Viking Age: Total War! [Archive]

King Yngvar

11-01-2004, 20:14

Viking Age: Total War

Game will start in the year 900.

20 Factions:

Norway
Sweden
Denmark
Gardariki
Dublin-York
Normandy
Wessex
Ireland
Scotland
Frankish Kingdom
German Kingdom
Poland
Asturia
Al Andalus
Italy
Papacy
Magyars
Bulgar Kingdom
Byzantine Empire
Karjala

Many new units will be made, with a larger variety than in vanilla RTW

We have some people on the team already but we need more, especially moddelers. If you wish to join us, contact me at: yngvarv@hotmail.com
Or write at the Total Rome forums: http://forums.totalrome.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=13

Europe in 900 AD

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/NewMapBorders2.bmp

This is the currently planned provinces, the rest will be added soon...

Units currently planned:

Scandinavian Kingdoms (Norway, Sweden and Denmark):
Trell Knifemen
Trell Spearmen
Leidang Spearmen
Light Archers
Leidang Archers
Huskarl Arhcers
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Ulfhedin Berserkers
Huskarl Swordsmen
Huskarl Axemen
Hirdmen
Horse Raiders

Boats:
Snekkja
Drakkr
Bardi

Dublin-York
Saxon Peasants
Gaelic Peasants
Bonnaght Spearmen
Dibhlann Swordsmen
Light Archers
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Huskarl Swordsmen
Huskarl Axemen
Hirdmen (royal guard)
Horse Raiders
Hobilars

Boats:

Snekkja
Drakkar

Scotland
Gaelic Peasants
Light Archers
Pict Levies
Firdacraoiseach
Celtic Swordsmen
Batareicht Swordsmen
Sinoach Warriors
Cleighdemhor Warriors
Ridire Guard (infantry)
Light Cavalry
Scottish Cavalry

Wessex
Light Archers
Saxon Peasants
Fyrd Spearmen
Fyrd Axemen
Skirmishers
Huskarl Axemen
Huskarl Swordsmen
Royal Huskarls
Light Cavalry
Saxon Cavalry

Ireland
Gaelic Peasants (throws javelins, fight with knives)
Raighhangh Berserkers
Kern Spearmen (throws javelins and fight with them)
Bonnaght Spearmen
Iobnaght Axemen
Celtic Swordsmen
Dibhlann Swordsmen
Batareicht Swordsmen
Ridire Guard (Infantry)
Light Cavalry
Hobilars

Gardariki
Light Archers
Slavic Archers
Peasant Spearmen
Rus Spearmen
Armored Rus Spearmen
Slavic Axemen
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Varangian Axemen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)
Varangian Swordsmen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)
Royal Varangians
Light Cavalry
Boyars (heavy)
Steppe Cavalry (missiled)

Magyars
Peasants
Spearmen
Magyar Archers
Skirmishers
Avar Axemen
Light Cavalry
Steppe Cavalry
Magyar Horse Archers
Heavy Lancers
Royal Lancers

Byzantine Empire
Militiamen
Psiloi
Anatolian Highlanders (archers)
Peltastoi
Skutatoi Spearmen
Veristitatae Swordsmen
Varangian Axemen
Varangian Swordsmen
Horse Archers
Foederati Skythikon
Latinikon
Kavallaroi
Kathapraktoi
Klibanophoroi (royal guard cavalry)

Al Andalus
Falahin (peasants)
Slave Spearmen
Arab Spearmen
Arab Warband
Saber Warriors
Desert Warriors
Moorish Infantry (elite sabermen)
Mujahedins (means holy warrior, so yes it fits for the time)
Desert Archers
Arab Longbows
Camel Warriors
Arab Cavalry
Moorish Heavy Cavalry
Horse Archers
Royal Cavalry

Poland
Peasants
Slavic Axemen
Slavic Archers
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Skirmishers
Polish Swordsmen
Royal Guard (infantry)
Light Cavalry
Polish Cavalry

Bulgaria
Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Slavic Axemen
Slavic Archers
Bulgarian Brigands
Light Cavalry
Steppe Cavalry
Heavy Lancers
Boyars

Asturia
Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Skirmishers
Light Archers
Highland Axemen
Galician Infantry
Asturian Fanatics
Asturian Swordsmen
Royal Guardsmen
Light Cavalry

Normandy (will have a "reform" system like the Romans, take place in between 970-1000 maybe)
Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Huskarl Swordsmen
Huskarl Axemen
Hirdmen
Horse Raiders
~After reform~
Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Skirmishers
Light Swordsmen
Norman Swordsmen
Light Cavalry
Retainer Cavalry
Norman Knights
Skirmisher Cavalry
Royal Knights

German Kingdom
Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Bavarian Spearmen
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Skirmishers
Saxon Axemen
Light Swordsmen
Swabian Swordsmen
Light Cavalry
Feudal Knights
Royal Knights

Frankish Kingdom
Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Light Archers
Axe Skirmishers
Skirmishers
Light Swordsmen
Frankish Swordsmen
Light Cavalry
Feudal Knights
Frankish Knights
Royal Knights

Italy
Peasants
Spearmen
Italian Spearmen
Langobardian Axemen
Light Swordsmen
Italian Swordsmen
Venetian Infantry
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Venetian Archers
Crossbowmen
Venetian Crossbowmen
Light Cavalry
Feudal Knights
Royal Knights

Papacy
Peasants
Spearmen
Italian Spearmen
Light Swordsmen
Italian Swordsmen
Brothers of Camael
Brothers of Michael
Holy Virgin Brothers
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Crossbowmen
Light Cavalry
Feudal Knights
Royal Knights

Karjala
Korpisoturit
Heimosoturit
Armored Spearmen
Keihäsmiehet
Footmen
Karelian Kylfings
Karelian Raiders
Karelian Horsemen
Finnish Berserkers
Finnish Nobles
Kuninkaan Henkivartio

Boats:

Small boat
Uisko

Mercenaries
Gael Gaedhil Buanna (All of Ireland and Scotland)
Leinstermen (Dyflinnsysla and Leinster)
Welsh Longbowmen (All of British Isles)
Manx Fer Cliwe; (Kumberland, Nordimberland, Dyfed, Gwynedd, Man, Sudr-Eyar, Cymri, Dublin, Ulster, Strathclyde and Lowlands)
Gorddgwas (Dyflinnsysla, Bretagne and All of Britain south of Scotland)
Gallowglasses (Connaght, Ulster, Meath, Dyflinnsysla, Leinster, Man, the Highlands, Strathclyde and the Grampians)
Saxon Mercenaries (Saxland and All of England)
Breton Axemen (Brittany and Outer Britanny)

Mercenary Vikings (All of British Isles, Finland, Baltics, Northern Russia, Iceland and Scandinavia)
Jomsvikings (Jume, Vendland, Aust-Vendland, Sjellund, Odinseyar, Jutland, Nord-Jutland, Sudr-Jutland, Skáni, Halland, Aust-Gautaland, Svitjod, Viken, Agdir, Hordaland, Trønderlag and Hålogaland: Important, Jume annually recieves several available Jomsvikings for hire, the other provinces get them less frequently)
Vendish Warband (Vendland, Aust-Vendland and Jume)
Vendish Warriors (Vendland, Aust-Vendland and Jume)
Karelian Mercenaries (All of Finland, Karelia and Lappland)
Saremaa Raiders (Saremaa and Estland)
Lithuanian Cavalry (Lithuania and Livonia)

Feel free to add suggestions.

Scandinavian Units

Trell Knifemen
Weapon: Knife
Armor: None
Shield: None
Helmet: None
Morale: Very Poor
Abilities: None

Trell Spearmen
Weapon: Short Spear
Armor: None
Shield: None
Helmet: None
Morale: Very Poor
Abilities: None

Leidang Spearmen
Weapon: Long Spear
Armor: Light chain mail
Shield: Medium round shield
Helmet: Leather
Morale: Good
Abilities: Warcry

Light Archers
Weapon: Bow + Knife
Armor: None
Shield: None
Helmet: None
Morale: Poor
Abilities: Flaming arrows

Leidang Archers
Weapon: Bow + Knife
Armor: Light (fur/leather)
Shield: None
Helmet: None
Morale: Average
Abilities: Flaming arrows

King's Archers
Weapon: Bow + Sword
Armor: Light chain mail
Shield: None
Helmet: Leather
Morale: Good
Abilities: Flaming arrows

Viking Axemen
Weapon: One handed axe + Throwing spear
Armor: Light (fur/leather)
Shield: Medium round shield
Helmet: Leather
Morale: Good
Abilities: Warcry and Svinefylking (wedge)

Berserkers
Weapon: One handed axe
Armor: None (half-naked)
Shield: Medium round shield
Helmet: None
Morale: Excellent
Abilities: Berserkergang

Ulfhedin Berserkers (special Nordic)
Weapon: One handed sword
Armor: Light (much fur)
Shield: Medium round shield
Morale: Fearless (can't be routed)
Helmet: None
Abilities: Berserkergang

Huskarl Swordsmen
Weapon: One handed sword + Throwing spear
Armor: Heavy chain mail
Shield: Large round shield (iron edge)
Helmet: Gjermundbu
Morale: Excellent
Abilities: Warcry and Svinefylking (wedge)

Huskarl Axemen (best in loose formation)
Weapon: Bearded axe
Armor: Heavy chain mail
Shield: None
Helmet: Gjermundbu
Morale: Excellent
Abilities: Warcry and Svinefylking

Hirdmen (Royal Guard)
Weapon: One handed sword
Armor: Heavy chain mail
Shield: None
Helmet: Gjermundbu (general/king himself has it in gold)
Morale: Fearless
Abilities: Rally, Warcry, Svinefylking and Shield Wall (protects the general/king)

Horse Raiders (Mounted)
Weapon: Long Spear
Armor: Light chain mail
Shield: Medium round shield
Helmet: Gjermundbu
Morale: Good
Abilities: Wedge

Hagbard la Suede

11-01-2004, 20:24

King Yngvar

11-01-2004, 20:39

Leidang Archer = Well actually,wouldn't it be Ledung or Ledgang?The Ledung/Ledgang was when the chieftain or king called his followers to join him in war.
Leidang Skirmisher = I'm not sure scandinavians had special units of these people
Leidang Spearman = Acceptable
Viking Axemen = All vikings were made for raiding :P,but ok.
Berserker = good
Huskar Swordsman = I think you mean huskarl,its ok.
Huskar Axeman = alright for the flavor
Hirdmann = Hirdman,Hirdmen.Soldiers in the service of a lord
Light Cavalry = good

Leidgangr is the old norse word, I just used the modern Norwegian.
It was a "draft" system where the peasants had to fight for their king for a certain time. They used bows, spears, etc. Light units. Skirmisher, maybe we don't need it, but give the Viking Axemen and maybe the huskarls and hirdmen an ability to throw spears before charging. Yes, the Vikings did that.

Viking Axemen = All vikings were made for raiding :P,but ok.

Just need a light axeman ~:)

Huskar Swordsman = I think you mean huskarl,its ok.
Huskar Axeman = alright for the flavor

Huskarl might be a better name, though I have read the use "huskar" as well.

Hirdmann = Hirdman,Hirdmen.Soldiers in the service of a lord

Hirdmann is just the Norwegian name. The name of the group would be Hirdmenn or Hirdmen in English. The most elite warriors. There was fewer than a thousand in a kingdom. These men formed the shield walls of the king.

King Yngvar

11-01-2004, 20:44

Special abilities (using some of your suggestions, eliminating the skirmisher if we are to include ability to throw spear for the other infantry):

Leidang spearmen: Warcry
Leidang archers: Flaming arrows
Viking Axemen: Warcry
Berserkers: Warcry (Berserkegangr, extra effect on berserkers)
Huskar Axemen: Wedge (Svinefylking)
Huskar Swordsmen: Wedge (Svinefylking)
Hirdmen: Wedge (Svinefylking, warlord in front!)
Light Cavalry: Wedge

Another idea: Mercenary that can only be sold to "Viking" factions: Jomsviking.

Meneldil

11-01-2004, 20:49

Hey, I was thinking about making a Age of Charlemagne mod, but i think I'll rather wait for CA to show us their next project, because everything would be easier if the plan to release MTW2.

Anyway, if you're looking for informations, you might want to ask to Norseman. He's working on the Fury of the Northmen mod for MTW, and has gathered a loads of historical informations.

King Yngvar

11-01-2004, 20:56

MTW2? Wouldn't that be based in around the same period as MTW? Plus, it will take them at least two years to release it.

About information, if someone want to give information (especially about the other kingdoms outside Scandinavia) that would be nice. But I need some modders too.

King Yngvar

11-03-2004, 22:18

Meneldil

11-04-2004, 07:07

The best name for the Russian faction is Kievan Rus, cause Novgorod was an independant city in 911 I think.

Paul Peru

11-04-2004, 09:07

It's true that the norse threw spears/javelins.
Jan Guillou mentions this in one of his medieval novels. (post-viking era)
The hero, a former knight templar, is defeated in two contests back home in Götaland: throwing spears and throwing axes, which the young men he competes against have been practicing since infancy. He comments that he needs to get better at throwing away his weapon. ~;)

I got an idea for a unit, inspired by the Burgundian snipers in NTW: How about a "Heroic Archer"? In the sagas there is a guy called Einar Tambarskjelve, who has unique skills. He is "one shot, one or more kills". The Norwegian king is a great athlete, but when Einar's bow breaks and he is offered that of king Olav instead, he complains that it is too weak. After that, they lost the battle (against a combined force of Danes, Swedes and Norwegian rebels) Einar subsequently worked for the former enemies. This made me think that the unit might be a recruitable mercenary, available in western Norway.
One man unit (if possible). Expensive to hire, high upkeep, max.possible missile attack, very long range. High starting experience/valour. Possibly lower than standard number of arrows (because the silly sod ruins his bow a lot)
Should be good for taking out enemy leaders etc.

King Yngvar

11-05-2004, 02:20

I have read those books yes, all four of them ~:)

One man unit (if possible).

Don't know if this is possible, maybe a small berserker sized unit (24 right?).

By the way, do you wish to help with this mod? Either by collecting historical information or if you know anything about modding.

The best name for the Russian faction is Kievan Rus, cause Novgorod was an independant city in 911 I think.

Helgi ruled both cities ~;)

Paul Peru

11-05-2004, 15:00

By the way, do you wish to help with this mod? Either by collecting historical information or if you know anything about modding.

I would like to help. I'm not
-a historian
-an archaeologist
-a graphic designer
-an experienced modder

I'd be happy to help with testing.
I can try to help with research, unit info, finding pictures to base unit design on, text file editing/experimenting etc.
Just try assigning me a task, and we'll se how I perform ~;)

As I usually say: try benefiting from the work of others instead of reinventing the hand pump from scratch. ~;)
There's VI with a lot of units. There may be something to rip off in the Medieval mod for RTW. https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=38508
Some guys are working on a MTW mod called "Fury of the Northmen". It's got roughly the same timeframe as "your" mod, and there's loads of information in the thread: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=30879
My impression is that most modders are happy to share as long as they're given proper credit for their work.
Another thing (probably well known): There may be changes to moddability and possibly CA-made modding tools in the next patch.

wilpuri

11-05-2004, 15:06

For information, you might want to take a look at the "Fury of the Northmen" mod thread in the engineers guild.

Good luck with the mod.

King Yngvar

11-06-2004, 05:24

I'd be happy to help with testing.
I can try to help with research, unit info, finding pictures to base unit design on, text file editing/experimenting etc.
Just try assigning me a task, and we'll se how I perform

I think the testing phase is far ahead. I am getting photoshop soon on CD in the mailbox, not sure when. Probably soon as I get my new computer.

Scandinavian Kingdoms (Norway, Sweden and Denmark):

Trell Spearmen: Short spears and small wooden un-painted shield, no armour.
Leidang Spearmen: Longer spears, medium wooden un-painted shield, fur clothing.
Leidang Archers: Light standard archers with a "Viking look"
Viking Axemen: Skegg-axe, medium wooden, un-painted shield, no armor, lether helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Berserkers: Sword and medium wooden, un-painted shield, "wild" fur clothing. Ability: Berserkergang warcry, last longer, more effect than normal warcry (if possible).
Huskarl Swordsmen: Sword, big painted shield, chain mail, gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Huskarl Axemen: Two handed bearded axeman, chain mail, gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Hirdmen: Infantry royal guard, sword, big painted shield, golden gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Horse Raiders: Spear and small wooden shield.

Boats:

Snekkja
Drakkar

Dublin-York (Disable berserker, York was already christianized, Dublin got christianized in 948. No drakkr. No leidang system. But gets Irish units in return):

Trell Spearmen: Short spears and small wooden un-painted shield, no armour.
Irish Spearmen
Gallowglasses
Viking Axemen: Skegg-axe, medium wooden, un-painted shield, no armor, lether helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Huskarl Swordsmen: Sword, big painted shield, chain mail, gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Huskarl Axemen: Two handed bearded axeman, chain mail, gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Hirdmen: Infantry royal guard, sword, big painted shield, golden gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Horse Raiders: Spear and small wooden shield.
Hobilars

Boats:

Snekkja

The others are just wild ideas that will definately be changed:

Scotland

Peasants
Commoners
Light Archers
Spearmen
Skirmishers
Armored Spearmen
Claymore Warriors
Pictish Axemen
Lowland Infantry
Light Cavalry
Scottish Cavalry
Celtic Guard (infantry)

Wessex

Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Peasants
Fyrd Spearmen
Fyrd Axemen
Skirmishers
Huskarl Axemen
Huskarl Swordsmen
Royal Huskarls (infantry)
Light Cavalry
Saxon Cavalry

Wales

Peasants
Light Archers
Longbowmen
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Axemen
Skirmishers
Briton Swordsmen
Briton Horsemen
Celtic Guard (infantry)

Irish

Peasants
Dagger Fighters
Irish Spearmen
Viking Axemen
Gallowglasses
Skirmishers
Kerns
Celtic Guard (Infantry)
Hobilars

Kijev

Peasants
Slavic Archers
Rus Spearmen
Armored Rus Spearmen
Slavic Axemen
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Varangian Axemen
Varangian Swordsmen
Royal Varangians
Light Cavalry
Boyars
Steppe Cavalry

Boats:

Snekkja
Drakkar

Magyars

Peasants
Light Archers
Magyar Archers
Skirmishers
Swordsmen
Slavic Axemen
Light Cavalry
Steppe Cavalry
Magyar Horse Archers
Heavy Lancers
Royal Cavalry

Byzantine Empire

Peasants
Archers
Crossbowmen
Trebizbond Archers
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Roman Swordsmen
Varangian Axemen
Varangian Swordsmen
Cathapracts
Pronoias
Horse Archers
Royal Cathapracts
Catapults
Ballistas

Abbasid Caliphate

Peasants
Desert Bowmen
Syrian Archers
Crossbowmen
Spearmen
Saracen Infantry
Nubian Spearmen
Skirmishers
Beduin Camels
Saracen Cavalry
Horse Archers
Ghulam Cavalry
Royal Cavalry

Fatimid Caliphate

Peasants
Spearmen
Fatimid Spearmen
Saracen Infantry
Berber Warriors
Desert Bowmen
Light Camels
Saracen Cavalry
Berber Cavalry
Royal Cavalry

Cordoba

Peasants
Slave Spearmen
Iberian Spearmen
Light Infantry
Moorish Infantry
Desert Bowmen
Light Cavalry
Moorish Cavalry
Horse Archers
Royal Cavalry

Wends

Peasants
Slavic Axemen
Slavic Archers
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Skirmishers
Berserkers
Wendish Swordsmen
Bearded Axemen
Royal Guard (infantry)
Horse Raiders

Have not come up with appropriate names for the others yet. This is just to give you an idea of units.

King Yngvar

11-06-2004, 05:28

http://forums.totalrome.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=81

Pherhaps this can be an armored spearman unit?

Radier

11-06-2004, 15:39

King Yngvar... Excellent units and map!
I hope this mod will be released, but since i am not a modder or a historian I can't help.. but I wish you the best of luck!! ~:)

Fury of the Northmen mod have a load of information... Maybee you can get some info there or maybee join them... 'cause your units is great!

Radier.

King Yngvar

11-06-2004, 16:49

Fury of the Northmen mod have a load of information... Maybee you can get some info there or maybee join them... 'cause your units is great!

Thank you, however I don't think I can join them as they mod MTW. I don't even have MTW anymore, and the new 3D engine of RTW prevents me from even thinking about going back to MTW ~:)
What is needed is a "Viking mod" for RTW.

wilpuri

11-06-2004, 17:59

Thank you, however I don't think I can join them as they mod MTW. I don't even have MTW anymore, and the new 3D engine of RTW prevents me from even thinking about going back to MTW ~:)
What is needed is a "Viking mod" for RTW.

Well I know that. I was just thinking, that since thr FotN crew has done some very extensive research on the viking world, may be you would find that useful for your mod. ~:)

EDIT: oops I thought you were quoting me. Got to learn how to read first and post later. :book:

Lazul

11-07-2004, 00:53

King Yngvar

11-07-2004, 06:24

Might I just add that the favored weapon of the "more veteran" viking was NOT the axe but the simple sword/boradsword etc etc.
It is just a myth that all vikings used only axes.

just wanted to say that...

The reason berserkers, huskarl swordsmen and hirdmen will have swords.

Well I know that. I was just thinking, that since thr FotN crew has done some very extensive research on the viking world, may be you would find that useful for your mod.

I may concider it, thank you ~:)

Ranika

11-07-2004, 06:42

Christianized 'Irish' Vikings in Dublin shouldn't disclude berserkers, the Christian Irish had berserkers called Raighhangh (in the old An Mhumain). Also, the backbone of the late dark age Irish armies were chainmaille wearing light swordsmen (Dibh Lann, black blade), coupled with chainmaille wearing heavy spearmen (Bonnaght, later Bonnacht, spearman).

King Yngvar

11-08-2004, 04:56

King Yngvar

11-08-2004, 05:02

Sorry for the second post, but it seems you cannot edit posts in this forum. Oh well;

Irish

Peasants
Raighhangh Berserkers
Spearmen
Bonnaght Spearmen
Viking Axemen
Dibhlann Swordsmen
Gallowglasses
Skirmishers
Kerns
Celtic Guard (Infantry)
Hobilars

Dublin-York (No drakkar. No leidang system. But gets Irish units in return):

Trell Spearmen: Short spears and small wooden un-painted shield, no armour.
Bonnaght Spearmen
Dibhlann Swordsmen
Viking Axemen: Skegg-axe, medium wooden, un-painted shield, no armor, lether helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Berserkers: Sword and medium wooden, un-painted shield, "wild" fur clothing. Ability: Berserkergang warcry, last longer, more effect than normal warcry (if possible).
Huskarl Swordsmen: Sword, big painted shield, chain mail, gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Huskarl Axemen: Two handed bearded axeman, chain mail, gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Hirdmen: Infantry royal guard, sword, big painted shield, golden gjermundbu helmet. Geirrkastir, throw spears like Roman infantry throw pilums. Abilities: Svinefylking (Wedge) and Warcry (hoping for possibility to have two).
Horse Raiders: Spear and small wooden shield.
Hobilars

Boats:

Snekkja

Speiz_Bankurt

11-08-2004, 13:14

Radier

11-08-2004, 20:02

King Yngvar were are you from? Just wonder since you to this vikingmod...
~:cheers:
And the scandinavian units... will the different vikingfactions have unique units apart from each other?

Radier.

Ranika

11-09-2004, 03:34

I am an expert in Celtic history, and have a degree in Irish Military History. The professional Irish army also did not employ viking axemen, except as mercenaries, they had their own, Iobnaght (Ee-obe-nakt), who fought using a two-handed axe called a moriob (great axe). These were a type of light-to-medium infantry, coupled with similarly armored Cleighcach, shortswordsmen, and Kerns. The Iobnaght and Cleighcach were the lightest 'professional' soldiers used by Irish militaries (Kerns are peasants), though they were actually just chiefsmen (tribal warriors) that were led by their chieftans, under the direction of a greater Arras (Irish noble), and, unless in a small skirmish or a cattle raid, were usually used as a reserve, or as a forward force to soften the foe, before the bulk of the actual army, consisting mainly of Bonnaghts and Dibh Lann swordsmen, would follow and do the true bulk of damage, using their high quality armor and weapons, as opposed to the Iobnaght and Cleighcach's total lack of armor and shields (However, Cleighcach from parts of Munster, called Dhácleighcach, used two swords).

Also, having Irish with peasants and kerns are redudant. Kerns were simply a peasant mob that were given darts and a spear, both of which were more than plentiful in Ireland. Subsequently, Kerns are ALSO Irish skirmishers. In Viking Invasion, it had a seperate unit for dartmen (Irish skirmishers) and kerns, but in reality, they're the same thing.

Also, hobilar, just so a common mistake is not repeated, are NOT light cavalry. They are, in fact, Irish medium-to-heavy cavalry. Hobby ponies are very sturdy, and their riders were clad in high quality chain, threw three javelins before a charge, and then attacked using their spear in 'the old fashion', that is, wielding it over their head. Irish light cavalry are Marcach (horsemen), and aren't really exceptionally different than other horsemen, so a generic horsemen unit could be employed for that. There are also Ridire, who I'll talk about shortly.

Gallowglass, also, do not use two-handed swords, usually. Some did, but the main weapon of the Gallowglass, is a large, two-handed axe, called a sparth axe. The axe is on a 4.5-to-6-foot pole. Gallowglass should not be included, however. While the Irish employed them heavily, they were actually Gaelo-Nordic warriors from the Hebrides. Gallowglass itself (the Anglicized version of the Irish word 'Gallogladh'), means 'Foreign Warrior'. The most important point, though, is that they did not come into usage until the high middle ages. If you still wish to use them, make them a mercenary unit available in the north of Ireland, and Scotland, they were not trained, they were bought, and even fought for the English a few times.

Irish two-handed swordsmen were lewcach, and used a massive two-handed sword called a lewing sword. These huge weapons were made to split through chain armor, and cleave off heads in wide strokes. They were the precursor to the cleighdemornach (claymore men, two-handed swordsmen) used by the Scots.

In Connacht, the tribe of the Dal Cais produced extremely heavily armed, and long trained warriors called the Dalcaission Knights, they used a lewing sword, or a longsword and shield, coupled with full body chain, and a shield with the flag of Ireland on the front (a blue field, not green, with a yellow Irish harp on it) after the unification under Brian Boroime. If used, they would be vaguely like R:TW's Spartans, a limited area, high power, extremely expensive unit. Also, they appear only in small numbers, a unit of Dalcaissions were about 20-30 men. They were paid in pounds of treasure, weapons, and armor, as such, they were VERY expensive to maintain. Alternatively, the high king of Ireland himself employed these men as his own guards, and they could be a 'royal' unit for generals. However, I recommend Ridire. Ridire are a mounted unit, they are Irish 'knights', who use extremely high quality swords, shields, suits of chain, and metal helmets, and wear flowing cloaks. Either one would be good as a bodyguard unit though.

Also, bonnaght ARE spearmen in Ireland, the Irish spear was a throwing weapon as well as a defensive weapon. The Irish military was highly unique. Archers in Ireland were always mercenaries, the Irish military didn't rely on long range engagements, they relied on their high quality chain and shields to protect them at distance, use short range armor piercing missiles (heavy javelins), or fast to throw light missiles (darts), and close and use their melee weapons (axes, swords, and spears). I know I said the bonnaght are heavy spearmen, and they are, but that's more of a comparison to other nations spearmen. The only 'light' spear unit used by the Irish were Kerns, who, when their darts were thrown, used a homemade spear.

The vikings of Dublin no longer employed Trell spearmen by 1000, they adopted the Irish bonnaght entirely for their spears, as the bonnaght's system was very effective against most enemies you'd need spears against. However, their bonnaghts were really more like Kerns who marched in formation.

Also, on Dibhlann, they worked similarly to legionarres, they throw a javelin before their charge, which is precursored by their warcry "Bas! Bas! Bas ach Ifreann ru ta namhaid!" - "Death! Death! Death and Hell on the foe!"

Scottish armies in this period were VERY similar. However, they employed their cleighdemornach instead of lewcach, and used light archers. However, their clothing is of importance to note.

Irish and Scottish warriors, none of them at this time, wear kilts. They wear brat, a shoulder cloak akin to the kilt (in fact, the kilt is simply a brat worn about the waist). The poorer soldiers and peasants wear a long shirt, called a leine. It goes to the knee. They wear, with it, a belt, a brat, and leather shoes.

Professional soldiers (Dibhlann, Bonnacht, etc.) wore checkered pants called trews, along with a brat, a leine, and usually, a chain shirt, with a padded vest over it, and high ankle boots with the trews stuffed into the boots.

Beards are not popular with Gaelic soldiers (though they are with peasants), but mustaches are. Long 'handlebar' mustaches, called cruda or brocha, or any number of things based on dialect, are especially popular, and are, in fact, a hold over to ancient Gallic mustaches in France and north Italy. The most advanced soldiers wear long cloaks. Included there would be 'noble' units, like those around generals, and any of the highest tier units.

The strength of an Irish army should be in two main areas:
Heavily Armored Advanced Units - During the Dark Ages, the Irish had the finest made chain in Europe. They used advanced metallurgical procedures to have a 'double knit' shirt, that was light as the average shirt of chain.

Morale - Gaelic armies are historically reknowned for an insanely high level of morale and fearlessness during this period, instilled mainly due to the teachings of the Celtic rite of the Catholic Church. They still took heads, and saw death in battle as the greatest glory.

The weaknesses of an Irish army should be in two main areas as well:
Range - While having decent short ranged attacks, at a long range, the Irish are at a HUGE disadvantage. While their most advanced units should have good enough armor to get them close, their lower tier units are another story.

Very Poorly Armored Low Tier Units - While generally willing to fight, more so than most warriors in many places, the Irish levymen, their very basic soldiers are VERY badly disadvantaged when it comes to armor. Totally unarmored, and without shields, they have little chance of survival at range, against archers and the like. While their unarmored status affords them great speed upclose, and the ability to dodge, at a range, they're good as dead.

Ranika

11-09-2004, 03:45

Also, on the subject of Raighhangh Berserkers, they were not unarmored like Nordic berserkers, they used a high quality hand-and-a-half sword called a sidhemhor, with a large targe-style shield. They wore chain shirts, under a leine, no pants, but wore shoes, with an elaborate gold neck chain (a gift given to them all), a heavy cloak that stopped just above the knees, with a plaid design, and body painted heavily with blue or white dyes, especially the face, and often have religious tattoos on the arms.

Such a unit should be confined to a province with a specific religious structure, as they were supposed to be the 'children of Saint Finbar', a little known Catholic saint of wolves, but he was very popular in 'backwoods' regions of Ireland, among hunters and the more tribal warriors, who hadn't really incorporated heavily into the uniting kingdom of Ireland. In professional armies, they only showed up three times, and every time, they were were found in a chapel to Saint Finbar in Connacht when they were hired, found praying naked and tattooing and cutting themselves in front of the altar.

After their ritual, they were hired, and gathered their brethern to fight for the Irish. In battle, they exhibit the same qualities as a Nordic berserkr, a berserk rage, and wild, selfless behavior. They would cry 'For the Christ, Saint Finbar, and Eireann, I will take your head and eat your pagan soul' before battle. With such a cry, I'm sure you can see why I insist that they be tied to a religious structure.

Ranika

11-09-2004, 03:52

I am also aware that in later periods, a Kern was simply an ordinary Irish warrior, and meant many types of troops, but in this period you've outlined, the Kern is just a peasant sent to fight.

Ranika

11-09-2004, 04:50

And now, the Scots. The Scots had a very similar military, and, at the 'entry' point of the game, were just recently to become the Albions, with Kenneth Mac Alpin's completed conquest of Pictland. The kingdom of Alba was, itself, still VERY Gaelic in this period, and the Scots, as such, were not that different from the Irish. The distinction between highlanders and lowlanders wouldn't really be formed until the Norman incursions north, when the lowlanders would become more 'European' in culture, while the highlanders were more Gaelic in culture. Any Picts used in a Scottish military, it should be noted, are generally significantly shorter than a Gael, with black hair.

The Scottish military, as such, acts similarly to the Irish one. While there is a professional military, the bulk of soldiers in Scotland are clan warriors. They are made for raiding, not prolonged battles. They are patroned to a chieftan, who is himself patroned to a local 'ruire', who is then patroned to the 'ardruire' (the same titles as Irish 'ri' and 'ard ri', the 'kings' and 'high king'). These would be the lowest tier soldiers, kerns (called bollocknach, as they used bollock knives, not spears, in Scotland), spearmen, very light archers, Pict levies (Picts fought in large levies, all generally very poorly armored, using axes or curved swords), and the lightest of cavalry.

Then, you have the soldiers trained by the ruire, they are professionals. They include: Strathnach (used by the Welsh and Scots, they were essentially just Armored Spearmen, so that's a fine unit for them), Droganach (medium cavalry, wearing light chain, and using an axe and shield from horseback), and Sinoach Warriors (these were also used by the Irish, but not as often), who would dress in fox furs, and, at a distance, appear to be a fox by laying down. This would leave them fairly unmolested by enemies, or draw hungry enemies closer looking for something to eat. They would use this camoflauge to sneak near to enemies, then fire on them with fair quality bows, and draw a mace or sword, and their shield, to engage in melee. They weren't used too often, but almost every Ruire before 1050 AD had at least a few groups of them for assassinating traveling nobles and their entourages, and used them sometimes on the field to go after noblemen.

The most professional were the soldiers of the high king. These included Moarcleigh (Bearer of the sword), who dressed in very elaborate chain, and used swords with the mark of the king on the pommel, and were his personal guards, cleighdemornach, claymore warriors, also, were in his private armies, they used the heavy two-handed swords as an anti-armored infantry unit, and also batareicht (also an Irish soldier), clubmen. The bata is also called a shillealagh, a stick with a rounded 'head', and many knots, to inflict nasty gashes. Professional bata warriors were something like a Japanese kensai, they were very skilled martial artists with their weapon. Batareicht also used swords, called Pronoais, and those who used swords were generally the most skilled, and used, often, two at a time. The pronoais warriors were also sometimes called Prochacht or Pronach, and the pronoais itself is an elaborate shortsword.

Ranika

11-09-2004, 06:01

The Welsh, you have pretty well. They did employ a large number of archers, light archers, as well as "Ddynion chan bwâu", 'Men of Bows', excellently trained longbowmen, as well as shortswordsmen. They were, in a pinch, decent light infantry, and carried small shields and shortswords. The later English employed Welsh longbows were 'Anglicized', they weren't as heavily trained in melee combat as the dark age Welsh bowmen were.

Also, they made extensive use of "Allt farchogion" (Hill Horsemen), who were a swift cavalry unit that used bows from horseback, and then road in with a longsword or axe, and large shield.

A side note for the Irish. As a united people, the 'kingdom' of Ireland was actually called 'the Irish Empire', as it was several kingdoms under a single ruler. Brian Boroime actually held the title of 'Scotum Imperator', in Papal records, as he was 'Emperor of the Irish', and in some places of Ireland (like where I'm from), he's referred to in English, not as King Brian, but as Emperor Brian. However, either way, in Irish, he's 'Ard Ri', 'High King'

King Yngvar

11-09-2004, 22:00

Great idea for a mod. Just thought I'd mention, Magyars should be pretty much cavalry only. They certainly didn't use slavic troops that's for sure! They were basicly like Eastern horsemen, excellent horse archers and some heavy cav, really hard bastards.

Are you 100% sure? So those Slavs that lived within their borders did not fight in their army at all? It seems unlikely that they did not employ any infantry, even the Mongols employed infantry. But of course, I wish their army to have weak infantry and great cavalry. Those who like to play as Parthians in RTW will like to play as Hungarians here.

King Yngvar were are you from? Just wonder since you to this vikingmod...

Norway

And the scandinavian units... will the different vikingfactions have unique units apart from each other?

I do not see a point in that. If this was for the later period after the Viking Age, I might have concidered that. But the Scandinavians was so similar in the Viking Age you can say they were all the same people, just divided by borders.

Also, they made extensive use of "Allt farchogion" (Hill Horsemen), who were a swift cavalry unit that used bows from horseback, and then road in with a longsword or axe, and large shield.

Horse archers for the Welsh, interresting...

The most professional were the soldiers of the high king. These included Moarcleigh (Bearer of the sword), who dressed in very elaborate chain, and used swords with the mark of the king on the pommel, and were his personal guards

The Scottish equilant of Hirdmen then...

I am also aware that in later periods, a Kern was simply an ordinary Irish warrior, and meant many types of troops, but in this period you've outlined, the Kern is just a peasant sent to fight.

Pherhaps like the "leidgangr" system in Norway then?

After their ritual, they were hired, and gathered their brethern to fight for the Irish. In battle, they exhibit the same qualities as a Nordic berserkr, a berserk rage, and wild, selfless behavior. They would cry 'For the Christ, Saint Finbar, and Eireann, I will take your head and eat your pagan soul' before battle. With such a cry, I'm sure you can see why I insist that they be tied to a religious structure.

Seems all natural, was thinking the line of just making churches of Christ for the Christian factions. But pherhaps national patron Saints can get their churches. Like "Curch of Saint Finbar" could be a structure necessary for Irish berserkers, "Temple of Odin" could be necessary for Nordic berserkers.

The professional Irish army also did not employ viking axemen, except as mercenaries,

Hmm... Pherhaps these mercenaries could be set to the Irish provinces then, at a fair price and upkeep cost.

make them a mercenary unit available in the north of Ireland, and Scotland

Thanks, I shall take them out of the unit list. Was actually just copying Viking Invasion there. About the kerns, what about making two different units, first a Kern with a spear and then a Kern with throwing javelins. The Kern Spearmen being light anti cavalry units while the Kern Skirmishers being, well skirmishers. About the Marcach horsemen, using the name Light Cavalry and making it the same for all Celts might be better concidering all these units have to be skinned. Using the same royal guard units for Celts might be preferable, concidering 25 factions are to be made. It's the reason I want Norway, Sweden and Denmark to use exactly the same units. However royal guard units will have the coat of arms of their respective faction, though they elsewhere look the same.

Also, bonnaght ARE spearmen in Ireland, the Irish spear was a throwing weapon as well as a defensive weapon

Maybe a "legionary ability" here then...

Also, on Dibhlann, they worked similarly to legionarres, they throw a javelin before their charge, which is precursored by their warcry "Bas! Bas! Bas ach Ifreann ru ta namhaid!" - "Death! Death! Death and Hell on the foe!"

Same ability as I plan the Scandinavian units to get...

Morale - Gaelic armies are historically reknowned for an insanely high level of morale and fearlessness during this period, instilled mainly due to the teachings of the Celtic rite of the Catholic Church. They still took heads, and saw death in battle as the greatest glory.

They will have the same main strength as Scandinavian units then. A clash between the two would be a long battle...

Irish and Scottish warriors, none of them at this time, wear kilts.

So when did they start using kilts? Magnus Barefoot (king of Norway who attempted conquering Ireland but fell in an ambush in Ulster) is said to have had bear legs, "like the Irish". I always thought he wore a kilt, but then again, that was between 1098 and 1103, 200 years after this mod shall start.

The Welsh, you have pretty well. They did employ a large number of archers, light archers, as well as "Ddynion chan bwâu", 'Men of Bows', excellently trained longbowmen, as well as shortswordsmen

Would like to use the same shortswordsmen for Welsh and Irish. Did they both use shields? Then maybe just name them Celtic Swordsmen and give them a short sword and a wooden shield...

Ireland

Kern Spearmen
Skirmisher Kerns
Raighhangh Berserkers
Bonnaght Spearmen
Iobnaght Axemen
Celtic Swordsmen
Dibhlann Swordsmen
Celtic Guard (Infantry)
Light Cavalry
Hobilars

Scotland

Bollock Knifemen
Pict Levies
Light Archers
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Celtic Swordsmen
Batareicht Swordsmen
Sinoach Warriors
Claymore Warriors
Celtic Guard (infantry)
Light Cavalry

Wales

Peasants
Light Archers
Longbowmen
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Axemen
Skirmishers
Celtic Swordsmen
Briton Swordsmen
Light Cavalry
Hill Horsemen (missiled)
Celtic Guard (infantry)

Meneldil

11-09-2004, 22:18

Well, if you need some help, I think I can work on the mapping. I have some knowledge about russians, frankish and possibly english provinces.

Ranika

11-09-2004, 23:31

The Welsh did have a similar shortsword unit, so using the same wouldn't be bad, but the Irish ones did not use shields too often in this period, early medieval Irish armies used shields more extensively. These swordsman should be a very early unit, with very little armor, and if they have shields, rather poor ones, so little shield defense.

I've no problem with two Kern units, that sounds fine to me, but if you can get a modeller on board for the project, you could model it all into one unit. That would save space, by removing one unit, since you can only have 300 units total.

As for the bare legs remark, that is proper. You see, the leine, the shirt worn by Irish and Scots (and the Manx, too), comes only to the knee. So, the legs are generally bare. Only professional soldiers, in combat, wore trews (pants). On a statue, a leine looks like a kilt, it comes down about the same length, but kilts were not used until well into the late middle ages/early renaissance. In day-to-day wear, the average citizen, and even most of the arras, wore a leine, so their legs would be bare.

As for using the same Royal Guard, then go with Ridire. The Scots and Irish both used them, and the Welsh had an identical class of bodyguards, as did the pre-Nordic Manx and the pre-Saxon Corns. Ridire itself is the Saxon name that was used for all of them, they all had unique names though, but are commonly recognized as Ridire.

And remember, the Irish flag is blue, not green, with a yellow Irish harp, and the Scots had just adopted St. Andrew's Cross for their flag (white criss-cross on a blue field) around 890. The flag of Leinster, and Dublin, for that matter, for a while anyway, was identical to the Irish flag, except the field was green.

Good then, that battles with the Scandinavians will be long, historically accurate, that. Brian Boroime used to say, when campaigning against the vikings and their Leinstermen allies; "The problem with the Danes is that they don't want to leave, and will fight until they're all dead. Their problem is that we'll do the same." Gaels, Scottish and Irish, were fiercely nationalistic, even though real nationalism wouldn't be typified until the French revolution, but this was really similar, and generally very religious. It'll be fun to see them fight with the Nordic invaders (Danes, in Ireland, most people assume the invaders there were from Hordaland and such, but the truth is, they were mainly Danes, and sometimes a few Jutes, however, the Irish called ALL Nords Danes, except those from Hordaland and Iceland, who were called Garedhgolth, Infernal Goths).

On Welsh horse archers, I was a bit surprised, initially, too, as they were a type of skilled horse archer, not unlike the steppe people utilized, and likely comparable in their skill. But, they are a footnote in history, thus often overlooked, because they were overshadowed, easily, by the skill and science of Welsh longbows. However, they would give a unique dimension, I think, to a Welsh faction in the British isles. And while the Welsh would share some units with the Irish/Scots, be careful to not make them too similar, as the Welsh, being of Brythonic extraction, not Goedelic, were quite different in many aspects, including militarily. However, all did have lightly armored swordsman on a clan level, for raiding, that were sometimes employed to fight larger enemies. If possible, try and divide Wales into a north half (Morganwydd) and a south half (Gwynydd), so the Welsh have more than one province. They won't be big, but, then, many of the original provinces for Rome weren't huge (Palma). The cities could be at Dinas Powys or Caernoforn, and Dyfydd or Cardiff in the south.

Ranika

11-10-2004, 00:59

I'd also make Claymore Warriors both Irish and Scottish. While the Irish ones were actually called Lewcach, and used a bit larger of a sword, they served the same purpose in battle and were very similar, as well as the claymore being an outgrowth of the Irish lewing sword. However, at the time, keep in mind that the claymore did not yet have the 'sloping' v-guard and quillons, it had a straight guard. The lewing sword had a sloping v-guard, but the tip was also rounded (it was so long that stabbing was simply never done with it). The handle of a lewing sword is also much longer (actually, it's so long that the animations for the Falxmen could probably be used, as they grip their falx with their hands so far apart). It has a 'four-hand grip', as the martial art for using the lewing sword was complicated with many types of slashes that required the different possible grips. The claymore was more simplified, with a shorter grip, and utilized a mixture of Germanic and Irish two-handed sword styles, using only a single type of grip.

Ranika

11-10-2004, 05:18

Also, to note, while the Irish did use Sinoach Warriors (though far more rarely than Scots), who themselves used bows, they weren't really 'archers' in the classic sense, so I stand by my statements on the lack of Irish archers (the Irish hired merc archers from Wales and Mann, usually). They were a horde of men trained to hide, and get themselves close to nobility or a small unit, pepper them with arrows, and then engage in a melee. They were more akin to battlefield assassins, not intended to back up any other unit or assist in the main battle, but rather, to disrupt the command of the the opposing side. It's a pity a unit can't have an ability allowing it to be placed outside of the region that a faction can place units in, as that could be used to represent the forward scout and disrupt status of the Sinoach Warriors, but that's a pipe dream. In any event, their implementation, if used, should be as a small unit, of about 12-20 men, in a 'horde' formation, who can hide anywhere.

However, I'd not give them to the Irish, as they didn't use them nearly as often.

Ranika

11-10-2004, 10:34

I have forgotten to ask, have you decided upon just how large, for sure, you wish the map to be? How far east/how far south? It'd give me a better idea of how to recommend placement of mercenaries, like gallowglass, if I knew the general size of the potential areas. The gallowglass, for example, in a map with at least four Irish provinces, and a few in Scotland, would make more sense to have them as mercenaries only in the north of those countries, were they were most often employed. But, if smaller, then having them placed in all of the countries would probably be better.

Leet Eriksson

11-10-2004, 11:45

I would like to contribute to this mod a little bit, if you wouldn't mind.

Cordoba had control of Tangiers and were at war with the Zenata tribe at that time, also the spanish factions are united here (they weren't), if i recall correctly, Crodoba had several trade treaties with leon (a state north of Lisbon) i can't recall the names of the other 2 states but they were at peace.

Also the unit lists for Fatimids, Cordoba and Abassids are pretty bland, i'll just do renames for them if you wouldn't mind.

Speiz_Bankurt

11-10-2004, 12:22

King Yngvar! Yes I am very sure, Magyars would not have used Slavic warriors. When the Magyars invaded present day Hungary, Slavic presence was minimal, as far as I remember only one or two very small settlements have been found on the very far north west part of the country by archeologists. The Moldavians (who were Slavic) claimed the land as part of their territory, but they did not populate the area. Most of the rest of the country was populated by Avars, whose settlements and cemetaries have been found everywhere, all over the place. I think there were some turkic bulgarians in the eastern part of the country too. All these people would have been culturally similar (perhaps even related)to the Magyars, perhaps they joined them and later on were assimilated.
If you're thinking about game balance and want an infantry unit for this faction you could invent some Avar unit. They probably would have had a spear or an axe unit, but once again they were a horse culture too! But for the Magyars I would go with cav only, they simply did not fight on foot. The whole horse archery thing worked out beautifully for them until they got beaten at Leichfield by the Germans.

legend

11-10-2004, 17:19

mayby some pics of the irish warriors would help the skinners
and id like 2 see some irish warriors me being a O'Brien (note the irish spelling ~;) )

Ranika

11-10-2004, 17:26

Irish spelling? O'Brien is an Anglicized version of the name. The true Irish spelling is Ui Boroime, or the later Ui Brean. O' is always the Anglicized version. Also, have no pictures I can find online, most of my knowledge of Irish, Scottish, and Welsh soldiers come from dark age period chronicles, mainly Irish monks, who were rather painstaking in their notations on the various soldiers.

legend

11-10-2004, 17:48

i meant that it wasnt o'brian but o'brien u wont find the first as often as the second in ierland its more american (or somthing)

The_Doctor

11-10-2004, 18:15

After my saxon invasion mod died within hours of being started, King Yngvar suggested that I help with this mod. So here I am. ~:)

I have some ideas for the mod.

1. The map ,in my opinion, is far to big for a Viking age mod. I know the Vikings raided in the mediterran a few times, but they didn't conquer anything. If you include the spanish, muslim countries, the holy roman empire etc, you will end up with countries that are more powerful and important than the Vikings. I think the map should include the northern part of europe, Iceland, Greenland, the baltic states and parts of russia. Maybe even Vinland (modern day Newfoundland)

2. The Vangrian Guard could be represented by a +1 experience building for some of the Viking factions e.g Novgorod, kiev.

3. I think the senate has to be on the map or the game will not work, if this is the case it could be put in Vinland, so it does not influence the game too much.

I know how to make new maps coding-wise, but the drawing bit would result in my computer going out of my window and being smashed into a billion pieces. I tried to make a map of Britain and Ireland and it nearly killed me, it just looked so wrong and messed up. I can change a map, but not start one

I am going to try to make some new units and look into other parts of the game. So I should be useful soon. ~:)

King Yngvar

11-10-2004, 18:25

And remember, the Irish flag is blue, not green, with a yellow Irish harp, and the Scots had just adopted St. Andrew's Cross for their flag (white criss-cross on a blue field) around 890. The flag of Leinster, and Dublin, for that matter, for a while anyway, was identical to the Irish flag, except the field was green.

Interresting. Though Frankish Kingdom and Scotland will both be blue. Don't want too much of the same color, might need to use the Leinster flag there.

Good then, that battles with the Scandinavians will be long, historically accurate, that. Brian Boroime used to say, when campaigning against the vikings and their Leinstermen allies; "The problem with the Danes is that they don't want to leave, and will fight until they're all dead. Their problem is that we'll do the same." Gaels, Scottish and Irish, were fiercely nationalistic, even though real nationalism wouldn't be typified until the French revolution, but this was really similar, and generally very religious. It'll be fun to see them fight with the Nordic invaders (Danes, in Ireland, most people assume the invaders there were from Hordaland and such, but the truth is, they were mainly Danes, and sometimes a few Jutes, however, the Irish called ALL Nords Danes, except those from Hordaland and Iceland, who were called Garedhgolth, Infernal Goths).

Actually, while danes was used by English and normannes (spelling?) was used by French, the Irish called them men of lochlann. White lochlann and black lochlann was appearantly their names from Norway and Denmark. White lochlann being Norway. Olaf the White was kalled so because he was from Norway. I believe it had to do with the colour on the shields (might be on their cloaks). The first "Dublin king", Thorgest (or Turgeis as the Irish called him), was also from Norway. So the Dublin line of kings was Norwegian. And most of the settlers were Norwegians as well. In Normandy the case is pherhaps a little different, there the ruler was Norwegian while most of his followers was probably Danes.

However, I'd not give them to the Irish, as they didn't use them nearly as often.

In addition to being a Scottish unit, sinoach could be a mercenary unit. Thank you.

Hmm, Ranika, do you know of any good pictures we could use as a model for the skinning of those Irish units?

I have forgotten to ask, have you decided upon just how large, for sure, you wish the map to be? How far east/how far south? It'd give me a better idea of how to recommend placement of mercenaries, like gallowglass, if I knew the general size of the potential areas. The gallowglass, for example, in a map with at least four Irish provinces, and a few in Scotland, would make more sense to have them as mercenaries only in the north of those countries, were they were most often employed. But, if smaller, then having them placed in all of the countries would probably be better.

I was thinking about 3 provinces in Ireland (one held by Dublin-York) and 3 in Scotland (one held by Norway). England will have 4 (maybe 5) and Wales 1 (maybe 2).
This may be changed though, as this is just the beginning phase of the mod.

On Welsh horse archers, I was a bit surprised, initially, too, as they were a type of skilled horse archer, not unlike the steppe people utilized, and likely comparable in their skill. But, they are a footnote in history, thus often overlooked, because they were overshadowed, easily, by the skill and science of Welsh longbows. However, they would give a unique dimension, I think, to a Welsh faction in the British isles.

Sounds like they will be a tough nut to crack for Irishmen and Vikings ~:cool:

I've no problem with two Kern units, that sounds fine to me, but if you can get a modeller on board for the project, you could model it all into one unit. That would save space, by removing one unit, since you can only have 300 units total.

Probably the smartest, making kerns only skirmisher (don't want overpowered peasants) may be the smartest. The bonnaghts will get both throwing and normal spear.

As for the bare legs remark, that is proper. You see, the leine, the shirt worn by Irish and Scots (and the Manx, too), comes only to the knee. So, the legs are generally bare. Only professional soldiers, in combat, wore trews (pants). On a statue, a leine looks like a kilt, it comes down about the same length, but kilts were not used until well into the late middle ages/early renaissance. In day-to-day wear, the average citizen, and even most of the arras, wore a leine, so their legs would be bare.

As for using the same Royal Guard, then go with Ridire. The Scots and Irish both used them, and the Welsh had an identical class of bodyguards, as did the pre-Nordic Manx and the pre-Saxon Corns. Ridire itself is the Saxon name that was used for all of them, they all had unique names though, but are commonly recognized as Ridire.

Hmm, so our king wore poor-man clothing? ~;)

Ridire it is.

King Yngvar! Yes I am very sure, Magyars would not have used Slavic warriors. When the Magyars invaded present day Hungary, Slavic presence was minimal, as far as I remember only one or two very small settlements have been found on the very far north west part of the country by archeologists. The Moldavians (who were Slavic) claimed the land as part of their territory, but they did not populate the area. Most of the rest of the country was populated by Avars, whose settlements and cemetaries have been found everywhere, all over the place. I think there were some turkic bulgarians in the eastern part of the country too. All these people would have been culturally similar (perhaps even related)to the Magyars, perhaps they joined them and later on were assimilated.
If you're thinking about game balance and want an infantry unit for this faction you could invent some Avar unit. They probably would have had a spear or an axe unit, but once again they were a horse culture too! But for the Magyars I would go with cav only, they simply did not fight on foot. The whole horse archery thing worked out beautifully for them until they got beaten at Leichfield by the Germans.

They need some infantry, will limit it to maybe a spear unit, axe/sword unit and maybe an archer. Or we could just overpower their cavalry...

I would like to contribute to this mod a little bit, if you wouldn't mind.

Cordoba had control of Tangiers and were at war with the Zenata tribe at that time, also the spanish factions are united here (they weren't), if i recall correctly, Crodoba had several trade treaties with leon (a state north of Lisbon) i can't recall the names of the other 2 states but they were at peace.

Also the unit lists for Fatimids, Cordoba and Abassids are pretty bland, i'll just do renames for them if you wouldn't mind.

Asturia, Galicia and Pamplona, the latter being Navarrans (basques). However I do not wish such small provinces to be made, Asturia should be one faction and they will probably have one or two provinces. About the Morocco area, it was held by the Idrisid dynasty at that time. These were so insignificent that I do not even see a point of having them in this mod. The Idrisids controlled parts of modern day Morocco and parts of Algiers. At various occations, 920-925, 927-937 and 974-987, their land was occupied by Fatimids. Their "kingdom" fell in 974. Leaving the area as rebel land is just as good.

I know that the unit names for Muslim factions are silly and probably they are all copied from other games. My knowledge of Muslim history is pretty much "overall", I know about the dynasties who ruled when and where, the name of some rulers, and some of their political history. Not much detail. I would appreciate if you would like to rename them ~:)

Well, if you need some help, I think I can work on the mapping. I have some knowledge about russians, frankish and possibly english provinces.

Sounds good, if you would like to be our mapmaker. See the map, this is the idea we will base it on.

Anyone who wish to contact me outside the forum: yngvarv@hotmail.com.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/911.jpg

Meneldil

11-10-2004, 19:18

I have started to work on the map, mostly changing or adding provinces and settlements. I'll post some screens later if I manage to correct all the errors.

As for the Senate, I was thinking about putting him as the Papal States, and make both Frankish Empire roman-like factions. I think that's the best way to deal with this problem, as it is somewhat accurate.

Leet Eriksson

11-10-2004, 20:25

Thanks ~:) , here is the renamed list, i will not list stats as i realise it would be very unbalanced ~;p you do the stats as you see fit.

This is before it was editied :-

Abbasid Caliphate

Peasants
Desert Bowmen
Syrian Archers
Crossbowmen -
Spearmen
Saracen Infantry
Nubian Spearmen -
Skirmishers
Beduin Camels -
Saracen Cavalry
Horse Archers
Ghulam Cavalry
Royal Cavalry

This is After the Edition :-

Falahin - peasants ~;p
Arab Warband - (instead of Saracen infantry and Skirmishers) (skirmishers, good attack, armed with javelins, light chain armour)
Arab Cavalry - (instead of Saracen Cavalry) (light cavalry, javalin armed/light lances)
Askari - Spearmen (should be veterans, armoured)
Ghulam Cavalry - (heavy cavalry,armoured, good charge)
Royal Ghulam - (better version for royality only)
Turkoman Cavalry - (Instead of horse archers) (horse archer that can skirmish, decent armour)
Arab Longbows - (instead of Desert Archers) (good shooting skill)
Syrian Archers - (good shooting skill, can skirmish)

Units with "-" in the quote remain unchanged.

Actually to make your task easier King Yngvar the abassid units could also be used by the fatimids and cordobans to some extent (cordobans also had spanish, and visigoth recruits, Visigoth are mainly cavalry), Turkic units are used by abassids mostly, so they don't apply for cordobans and fatimids.

Also i hope no one from the Medieval mods mind if i used the same unit names here ~;p. i'll try to refine the lists some more, but as for now the Abassids are done, i'll try to modify the fatimids and Cordobans a bit in a later post, my final post will probably have descriptions for these units.

Meneldil

11-10-2004, 22:55

Here's a screenshot of some new provinces in the north of france

http://www.image-dump.com/view.php?m=1&x=22149

I made that fairly easily, though an annoying bug made me to restart everything (I firstly had all the whole France and northen Spain remade).

Adding provinces seems not that hard, the main problem will IMO adding territories in the north. I haven't tried to do that today, but I'll have a look at it tomorrow, if possible

Ranika

11-11-2004, 01:33

Well, the blue of the flag of Ireland should actually be more pale. While it is often now depicted as dark blue, it's much lighter than the Scottish flag is. And Brian DID call them Danes, it appears in his writings. The general Irish names used for the vikings were more slang than they were a designation of nationalities. On Irish maps, it's important to note that all of Scandinavia is called Doahnbhuil, Daneland. While the Irish knew of multiple kingdoms there, all of them, in the 'upper crust' of educated Irish society, were called Danes (Doahn in the old Irish of the west of Connacht). Subsequently, the names applied to different Scandinavians are attributable, largely, to the Leinstermen, who were often working with the vikings. Most of the Irish simply weren't aware there any differences, and in Connacht and Munster especially, the general slang term for all Scandinavians was Bohrcach, Road Men, though, I honestly don't know WHY they were called Road Men.

Of the leine, it's not poor man's clothing. Kings and the like wore it too, but they also had the option open to robes and the like. Leine, to the contrary of being a poor man's clothing, could be quite rich in appearance, with many ornaments sewn on, or elaborate designs or weaves. The leine was casual clothing for most Irish nobility, while robes and cloaks were more for ceremonies or formal occassions, and even then, many would forego such clothing in favor of the leine, which was considered more comfortable much of the time. Note that I mention that the arras/aires wore them too. Aires are Irish nobility.

As for bonnaghts, they should only have one spear to throw, and then use their melee spear. Kerns should have a spear for melee, but no anti-cavalry bonus, I think, as it was generally a short spear meant to engage infantry with. Well, 'infantry', kerns were an anti-levymen force, really.

Addendum: I was reading, and the name 'bohrcach trodai' shows up, denoting viking mercenaries. These mercenaries were largely fairly well equipped warriors, with shields, swords, spears, or axes, and high quality shields. In all cases but the axes, they appear to have provided their own equipment. I say not for the axes, because their are letters written asking for axes to be supplied for a group of bohrcach trodai, as the ri of the Thomond tribe wanted some axemen for fighting the chainmaille heavy clan force of the Mac Nois, and he already had as many axemen as he could get from the clan, without resorting to untrained levies, which wouldn't be any good at all against the well-trained force of the Mac Nois.

Ranika

11-11-2004, 11:17

Some other mercenaries possible for northern Britain and Ireland:

Gael Gaedhil Buanna, while generally brigands and thieves, during wartime, they were often paid to fight, and Brian Boroime, especially, used them. He would actually raise entire forces of Gael Gaedhil and send them raiding parts of modern England and Scotland, just to get rid of them, until they were slaughtered in massive numbers at the Battle of Clontarf (Brian's intention for their presence, the chance to get them killed). Gael Gaedhil are of Gaelic and Nordic blood, and generally adopted fighting techniques from both. They used, often, axes or swords, a javelin, a leather shirt (though just as often, they would be totally unarmored, sometimes bare chested and wearing trews) and solid wood shield (often taken or bought from vikings), usually provided for them, and accompanied this equipment with whatever other armor or weapons they may have 'cannabalized' from their raiding and thieving. Both the Gaels and the vikings HATED Gael Gaedhil, and made no secret of it, but their quality combat skills made them useful for softening up heavier infantry formations. The Gael Gaedhil were used all over Ireland, and in Alba and the Hebrides, as well, though they showed up their much more rarely. (Buanna is simply a Gaelic word meaning a mercenary, and is thus applied to Gael Gaedhil in this case, to differentiate them from the normal 'thief' Gael Gaedhil).

Gallowglass were already discussed. I don't object to their presence, though they'd not be mentioned by name until the mid 1200s. However, there are some reports of mercenaries from the Hebrides, and the descriptions are similar. They used chainmaille, an axe on a long pole, and wore an iron helmet, often of Norman make. They were present in the north of Ireland all over north Scotland, on the Isle of Mann, and along the west English and Welsh coasts. Because of the earlier reports of similar warriors, by Donall Ui Arran.

Gorddgwas/Ordgwas are Welsh or Cornish (with the respective spellings) mercenary soldiers who used warhammers. These hammers were a heavy head on a two foot grip, with a large shield. They were used throughout Wales, Cornwall, and much of Great Britain, as well as south-east Ireland, and the south-west shores of modern day Scotland. They dressed in a saffron tunic, with pants, and leather shoes, and wore a leather cap. If used, this unit should have the 'ap' (armor piercing) trait for their attack, as their hammer had a flat head, with a pick side, so as to puncture various types of armor. While it may seem like a unit to give to the Welsh as buildable, the notable part of their name is 'gwas', which is a 'military servant', implying some one paid to fight, not trained into the army.

Lendan is the word for 'Concubine' (and also the basis of the Irish word leannán, meaning 'sweetheart'). Soailtaght Lendan Ysgien were Manx male, concubine 'knife' fighters (Soailtaght is 'an effeminate male', Ysgien is the Welsh 'knife'). However, they were niether, generally, assumed to be effeminate, nor did they fight with knives, but instead with shortswords, and in groups of twelve. They were bought, being technically slaves, and were intended for 'accompaniement' for warriors who'd be spending a long time on campaign (and thus away from women, and they served the additional bonus of being efficient ambushers). Like most dark age 'specialized' soldiers, these are a footnote, but, for more obvious reasons. The 'male concubine soldier' isn't exactly something you'd brag about. They're mentioned by Saint Deiniol, a Welsh saint who voiced only slight disapproval of them, saying that while he did not fully approve, he hoped they would at least help stem constant rape that would occur often when an army sacked a town or city, much like Thomas Aquinas's arguments in the favor of legalized prostitution, to stem the tide of domestic sexual abuses in France. Deiniol's main complaint, aside from their...ancillary purposes (yes, that'll do nicely), is that they were slaves. He describes them as using shortswords, and wearing red cloaks. Their availability would be in, likely, the Celtic areas of Britain, as they were more acceptable there, usually, than in the Roman rite areas of the church.

Manx Fer Cliwe were Manx warriors. While very rare to be hired by outside armies, the Manx sometimes did hire themselves to eastern Irish armies, as well as to western British armies. Fer Cliwe is literally 'man sword', but is translated to English as 'sword bearer', or 'swordsmen'. The Manx swordsmen were fairly unique, they were of Nordo-Gaelic extraction, and used a combination of viking, Gaelic, and Welsh arms and armor. Their principle weapon was a viking sword, and they wore thick leather brigadines with metal studs on them (also a viking introduction, I think). They used oval shields of a Welsh design, probably originally intended to be used from horseback.

Saighdearbuanna are Welsh mercenary archers in Ireland and Scotland. Isn't much to be said about them, really. They dressed in light tunics and pants, with leather shoes, and used Welsh shortbows. If it's possible to have light archers as a buildable unit, and as mercenaries, that'd be the most workable. These were the Irish mercenary archers I believe I mentioned briefly.

A minor change, Iobnaght is the name given in Munster, but much more common to Irish axemen is tuagachnaght.

King Yngvar

11-12-2004, 01:17

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=39284&page=1&pp=30 Meneldil, it seems there is a possibility to expand the map, the guys over at "Europa Barbarorum" is attempting this. Thank you for starting the work on the campaign map, I could unfortunately not connect to the link you posted. Would you like to be our mapmaker then? ~:)

After my saxon invasion mod died within hours of being started, King Yngvar suggested that I help with this mod. So here I am.

I have some ideas for the mod.

1. The map ,in my opinion, is far to big for a Viking age mod. I know the Vikings raided in the mediterran a few times, but they didn't conquer anything. If you include the spanish, muslim countries, the holy roman empire etc, you will end up with countries that are more powerful and important than the Vikings. I think the map should include the northern part of europe, Iceland, Greenland, the baltic states and parts of russia. Maybe even Vinland (modern day Newfoundland)

2. The Vangrian Guard could be represented by a +1 experience building for some of the Viking factions e.g Novgorod, kiev.

3. I think the senate has to be on the map or the game will not work, if this is the case it could be put in Vinland, so it does not influence the game too much.

I know how to make new maps coding-wise, but the drawing bit would result in my computer going out of my window and being smashed into a billion pieces. I tried to make a map of Britain and Ireland and it nearly killed me, it just looked so wrong and messed up. I can change a map, but not start one

I am going to try to make some new units and look into other parts of the game. So I should be useful soon.

Sorry I overlooked you post yesterday as I was posting at the same time. If you are good at making units. I would like to have you on the team. There is another guy as well that may be into unit making, I am still not sure. But the more people the better. About the Vikings not becoming important, well the solution to that is to make them powerful. What would be essential for a Viking kingdom to maintain strength would be to unite the Scandinavian kingdoms into one. Norway's starting strength compared to the others would be amount of provinces, Denmark's would be wealth of provinces, while Sweden's would be that they can easily expand into un-owned territory to the east (Finland and the Baltics). About the Senate, really? Well, maybe we could make a far gone island for them (in the corner somewhere).

And Brian DID call them Danes, it appears in his writings.

He called them Danes, but that did not mean they were from Denmark. It was a term used on everyone who spoke "danish tongue" (Old-Norse).

As for bonnaghts, they should only have one spear to throw, and then use their melee spear. Kerns should have a spear for melee, but no anti-cavalry bonus, I think, as it was generally a short spear meant to engage infantry with. Well, 'infantry', kerns were an anti-levymen force, really.

Alright, I may have misunderstood it them. Kerns can be skirmishers, just that they have a short spear instead of dagger to fight with in melee.

Meneldil, I shall make a province idea and name the provinces now...

Ranika

11-12-2004, 01:36

The Scottish knifemen would be more like skirmishers, identical really. They threw four or five short javelins before drawing a bollock knife to melee with.

King Yngvar

11-12-2004, 01:48

Heh, forget what I said about placing the Senate in some distant corner, the papacy is the senate and gives "senate missions" to catholic kingdoms. You can change the name right?

King Yngvar

11-12-2004, 02:13

Abbasid Caliphate

Falahin - (muslim peasants, maybe the rest of the Muslims shall use the same then)
Arab Warband - (instead of Saracen infantry and Skirmishers) (skirmishers, good attack, armed with javelins, light chain armour)
Arab Cavalry - (instead of Saracen Cavalry) (light cavalry, javalin armed/light lances)
Nubian Spearmen (slightly better than spearmen)
Askari Spearmen (should be veterans, armoured)
Bedouin Camels
Ghulam Cavalry - (heavy cavalry,armoured, good charge)
Royal Ghulam - (better version for royality only)
Horse Archers (keep this, standard "eastern" horse archers, turkoman will be a better version)
Turkoman Cavalry - (Instead of horse archers) (horse archer that can skirmish, decent armour)
Crossbowmen
Arab Longbows - (instead of Desert Archers) (good shooting skill)
Syrian Archers - (good shooting skill, can skirmish)

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

The Scottish knifemen would be more like skirmishers, identical really. They threw four or five short javelins before drawing a bollock knife to melee with.

Umm, what about making a "Celtic Peasant" for them all, that throw spears and then draw up knives?

NEW MAP

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/VikingMod911idea2.bmp

The idea with those green provinces in Finland, you might be wondering about them. But I tought that the load of rebel provinces in the east would make it simple for the Swedes and Kijevans, so adding a competitor in the Baltic region would be nice. It is not necessary, just another idea...

Amount of provinces: 160

I have cut down on provinces some places. Rhodes is no longer a province for example, Sicilia will be two instead of three and Tunisia will also just be one province. To strengthen the Scandinavians I think there should be an extra province in Sweden, two Denmark and two in Norway. Sweden gets one of the extra province in Denmark, Sudr-Jylland (town - Hedeby) because Swedes controlled that point at the time this game starts. Sweden now has 6, Norway has 7 and Denmark 3 provinces. So Denmark will get one more - Halland. They can be strengthen by making the provinces richer. And they will have an easy time taking Hedeby from the Swedes, and Sudr-Jylland should be a rich province.

Ranika

11-12-2004, 02:21

That would work (a Celtic peasant), and save space. While not as common, some Irish kerns DID use knives (particularly in Munster, where there was more iron to go around for the knives). I'm assuming the Dublin-York vikings possess Leinster? The map isn't showing up for me. What are the British and Irish provinces? Also, the Welsh would utilize more...peasant-like peasants, unarmed or poorly armed peasant throngs, and should just have 'regular' peasants. In such a case, the Irish/Scots should have 'Gaelic Peasants', I think.

Total, there can be around 200 provinces, so a pretty complex map can be made, I believe, compared to the original Rome's map, which had a bit overm 100 provinces?

King Yngvar

11-12-2004, 02:31

The reason the map did not show up is that I edited it, I realised that Sweden needed control of Hedeby. I wish the Irish to hold Munster, Connaght and Ulster/Ui Neill. If 200 provinces can be made, great. But of course we need to make them all and if one guy alone is going to make them it will take alot of work. But if we get more people on board, sure we can do 200 provinces ~:)

King Yngvar

11-12-2004, 02:38

~Britannia~
England: Wessex, Cornwall and Midlands

Dublin-York: Dublin, Northumberland and East Anglia

Ireland: Munster, Connaght and Ulster

Wales: Dyfed and Gwynedd(name?)

Scotland: Lowlands, Highlands and The Grampians

~Scandinavia~
Norway: Viken, Agdir, Oppland, Hordaland, Trønderlag, Hålogaland and Orkney

Sweden: Svitjod, Gautaland, Vermland, Uppland, Gotland and Sudr-Jylland

Denmark: Sjælland, Skåne, Halland and Nord-Jylland

Rebel provinces in Scandinavia: Jamtland and Norrland

~Germania~
German Kingdom: Saxland, Frisland, Lotharingia, Franconia, Thuringia, Swabia, Bavaria and Carinthia

Vendland: Vendland and Veletia

Rebel provinces near Germany: Moravia, Sorbland and Ostmark

~Gallia~
Frankish Kingdom
East-Francia, West-Francia, Flanders, Burgundy, West-Aquitaine, East-Aquitaine, Toulouse, Gothia and County of Barcelona (in Iberia)

Normandy
Normandie and East-Britanny

Rebel provinces in France: Britanny, Upper Burgundy and Lower Burgundy

~Iberia~
Asturia: Asturias and Galicia

Cordoba: Toledo, Lusitania, Granada, Cordoba, Valencia and Zaragosa

Rebel provinces in Iberia: Pamplona

~Italia~
Italy: Savoy, Lombardy, Venetia, Tuscany and Spoleto

Papacy: Papal State (Roma)

Rebel provinces in Italia: Benevento

~Balkans~
Bulgaria:

Magyars:
NEED PROVINCE NAMES

Except,

Rebel Provinces in Balkans: Dalmatia, Croatia and Rashka

~Balticum~
Finnish Tribes: Finland, Kainu, Häme, Bjarmaland and Karjala

Rebel provinces in Balticum: Estland, Livland and Lithuania

~Russia~
Gardariki: Holmgard, Aldgjuborg, Jordlav, Polotsk, Gnezdovo, Kijev/Kjönugard and Khazar March

Khazar Khanate: Crimea, Chersonia, Western-Khazaria, Eastern-Khazaria and Avaria

Rebel Provinces: Armenia, Georgia, Pechnegia, Volga Bulgharia, Murom, Mordivia, Northern Lands(eh, can't find name on that last one)

~Byzantia~
Byzantine Empire:
(in Italy) Thane of Sicily, Longibardia
(in Greece) Peloponese, Hellas, Macedonia, Nicopolis, Thrace and Crete
(in Asia Minor) Optimaton, Thracesia, Anatolia, Seleucia, Trebizbond, Chaldea and Kypros

~The Caliphate~
Abbasid Caliphate: NEED NAMES HERE

~North Africa~
Fatimid Caliphate: Tunisia, South Sicilia, North Sicilia, Libya, Cyrenaica (need names on the far western one and the inland eastern one)

Rebel provinces in North Africa: Tangiers and Sahara

~Mediterraneum~
Rebel provinces in Mediterraneum: Balearic Isles and Sardinia

~Poland and surroundings~
Poland:

Rebel provinces near Poland:

NEED NAMES HERE

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
More province names coming up later. (City names not included, some of these province names are actually city names. Suggestions are welcomed.)

Ranika

11-12-2004, 02:46

Those all sound good to me, except Ui Neill was actually only part of Ulster, the name of Ulster, in Irish, is Ulaid. Ui Neill is a tribal sub-kingdom that controlled Ulster, and for a long time, the line of the high kings was drawn from them. However, Brian, who was a Dal Cais, moved the capitol from Tara to his citadel at Cashel in north Munster, and the line of the kings changed significantly.

King Yngvar

11-12-2004, 03:00

Tara was the seat of the high-kings right? Read something interresting a while ago, the first Nordic king that controlled Dublin, Thorgest, is supposed to have captured Tara and declared himself high-king. He was killed in Ulster and thrown into a lake.

Ranika

11-12-2004, 03:15

It was the seat of high kings until 986 AD, when Cashel in Munster became the new seat, until 1093 AD, when the seat was restored at Tara, but only until 1097, when it was moved to Armagh briefly, and then back to Cashel in 1102 AD.

Tara was the more steady seat of the high kings before the 900s, when the only time it moved was to Armagh for about 30 years, somewhere within 530-580, probably around 540-570 AD.

In 1174 AD, it was moved again, BACK to Tara, where it'd remain, though the following year, Henry II of England would call himself Lord of Ireland (which was ignored, largely, by the western counties, and southernmost counties of Leinster).

Edit; In 986, forgot to mention, Brian was not yet actually high king, when he 'moved' the capitol from Tara to Cashel, as he was not technically king of Ireland, he was the kingdom of Munster and Connacht, and DECLARED he was king of Ireland, but there was still resistance from the Ulstermen. Brian would not officially be high king until 1002, after he takes the crown of Ulster, and unites Ireland except for Dublin and the northern counties of Leinster (but the southern Laigin tribes had sworn fealty to Brian, but would betray him at Clontarf in 1014). After the battle of Clontarf, which Brian died in, his former rival, the former king of Ulster, was already appointed to sucede Brian. Máel Sechnaill macDomnaill O'Néill, retook the throne of Ulster, and was high king of a truly united Ireland. He kept the technical seat at Cashel out of respect for Brian, and it remained there until Domnall macArdgar O'Lochlainn O'Néill became king in 1090, where he began the process of moving the seat back to Tara, accomplished in 1093, then to Armagh in 1097, but then back to Cashel in 1102, because of a request from one of his cousins who was descended from Brian. In 1174, it was returned to Tara by high king Ruaidrí macToirrdelbaig, in a deal with Henry II of England, who then declared himself lord of Ireland. Here, the line of high kings effectively ends, at Tara, later high kings established themselves away from Tara, in fear of a capture by English. The only Irish high king after Ruadri to have his capitol at Tara was Brian Catha an Duin, as English power had wained in Ireland when he came to power. There was a Scottish-born high king, Edward de Bruce, who would establish himself there, as well, but after the debacle with Henry II, the state of the high kingship, and the seat of power, was generally at whatever fortress or citadel the current high king would set up for himself.

If you can get enough of a team together, maybe see if you can get this hosted, as I'd really like to see this mod done, and having it hosted would probably attract more people willing to work on it. I'm busy a bit with Europa Barborum, but would really do what I can to help here. Trying to find some decent pictures online, but every I can find are only MEDIEVAL Irish, and they looked different (such as, by then, Kern meant any basic soldier, so pictures of medieval Kerns show Irish light infantry, who used a lochaber axe, not the dark age peasant levies).

King Yngvar

11-13-2004, 15:06

If you can get enough of a team together, maybe see if you can get this hosted, as I'd really like to see this mod done, and having it hosted would probably attract more people willing to work on it. I'm busy a bit with Europa Barborum, but would really do what I can to help here. Trying to find some decent pictures online, but every I can find are only MEDIEVAL Irish, and they looked different (such as, by then, Kern meant any basic soldier, so pictures of medieval Kerns show Irish light infantry, who used a lochaber axe, not the dark age peasant levies).

Would probably attract more people yes. And it would be more organized with more topics on the different fields. I guess we have some people now, from the totalrome forums and here. Campaign map makers, pherhaps a couple of possible unit skinners and historical info peoples. Who do you think I shall ask for some hosting space, someone here in totalwar.org?

Ranika

11-13-2004, 15:23

Possibly, I'm not totally sure how to go about it. I would look at getting it hosted here though, but I like the forum organization, and the org does get a good number of really talented individuals through it.

wilpuri

11-13-2004, 15:30

The idea with those green provinces in Finland, you might be wondering about them. But I tought that the load of rebel provinces in the east would make it simple for the Swedes and Kijevans, so adding a competitor in the Baltic region would be nice. It is not necessary, just another idea...

I would very humbly like to suggest adding a few Finnic and baltic tribes to the baltic and Finland. All of the research (which took me a long time and lots of work) would be ready. Here is a summary of my research and how it would be implemented into FotN: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=612005&postcount=642 .
Feel free to use any of the info there.

King Yngvar

11-13-2004, 18:00

Ranika

11-13-2004, 18:44

I'm having a problem with my PMs, this happens to me intermittently, but I'll keep trying.

Do you have updated unit lists? And maybe prepare a unit list for potential mercenaries and rebel units?

King Yngvar

11-13-2004, 23:17

Scandinavian Kingdoms (Norway, Sweden and Denmark):

Trell Knifemen
Trell Spearmen
Leidang Spearmen
Light Archers
Leidang Archers
Huskarl Arhcers
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Ulfhedin Berserkers
Huskarl Swordsmen
Huskarl Axemen
Hirdmen
Horse Raiders

Snekkja
Drakkr
Bardi

Dublin-York

Trell Spearmen
Bonnaght Spearmen
Dibhlann Swordsmen
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Huskarl Swordsmen
Huskarl Axemen
Hirdmen (royal guard)
Horse Raiders
Hobilars

Boats:

Snekkja

Scotland

Gaelic Peasants
Pict Levies
Light Archers
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Celtic Swordsmen
Batareicht Swordsmen
Sinoach Warriors
Claymore Warriors
Ridire Guard (infantry)
Light Cavalry

Wessex

Light Archers
Peasants
Fyrd Spearmen
Fyrd Axemen
Skirmishers
Huskarl Axemen
Huskarl Swordsmen
Royal Huskarls
Light Cavalry
Saxon Cavalry

Wales

Peasants
Light Archers
Longbowmen
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Welsh Axemen
Skirmishers
Celtic Swordsmen
Briton Swordsmen
Light Cavalry
Hill Horsemen (missiled)
Ridire Guard (infantry)

Irish

Gaelic Peasants
Raighhangh Berserkers
Kern Spearmen (spears only, will add them if space only)
Bonnaght Spearmen
Iobnaght Axemen
Celtic Swordsmen
Dibhlann Swordsmen
Batareicht Swordsmen
Ridire Guard (Infantry)
Light Cavalry
Hobilars

Kijev

Peasants
Light Archers
Slavic Archers
Rus Spearmen
Armored Rus Spearmen
Slavic Axemen
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Varangian Axemen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)
Varangian Swordsmen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)
Royal Varangians
Light Cavalry
Boyars (heavy)
Steppe Cavalry (missiled)

Magyars

Peasants
Spearmen
Magyar Archers
Skirmishers
Avar Axemen
Light Cavalry
Steppe Cavalry
Magyar Horse Archers
Heavy Lancers
Royal Lancers

Khazars

Peasants
Spearmen
Khazar Archers
Skirmishers
Light Cavalry
Steppe Cavalry
Khazar Horse Archers
Heavy Lancers
Royal Lancers

Byzantine Empire

Peasants
Byzantine Archers
Trebizbond Archers
Crossbowmen
Pilum Skirmishers
Byzantine Spearmen
Roman Swordsmen
Varangian Axemen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)
Varangian Swordsmen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)
Cathapracts
Pronoias
Horse Archers
Royal Cathapracts

Abbasid Caliphate

Falahin (peasants)
Arab Warband (skirmishers)
Saber Warriors
Desert Warriors
Arab Cavalry
Slave Spearmen
Nubian Spearmen
Arab Spearmen
Bedouin Camels
Ghulam Cavalry
Royal Ghulam
Horse Archers
Turkoman Cavalry (missiled)
Crossbowmen
Desert Archers
Arab Longbows
Syrian Archers

Fatimid Caliphate

Falahin (peasants)
Spearmen
Arab Warband
Slave Spearmen
Arab Spearmen
Saber Warriors
Desert Warriors
Light Camels
Desert Archers
Arab Longbows
Berber Cavalry
Arab Cavalry
Ghulam Cavalry
Royal Ghulam

Cordoba

Falahin (peasants)
Slave Spearmen
Arab Spearmen
Arab Warband
Saber Warriors
Desert Warriors
Moorish Infantry (elite sabermen)
Desert Archers
Arab Longbows
Arab Cavalry
Moorish Heavy Cavalry
Horse Archers
Royal Cavalry

Wends

Peasants
Slavic Axemen
Slavic Archers
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Skirmishers
Berserkers
Wendish Swordsmen
Bearded Axemen
Royal Guard (infantry)
Horse Raiders

Poland

Peasants
Slavic Axemen
Slavic Archers
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Skirmishers
Polish Swordsmen
Royal Guard (infantry)
Light Cavalry
Polish Cavalry

Bulgaria

Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Slavic Axemen
Slavic Archers
Bulgarian Brigands
Light Cavalry
Steppe Cavalry
Heavy Lancers
Boyars

Asturia

Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Skirmishers
Light Archers
Highland Axemen
Galician Infantry
Asturian Swordsmen
Royal Guardsmen
Light Cavalry

Normandy (will have a "reform" system like the Romans, take place in between 970-1000 maybe)

Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Viking Axemen
Berserkers
Huskarl Swordsmen
Huskarl Axemen
Hirdmen
Horse Raiders

~After reform~
Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Skirmishers
Light Swordsmen
Norman Swordsmen
Light Cavalry
Retainer Cavalry
Norman Knights
Skirmisher Cavalry
Royal Knights

German Kingdom

Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Skirmishers
Saxon Axemen
Light Swordsmen
Swabian Swordsmen
Light Cavalry
Feudal Knights
Royal Knights

Frankish Kingdom

Peasants
Spearmen
Armored Spearmen
Light Archers
Axe Skirmishers
Skirmishers
Light Swordsmen
Frankish Swordsmen
Light Cavalry
Feudal Knights
Frankish Knights
Royal Knights

Italy

Peasants
Spearmen
Italian Spearmen
Langobardian Axemen
Light Swordsmen
Italian Swordsmen
Light Archers
Venetian Archers
Crossbowmen
Light Cavalry
Feudal Knights
Royal Knights

Papacy

Peasants
Spearmen
Italian Spearmen
Light Swordsmen
Italian Swordsmen
Light Archers
Heavy Archers
Crossbowmen
Light Cavalry
Feudal Knights
Royal Knights

I'm having a problem with my PMs, this happens to me intermittently, but I'll keep trying.

Do you have updated unit lists? And maybe prepare a unit list for potential mercenaries and rebel units?

Umm, could you make a list for the British isles please?

At least the Jomsvikings will be able to hire in:
Vendland
Veletia
Sudr-Jylland
Nord-Jylland
Sjælland
Skåne
Halland
Gautaland
Gotland
Svitjod
Viken
Agdir
Hordaland
Trønderlag

-> Basically the coastal provinces of Scandinavia, except the northermost ones...

Ranika

11-14-2004, 00:44

Alright, a list, so far, potentially for what I'd use for British isles mercs:

Gael Gaedhil Buanna; All of Ireland and Scotland

Gallowglass (assuming you wish to use them); Connacht, Ulster, Dublin, the Highlands, the Grampians

Gorddgwas; Dublin, all of Britain south of Scotland, edit: and possibly the north of France, maybe just Brittany, it seems a few fought in Brittany, as a Welsh prince has a record of recieving payment for, essentially, renting out his own mercenary Gorddgwas for something I can't quite determine, in Brittany. His records don't say why they were there, and the record is in somewhat poor condition, including, damnably, the year, so I can't determine what was going on in Brittany at the time.

Manx Fer Cliwe; York, Wales, Cornwall, Dublin, Ulster, Lowlands

Mercenary Welsh Archers (whatever name you might wish, the one suggested earlier, Saighdearbuanna, is of Irish origin); All of Britain and Ireland

Mercenary Vikings (Possibly two or three units, as the Irish and Scots, particularly, employed various mercenaries, axemen, swordsmen, and spearmen); all of Britain and Ireland

Leinstermen; Dublin and York, a light armored poleax infantry unit that would become the standard for Irish armies in later periods. Possibly make a localized unit to Dublin, or a unit for the Dublin-York faction.

Edit 2, Rebels:
As for rebels, I think 'indigenous' units should be used in their particular areas, if possible, such as Gaelic peasants in Ireland and Scotland, along with maybe a few actual soldier type units, like Celtic Swordsmen. This would give the sense of the minor kingdoms that were present, but lacked the cohesiveness to have the more professional and advanced soldiers, but also keeps the rebels proper to the area. Is this possible?

Meneldil

11-14-2004, 19:36

Alright, I've finally managed to increase the map height and run the game without any script/generic error.
Now, there's one problem you might already have heard of : there are graphical glitches on the campaign map once you've increased its size.
Some of them I can deal with (it looks like some cliffs are somewhat messed up once you've edited the map, so I had to delete cliffs in corsica and in Brittany, might delete a few other laters), but it looks like I won't be able to get rid of some of those problems (mainly on the coasts, I'll have a look at the map_groundtype file, but I don't think it will be of any help)

wilpuri

11-14-2004, 21:45

Thank you Wilpuri, would it be appropriate to name my South-Finland (Helsinki based) province Häme, even if it is not located to the Gulf of Botnia? The name was Kainu for Kvenland, had forgotten that one. Will use the Finnish one. About Finland, I will choose to use the Swedish name for that province. Karjala is only south Karjala here, the northern part will be named Bjarmaland after what the Norwegians from Hålogaland who traded and raided there called it.

If you have ideas for Finnish character names, please tell us ~:)

Well, if Finland is going to be split up like this

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/VikingMod911idea2.bmp
And you are going to have the following tribes:

~Balticum~
Finnish Tribes: Finland, Kainu, Häme, Bjarmaland and Karjala

Then you don't have enough provinces. I'm guessing "Finland" is the same as the Suoma faction. At the moment, the Suoma and the Häme would be sharing the same province. The Province that goes along the gulf of Bothnia should be for the Kainuu, the South Eastern Province for the Karelians and the N. East province for the Perms (Bjarms). Either you have to add one more province into western Finland to make room for both Suoma and Häme, or then leave out one of the tribes. If you choose to leave one of those two tribes out, I would keep Häme and leave out Suoma.

I would have the South West as Häme or Vakka-Suomi, depending on which tribe you will keep. If you add a province, you can have both Häme and Vakka-Suomi.

As for the character names, give me you email and I will send you the namelist we will use for FotN. Its quite extensive. The ideas for units is in the post I referred to earlier, feel free to use the ideas there as you please.

In the end, all the info you really need is right here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=612005&postcount=642

One more thing:
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/VikingMod911idea2.bmp

In this map, you have Ingria/Ingermanland/Inkerinmaa/Staraya Ladoga (You know which province I mean ~:) ) labeled as belonging to Novgorod (or I presume its Novgorod/Rus?), when in reality, through out most of the viking age, it was in the hands of the Ingrians (Inkeri) themselves.

DemonArchangel

11-14-2004, 21:57

King Yngvar

11-14-2004, 23:52

Byzantine Empire- Demon's Suggestions

Peasants- Nix this one, or replace with Imperial Garrison Troops/Militiamen
Byzantine Archers- Call them Psiloi
Trebizbond Archers- Anatolian Highlanders
Crossbowmen- Not used until 1st Crusade Arrives.
Pilum Skirmishers- Peltastoi
Byzantine Spearmen- Skutatoi
Roman Swordsmen- Veristitatae
Varangian Axemen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)- Paramonai. And yes, they're as good as the huskarls, and also, they would have byzantine equipment.
Varangian Swordsmen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)- Also Paramonai
Cathapracts- Kavallaroi
Pronoias- Replace with Latinikon (Western Mercenary Knights)
Horse Archers- Call them Foederati Skythikon
Royal Cathapracts- Klibanophoroi (sp?)

What about:

Militiamen
Psiloi
Anatolian Highlanders (archers)
Peltastoi
Skutatoi Spearmen
Veristitatae Swordsmen
Varangian Axemen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)- Paramonai. They did not use Byzantine equipment until later. Later on the Varangian ranks became filled up with Englishmen and others. At this point they were purely Nordic (and some Slavs). Varangian name stays, they will be the same unit as the one for Gardariki. They will not be quite as good as huskarls. One reason is that Gardariki already has better units than the Scandinavian kingdoms. Another thing is that the Varangians actually were not as trained warriors as the huskarls at this point.
Varangian Swordsmen (another version of Huskarls, not quite as good)
Horse Archers (this is the basic one, the one below can be a special Byzantine version)
Foederati Skythikon
Latinikon
Kavallaroi
Klibanophoroi (royal guard cavalry)

Thank you for the suggestions in unit names ~:)

Then you don't have enough provinces. I'm guessing "Finland" is the same as the Suoma faction. At the moment, the Suoma and the Häme would be sharing the same province. The Province that goes along the gulf of Bothnia should be for the Kainuu, the South Eastern Province for the Karelians and the N. East province for the Perms (Bjarms). Either you have to add one more province into western Finland to make room for both Suoma and Häme, or then leave out one of the tribes. If you choose to leave one of those two tribes out, I would keep Häme and leave out Suoma.

I would have the South West as Häme or Vakka-Suomi, depending on which tribe you will keep. If you add a province, you can have both Häme and Vakka-Suomi.

As for the character names, give me you email and I will send you the namelist we will use for FotN. Its quite extensive. The ideas for units is in the post I referred to earlier, feel free to use the ideas there as you please.

In the end, all the info you really need is right here: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...5&postcount=642

Hmm, you speak about tribes, getting me a little confused. But I assume you mean provinces? I am not planning on having 5 Finnish factions, that would be too much. I think the name of the faction "Finnish Tribes" is ok for now, any other suggestion? A province could be added in Finland, some provinces could be fixed on as well.

Could we use those unit names? If so, thanks alot ~:)

In this map, you have Ingria/Ingermanland/Inkerinmaa/Staraya Ladoga (You know which province I mean ) labeled as belonging to Novgorod (or I presume its Novgorod/Rus?), when in reality, through out most of the viking age, it was in the hands of the Ingrians (Inkeri) themselves.

Ingermanland will probably be the province name here, as I am very certain that it was held by Gardariki at the time this mod will start. It was held by Finns between 838 and 862, but from then on held by Gardariki (Kijevan Rus) and whoever held Holmgard/Novgorod later on. The city name will be Aldjuguborg(sp?).

Finnish Tribes

Korpisoturit
Heimosoturit
Armored Spearmen (Feel like giving them these, the description of "Heimosoturit" did not make me feel they would be capable of taking on the heaviest cavalry. And Gardariki has got some cavalry...)
Keihäsmiehet
Footmen
Karelian Kylfings
Karelian Raiders
Karelian Horsemen
Finnish Berserkers
Finnish Nobles
Kuninkaan Henkivartio

Boats:

Small boat
Uisko

Alright, a list, so far, potentially for what I'd use for British isles mercs:

Gael Gaedhil Buanna; All of Ireland and Scotland

Gallowglass (assuming you wish to use them); Connacht, Ulster, Dublin, the Highlands, the Grampians

Gorddgwas; Dublin, all of Britain south of Scotland, edit: and possibly the north of France, maybe just Brittany, it seems a few fought in Brittany, as a Welsh prince has a record of recieving payment for, essentially, renting out his own mercenary Gorddgwas for something I can't quite determine, in Brittany. His records don't say why they were there, and the record is in somewhat poor condition, including, damnably, the year, so I can't determine what was going on in Brittany at the time.

Manx Fer Cliwe; York, Wales, Cornwall, Dublin, Ulster, Lowlands

Mercenary Welsh Archers (whatever name you might wish, the one suggested earlier, Saighdearbuanna, is of Irish origin); All of Britain and Ireland

Mercenary Vikings (Possibly two or three units, as the Irish and Scots, particularly, employed various mercenaries, axemen, swordsmen, and spearmen); all of Britain and Ireland

Leinstermen; Dublin and York, a light armored poleax infantry unit that would become the standard for Irish armies in later periods. Possibly make a localized unit to Dublin, or a unit for the Dublin-York faction.

Edit 2, Rebels:
As for rebels, I think 'indigenous' units should be used in their particular areas, if possible, such as Gaelic peasants in Ireland and Scotland, along with maybe a few actual soldier type units, like Celtic Swordsmen. This would give the sense of the minor kingdoms that were present, but lacked the cohesiveness to have the more professional and advanced soldiers, but also keeps the rebels proper to the area. Is this possible?

Thank you. About the Leinstermen, I do not think it is possible to have localized units for construction, like in MTW. I was actually thinking about having cheaper mercenaries, agree? Mercenary Vikings should pherhaps be slightly better than Viking Axemen, but not of same quality as Huskarls or Varangians. I don't know the amount of units already available to the different civs, so I don't know how many mercenaries we can actually include.

I was thinking about some basic info on each unit, starting with Scandinavian kingdoms:

Trell Knifemen
Weapon: Knife
Armor: None
Shield: None
Helmet: None
Morale: Very Poor
Abilities: None

Trell Spearmen
Weapon: Short Spear
Armor: None
Shield: None
Helmet: None
Morale: Very Poor
Abilities: None

Leidang Spearmen
Weapon: Long Spear
Armor: Light chain mail
Shield: Medium round shield
Helmet: Leather
Morale: Good
Abilities: Warcry

Light Archers
Weapon: Bow + Knife
Armor: None
Shield: None
Helmet: None
Morale: Poor
Abilities: Flaming arrows

Leidang Archers
Weapon: Bow + Knife
Armor: Light (fur/leather)
Shield: None
Helmet: None
Morale: Average
Abilities: Flaming arrows

Huskarl Arhcers
Weapon: Bow + Sword
Armor: Light chain mail
Shield: None
Helmet: Leather
Morale: Good
Abilities: Flaming arrows

Viking Axemen
Weapon: One handed axe + Throwing spear
Armor: Light (fur/leather)
Shield: Medium round shield
Helmet: Leather
Morale: Good
Abilities: Warcry and Svinefylking (wedge)

Berserkers
Weapon: One handed axe
Armor: None (half-naked)
Shield: Medium round shield
Helmet: None
Morale: Excellent
Abilities: Berserkergang

Ulfhedin Berserkers (special Nordic)
Weapon: One handed sword
Armor: Light (much fur)
Shield: Medium round shield
Morale: Fearless (can't be routed)
Helmet: None
Abilities: Berserkergang

Huskarl Swordsmen
Weapon: One handed sword + Throwing spear
Armor: Heavy chain mail
Shield: Large round shield (iron edge)
Helmet: Gjermundbu
Morale: Excellent
Abilities: Warcry and Svinefylking (wedge)

Huskarl Axemen (best in loose formation)
Weapon: Bearded axe
Armor: Heavy chain mail
Shield: None
Helmet: Gjermundbu
Morale: Excellent
Abilities: Warcry and Svinefylking

Hirdmen (Royal Guard)
Weapon: One handed sword
Armor: Heavy chain mail
Shield: None
Helmet: Gjermundbu (general/king himself has it in gold)
Morale: Fearless
Abilities: Warcry, Svinefylking and Shield Wall (protects the general/king)

Horse Raiders (Mounted)
Weapon: Long Spear
Armor: Light chain mail
Shield: Medium round shield
Helmet: Gjermundbu
Morale: Good
Abilities: Wedge

Ranika

11-15-2004, 00:10

Localized units are possible, it's done in the current Rome: Total Realism build, and is present in Vanilla R:TW with the Spartans and elephant units. A 'hidden' resource is present in a province (such as Spartans, for the Spartans), and in the building file, under buildings that can train units, look for Spartans, and see the additional line that comes after their entry, requiring the resource. However, Leinsterman tended to fight in a mercenary faction (whoever paid them some tribute, they'd often fight for them), so they may be a viable mercenary. I only wish them to be included, as they were important at Clontarf, and Brian's campaign against the vikings in Dublin.

I agree with the rest, one viking merc would be fine, simply suggesting the possibility of others. And cheaper mercs sounds good to me.

King Yngvar

11-15-2004, 00:18

Localized units are possible, it's done in the current Rome: Total Realism build, and is present in Vanilla R:TW with the Spartans and elephant units.

That opens up new doors...

Jomsvikings could now be localized units as well as mercenaries, nice. Actually I have never gotten around to produce Spartans though I have held Sparta at many times. Useful information.

By the way Ranika, your signature; when was that said?

wilpuri

11-15-2004, 00:36

Hmm, you speak about tribes, getting me a little confused. But I assume you mean provinces? I am not planning on having 5 Finnish factions, that would be too much. I think the name of the faction "Finnish Tribes" is ok for now, any other suggestion? A province could be added in Finland, some provinces could be fixed on as well.

Could we use those unit names? If so, thanks alot ~:)
Ah, so you meant that "Finnish tribes" would be one faction, like the gauls and the germanics are in RTW. Ok, sure (not too accurate but at least its something). Yes, you can use the unit names, by all means. If you need names for generals, I would be happy to send you a list of names.

Ingermanland will probably be the province name here, as I am very certain that it was held by Gardariki at the time this mod will start. It was held by Finns between 838 and 862, but from then on held by Gardariki (Kijevan Rus) and whoever held Holmgard/Novgorod later on. The city name will be Aldjuguborg(sp?).

I didn't mean Novgorod, I meant Staraya Ladoga, or Laatokankaupunki as it is known in Finnish.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/VikingMod911idea2.bmp

It is the most Northern Rus/blue province on the map, containing half of Lake Ladoga in it. It was in the hand of the Ingrians until 1105, when it was taken by Novgorod.

In one of the Novgorodian tax documents dating back to 1137, there is no mention of the Karelian or Ingrian villages north and west of Lake Ladoga. Laatokankaupunki (staraya ladoga) had been subdued in 1105.
-a translated excerpt from a book called Itärajan Vartijat - Keskiaika by Lena Huldén.

King Yngvar

11-15-2004, 03:15

Ah, so you meant that "Finnish tribes" would be one faction, like the gauls and the germanics are in RTW. Ok, sure (not too accurate but at least its something). Yes, you can use the unit names, by all means. If you need names for generals, I would be happy to send you a list of names.

The more factions, the more work. We already have 25 of them. Plus, it would make those one-province Finnish tribes very weak if they were divided.
My email is yngvarv@hotmail.com, if you would like to send me generals.

I didn't mean Novgorod, I meant Staraya Ladoga, or Laatokankaupunki as it is known in Finnish.

I was also talking about Staraja Ladoga, or Aldeigjuborg as it is called in Old Norse.

Scandinavians took control over Staraya Ladoga in the 750's. They called the town Aldeigjuborg - From a "history of Norway" book. The same book also show a map where the Rus holds control of that area. It was pherhaps the third most important town in Gardariki.

Ranika

11-15-2004, 09:32

Signature was of an indetermined date, it's a rather poor translation, and the document it was in was written with a number of early and old Irish words. Donall lived somewhere between 650-750, so it was said somewhere in that span. Donall's unknown except for a couple of papers on the concepts of emotion being 'trained' to utilize it, and his name appears in a few name rolls at Saint Tybalt's Abbey.

wilpuri

11-15-2004, 13:57

I was also talking about Staraja Ladoga, or Aldeigjuborg as it is called in Old Norse.

- From a "history of Norway" book. The same book also show a map where the Rus holds control of that area. It was pherhaps the third most important town in Gardariki.

Hmm. What is the starting date for this mod? I guess this is a debatable issue, but I'm guessing Staraya Ladoga was back in the hands of the Ingrians by the end of the Viking Age, my mistake. The book I was quoting only deals with medieval times, so it does not mention the former owners. I'm sending the namelist now.
~:cheers:

EDIT: Scandinavians ruled over SL, but the inhabitants were mainly Finns/Ingrians/Karelians. I suppose they, like most vikings, assimilated to the local cultures with time. That would explain why it was an Ingrian town in 1105.

Sephriel

11-15-2004, 14:44

cool work guys!

but, isnt there a faction limit? (heard 15)

Ranika

11-15-2004, 14:46

The faction limit is around 30.

King Yngvar

11-15-2004, 15:44

Hmm. What is the starting date for this mod? I guess this is a debatable issue, but I'm guessing Staraya Ladoga was back in the hands of the Ingrians by the end of the Viking Age, my mistake. The book I was quoting only deals with medieval times, so it does not mention the former owners. I'm sending the namelist now.

EDIT: Scandinavians ruled over SL, but the inhabitants were mainly Finns/Ingrians/Karelians. I suppose they, like most vikings, assimilated to the local cultures with time. That would explain why it was an Ingrian town in 1105.

911 is the starting date. The Ingrians probably controlled the area in 1105, but Kijev Rus was divided in the mid 1000's. There was no longer a united "Russia" by 1105, and the aristocracy had forgotten their Nordic blood.

In 911, the elite warriors and the aristocracy spoke Old Norse, "Russia" was united and strong. This was the high period of Kijevan Rus.

Signature was of an indetermined date, it's a rather poor translation, and the document it was in was written with a number of early and old Irish words. Donall lived somewhere between 650-750, so it was said somewhere in that span. Donall's unknown except for a couple of papers on the concepts of emotion being 'trained' to utilize it, and his name appears in a few name rolls at Saint Tybalt's Abbey.

I just tought it was some fine words of wisdom.

The faction limit is around 30.

Good, then we'll be alright.

cool work guys!

Thank you ~:) Though the work has barely begun...

Ranika

11-15-2004, 16:04

I just tought it was some fine words of wisdom.

It is too often mistaken that aesthetic martial arts (or martial arts all together, for that matter) are purely Eastern. To the contrary, near every place has produced many martial arts (fighting with a longsword, after all, isn't simply hacking away at your opponent, there is a science to it). Raighhangh is a philosophy and a way of life, coupled with intensive martial arts training. The Raighhangh berserkers took it all very seriously. The idea was simple. Donall explained it very well:

"Emotion will keep a man fighting long after he should be dead. Hate for one's enemies, and love of his people and home, will push him to fight until his body simply collapses. His greatest strength is not his sword or his arm, it is his heart, and the love and hate there in, and his fearlessness, because he knows the truth. Pain and suffering are temporary, and death does not come for the man who's body falls for the glory of his people. There is no fear or blindness. Only clarity of the greatest truths."

Raighhangh were martial artist-berserker-religious fanatics. It's a pity so little is known about them, aside from their philosophy (which is still taught in some places, I, myself, will be opening a school soon to teach Raighhangh philosophy and Irish martial arts with it).

Back on topic, the Ridire, on foot, would utilize a two-handed sword, a spear from horseback. Says infantry with them, so assuming you wanna go that route. They used large, two-handed swords (almost all of them imports of the Irish lewing sword, or copies, even in Wales, which, aside from a few similarities, was disassociated militarily from the Irish). The lewing sword can smash through armor, it's of great weight, with a rounded tip (it's too long to thrust with). It is swung in wide, horizontal strokes, aimed at necks, generally (a master with it could supposedly take off as many as ten heads in a single great swing). Ridire would be dressed in very fine chain armor, wear plaid cloaks, iron helmets, tall leather boots, and plaid trews (loose pants), with chain leggings. They would actually look pretty similar to the 'Gallowglass' picture in the description of them in Medieval: TW, and Viking Invasion. Gallowglass would look pretty similar, but would carry a Sparth, and cloak would probably be a solid color. Too bad the AI can't be editted heavily, it'd be nice to see the different armies battle in their proper fashion, like Irish armies, which would fight 'heavy' armies, by organizing a cavalry screen, flanked by bonnaghts or kerns, who would rush in, pelt the enemy with their missiles, and withdraw while the cavalry closes to deal a first strike, then withdraws quickly, with medium-to-heavy infantry behind them to break the front line, and then another missile attack. It's too often assumed, and simulated, that large scale battles were just two hordes hurling themselves at eachother in a rather blind fashion.

King Yngvar

11-16-2004, 01:40

Back on topic, the Ridire, on foot, would utilize a two-handed sword, a spear from horseback. Says infantry with them, so assuming you wanna go that route.

I'm going for infantry royal guards. A true king fights on foot, well at least in Northern Europe they did. Believed the Irish kings did so as well, at least most of them.

Britain, Scandinavia (+Finland), Gardariki (Rus), Vendland, Asturia and Normandy (before reforms) will have kings fighting on foot.

NormanPain

11-16-2004, 11:55

About the scottish units:
Claymores did not exist until the early renaissance when large swords were neccesary to knock over heavily armoured oppenents or to make headway through pikelines...therefore claymore infantry would not have existed in the time of the vikings...also remember that the kilt did not exist till the 1700's ... Braveheart is not a documentary, it was an extremely historically flawed excuse to make money. I mean, mel gibson didnt even grow the beard the Wallace had, and Wallace in real life was a complete pig...do the research about the claymore and the kilt if you want.

Also..Huscarl archers? Archers were frowned upon in the time of the vikings and therefore were hardly considered soldiers...I seriously doubt if any self respecting huscarl would carry a bow in battle. Also be careful as to what you mean by huscarle...as if you are using the definition I believe you are then they would be restricted to the Saxons...and the Byzantine Varangian guard, historians believe, inspired the creation of the huscarles, and they based their organization off of the Vargangians...at the very least they are equals.

Also...there was no german kingdom, just alot of divided people...conquered by the franks under various kings, and under charlemagne they also owned italy, all of france and germany, and bits of spain as well as parts of hungary and poland.

Remember that vikings did not have horned helmets.

Also remember that sword fighting was not slow and clumsy as hollywood shows...sword were well balanced and rarely weighed over 3 pounds. Viking swords on the other hand were not as well made which is why they often bought swords from other countries.

Anyways...dont mean to anger or offend anyone...just to help keep this historically accurate if thats what you want, if not...ignore my post. ~:cheers:

Ranika

11-16-2004, 13:05

I stated before that the common concept of the claymore and kilts didn't exist yet. However, lewing swords, and an early Scottish two-handed sword DID exist. However, the Scottish two-hander (Cleighdemhor), did not have the sloping guard, nor the 'quad-quillon-clover leaf'. It had a straight guard with knobbed dercaigh, two little iron balls on the end of the metal guard slat. However, the lewing sword had both the slopping guard, and the clover leaf style quillons, and was shortened to the Scottish sword's length, later, to make the 'claymore' (anglicized from the original name, Cleighdemhor). Claymore infantry DID exist, in a sense, that there were Cleighdemhornach, Great Swordsmen, who did use a large two-handed sword. I've done plenty of research, as well as participated in digs and examinations of actual weapons and armor recovered. As stated, the kilt did not exist, it was the leine that was worn, that looks like a kilt on statues, but is actually a long, one piece shirt that comes to above the knee.

Claymore Infantry, if using an Anglicized version of the name, would be the proper term. If it were to be lingually correct to the period, they'd be Cleighdemhornach, and would be the same thing as lewcach, except with a slightly shorter, but still two-handed sword. The Gaels had numerous bastard swords, and two-handed swords, during the dark ages. Cleighdemhor, itself, is actually a generic term meaning any two-handed sword, but most of the Scottish two-handers of the period are as described above.

However, there is a lowlander variant that was quite different, it was based on a Germano-Norman style that wouldn't be present for about another 75 years, from best estimates, from the period when the game starts.

My point is though, there were plenty of two-handed swords, and soldiers did use them plenty, however, most of those who actually had such weapons were at least lower tiers of the aristocracy. Two-handed swords in the British Isles were not developed originally to combat armored soldiers, they were made to kill groups of people at a time (like the lewing sword). However, in this period, the first anti-armor two-handers developed in Britain (but not Ireland, the lewing sword was an outgrowth of a MUCH earlier design, with a reweighted blade, made to smash chain), including the early Scottish two-handers, probably actually an adopted British design (the Strathclyders had very similar swords).

As on the weights of sword, during this period the average sword weight is more around 2.35 pounds in the Imperial standard, but the larger swords, such as lewing swords and cochcliwe (early Manx greatsword) weighed closer to 7-9 pounds, easily some of the heaviest swords implemented, ever. Combat with them WAS slow (but not for most other swords, which weighed significantly less), but not clumsy. As I've stated, martial arts are developed for weapons, you don't just hand a soldier a sword and hurl him blindly at a foe. One is trained in specific combat techniques, and if a noble, likely trained in numerous weapons, unarmed combat, wrestling, and improvisitional fighting.

Also, not all cultures frowned on archers, and your statement is vague, so I'm not sure who you mean, but the Welsh, Corns, and Bretons had a fairly developed system of archery, and rewarded skill with a bow. However, it is true many cultures had only levy or mercenary archers.

William Wallace, by the way, used an actual Irish lewing sword (though the blade was manufactured by a German steelsmith, Wallace had it done in the Irish style, as one of his uncle's, a half-Irish, half-Scot Lowlander, used one, and Wallace wanted to emulate him), but ground the tip down to a point himself, because he was large enough a man to actually use the point for thrusting down onto an enemy that was prone. He was a very educated man (not an exaggeration on the movie's part), but very boorish (which was not shown at all). More over, his reasons to fight had nothing to do with some apocryphal murdered wife, it was generally regarded as nationalism, coupled with a great desire for revenge over his brother and father, who died fighting the English. I could go on, as the movie was HORRIDLY inaccurate, but I think most of the potential 'anachronisms' you've pointed out are already within the grasp of most people talking about the mod.

Lasias Wenson

11-16-2004, 16:31

Sounds like a great mod.

Maybe you sould change the names of the danish provinses to:

Suthr-Iūtland (south-jutland), this is old danish which should be closer to old nörront than Sutr-Jylland.

Northr-Iūtland (north-jutland), Iūtland is still old Danish, but Northr is old nörront

Selund (poem 950), Seolandi (poem 1085), this is also old nörront for Zealand (sjælland)

And Skáni, Skáney (skåne), both of these is old nörront.

(nörront is the language that was spoken by the vikings, but they called it dana tunga)

King Yngvar

11-16-2004, 16:32

Also..Huscarl archers? Archers were frowned upon in the time of the vikings and therefore were hardly considered soldiers...I seriously doubt if any self respecting huscarl would carry a bow in battle. Also be careful as to what you mean by huscarle...as if you are using the definition I believe you are then they would be restricted to the Saxons...and the Byzantine Varangian guard, historians believe, inspired the creation of the huscarles, and they based their organization off of the Vargangians...at the very least they are equals.

Huskarl had a different meaning in Scandinavia than England. The Norwegian equillant of a Saxon huskarl is the hirdman. Being a huskarl simply meant to be a part of the "huskar" or "elite warband" as you could call it. Elite Archers were there as well, though the name "huskarl archer" may not be the best, I will give it a go until someone gives me a better idea for the name. By the way, none was frowned up except the trells, and the enemy of course...

Also...there was no german kingdom, just alot of divided people...conquered by the franks under various kings, and under charlemagne they also owned italy, all of france and germany, and bits of spain as well as parts of hungary and poland.

What century are you talking about? This mod will be about the 10th century. Charlemagne had been dead for almost 100 years ~:)

Remember that vikings did not have horned helmets.

I learned that in kinder garden...

just to help keep this historically accurate if thats what you want

Trying to do that...

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

By the way; We may get a hosted forum place somewhere, I will not say yet where as it is not 100% certain...

King Yngvar

11-16-2004, 17:25

Maybe you sould change the names of the danish provinses to:

Suthr-Iūtland (south-jutland), this is old danish which should be closer to old nörront than Sutr-Jylland.

Northr-Iūtland (north-jutland), Iūtland is still old Danish, but Northr is old nörront

Selund (poem 950), Seolandi (poem 1085), this is also old nörront for Zealand (sjælland)

And Skáni, Skáney (skåne), both of these is old nörront.

Norðr, that "ð" is actually closer to a "d" than a strong "th" sound. But I am not sure if the game accepts letters outside the English alphabeth. In which case we would have to call for example Skáni for Skani. Nordr-Iutland instead of Norðr-Iūtland. Thank you for the info.

Ranika

11-16-2004, 22:37

Honestly, the only society I can think of in the late Dark Ages that actually tended to shun archers was Gaelic society, and even that's really a strong term for it. Archers were often disregarded, more than shunned. As for a name for Huskarl Archers, I used to see a lot of references to Dýrlegr Bogmaðr when I was translating Old Irish when I stilled lived in Ireland. The word is clearly not Irish, probably a bastardization or misspelling of Norse words. We had it translated as 'Great' or 'Glorious' Archer. The modern equivalent seems to be the Icelandic Bogamaður, which I think is just 'Archer'. However, the one's described as Dýrlegr Bogmaðr wore elaborate chain or metal scale armor, and had good swords and carried shields on their back for melee. Their archery skills were described as by a monk in some Latin rolls as being "Bonus ut vir ex Cymriu" (Cymriu was not Latin), 'good as the man from Wales' (singular, referencing a single Welsh archer, possibly Gwynn, a great archer who fought freely for the Ulstermen from time to time with his men). They dressed in a manner similar to "Borr Doahn", the "Great Danes", which is, as far as I can tell, the Huskarls were called. Possibly, then, these Dýrlegr Bogmaðr were the Huskarl Archers?

King Yngvar

11-17-2004, 02:06

Bogamaður

It is the same as Bogmaðr. Bog means bow, maðr means man.

Dýrlegr

Mikla = great, that far on misspelling it can't be. It might be glorious. Frægðar is the Norse word for honour. Ok, I looked it up, Mærr/Ágæti means glorious.

Ranika

11-17-2004, 02:21

Then I have no clue what Dýrlegr means. It's clearly not a mispelling or mispronuciation. It may just be something meshed to the Old Irish word 'Duriaghir', which is 'Kingly', or is an attempt to making the word sound more like a 'Dane' word. As such, the Irish soldiers likely meant to call them 'Kingly Bowmen'.

Mærr shows up as well, I believe (or a word similar to it), accompanied by Bogmaðr, but the reference was far more rare, so I though possibly Dýrlegr was the more 'common' version, but in retrospect, it's likely an attempt to come up with an Irish equivalent of Mærr, so the actual correct word name then would be, possibly, Mærr Bogmaðr? I should have probably thought that through a bit more, since whenever such a word showed up, it was talking about what the vikings were saying, where as Dýrlegr Bogmaðr was what the Irish soldiers were calling them.

Edit:
As an aside, my Scandinavian languages are absolutely horrendous, so I'm not sure in which order words should be, or how they work together. I do have some of the copied papers left, though, and Mærr shows up, but not WITH Bogmaðr. Instead, it shows up in a sentence talking about the bows themselves. It says, loosely translated into English; "They use a glorious (if Mærr is glorious) bow as they say, but it is not of any make in Britain, nor is it of the size of the Welsh bows. It is smaller, like a broganbo (hunter's bow), but of finer quality afforded to a noble." I'm not sure of the nobility status of such archers, but in any case, they were apparently either very well off, or nobles. I'd been translating Mærr as being 'small' or 'light', since they reference the hunter's bows used in Ireland, and then later state, in Irish, that they're of fine quality, so it seems a bit redundant to say they're both glorious and fine, but Mærr may have just been part of the name of the type of bow itself.

Edit Again:
Actually, it appears to say Mæhr, but it's all fairly blurry. That seems within the range of a mispelling though. The writer laments twice that he doesn't actually know how to write the words, and was, much of the time, copying his master's spellings, and was essentially improvising from what he knew of those spellings.

And Again:
Alright, it says Maohr. In Old Irish, this would be pronounce 'Mow-er' or 'Mor', though it is not in the least an Irish word, it appears to be a phonetic spelling of a foreign word. Does that sound similar to Mærr (potentially being the same thing)?

Speiz_Bankurt

11-17-2004, 12:30

While I was looking at the list of units per faction it occured to me that perhaps some of these factions should not have a peasant unit at all. I mean lets look at Khazar or the Magyars who were supposedly nomadic, did not have much agriculture and their society was based on a tribal system. Where do these guys find peasants? They were practically all warriors, some were a little richer some a little poorer but none were peasants!

Meneldil

11-17-2004, 14:21

Khazar khagnate was not a nomadic faction, from what I know about it.

King Yngvar

11-17-2004, 20:49

Alright, it says Maohr. In Old Irish, this would be pronounce 'Mow-er' or 'Mor', though it is not in the least an Irish word, it appears to be a phonetic spelling of a foreign word. Does that sound similar to Mærr (potentially being the same thing)?

Though "ae" is usually used as to write the pronounciation "æ" by those who do not have "æ" in their alphabeth, "oe" may be an old Irish way of expressing "æ". If people is not sure what I mean, listen to how an American says "can", they use the "a" for "æ" though it mostly sounds like a long "æ" or "ææ". Anyway it is probably the same.

While I was looking at the list of units per faction it occured to me that perhaps some of these factions should not have a peasant unit at all. I mean lets look at Khazar or the Magyars who were supposedly nomadic, did not have much agriculture and their society was based on a tribal system. Where do these guys find peasants? They were practically all warriors, some were a little richer some a little poorer but none were peasants!

Pretend they are foreign peasants fighting for them, the Magyars invaded the land that is now Hungary plus a little more. Do you think it all was empty when they came there? I believe there were agriculture in Hungary at that time as well. So there must have been peasants as well, even Magyars settled down after some while... Another thing would be to name them slaves...

By the way:

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/NorwayBanner.jpg (by me - Norway)

http://forums.totalrome.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=106 (by Trajan - Scotland)

http://forums.totalrome.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=107 (by Trajan - Dublin-York) pherhaps this one needs some change, feel free to suggest

http://forums.totalrome.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=108 (by Trajan - Wessex)

http://forums.totalrome.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=109 (by Trajan - Magyars)

http://forums.totalrome.com/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=110 (by Trajan - Frankish Kingdom)

Meneldil

11-17-2004, 20:59

Are you sure all those Flags are historically accurate ?

Ranika

11-17-2004, 21:05

It seems Maohr, 'ao', is the old Irish æ, and pronounced the same way, so it is a phonetic spelling of what then would seem to be Mærr. Hope that helps with what to call Huskarl Archers, maybe.

Good symbols, I was actually trying to think of an alternative St. Andrew's Cross for the Scots, as it would've been rather dull (just white on blue), and the Scots did use a number of other, more vibrant banners. The Dublin-York one looks fine to me as well, it will, at the least, look distinct apart from the others. What are the plans for the other flags?

As for historical accuracy of flags, during the period, many flags were used much of the time, and some, like St. Andrew's Cross, are rather boring. The Scots had other, more interesting flags. St. Andrew's Cross is simply the most recognized, as it remained in use, while others fell into disuse.

King Yngvar

11-17-2004, 21:23

I was actually thinking to use the St. Andrews cross but believed it was not that old and unhistorical for the early medieval. The St. Andrew cross would be perfect if it is historical ~:)

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/ByzantineBanner.jpg (Byzantine Empire - made by me)

Yes I know this one has the "purpur purple" and the real one usually had blue. But there are enough blue factions alright(!)

Ranika

11-17-2004, 21:27

St. Andrew's Cross was the mark of the Scottish crown since 893, I believe, so it would be historical, but Scottish armies marched under several banners, and the 'King's Mark' was actually a rearing lion on a shield.

Edit;

The King's Mark, in 911, is a red, rearing lion, with a red barbed border, on a yellow field. The shield is later. St. Andrew's Cross was present before 1000, but wasn't used on a flag beforehand, my mistake. It was a wax seal, and it appear on some nobility's clothing, but was not a flag yet.

Ranika

11-17-2004, 21:38

Oh, and please, PLEASE don't use the flag of Leinster for Ireland. I know you don't want another blue flag, but there are three other flags aside from Leinster and the flag of Ireland, and they all look far different. I recommend the flag of Munster (since Brian, the first real king of Ireland, was from Munster). However, some variants of that are pretty blue heavy. Maybe use the flag of Ulster, red and yellow, that one. But not the flag of Leinster, there's simply no concievable reason why a Gaelic Irish nation at this point would use it, considering the flag of Leinster was flown by the Irish who supported the vikings in Dublin, not by any of the Gaelic Irish kingdoms seeking a united, Gael Ireland.

To note, the modern flag of Ulster is not the old flag, though it looks similar. The Anglo-Irish flag was white, with a crown over the hand. However, the original is identical to the modern flag, except it has a silver cross in the center of the hand. All I can find are the medieval and modern flags though.

The flag of Munster today is 3 gold crowns on a blue field, but it was originally a single gold crown in the center of a blue field, adopted about 908 (changed from the Screighan symbol). This would be the first 'flag of Ireland', since it was Brian's flag when he first claimed kingship. However, Ireland was recognized by the harp on a blue or white field (the white field could be an alternative then, since there is so much blue).

The flag of Connacht was white with three red bars, vertical, in the upper left corner, and four blue bars in the lower right corner. (Today's is DRASTICALLY different).

King Yngvar

11-17-2004, 22:05

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/ScotlandBanner.jpg

Pherhaps we could take this one up for a vote when we get our own forums, I have not decided on what to use anyway. Munster and Connaght is probably out of deal as they are blue. So it would be a competition between Ulster and Leinster.

Ulster:
http://www.geocities.com/emerald_ancestry/_derived/towns.htm_txt_FlagUlster.gif

Munster:
http://www.geocities.com/emerald_ancestry/images/FlagMunster.gif

Leinster:
http://www.geocities.com/emerald_ancestry/images/flagleinster.gif

Connaght:
http://www.geocities.com/emerald_ancestry/images/FlagConnaght.gif

Ranika

11-17-2004, 22:35

None of those are period except Leinster's, but Ulster's is closest to period (just needs a silver cross in the palm).

However, there is an Irish flag that is simply a white field with a silver harp upon it. It is the Holy Mark, and was often flown by Irish kings, as an alternative to the blue-with-gold harp. And I've been searching for a better flag for Scotland, using the original King's Mark (since I misunderstood the adoption of St. Andrew's Cross as meaning it was used as a king's seal, not as his banner yet). The closest to period I can find is the first version of the 'Scottish Governmental' flag. It looks similar to this flag, except the border is a solid red, not two bars.

Connaght's flag would be entirely different, that flag there is a late medieval one that meant to represent piece between Brits and Gaels in Ireland.

Edit;

I have an early Holy Mark flag of Ireland, used by both the kings of Munster and Ulster. The early version is the silver harp on a pale yellow field, I've tried to recreate it as best I can, but not sure how to upload an image on my computer to the board. However, I think this should be agreeable. No blue, and it's not the overused flag of Leinster, and, it would be period.

Duke Malcolm

11-18-2004, 19:06

For Scots, I would have thought the Royal Lion Rampant, without the border, would be right.

Ranika

11-18-2004, 19:09

Actually, without any border, may be. It seems the red border is a banner, but only for the old Scottish Moarmor, and the personal guards of the king. But the banner of the king himself LACKED the border (the red border was meant to represent the blood the guards would shed for the king).

King Yngvar

11-19-2004, 00:23

I have an early Holy Mark flag of Ireland, used by both the kings of Munster and Ulster. The early version is the silver harp on a pale yellow field, I've tried to recreate it as best I can, but not sure how to upload an image on my computer to the board. However, I think this should be agreeable. No blue, and it's not the overused flag of Leinster, and, it would be period.

For Scots, I would have thought the Royal Lion Rampant, without the border, would be right.

Oh well the flags are easy to make and that can probably be handled by myself. I need some 3d skinners though, did not seem like Martinius answered on my PM...

The_Doctor

11-20-2004, 11:46

"Oh well the flags are easy to make and that can probably be handled by myself. I need some 3d skinners though, did not seem like Martinius answered on my PM..."

I found out you PMed me a few minutes ago. Then I came here.

I will help you with your mod, but first I need to get a shower and read the last few pages of this thread.

BalkanTourist

11-20-2004, 13:34

"Special attention should be paid to the military organization of the Bulgarians. The army consisted of all physically strong and battle-fit men but, in critical times, young women were also known to have been recruited. It may be from those days that we have inherited the currently popular view that he who has not done his military service is no real man. Stringent customary rules turned later into a law, stipulated the rights and obligations of the military men and, in many respects, that law is very close to contemporary army statutes. The troops were mainly horse-mounted. Besides the light cavalry which was customary with the peoples in the steppes, the Bulgarians had contingents of heavily-armed soldiers with both men and horses covered in chainarmour made iron or felt. A blow delivered by the heavily armed cavalry (in khan Krum times at the beginning of the 9th century it was about 30 000-strong) could be compared with the effect of the blow a contemporary tank army would have on lightly-armed infantry divisions. In fact, the repeated Bulgarian victories over Byzantium were mainly due to the blows struck by the heavy cavalry. The Byzantine army had never had more than 400 heavily-armed warriors on horseback.

The armaments of the Bulgarians consisted of swords, battle axes, knives and javelins for the heavy cavalry, and lances for the light cavalry, as well as of heavy bows and arrows. "
http://www.bulgaria.com/history/bulgaria/live.html

The_Doctor

11-20-2004, 17:03

At last I can call myself a modder ~:)

I have started to make a skin for a huscarl unit. Right now I am working on the armour. I will show it a bit later today.

DemonArchangel

11-20-2004, 19:02

The_Doctor

11-20-2004, 20:13

I have got a screenshot of the huscarls, but I do not know how to post it.

King Yngvar

11-22-2004, 18:05

I was gone the whole weekend, if someone wonder why I did not answer...

I found out you PMed me a few minutes ago. Then I came here.

I will help you with your mod, but first I need to get a shower and read the last few pages of this thread.

Good to have you with us then ~:)

"Special attention should be paid to the military organization of the Bulgarians. The army consisted of all physically strong and battle-fit men but, in critical times, young women were also known to have been recruited. It may be from those days that we have inherited the currently popular view that he who has not done his military service is no real man. Stringent customary rules turned later into a law, stipulated the rights and obligations of the military men and, in many respects, that law is very close to contemporary army statutes. The troops were mainly horse-mounted. Besides the light cavalry which was customary with the peoples in the steppes, the Bulgarians had contingents of heavily-armed soldiers with both men and horses covered in chainarmour made iron or felt. A blow delivered by the heavily armed cavalry (in khan Krum times at the beginning of the 9th century it was about 30 000-strong) could be compared with the effect of the blow a contemporary tank army would have on lightly-armed infantry divisions. In fact, the repeated Bulgarian victories over Byzantium were mainly due to the blows struck by the heavy cavalry. The Byzantine army had never had more than 400 heavily-armed warriors on horseback.

The armaments of the Bulgarians consisted of swords, battle axes, knives and javelins for the heavy cavalry, and lances for the light cavalry, as well as of heavy bows and arrows. "

Thank you for the information, though I do believe the Byzantines had a little more than 400 men in the cavalry, pherhaps the heaviest cavalry, I'm not sure...

I have got a screenshot of the huscarls, but I do not know how to post it.

Send it to me on: yngvarv@hotmail.com
I will post it on my "photobucket" site.

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

By the way, Trajan made some new flags: http://forums.totalrome.com/index.php?showtopic=333&st=40&p=5161&, please feel free to comment.

The_Doctor

11-22-2004, 20:32

King Yngvar, your over your storaage limit on hotmail, so I can't send the screenshot to you

Meneldil

11-22-2004, 21:07

The new banners are quite nice :)

Ranika

11-22-2004, 21:49

Great looking new banners, I especially love the Papacy's banner, looks really well done.

I've been searching for pictures of dark age Irish/Scots (they dressed the same and had the same manner of hygiene/hair styles/etc. for quite a long time), but all I can find are high medieval-renaissance, and there were many drastic changes in appearance.

King Yngvar

11-23-2004, 13:59

I have only used 22% of 2 MB

It's enough, for a jpg pic at least. Make it into JPG before sending...

I've been searching for pictures of dark age Irish/Scots (they dressed the same and had the same manner of hygiene/hair styles/etc. for quite a long time), but all I can find are high medieval-renaissance, and there were many drastic changes in appearance.

Is the High-Medieval style totally unusable for the 900's?

JANOSIK007

11-23-2004, 16:59

So I decided for a starting age, at first that starting age will be 911 as it is more interresting and with more options than 793. Just another thing that proves this is not the same as Viking Invasion. Well, mostly I decided this because of Normandy and the Magyars, as they will now be included.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v518/Carthago/King%20Hasdrubal%20I/911.jpg

Only the provinces of the north have been lined up there, the rest of Europe is just bordered by factions for now.

Factions:

Norway
Sweden
Denmark
Wessex (or England)
Dublin-York (yes I know they were not united until 919, but no need to include them both)
Scotland (or Alba, just think Scotland sounds better)
Ireland (or Eire)
Wales (or use one of the names of a Welsh principality, f.ex Gwynedd or Dyfedd?. Yes, just one province, but we want them in don't we?)
Kingdom of Vendland (those two provinces east of Denmark if you wondered, Slavic people)
Normandy
Frankish Kingdom (or West-Frankish Kingdom)
German Kingdom (or East-Frankish Kingdom)
Cordoba
Asturia
Italy (yes there were actually a kingdom called Italy from the late 800's till mid 900's)
Papacy (the Catholic "senate")
Poland
Magyars (or Hungary)
Kijev/Novgorod/Konugard/Holmgard (still not sure which name to use)
Bulgar Khanate
Khazar Khanate
Byzantine Empire (or Romanoi Empire/Eastern-Roman Empire?)
Fatimid Kaliphate (started out in Algeria in 901, rapidly expanded westwards, took Egypt later on)
Abbasid Kaliphate (the original Kaliphate, the Fatimids challenged them for the title of Kalif)

I have a strong suggestion for you to include Great Moravian Empire. If the game is going to be about Dark Ages then they must be in. They were an important European Ally of Byzantines against Bulgars and Franks. They even managed to snatch some territorial posessions from both of them. Morava was important for the history of Central Europe and I think they justly belong there (in place of Magyars). Their territories included: present day Czech rep., Slovakia, Lusatia-Silesia (present day SE Germany and S Poland), Panonia, and parts of Germany, Austria, even into Romania. From the East it bordered with Kievan Rus (separated by few tribes), similar to what you drew on the map. So it was a moajor contender for power in Central Europe and that's why Franks invited Magyars on them (which became a problem for them as well). Speaking of which, Magyars weren't as centralized and were located further East (I'd say aroun Crimea) pressured by Pechenegs.

If I can ask you, what are those grey territories to the east of Germany up in th north around the river Elbe. Historically all lands East of Elbe belonged to Slavs. Only in medieval HRE began expanding east and assimilating Slavs there.

Ranika

11-23-2004, 20:33

Is the High-Medieval style totally unusable for the 900's?

Yes, with the exception of clothing in Ireland (but not Scotland, it had changed there), weapons, armor, and troop types from the 900s, had completely changed by the high-medieval period. The word 'kern' meant a semi-professional soldier by this point, so whenever you see a medieval kern, he has a lochaber axe, maybe some padded or leather armor, etc. However, in the 900s, a kern was just a peasant, and not at all professional. The Irish shifted gears a good deal, they had more cavalry, still used hobilars, but they dressed differently (inspired by Norman clothing and armor), many of their soldiers simply aren't mentioned or used. The only usable images you'd find are probably going to be gallowglass, because this was the period when they came into use. It's a severe pain, but I think I may be able to find at least a few things, but it may take me a little. I'll have some good, accurate depictions soon, I hope.

Meneldil

11-23-2004, 20:44

'Good' news guys, the problem I was having with the extended map is not related to the modification. I just re-installed RTW, and the original map is bugged aswell. I'll start working on it seriously tomorrow.

King Yngvar

11-24-2004, 02:13

I have a strong suggestion for you to include Great Moravian Empire.

Will be concidered, it would be located in the rebel provinces between Germans, Magyars and Poles then? If you help us make them that would be nice. I for one have no knowledge about Moravia except where they were...

Speaking of which, Magyars weren't as centralized and were located further East (I'd say aroun Crimea) pressured by Pechenegs.

I checked it in several sources, Magyars were located in Hungary by 911. They had been so for over a decade...

If I can ask you, what are those grey territories to the east of Germany up in th north around the river Elbe.

Vendland, a slavic tribe. Used to be alot of wars between them and the Scandinavians...

'Good' news guys, the problem I was having with the extended map is not related to the modification. I just re-installed RTW, and the original map is bugged aswell. I'll start working on it seriously tomorrow.

I found that out myself, playing a campaign as Scythia I had problems getting to the Amazon city as the "corner bug" came to me all the time...

It's a severe pain, but I think I may be able to find at least a few things, but it may take me a little. I'll have some good, accurate depictions soon, I hope.

That sounds nice if you could find some, thank you.

Ranika

11-24-2004, 02:33

I may end up having to scan some stuff myself, but don't know how to post it on the forum. I'll procure some stuff though, and share it as soon as possible though.

JANOSIK007

11-24-2004, 17:04

I checked it in several sources, Magyars were located in Hungary by 911. They had been so for over a decade...

That is true, but I thought you would like Dark Ages which begin sooner. But if you want to make it about vikings that's fine. Although it is called Viking Age, I though it could be a more overarching Dark Age, spaning much larger window in time than Vking raids. If you would ever choose a Dark Age than it could be divided into three stages: first, much of Europe Decentralized- Franks and Byzantines would be two major powers as well as the Caliphate and Slavic tribes begin to band into larger confederations and lastly Avars as the biggest power in central Europe; second; forming of ditinct Slavic principalities and kingdoms (Morava, Kiev, 'Bulgaria'), break up of Franks, Avars wiped out, Byzantines under pressure from Bulgars-seek alliance with Morava; Third, Viking raids, destruction of Moravia by Magyars, Bohemia rises out of its ashes, Magyars established as a central European power, Poland established, last Turkish invasion from the east by Pechenegs (around Crimea), Bulgarian frist Empire falters (under pressure from Magyars who reduce their territories north of Danube and Byzantines until its eventual colapse in late 900s/early 1000s), Byzantines make considarable territirial conquests, HRE established. That's preety much it for Cetnral Europe.

Of course if you choose to cover only the latter stage aka Viking raids than Magyars are there instead of portions of Moravia.

I can help you with certain historical facts, especially in Central Europe. Im not much of use in modding department.

King Yngvar

11-24-2004, 18:23

I may end up having to scan some stuff myself, but don't know how to post it on the forum. I'll procure some stuff though, and share it as soon as possible though.

My email is yngvarv@hotmail.com, I can post up pics...

That is true, but I thought you would like Dark Ages which begin sooner. But if you want to make it about vikings that's fine. Although it is called Viking Age, I though it could be a more overarching Dark Age, spaning much larger window in time than Vking raids. If you would ever choose a Dark Age than it could be divided into three stages: first, much of Europe Decentralized- Franks and Byzantines would be two major powers as well as the Caliphate and Slavic tribes begin to band into larger confederations and lastly Avars as the biggest power in central Europe; second; forming of ditinct Slavic principalities and kingdoms (Morava, Kiev, 'Bulgaria'), break up of Franks, Avars wiped out, Byzantines under pressure from Bulgars-seek alliance with Morava; Third, Viking raids, destruction of Moravia by Magyars, Bohemia rises out of its ashes, Magyars established as a central European power, Poland established, last Turkish invasion from the east by Pechenegs (around Crimea), Bulgarian frist Empire falters (under pressure from Magyars who reduce their territories north of Danube and Byzantines until its eventual colapse in late 900s/early 1000s), Byzantines make considarable territirial conquests, HRE established. That's preety much it for Cetnral Europe.

Of course if you choose to cover only the latter stage aka Viking raids than Magyars are there instead of portions of Moravia.

I can help you with certain historical facts, especially in Central Europe. Im not much of use in modding department.

It's a matter of work, making three periods would take much more work. Pherhaps for an "expansion" after the mod is done, we could do an earlier starting age. This starting age however is set to 911, after the founding of Normandy by Gangr-Hrolf (Rollo). This is the middle of the Viking Age, after the establishment of Scandinavian kingdoms abroad. These are seen in Gardariki, Normandy and Dublin-York.

But if you know stuff from this period as well it would be nice with some historical help from you on Central Europe ~:)

JANOSIK007

11-25-2004, 17:49

But if you know stuff from this period as well it would be nice with some historical help from you on Central Europe ~:)[/QUOTE]

Sure. Although I hate Hungars for 1000 years of opression I will give the most accurate info on how the established themselves as a Central European power. Of course I will give you the appropriate info abot others as well.

I am reading right now 'Historical Atlas of Central Europe' by PR Magocsi. It has the best compilation of maps that I have seen for this region. This book rules.

The_Doctor

11-25-2004, 18:29

King Yngvar, I am going to be testing Duke John sengoku jadia mod. But I will continue to help you on this mod.

The website in your email is full of poetry and the British royal family.

Paul Peru

11-26-2004, 09:55

I hate Hungars for 1000 years of opression
Gods, you're old! ~;)
Sorry, I'm off topic, but hating someone for something someones forefathers did to your forefathers is not the way to bring the world forward, IMNSHO.
:bow:

Speiz_Bankurt

11-26-2004, 14:00

King Yngvar

11-26-2004, 16:22

King Yngvar, I am going to be testing Duke John sengoku jadia mod. But I will continue to help you on this mod.

The website in your email is full of poetry and the British royal family.

Alright, thank you for staying. By the way, I could not open the picture you sent me, it was loaded with virus...

What you mean by poetry and the British royal family? ~:confused:

JANOSIK007

11-26-2004, 16:23

Come on Janosik, there is no need to hate us Magyars. Everyone did a bit of pillaging and oppressing back in those days. If they didn't, this game wouldn't exist! Just think about that.

Besides, I don't think we really oppressed anyone. Most of "greater" Hungary was occupied by Magyars, except for Croatia. I have Croatian friends and they don't hate me.

To put this off-topic bit behind us, let me resolve this. OK, I don't hate Magyars for the sake of being Magyars. I just hate about the 1000 years (goddamn that's of Biblical proportions) of oppression. All the peasant revolts brutally supressesed, all the lynchings of peasants at the hands of drabs (hungarian police), all the rejection of our nationality and failure to recognize its worth and their right to self-govern (which apparently still prevails in some minds of your policy makers), and finally magyarization + treating my people as second-class citizens in their own country (which almost destroyed my culture completely). I can't perhaps set up a convincing argument about medieval times, but in 1800s when nationalism was prevalent Magyars tried to prevent these ideals from growing within the multitude of people they governed. Croatia was an exception, but the rest weren't so lucky. Most of greater Hungary outside of hungary itself (except for Transylvanian Szekelys) wasn't occupied by Hungarians. These people were a product of intense Hungarization as were the people within Hungary who were invited by the government after the Turkish were repelled. And those that were ethnic Magyars were a minority who treated majority as second-class citizens (Slovakia, Rus, Romania, Serbs). As if that wasn't enough, in WW2 Magyars invaded us and took with them areas that were occupied by Slovaks and Rusyns.

King Yngvar

11-26-2004, 16:32

but in 1800s when nationalism was prevalent Magyars tried to prevent these ideals from growing within the multitude of people they governed.

Don't forget that the Hungarians themselves was "oppressed" by Austria. Though the name Austro-Hungarian Empire may suggest a fair union where both have their say, it was really not. It was more like Denmark-Norway, the power resting in the first part of the name. Anyway, this discussion is a little off topic and posts like this:

Paul Peru:

Gods, you're old!
Sorry, I'm off topic, but hating someone for something someones forefathers did to your forefathers is not the way to bring the world forward, IMNSHO.

Would be deleted if I was a mod, lucky you I'm not ~:cool:

I will give the most accurate info on how the established themselves as a Central European power. Of course I will give you the appropriate info abot others as well.

I am reading right now 'Historical Atlas of Central Europe' by PR Magocsi. It has the best compilation of maps that I have seen for this region. This book rules.

Sounds great, thank you. Here is where we will mostly discuss the mod: http://forums.totalrome.com/vb/showthread.php?t=324

JANOSIK007

11-26-2004, 17:25

Don't forget that the Hungarians themselves was "oppressed" by Austria. Though the name Austro-Hungarian Empire may suggest a fair union where both have their say, it was really not. It was more like Denmark-Norway, the power resting in the first part of the name. Anyway, this discussion is a little off topic and posts like this:

Not really or not to the same extent. There was some inequity (like inequity between Austria and Czechs) but not an outright opression. You got your equality (after losing a war over it-> Lajos Kosuth, whom you may regard as a hero, was hated by non-Hungars in Hungary) with dual Austria-Hungary, but next up Magyars imposed even harsher oppression after reestablishing control, being the hypocrites they were (this was preety recent not medieval).

JANOSIK007

11-26-2004, 17:41

A thing or two that I can add to the map you intend to use:

Magyars at that starting date were not yet an established power. They were still committing raids all over the place, but most frequently towards the west. Bulgars were waning in power and would soon-100 years- come under Byzantine Empire as were the territories of present day Yugoslavia (which were experiencing some social unification). Germany was pushing east and would check the Magyar raids and end this threat once and for all. Poland was on the rise (location is pretty accurate). Kievan Rus was also stepping up on the ladder of prominence. Its continuous raids on Bulgars contributed to their weakening. Pechengs (which I assume is the light blue) were in decline. Their location was pretty much all over the place and puting them as a state would be tricky. Kievan Rus held a dominance over much of their territories in central Europe.

The_Doctor

11-26-2004, 20:18

Alright, thank you for staying. By the way, I could not open the picture you sent me, it was loaded with virus...

How very odd. I scanned it before I sent it.

What you mean by poetry and the British royal family?

www.emule.com was the web address in your email. You said there was photoshop and modeling stuff on there. Its only got stuff about poetry and the British royal family. ~:confused:

Speiz_Bankurt

11-27-2004, 00:51

The Magyars occupied the Carpathian basin in 890. So by 910, which I understand is the starting year of this mod, they should be still sorting themselves out but by about 950 they were certainly settled down and had a centralised government. I think the raids that Janosik mentioned went on till the mid/late 10th century.

Janosik, peasent rebellions in my opinion were more of a class strugle rather than an ethnic one, the magyar peasents were just as ruthlessly treated as the slavic ones, by the nobles. Anyway, I will not talk about this anymore since it is completely off-topic in this thread (although I would have a fair bit to say to you).

King Yngvar

11-27-2004, 01:14

New Map

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/VikingMod911idea4.bmp

I has gotten around to know that it is impossible to add new factions. So we are stuck with 21 it seems. That is why the change, date will change to 900 AD.

A thing or two that I can add to the map you intend to use:

Magyars at that starting date were not yet an established power. They were still committing raids all over the place, but most frequently towards the west. Bulgars were waning in power and would soon-100 years- come under Byzantine Empire as were the territories of present day Yugoslavia (which were experiencing some social unification). Germany was pushing east and would check the Magyar raids and end this threat once and for all. Poland was on the rise (location is pretty accurate). Kievan Rus was also stepping up on the ladder of prominence. Its continuous raids on Bulgars contributed to their weakening. Pechengs (which I assume is the light blue) were in decline. Their location was pretty much all over the place and puting them as a state would be tricky. Kievan Rus held a dominance over much of their territories in central Europe.

The Magyars have to be in...

The light blue is Kiev. The other was Khazaria, but I had to remove them due to the faction limit. Kievan Rus, or Gardariki as they will be in this mod, is ruled by Helgi Røreksson at this point and is on the rise ~:)

wilpuri

11-27-2004, 14:07

Why is S.W Finland Yellow (Swedish)!? It was not under Scandinavian control by any means during this period.

DemonArchangel

11-27-2004, 16:04

so you're just deleteing the Khazars, Fatimids, Abbasids? GAH! That's downright wrong!

Reduce the number of british factions in the british isles if anything.

DemonArchangel

11-27-2004, 16:16

Norway
Sweden
Denmark
Wessex
Dublin-York
Scotland
Ireland
Wales
Normandy
Frankish Kingdom
German Kingdom
Cordoba
Asturia
Italy
Papacy (the Catholic "senate")
Poland
Magyars
Kijev/Novgorod/Konugard/Holmgard Bulgar Khanate
Byzantine Empire
Fatimid Kaliphate
Abbasid Kaliphate

There, exactly 21, the rest shall be rebels.

JANOSIK007

11-27-2004, 17:42

King Yngvar

11-27-2004, 19:36

Why is S.W Finland Yellow (Swedish)!? It was not under Scandinavian control by any means during this period

It was to strengthen the Swedes, but then I actually forgot that the Swedes did hold Hedeby in 900 as well, so it may not be necessary. I want Värmland to be Norwegian as it was taken by Harald Hårfagri. But I should make a new map with a few fixes in the north...

Norway
Sweden
Denmark
Wessex
Dublin-York
Scotland
Ireland
Wales
Normandy
Frankish Kingdom
German Kingdom
Cordoba
Asturia
Italy
Papacy (the Catholic "senate")
Poland
Magyars
Kijev/Novgorod/Konugard/Holmgard Bulgar Khanate
Byzantine Empire
Fatimid Kaliphate
Abbasid Kaliphate

You mean cutting out Karelia and Bulgars to fit in Fatimids and Abbasids?

You should include more east territories for Kiev. It went further east, though that may have happened later in history.

I think it was around 907 the Rus captured some more land south of Kiev, however another province could be added to them until new information is revealed...

Meneldil

11-29-2004, 19:13

I'm finally back. I had some connection issues, but I did not waste my time, I worked on the map. Scotland is ready, and scandinavians lands are 50% done.

King Yngvar

11-29-2004, 21:34

Yes good work, I looked at them ~:)

DemonArchangel

11-29-2004, 21:38

Actually, cut out Karelia and the Fatimids in order to fit the Abbassids and the Bulgars in.

King Yngvar

12-01-2004, 17:02

Actually, cut out Karelia and the Fatimids in order to fit the Abbassids and the Bulgars in.

We already cut the Vends, they would be a new addition never seen before, don't really want to cut the Karelians as well. The Fatimids and Abbasids will be added if there is a possibility to have more than 21 factions.

Now to another faction question: What do people think about the "Romans" that are necessary, the Papacy will act as Senate, but who should we have as Romans?

DemonArchangel

12-01-2004, 22:52

The Catholic Factions of Course.

Ranika

12-01-2004, 23:44

There are too many Catholic factions to have them all as the "Romans" though, and most of them should have the chance to fight one another as soon as they want.

BalkanTourist

12-02-2004, 06:58

400? that's a typo or crock of shit.
Aye, it should be 4000.
Regarding Bulgarian - Magyar relations. The Byzantines were "true" Romans always dividing and conquering. I am not sure if the Moravians ever had quarrels with the Bulgarian Kingdom, but I wouldn't doubt it since Byzantium tried to turn all our neighbors against us so that we are distracted from waring the Empire. They persuaded the newly shaped as a people Serbs to attack us for which Serbia and Croatia were under Bulgarian control during the reign of Czar Simeon The Great. Then came the Magyar nomads and caused a lot of havoc. There is this passage that I'd like to paste.
===================================================
In order to drive off the Bulgarian troops from the avenues of approach to Constantinople, Byzantium sent for the militant Magyars, then dwelling in the lands of the present-day steppes of the Russian Black Sea littoral. Their invincible cavalry raids were known to have passed like a dark cloud all over Europe from the Don to the Atlantic.

"The Magyar incursion on the north Bulgarian lands forced Simeon to abandon Thrace and to hurry the better part of his army northwards. It did not succeed in winning the field and Simeon even had to encamp his troops behind the walls of the big Bulgarian forts along the bank of the Danube. The Magyars advanced on Preslav, the new Bulgarian capital, and besieged it.

The situation in Bulgaria was full of drama. With the Bulgarian elite troops confined to the castles by the Danube, Preslav was left to the weak and unfit for action volunteer forces consisting of adolescents, old men and women. To the south, Byzantium was preparing an offensive by an enormous army that could hardly be stopped by the meagre Bulgarian troops left back in Thrace. The Bulgarian capital was obviously the target of a most ferocious warfare The voluntary forces had hard times driving back a series of attacks on the fortress, with their strength wearing thin and their water and food supplies running low. The Magyars were preparing themselves for the zero-hour assault.

At this juncture, as reported by West European chroniclers, Boris I cast off his monastic cassock to head the troops. The appearance of the 90-year old man in full armour, flourishing a sword in front of the voluntary forces defending the capital, revived the general public enthusiasm which, at times, verged on religious ecstasy. The young saw him as a saintly man who had just come back to life (Boris was canonized after his death but to many he had been a saint while still living). The elderly perceived him as a relic of their heroic military past. So inspired, the volunteers did not even wait for the actual assault to start but left the capital walls into the fields encompassing them and threw themselves into a fight against the Magyars. The battle was ruthlessly fierce. The Magyar crack besiege army was destroyed to the last man. The siege of the Bulgarian capital was raised. Boris was still putting back on his monastic cassock when the Bulgarian crack regiments left the Danube fortifications and took the offensive. Having driven the remains of the Magyar troops out of Bulgaria, Simeon made his way into the territories occupied by the Magyars. The enraged Bulgarians destroyed everything that crossed their path. The Magyars were forced to abandon for good the Black Sea littoral steppes and to settle in the heart of Europe, where they founded their own state. "
http://www.bulgaria.com/history/bulgaria/predom.html
During the 10th century The Bulgarian Kingdom held most of Thrace ( south of the Balkan Mtns/Phillipopolis - capital), Macedonia ( west of Thrace/Ohrid), Moesia (north of the Balkan Mtns/Preslav), Dobrudja (near Black Sea and the Danube delta/Preslavets), Dacia - north of the Danube. Serbia (toward the end of tenth century it split, but Belgrade and Branichevo districts were still strong Bulgarian castles. The Bulgarian power reached even Budapest in modern Hungary, eventhough I doubt it was occupied by a large Bulgarian population.

Meneldil

12-02-2004, 07:03

You know my opinion about the 3 romans factions :

1 & 2 - Western and Eastern Franks, mainly because they were supported by the pope and often helped him against Lombards, Italians, Magyars

3 - Asturia. Since it was at war with Al-Andalus, a muslim KD, it was fully supported by the papacy.

BalkanTourist

12-02-2004, 07:18

Also, please don't confuse the Bulgarian Kingdom with the Bulgarian Khanate and the Bulgarian Khaganate. TheBulgarian Khanate was the state of the Bulgars with capital Phanagoria near Sochi and Astrahan in Southern Russia. It was spread in the vast steppes of Southern Ukraine, Crimea, Northern Georgia. It was a state that was well respected and the Byzantines paid tribute to them to guard the steppes from new nomads constantly coming from Asia. They succeeded in doing that until the Khazars came and finally subdued them. It split into five groups. One went to Northern Italy and melted with the local population without leaving a trace. One other group went up north to where Volga and Kama rivers join and formed yet another Bulgaria that is known as the Volga-Kama Bulgarian Khaganate. They survived until the 13th century, accepted Islam and were subdued by the Mongols. Today their ancestor live in the Tatarstan Republic which is in Russia.Another group went to where the Rep. of Macedonia is now, and along with the group led by khan Asparukh and the local slavs - anti and slavinii eventualy formed the Bulgarian Kingdom in the Balkans, which was a khanate at first - 681, then when Christianity was accepted as a state religion it was a Principality (865) and then Czar (slav version of Caesar or King) Simeon was given his title after repeatedly defeating the Byzantines in the 10th century. The last group stayed where they where and melted with the Khazars. Which were half a millenium later pretty much destroyed by the Kievan Rus.

DemonArchangel

12-02-2004, 21:14

4000 Klibanophoroi maybe.
More heavy calvary than that for sure.

Speiz_Bankurt

12-03-2004, 01:48

That's interesting info there Balkan Tourist. So were the Magyars attacking the Bulgars because the Byzantines paid them to?

Also I thought that the attack on the Magyar settlements was done in co-ordination with the Pethcenegs. Is that true? According to Hungarian historians when the Bulgars and Petchenegs wiped out the Magyar settlements north of the Black sea, the majority of the Magyar forces were still abroad raiding western countries and checking out "future" Hungary.

I'm just curious, at this time when the Magyars appeared, where the Bulgars you speak of still more of a Turkic people, or were they already becoming more Slavic like they are today?

Sorry to everyone if this is off topic!

BalkanTourist

12-03-2004, 06:34

[B]That's interesting info there Balkan Tourist. So were the Magyars attacking the Bulgars because the Byzantines paid them to?
That is correct. The Byzantines commonly used that practice to have their enemies defeated.
1. Czar Simeon was advancing on Constantinople when the Magyars attacked the North and threatened the capital. He had to turn back and face the Magyars.
2. The Byzantines tried to persuade the Pechenegs to also advance on the Bulgarians. Unsuccessfully.
Of course it took a lot of cash to do that, but the Byzantines could afford it more than they could afford to mass an adequate army against the Bulgarians since they were always fighting the Arabs in Asia Minor.
3. Later that century they promised lots of loot and plunder as well as trade rights to Kniaz Sviatoslav of the Kievan Rus to come from Kiev and attack the Bulgarians from the north while the Byzantines taking a break from the wars in Asia Minor decided to finish the Bulgarian Kingdom once and for all and marched a huge army into Thrace thus braking the 50 year peace between the two states.
The Kievans sacked Preslav, capital of the Bulgarian Kingdom which was moved to Ohrid in present day Macedonia. Later though, following a despute the Kievans allied the Bulgarians and together defended Preslav from the Byzantine army.
Eventually the First Bulgarian Kingdom came to an end in 1018 thanks to Basil II Bulgaroctonus (The Bulgarian Slayer) who won several decisive battles after one of them he blinded 15,000 Bulgarian prisoners of war leaving one one-eyed man per 100 to lead them back to the capital of Ohrid. When King Samuel saw what happened to his army he died of a heart attack. That was in 1014.

Also I thought that the attack on the Magyar settlements was done in co-ordination with the Pethcenegs. Is that true? According to Hungarian historians when the Bulgars and Petchenegs wiped out the Magyar settlements north of the Black sea, the majority of the Magyar forces were still abroad raiding western countries and checking out "future" Hungary.

1.That is also true. The Pechenegs decided to ally with Bulgaria and not the Byzantines. The Pechenegs were superb cavalrymen not any worse than the Magyars. With their help the Magyars were tamed and politely "showed the door" to the west. Had they not allied the Bulgarians, the Magyars were still gonna be in present day Romania probably. Unfortunatelly as it happens with most of the nomad tribes the Pechenegs melted into the local population without leaving any significant traces.
2. Do not confuse Bulgars and Bulgarians. Bulgarians = Bulgars +Anti +Slavinii.

I'm just curious, at this time when the Magyars appeared, where the Bulgars you speak of still more of a Turkic people, or were they already becoming more Slavic like they are today?

- The Huns, Pechenegs, Cumans and others were of turkic origin
1. Magyars are not of turkic origin . They are of Ugro-Finnic origin.
2. Contrary to popular believes the Bulgars were not of turkic origin and neither were they nomads.There is a new theory based on many archeological excavations that the birthland of the Bulgars is in the mountains of northern Afganistan. They are thought to be of Alano-Sarmatic origin related to Persians and Armenians.
Later they moved to the Caucasus and Caspian regions neighboring their kin the Alans and Persians. Even nowadays there are people closely related to them in the Northern Caucasus regions of Russia and Georgia (North Osetia, Dagestan, Chechnia and Ingushetia) - the Chuvash people and the Balkars (even their name is very similar to the Bulgars). Their language is a modern version of what the Bulgar language was 1500 years ago. The Bulgars had their own primitive way of writing but they did leave some documents like "Name list of all Bulgar Rulers". Today very few words are surviving in the Bulgarian language which is slavic.
Just facts:
-Bulgars worked the land as well as possesed livestock
-they were superb in the crafts and built towns of stone
-had a primitive writing system
-had a solid tradition in government
Most nomads only lived in temporary settlements for the winter. They never had defined borders and moved wherever there was grass for their livestock to graze on. They had loose unions and as soon as the ruler died most of them disbanded and disappeared (Atilla and the Huns)
The Bulgars fought succesfully the Arabs who were pushing north from Asia, they didn't just pack and leave but made an attempt to save their land. They also put up fierce fights with the Khazars before they spilt. But even when they split. They still carried on their tradition in statemanship and governing.
Only about 20,000 Bulgars led by Khan Asparukh made the trip from Phanagoria which was the last capital of the Bulgar Khanate near the Azovl Sea to the Danube delta. Even less were with Khan Kuber who after reaching Dalmatia, turned around and went south to Kutmichevitsa region (north of Thesaloniki in present day Rep. of Macedonia). There were already about 2,000,000 slavs in the South and Eastern Balkans.T hird component of the Bulgarians were the local Thracians who were Bulgarianized. (The ones that didn't hid in the mountains or became local herders ( they were called vlahi - name of region north of Danube Wallachia or Vlahia in Bulgarian)).The Illirians who were from the Thracian family are the ancestors of nowadays Albanians. And the Romanians are a mix of Romanized Dacians (who were also of the Thracian family), slavs and avars.
So you judge how Bulgar the Bulgarian state was. Before the Christening of the people the slavs had their gods - Perun (=Zeus=Thor), Volos, Lada etc, and the Bulgars had one god - Tangra. The Thracians had many gods Dionisius (the god of drinking and wild orgies) was one of the most famous ones.In 200 years - 681-865 there was one language, one religion - Christianity and people from the three people were mixing together. But Christianity was the single most important factor for the formation of the Bugarian identity. So in the 9th century the process was still going on but the devision of the people was not that visible. Still in general the Bulgars composed the majority of the ruling clique in the capital city of Pliska and then after Christianity came in Preslav (the new capial) but the local rules in Moesia,Thracia and Macedonia were mostly of slavic origin.

Sorry to everyone if this is off topic!

Sorry for the long post and I appologize that I went so off topic. I figured it would be interesting for people to know since not that many people are familiar with the history of that region.

Speiz_Bankurt

12-03-2004, 09:54

Thanks for that Balkan Tourist, most informative.

Although I might mention the origin of the Magyars is still in hot debate. The officially accepted theory is still the Finno-Ugorian, however there is more evidence pointing towards Turkic, and not just in linguistics. There is more politics in Hungarian history, than real history...

Just one more question. Is this Alano-Sarmatic theory widely accepted now?

BalkanTourist

12-03-2004, 12:04

I am not sure of the origin of the Magyars, I am sure you know about them more than I do. All I know is that they are related to the Finns and the Estonians. I'd be interested to know more about what happened to the Magyars after they were repulsed from Bulgaria and how did they end up in Panonia.
The Alano-Sarmatic theory is a fairly new one but has gained popularity among many Bulgarian historians. Franky I could care less if it is one way or the other, but I was just curious and read a book by Peter Dobrev that really made me agree with the new theory. He is an Economic History professor. Two of the sources he cites are the Armenian Geography - "Ashkharacuic" and the writtings of an Arab - Ibn Fadlan who travelled to the lands of the Volga-Bulgars.Most of his work is in Bulgarian and is quite impressive but he also has some books translated - "Inschriften und Alfabet der Urbulgaren. Sofia, 1995" in German and "Universum Protobulgaricum. New York, 1996" in English.
Here are some links in English I found.
Read this one first:
http://tangra.bitex.com/eng/calendar/1999/1.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/pb_lang/
This is a site that supports the turkic theory but if you read about the Bulgars it really contradicts itself. They say they were nomads, but which other nomads built cities of stone? And eventhough it says that the conclusions are Dobrev's that's not true as at the bottom credits were given to his major opponent - Bojidar Dimitrov, P.H.D.
http://wings.buffalo.edu/gsa/bigsa/works/history/
http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/b_lang/cluster_user.html
I recomend this one as well:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/thread?forumid=84302&messageid=1026301226&lp=1029837527

That should be enough for you to make up your mind. What do you think? Feel free to do more research if you love history like I do. And let me know how I can improve my knowledge of the Hungarians. You know they almost saved us from the Turks in 1444. They came so close!

Speiz_Bankurt

12-03-2004, 14:49

Well, I really know little about Bulgars and I always thought they were Turkic but ofcourse I am not doubting this new theory. New discoveries are always being made. I generally have a great interest in eastern nomad cultures that moved to Europe. I will read these links you have given.

However your point on nomads not building cities isn't accurate, I know several exeptions. For instance, Chinese archeologists have recently discovered an ancient Hun city in the deserts of western China. I don't have the link right now but I've read about it in several news sources and even national geographic has a good article on it on their web site. It was appearantly a very large stone city and they are convinced it was built and occupied by the Huns who were supposed to be nomads.
They also built at least one stone city when they came to Europe.

What happened to the Magyars? Well, after the Bulgars and Petchenegs attacked them they moved to present day Hungary where they continued in their old ways for about a century. Then they converted to Christanity and transformed into a feudalistic society. They managed to build a powerful medieval state which was only crushed by the Turks in the 16th century. All downhill after that...

Just going back to the Magyar-Bulgar conflict, most historians think the Magyars attacked several factions in the area at that time not just because they were hired by someone as mercs, but also to carry out a bit of recon about where they can migrate to in Europe. They were constantly pressured by the Petchenegs, who were quite strong at this time, to move westwards.

Well, that's it, we'll better stop hijacking this thread from its intended purpose. BTW, it's a pitty we couldn't save you from the Turks, they screwed us too in the end!! 1444, was that the battle at Varna(sp?)??

King Yngvar

12-03-2004, 23:19

Please take the heavy discussion somewhere else, unless you guys wish to give me appropriate names and pictures for Bulgarian and Magyar units, that would be something ~;)

Most of the progress have lately been discussed here, where we will soon get our own forum (I'm not sure when):
http://forums.totalrome.com/vb/showthread.php?p=5779#post5779

Speiz_Bankurt

12-04-2004, 00:15

I'll see if I can find you some pics.

wilpuri

12-04-2004, 02:38

Speiz_Bankurt

12-04-2004, 05:05

The finno-ugric theory is becoming more and more doubtful. Here's a good link for anyone interested on Magyars. It acknowledges the finno-ugric theory and mentions a few other ones which are also qiute feasable. There's also some mention of legends, obviously not factual info, but mildly interesting anyway.

http://hungarianhistory.freeservers.com/magyars.html

I found some pics btw, but I don't know how to post them.

King Yngvar

12-04-2004, 19:22

I have a Hungarian classmate, and he is almost Turkic in appearance. Black hair, darkish skin, dark eyes.

I've only met one in Norway, he had light skin, blue eyes and light brownish hair. I don't know if it is common, but still...

I found some pics btw, but I don't know how to post them.'

Make them into JPG files and send them to yngvarv@hotmail.com ~:)

Headhunter

12-04-2004, 20:47

I was just thinking how great it would be If RTW was made into a dark age mod, what your doing is way over what i expected. I really hope this gets finished, the blueprint for its looks great. :thumbsup:
I wouldn'd know were to start in modding RTW, so I'm sorry to say I'm really of no help to you other than a player in waiting. ~:)

Will there be much new graphic work and detail added?

King Yngvar

12-05-2004, 17:07

I wouldn'd know were to start in modding RTW, so I'm sorry to say I'm really of no help to you other than a player in waiting.

Perhaps you could be a tester when the time is ready ~:)

Will there be much new graphic work and detail added?

Well, since we can't use any of the original RTW units or buildings due to the leap in years, I guess we have to add much graphic work...

CaeroxVII

12-05-2004, 19:31

I like how this mod focuses on the vikings!(with the title: Viking Age!!)

Meneldil

12-05-2004, 20:28

Err, was that ironical or what ?

Headhunter

12-05-2004, 21:07

How do you upload images to your posts here? ~:confused:

Headhunter

12-05-2004, 23:25

...I have a few graphics that might be off use.

King Yngvar

12-06-2004, 05:26

I would give these links a try, for everyone who wish to post screenies. You can register and get free image space...

https://www.photobucket.com

http://www.imageshack.us

I like how this mod focuses on the vikings!(with the title: Viking Age!!)

Witty ~D

...I have a few graphics that might be off use.

You do? Sounds great ~:) If you wish to contact further, my msn/email is: yngvarv@hotmail.com

Headhunter

12-06-2004, 06:16

I would give these links a try, for everyone who wish to post screenies. You can register and get free image space...

https://www.photobucket.com

http://www.imageshack.us

Anyway of uploading images here without signing up to a third party spam fest?
How did you post those pics in your previous posts?

It seems a bit bizzare to have a modding forum were you can't upload images. :dizzy2:

Meneldil

12-06-2004, 12:12

Here's what I thought for the new factions :

The Senate > The Papacy
The Scipii > Western Franks
The Brutii > Eastern Franks
The Julii > The Kingdom of Asturias
The Greek Cities > The Kingdom of Italy
Macedon > The Byzantine Empire
The Seleucid Empire > The Bulgar Kaghnate
The Numidian > Al Andalus Khaliphate
The Carthaginian > Kievan Rus'
The Parthian > The Magyar
The Scythian > The Pole
The Egyptian > Ungrian people (don't remember their name)
The German > The Dane
The Gauls > Normandy
The Britons > Sweden
The Dace > Norway
Armenia > The Scot
Pontus > The Irish
The Iberian > Mercia
The Thracian > York
The Slaves > The Rebels

As you can see, there are 21 factions, slaves included, so we have to cut out another faction. I thought about the welsh, but any faction from britain could do it, since there are many people on a not so big island..

The factions in bold are the real important ones, since they will be the one that will receive missions from the senate, and will probably be allied at the beginning of the game. I think the 2 frankish factions must be allied with the senate. I chose the KoAsturia as the third faction because it was fully supported by the pope during their fight against Al Andalus.
We could also set the Kingdom of Italy as the third roman faction, so it doesn't attack the pope after a few turns.

Hopefully, the next patch will allow us to add new factions.

Headhunter

12-06-2004, 17:11

None of those are period except Leinster's, but Ulster's is closest to period (just needs a silver cross in the palm).

However, there is an Irish flag that is simply a white field with a silver harp upon it. It is the Holy Mark, and was often flown by Irish kings, as an alternative to the blue-with-gold harp.
Edit;

I have an early Holy Mark flag of Ireland, used by both the kings of Munster and Ulster. The early version is the silver harp on a pale yellow field, I've tried to recreate it as best I can, but not sure how to upload an image on my computer to the board. However, I think this should be agreeable. No blue, and it's not the overused flag of Leinster, and, it would be period.

Heres two flags I made for Ireland based on your info. I prefer the white but whatever you think yourself.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/AIrelandBanner.jpg

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/AIrelandBannerwhite.jpg

I resized these graphics that i did a couple of years ago for civ3. I thought they could be used to add a bit of unique flavour to the mod.
If you like them theres another 10 more.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/scotdiplo.jpg
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/frankhead.jpg

Ranika

12-06-2004, 17:16

One minor addition to the flag I forgot would be the presence of three crosses in the lower left corner, arranged like:

1
1 1

The top cross and the lower left cross are typical Celtic crosses with 'halos' around the cross-point, and the the lower right is a cross with no halo. Otherwise, very good looking flags, except the yellow variant would be paler. It's an almost white-yellow (probably why mine has few traces of the yellow color left in it). Also, this board displays it improperly. The top cross is in the middle of the lower two.

Meneldil

12-06-2004, 17:37

HeadHunter, those pics are awesome ~:)

Would you mind sending them to me ?

Headhunter

12-06-2004, 19:39

Hows that?

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/AIrelandBanner2.jpg

Ranika

12-06-2004, 19:53

That looks great, that's the proper hue and crosses. I like that flag.

Headhunter

12-06-2004, 22:23

I was reading your discription of the period scots flag but I can't really picture it.
You know your stuff, so If you post up some links and/or images of other flags for factions that are definitly goiing to be in the game I can get them done and over with.

If they arn't the exact type you can explain the rest and i'll try to get it close enough.

King Yngvar

12-07-2004, 15:50

I have actually been doing some rethinking, concidering the flag of the high kings (Ireland will still be "brutii coloured" on the map).

http://www.hostkingdom.net/irelarms.gif

Another option is the flag newly made by Headhunter

The last one is the flag of Leinster (green with a golden harp).

Everyone make your vote for one of these three, I will post up a poll on TotalRome and put up the link here: http://forums.totalrome.com/vb/showthread.php?t=572

I resized these graphics that i did a couple of years ago for civ3. I thought they could be used to add a bit of unique flavour to the mod.
If you like them theres another 10 more.

Nice character pics, thank you. Would be neat if you showed us the others as well ~:)

The Senate > The Papacy
The Scipii > Western Franks
The Brutii > Eastern Franks
The Julii > The Kingdom of Asturias
The Greek Cities > The Kingdom of Italy
Macedon > The Byzantine Empire
The Seleucid Empire > The Bulgar Kaghnate
The Numidian > Al Andalus Khaliphate
The Carthaginian > Kievan Rus'
The Parthian > The Magyar
The Scythian > The Pole
The Egyptian > Ungrian people (don't remember their name)
The German > The Dane
The Gauls > Normandy
The Britons > Sweden
The Dace > Norway
Armenia > The Scot
Pontus > The Irish
The Iberian > Mercia
The Thracian > York
The Slaves > The Rebels

This should not mean colours on everyone however...

Norway: German Red
Denmark: Dacian Brown
Sweden: Egyptian Yellow
German Kingdom: Macedon Black
Frankish Kingdom: Scipii Blue
Scotland: Dark Blue
Dublin-York: Briton Blue
Karelia: Thracian Blue
Ireland: Brutii Green
Italy: Gallic Green
Normandy: Scythian Orange
Wessex: Julii Red
Cordoba: Iberian Colour(name?)
Gardariki: Carthaginian White
Papacy: Light Yellow
Byzantine Empire: Senate Purple
Magyars: Greek Colour(name?)
Poland: Parthian Purple
Bulgar Kingdom: Dark Brown

As you can see, there are 21 factions, slaves included, so we have to cut out another faction. I thought about the welsh, but any faction from britain could do it, since there are many people on a not so big island..

Yeap, they may have to go, even though Britain will be the smallest piece of land with such an high amount of provinces.

We could also set the Kingdom of Italy as the third roman faction, so it doesn't attack the pope after a few turns

I was thinking to add Italy, Asturia and the German Kingdom. Cutting out the western Franks, leaving things open for warfare between them and the other remains of the Carolingian empire. They could be given some extra strength in return.

However if we do get the ability to make more than the 20 factions I suggest splitting Italy in three parts:

Kingdom of Italy, Venetia and Benevento. These could just get the exact same units...

King Yngvar

12-07-2004, 15:52

Ranika

12-07-2004, 16:00

I was having trouble finding a proper flag for the Scots, online at least. But then, I found one almost identical to the period proper one. It's the modern Scottish government flag. http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/icons/rampflag.gif This flag is almost identical. In 900, the Scot's used what was essentially this flag, but with no red border, and a crossed spear and sword beneath the lion. A similar flag, but with a solid red border, was used as the banner of the Moarmor, the Scottish king's personal guards and elite soldiers.

I've been growing closer to wanting the 'holy mark' style of flag for Ireland. The blue background with gold harp is close, and not truly improper (it was used about the same time as the holy mark, varying kings used each one on and off).

Headhunter

12-07-2004, 18:02

Nice character pics, thank you. Would be neat if you showed us the others as well ~:)

I don't know if these are of any use. I think that each head in the game comes as a set, progressing to old age, were as this is all i have. I could try to make them look older with photoshop but it would be too much effort for crap results compared to the heads already in the game.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/allheads.jpg
Heres one that could be used a druid retinue pic maybe.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/head13.jpg

Ranika, just to clear it up before i start. Should the scots flag just be the lion with a sword and spear below, nothing else, and the banner the same but with a soild red border?

Ranika

12-07-2004, 18:07

wilpuri

12-07-2004, 18:58

I assume the Light Green on the map is Karelia? If so, there were a few things I would change:

1) Take away the most eastern province. There was very little real contact besides trade and hunting trips over such long distances.

2) Give Savo and Western Karelia to Karelia.

So the map would look like this:

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v103/wilpuri/karjala.bmp

Headhunter

12-07-2004, 21:21

It should be the same, with sword and spear, but no red border. I suggested the red border earlier, by mistake. That's not the king's mark in 900, it's the mark of his bodyguards. So, it would be a rampant lion, on a plain yellow field, with sword and spear beneath it, and no border.

Scots flag/banner. I'm not that happy with it, but if you think it looks ok it'll do. Its the best i could do with the sword and spear.
If it isn't up to scratch I can do another one without them or someone else can have a go at doing the sword and spear.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/scotbanner.jpg

Ranika

12-07-2004, 21:28

That looks alright to me, spear and sword could maybe use a bit work, but they look alright, that'd look fine in game to me.

Headhunter

12-07-2004, 21:32

An older looking verson, the sword and spear don't look as out of place in this one.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/scotbanner2.jpg

Ranika

12-07-2004, 21:35

That looks much better, go with that one.

Headhunter

12-07-2004, 22:15

Ranika, do you have any info the wessex flag of the time?
I'd look myself, but your more knowledgeable about details of that time than me.
'Dublin-york': Would it not be better to give Leinster in Ireland to Norway to drag them into war with Ireland and call the northern anglo-saxon kingdom Mercia?

If so, info on Mercian flag of the time. If not something to represent Dublin-york.

Headhunter

12-07-2004, 22:17

..or is york already under viking rule?

Ranika

12-07-2004, 22:30

Mercia was about to disappear by 900 though, it would be absorbed into Wessex in 919, when the queen died, and her brother, King Edward, inherited the land.

York, I believe, was already under viking rule, and Leinster wasn't actually controlled by the vikings, and wasn't even sympathetic to them yet. The northern counties would pledge themselves to the king of Dublin in 950. Ulster and Leinster as indepedent territories should be the flashpoint for the viking-Irish conflict, fighting over dominance of the island. Historically, the vikings ended up controlling Leinster by proxy, but Ulster was a rather unwilling vassal of Munster-Connacht, which absorbed Ulster by demand that the king of Ulaid surrender his crown. The subsequent war was fought over economic and social factors (not a small one, of which was religion). The war actually started in the early 900s, but didn't really get rolling in earnest for a few decades.

And I have a period flag of Wessex, trying to find it. The flag of Mercia was changed twice though between 900-919 (when it was absorbed). The last flag was essentially a blue and white version of the flag of Wessex, though want to make sure I don't mistake the design.

Edit;

In 905, the flag of Wessex was a black sword on a red field, with a black clenched fist below it, and a border of diagonal black lines. The only flag of Mercia I know the design of was the same, but blue and white instead of black and red, respectively.

Headhunter

12-07-2004, 22:40

I was just thinking for gameplay issues, but realised i was probably talking through my arse as soon as i hit the send button. :book: :huh2:

I think sometimes you have give yourself a bit of artisic licence though and sacrifice some details in history to get the AI and game rolling in the right direction.

Ranika

12-07-2004, 22:43

Dublin and the Irish will be pressed right against one another though, either way it goes. The AI will go for the nearest rebel provinces, then fight what is right next to it. So, the Irish and Dublin-York should go to war pretty much immediately after Ulster and Leinster are claimed which is about when the true bulk of the war occured.

If there were space, including Mide as a province would be nice, they fought the vikings indepedently for some time, and what remained of Meath pledged to the Irish king, but it was generally heavily assailed by vikings (and would be a first rebel province for Dublin to take, since it'd be so close to Dublin).

However, I'd only ask for Mide if there is still some room (not all the possible provinces used).

Meneldil

12-07-2004, 22:50

I think we still have some room for the provinces right now ~:)

Headhunter

12-07-2004, 23:18

And I have a period flag of Wessex, trying to find it. The flag of Mercia was changed twice though between 900-919 (when it was absorbed). The last flag was essentially a blue and white version of the flag of Wessex, though want to make sure I don't mistake the design.

Edit;

In 905, the flag of Wessex was a black sword on a red field, with a black clenched fist below it, and a border of diagonal black lines. The only flag of Mercia I know the design of was the same, but blue and white instead of black and red, respectively.

I couldn'd find anything on the net so I'll need more info on the flag. I threw this together as a reference for you to help explain.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/Flagsmall2.jpg
What i need to know is how thick is the border, how thick and how many lines within the border.
The shade of red.
The position of the sword, vertical or horizontal.

If the mercian flag is the right flag to use for Dublin-york, the shade of blue.

If you can find any links that have a similar pattern/colour shades, even better. It'll give me a better idea of what to do and save time.

Headhunter

12-07-2004, 23:42

Dublin and the Irish will be pressed right against one another though, either way it goes. The AI will go for the nearest rebel provinces, then fight what is right next to it. So, the Irish and Dublin-York should go to war pretty much immediately after Ulster and Leinster are claimed which is about when the true bulk of the war occured.

What I trying to say, I could be wrong, was that the york Kingdom was a predominately Danish-viking kingdom, were as the domaniant viking presence in Ireland was mostly Norway-Viking.

So giving leinster to Norway would hopefully make them cross the sea when war breaks out. In my experience the AI in RTW never seems to invade islands.

Viking-York could then be allied with the Danes to keep them focused on Britian.

Just an idea.

Ranika

12-07-2004, 23:59

Dublin-York already has a flag, I believe, already done. And they'd not use the Mercian flag anyway.

The lines in the border are about half as thick, but the red and black are evenly sized. The border is a small bit thinner (about 3/4 of that). The sword is vertical. The flag is huge though, so I really can't take the time to count the lines, I simply don't have the patience. The red is only a bit darker than that.

King Yngvar

12-08-2004, 00:21

Nice pictures Headhunter, I like them ~:)

What I trying to say, I could be wrong, was that the york Kingdom was a predominately Danish-viking kingdom, were as the domaniant viking presence in Ireland was mostly Norway-Viking.

So giving leinster to Norway would hopefully make them cross the sea when war breaks out. In my experience the AI in RTW never seems to invade islands.

Viking-York could then be allied with the Danes to keep them focused on Britian.

It was not until 919 that York came under Dublin rule. But still there is no point in having them both. And the idea of Norway attacking Ireland sounds strange to me as this only occured in 1098-1103 on Magnus Barefoot's campaigns.

York was about to become ruled by Norwegians anyway. In 919 Dublin seized control and for the 6 last years of the Kingdom of York's lifetime it would be ruled by Eirik Bloodaxe, son of Harald Hårfagri.

Scots flag/banner. I'm not that happy with it, but if you think it looks ok it'll do. Its the best i could do with the sword and spear.

What about just having the classic blue/white, oh well we can have a vote on that one as well ~;)

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 00:31

Nay bother, I'll keep the history to those who know better. ~:)

I did the scots flag on Ranika's advice. I don't know if the St Andrew's cross was the predomant flag within the time frame. The lion is an older flag though, but St Andrew's cross more familar.

Depends on how historically acurate you want it, but i don't really know. I'll leave it up for arguement.

Ranika

12-08-2004, 00:40

St. Andrew's Cross is more recognizable, but before 1000 (and even for quite some time after 1000, it wasn't used in any large amount), wasn't put on any banners, it was a mark on clothing, pendants, brooches, and a mark used by the bishops in Scotland. The rampant lion is older, and would remove another blue flag.

However, a lot of people won't recognize the rampant lion, but they WILL recognize St. Andrew's Cross. So it's a familiarity versus correctness argument. The kings of Alba in 900 likely used the rampant lion, and definitely didn't use St. Andrew's Cross, but St. Andrew's Cross will drum home the point that the faction is indeed Scotland. We could always come to some bizarre compromise with blue and white rampant lion flag or something, but that might just look odd. However, the inverse, a yellow and red flag would be a flag used in Northumbria or Mann, depending on which part of the flag was red/yellow

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 00:53

I say go with being historically correct, since a lot of the people who play the game have played similar games and have an interest in history, or at least a growing curiosity through playing them.

Those that know will respect your attention to detail, those that don't will seek to know and appreciate the detail when they learn.

Thats how I would view it anyway.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 00:58

..and the rampant lion isn't that unfamiliar with scotch identity.
People will recodnise it, they just won't make the conection with the modern national flag.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 02:08

In 905, the flag of Wessex was a black sword on a red field, with a black clenched fist below it, and a border of diagonal black lines.

This is the best i can do from that discription. If its way off let me know what needs to be changed.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/wessex.jpg

Ranika

12-08-2004, 02:21

That's pretty much it, a sufficient facsimile at least, and it looks good, so that'll do the trick for that. Maybe darken the red a little, but, maybe not, that looks close enough, and the flag I have may have some problems with the color, like the black bleeding into the red or something over the years.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 02:58

Darker red, probably not acurate but i think it looks better than the other one.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/wessex2.jpg

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 02:59

I can lighten it if its too dark, it only takes a minute to change the background colour.

Ranika

12-08-2004, 03:02

It looks better, but yeah, lighten it a bit, somewhere in between the two, but leaning towards that darker one, that looks a lot better, more realistic.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 03:14

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/wessex3.jpg

Ranika

12-08-2004, 03:27

That looks perfect, not too dark or light. Very good work.

King Yngvar

12-08-2004, 05:17

Yes, nice work indeed. When was the lion introduced to England? That was not until the Norman invasion?

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 05:43

Yeah, i think your right.

Some info on the flags.

The rampant lion:
http://members.aol.com/skyelander/thelion.html
http://flagspot.net/flags/gb-sc-rb.html#des

St Andrews cross: http://flagspot.net/flags/gb-scotl.html

Both were around at the same time, but the rampant lion was used as the miltary flag. St.Andrews cross as a religious emblem.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 05:45

No idea what flags they used before that, can't find any pics or info on it.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 09:50

An alternative option to the earlier 'Peoples republic of wessex' flag.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/wessex4.jpg

Ranika

12-08-2004, 10:16

Ha, yeah, the fist looked a bit odd, but I'm generally willing to settle if it's what we have to work with. But that looks better, closer to the actual one (which is dreadfully difficult to describe).

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 10:31

..and fatter swords.

Thats it finished now. ~:)

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v610/headhunter2000/wessex5.jpg

Ranika

12-08-2004, 10:56

Can you post this over in the other forum? That seems like a good final flag for Wessex, and we really should start moving all the info from this thread over there.

Meneldil

12-08-2004, 11:18

Note that all flags must be .tga.dds files.

If you're working on flags, banners and so on, please make them in this format, or it will not work.

King Yngvar

12-08-2004, 16:40

An alternative option to the earlier 'Peoples republic of wessex' flag.

Hehe, well there is one problem with this new one. Isn't the fingers a little far spread? Maybe they should be a little tighter like in a "hail to the king".

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 19:34

Hehe, well there is one problem with this new one. Isn't the fingers a little far spread? Maybe they should be a little tighter like in a "hail to the king".

I fixed the fist, it looks better.

Note that all flags must be .tga.dds files.
If you're working on flags, banners and so on, please make them in this format, or it will not work.

Photoshop can save as a Targa file (.tga), but there'd no (.dds) anywere that i can see.
Can you explain to me what .dds is and what sort of file type and I'll post all the banners in the other forum.

Should I change the faction select buttons too, or just leave those to later?
I was wondering because I'd have to add an emboss effect and some highlight to give the immpression that is sticking out a little and if different people are doing different ones in thier own way they will look pretty crap when they're all put together in the game, if you know what i mean.

King Yngvar

12-08-2004, 19:40

Try this link Headhunter: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=37203

I fixed the fist, it looks better.

The image won't display now ~:confused:

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 19:49

I deleted the other ones from photobucket and haven't posted up the new one.

Sorry about that.

I'll post the new one in its right format on the other site.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 21:15

I downloaded and installed the DDS Photoshop Plug-in and thumbnail viewer, closed and restarted photoshop,...no new .dds save option available. ~:confused:

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 21:17

I don't know whats wrong, but I can post the Jpeg's and someelse can convert them if thats not too much hassle.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 21:41

Is there are any other graphics that need to be done, which can be done in photoshop, let me know.

A list would to work off would be better, like doing this sort of stuff.

I'll do the splash screens if you like, but I thought maybe to keep those until later on if there are other things to do.

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 22:08

..and if you can make sense out of that first sentence your a better man than me. ~:dizzy:

Meneldil

12-08-2004, 22:42

You might want to have a look at the symbols in the \Data\menu\symbols folders

Headhunter

12-08-2004, 23:41

I was looking at those, but i think they should be done by one person when all the banners are complete to get roll over colours etc matching and so they all conform to one another.

King Yngvar

12-09-2004, 00:37

Hey guys, I think both you and Trajan have mistaken the Wessex banner. Here is the real one, posted it at totalrome as well: https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v513/RTW_Screenies/Viking%20Mod/WessexBanner.jpg

Headhunter

12-09-2004, 01:02

Tidy.

Whatever you think yourself, I think mine looks a bit too hardcore. That looks more royal.

King Yngvar

12-09-2004, 01:18

Yours looked okey but not royal as you said. I think we shall use something like this for Wessex.

Ranika

12-09-2004, 09:39

Looks good to me. I'm not actually sure what the banner I have is for, just that it's from Wessex, from around 905, and it has something to do with the royal heraldry, but that could make it, potentially, a lot of things.

CaeroxVII

12-15-2004, 17:42

Really deep and great mod i must say, but wheres everybody?
Why has everyone stopped posting here, now the Blue lotus thread have more posts than this mod, lol, no posts in 3 days a boo boo!

Meneldil

12-15-2004, 18:31

The official forum is here (http://forums.totalrome.com/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=26)

CaeroxVII

12-15-2004, 22:35

K, thanks for the note, was beginning to get a little scared that this mod might had been shut down... hehe. :uhoh:

BalkanTourist

12-27-2004, 11:42

I can't post at the other furum yet.
Just some suggestions about Bulgarian Kingdom.
The names of the 5 provinces Bulgaria will start with:
top right - Northern Dobrudja, or the Bulgarians used to call it "the Ongul" capital Preslavets
below it - Southern Dobrudja, capital Pliska
top - Moesia, capital Preslav
bottom right - Kutmichevitsa (Northen Macedonia) - Ohrid
next to it - Central Thrace - Phillipopolis
Also if I may add a unit - Horse Archers - a traditional very fast horse archer that did not usually fight melee. The Boyars were a heavy horse archer that was slower but could fight well in melee.
How many names do you need? I'll give you some if you guys need more let me know.

Aron
Asparukh
Boril
Boris
Chernorizets the Brave
David
Gavrail
Gavrail Radomir
Ivan Vladislav
Iosif
Kardam
Kiril
Kliment
Konstantin
Krum
Kubrat
Malamir
Metodiy
Moisey
Naum
Nikola
Omurtag
Peter
Presian
Radomir
Samuil
Simeon
Stratsimir
Telerig
Tervel
Toktu
Vladimir
Vladislav

And some titles:
khan
khagan
boil
ichiriguboil
bolyar
knyaz
tsar

Let me know if you need anything else.

Blacksquare

01-05-2005, 04:03

If you guys need help in a site and forums I can help out.

Iron-Chef

01-05-2005, 16:30

I have to say, being somewhat of an ammature historian I am most impressed with the huge level of historic detail put into this mod, great job all and I eagerly await its arival on the gaming scene!

ShadowStriker

01-23-2005, 19:27

I am Norwegian so i will be looking forward to this mod

ps: make the norwegians strong OR ELSE lol

stebius

01-24-2005, 01:54

about the word dýrlegr,the modern equilent is dýrlegur,used in icelandic. THe word means indeed Glorius but it is also been used has saintly in the last thousand years.

ShadowStriker

01-25-2005, 03:21

if a norwegian read that he would think it meant veteranerian

Dyrelege is the norwegian word for animal doctor bascily a VET

ShadowStriker

01-25-2005, 03:22

they would probably think u missed spelled it lol

ShadowStriker

01-25-2005, 03:22

i am norwegian but u said it was glorios in icelandic....

Sebastian Seth

01-26-2005, 15:11

If you are going to put swedish and norwegians as same faction you can do
the same to all finnish tribes too. That means lot more green instead of
white in finland and more realistic mod.

And novgorod has too much of south Karelia. There are ingrians below karelians and they are finns too.

Íslendingr

01-29-2005, 15:33

about the word dýrlegr,the modern equilent is dýrlegur,used in icelandic. THe word means indeed Glorius but it is also been used has saintly in the last thousand years.

Sæll lagsmaðr.

Are you sure you do not mean dýrðligr or dýrligr? E.t.v. styðzt þú við nútíma-íslenzkun á fornsögunum?

Brother Faolain

01-29-2005, 20:52

Dang it, I wish this mod was finished. Finally, a mod where there is someone who knows somethin' about Irish Military too ~:) Though, I'm not sure about having al those armoured uhits. Irish didnt have much armour, though it was the best in Europe. And Bonnagth was a term that means "to billet" not a actual soldier. Billeting was a old irish thing about, if someone protects your life, the least you can give them is your home. A closer term for a spear-armed soldier would be Gaechadh of literakky "spear warrior" And, one suggestion for a province. Corco Modhruadh, in northern Munster on the border of Connacht. They were like the Orkneys of Ireland, they were renowned fighters who were kind of like mercenaries. They fought mainly for Brian Boru, before his sons pissed them off by taking some cattle. They were also great sailors. So, a province specfic unit/mercenary, Corco Modhruadh Sea Raider. Medium morale, high charge and should charge without orders. They were famed for their ability to get their king killed and still fight like rabid dogs, usually acting as a reaguard for retreats. Kind of like Jomsvikings for the Irish but without the armour and super-uberness.

Brother Faolain

01-30-2005, 14:29

Is this mod finito? Are there any modelers yet? God, I hate suspense. :furious3:

Nidhogg

02-07-2005, 23:20

Meneldil

02-08-2005, 07:01

1 - I thought vikings were the inhabitants of current nordic states

2 - Because we aren't focusing on the vikings.

3 - Because we want to have normans in the mod

Nidhogg

02-08-2005, 15:55

1 - I thought vikings were the inhabitants of current nordic states

About 1% of them was vikings, and they were thrown out, people in Norway were farmers and fishermen. And lived far from each other.

Frans Ubberdork

02-08-2005, 16:46

Lets see..lets have a mod where all the vikings are rebels....and none have any axes..let us go for historical accuracy too....heat strokes in hot weather..the vikings have to sharpen the weapons after battle....oh and do not forget the raping after the battle....
come on a viking game mod is about having a good time with the vikings not about annal realism. total realism games can get quite boring. If I want to play with vikings, I want to do it like I picture vikings, big scary warriors with all kinds of weapons(no horns on helm tho)

CrackedAxe

02-10-2005, 01:11

Ok, excuse me if I`m wrong on some stuff, haven`t bothered to read everything in this thread.
Is this going to be a mod where the Vikings are the focus?
Speaking from a norwegian standpoint. If you are to make a Viking era mod, it is time to put away the nationalistic image of the "glorious" vikings that the nationalromantic writers of the 1800s established, and the nazis continued.

- The state of Norway should not under any circumstances have any viking soldiers, Vikings were banned from Norway. And several of the Norwegian kings went through great trouble to root out Vikings, Harald Haarfagri(first king), followed vikings to both Denmark and the islands north of Scotland to slaughter as many as he could. His son was also raised at the English court.
Vikings were in short terms stateless warriors.

- If you are going to focus on the vikings, why are you including a map over all of Europe? The Areas the Vikings managed to establish themself for short periods were mainly the British isles, France, and down in East Europe. To include the south Europe and the middle East would be pointless, the conflicts with the vikings would be mere buzzing in northern Europe. And Norway would certainly not be very strong. First of, they did not have an imperialistic foreign policy, Norway was not involved in any wars with any foreign nations, and the population was low.

- Why does the game start in the year of 900? The Viking attacks started at full a 100 years earlier(even though attacks can be traced all the way back to 500), by the year 900, a city like Paris had been burned like 3 times. And by this time the Vikings had looted out most of the gold they could find on all of Ireland, including digging ut most of the graveyards when all the all the churchgold was taken. Where is the logic in starting the game at 900 if the Vikings are the focus? Most of the bloodbaths in England, Ireland and France was over at the year 900, and they had lost control over Ireland.

-Quick notes.. Vikings did not fight with axes.
Trells did not fight either.

I really do not understand this post AT ALL, where did you learn your history? First off, Harald did NOT ban vikings. When he became the first king of all Norway, many vikings simply refused to accept his rule. Remember, there had been no concept of a nation until this point and most vikings followed their own regional lord or king and no other. This rejection of Harald led to many vikings leaving Norway to set up elsewhere, many forming raiding bases in Scotland, so Haralds kingship actually led to an INCREASE in norwegain viking raider activity. The reason why Harald sought to attack them was because many of these vikings refused to pay him tribute, not because he had 'banned' them.

Secondly, why should'nt the map include all europe? why exclude Hasteins epic raids against the moors in southern Spain and North Africa, not to mention his sacking of what he thought was Rome. Or why exclude Olegs eastern viking nation (the Rus)? Or the viking attacks against Byzantium.

Also, viking raids in England, Ireland and France had NOT ended by the year 900, in fact, they intensified. The Battle of Maldon, 991 AD, was one of MANY such battles in the British Isles at the time. Viking attacks did not end until the Battle of Stamford Bridge 1066 AD.

Lastly, 'vikings did not fight with axes', lol, are you crazy? How much archeological avidence do you think you are ignoring here? The axe was second only to the sword in the vikings armoury, some vikings actually preferred it, for example, King Knut (a viking invader of England) would allow his elite Huscarl bodyguards to be armed with axes only. This became a tradition for all English Huscarls afterwards.

Hope this clears some things up for you.

Meneldil

02-10-2005, 08:59

I kinda agree with CrackedAxe here. I'm not much of an expert about viking age, but I think half of your statements are wrong.

Anyway, since we don't have any skinners, the mod is kinda dead right now.

Nidhogg

02-10-2005, 13:48

really do not understand this post AT ALL, where did you learn your history?

Books based on literature from that period of time: annals, chronichles, sages, old laws.. etc...
And the works of Snorre Sturlason (1179-1241).

Snorre writes:

22. KING HARALD'S VOYAGE TO THE WEST.

King Harald heard that the vikings, who were in the West sea in
winter, plundered far and wide in the middle part of Norway; and
therefore every summer he made an expedition to search the isles
and out-skerries on the coast. Wheresoever the vikings heard
of him they all took to flight, and most of them out into the
open ocean. At last the king grew weary of this work, and
therefore one summer he sailed with his fleet right out into the
West sea. First he came to Hjaltland (Shetland), and he slew all
the vikings who could not save themselves by flight. Then King
Harald sailed southwards, to the Orkney Islands, and cleared them
all of vikings. Thereafter he proceeded to the Sudreys
(Hebrides), plundered there, and slew many vikings who formerly
had had men-at-arms under them. Many a battle was fought, and
King Harald was always victorious.

24. ROLF GANGER DRIVEN INTO BANISHMENT.

Earl Ragnvald was King Harald's dearest friend, and the king had
the greatest regard for him. He was married to Hild, a daughter
of Rolf Nefia, and their sons were Rolf and Thorer. Earl
Ragnvald had also three sons by concubines, -- the one called
Hallad, the second Einar, the third Hrollaug; and all three were
grown men when their brothers born in marriage were still
children Rolf became a great viking, and was of so stout a growth
that no horse could carry him, and wheresoever he went he must go
on foot; and therefore he was called Rolf Ganger. He plundered
much in the East sea. One summer, as he was coming from the
eastward on a viking's expedition to the coast of Viken, he
landed there and made a cattle foray. As King Harald happened,
just at that time, to be in Viken, he heard of it, and was in a
great rage; for he had forbid, by the greatest punishment, the
plundering within the bounds of the country. The king assembled
a Thing, and had Rolf declared an outlaw over all Norway. When
Rolf's mother, Hild heard of it she hastened to the king, and
entreated peace for Rolf; but the king was so enraged that here
entreaty was of no avail. Then Hild spake these lines: --

"Think'st thou, King Harald, in thy anger,
To drive away my brave Rolf Ganger
Like a mad wolf, from out the land?
Why, Harald, raise thy mighty hand?
Why banish Nefia's gallant name-son,
The brother of brave udal-men?
Why is thy cruelty so fell?
Bethink thee, monarch, it is ill
With such a wolf at wolf to play,
Who, driven to the wild woods away
May make the king's best deer his prey."

Rolf Ganger went afterwards over sea to the West to the Hebrides,
or Sudreys; and at last farther west to Valland, where he
plundered and subdued for himself a great earldom, which he
peopled with Northmen, from which that land is called Normandy.
Rolf Ganger's son was William, father to Richard, and grandfather
to another Richard, who was the father of Robert Longspear, and
grandfather of William the Bastard, from whom all the following
English kings are descended. From Rolf Ganger also are descended
the earls in Normandy. Queen Ragnhild the Mighty lived three
years after she came to Norway; and, after her death, her son and
King Harald's was taken to the herse Thorer Hroaldson, and Eirik
was fostered by him.

Conclusion: Vikings were a pain in the arse even to their own countrymen... therefor they were made outlaws. Gulatingslovi also states that it was illigeal to build a warship without permission, and if you did, the kings men would come and smash it. So you better have a good reason to build one, and raiding was probably not a good one...

And on a side note. Just because many people defended themself from Harald when he united Norway, that doesn`t automaticly mean that they were vikings, a viking is a raider.

Nidhogg

02-10-2005, 14:12

Viking attacks did not end until the Battle of Stamford Bridge 1066 AD.

no shit!

astly, 'vikings did not fight with axes', lol, are you crazy? How much archeological avidence do you think you are ignoring here? The axe was second only to the sword in the vikings armoury,

k, sorry, my bad.. I could have said more on that.
I am fully aware that vikings had axes in their armoury, I would just seem so cheesy to have an own troop class named "viking axemen", when swords were the most common weapon. But hey... if thats what you want.

I kinda agree with CrackedAxe here. I'm not much of an expert about viking age, but I think half of your statements are wrong.

You think... feel free to expand on that.

Meneldil

02-10-2005, 17:03

- If you are going to focus on the vikings, why are you including a map over all of Europe? The Areas the Vikings managed to establish themself for short periods were mainly the British isles, France, and down in East Europe. To include the south Europe and the middle East would be pointless, the conflicts with the vikings would be mere buzzing in northern Europe. And Norway would certainly not be very strong. First of, they did not have an imperialistic foreign policy, Norway was not involved in any wars with any foreign nations, and the population was low.

Vikings raided about every part of europe, including Italy, modern Russia and some part of the Byzantine empire, so yeah, your statement is pointless.
Who cares about either Norway was strong or not strong or if it was involved in many wars or not ? I don't really understand your point.

- Why does the game start in the year of 900? The Viking attacks started at full a 100 years earlier(even though attacks can be traced all the way back to 500), by the year 900, a city like Paris had been burned like 3 times. And by this time the Vikings had looted out most of the gold they could find on all of Ireland, including digging ut most of the graveyards when all the all the churchgold was taken. Where is the logic in starting the game at 900 if the Vikings are the focus? Most of the bloodbaths in England, Ireland and France was over at the year 900, and they had lost control over Ireland.

As I said, we aren't focusing on the Vikings. I didn't really agree with the name of the mod (I think An mil total war would have been better). Starting in 900 means that we would have been able to have the Normans in. Since they created some of the wealthiest and most powerful christian kingdoms c. 1000AD, they are revelant to the period.

-Quick notes.. Vikings did not fight with axes.
Trells did not fight either.

They did. Axes were probably used as much (if no more) as swords. Swords were expensive, and long to be produced, while an axe was an effective and cheaper weapons.

As you can see, more than half of your statements are meaningless. Would you have bothered to read the forum or even the whole thread, we could have avoided the 'no shit!' and other crap like that.

Nidhogg

02-10-2005, 19:25

Vikings raided about every part of europe, including Italy, modern Russia and some part of the Byzantine empire, so yeah, your statement is pointless.

So .. yeah.. my statement is pointless?
let me quote myself:

The Areas the Vikings managed to establish themself for short periods were mainly the British isles, France, and down in East Europe.

Where did I say the vikings didn`t raid south Europe... My point is that, as the Vikings didn`t manage to manifest themself south of the Kiev area and North France. It would be more apropriate to include Northern Europe. Take a map of Europe and cut it around the Alps. The total war engine is best for conquest, not spending 8 turns to sail from brittain to Italy, Raid, spend 8 turns back.

Who cares about either Norway was strong or not strong or if it was involved in many wars or not ? I don't really understand your point.

Dunno.. who really cares. Some of the initial point of my post was that the faction of Norway should not have any viking warriors. And you got like five pages about the hungarians and the bulgarians, so why wouldn`t you care.

As I said, we aren't focusing on the Vikings. I didn't really agree with the name of the mod (I think An mil total war would have been better). Starting in 900 means that we would have been able to have the Normans in. Since they created some of the wealthiest and most powerful christian kingdoms c. 1000AD, they are revelant to the period.

yes, I read you first reply.

They did. Axes were probably used as much (if no more) as swords.

Probably.. you are using the word "probably", this means you are guessing. You said a couple of posts up that you weren`t an expert on the viking age.

Would you have bothered to read the forum or even the whole thread, we could have avoided the 'no shit!' and other crap like that.

How?

Meneldil

02-10-2005, 21:24

Where did I say the vikings didn`t raid south Europe... My point is that, as the Vikings didn`t manage to manifest themself south of the Kiev area and North France. It would be more apropriate to include Northern Europe. Take a map of Europe and cut it around the Alps. The total war engine is best for conquest, not spending 8 turns to sail from brittain to Italy, Raid, spend 8 turns back.

Just look at the last map we planned to have, northern europe is included. We even cut northern africa to allow viking factions to raid karelia.
Btw, we edited ship movement. Ships would have travelled way faster (we were planning to make the trip from norway to normandy only one turn long).

Dunno.. who really cares. Some of the initial point of my post was that the faction of Norway should not have any viking warriors. And you got like five pages about the hungarians and the bulgarians, so why wouldn`t you care.

You were kinda assuming that the Norway shouldn't conquer or fight with anyone. And this is a thing we do not really care about (except for our own historical knowledge).

Probably.. you are using the word "probably", this means you are guessing. You said a couple of posts up that you weren`t an expert on the viking age.

Will I be an expert if I don't use the word "probably" ? Are you an expert cause you don't use it ? Actually, I'm proba -oups-, I'm sure none knows for 100% how people fought back in 911 (well, if you do, you must be the greatest expert ever :dizzy2: ).

How?

You would have understood why the start date was c. 900, why we were planning to have a map of whole europa and a few other things aswell.

I'm probably not going to answer anymore. Ygnvar might find some time to check this thread and explain a few other things. I'm now working on my own mod, which will hopefully not freeze like this one (though if Ygnvar find some skinners, I'll gladly help him again)