantry for the Song reform to even the numbers with the Ming? Or as a 'normal' infantry that upgrades to some kind of Changdao swordsmen for the Ming upgrade? Whatever works best.

Loving the new reference pics! Where did you find all these replicas? Especially the costume, ships and firearms.

I categorized Zhanmadao as 'Glaive', similar to Guandao/Podao as it suppose to be. Heavy axemen and the reform 1 champion infantry will be using it.

(The massive two-handed 'katana' version did not appear until sixteenth century, and it was never called zhanmadao until Qing Dynasty).

Knowing the right keywords and Google-fu can get you very far

[Ayakashi]

Weren't song Zhanmadaos basically a very long straight single edged sword that's roughly 2/3 blade and 1/3 handle? Does that count as a glaive? Well nice to know you haven't forgotten them! What were they called during the Song?

I think I know what you mean by the 'katana' version: those Ming miao daos which were supposedly reverse engineered from Japanese pirates? That wasn't what I had in mind! I own one of these. Most kung-fu weapons now days are post 19th century anyway! I've been doing kung-fu and wushu for like 15 years so at least I know that much

Edited May 13, 2015 by Ayakashi

[wolflance]

Weren't song Zhanmadaos basically a very long straight single edged sword that's roughly 2/3 blade and 1/3 handle? Well nice to know you haven't forgotten them! What were they called during the Song? Maybe I should check that Wujing Zongyao in a bit.

I think I know what you mean by the 'katana' version: those Ming miao daos which were supposedly reverse engineered from Japanese pirates? That wasn't what I had in mind! I own one of these. Most kung-fu weapons now days are post 19th century anyway! I've been doing kung-fu and wushu for like 15 years so at least I know that much

Actually we don't have any drawings of Song-period Zhanmadao.

It was called MaZha Dao (麻札刀) during Song time. A weapon with the name of MaZha Zhanmadao (麻札斩马刀) was recorded in Ming-period 明会典, alongside normal zhanmadao, So I can assume with certain confidence, that Song Zhanmadao follows the Ming definition.

The Song version have a ring pommel instead of a butt spike.

A Ming period Zhanmadao, from Wu Bei Yao Lue (武备要略)

Edited May 13, 2015 by wolflance

[Ayakashi]

Yeah, maybe the weapon I described was closer to a Tang Dynasty Modao. Would you say the blade to pole ratio would be the same or the blade would be longer in the Song version? I've read up somewhere before that the Modao was more or less a precursor to this weapon.

[wolflance]

Yeah, maybe the weapon I described was closer to a Tang Dynasty Modao. Would you say the blade to pole ratio would be the same or the blade would be longer in the Song version? I've read up somewhere before that the Modao was more or less a precursor to this weapon.

The only thing in common (between a MoDao and a Zhanmadao) is that they are both compared to the Han Dynasty ZhanmaJIAN.

AFAIK MoDao is double-edged, total length is one zhang/300~360cm (but ratio of blade to handle unknown). Beyond that, we don't really know anything about this weapon. It could be a polearm or a two-handed sword, or somewhere in between.

Song Dynasty Zhanmadao has a blade of three chi (~93cm)and a crossguard length of one chi (~31cm). It has a ring pommel. Handle length unknown.

Speaking of MoDao, I should go and re-read your Tang Dynasty thread.

Edited May 13, 2015 by wolflance

[Ayakashi]

Just remembered I came across this webpage a while ago:

http://thomaschen.freewebspace.com/catalog.html

It shows what's supposedly an excavated Song dynasty zhanmadao along with a stone mural depiction (or at least what the author believes is).

Edited May 16, 2015 by Ayakashi

[wolflance]

Just remembered I came across this webpage a while ago:

http://thomaschen.freewebspace.com/catalog.html

It shows what's supposedly an excavated Song dynasty zhanmadao along with a stone mural depiction (or at least what the author believes is).

That sword on Thomas Chen's website does fit several description of Song Zhanmadao - roughly 93cm blade length and ring pommel, etc.

The '31cm crossguard (鐔长尺余)' description is ambiguous though. The chinese for crossguard/tsuba is '鐔', but a 30+cm crossguard is massive, and not very common on Chinese swords. If the 鐔 here means 'hilt' , then it make much more sense.

Note: There are some Song-period scribes that equate Zhanmadao with Tang Dynasty MoDao. So maybe there are some similarities.

Several Candidates for Song period Zhanmadao:

Shorter blade, but longer handle.

A version without (or missing) ring pommel. Possibly Liao Dynasty.

Edited May 16, 2015 by wolflance

[Ayakashi]

Found this interesting link with pics of models of some of the ships used in the Ming treasure fleet (and some other ships too):

http://www.hanfu.hk/forum/viewthread.php?action=printable&tid=3647

(The last couple of models in the bottom are no so good though)

Some examples and caption for those who don't read Chinese:

Treasure Ship: 125.65m long by 50.9m wide. Displacement 14800tons. 9 masts, 12 sails.

Horse Ship: 104.7m long by 42.4m wide

Troop Transport Ship: 67.9m long, 19.4m wide. Displacement 2000tons.

Warship: 50.9m long by 19.2 m wide. Displacement 1700tons. (IMO, this model don't look the part! Maybe they mixed up the pictures?)

As nice as those are, IMHO I still prefer the replicas from IOACS: http://ioacs.org/collection.html

A Song Dynasty Paddle Ship

Ming Treasure Ship

Ming "Fengzhou" Ship; (Might be out of time-frame by just a few years/decades) around 50m long.

Edited May 29, 2015 by Ayakashi

[Ayakashi]

I just thought of an idea. What if instead of building free standing fortresses, the Chinese faction can instead upgrade individual gates into huge fortified gatehouses for an expensive amount of stone and wood provided there is enough space, as they will be much wider than regular gates. Maybe have them have between 1/2 to 3/4 the hit points of normal castles, and like fortresses can maybe garrison 20 infantry, cannot be built too close to each other and also has a light cannon attack, and unlike regular gates, infantry garrisoned inside are fully protected and the upgrade is not instant.

The reason I thought of this is because it might be too OP for China to have castles or fortresses separate from the civic center whereas all the European factions won't, and AFAIK China didn't have a tradition of building large standalone castles. However, China would still need a "castle-like" structure, so I guess you can call this a compromise. But IMO it can be another thing that makes the faction stand out.

So, using the this diagram of Nanjing's Zhonghuamen from Early Ming as an example, we can have regular gates look like the smaller ones, whilst upgraded gatehouses will look like the big one.

But then that leaves the question of where to train advanced units? Maybe some form of advanced barracks? Or a palace like in my Part 1 proposal?

Edited June 2, 2015 by Ayakashi

[wolflance]

I just thought of an idea. What if instead of building free standing fortresses, the Chinese faction can instead upgrade individual gates into huge fortified gatehouses for an expensive amount of stone and wood provided there is enough space, as they will be much wider than regular gates. Maybe have them have between 1/2 to 3/4 the hit points of normal castles, and like fortresses can maybe garrison 20 infantry, cannot be built too close to each other and also has a light cannon attack, and unlike regular gates, infantry garrisoned inside are fully protected and the upgrade is not instant.

The reason I thought of this is because it might be too OP for China to have castles or fortresses separate from the civic center whereas all the European factions won't, and AFAIK China didn't have a tradition of building large standalone castles. However, China would still need a "castle-like" structure, so I guess you can call this a compromise. But IMO it can be another thing that makes the faction stand out.

So, using the this diagram of Nanjing's Zhonghuamen from Early Ming as an example, we can have regular gates look like the smaller ones, whilst upgraded gatehouses will look like the big one.

But then that leaves the question of where to train advanced units? Maybe some form of advanced barracks? Or a palace like in my Part 1 proposal?

Image link is broken, so I can't see the "upgraded gate" you mentioned.

If I am not mistaken, Song period was one of the period where stand-alone fortresses wouldn't be out of place, as they constructed a defensive network of fortresses and signal towers to deter Western Xia attack.

Although Song Dynasty Forbidden Army was in theory a palace guard unit, in reality they were the only functioning military unit in the empire, i.e. They were 'ordinary' and did not hold any special prestige, thus not very suitable to train from a 'Palace' building. (We will have to consider after reform 2 the new Ming Dynasty troops were citizen-soldier too).

Edited June 2, 2015 by wolflance

[Ayakashi]

Hmm... well, I guess to get an idea of what they should look like you can just look at the surviving gate towers of Nanjing, Beijing, and Xi'an.

I thought that Song champions except Beiwei would be trained from barracks, because what's the point of dedicating a whole building to one weak militia unit? Shouldn't they be trained from the civic center instead?

Maybe what we can have is fortresses for the Song, and fortified gatehouses and palaces for the Ming. Song fortress train Beiwei units, and Ming palace trains Ming champions. Such buildings and units wouldn't normally be available until phase 3 and post reform anyway.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Ayakashi

[wolflance]

Hmm... well, I guess to get an idea of what they should look like you can just look at the surviving gate towers of Nanjing, Beijing, and Xi'an.

I thought that Song champions except Beiwei would be trained from barracks, because what's the point of dedicating a whole building to one weak militia unit? Shouldn't they be trained from the civic center instead?

Maybe what we can have is fortresses for the Song, and fortified gatehouses and palaces for the Ming. Song fortress train Beiwei units, and Ming palace trains Ming champions. Such buildings and units wouldn't normally be available until phase 3 and post reform anyway.

By gate, you mean something like this?

The 'weak militia' (Xiang bing) are supposedly to be available from the civic center.

[Ayakashi]

I hope this works:

It shows the destroyed main gate which is the one I'm on about.

IMHO, maybe it's much too early to talk about Ming Dynasty now! As it's likely this mod will now be made of 3 parts, the Ming should be a separate faction altogether for part 3, which is going to be quite some time in the future. Save the Ming part of the proposal somewhere though for future reference!

However perhaps we can still preserve some of that 'reform tech'? We can maybe have the part 2 Chinese faction be able to choose between Southern Song or Jin as part of their phase 3 upgrade or something else? Which unlocks corresponding advanced units.

[wolflance]

Was thinking about Northern & Southern Song, but I don't have any concrete idea yet.

[Ayakashi]

I think to have to choose between dynasties that existed in parallel would be better, and IMO would also be more meaningful if the difference is clearer as in Jin vs Southern Song, like having to choose between having strong cavalry or heavy infantry. It will also mean opportunities for people to make campaign or scenarios about wars between the two such as a campaign about Yue Fei.

I guess you can always have pre-reform tech represented by Northern Song.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Ayakashi

[wolflance]

I think to have to choose between dynasties that existed in parallel would be better, and IMO would also be more meaningful if the difference is clearer as in Jin vs Southern Song, like having to choose between having strong cavalry or heavy infantry. It will also mean opportunities for people to make campaign or scenarios about wars between the two such as a campaign about Yue Fei.

I guess you can always have pre-reform tech represented by Northern Song.

Good idea, although I cannot decide whether to choose from Jin, Liao, Xi Xia, or even Mongols.

[Loki1950]

Or even a champaign based on the "Water Margin" for epic battles lots of fun.

Enjoy the Choice

[Ayakashi]

Jin would be the obvious choice really. They were simply bigger and had a bigger population of Han Chinese, and occupied much of former Song territory but still co-existed with the Song, though violently, so the continuity makes sense. The Liao got destroyed quite early in this time frame, and the Xi Xia I feel are just not as big. The Mongols should obviously be a separate faction!

Edited June 11, 2015 by Ayakashi

[wolflance]

Jin would be the obvious choice really. They were simply bigger and had a bigger population of Han Chinese, and occupied much of former Song territory but still co-existed with the Song, though violently, so the continuity makes sense. The Liao got destroyed quite early in this time frame, and the Xi Xia I feel are just not as big. The Mongols should obviously be a separate faction!

Each has their own charm and unique unit - Jin has the Iron Pagoda cataphract and the so-called "chained horse"/Guai Zi Ma (with dubious historicity), Liao has Iron Forest Army, Eagle Army and Elite scout.

Xi Xia has Iron Sparrowhawk cataphract, Mountain Infantry, Elite Slavetaker, Camel trebuchet, gunpowder grenades and bronze cannon (they are one of the possible 'way' that we can get cannons for the Chinese for part 2) . They also has the best sword, Shen Bi Nu crossbow (this one was reverse-engineered by the Song fairly early though), and extremely tough cold-hardened iron armour.

Edited June 11, 2015 by wolflance

[Ayakashi]

The Xi Xia are awesome indeed! But as I said the primary reason I'd go for the Jin is because they conquered Northern Song Territory, thus makes the most sense as a reform tech.

However, I think a way we can get them both represented is instead of reform tech we split 'China' into sub factions in the same way the Greeks are in the vanilla game. So we can have Song, Jin and western Xia, all sharing generic assets like architecture and basic units, but also having distinctive special units and wonders. That will mean more work though, so I don't know how the CoM will react!

[wolflance]

The Xi Xia are awesome indeed! But as I said the primary reason I'd go for the Jin is because they conquered Northern Song Territory, thus makes the most sense as a reform tech.

However, I think a way we can get them both represented is instead of reform tech we split 'China' into sub factions in the same way the Greeks are in the vanilla game. So we can have Song, Jin and western Xia, all sharing generic assets like architecture and basic units, but also having distinctive special units and wonders. That will mean more work though, so I don't know how the CoM will react!

Yes, I am inclined to choose Jin as well, because they are also the only faction that 'make sense' to appear in Song army. Song and Jin did formed an alliance to destroy Liao, after all (It came back to bite them in the @#$%, but that is beside the point XD)

Then again, there are many historical source that suggest that Iron Pagoda is actually a type of heavy infantry (instead of Cataphract).

Edited June 11, 2015 by wolflance

[Ayakashi]

Just read your update.

As I've mentioned in the previous reply: if it was me, considering the split of part 2 and that we're not doing the branching into specialized sub-factions late game anymore, I would've split the Chinese (maybe sinicized factions is a better term) into the Jin, Xi Xia, and Song, as 3 separate factions/sub-factions, just like the Greeks in the vanilla game. I think a consensus among the CoM on this is needed 'cause I don't know if they would want 3 Chinese style factions, although IMO it shouldn't be much more work than the current proposal since buildings and most basic units will likely be shared. But it's probably too early for that right now.

I reckon you've done great work on this update, but the seemingly lack of any strong units other than maybe the Jin ones from Reform 1 I find a bit concerning. I know this is meant to reflect the troubled state China was facing at the time especially their army, but I can't help but feel this amount of nerfing almost unintentionally evokes the stereotype of the suicidal human wave that is too often applied to historical Chinese armies, and which we should do well to avoid. Winning purely through sheer numbers won't work IMO, considering that you need to train loads of military laborers just to build and maintain a strong defense. This is going to cost population points and will result in a smaller army than the other faction made of weaker units. IMO this is either begging to get roflstomped, or if the player is a good turtle will result in 2 hour stalemates. A massive population bonus might help but I doubt it's applicable because of the adjustable pop cap. Therefore, I think you should include at least one or two of decently strong "true" champion units such as re-adding the Beiwei.

Otherwise a great update to the proposal overall! Must've been a huge effort starting all over again and it easily puts mine to shame!

Edited June 24, 2015 by Ayakashi