New Unit ~ Hand-Axe!

[Depravo]

We got used to 'Burial Tomb' ( ), we'll get used to this.

 

[Pikachao]

Well what you are saying is simply not true. Primitive people were not primitive because of their "culture" or that they wanted to live like they did. This is common misconception that people have from more primitive people. NA Natives were not primitive, because they wanted to be. Australian aboriginals were not primitive because they wanted to be.The reason is in the environment and in the possibilities for agriculture. Without agriculture the societies stay pretty much the same. Without agriculture there are no cities, no big armies, no big empires. Its just a fact that societies that practice agriculture grow stronger pretty fast and destroy hunter gatherer societies, because of their bigger population.

just as a note, I'm not saying hippies or nothing with this, I don't think i mentioned anything like that or the such. I realize they liked guns. I was saying that primitive is subjective. (also, agriculture was practiced in the northern US, at least until horses came. Even then it still was, Pueblo comes to mine.)

 

[Inhalaattori]

While it is true that the hippie, tree-hugger stereotypes are there, it's also true that Native Americans have a more spiritually based connection with nature in a way European cultures never had - or had but abandoned. Such remains true today in 2013 - many spirtual stories revolve around symbolism from Nature, which includes anything from plants to animals to the cosmos

Many old pagan European religions are almost identical to NA native religions. I know Finno-ugric religions pretty well and they are really similar to NA Native religions. The only big difference is in the animals they worshiped. All hunter gatherers have pretty much same kind of religious beliefs.

Agriculture changed peoples cultures and religions. Historically it has been more true that your culture or religion does not define you way of life - your way of life defines your culture and religion.

just as a note, I'm not saying hippies or nothing with this, I don't think i mentioned anything like that or the such. I realize they liked guns. I was saying that primitive is subjective. (also, agriculture was practiced in the northern US, at least until horses came. Even then it still was, Pueblo comes to mine.)

The plants suitable for a large scale agriculture were really scarce in North America. Big societies could not live with just agriculture in most parts of North America.

 

[SnowKomodo]

Your culture or religion does not define you way of life. Your way of life defines your culture and religion.

Amen .

 

[Pikachao]

Agriculture changed peoples cultures and religions. Your culture or religion does not define you way of life. Your way of life defines your culture and religion.

I do agree there, but I don't think we're discussing the same thing anymore.

back to the Hand-axe (I admit i like the stilted sound of it's name) why chariot archer do you think? I'd have guessed it would replace the archer.

 

[Gali]

They replaced the chariot archer for the barbarians because they don't get strategic resources. The whole point is unit diversity, so replacing a common barbarian unit is less useful.

 

[fat_tonle]

this. all of this, every part of this.
I'd hate to throw the word eurocentrism around, so I'll try not to, but we tend to think of great cultures based off of empires and technologies and what not, while forgetting that sometimes they didn't have those because they didn't need them. Northern native americans may not have empires, did a ton of stuff with things like crops and equality and right n stuff we don't even look at. it's important not to look at civs as better or worse, but as different.

that being said, I'd only be offended by that barb if it's name was "Tomahawk man" or "Injun."

The game is about building empires. Playable civs should be those trying to dominate the world with technology and engineering. I think future iterations of the franchise need to come up with a more accurate portrayal for uncontacted, "New World" peoples. The CS mechanic (or equivalent) can be expanded to include a multitude of different cultures, but that's a discussion for Civ VI.

 

[fat_tonle]

They replaced the chariot archer for the barbarians because they don't get strategic resources. The whole point is unit diversity, so replacing a common barbarian unit is less useful.

How do they get Knights and such? Didn't it say they upgrade to Knights, or is that only when Germany captures them?

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Chariot Archer.... doesn't require Horses... or is that the Horse Archer for the Huns...

My bad, Horse Archer doesn't require Horses... I think.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

Willowmound: Spot on! Hand Axe is a ludicrous name. I vote for an urgent change for BNW before release. Let it be called "Axe Warrior".

Why the outrage? Hand Axe is a specific thing. When I heard "Hand Axe" I knew exactly what they meant, as opposed to Battle Axe or Pole Axe or Pick Axe or any one of a number of other type of axes. It's like having a problem with "Machine Gun" or "Chariot" or "Cruise Missile." I suppose pedants would go for "Handaxeman," but that just sounds dumb.

 

[Buccaneer]

People still are getting so hung up names of units, buildings and civs. Just look at their attributes and forget what they are called if it bothers you so much.

 

[Inhalaattori]

Why the outrage? Hand Axe is a specific thing. When I heard "Hand Axe" I knew exactly what they meant, as opposed to Battle Axe or Pole Axe or Pick Axe or any one of a number of other type of axes. It's like having a problem with "Machine Gun" or "Chariot" or "Cruise Missile." I suppose pedants would go for "Handaxeman," but that just sounds dumb.

It might be language thing. English is not my native language (Im Finnish myself) and to me unit called Hand-Axe sounds ridiculous (possibly because it would be totally ridiculous in my native tongue). To me its same thing as having unit called "Sword" or "Spear". Its like we would have "fire" instead of "fireman".

I think Chariot and Cruise missile are different thing. They are not really "weapons" in the same sense as sword or axe. Chariot is more like "tank", "cannon" or "armor".

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I think Axeman would've been a better name for it, in hindsight, I mean, it's not a Leg-Axe, you hold the Axe in your hand.

 

[gamedude14]

Whatever it is, it is a ridiculous name. "Hand-axe", as opposed to what? Foot-axes? Free-standing machine axes? What axe isn't a hand axe?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_axe

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I think Axeman would've been a better name for it, in hindsight, I mean, it's not a Leg-Axe, you hold the Axe in your hand.

by that logic, a rifle is a handgun.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

It might be language thing. English is not my native language (Im Finnish myself) and to me unit called Hand-Axe sounds ridiculous (possibly because it would be totally ridiculous in my native tongue). To me its same thing as having unit called "Sword" or "Spear". Its like we would have "fire" instead of "fireman".

I think Chariot and Cruise missile are different thing. They are not really "weapons" in the same sense as sword or axe. Chariot is more like "tank", "cannon" or "armor".

I can see that, but we already have machinegun and bazooka, right? Eh, not that important one way or the other.

 

[Antiphon]

Well the original definition of Barbarian is someone who does not speak Greek (or later Latin), so pretty much all people are barbarians.

I dont really understand these politically correct people, but whatever...

One Non-Barbarian here!

 

[Willowmound]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_axe

I see that is indeed what they call those stone age axe heads that have no handle. I have learned something new today.

I guess the name comes from the fact that the bit that cuts -- the axe head -- is held directly in the hand.

Which means this is a hand axe:

...and this isn't:

 

[PhilBowles]

Apparently it is a barbarian unique unit which IMO is the worst possible outcome for it. I can't believe how backwards they've turned on native americans with this expansion...

Since the graphic's Native American, why can't it be the Shoshone Pathfinder? Have we seen that one?

There seems to be something weird with barbarians since we have this as well as barbarian battleships - I'd hazard a guess that there will be some new mechanic to lend units to barbarians.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Woaah.. Woaah... If... If...

Let me get this straight

If a Hand-Axe is a rock... and the Hand-Axe is an archery unit..

Does that mean the barbarians are literally throwing stones at you?