Axeman Speculation

Why would they?

A picture is worth a thousand words. The details sell the narrative. They wanted it to look like a scene where a barbarian is threatening a trade caravan and the swordsman is rushing to defend it. that's the primary reason the picture exists. If they have included some sort of deceptive Easter egg unit, it is a secondary reason. We have to parse the primary function of the whole picture from the secondary function of the appearance of this mystery unit. To me, the damage to the swordsman is part of the narrative about the caravan needing to be defended, not about revealing the nature of the tomahawk unit.
 
Or the sword could be previously damaged from killing a second barbarian or clearing a camp. I don't think there is enough proof to try and tie the sword's damage to the barb.
 
It could be anything. It could be the new model for the Great Prophet. But the evidence in the screenshot leads me to this conclusion.

Is it ranged? Probably, but who knows? I was more referring to how unique units, if it is one, don't always have ther weapon as an icon. Also, brutes and galleys the barbarian unique units, so it could've a barbarian archer replacement, if it's ranged. Or, barbarians now can get uus from civs somehow. Who knows?
 
Is it ranged? Probably, but who knows? I was more referring to how unique units, if it is one, don't always have ther weapon as an icon. Also, brutes and galleys the barbarian unique units, so it could've a barbarian archer replacement, if it's ranged. Or, barbarians now can get uus from civs somehow. Who knows?

Another off-tangent possibility:

Barbarians can now get units from city-states in some contexts (bullying them, maybe?). Possibly a militaristic CS that can produce the tomahawk unit as its UU has given it to the barbarians? Or maybe barbs get CSes' ability to request units for some reason, so a civ can gift a unit to a barbarian camp near its rivals.
 
Why would they?
I think this is a very valid point, actually. Even though the developers could use time to stage all kind of weird set-ups, why would they actually spend time taking hit points from the swordsman, if it didn't come naturally. We can always make up all kind of weird hypothesis, like they want it to look like a fight, but then why don't they also take away hp from the 'axeman', etc. etc., so I do think it's overthinking things to imagine that developers did all kind of unusual things just to make this one screenshot.
 
I have to admit, you guys sure are creative. But I think a few too many people are looking into it a little too deeply. A unique unit that looks like a barbarian to other civs..? :p

I will throw my two cents in maybe it is a new unit like literal new unit maybe they are going to put a whole new unit tree/path. You never know.

This is what I'm going with. I don't think they would take the time to create a model/animations just for a barbarian unit replacement. (replacing archer for example) If it was that they would have to do it for all the other barbarian spawned units if they wanted consistency. No, I think they put it under barbarian control so it wouldn't look like a unique unit for a civ. Which is ironic because that is what everyone speculates it is. Could be wrong of course, but I feel a simplistic viewpoint is best here. It's a new unit, spawned under neutral (barbarian) control. I suppose only time will tell~ ^^
 
*bump*
I think this will be the next civilization to be revealed by the end of the calendar month (April).
 
Yes. *if* the Tomahawk warriors are a UU, I think that they will be revealed in the next push. Kind of like how Assyria was teased in the first announcement and revealed at PAX.
 
Am I the only one who sees beards on these guys? My guess is that there is a new barbarian unit that replaces the swordsman. Maybe barbarians have been tweaked a little so they are more ... ya know ... barbarian-like. Seeing barbs with swords and pikes has always annoyed me. They're supposed to be uncivilized brutes, not iron-working people on their way to civilization, right?
 
Am I the only one who sees beards on these guys? My guess is that there is a new barbarian unit that replaces the swordsman. Maybe barbarians have been tweaked a little so they are more ... ya know ... barbarian-like. Seeing barbs with swords and pikes has always annoyed me. They're supposed to be uncivilized brutes, not iron-working people on their way to civilization, right?

Wishful thinking. I doubt the developers would care to go such lengths. If that's the case, then barbarians should remain with ancient or classical brute units for the entire game really, since they never get around to the technology of the present. I actually wouldn't have a problem with that. If barbarians are meant to be savage, uncivilized brutes, then it is what it is.

On old world, new world maps though, it may be too easy to colonize the new found continent, meeting little resistance. So it could seem a little weak for that type of setup if they are relegated to primitive technology. Obviously there are modern barbarians as well, such as pirates and privateers (although those units can currently be built by civs and CS's). You may want to preserve a modern portrayal of barbarians that spawn later in the game. All in all, I don't see them making barbarians completely primitive. Barbarians will continue to tech at a slow but steady pace, until the world/map is completely colonized.

What I'd like to see are the return of barbarian uprisings that raze and pillage, and possibly barbarian generals. They should also have appropriate technology for the era to be formidable. So I don't think making all barbarians primitive is even an accurate portrayal, since many conquerors did amass technological armies in history. Hell, we even have the Huns as a civ in the game, as lame as that addition was.
 
I contemplated the beards angle, but I think they are just shadows under their chins.
 
Well, the unit doesn't look very technological. We can definitely say that the unit is not a warrior replacement. The axe is too technologically advanced. As an archer replacement? Was there any native american civ that never implemented the basic bow and arrow? Also, would they really take out barbarian archers from the game?

This looks to be a melee unit in the classical era, or a ranged unit replacement for a composite bowman or something. I'd bet a melee unit. I think it could either be a replacement for an Axeman UU (that sort of overlaps with the Iroquois UU however). It could be the axeman itself, and this might be the barbarian flavor of it.
 
Primarily Eastern Woodland Natives like the Iroquois and Algonquins. Tomahawks were trade goods brought by European traders. They were also heavily used by English and French colonists. They are good light melee weapons. In fact some US troops are experimenting with carrying modern steel tomahawks in Afghanistan.
 
Hell, we even have the Huns as a civ in the game, as lame as that addition was.

That's kind of my point, though: Barbarians who are significant enough (either historically or technologically) are already in the game, as full blown civs. So, what are "barbs" in the game supposed to represent if not the most technologically backwards tribes that never matured? I think it's more wishful thinking on your part to think that barbarians should be viable throughout the entire game. Most games I play, they are phased out after you reach a certain era. (hence why the Honor tree is so lacking, etc.)

In any event, I could easily see a new axeman unit in the game, whether it's barb-only or not. The point is it would probably be a primitive, no-iron-required answer to swordsmen/legions/mohawks. Something a little stronger than spearmen. (Who knows? Maybe units--especially early ranged--have been rebalanced?)
 
They represent warlike people living outside the bounds of civilised society - hence the fact that, later in the game, they can have advanced weapons. They are armed bandits, militias, secessionists, rebels, etc.
 
They represent warlike people living outside the bounds of civilised society - hence the fact that, later in the game, they can have advanced weapons. They are armed bandits, militias, secessionists, rebels, etc.

Not to mention Barbarians are the ones represnting Rebels when your happiness goes to -20.
 
Rebels ... With their own polar continent, or island in the middle of nowhere, hanging out, by themselves, in the mid-to-late game, in some remote corner of the map ... who also just happen to have discovered all the same techs as leading civs despite being isolated and without resources. Yeah, OK. Sure. :/
 
Top Bottom