Argalius Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 Will there be women in 0AD, like female villagers and warriors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Centurion_13 Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 I think I read somewhere which said it has some wmen in it. Im about 60% sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Giant Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 It has been over a year since I have read the DD for the last time, but I'm pretty sure that it says yes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted October 27, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 Only villagers or warriors too. And if there are women warriors will they be just normal warriors or will they be special warriors, just like in AoM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nawen Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 Well, this is a real time strategy game, so if the wouldn't be any woman's in the villages, then it wouldn't be very logical, or?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curufinwe Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 and women warrior in 0 A.D is not very logical either ... so, I guess there won't be any female warrior ... but ain't sure, so ask the developers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeros Posted October 27, 2004 Report Share Posted October 27, 2004 Im about 60% sure. I'm 100% sure that theres female villagers in 0AD , and their role is abit different from male villagers, aka Citizen Soldiers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos_Ruler Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Cheezy's right. Female Citizens have an expanded role in 0 A.D. relevent to the historical time period. Male Citizens and Warriors are also quite a bit different than what you are used to in an historical RTS. I won't devulge the details, so I'll leave it at that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wijitmaker Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Historically there was women warriors in the ancient world, you guys should do some googling and investigate for youself. Joshua also has a nice article on the role of women in the ancient world on the 0 A.D. website. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted October 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 So if I understand Mythos right, women and men have different bonusses or something, but then can you choose which one you want, a man or a woman? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeusthor Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 you can choose between men and women, but I'm not sure if we are supposed to say more than that . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted October 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 I don't mind if you tell more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fire Giant Posted October 28, 2004 Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 I guess you'll learn more as soon as the game reaches beta or release stage Asides, I think there *may* be preview articles some time dealing with those gameplay stuff - but it way too early for that right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted October 28, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2004 Well we'll wait for that then, but atleast my question has been answered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aeros Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 women and men have different bonusses or somethingHehe, I think it would be an insult or atleast an easy break if we make women villagers gather 10% faster or male villagers carry 10% more or something like that, no the difference between them isn't in their statistics but in their role in the game. I'll let you speculate on what that means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted October 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 Ok ...Speculation 1: Women can have babies Speculation 2: I can't think of anything else atm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nawen Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 Ok ...Speculation 1: Women can have babies Speculation 2: I can't think of anything else atm ←They cared for the babies and worked in the house while the men was out hunting Anyway, will there be amazons maybe?? only women warriors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted October 29, 2004 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 If not it would be a good idea for a mod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nawen Posted October 29, 2004 Report Share Posted October 29, 2004 Inndeed Hope so, that would be something-out-of-the-ordinary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paal_101 Posted November 10, 2004 Report Share Posted November 10, 2004 There will not be any standard female warriors in the game. The only people that might apply to would be the Sarmatians and even in that case females would have made up only a VERY small part of their army. And that was early on, since by the time the Sarmats were fighting the Romans there is no mention of female soldiers, something the conservative Roman historians would definately mention Remember that when you do your Google searches that many of the women mentioned as warriors were leaders and their armies would have been men. Anything you've heard about Celtic women fighting along with their husbands in organized battles is false. Again, its something the Roman historians would have mentioned....and didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argalius Posted November 11, 2004 Author Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 Well what do you think of Boudicca. She fought against the Romans. So I think see will be included, won't she? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Ultor Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 I believe that was in the time of the Roman Empire. And the Roman historians did, in fact, mention her specifically, implying that it was an uncommon thing from their perspective. Boudicca wasn't of a common stock of ancient female. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paal_101 Posted November 11, 2004 Report Share Posted November 11, 2004 In that the historians mentioned her you would be right. That alone shows how unusual women warriors were in ancient times. Although obviously female units have existed, such as one African king who had a female bodyguard famous for their brutality. Or as in our times, Mohamar Gadaffi (sp?) of Libya who has a female bodyguard.....20 somthing female bodyguards watching a 60+ man Sad really.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Titus Ultor Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 At least the man's living the good life? Either way, I believe the role of women in 0 A.D. will be/is minimized by today's standards, because historical accuracy is important to the members of this project (Apparently. If I actually had some useful skills, I'd try to join. Otherwise, I can only go by the statements of those within.) Besides. Making female warriors would require a lot more work, I'm hypothesizing, and that would only slow progress down. There's no need to slow down the project for something that isn't at all historically accurate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paal_101 Posted November 12, 2004 Report Share Posted November 12, 2004 Speed isn't the problem, its historical reality which is this: there were no true female warriors. They may have occasionally fought in abnormal conditions i.e. last stand, or fight raiders when their husbands were gone, but this was extremely unusual. Even at Boudicca's defeat there is no great evidence that women fought. Sure Taciticus quotes Suetonius saying something to the effect of "Look...they're more women than men." But this is because the Celts brought their families to watch the battle, and considering that a part of the male population would now be dead from fighting the Romans and the naturally larger numbers of women in the world it make it understandable. Plus more than likely he was referring to the entire group, which would be what they could see, not just the warriors. Short answer: If there were female warriors in history we would have put them in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.