1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Humankind - Poles Discussion Thread

Discussion in 'Humankind by Amplitude' started by Eagle Pursuit, Aug 18, 2020.

  1. Krajzen

    Krajzen Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,903
    Location:
    Poland
    I have four problems with Venetians in EM:
    1) Venice would fit medieval better - it is the golden age of merchant republics, there was a lot of intrigue and warfare between Italian states, it was partly Venice which took down Byzantium, it participated in crusades...
    2) We already have Dutch as naval merchant culture in EM.
    3) EM (Renaissance) Italy could instead get Tuscany or Milan with AESTETHE FOCUS!!! Its such clear opportunity
    4) Venice in EM means no Subsaharan culture in EM, which is weird to me, I thought they were going for wholesome "every era you have some great black culture" ;) and EM has a lot of Subsaharan candidates.

    Sweden is fine in industrial, but it would be really cool in early modern. One poster above tried to dismiss "few decades of warfare" but this 150 year long period of Swedish warfare (1570 - 1720) feature the best military machine on the continent, which revolutionized gunpowder warfare. EM Sweden was a major player of Thirty Year old war, a major nemesis of Poles (and absent Danish and Russians)... It is the archetypal militarist culture of this period, much more than Polish.

    So I'd prefer it over Venice as well :p
     
    Atlas627, Gwydden and Siptah like this.
  2. Narcisse

    Narcisse Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2020
    Messages:
    289
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, Swedes could be a really nice militarist pick (even as expansionist) for Early Modern Era. But "the best military machine on the continent, which revolutionized gunpowder warfare" seems to be an overexagerated statement for me.
    Yes Gustavus Adolphus is one of the pioneers in term of basis of European land armies. But they didn't outclass everyone on the whole continent, no. Nothing comparable to the European Great Powers or the Islamic gunpowders empires especially Ottomans which invade a part of the continent.
    There is a lot of important aspects of the Early Modern warfare and of the gunpowder usage, where the Swedes are neither the pioneers nor the experts. (line battles for exemple, they adopted it as everyone else, but they were not the iniators)

    But yes, these periods of wars are important for Sweden, because it's give them the oppurnity to exist as an established state, in front of huge empires. They don't need the "ultimate european war marchine" argument, to be envisaged for Early Modern imo.

    For the arguments about Venice in medieval era, I cannot validate the one of "there was a lot of intrigue and warfare between Italian states". Italian Wars are highly associated to Renaissance, so Early Modern in the game. It's the best era to settle these conflicts.

    Anyway, medieval era in Humankind is not at all focused on naval gameplay (from Cat). Medieval naval warfare in europe was indeed really secondary : Yes Byzantine and Venetian controled the sea, because no one really tried to outclass them, so they have always their Roman navy. (similar navy army composition and similar ships)

    I prefer to have another naval culture in Medieval Era from another part of the world where naval design and warfare really matter. Malay archipelago for exemple, which was a sort of huge Thalassocracy. And they had some innovative and really interesting ship design. For europe : the Sicilians, a leading maritime power in the Mediterranean Sea for almost a century, they decided one day to take Byzantine territories, and they totally outclassed the Venetian-Byzantine alliance in naval warfare. (they were stopped by the death of their leader). For the Italian culture representation in medieval era : something innovative, the Lombard culture for exemple, with a good lineage from Goth (which is not naval btw)

    So yes there is solid arguments to have Venetians in Medieval instead of EM. But no, they are not the first choice for a naval culture or an italian culture in medieval era.
    For me, in medieval era, they were just good as citystate if transposed to a 4X. In Renaissance, they have the potential to be a widespread culture. (Controlling multiple cities,territories, and colonies. Founding new cities and colonies. Their golden age is just on the 15th century : if they didn't lose versus the Ottomans, they would have had a decent empire, ... And the Galeasse is not medieval).

    > So I only see two possibilities, imho : Venetians are not a major culture, but a citystate in medieval era. Or a culture in EM.
    If they are confirmed, we will have two Merchant, two Aesthete and two expansionist. Looks really decent for the period in term of gameplay. And if they add Tuscans or Napolitans later in dlc, we will have the Italian-Wars representation in Early Modern.

    But maybe we will get Swedes, we will see in two weeks.
     
    Last edited: Aug 24, 2020
  3. j51

    j51 Blue Star Cadet

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,198
    Location:
    Ping Island
    I wonder why they didn't name EM Polish "Polish-Lithuanian" when they named Industrial "Austro-Hungarians."
     
    Krajzen, CivLuvah and Narcisse like this.
  4. Narcisse

    Narcisse Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2020
    Messages:
    289
    Gender:
    Male
  5. Siptah

    Siptah Eternal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2016
    Messages:
    5,170
    Location:
    Lucerne
    They might want to add medieval Lithuania later on and thus avoided Polish-Lithuanian in the following era? Austro-Hungarians might mean that if another Hungarian culture might be implemented eventually, it might be called Magyars.
     
  6. Narcisse

    Narcisse Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2020
    Messages:
    289
    Gender:
    Male
    I hope so, by the way, two of them have damn interesting history in medieval era, and really emblematic clashes with some of the confirmed cultures. But I hope than if the name "Magyars" is chosen, it's anyway medieval Hungary which is represented, and not the semi-nomadic raiders period, which is less interesting IMHO
     
    CivLuvah likes this.
  7. Siptah

    Siptah Eternal Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2016
    Messages:
    5,170
    Location:
    Lucerne
    The semi-nomadic Magyars would count as a central asian culture though, and there are already so many medieval European ones.
     
  8. Narcisse

    Narcisse Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2020
    Messages:
    289
    Gender:
    Male
    if I want additionnal semi-nomadic cultures, I prefer to go with Cumans, Kipchak, Tatars, Petchenegs, etc... IMO
    or Bulgarian, could be cool to have a reference to the transition from the Khanat to the feodality.
    Magyars informations are just too lite, and medieval Hungary have a rich history and again iconic clashes with confirmed cultures.
     
  9. Aquila SPQR

    Aquila SPQR Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2009
    Messages:
    510
    Location:
    Central Europe
    What? "Expansionist aggressor"? Any arguments proving it? The biggest territorial gain was diplomatic (half of Duchy of Lithuania). Then minor expansion towards northern Baltic states and east against Muscovy. Most detailed map I've found:



    Nothing really big enough to justify being branded as "expansionist aggressor".

    Poles should most definitely be agrarian. For a long time Poland exported tonnes of grain to western Europe and had a lot of "folwark" estates. Also peasants were tied to the land and their lord and had to work on both their own fields and also on their lord's fields (this system survived up to XIX century). Just because Poles had the famous winged hussars and were the largest regional power back then doesn't mean it was any more "militaristic" than any other country.

    Also this barbican... why? Folwark was much more widespread and important to the country's economy.

    Oh, and the winged hussars on both artwork and 3D model are wrong. There was usually one wing only, attached to the saddle, not cuirass.

    So... it's cool there are Poles in the game, but the devs definitely could've researched the topic much better.
     
  10. Elhoim

    Elhoim Iron Tower Studio Dev

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,472
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Isidro, Argentina.
    Not so much about Poland exactly, but the "expansionist" concept in HK it's not only about the final size, but about how quick it a civ can expand and not only by military conquests (has an ability to take territories without wars).
     
    Kjimmet, Atlas627, Krajzen and 3 others like this.
  11. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    3,282
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    Amplitude had a designer who spoke an obscure Provencial dialect in which 'Ottomans' came out 'Zottomans', so they will still fit right into whatever alphabet is left . . .

    As for Sweden/Gustaphus as a so-so military force, beg to differ: There were three techniques for combining pikes and firearms that were developed and tried in Europe between 1530 and 1620 CE: Spanish Tercios, Maurice of Nassau's Battalions and the Swede's 'Squadron/Brigade'. The Tercios proved to be very solid, but also very unwieldy and hard to maneuver. The Battalion eventually became standard, but had to be combined with other battalions to really last long. The Swedish squadron formation combining advanced firearms (first cartridges), pikes, and light artillery could outshoot anything in front of it, and out-maneuver anything around it. The battalion outlasted it because the organization cold accommodate regimental administration and they followed the Swede's example and added light artillery ("battalion guns") to the battalions. However, the successor tactic hat built on Adolphus' squadrons, the 'Ga Pa' of the late 17th, early 18th century, was almost unbeatable: Swedish infantry charged and smashed every opponent they faced in the Great Northern War, including Danes, Saxons, Poles, and Russians, and were only beaten by being half-starved, losing most of their horses, faced with 3 - 1 odds and a fortified enemy - and even then they almost broke through the fortifications!

    Oh, and Vasa Sweden also had the first modern military conscription system, first militarized artillery (their gunners were enlisted in the army while in other armies they were still technically civilian 'craftsmen') and invented the howitzer: not bad for a small northern kingdom with a tiny population compared to, say, the Zottomans.
     
  12. Krajzen

    Krajzen Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2013
    Messages:
    2,903
    Location:
    Poland
    Yeah, but Poland didn't have that ability either in military or in non - military terms.

    The vast majority of PLC territory was a single period of conquest of weak Rus principalities done by pagan Lithuania in 14th century. So not only it was one series of campaign, not only it was done by a completely different culture (btw I still think it should be "Polish - Lithuanian" culture), but it wasn't even done in the early modern era.
    Seriously, this is how personal union of Poland and Lithuania looked in the year 1385:
    Spoiler :


    The Polish - Lithuanian civilization has reached is maximum extent (excluding Latvia and very short episodes of Russian conquests) by the late 14th century, and then remained in the same or smaller borders for four centuries.
    This makes for a pretty bad vibe of "expansionist culture".
    In fact, the game making early modern Poland - Lithuania "militarist" is also slightly strange, because while the army had a remarkable quality and ability to achieve spectacular victories until late 17th century), the mentality of the society (elites included) was actually remarkably 'pacifist' for this era. PLC had good relations with Ottomans as well as Habsburgs for most of the time, was not participating in Reformation wars, and was content to remain within its borders. Its only period of half hearted expansionism were desperate attempts of Vasa dynasty to convince nobility to fight for the Swedish crown and elites being undecided as to what to do with the dynastic crisis in Russia, with subjugation of Russia being one of ideas (but few people geuinely believed it is possible, which seems to be sane approach). There were few wars with Ottomans, but they were either quick defensive campaigns or precisely two "holy wars in defense of Christendom" (disastrous Varna and famous Vienna). In general, most of PLC wars were defensive in nature, and those that weren't had very local and precise goals (Baltic strategic control, Moldavia, precise Russian strategic strongholds etc).

    In fact, by the 18th century, when PLC was a decadent failed state, one of its pathetic aspects was pacifist mentality of its nobility which didn't care about reformation of the army or external affairs, just internal "peace" with the insane mentality of "if we are not armed then other countries won't see us as threats and we shall be peaceful :)". One of the best examples I know of when pacifism can be a terrible vice lol.

    I am generally fine with the militarist affinity, because it is cool and because it highlights general tendency of Polish - Lithuanian military to be highly competent between 14th century and half of 17th century, frequently winning against numerically superior foes. But expansionist would be really, really based on nothing other than "big area".

    Still, agrarian reality would be by far the most realistic one - if there is one state which can be based as agrarian, it was PLC which had its entire economy and society built on the export of grain to the West.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2020
    grug, 8housesofelixir and Narcisse like this.
  13. Narcisse

    Narcisse Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2020
    Messages:
    289
    Gender:
    Male
    Btw, it's the whole concept of their gameplay in Humankind. It's why they are not agrarian. Their pitch is being excellent defenders being able to defeat the strongest and unstoppable empires.
    I mean, the pitch about being great exporter of grain is legit. But being excellent in the defense of their country is a valid pitch too, and interesting in term of gameplay perspective.
    And Militarist was highly expected by the community to be honest, Agrarian too. But yes, Militarist cultures in Humankind seems to be really diverse, and not only about warmongering


    The fort deserve to be highlighted in my humble opinion. Indeed, it's less widespread than folwark, but the architecture of the reference is really interesting, and fit well with their gameplay.
    If they were agrarian, the folwark would be the obvious choice by the way, but they are not.
    And it was one of the quarter suggested and expected by the members of the community before the reveal, so it don't look like an outrageous choice.

    I would like to have more informations about this topic. I already saw museum pieces with two wings on the saddle, or one or two wings attached directly on the back of the cuirass. I suppose than it was maybe just used for parades ?
    But I don't find any topic which confirm than it was always one wing only on the saddle, in all the early modern history of Poland / PLC. So, if someone can explain the whole thing, with good sources, it could interess me.

    Mistakes on equipments happens really often in games with historical context. So it's possible, we already spotted the wrong shape of sword of the french Cuirassier.

    So, because the Poles are not agrarian like you wanted, "the dev didn't enough well researched the topic". I mean, firstly, it's their historians which researched the topics, not the devs. And the gameplay is important too, like in Civ.
    I think than how they conceptualized Poles, for Humankind is really interesting in term of gameplay. Being able to stop the biggest and greedy empires looks situational ... but epic. And forts are really nice to widespread farmer quarters (for exemple) in the futher parts of your territories in the same time than you need units spawn points.

    I think than it's a really short and quick statement to say than they didn't work well their topic, when it's just alternative choices than your own, but which work well too. I mean, some appreciated these choices, some poeple not, it's life. But there is no scandalous mistakes here, from my point of view.

    Well, agrarian Poles sounds like an interesting trope and is obviously really legit ! I can't imagine what could be their gameplay (don't look really appealing to me atm, and militarist affinity don't stop you to be the best in other parts of the game), but we can hope than some modders will made some alternative gameplay mod for some cultures which work well with multiple affinities, and have diverse and interesting quarters / units.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2020
    Elhoim, 8housesofelixir and ost like this.
  14. Boris Gudenuf

    Boris Gudenuf Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    3,282
    Location:
    north of Steilacoom, WA
    Winged Hussars.jpg

    My reference is George Gush's Renaissance Armies, which is old but has the advantage that much of his material came from personal visits to military museums all over Europe, so in the case of specific uniforms/costumes it is 'eye-witness' rather than literary. The original 'Polish' Hussars were Serbian or Hungarian mercenaries, and were indifferently armored and used (by, among others, our old Civ VI friend Mathias Corvinus) as 'expendable' light cavalry. By the reign of Stephan Bathory (1576) they had adopted the heavy lance and heavy armor of the medieval 'knight' and later became the principle heavy cavalry of the Polish/Lithuanian forces.
    Sometime in the late 16th century they adopted the 'wings'. The 1 versus 2 'wings' question is due to the fact that they used both: originally a single wooden curved wing attached to the saddle, by the 17th century 2 wooden wings attached by a harness to the rider. The old theory that the clattering of the wings would frighten the enemy or his horses is a myth: in the roar of thundering hooves and clangor of metal on metal in a Renaissance cavalry action no one would hear any wooden thumping or clacking. More likely they were to protect the rider's back against enemy swords and keep Tartar or Cossack lassoes from yanking him off his horse (a tactic that goes all the way back to the Huns, who are described by Roman authors as using loops of rope to entangle enemy cavalry)
    The later rider shown as iIlustration b, by the way, is wearing a metal cuirass composed of plates fastened together by prominent metal rivets as shown. The separate plates were a lot easier to forge than a single breastplate as used in the previous century. The easier manufacture was required because the Winged Hussars started as a small 'elite' force but had become virtually the entire Polish heavy cavalry by the 17th century, so some economy was necessary!
    Note Gush's comments on the colors, which are from the surviving exhibits: the red and white Polish 'national colors' were already prominent as well as a whole suite of colorful animal skins and pelts
     
  15. 8housesofelixir

    8housesofelixir Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2020
    Messages:
    1,092
    The Militarist ability - spawn 4 Militia unit in every city - always looks very defensive to me (it can be used in offensive though).

    IMHO by this ability, and a lot of Militarist culture's IRL military history, Militarist affinity seems to emphasis on three (sometimes different) aspects: Warmongering, Defending, and Mobilizing.
     
    Narcisse likes this.
  16. SuddenAppearance

    SuddenAppearance Chieftain

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2020
    Messages:
    28
    Thank you for that piece of information Boris, very interesting. Sometimes it's difficult to get detailed information on certain things when you don't have a book at hand!
     

Share This Page