[NFP] September Update Video Discussion

To me I feel like the Hippodrome replacing the EC is the most logical

If they really make a Hippodrome as a Byzantium UD, then there should be an achievement refers to the Nika Revolt when your Hippodrome city rebels.

"Byzantium with a Hippodrome" really sounds like an elegant history joke/meme to me.:p
 
My money is on the Byzantine leader being Basil II, with a Varangian Guard UU, as well as the Byzantines having some sort of temple replacement as their UB to reflect the faith aspect of their playstyle. If not that, then maybe they'd have Theodosian Walls, but that would sorta make them a bit too similar to Georgia. Alexios I Komnenos could also be a possible leader, but from the blurred outline the leader seems to have a gray beard, which fits with Basil.

Anton said both civs get a unique district. Most people think it will be a Hippodrome EC replacement.
 
Celtic leaders and 'Noble Savages' in general are so often depicted shirtless but how true would that be? He'd be a King after all surely he should be wearing armour and clothing befitting the elite?
Gaulish kings and elites wore chainmail.

Weren't the Gauls famous for often fighting naked? That being the case, would they even respect a warrior, let alone king/leader who felt the need to armor himself? They'd likely see it as craven vanity.
No, Gaulish elites wore chainmail. It's also worth noting that "naked" can simply mean "unarmored"; it's uncertain whether the Romans meant they literally went into battle unclad.
 
Given the pattern of first look releases, I'd say we can expect the Byzantine first look tomorrow and the Gallic first look on Tuesday.
 
Greece actually seems to get some nice little buffs here that they, frankly, didn't need. Obviously the Statue of Zeus is (understandably) designed to best fit them, letting you spam your hoplites with abandon. But the extra wildcard slot will be extra-helpful to them (and Poland) in the Dramatic Ages mode.

Isn't the wildcard bonus slot is just for Georgia during Golden Ages, or did I missed something ?
 
Gaulish kings and elites wore chainmail.


No, Gaulish elites wore chainmail. It's also worth noting that "naked" can simply mean "unarmored"; it's uncertain whether the Romans meant they literally went into battle unclad.

I was recently reading up on the Germanic "berzerker" warriors, who were attested to go into battle wearing only a bearskin. There was another group that only wore wolf skins. One article theorized that the Celts did this sort of thing as well, giving the Romans the concept of the naked Gaulish warrior. If that's the case, the naked fighters were just a handful of amped up shock troopers, rather than the full host of the army.
 
I was recently reading up on the Germanic "berzerker" warriors, who were attested to go into battle wearing only a bearskin. There was another group that only wore wolf skins. One article theorized that the Celts did this sort of thing as well, giving the Romans the concept of the naked Gaulish warrior. If that's the case, the naked fighters were just a handful of amped up shock troopers, rather than the full host of the army.
Yeah, I think of all of the romanticized paintings of the Native American people in my area, and it's hard for me to imagine that sensible people would walk around in the Northern Ohio Valley winters wearing hardly anything.
 
I'm amused because the Dramatic Ages mode sounds a lot like an idea I floated for an Assyrian design about a month ago - darker dark ages, golder golden ages, and no normal ages except for in the ancient era. Plus golden age points roll over. Now, in that idea I wanted Assyria to immediately enter a dark age upon losing a city, and in Dramatic Ages GA points don't seem to really "roll over" as such, but I still like the idea of being able to play more naturally with GA points, and the heftier risks that come with not keeping yourself the shining beacon of civilization. That sounds great.
 
Last edited:
I think they mean that Greece having an extra wildcard spot in general (as their UA) will be helpful during golden ages to run the extra golden age policies.

Yeah, anyone with extra WC slots will benefit, given that it seems that golden age cards should be better than your average econ or WC slot card otherwise.
 
Gaul is very unexpected but welcome, and I'm always down for production bonuses. I agree that the unique defensible district is probably an IZ, but it could possibly be a neighborhood as well. Probably an IZ, though. Culture-bombing mines is a nice touch, and one which you won't have to reach too far to take advantage of.
In the same video we could see a workshop in the district so it looks like it's clearly an IZ. I'm hoping it might could unlock earlier at Iron Working.

No, Gaulish elites wore chainmail. It's also worth noting that "naked" can simply mean "unarmored"; it's uncertain whether the Romans meant they literally went into battle unclad.
That's good to know. I'd at least expect some clothes on the leader and units to keep the rating from not going up. :mischief:
 
Mines that culture bomb, have +1 culture, and provide adjaceny to a theater square sounds pretty strong. I'm wondering if Gaul will be coming with a malus. Maybe they'll be bizarro Mansa and buying things with gold costs more.
 
the only reference of a gang of naked gaulish warriors was given by Polybius (a Greek historian, so maybe biased, what means "naked" for him ?), to a little group of confident warriors of the Alps, which fight naked UNLIKE their Gallic allies who fought in trousers and light cloaks

So it so exceptionnal and uncommon, if it's really happened.

We want a Gaulish leader with a chainmail, it's the basic :p
 
Gauls also introduced pants to the Roman empire, so I'm not too concerned about a nude leader.
Breeches and trousers are both Celtic-derived words.
 
I was recently reading up on the Germanic "berzerker" warriors, who were attested to go into battle wearing only a bearskin. There was another group that only wore wolf skins. One article theorized that the Celts did this sort of thing as well, giving the Romans the concept of the naked Gaulish warrior. If that's the case, the naked fighters were just a handful of amped up shock troopers, rather than the full host of the army.
People today might be surprised at how effective a hardened leather jacket, or even a Thick garment resembling a “padded shirt,” are.

Definitely not as good as metal but a far cry from your bare skin. Everyone preferred Metal when they could get it. Ancient people were just as smart as us, and definitely knew a naked army was a dead army. (There is also not really light armor as we might think of in a modern RPG setting, only lightly armored. People wanted metal because it’s stronger and thinner and less restrictive than alternative equivalent protection. Even full plate was plenty mobile!)
 
People today might be surprised at how effective a hardened leather jacket, or even a Thick garment resembling a “padded shirt,” are.
Worth noting, though, that padded armor and leather jerkins were primarily intended to protect the wearer from being bruised or pierced by their own armor, not from attacks. In particular, the misconception of "studded leather armor" comes from a lack of understanding of brigandine or jack of plates. Not saying it's not better than skin, but it wasn't really intended to be armor proper.
 
Top Bottom