Anno Domini update

Status
Not open for further replies.
[sarcasm]I dunno... looking at that picture, I'd say Iberia were pretty important, I mean, they're in COLOUR![/sarcasm]

Anyway, who were the "White Huns"?
 
R8XFT said:
I've not really played TAM as much as I should have to be honest (as I was too busy creating my own mod!) so I'm unfamiliar with the culture specific minor wonder. I would have thought that Thamis would have done it the same way as I did the flavour stuff in the original game though (i.e. gave each civ four free untradeable advances that were required for techs later on in the game).
in TAM each tribe has a Civ-Specific Ability. For most, but not all, this is a wonder that only they can build. For example, Macedonia can build Alexander's Army which autobuilds Companion Cavalry and allows healing in enemy territory. Some affect culture or production, some give a special ability to units unique to that civ; all make historical/cultural sense. Some can be built right at the beginning, some reqiure an early tech advance.
 
The Huns are a possibility :) . So the last slot available goes to one of these candidates:

01. Alans
02. Berber
03. Huns
04. Numidia

What do you think?
Answers on a postcard.....or should I say, "answers in a post..;) "
 
Blue Monkey said:
in TAM each tribe has a Civ-Specific Ability. For most, but not all, this is a wonder that only they can build. For example, Macedonia can build Alexander's Army which autobuilds Companion Cavalry and allows healing in enemy territory. Some affect culture or production, some give a special ability to units unique to that civ; all make historical/cultural sense. Some can be built right at the beginning, some reqiure an early tech advance.
Clearly I haven't given TAM the playing time it deserves. That is very useful info, thanks :goodjob: !!
 
R8XFT said:
Clearly I haven't given TAM the playing time it deserves. That is very useful info, thanks :goodjob: !!
Most of the Civ-Specific Abilitites are the key to triggering an early Golden Age (ie building a key wonder or triggering unit); choosing the research path and production schedule that gets you your Advance can mean the difference between being a dominant culture and playing catch up for the whole game.
 
Partizanac,
I think that you really exagerate this time. Just the fact that you want your civ, or any other slavic civ in the mod is not enough to justify adding a civ that is not in the timeframe of the mod. And you just made too many posts in this thread like "Include [insert slavic civ]", or "let's make a poll". (BTW, you can make a poll, not a pool. :p)

Just IMHO.
 
I say the Huns would be a fierce Civ to add. Has anybody tried making Atila the Hun's LH? I know Fireaxis got lazy and used a Mongloid . Ya just to see your rendintion of that guy would be reason enough to add them.

Be nice to go somewhere with the Huns for a change. The entire Civ series has never used them in a random epic qame, or any mods I know of for that matter..
 
Plotinus said:
The Huns are in the Fall of Rome conquest. But I agree that they would be fun for this mod too. Everyone likes the Huns!
Ya I said the " Random epic " ;). I Can't believe the've never made an appearence yet :sad: .

I like to start from scratch and carve out a piece of unexplored pie before I start taking others pie. But the Huns were in the RFRE and thats by far the one of the best Scenario ever made, So right there that tells us something.( Hun Huns Huns = Funs Funs Funs :) )...um, or something like that.

Edit: ya and I guess you meant we could copy the city list from the Scenario files. awesome! there we go!.
 
I did an Attila the Hun leaderhead a couple of years ago.

Attilapreview.jpg


HunsPreview.jpg


Though of course, it was pointed out to me that Attila would have looked more European, though I'm not sure that'd be right either. For what it's worth, I also think the Huns should be the civ that gets the nod.
 
Well I guess, the Huns are an absolute "must have" in the scenario I'd say. Though not much is known about the real appearance of Attila, this guy seems a little too hamito semitic to reflect him well (its still a cool leaderhead, don't get me wrong). IIRC the Huns were driven from central Asia to the European lands by other central Asian tribes. I would imagine Attila reflecting the central asian appearance a little more (turkmenian, mongolian mix). I could be completely wrong though.

Looking forward to play this.
 
I'd actually think Attila would be be LESS European as well...

The main source for information on Attila is Priscus, a historian who traveled with Maximin on an embassy from Theodosius II in 448. He describes the village the nomadic Huns had built and settled down in as the size of the great city with solid wooden walls. He described Attila himself as: "short of stature, with a broad chest and a large head; his eyes were small, his beard thin and sprinkled with gray; and he had a flat nose and a swarthy complexion, showing the evidences of his origin."
Attila's physical appearance was most likely that of an Eastern Asian or more specifically a Mongol-related ethnicity, or perhaps a mixture of this type and the Turkic (peoples of Central Asia). Indeed, he probably exhibited the characteristic Eastern Asian facial features, which Europeans were not used to seeing, and so they often described him in harsh terms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom