Jump to content

Civ: Germans (Cimbri, Suebians, Goths)


 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:
On 18/08/2024 at 4:38 PM, Genava55 said:

Animal representations were extremely rare at this time on the material that survived. And when it is the case, the depiction and the style are simplistic. The earliest form of emblematic native art appeared with the bracteates, during the Roman Empire.

Expand  

The problem is that there is a lot of mixing of themes here, Suebian and Cimbrian.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

No, its a more a mix (not melting bot) of cimbrian and gaul culture. Suebians were much later as I understand.

No, I'm saying is that the post is already very long (36+ pages) and has a lot of mixed content.

I can't find my designs, and all the content is mixed up. I can easily tell the difference between the Goths, but I can barely tell when it comes to the Cimbri and the new ones.

The worst thing is that I found a banner without animal symbols.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

yes especially with the animal on top. Also we know that animal symbols are not common.

That being said, the Cimbrian wars were almost in the first century.

Tbh, I think it would be cool to either go really simple or use a captured roman helmet.

Some sort of animals symbol is mentioned by Plutarch; but the description is pretty vague.

Quote

 They wore helmets, made to resemble the head and jaws of wild beasts, and other strange shapes, and heightening these with plumes of feathers, 

 

1 hour ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

I thought it was a  kind of Montefortino.

It seems to be a Port helmet, introduced around 60 B.C.

Edited by Ultimate Aurelian
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

We would use what is inside the circle.

It is a job with quite a few details and difficulty.

There is another easy way to do it, with a 3D render.

The style that Enrique used.

But it is dangerously legal, I mean barely legal.

My strategy is to do it from 0. Completely legal.

Screenshot_20241102-124554.jpg

https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/78851/how-to-make-bas-relief-from-picture

Basically it is the technique of baking an image, but you always needed the original and projected it. Then you form a relief and then bake it and make a rendering.

@Stan`  knows best how to do this technique.

Edited by Lion.Kanzen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24/10/2024 at 8:33 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

We decided to call them Germans instead of Cimbri because there are 4 different tribes represented within the faction, some of them just as powerful as the Cimbri, so it made more sense to call them Germans. The Gauls aren't called "Arverni," for example. Anyway, it's not perfect, but that's the basis of the decision. If we add more Germanic factions in the future (like Goths or Suebians), we can alter the name.

That's true but the Gauls in our game is not only the Gauls of the sack of Rome, or the Gauls of the Punic Wars, or the Gauls of the Gallic Wars. They depict a civilisation over a time span of four centuries.

Why it is so difficult to grasp a civilisation that knew some diversity and evolution in its history?

Edited by Genava55
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this about the name? Germans vs Cimbri?

Well "Gauls" is, from what I understand, quite a generic term as there were many gallic tribes. In this case, using "Cimbri" would be a little at odds with the other cimbri allies that are included in the civ.

Its true that some of these allies are better described as gallic or celtic, but as we have seen from the ambiguity around the Cimbri themselves, they too could be described as celtic.

But since these groups participated in the well-known cimbrian wars and were referred romans as germanii, I prefer Germans.

Although lets not let this hold up development: the name should be simple to change if a little labor intensive.

are we set on that face as the civ emblem? And using some geometry for the standard flag?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cimbrians would be fine. The Teutons were just their sister tribe and the other 2 are Celts from the Alps who joined the invading population.

It's 4 centuries for a very large faction, I understand that this is the root to create more factions(german factions).

Then there may be the great Germanic confederations of the 1st century AD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Its true that some of these allies are better described as gallic or celtic, but as we have seen from the ambiguity around the Cimbri themselves, they too could be described as celtic.

I understand, but it is more complicated than that. They had a language, a religion and particular customs. This is the important features to determine a cultural affiliation. If they are coming from Jutland, they are more probably Germanic or they were related to a sister-language who disappeared without letting any traces but with a common ancestor related to the Proto-Germanic language.

The issue is that the Cimbri wandering in Europe aggregated different peoples and we know some of them were Celtic (the Tigurini). For the Ambrones, it is uncertain, they gathered little interest and we don't know much about them. Strabo, Plutarch and Pliny generally said the Teutones were Germanic and came from the same area than the Cimbri.

18 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

But since these groups participated in the well-known cimbrian wars and were referred romans as germanii, I prefer Germans.

It is not the issue. It's just a fascinating effort you make to add to your difficulties and make things more complicated than they are. The Cimbri are not the most prominent of the Germanic people.

49 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Uhhh, this is not difficult to "grasp." Don't know what the implication here is. 

You're building a house of cards. With the Germans in general.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Certainly not the most prominent but one of the earliest. Sure the teutons were likely similar, but we have units from the teutons in the civ and a certain leader called "teutobod" as a hero. So i think "Germans" is appropriately nonspecific.

@Genava55 What do you think the name should be? I haven't seen your proposition, only critiques.

Maybe "Crimbrian Alliance"

Edited by real_tabasco_sauce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...