Hussar,Austria,and Hungary.

[fuzzatron717]

For all of you talking about The hussar in the austria thread please talk about it here. the austria thread is for austria not hungary.

 

[Duke Maynard]

Hussars were an extremely common cavalry unit with all the major powers of Europe from London to St. Petersburg. It's perfectly fine for Austria to have the unit, (I'm sure they have had some elite hussars units in history, just guessing) and Hungary was a territory of the Austrian Empire for hundreds of years.

While Hungary was a fairly powerful nation in the middle ages and a significant power in Eastern Europe, I think our Hungarian members overestimate it's importance in terms of power or influence, especially considering the space of time the Kingdom of Hungary was actually powerful for.

While obviously if there were infinite amounts of expansions or DLC's Hungary should get it's place, but for Eastern Europe I think Poland(-Lithuania) is ahead in line, and there probably won't be too terrible many more Civs added at this point, if any. Add in the fact that most on this forum will want a greater mix of non-Europeans Civs added, I don't think Hungary really has a place in Civ 5 outside a mod.

 

[SHaW1986]

i personally believe the more civs the better, it adds immensely more flavor as long as each civ really is unique, but to reiterate my point on the austria thread just because the austrians have the hussar unit doesnt mean that the hungarians are out, there has got to be more unique units for hungary, or how about 2 UBs?

 

[MadDjinn]

ok, death match time:

Only one can join the Civ 5 cast while the others will remain in the trash bin of history. Which will it be - Zulu, Hungary or Poland?





(trolololol I know, but it's not happening for all 3, so let's sit back and watch the fireworks...)

 

[SHaW1986]

hmmm... zulu are really overrated, so that leaves poland and hungary... both poland and hungary have had an immense impact at some point in their histories but hungary was incorporated in the austro-hungarian empire and austria is in, with austria's UA i think budapest ought to be a CS. so that leaves poland which would also fit in really well in a WWII scenario and in the medieval era. so yeah, gotta say poland

 

[GenjiKhan]

Europe is too over-represented . Need more Non-European Civs,even if it's not new,so Zulu is a obvious choice . Also,it is possible to use gatling guns in a scenario about the "Anglo-Zulu War",which would be a nice and a sucessful dlc .

 

[PhilBowles]

Europe is too over-represented . Need more Non-European Civs,even if it's not new,so Zulu is a obvious choice . Also,it is possible to use gatling guns in a scenario about the "Anglo-Zulu War",which would be a nice and a sucessful dlc .

I've suggested a 'Scramble for Africa' scenario in the past. The problem with the 'Anglo-Zulu War' being that:

1. A scenario demands more than two civs.

2. A scenario demands that all factions have the ability to win, with roughly equivalent ease at a given difficulty level. There isn't any reasonable way to make an Anglo-Zulu war scenario that the Zulus could have won, let alone one that gives them as much as a 50-50 chance. A scenario featuring the Zulus would therefore have to have a win condition that doesn't involve defeating a European civ.

 

[flairin]

Hussars were an extremely common cavalry unit with all the major powers of Europe from London to St. Petersburg. It's perfectly fine for Austria to have the unit, (I'm sure they have had some elite hussars units in history, just guessing) and Hungary was a territory of the Austrian Empire for hundreds of years.

In other words "Light Calvary"

 

[Louis XXIV]

The Austrian Hussar is a light cavalry. It's not the same thing as the medieval Huszar by that point.

I don't really think there's much more to talk about on this subject. I thought it was winding down. Certainly didn't need its own thread.

 

[Haig]

PhilBowles, you stole my thoughts about a Scramble for Africa scenario.

In PAX it was confirmed we get more DLC, and Zulu is pretty obcvious choice, and the DLC Civs have been accompanied by Scenarios, so for Zulu it could be an Africa colonial scenario with:
Zulu
England
France
Ethiopia
Boer Republic (Netherlands could be used for it and give them a scenario-specific UU)

****

Personally I love the European Civs most, and would have nothing against Poland or Hungary, but Zulu is a "classic" for the game series, and Africa definately needs another Civ.

 

[killmontieasap]

I think in the end it will be about how many users Firaxis can please by adding a new civ. I.e. how many DLCs the addition will help sell.

Something like Zulu, which has been around since Civ 1, is one of the more obvious choices. Korea seems to have been added because of its large gaming community (as well as it having been included before).

As for those that have not been included previously, enough pressure from the community may give Firaxis the incentive to develop them. Or they might go out on a limb and create new ones just to explore as well (such as Siam being a new addition).

 

[AbsintheRed]

ok, death match time:

Only one can join the Civ 5 cast while the others will remain in the trash bin of history. Which will it be - Zulu, Hungary or Poland?

Hungary is out
Thus Poland, definitely

The Austrian Hussar is a light cavalry. It's not the same thing as the medieval Huszar by that point.

While you are right about the Napoleonic era light cavalry not being the same, Hungarians made the majority of the Austrians Hussars too
Also, most nation's Hussar regiments in the 18th century were based on the Hungarian Hussars, usually even founded by deserting Hungarian officers:

"The first Hussar regiments were the light cavalry of the Black Army of Hungary under Matthias Corvinus. Under his command the hussars took part in the war against the Ottoman Empire in 1485 and proved successful against the Turkish Spahis as well as against Bohemians and Poles. After the king's death in 1490, hussars remained the preferred form of cavalry in Hungary. The Habsburg emperors hired Hungarian hussars as mercenaries to serve against the Ottoman Empire and on various battlefields throughout Europe.
Over the course of the 16th century hussars in Hungary had become heavier in character: they had abandoned wooden shields and adopted plate metal body armour. When István Báthory, a Hungarian prince of Transylvania, was elected king of Poland in 1576 he reorganised the Polish-Lithuanian hussars of his Royal Guard along Hungarian lines, making them a heavy formation
Hussars outside the Polish Kingdom followed a different line of development. During the early decades of the 17th century hussars in Hungary ceased to wear metal body armour; and by 1640 most were now light cavalry. It was hussars of this 'light' pattern rather than the Polish heavy hussar that were later to be copied across Europe.
During and after the Rákóczi's War for Independence (1703-1711), many Hungarians served in the Habsburg army. Located in garrisons far away from Hungary, some deserted from the Austrian army joining that of Prussia. The value of the Hungarian hussars as light cavalry was recognised and in 1721 two Hussaren Corps were organised in the Prussian Army.
In the late 17th and 18th centuries many Hungarian hussars fled to other Central and Western European countries and became the core of similar light cavalry formations created there. Following their example, hussar regiments were introduced into many of the armies of Europe.
The first Hussar regiment in France was founded by a Hungarian lieutenant named Ladislas Ignace de Bercheny (László Bercsényi), the founder of the first Russian Hussar regiment was Ádám Mányoki, a Hungarian officer."

Hussars were the main mounted unit type in Hungary from the 15th to the end of the 19th century
Also, Austrian Hussars in the 17-18 century were mostly Hungarians, and it was spread to Prussia, France, Russia, Poland and IIRC even America from here
The Napoelonic era Hussars were based on these formations, even if not totally the same
If anything, then Hussars are the UU for Hungary

I don't really think there's much more to talk about on this subject. I thought it was winding down. Certainly didn't need its own thread.

Yep, wanted to say the same thing
It was a cultured conversation about this, and was totally winding down in that thread

 

[Louis XXIV]

I think in the end it will be about how many users Firaxis can please by adding a new civ. I.e. how many DLCs the addition will help sell.

The ironic thing is they tried to please people by adding City-States for all those long-neglected nations. I think that's part of the reason why there are so many European ones. Warsaw, Budapest, Venice, etc. are included for the first time ever. Unfortunately, people would rather have a civ over a city-state so it only temporarily satiated people.

 

[Haig]

In Austria thread I wrote about Finland and Hungary and how they won't be in the game, and were always ruled by a stronger Empire.

I admit that it was a bad comparison, Hungary has been influential historically and were a strong power in itself.

Also AbsintheRed gave some good info, I also admit I don't know Hungary's history as well as some other Civs, I'll probably read more about them. (another example, didn't know much about Brazil, but a discussion in Civ forums made me interest in getting more info and was surprised to find out stuff. )

 

[cool3a2]

Although I don't think it was a wise step to start an own thread for this issue (at least at this early point) and don't think that I will go much deeper in this topic either, I'll post my answer from the other thread here, too, to have it complete:

I'm glad to see Absinthe made it here to support my point.

Denmark has Norwegian ski troops; Sweden has Finnish cavalry; Austria has Hungarian hussars. So? Hungary was part of Austria at one point.

There should be a rule that people kvetching about the lack of inclusion of their own country should be beaten repeatedly about the head and neck.

My main point is not, that I'm upset that Hungary didn't make it into civ5, my point is, that by the choice of Austrias UU they made it almost impossible to add Hungary. And no, it's not got style of modding to override anything of another civ (think of mod-merging etc). Sure, there would have been horsearchers as alternative, but the Huns got that again. And Germany will now be overrepresentetd, that's a fact.

And no, those late Hussars are not a western european invention either...

...

Hussars in the 18th century

Hussars outside the Polish Kingdom followed a different line of development. During the early decades of the 17th century hussars in Hungary ceased to wear metal body armour; and by 1640 most were now light cavalry. It was hussars of this 'light' pattern rather than the Polish heavy hussar that were later to be copied across Europe. These light hussars were ideal for reconnaissance and raiding sources of fodder and provisions in advance of the army.

In battle, they were used in such light cavalry roles as harassing enemy skirmishers, overrunning artillery positions, and pursuing fleeing troops. In many countries the hussars and bosniaks actually retained their original Asiatic uniforms. In the late 17th and 18th centuries many Hungarian hussars fled to other Central and Western European countries and became the core of similar light cavalry formations created there. Following their example, hussar regiments were introduced into many of the armies of Europe.
...

(Wikipedia)

EDIT: So please stop saying the later Huszárs had nothing to do with the hungarian huszárs, it's just not right.

And about Hungary being part of Austria, yeah, that's true. But only because Austria had occupied us and forced our soldiers to serve them. I hope you'll see that what you said is already close to an insult.
Hussars would have been well for Austria-Hungary, but not for Austria alone.

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

The makers have been deliberately vague about whether Denmark also incorporates Norway, and whether Sweden incorporates Finland and whether Austria incorporates Hungary. It is implied in each situation but not actually stated.

This kind of lends itself to a situation where these civs could make an appearance if public opinion deems them worthy.

However, Hungary, Finland and Norway seem to be behind at least Brazil, Majapahit, Sumer, Hittites, Zulu and countless others i'm sure.

If another euro civ is included i'd rather see Bulgaria.

 

[Nyanko]

Seeing as Swedens second (or third) city is Helsinki, the chances of Finland do not look good!

 

[nokmirt]

For all of you talking about The hussar in the austria thread please talk about it here. the austria thread is for austria not hungary.

What difference does it make? During the Napoleonic Wars, Hungarian hussar regiments were a part the Austrian army, just as Austrian hussars were. Therefore talking about them in the Austria thread makes sense to me. I am not sure what you are getting at here?

Hussar regiments were raised in all the main countries in Europe, they certainly are not just a Hungarian only type of light cavalry. I realize that many of these had Hungarian influence, officers and men who left Hungary, but the units were not made up completely of Hungarians. In other words they were hussar regiments who represented the country they fought for. In that sense I feel hussars should really be a common unit, one that everyone can recruit.

 

[AbsintheRed]

Hussar regiments were raised in all the main countries in Europe, they certainly are not just a Hungarian only type of light cavalry. I realize that many of these had Hungarian influence, officers and men who left Hungary, but the units were not made up completely of Hungarians. In other words they were hussar regiments who represented the country they fought for. In that sense I feel hussars should really be a common unit, one that everyone can recruit.

Yep, actually I agree with that
European mods should have separate heavy and light cavalry types, with Hussars definitely appearing as a common late light cavalry unit
And the Hungarian UU would be a Hussar replacament, the Huszár, which comes earlier in the tech tree, and have some kind of a free scouting or flanking promotion
(it is more or less this way in RFC Europe too)

Of course this will never happen for vanilla CiV, Hussar won't be a common unit
Thus it should be a Hungarian UU, if anything
I just don't see it being tied more to Austria than to all other European nations which adopted this form of light cavalry from Hungary

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Seeing as Swedens second (or third) city is Helsinki, the chances of Finland do not look good!

Stockholm used to be a city state, what's to say they can't change the city name list for Sweden if Finland suddenly becomes popular?