Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (XII)

[Mithadan]

LotR Thread I:
LotR Modders UNITE!!! Half-way-point.
LotR Thread II:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?postid=1015305#post1015305 Half-way-point.
LotR Thread III:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (cont) Half-way-point.
LotR thread IV:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (4) Half-way-point
LotR thread V:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (5)http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=60650 Half-way-point
LotR thread VI:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (part-hex)http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=63116 Half-way-point
LotR thread VII:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (septa)http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64619 Half-way-point
LotR thread VIII:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (octa)http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=67049 Half-way-point
LotR thread IX:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (nona)http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=71333 Half-way-point
LotR thread X:
Middle-Earth: Lord of the Mods (deca)http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=75258 Half-way-point
LotR thread XI:
Middle-Earth:Lord of the Mods (Undecim)http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=80821[latest] Half-way-point

From the beginning we have been a team of modders. Being a team, no one person has more authority than the other. Important (and unimportant) decisions get made as a team and by doing this we strive to make the MOD as balanced as possible. Our little democracy is a very good, but inefficient(time wise) way of making a MOD. The people who get involved in the LOTM project come with different opinions. Some view the movie as a perfect representation of the books, others have strong opinions the other way. Because of this, our votes cut much of the "over accurate" information and yet at the same time attempts to follow as close to Tolkien's vision as possible.

Because of this democracy styled-team, our project will take longer than someone going at it solo, but we feel that in its final form it will be the most in-depth LOTR work out there. We wholly encourage people to look at CFC's different scenarios and LOTR MODs, as they each represent someone's opinion on how LOTR should be. But please, stop by and give your opinion on how things should work for LOTM, so we can become a true melting pot of ideas.

Thread Log
-In the Third installment of our collaboration, significant work was completed on the buildings\wonder\improvement front. Unfortunately it was sort of sporadic, and it's hard to define just what we did . Discussion of the maps also took place, at which point Yoda Power offered to make an older version of Middle-earth, you can see this here.

-In the Fourth thread, we have gathered some new blood, and discussed about how to implement certain civilizations into the game, namely Isengard and Rohan. We set our course to make it clear, to stomp on the sporadic-ness of the third thread.

-In the Fifth thread, more new blood, significant progress in accumulating graphic designers, and a recession, in which the new blood has expressed their long bottled up opinions on how the mod should go. Talks on the tech tree in a forum based discussion has been put off for a bit. We should let the new (and old) idea's re-circulate, meanwhile, chat based discussion will take place at undefined periods, then re-introduced into the sixth installment of the thread.

-In the Sixth thread, believe it or not more new blood, and many of them CFC 'old-timers'. The tech tree thread should be getting a tech update, to initiate discussion about how to branch the tree itself. Lots of opinions have been rattling around, and we have gotten even more beautiful works and ideas from the unit creators\graphic designers.

-In the Seventh thread, we have developed a secure style of going about making the .bix. And that is by going tab-to-tab. For instance, we already covered the Citizen and General Settings tabs, allowing us to go in depth with the mod. Civilizations are agreed on, and soon we will start on the Civilzations tab.

-In the Eighth thread the Combat Experience is complete, and the Terrain tab is very near this goal also. Now that we wish to have a playable beta out within the month, it is very important that we come to decisions quickly and effectively. The beta itself will be somewhat hap-hazard, missing many civilopedia changes, and constantly evolving to the alpha version. If you want your vote to count, don't forget that even passing modders have their vote, then please post as quickly as possible so we can move on to the next subject. Do not be alarmed if new tabs get brought up before discussion has ended on the other. However we will make sure the vote has been tallied.

-The Ninth thread marks some changes, the release date pointing somewhere around the February month. We are down to the last three tabs in the tab system, Buildings, Units, and Civilization Advances. Some minor changes are taking place, the biggest being the additions of leaders for the civilizations, which will more than likely never be completed until the beta.

-In the tenth thread we have eliminated all tabs except but the Unit and Tech tabs. Hopefully we will go through the units tab quickly, and I can post the beta soon. Again, it will be hard to rush through these tabs, so be patient just a little longer.

-The eleventh thread worked out well, but went slowly. We have finalized the units, and as Mrtn said, it was like "juggling with eels". We had to try and balance the different unit stats together, to more accurately represent the difference between races. Try making an Orc cheap and fairly powerful, but at the same time try to not make and Elf overly powerful and expensive. Certain units were being eclipsed and we constantly had to make sure all the units fit. It wasn't exactly easy, but I feel we ended up at a good point in MOD progression. Hobbits have yet to be finalized, because we lack graphics. Once we get the graphics (Mrtn and I will shrink down some medieval hobbit-looking units) then we can finalize the hobbits. Mrtn will show me how to do this during the twelfth thread, so hang tight. All we have left are the technologies. [Unsolicited edit by Mithadan: actually, we're still fighting over what unit graphics to use, too. ] This might prove to be difficult, but I somehow feel it will be much faster-going than the units. After the techs, give me a week or two to tie up the loose ends and you will be playing the beta!

FAQ
I strongly recommend the Word Pad document.

View standard Text FAQ:
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads6/LOTM_FAQ_UNI.txt

Download WordPad RTF file:
http://www.civfanatics.net/uploads6/lotm_faq.zip
-end FAQ

The future should hold this final tab-
1.) Civilization Advances

After this is completed, we will be at 95% completion with the mod. The label & script texts are finished, and just need touching up for the new things we add. Needless to say, after this the private beta will be put up. Soon I will buckle down and finish the Civilization city and hero listings. Once this is done, we will start a beta thread and simply talk about ideas to make the MOD cooler.

Resources
View the resources at this link.

Unit Lines
Unit lines are finished. You can view all but the hobbits lines in this post, scroll down to the attachments.

LOTM Immediate Plan- Make the newly acquired MSN webspace better looking, and invite active members.
Overview plan- Make a new link library to important events and other fantasy threads.

Other CFC LotR\fantasy oreinted threads to look at, in no paticular order (not updated) :
Embryodeads WH MOD
Embryodeads Fantasy Units Preview Thread II
Unit Preview Thread:LOTR
Middle Earth Map
ME: Lord of the Mods (Tech Tree)

*-*-*-*-*-*

 

[[Ant]Wimp]

Yeah new thread! Finally.

Ontopic: Who accually thinks having just Iron is a real problem? Lets not have a huge discussion when everybody agreed in the first place. I dont think an extra recourse in needed, provided there will be a tech called Steelworking (or something...)

 

[The Last Conformist]

Forgive me for being to lazy to check for myself: What's the current list of SRs?

 

[Mithadan]

No being lazy, TLC! I'm not going to go looking for them for you!

Uh, the question of whether we need another strategic resource sounds like a gameplay thing, and I am too stupid to answer such questions.

Maybe we could think of it in terms of a (lame) RPG quest, like "in order to build this unit, you need to go and find the secret vial of mizzle-fniss of Mount Hermanpole." And then once you go and build a road to Mount Hermanpole, then you get the secret vial of mizzle-fniss which allows you to build a knight with some giant Texan horns on his bonnet.

Okay, sorry, bad idea. This is why I don't talk gameplay issues.

That was my original plan, high\middle\low flavor unit graphics. Unfortunately, I’d rather not have to do all that for the beta, as we will probably make some major changes. That can be done after the beta, all I need now is the “generic” route.

Eh? So the graphics we've been discussing will undergo massive alteration after the beta? All is for naught, then? I'm so emotionally unstable right now!!!!

---------------------

About the Arthurian Knights and Númenor- the idea seems plausible, but I hate to use the same graphic and we really should make use of the helmeted version. Also, Arnor and Gondor should fit in with the Numenor civilization. The faithful were not idling around on ME, they were on Númenor with the other Númenóreans. Therefore Gondor, Arnor, and Númenor make up the “high line”.

On the "High Line," if Gondor and Arnor are mirroring Numenor the entire time, then 1) what will be special about playing Numenor during the time of its ascendancy? Won't it be indistinguishable from playing counterfactual Gondor and counterfactual Arnor?[/URL].

My suggestion wouldn't be "reusing" any graphics at all. It would entail Numenor getting 3rd Era Cavalry in the 2nd Era, and maybe 4th Era Cavalry in the 3rd Era (and then nothing special if their existence extends counterfactually into the 4th Era -- or, give them the AoK Knight as a hypothetical flavour graphic, but with identical stats as their 3rd Era cav [i.e., the Generic 4th era cav] -- see, I can compromise). The Numenoreans would be an era ahead of their colonial cousins, and in the 4th Era their colonial descendants would resemble them like déjà vu. In order to mod this, yeah, it would involve a separate entry in the units tab, but in practice it wouldn't be anything other than having the Numenoreans skipping the 2nd Era cavalry-wise. In effect, Gondor and Arnor would play in Era 2 (i.e., as Numenor is building its ascendancy) as if they were cultural contemporaries of the Northmen (and Rohirrim) at the time. Would this cause gameplay chaos, or would it save Numenor from being made reduncant bu Gondorian and Arnorian dopplegangers? (I need gameplay folk to tell me, cuz I don't know.)

The helmeted Valiant Knight would go to the Elves, of course.

I don’t imagine the Easterlings from the cold regions by the Sea of Rhûn were Arabic in appearance. This is where the “Easterling Dwarves” supposedly dwelled. I imagine this area to be populated by peoples akin to Hungarians and Slavs. In this aspect I see no problem having the Slavic Horsemen graphics being used for the Easterlings and Northmen, who shared a border.

...so long as I get y'all to agree on putting the Slavic horseman in the generic lineup, it won't be necessary to suggest this Auxiliary dude (or something else less agreeable). ... Notice if we were to [give up on a generic line altogether], then the Slavic Horseman would apply nicely to the middle line exclusively, which seems to have been precisely PCH's original plan.

Thus far, two reasons to keep the Slavic Horseman away from the Easterlings and in the Generic Line (1. No need to put the AoK Knight graphic in the line-up someplace before the 4th Era, really muddling things up, and 2. it fits better with the "middle" line that excludes Easterlings). But lets get to the heart of the matter:

Just because you share a border doesn't make it plausible that the cavalry of two extremely distinct cultural groups are similar. Let's look at some pictures:​

Which of these three doesn't belong? Avar cavalry on top (heavy to the left, light to the right), Slavic cavalry on the bottom (obviously utah's inspiration). The Avars and the Slavs were enemies, sharing borders, and not exactly similar in appearance and equipment. Hair colour, armour, weapons, tactics -- language family (Indo-European vs. Turkic!) all quite distinct. Let's do another comparison:

Here we have Magyar on the top (heavy to the left, light to the right), and Rus cavalry on the bottom.

Both Asiatic heavy cavalries are wearing lamellar armour, faces are fully covered in those funky helmets, both lack those nice round shields. Both Indo-European cavalrymen are lightly armoured but have that nice round shield. The Slav isn't even wearing a helmet, so his thick and bushy blonde beard and mane really show up nicely. Both Asiatic light cavalries look nothing like their Indo-European counterparts. They kind of look Arabic, wouldn't you say? I can't say the same about the Euro dudes.

Frankly, I don't think we should have a Slavic Horsman representing an Easterling. I think my little examples make that clear. We have a shared border that is nothing less than a frontier between two extremely different cultural groups. Why confuse our players anyway? We have a goodly many Asiatic horsemen to pick from (Mongolian, which I forgot to use in my lists; Chinese, Japanese even). Why muddle things up when it's completely unnecessary?

...if we used some type of fourth cavalry unit, we could make the Wain Rider come in whenever we wanted, as a stand alone unit.

Okay, but why exactly would we think this necessary? In Vanilla, chariot units are just part of the cavalry line. Is that a problem? Or is it because of the timing (Wainriders being 3rd Age guys). If it's timing, I don't see why we couldn't just make the Wainriders the Easterling's 4th Era cavalry, and put something else in for their 3rd era cavalry (Keshik, Kinboat's Hordes, utah/Kryten's Eastern Cataphract). There aint much in the way of mention of late 3rd Age (4th Era) Easterling cavalry, is there?

 

[mrtn]

Mithadan, why do you post 6 pics and then just talk about four of them? Am I just to ignore the horse archer and the Chinese (?) rider?

I prefer not to use Japanese units for the Easterners. I think that Kinboats horde is very cool, and fit good. There we have three different but similar units that can upgrade to each other, and slip the Three Man Chariot in where we want it.
Problem solved?

And Mount Hermanpole is almost better than that Virgin idea.

 

[Mithadan]

Mithadan, why do you post 6 pics and then just talk about four of them? Am I just to ignore the horse archer and the Chinese (?) rider?

Ha ha, the horse archer is light Avar cavalry, and the Chinese dude is light Magyar cavalry. I'll edit it so it's clearer.

Gotcha on the Japanese units. We could use them in a pinch (I think they'd make better Easterlings than Elves, though), but I think we'll be fine with the Horde units. I'll do up a nice presentation of the lines with pictures, then, in a while. (Not too soon, though, I think I need to go to sleep soon! -- yeah, wussy, I know.)

--------------------

Edit: I was gonna say this earlier about using the Vanilla Chariot as a precursor to the Wainriders, but my Internet connection got squirrely so it had to wait until now.

I suppose the Three-man Chariot is the way too go, as suggested before. If we make this a stand alone unit, we could use the regular chariot as a precursor. As it is, it might look funny having this uber-armed unit come out of no where.

If we were to do that, though, we'd have a chariot line AND a cavalry line for the Easterlings, which might be a bit much. It's hard enough for the AI to make decent unit-build selections as it is. The Pechenegs suddenly showed up with their War Wagons, that was pretty much out of nowhere. All it took was the realisation that one's regular nomadic wagons (the bellybutton cars of the Dark Ages, maybe? ) could make formidable military weapons (suitably altered, I imagine). The wagon laager was used up at least until the Boer War, if I'm not mistaken (I think one reason why the Brits got into such a mess at Isandhlwana was their laziness in drawing up their own laager).

And yeah, I know the 3 Man Chariot isn't the best, but I can't think of anything better that we have legal access to.

---------------------

Edit2:

Cataphract- as I said earlier, it looks great as a Southron except for those Jaguar-leggings? Still, very easy to get over, for all we know they had big cats down there.

I'm getting a little turned around, PCH; you're talking about Easterlings as Arabs, and Southrons as Persians. I know it's a fine line, there, but didn't we sort of have the impression that Arabs would be Southerners at least (Near Haradrim = Arabesque or North African, Far Haradrim = Sub-Saharan African)? Persians are certainly more to the East in terms of antiquity. Anyway, I guess we could use Kinboat's Persian Cataphract for a Southron in a pinch, and then use utah's Eastern (Heavy) Cataphract for an Easterling? Either way, I don't think the Kinboat's horse trappings are jaguar skins. It's yellow cloth, bordered in blue, with a few black designs on it (not a repeating pattern like in animal camouflage). There aren't any jaguars in Persia, either, if I'm not mistaken!

Harad Horseman- again, we can’t build castles in the sky. Kryten is more than busy enough as is anyway.

Aww, I like castles in the sky! Okay, how about these ideas for 2nd Era (i.e., not terribly "advanced" at all) Southron Cavalry:

(Dom Pedro's Camel Rider or War Camel)
There ain't much more North African (or Nabatean) than a dude on a camel. I think it would fly fine as a hypothetical early cavalry unit for the Southrons, before they are introduced to the Numenoreans (via Umbar) and learn to kick things up a notch militarily...

'Course the way things have been going, I'm not sure this suggestion will fall on fertile soil. We could also consider Sims2789's African Horseman colour conversion, but that might look a little funny being the upgrade of the regular white-guy horseman in Era 1.

French knight- You’re walking on thin ice here. The unit looks, without a doubt to be the most imperial unit in the MOD. I don’t think it fits at all with the decline of ages.

Uh, that graphic is exactly the same time-frame of the graphic we're using for 4th Era Generic Mannish Cavalry: 12th/13th Century. What's the only difference graphically? The heraldry on the trappings & surcoat. Is it the blue with gold highlights that triggers your imperial alarm bells? I figger this guy would do well for Dol Amroth because those colours are closer to white swans on blue (the device of Dol Amroth) than anything else. Granted, using a 12th/13th Century knight (surcoat over mail, pot helm) is a compromise (this stage of European history was what Tolkien didn't like about Pauline Bayne's drawings), but it would be even worse to fill the spot with a dude prancing about showing off his fully plated torso for everybody to see (à la the AoK Cavalier).

I was using the AoE calvary for an early Noldo unit, but perhaps it is more fitting here.

Is this the guy you're referring to? I dunno that a Horse Archer qualifies as a Knight in the European sense, so it mightn't be the best choice for a Knight of Dol Amroth. (Further, I think we should talk s'more about all the Horse Archers in the Elvish cavalry line.)

Dol Amroth supposedly had Elf blood in its veins.

Yeah, I think you're right on that. However, it wouldn't lead to terribly different looking units for them. The Edain were highly influenced (i.e., fully educated) by the Elves (and "the middle-men" by the Edain), so while there would be local differences of appearance, it would be minor -- nothing like the Peter Jackson "Elves shave, Men don't; Elves have katanas, bladed quarterstaves and yellow space-men armour while Men don't" sort of cultural dichotomy. When Tolkien was comparing the appearance of the Peoples of Northwestern Middle-Earth to the Dark Ages (c. 500-1066 AD), he wasn't saying that exclusively of the Mannish peoples. It would apply generally, including the Elves. This is a key reason why I don't think Japanese graphics should be used for Elves, if our hands are not forced.

The pixilatedness of dp's units bother me.

Yes, they are more pixilated. But I think the tower on his oliphaunt's back is more Tolkien than the Vanilla tower, because there are guys in it launching missile weapons out of it. Ultimately, though, I could just as easily have the Vanilla oliphaunt.

I think that Kinboats horde is very cool, and fits good. There we have three different but similar units that can upgrade to each other, and slip the Three Man Chariot in where we want it.

Oh! I think I just realized what you mean: the entire Easterling cavalry flavour line would consist of the three Golden Horde units? Hmmm... no Chinese Rider, no Persian Cataphract...that might be a really good idea! Hmmm...

And Mount Hermanpole is almost better than that Virgin idea.

Ha ha! Well, that's what you get when Mithadan is asked to brainstorm!

----------------

Ok, editing finished (finally, after a half-decent night's sleep).

 

[PCHighway]

I got sick of editing quotes, so I divided the posts up.

Yeah new thread! Finally.

Ontopic: Who accually thinks having just Iron is a real problem? Lets not have a huge discussion when everybody agreed in the first place. I dont think an extra recourse in needed, provided there will be a tech called Steelworking (or something...)

Me. The gameplay complications of having only one strategic resource which harbors well over a hundred units is going to be enormous. It will make the MOD bland, as there will be virtually no way to win if a player does not get hold of iron, and it will have nothing to look forward to in the later ages.

In regular civ3, (for resources that are required for units) you have; saltpeter, oil, horses, iron, rubber, aluminum, uranium, and even one instance of coal.
In our mod you have; Iron, horses, timber, and wolves.
Three resources that offer little if no diversity gameplay wise. Wolves will only be used for 2, possibly 3 units, and then only for one race. They are not ‘universal’ and are quite limited in their capacity for use.

Timber exists for the ships, and sometimes certain buildings. Stone is only required for certain buildings, even if some of the buildings create units. Iron and horses speak for themselves.
Therefore we only have 3 resources that act somewhat similarly to the 7 resources in vanilla civ3. It doesn’t end there, however. Having so many units for one resource will mess up the civilopedia, make it look crappy, and fuddle up someone’s mind. When someone clicks on “iron” expecting to see what is required, they will see a barrage of units that overlap the screen may possibly crash their game.

From a gameplay standpoint, as stated earlier there will be over one hundred units that require this resource. We will not be able to blend “timber and horses,” to make interesting gameplay, as they do in Civ3. In Civ3 there are countless examples of the more powerful units requiring three or two resources “oil, rubber, and aluminum” or “oil and rubber”. When the player who can’t get iron comes to a certain point in the game, they will probably quit. There will be no time, in all four era’s, that iron goes obsolete. That is unavoidable, unless we have a resource that replaces iron later on. I see two options for the replacement of iron with steel:

1.) We go the simple route and make steel replace iron later on. We can keep iron as a resource that certain civilizations who haven’t mastered steel-working yet, need to have iron for slightly longer than the other civilizations.

2.) We go the complicated route, and make a short in-between period, where units require both iron and timber, to simulate coal. Then later on a universal “steel” resource comes into play.

I prefer the second route.
Adding a resource is the most-uncomplicated way to go, Wimp. Perhaps you remember the “light infantry” line from the beginning? We made up that line for the sole purpose of making the game more balanced, by having a offense line that didn't need iron. We also thought of having a mercenary line that would require gold, and be as good as the units that required iron. So in effect, we are talking about adding 8 units to the game, simply to make up for the fact that we only have 3 strategic resources for units. This would complicate things immensely, we really need a resource that is required for later units.

Forgive me for being to lazy to check for myself: What's the current list of SRs?

Strategic:
Iron: +2s +0f +0: mountain\hills
Horses: +1s +0f +1c: grassland\hills\plains
Timber: +1s +0f +0c: forest
Stone: +2s +0f +1c: mountain\hills
Wolves: -0s -1f -1c: tundra\dark forest

For future reference, there is a link in the overview that no one reads.

Maybe we could think of it in terms of a (lame) RPG quest, like "in order to build this unit, you need to go and find the secret vial of mizzle-fniss of Mount Hermanpole." And then once you go and build a road to Mount Hermanpole, then you get the secret vial of mizzle-fniss which allows you to build a knight with some giant Texan horns on his bonnet.

That would totally ruin the mood and feel of the MOD, as you did a good job of portraying!

Eh? So the graphics we've been discussing will undergo massive alteration after the beta? All is for naught, then? I'm so emotionally unstable right now!!!!

No, no! That’s not what I’m talking aboot at all .
No massive alterations, just that the less graphics we add to the MOD now, the quicker the beta will be out. I am all for the idea of not using flavor units until beta-testing is under way, as certain flaws may be discovered. Imagine that we realize certain units come to early in the game? I would need to backtrack and adjust the times for about 60 units, just to fix that one error. This is exactly why I do not want any work on the civilopedia until the day of reckoning (alpha version) is here.

My suggestion wouldn't be "reusing" any graphics at all. It would entail Numenor getting 3rd Era Cavalry in the 2nd Era, and maybe 4th Era Cavalry in the 3rd Era (and then nothing special if their existence extends counterfactually into the 4th Era -- or, give them the AoK Knight as a hypothetical flavour graphic, but with identical stats as their 3rd Era cav [i.e., the Generic 4th era cav] -- see, I can compromise).

I comprehended the idea easily enough, but you aren’t stating the implications of it. It looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, it sounds like a duck, but it doesn’t have the same stats as a duck. That is quite bad! It represents the superiority of the Númenóreans nicely, graphic wise, but is more or less a moot unit. Having the graphics and name for one unit come earlier in the chain for three civs, but not it’s stats is bad, nothing could cause more confusion than seeing Gondor and the Northmen come waltzing in your territory with the same looking unit, except that the stats are radically different. This would undoubtedly cause confusion, and is why I think giving one a helmet would solve the problem nicely.

In effect, Gondor and Arnor would play in Era 2 (i.e., as Numenor is building its ascendancy) as if they were cultural contemporaries of the Northmen (and Rohirrim) at the time. Would this cause gameplay chaos, or would it save Numenor from being made reduncant bu Gondorian and Arnorian dopplegangers? (I need gameplay folk to tell me, cuz I don't know.)

Of course you know! You can’t simply make the ‘High men’ get 3rd era units an age earlier. Think more realistically. If you feel that the high-men should have better cavalry, that can be arranged, but simply giving them stats an era early will cause unbalance within the force.
If we absolutely have to make the Edain better, simple stat adjustments, such as “zone of control” can handle that.

The helmeted Valiant Knight would go to the Elves, of course.

Thats as bad as the civ-color dilemma . You will see two radically different unit in stats and time frame, but the only difference is one has a helmet. We don’t need another Elven calvary unit, BTW. The helmeted unit could graphically represent the High line, with the same stats as the other mannish units of its time.

Thus far, two reasons to keep the Slavic Horseman away from the Easterlings and in the Generic Line (1. No need to put the AoK Knight graphic in the line-up someplace before the 4th Era, really muddling things up, and 2. it fits better with the "middle" line that excludes Easterlings). But lets get to the heart of the matter:

Just because you share a border doesn't make it plausible that the cavalry of two extremely distinct cultural groups are similar. Let's look at some pictures:​

Firstly, I’m not going to even argue about these validity of these pictures. But the bottom line is they don’t hold for ME in my vision. Saying all, or even a majority of cavalry troops, looked like that for the Avars at a specific time is quite doubt-able. Secondly, I’m in the business of choosing graphics for the Easterlings and the peoples in Rhovanion, not the Magyars and the Rus.

Tolkien himself says that there were both “swarthy and sallow” men who are the earliest Easterlings mentioned. However, I will not argue that the Easterlings should get this unit.

I will let it drop because he also says the Easterlings had dark hair .
I don’t think the Mongol units really fit, simply because of the bows, but I won’t push this issue either.

 

[tjedge1]

This is a little off-topic, but you guys have the longest post in the forum, just so you know. I think you guys could officially claim that. At least PCHighway could for sure. Every post is like a short story.

 

[PCHighway]

Part 2

Why muddle things up when it's completely unnecessary?Okay, but why exactly would we think this necessary? In Vanilla, chariot units are just part of the cavalry line. Is that a problem? Or is it because of the timing (Wainriders being 3rd Age guys). If it's timing, I don't see why we couldn't just make the Wainriders the Easterling's 4th Era cavalry, and put something else in for their 3rd era cavalry (Keshik, Kinboat's Hordes, utah/Kryten's Eastern Cataphract). There aint much in the way of mention of late 3rd Age (4th Era) Easterling cavalry, is there?

It isn’t unnecessary. In civ3 you don’t have horsemen upgrading to chariots and for good reason. To have a single man on a horse, upgrade to three people in a wain, pulled by two heavily armored horses is quite strange. Of course, so is having a horseman unit upgrade to an Assyrian styled chariot that uses lots of bronze. I figure that if we make the Wainriders (which in no way represent all of the Easterlings ) a stand alone unit, much like the Mumak, then we could meet both the requirement of timing as well as the requirement of an out-of place unit.

Having a horseman unit upgrade to a entire wagon does not represent “sudden realization” in anyway. What it does represent, is the sudden development of chariots, through research, in the fourth Era, which means they didn’t have any use for them before.

Edit2:I'm getting a little turned around, PCH; you're talking about Easterlings as Arabs, and Southrons as Persians.

No, I’m talking about Easterlings as Easterlings, and Southrons as Southrons . That “Persian” cataphract (which I advised Yoda Power to request for MEM) looks to me to be a perfect Southron knight for three reasons.

Appearance: There is no skin showing whatsoever. It is heavily mailed, and gives of the appearance of a civilization which had access to fine smiths through trade, such as the Black Númenóreans.

Harad: Harad in my mind does not represent Africa, personally in my mind the Easterlings are Eastern Europeans and the Southrons are Arabic and beyond. I imagine “far Harad” to be somewhere around Saba (the Saba from antiquity) with the exception it is not on the Sea.

Stature: The unit looks exotic and noble, as opposed to the descriptions of the Easterlings. You can’t rule out Umbar’s major role in this either, as nearly all of the cities list will come from Umbar, as well as their Leader head and MGL\SGL’s. I think this unit offers a nice blend of ‘Harad’ as well as advanced civilization.

“'Aye, curse the Southrons!' said Damrod. ‘'Tis said that there were dealings of old between Gondor and the kingdoms of the Harad in the Far South; though there was never friendship. In those days our bounds were away south beyond the mouths of the Anduin, and Umbar, the nearest of their realms, acknowledged our sway. But that is long since. 'Tis many lives of Men since any passed to or fro between us. Now of late we have learned that the Enemy has been among them, and they are gone over to Him, or back to Him -they were ever ready to His will as have so many also in the East.’ [...]”

Either way, I don't think the Kinboat's horse trappings are jaguar skins. It's yellow cloth, bordered in blue, with a few black designs on it (not a repeating pattern like in animal camouflage). There aren't any jaguars in Persia, either, if I'm not mistaken!

It is undoubtedly a skin from some orange animal with large black spots.
It is almost certainly fur, and that fact alone limits just what type of animal it could be.

Southron Cavalry:
(pictures of camels edited out)
(Dom Pedro's Camel Rider or War Camel)
There ain't much more North African (or Nabatean) than a dude on a camel. I think it would fly fine as a hypothetical early cavalry unit for the Southrons, before they are introduced to the Numenoreans (via Umbar) and learn to kick things up a notch militarily...

Camels are not mentioned at all in The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, or The Silmarillion. No one brought up the Arabic cavalry yet. There are two of these, of course; utahjazz7's and Lab Monkey’s.

'Course the way things have been going, I'm not sure this suggestion will fall on fertile soil.

What’s that supposed to mean!
If you suggest an animal that wasn’t in ME, don’t be surprised if it gets turned down.

We could also consider Sims2789's African Horseman colour conversion, but that might look a little funny being the upgrade of the regular white-guy horseman in Era 1.

Unit looks a little pixilated, but alright non-the-less. Lets use it to replace the Southron’s white horsemen.

Uh, that graphic is exactly the same time-frame of the graphic we're using for 4th Era Generic Mannish Cavalry: 12th/13th Century. What's the only difference graphically? The heraldry on the trappings & surcoat. Is it the blue with gold highlights that triggers your imperial alarm bells? I figger this guy would do well for Dol Amroth because those colours are closer to white swans on blue (the device of Dol Amroth) than anything else. Granted, using a 12th/13th Century knight (surcoat over mail, pot helm) is a compromise (this stage of European history was what Tolkien didn't like about Pauline Bayne's drawings), but it would be even worse to fill the spot with a dude prancing about showing off his fully plated torso for everybody to see (à la the AoK Cavalier).

Well, my imperial bells are certainly ringing! It could be that helmet ornament, or it could be the fact that the unit shows fleur de lis, which (unless I am much mistaken) was not used as heraldry other than for royalty until the time of Joan of Arc, the early 1400's.
The unit looks too advanced, is all. When I say “decline of ages” I mean how the ME was on the edge, and as you said earlier, there was really no time for culture in the War of the Ring.

Breastplates were around in the 13th century! You just boosted up your dark age-for-middle-earth about 200 years !
I’m still not going to suggest using the Cavalier, even though it fits your new time frame. Just suffice to know that the French Knight doesn’t fit for Dol Amroth! I don’t like the specific trappings and imperial look, it completely does not fit with the other ‘grimy’ dark age units of the game, even the Elves. I vote no.

“And last and proudest, Imrahil, Prince of Dol Amroth, kinsman of the Lord, with gilded banners bearing his token of the Ship and Silver Swan, and a company of knights in full harness riding grey horses; behind them seven hundreds of men at arms, tall as lords, grey-eyed, dark-haired, singing as they came.”

Is this the guy you're referring to? I dunno that a Horse Archer qualifies as a Knight in the European sense, so it mightn't be the best choice for a Knight of Dol Amroth. (Further, I think we should talk s'more about all the Horse Archers in the Elvish cavalry line.)

No. A lot of people seemed to be in the dark on the Elven cavalry, although I already explained it, once more won’t hurt.

Moriquendi and Sindar only get horse-archers. Three units, to be exact.

Noldor: Sword armed cavalry in the first era. This unit goes on until the 4th Era where it gets an upgrade, but in the meantime the Noldor get to build the second cavalry archer of the Sindar\Moriquendi for the middle two ages. They don’t get its upgrade, in other words, so they are stuck with an early sword armed knight unit in the beginning, and an outdated cavalry archer unit in the 4th era (along with a knight unit).

That is an AoK unit, not an AoE unit!
I meant this unit, found here.

It is one of the more fluid AoE graphics, and it’s horse isn’t drunk, IIRC.

I’m going to bring up techs soon, don’t carry on the graphic discussion when we do that though, cause that’s what stopped us from finalizing the technologies the last time we worked on it. We need you more for the techs that a graphic connoisseur .
We can talk about the UU’s and graphics more in the private beta.

This is a little off-topic, but you guys have the longest post in the forum, just so you know. I think you guys could officially claim that. At least PCHighway could for sure. Every post is like a short story.

Sort of ironic, isn't it.
You interrupted my post .
No, I'm not a fan of forums .

 

[mrtn]

Camels are not mentioned at all in The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, or The Silmarillion. No one brought up the Arabic cavalry yet. There are two of these, of course; utahjazz7's and Lab Monkey’s.

I don't see a need for camels.
I'm not fond of either of those units.
I think that
Horseman
Ansar
The bronze coloured cataphract by utah/Kryten
and Oliphaunt should suffice for the Southrons.

@Mithadan: That French Knight is too advanced and "highmiddleagey" IMO.

And I still don't like the idea of a steel resource. It isn't a resource.

 

[[Ant]Wimp]

Mmm, yeah weel gameplay. I havent much experience on that, but not having anything better does kill some of the fus, though it would be 'realistic' in the sence like that it was sortof so...

But, I am with mrtn on the no steel! Its not a recourse!

How about this:
You get to mine stuff when you learn 'mining'. Then Iron comes with Ironworking. Lateron in the game youd get something like 'Advanced Mining' which gives acces to a pure-er form of Iron. Finally youd get Steelworking, which grants new units, but not another recourse...

 

[Mithadan]

It represents the superiority of the Númenóreans nicely, graphic wise, but is more or less a moot unit. Having the graphics and name for one unit come earlier in the chain for three civs, but not it’s stats is bad, nothing could cause more confusion than seeing Gondor and the Northmen come waltzing in your territory with the same looking unit, except that the stats are radically different.

No no, I meant that the Numenoreans would also get the Stats early too. That's why I was worried about the gameplay effects of that. The Numenoreans would really get Era 3 Cavalry in Era 2 (not just Era 3 graphics). Would that totally screw up the gameplay?

Of course you know! You can’t simply make the ‘High men’ get 3rd era units an age earlier. Think more realistically. If you feel that the high-men should have better cavalry, that can be arranged, but simply giving them stats an era early will cause unbalance within the force.
If we absolutely have to make the Edain better, simple stat adjustments, such as “zone of control” can handle that.

Ack! No no, 'the High Men" wouldn't get 3rd era units an age earlier. Only the Numenoreans would. Gondor and Arnor would be an age behind, just like all the other Mannish races. All the other Mannish races would "catch up" in Era 4 (the Third Age) when the Numenoreans cavalry line dissolves into the same stat-line as the Generics (and flavours). Again, would this be bad for gameplay?

Thats as bad as the civ-color dilemma . You will see two radically different unit in stats and time frame, but the only difference is one has a helmet. We don’t need another Elven calvary unit, BTW. The helmeted unit could graphically represent the High line, with the same stats as the other mannish units of its time.

I didn't say a thing about when that graphic would show up, or what its stats would be (I had yet to dive into the issue of Elven cavalry). If I'm not mistaken, another interesting difference between the two is that the Valiant Knight has a stripey shield, while I don't see that on the Arthurian Knight (unless it's hid by the angle?) Besides, I've already argued that Elven units would likely resemble most other units of Northwestern Middle-Earth, so I have no qualms with the similarity.

Oh, and identical - or very similar - graphics for different units is a big no-no. Players are confused bastards without our help!

Oh, post while I'm editing, will you? But do you think a dude with a helmet (as opposed to none), a stripy shield (as opposed to something other), and Civ-colour would be insufficient to convince our dumb players that the units were not the same?

-----

Gotta make supper now. Later, skaters.

 

[The Last Conformist]

tjedge1: You've, quite obviously, not followed the ACW threads with the singleminded obsessiveness you should. Some post there are really long.

mrtn: I too would hate a steel resource.

Re: unit looks, I thought we had agreed that the Far Haradrim looked like Black Africans? Anyway, For the Near Haradrim, which I suppose are the ones we're primarily representing, I think Arabesque looks are quite the thing. Eurasiatic Steppe Nomadic is my idea what the 3rd Age Easterlings looked like.

The 1st Age Easterlings may have appeared quite different. I can't recall hearing of them using wains, or even horses, offhand.

Oh, and re: the supposed strangeness of upgrading horsemen to chariots, it pales to the sheer absurdity of using actual chariots (as opposed to war wains and what have you, that later-day folks like Pechenegs, Hussites and Boers used) frikken millennia after cavalry was introduced. 3rd Age Easterlings are on record for using wains and cavalry simultaneously, so ideally they'd be separate lines, of course. Basically, I think all available chariot graphics suck as far as the Easterlings are concerned. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have much choice.

Re: dotted critters in Persia, there used to be leopards, and possibly the last Persian cheetah hasn't been poached yet (the Shahs traditionally had them in lieu of hounds!).

I think the Southrons should still have cav in the 4th era. Perhaps simply cut the upgrade change 'tween the bronze cataphract and the oliphaunt.

Oh, and identical - or very similar - graphics for different units is a big no-no. Players are confused bastards without our help!

Yeah, and having Iron as requirement for 90% of units would suck big time. I really think we need adopt the CivIII concept of resources becoming "commonplace" to the point of no longer being needed. MEM distinguishes 'tween Horses and Warhorses, BTW - dja folks think that's an idea worth stealin'? Yeah, and just to be evil, we could make a copper resource, and require it for Southron units with bronze paraphernalia, and for economic improvement (copper coins). Heck, we could require it for early non-Edainic human units generally, to drive home the point those are just unimportant barbarians no-one though worthy of even recording what sort of metal they used in their blades anyway (1st Age Beleriandic Easterlings excepted).

And the Slavic Rider looks perfect for Northmen, does it not?

Well, that's the incoherent ramblings I had on my heart right now.

 

[AlcTrv]

Just showing my face, cuz I can't contribute to this discussion very well

 

[Mithadan]

Awww, c'mon Alcatraz! You know you can!

By the way, TCH, I don't think your contributions are irrelevant or incoherent. Quite to the contrary, actually. Keep 'em coming.

tjedge1, this post's for you!

I. On Historical-Appearance Analogues

I’m in the business of choosing graphics for the Easterlings and the peoples in Rhovanion, not the Magyars and the Rus.

*Ahem:*

I don’t imagine the Easterlings from the cold regions by the Sea of Rhûn were Arabic in appearance. ... I imagine this area to be populated by peoples akin to Hungarians and Slavs. In this aspect I see no problem having the Slavic Horsemen graphics being used for the Easterlings and Northmen, who shared a border.

II. On the Slavic Horseman himself

And the Slavic Rider looks perfect for Northmen, does it not?

...I will not argue that the Easterlings should get this unit.

That's settled, then. No Slavic Horseman graphic for the Easterlings. Northmen for sure, and Rohirrim by default (in the early 2nd Age they were quite indistinguishable). How we graft Gondor, Arnor and Numenor onto this line remains to be seen.

III. On Wains as Chariots

It isn’t unnecessary. In civ3 you don’t have horsemen upgrading to chariots and for good reason. To have a single man on a horse, upgrade to three people in a wain, pulled by two heavily armored horses is quite strange.

Oh, and re: the supposed strangeness of upgrading horsemen to chariots, it pales to the sheer absurdity of using actual chariots (as opposed to war wains and what have you, that later-day folks like Pechenegs, Hussites and Boers used) frikken millennia after cavalry was introduced. 3rd Age Easterlings are on record for using wains and cavalry simultaneously, so ideally they'd be separate lines, of course. Basically, I think all available chariot graphics suck as far as the Easterlings are concerned. Unfortunately, we don't seem to have much choice.

TLC's reminder is good. We are in the position of having to use a chariot graphic to represent a war wagon. This is a matter of appearance, therefore, not of substance. Be not too worried with "upgrading to a chariot." We aren't. We're upgrading to a wagon-laager, which we haven't got decent graphics for. That's it.

However, Steph has just received permission to convert Chariots of War graphics. This allows us to use the Gish War Cart (so long as PCH lays off on the ass commentary), which is a step in the right direction (four wheels), anyway. (To say nothing of two Germanic Warriors from the time of the Migrations [i.e., circa 500 AD], the British horseman and warrior, [hey, that Celtic Chariot has four wheels too!], Celtic cavalry, a non-naked Pict [British Isles circa 297-841 AD], a Roman Auxiliary spearman and Equite [both of which may look a lot less "Roman" than BeBro's dude, which would do better for Dark Age British cavalry c. the same dates as that Pict], a Celtiberian, six "Tribal" units [including an archer in green], two more horse archers and a whack of really cool foreign looking spearmen. Ilúvatar smiles upon us!)​

Of course, so is having a horseman unit upgrade to an Assyrian styled chariot that uses lots of bronze.

What's the problem with Bronze? It was still current in the War of the Ring, see that Samwise quote you mentioned a few pages back. Refer also to TLC's idea for copper as a strategic resource.

I figure that if we make the Wainriders (which in no way represent all of the Easterlings) a stand alone unit, much like the Mumak, then we could meet both the requirement of timing as well as the requirement of an out-of place unit.

The Wainriders' place is at least in-between T.A. 1856 and 1944. If these dudes, one of the most recognisable forms of Easterling cavalry in Tolkien's works (who said anything about them representing all of the Easterlings?), are "out of place" in our cavalry line, then something is wrong with our cavalry line.

Having a horseman unit upgrade to a entire wagon does not represent “sudden realization” in anyway. What it does represent, is the sudden development of chariots, through research, in the fourth Era, which means they didn’t have any use for them before.

Pechenegs weren't researchers, but exapters. Look:

"In his Armies of the Dark Ages (1st Edition), Ian Heath notes that the Pechenegs consisted of 8 hordes and 40 clans, and were the first Asiatic horse tribe to utilize their wagons tactically in battle." (Source)

Everybody had wagons, only the Pechnegs were the first to use them tactically in battle.

IV. On Geograpical-Historical-Appearance Analogues

Harad: Harad in my mind does not represent Africa, personally in my mind the Easterlings are Eastern Europeans and the Southrons are Arabic and beyond. I imagine “far Harad” to be somewhere around Saba (the Saba from antiquity) with the exception it is not on the Sea.

You have a marvelous imagination, PCH, but we need more than that. Tolkien has compared Middle-Earth to the Eurasian and African landmass using rough reference to latitude, in order to let us know climate-wise that the Shire is around the location of Britain, Gondor around the location of Italy...you can fill in the blanks regarding Africa and the Eurasian Steppes. The few reputable sources out there on Middle-Earth geography will confirm this even in regard to the shape of the landmasses outside the Northwest.

Re: unit looks, I thought we had agreed that the Far Haradrim looked like Black Africans? Anyway, For the Near Haradrim, which I suppose are the ones we're primarily representing, I think Arabesque looks are quite the thing. Eurasiatic Steppe Nomadic is my idea what the 3rd Age Easterlings looked like.

Bingo. In fact, this past agreement is what makes PCH's present recalcitrance so odd.

V. On the First Easterlings

The 1st Age Easterlings may have appeared quite different. I can't recall hearing of them using wains, or even horses, offhand.

Yeah, who knows? But it was the First Age. We aren't even going to use flavours for them then.

Edit: But maybe we should! (I want cool Ulfang guys running around betraying the other first men to show up in Beleriand! Sweet cans!)

VI. On Kinboat's Cataphract

It is undoubtedly a skin from some orange animal with large black spots.
It is almost certainly fur, and that fact alone limits just what type of animal it could be.

Doesn't look like jaguar skin to me, although it does look strangely similar to Kinboat's Cataphract...

Cool thing about there being leopards in Persia, though. I had no idea.

VII. On Camels

Camels are not mentioned at all in The Hobbit, The Lord of the Rings, or The Silmarillion. ... If you suggest an animal that wasn’t in ME, don’t be surprised if it gets turned down.

You can't prove a universal negative, son. If there's Ants, Apes, Bats, Bears, Bees, Boars, Butterflies, Cats, Cows, Crows, Crebain (big crows?), Deer, Dogs, Eagles (big ones and probably little ones too), Elephants (not just Mumakil), Fish, Flies, Foxes, Gnats, Gulls, Hawks, Horses, Hounds, Kine (wild cattle, probably aurochs), Moths, Nightingales, Oxen, Ponies, Rabbits, Rats, Ravens, Serpents, Sheep, Snails, Snakes, Spiders (not just big ones), Squirrels, Swans, Thrushes, and Wolves (including white ones and evil ones) in Arda, it seems likely that there might be the odd camel out there in the odd desert too. God knows what's in the jungles! It's not as if Tolkien only wanted us to infer the existence of bees in Middle-Earth, and not wasps, simply because he neglected to mention any. (He doesn't mention anybody taking a scheit either, so maybe Middle-Earthers never felt the need?)

I don't see a need for camels.

I advance no argument of necessity, but assert that they'd be pretty cool as 2nd Era (i.e., relatively primitive) Southron cavalry...and I already knew you didn't like Dom Pedro's graphics!

VIII. On Graphics I Forgot

No one brought up the Arabic cavalry yet. There are two of these, of course; utahjazz7's and Lab Monkey’s.

I like utah's unit (didn't remember it, though!). We should use that too (so much for us being short on Mannish cavalry graphics!)

IX. On 12th/13th Century Knights

The unit looks too advanced, is all. When I say “decline of ages” I mean how the ME was on the edge, and as you said earlier, there was really no time for culture in the War of the Ring.

Well, you know those 12th and 13th Century Knights, they had all the time for culture in the world!

@Mithadan: That French Knight is too advanced and "highmiddleagey" IMO.

Fine by me, so long as we reject BeBro's Generic 12th/13th Century Knight as the generic mannish 4th era cavalry graphic. We can't reject the one because and not the other simply because nobody likes the colour of one set of trappings and a lady's token stuck in the helmet. ('Tis a shame, though, because the colours of the trappings are as close as we've got to the white swan ship on blue -- wait, have I said that before? ) Maybe utah's heavy cataphract, drenched in uncovered mail, would be in order then? (Who knew my hammering away at the Dark Ages would be so convincing? Now they won't even let me make compromises that slip a little into the 13th century! I love you guys! )

You just boosted up your dark age-for-middle-earth about 200 years!

I have no idea what you're talking about. I made no secret about BeBro's Knights being compromises, about the possibility of assortments of dinner-plates being well-hidden beneath their surcoats and hauberks.

it completely does not fit with the other ‘grimy’ dark age units of the game, even the Elves. I vote no.

Who said anything about the Dark Ages being grimy? The mail of the heroes shone, my friend!

“And last and proudest, Imrahil, Prince of Dol Amroth, kinsman of the Lord, with gilded banners bearing his token of the Ship and Silver Swan, and a company of knights in full harness riding grey horses; behind them seven hundreds of men at arms, tall as lords, grey-eyed, dark-haired, singing as they came.”

Doesn't sound grimy to me!

X. On Elven Cavalry

I don’t think the Mongol units really fit, simply because of the bows, but I won’t push this issue either.

Moriquendi and Sindar only get horse-archers. Three units, to be exact.

Eh? What's this? Why can't Easterlings have bows, and why can't Sindarin and Moriquenderin elves have melée armed cavalry? Are there some texts I'm missing? Do share. I'm not asking you to push the issue, of course, I'm just eager to learn.

A lot of people seemed to be in the dark on the Elven cavalry....

That might be because we didn't discuss Elven Cavalry graphics or lines that much (in my limited memory, of course).

The AoK Cavalry unit you linked there looks okay, although I'm not sure exactly which unit you've got it pegged for (let alone what it should be pegged to). Is it the "High-Elven Roquen" from the lists?

This brings me to the question: why do we have a special cavalry unit for the Noldor in the 4th Era? One could probably count the remainng Noldorin elves in Middle-Earth in the 3rd age on one hand. If we want to give them kick ass units, then the First Age is the time for that. The Sindar/Sylvan mixes ruled by the odd Noldor will have to pick up the slack in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th ages (or do you want to prepare the Noldor for counterfactual possibility of not fading?) -- as would hypothetical Moriquendi out in Deep Rhûn somewhere (sounds like a candidate for embryo's Dark Elven rider)...

XI. On 4th Era Southron Cavalry

I think the Southrons should still have cav in the 4th era. Perhaps simply cut the upgrade change 'tween the bronze cataphract and the oliphaunt.

I agree, especially if both the Mumak and the Wainrider are supposed to be "stand-alone" units...

XII. On that elusive Strategic Resource

I found this, thought it might produce some more ideas

Usually traces of such other metal [ores] as chromium, nickel, copper, tungsten, etc. are also added to produce kinds of steel with slightly different characteristics. ... In general, steel is an improvement over iron in being less brittle, but its characteristics vary by the amount of carbon in the alloy. The introduction of other metallic ores allows the production of special purpose steels, such as stainless steel, made with aluminum. (Source)

I have a faint childhood memory of reading about the Mamelukes in the Encyclopedia, and how they used tungsten in their steel which allowed them to chop up a lot of their enemies' blades. The chopping up part might be all wrong, but we could feasibly have tungsten, nickel, copper and chromium (what the heck is the last one good for, though???) scattered about that would be required for later units. By then we could assume (à la standard Civ) that Iron is so common as to make it superfluous, but have these minerals required in order to build the steel-equipped units of the latter eras (or, bronze equipped units of the Southrons, and maybe even the Easterlings? -- heck, for bronze we could make tin a strategic resource, too). Graphics for such minerals there may not be, but there seem to be enough folks kicking around the Graphics Mod forum that might like to help out in that respect.

Oh yeah, remember the "Rych"? Did that idea get trashed way back in the day? I can't remember...

 

[Mithadan]

XIII. On Stopping with Graphics Talk

I’m going to bring up techs soon, don’t carry on the graphic discussion when we do that though, cause that’s what stopped us from finalizing the technologies the last time we worked on it. We need you more for the techs that a graphic connoisseur .
We can talk about the UU’s and graphics more in the private beta.

Promise? Cross your heart and hope to die? 'Cuz I don't like stopping with unit discussion simply because the thread reached 21 pages. I get the feeling something of a consensus is being hammered out, slowly, and new units get mentioned that others have overlooked (that would be me doing plenty of overlooking) that could be considered. I must be a visual learner, but I'd like to post another set of lists showing each "line" with little pictures attached (as I did earlier), with alterations in accordance with the discussion so far. Would that be so terrible?

Anyhow, that's it for now.

(Almost had the whole thing in there under the length limit, but I had to add some outline dividers to make it somewhat readable. That broke the camel's back [this kid must like his camels! ])

 

[Sarevok]

What techs exactly are you looking for?

 

[mrtn]

Hm, many posts this evening.
@Mithadan: The Arthurian and Valiant Knights do have the same shield. They're too similar IMO, besides I don't think we need both.

The Resource
We don't need to introduce stainless steel in ME! That's absolutely silly.
Then I prefer the copper idea. We could make the use of bronze more widespread than ME history suggests, by making the first offensive unit per civ (except the odd Noldor or dwarf smith) require copper instead of iron.
Similarly the odd spearman can require copper.

The Numenorean Knight
Why should the Numenoreans get kick ass knights? Were they famous for their mounted charges? I thought naval action was their forte, and ships and horses goes together like oranges and toothpaste.
EDIT: I've searched the Silmarillion for both horse and rider, and didn't find anything in any part dealing with Numenor.

Mithadan raises an interesting quiestion:

why do we have a special cavalry unit for the Noldor in the 4th Era?

The Noldor could merge with the other elves later in the game. Plus, we don't need to add another unit. In short, I agree.

Which leads me over to a similar question: why add cavalry for the Easterlings and the Southrons in the fourth era if we are giving them wains and Oliphaunts? They fill the same niche, plus the Oliphaunt (at least) don't need horses.

 

[The Last Conformist]

By the way, TCH, I don't think your contributions are irrelevant or incoherent. Quite to the contrary, actually. Keep 'em coming.

Is it really that tricky to keep me and PCH apart? I mean, "TLC" and "PCH" only share one letter, and it's not even in the same place!

Thing is, I've been too tired/busy lately to be bothered to present carefully laid-out arguments, so I've opted simply to post whatever ideas strike me in the order they do - hence incoherent. As for irrelevant, I believe I used that in reference to a couple OT comments?

Chromium is good for making steel rust resistant, as well as giving it a shiny look. But I rather agree with mrtn that having fancy modern alloyed steels in M-e feels wrong.

As for Easterling/Southron 4th era cav, well, the principial argument is that they had it in the books. As for niche, well, that's pretty much up to us, isn't it? I imagine the Oliphaunt will be in rather another class of cost and strength than Southron cavalry (ACW experience shows that the AI can handle same-role units of different strength decently, so it's not necessarily an AI problem).

As for war wains, I'd imagine them in a rather more defensive role than cav. A 2-move defender is fairly useful piece of kit. Just conjuring absolute stat strengths out of thin air, you could have 5.2.2 cavalry and 3.4.2 wains, say.

 

[PCHighway]

Re: unit looks, I thought we had agreed that the Far Haradrim looked like Black Africans? Anyway, For the Near Haradrim, which I suppose are the ones we're primarily representing, I think Arabesque looks are quite the thing. Eurasiatic Steppe Nomadic is my idea what the 3rd Age Easterlings looked like.

I concur, completely and enthusiastically. That is one reason why I’ve been suggesting the Persian Cataphract should be for the Southrons, as I don’t think of the Easterlings as Arab.

Oh, and re: the supposed strangeness of upgrading horsemen to chariots, it pales to the sheer absurdity of using actual chariots (as opposed to war wains and what have you, that later-day folks like Pechenegs, Hussites and Boers used) frikken millennia after cavalry was introduced.

Chariots are quite clumsy and without having the ‘wheeled’ aspect to the game, we can’t represent them accurately, besides making them unload able into boats, for instance.

I think the Southrons should still have cav in the 4th era. Perhaps simply cut the upgrade change 'tween the bronze cataphract and the oliphaunt.

Will the AI build those units? Of course not. We need it to upgrade to a unit that is somehow helpful.

Yeah, and having Iron as requirement for 90% of units would suck big time. I really think we need adopt the CivIII concept of resources becoming "commonplace" to the point of no longer being needed.

Having no-resource units? That’s worse than needing onc resource for all units. We need another resource to add tactics and strategy, taking the resource away defeats a large strategic aspect of the game.

MEM distinguishes 'tween Horses and Warhorses, BTW - dja folks think that's an idea worth stealin'? Yeah, and just to be evil, we could make a copper resource, and require it for Southron units with bronze paraphernalia, and for economic improvement (copper coins). Heck, we could require it for early non-Edainic human units generally, to drive home the point those are just unimportant barbarians no-one though worthy of even recording what sort of metal they used in their blades anyway (1st Age Beleriandic Easterlings excepted).

Yes, I suggested War Horses in the beginning threads, was shot down with me agreeing that is was quite useless. I can’t remember MEM too well, but I do seem to recall that the ‘horse’ resource was a bonus resource, at least for a certain amount of time. All it would give us another bonus resource, which we don’t need.

Why would we want to add a resource that will essentially becomes the non Edian\Elves\Dwarves iron? Same effect, required for all its units until it gets to a certain point, when all those units are useless and it is stuck in the iron boat again.
We need a ‘saltpeter’ type resource, or there is no point in making a change.

By the way, TCH, I don't think your contributions are irrelevant or incoherent. Quite to the contrary, actually. Keep 'em coming.

TCH? Is this some kind of super being melded between TLC and I! The Conformist Highway, has a certain ring to it .

Akin, but not a reality . This seems to be another lump we can’t get past. As you explain in your post later, camels can be ‘expected’ in Middle-earth. There are two beefs I have which I will bring up now and again later.

1.) Mongol Horse as Easterling Cavalry
The reason I don’t like this idea, is that, unlike the Elves and Northmen, the Easterlings were not famed for bowmen. Unlike the Elves, there is small mention of mounted bowman for the Easterlings (edited). I’m not a stiff however, I can take some contemporary ME type stuff, why I said I won’t push it. But from my point of view, if there is no mention Easterling Horse Archers, should we take the extreme and suddenly make _all_ of their cavalry mounted bowmen?
For this reason I am nervous in adopting the “Mongol flavor” for the Easterlings.

(edit- because I now have improved methods of searching LotR, I was able to find a horse-archer quote for the Easterlings, which relinquishes any doubt I’ve had, I make an important statement about this later down the line)

2.) Camels as Arabians and Africans
Your logic doesn’t make me want to add the camel unit. While it is reasonable to assume they existed in ME, it is not reasonable to assume that the Easterlings had any type of war camels that would qualify as a unit. To me it seems implausible to make a flavor unit like that, such a proposal is in it’s nature extreme and I would only go for it if we were very limited on graphics.

My point: I see no reason to go out of our way to use things that don’t exist in ME. If the Easterlings were not well known for their mounted bowman, and our mod portrays it as such, we are skewing the reality of ME. Ditto with camels.

TLC's reminder is good. We are in the position of having to use a chariot graphic to represent a war wagon. This is a matter of appearance, therefore, not of substance. Be not too worried with "upgrading to a chariot." We aren't. We're upgrading to a wagon-laager, which we haven't got decent graphics for. That's it.

It was a good reminder. But that is only the cosmetic side of my argument . The playability part of my argument was that cavalry did not suddenly become chariots (as The Last Conformist states, they were co-existing) in my reasoning the unit should be ‘stand alone’.

-It would indeed be cool if those ancient units were created. And not just for chariotphiles like yourself .

What's the problem with Bronze? It was still current in the War of the Ring, see that Samwise quote you mentioned a few pages back. Refer also to TLC's idea for copper as a strategic resource.

The problem is you will be having a more advanced unit that uses iron, upgrade to a unit that uses inferior armor, but is more effective historically and statistically.

The Wainriders' place is at least in-between T.A. 1856 and 1944. If these dudes, one of the most recognisable forms of Easterling cavalry in Tolkien's works (who said anything about them representing all of the Easterlings?), are "out of place" in our cavalry line, then something is wrong with our cavalry line.

Nothing is wrong with the line. What you have is a horseman with a spear, upgrading to a horseman that again, has a spear, then upgrading to a unit that uses iron, and then upgrading to a unit that has wheels, scale mail armor, a spear, a bow, and a guy steering the horses. I find the unit being a ‘stand alone’ offers us to make more changes to it. If we added a HP bonus to the unit and gave stat improvements, it would be too powerful and we would be able to make shield adjustments which would not affect the overall cavalry of the Easterlings. I would much rather have the unit stand alone, offers more variety.
As The Last Conformist says the Easterlings used cavalry as well as wains. In fact, from my view it seems the Wainrider sect was not organized with the Easterlings of the War of the Ring. They where simply one of the “Easterling tribes” that played an important part in ME history, and being as such, I would rather is was a ‘bonus unit’ outside of any unit lines. I honestly can’t see what the problem is here.
You are angry you won’t have to pay large amounts of money to upgrade to a unit that is too powerful for its time? It is not as if I am saying “Wainriders suck,” and shouldn’t be in the game. But these units have will not be like traditional cavalry, perhaps better in defense as TLC mentions.

You have a marvelous imagination, PCH, but we need more than that. Tolkien has compared Middle-Earth to the Eurasian and African landmass using rough reference to latitude, in order to let us know climate-wise that the Shire is around the location of Britain, Gondor around the location of Italy...you can fill in the blanks regarding Africa and the Eurasian Steppes. The few reputable sources out there on Middle-Earth geography will confirm this even in regard to the shape of the landmasses outside the Northwest.

Of course it doesn’t represent Africa! I see nothing that should imply Bantu’s among Tolkiens work. When I say Saba, I am referring to the Sabean and Ethiopian roots at the tip of Saudi-Arabia, and from that point descending down the map to Ethiopia.
My entire point of that post was to defend my position on Mithadan claiming that the Easterlings could well be represented by a Persian unit. Again, I am of the opinion that the Easterlings come from far eastern Europe, extending beyond the Ural Mountains. I am of the opinion that the Southrons represent the Middle East and a ‘contemporary Africa’ of sorts. Completely skipping hellenized Egypt and at the same time skipping the large jungles of central Africa. In many views I believe Tolkien represents Africa with mainly desert lands and his own experience of fertile South Africa. No, I have no doubt that Africa is someway represented in _Far Harad_, but I am of the firm belief that the Southrons in general, are mainly Middle Eastern, as opposed to being mostly black African.