Unit Assets: Art and Historicity

[ThichN]

Unit assets in Civ7 are the best they've been in the franchise imho. While surely there are some historical missteps and liberties, I thought it would be fun to post some in-game images with side-by-side historical reference. I'm sure there are members in this community who are knowledgable about the militaries of certain time periods and nations. I hope to hear from others on small details or touches Civ7 got right, as well as things they did not. Despite any mistakes or errors, I appreciate the assets and how they function on the map. It's also interesting to see where artists may have gotten inspiration when making the assets.

Here are a few. Hope to see you all post others!

Tercio (Spain)
In-game asset vs Battle of Rocroi painting

Spoiler :

Numidian Cavalry (Carthage)
In-game asset vs miniature model
Are there any references folks could point to that identify the appearance of Numidian cavalry?

Spoiler :

Burning Arrows
In-game asset vs Susan Walton depiction of a Mississippian (Cahokian?) tribe
Note that flaming arrows were more often used for communication rather than warfare.
Love the detail of the necklaces here, in particular.

Spoiler :

Mississippian Commander
In-game asset vs depiction of a Cahokian elite at a museum in Illinois, US (I think)
A fun detail in the commander's headdress here.

Spoiler :

 

[untitledjuan]

It's cool that units have that level of historical accuracy. I just hope leaders, such as Bolívar, had that same level of historicity, but they sadly seem to have taken waaay to much liberties on his leader design.

 

[ThichN]

Mexican Soldaderas
In-game vs photograph from University of Texas El Paso Special Collections

Spoiler :

Mexican Cuirassier
In-game vs 1889 Frederic Remington painting

Spoiler :

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Numidian Cavalry (Carthage)
In-game asset vs miniature model
Are there any references folks could point to that identify the appearance of Numidian cavalry?

Spoiler :

View attachment 726687View attachment 726688

Osprey publishing's Men At Arms series is one of the 'standard references' for companies producing miniature figures like the one shown.
Specifically, MAA 537, The Numidians 300 BC - 300 AD by William Horsted, illustrated by Adam Hook, has a very thorough discussion of the Numidian military during their prime period, whether fighting for or against Carthage.

 

[ThichN]

Osprey publishing's Men At Arms series is one of the 'standard references' for companies producing miniature figures like the one shown.
Specifically, MAA 537, The Numidians 300 BC - 300 AD by William Horsted, illustrated by Adam Hook, has a very thorough discussion of the Numidian military during their prime period, whether fighting for or against Carthage.

Thank you! Fantastic.

 

[marius_kaparius]

I don't know how accurate they are but the Hoplite models excite me and actually has me playing Greece more than I've done in any other Civ.

 

[tangjinfeng]

The Mexican unit is disappointing. I remember fantasizing before the release of Civ7 that they would do some historical research, but there’s absolutely none. It feels like a character they just randomly threw together. This cavalry is completely different from the ones Remington painted, and it doesn’t even have any Mexican characteristics (of course, Remington himself didn’t do much research either; he just painted what he saw, like a medieval artist depicting Joshua slaughtering Ai. In his painting of the The Drawing of the Black Bean, the Mexicans are wearing late 19th-century uniforms).

 

[ThichN]

The Mexican unit is disappointing. I remember fantasizing before the release of Civ7 that they would do some historical research, but there’s absolutely none. It feels like a character they just randomly threw together. This cavalry is completely different from the ones Remington painted, and it doesn’t even have any Mexican characteristics (of course, Remington himself didn’t do much research either; he just painted what he saw, like a medieval artist depicting Joshua slaughtering Ai. In his painting of the The Drawing of the Black Bean, the Mexicans are wearing late 19th-century uniforms).

This thread is for constructive discussion. Can you provide links, research, or other alternative references and images? Providing those in a fun thread would be a good way for others to learn about history. It's always interesting to see where art teams glean their inspiration from, the level of historical accuracy, etc. And yes, painters often paint what they see.

 

[ThichN]

I don't know how accurate they are but the Hoplite models excite me and actually has me playing Greece more than I've done in any other Civ.

Greek Hoplite
In-game vs image of the calyx krater vessel (530 BCE)

Spoiler :

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Greek Hoplite
In-game vs image of the calyx krater vessel (530 BCE)

Spoiler :

View attachment 727701View attachment 727702

The krater shown, dated to 530 BCE shows the early 'classic' Hoplite: Corinthian helmet, large Aspis shield, solid bronze 'muscled' cuirass, bronze greaves protecting the lower legs, and stout spear with a long iron point.

But within a century or so much of this appearance had changed: within a century or so several things happened:
1. Helmets became more open, giving better vision. There were several types, but at the end (mid 4th century BCE) the helmet had become a metal or felt/leather 'Pylos' cap covering only the skull and back of the neck and leaving eyes and ears open.
2. The heavy (20 - 25 kg) bronze cuirass was lightened, then made of leather and finally became a cuirass made of layers of stiffened linen or canvas, which, like the pylos cap, was also adopted by the Macedonian Pezhetairoi pike phalanx.
3. The greaves were abandoned, since they reduced mobility for very little real protection: made thick enough to stop an arrow or a spear and they exhausted a man's legs in a few hours, made light enough to move in and they did not protect much.

The formation also shows another, very small, problem: the shield designs. Most of them were individual designs, peculiar to a single man or family, so it would be very unlikely to see more than one of each kind in a single formation - except for City State designs like the Spartan lambda: λ - and that design was carried by ALL the Spartans, so would only be seen in a Spartan formation with no other designs showing. Also, from descriptions, the early Aspis shields were faced with a thin sheet of bronze on which the design was painted and the rest left in polished bronze - the point was that the surface would be smooth enough that an enemy spear would slide off rather than penetrate, and painting the entire shield would reduce that desired smoothness.

 

[ThichN]

The krater shown, dated to 530 BCE shows the early 'classic' Hoplite: Corinthian helmet, large Aspis shield, solid bronze 'muscled' cuirass, bronze greaves protecting the lower legs, and stout spear with a long iron point.

But within a century or so much of this appearance had changed: within a century or so several things happened:
1. Helmets became more open, giving better vision. There were several types, but at the end (mid 4th century BCE) the helmet had become a metal or felt/leather 'Pylos' cap covering only the skull and back of the neck and leaving eyes and ears open.
2. The heavy (20 - 25 kg) bronze cuirass was lightened, then made of leather and finally became a cuirass made of layers of stiffened linen or canvas, which, like the pylos cap, was also adopted by the Macedonian Pezhetairoi pike phalanx.
3. The greaves were abandoned, since they reduced mobility for very little real protection: made thick enough to stop an arrow or a spear and they exhausted a man's legs in a few hours, made light enough to move in and they did not protect much.

The formation also shows another, very small, problem: the shield designs. Most of them were individual designs, peculiar to a single man or family, so it would be very unlikely to see more than one of each kind in a single formation - except for City State designs like the Spartan lambda: λ - and that design was carried by ALL the Spartans, so would only be seen in a Spartan formation with no other designs showing. Also, from descriptions, the early Aspis shields were faced with a thin sheet of bronze on which the design was painted and the rest left in polished bronze - the point was that the surface would be smooth enough that an enemy spear would slide off rather than penetrate, and painting the entire shield would reduce that desired smoothness.

This is fantastic, thank you for sharing!

What were some of the other city-state symbols?

Also, the last I played as Greece it was as Ada. Fairly amusing to see them in pink.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

This is fantastic, thank you for sharing!

What were some of the other city-state symbols?

Also, the last I played as Greece it was as Ada. Fairly amusing to see them in pink.

I posted this some years ago, but here it is again:

These are among the most common Greek shield designs, taken from contemporary sources like kraters and other pottery, wall frescoes and paintings, etc.
Numbers 9 - 13 are State Symbols: 9 = The Spartan 'Lambda', 10 = the symbol for the city-state of Sicyon, 11 = The Greek 'M' standing for Messenia, 12 = the trident of Mantinea and 13 = Hercules' Club, the symbol of the city of Thebes.

The rest are personal. individual symbols. No. 15 is the head of a Gorgon: the emblem depicted on Athena's shield or armor, because it would terrify her enemies and protect her from harm - ordinary warriors liked those attributes as well, and it appears to have been most common among Athenian troops. Problem is, of course, that it is a very intricate design to make visible and distinguishable at the scale of the game's graphics. No 18, the winged horse Bellerophon, is also associated primarily with the men from the city of Corinth although, like Athena's Gorgon, it does not seem to have been 'official' in any way.

 

[ehecatzin]

I need to get in game to get some screenshots BUT. I'm a bit torn about the infantry units for the Mayans, most of those units are clearly inspired by Mexica infantry which I assume is just being used as the standard "mesoamerican set", makes wonder what they would use for an exploration mesoamerican set when the Mexica are added.

that or Mexica are going to be Antiquity *shudders*

 

[Ryansinbela]

No they are definitely Exploration

 

[ehecatzin]

No they are definitely Exploration

Yeah that's my point, I think It's a bit dissapointing to use a lot of clearly Mexica units as default in Antiquity. I guess Mexica are surely to get an infantry UU, so maybe they didn't want to waste them?

 

[evonannoredars]

I need to get in game to get some screenshots BUT. I'm a bit torn about the infantry units for the Mayans, most of those units are clearly inspired by Mexica infantry which I assume is just being used as the standard "mesoamerican set", makes wonder what they would use for an exploration mesoamerican set when the Mexica are added.

that or Mexica are going to be Antiquity *shudders*

I'd need to see what the standard mesoamerican set looks like again, but reusing the mesoamerican/mexica style but with added stolen european guns and helmets Inka-style for Exploration seems easily doable.