|
Post by ByzantineKnight on May 3, 2007 2:42:45 GMT
Guys, i'm begining to feel that we've left the path that the mod originally started on. Too much fantasy is going into this mod...
Do you guys feel the same?
ByzantineKnight
|
|
|
Post by meliritiatl on May 3, 2007 5:42:46 GMT
What do you mean fantasy? I ll tell you one thing. If we wanted to make one historically dead accurate mod then we shouldnt have more than two units for each civ, except for the Aztecs. And I will explain: All the other civs had warriors that werent classified with special names. There were just warriors, captains, the nobles and the King (ok thats 4 units per civ). Only the Aztecs had sth like a professional army, they had the 1,2,3,4 prisoner classification, the had the quachique, the jaguar, the eagle and the coyote warriors. Ok, Im in for historical accuracy, lets make a mod with 4 units each civ and lets pay someone to play it. Sorry guys, Im so tired these days with my job and the units, and Im trying so hard to please everyone, sorry if i sound ironic or sth. Ok we may have strayed from our original path but it was one we couldnt follow. But if anyone feels we should stick to historical accuracy, ok get some historically correct references, and i will vote "yes". And when i say historically correct I mean drawings from university professors, not references of the kind "I have seen that and it must have looked like this, and maybe it would be better to do that...". So far now, this is how we worked, and dont get me wrong I LIKE IT. Murfios and Filis references may not be the best, but the guys were there, they helped, and if they combined reality with their imagination, I LIKE IT. Its not like we made a dinosaur fighting the Incas (although I could model one) What I suggest is that everyone is more active for the mod and offers all the help he can. And I mean more active even with remarks and ideas. The last month it has been me, Vuk, Murfios and Fili. Byzantine, you got my respect. But why didnt you put that question a month ago when we started making our units. Please, we need support and not doubt. Thank you all, I hope you dont go mad at me.
|
|
|
Post by Vuk on May 3, 2007 11:26:01 GMT
I gotta agree with Mel on most of what he said. If we made this historically accurate, the units would be a rabble mix of warriors all armed and armoured differently (with a leader at their front). Even all the leaders would be different. Not only that, but most units would be positively frightening. Also, the units would have to randomly run around, because they didn't use formations!! If you are going to make a mod like this, you HAVE to do it this way! If not, you'd need to find a differrent engine to build it on. No matter what you guys decide, I offered my help and will help with any plan you come up with, but my opinion is that we are doing fine the way we are. I see a lot of changes that I would like to make in a lot of the units, but I do not have the skills to draw or express them. Anyway, that is not my job.
Vuk
|
|
|
Post by meliritiatl on May 3, 2007 11:47:17 GMT
Thanks. And Im here to listen to any remarks you make. Murfios made some remarks about the 2 Chimu units, i believe they are justified and i immediately found a solution. I will model 2 new units and we can transfer the Chimu ones to the Incas. If anyone else has any more remarks they are welcome and we definitely can talk about it. But please, we need to advance not step backwards. We need fruitful discussion guys. The forum is here, lets talk
|
|
|
Post by Roman_Man#3 on May 3, 2007 21:08:00 GMT
If we are not commited to historical accuracy, I think we should stop advertising it as 98% historical accuracy, 2% pixels.
|
|
|
Post by Vuk on May 3, 2007 21:12:54 GMT
Historical accuracy as far as is possible with the game engine. (even NTW2 doesn't have the front rank kneel because the game doesn't support it) That we are committed too. We should change the ad (I think we should regardless ), but that doesn't mean we should stop telling people that it is realistic. Too little is known about the people we are making the mod about to make it historically accurate, so when we say that it comes with conditions of course. Vuk
|
|
|
Post by Filibusteria on May 3, 2007 21:15:37 GMT
Also, the units would have to randomly run around, because they didn't use formations!! Vuk They did.
|
|
|
Post by Filibusteria on May 3, 2007 21:19:26 GMT
And when i say historically correct I mean drawings from university professors, not references of the kind"I have seen that and it must have looked like this, and maybe it would be better to do that" im not a university proffesor, but i live in the place where these people lived, and ive gone to museums. I also have books with info. If i had dropped a just little of my imagination on those concepts they would have 34 units each. So please dont say they are not historically correct, like the osprey books, because they are.
|
|
|
Post by rexdacorum on May 3, 2007 21:23:41 GMT
Its hard to make historicall accuracy for south-american civilizations wich did not use writing sistem to record theyr military issues .
Howewer, we can make something that may look very similar to what was like out ther 500 years before. Something plausible.
And to the current stage, our units are very good. And the level of historicall accuracy in our mod is much higher than the one existing in to vannila RTW, or vannila BI, or even vannila MTW II.
|
|
|
Post by Vuk on May 3, 2007 21:23:59 GMT
Also, the units would have to randomly run around, because they didn't use formations!! Vuk They did. A few did in a vague sense, but nothing that would be considered a formation by the rest of the world! (like all the formations in RTW are made for!) The closest think the "Formation fighting" that they did was charge in a line and group into a circle when defending! (and not all did this) At least that is all I have ever read about, if I am wrong, please tell me and point me to where I can learn more about it. Thanks, Vuk
|
|
|
Post by Filibusteria on May 3, 2007 21:37:27 GMT
well, the inca had organised battallions, so the rest of important empires, excepting the aztecs.
I suggest that we use the Roman archer formation, just to show that savageness you want to show
|
|
|
Post by rexdacorum on May 3, 2007 21:49:42 GMT
Civilised factions fought in battle formations of some sort, that is for sure. I`ve read twice the book of Garcilaso de Vega el Inca (the second time, solely for the mod), and the Inca`s where able to use in certain ocassions advanced military tactics. They where a disciplined army, and discipline means formations of some sort...
Of course, no testude, no phalanx, no specialised formations, but groups of warriors acting on the battlefield as single units.
The more savage tribes prefered a sort of guerrila like warfare. Aguarunas and so fough guerrila warfare for a few reasons :
- they where not civilised enough to organised themselfes into an effective battle force. - they relied on forces rallied from small villages by different chiefs, having thus rather small numbers, they did not afford to engage in frontall attacks to loose many man.
For the Aguarunas, the type of formation used by peasants in vannila RTW would be just fine... large, loosely spreadead formations.
|
|
|
Post by Vuk on May 3, 2007 21:50:15 GMT
The men were organized, but the didn't use the rank and file system used in RTW. That is what I am trying to say. I don't mind any of them, I am just pointing out that it would be hard/impossible to simulate it on the RTW engine.
Vuk
|
|
|
Post by rexdacorum on May 3, 2007 21:53:01 GMT
Inca`s had ranks and organization...
"commander over 10 man" "commander over 100 man" "commander over 1000 man"
These are military organisation types wich are common to even the most primitive army.
But you are right on one thing, Vuk. Most of the civilisations wich we will represent, where very disorganised.
|
|
|
Post by Filibusteria on May 3, 2007 21:54:59 GMT
then we should use the roman archr formations
|
|