Female warriors

How comes it that the Sauromatians doesen't have female warriors?


Sources: http://people.uncw.edu/deagona/amazo...romations2.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sauromatae#Herodotus

Wrong timeframe perhaps? I dunno

Meh, it's not like you could really tell them from the men under the kaftans and trousers anyway. And, given that the fighting-women would in practice have come from the aristocracy (conceivably the only class which could spare the time and resources to train and equip some of their women as frontline-grade combatants), armour.

Since they didn't exist as separate units, representing them as such wouldn't make any sense in EB. They fought alongside male troops in the same formation. I'd have thought if the flexible MTW2 model variation system would allow it regular units could contain the odd female warrior (or dare I say it, the odd lorica segmentata...) but whether that's possible I don't know.

I don't think they had political correctness back then. :laugh4:

That has little to do with the matter though.

To be fair, they probably wouldn't have beards as featured in EB.

But otherwise, as mentioned already, how would you know under that armour?

Expecting Scythian Valkyrie-Amazon horse archers? :viking: With figure hugging cuiraisses?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeran

Expecting Scythian Valkyrie-Amazon horse archers? :viking: With figure hugging cuiraisses?

---

oh YES! :girlslap:

Ah man I so want that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoffrey S

Since they didn't exist as separate units, representing them as such wouldn't make any sense in EB. They fought alongside male troops in the same formation.

---

You could argue though that a lot of barbarian units wouldnt have fought in separate groups. The female units did add bit of variety to things, it'd be great if the team could find a way to use them that's historicaly acceptable. The virgin archers from BI were one nifty looking unit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoffrey S

(or dare I say it, the odd lorica segmentata...)

---

Recant, thou heretic, recant from thy heresies or be burnt at the stake! Or crucfied as doth fit the Europa Barbarorum timeframe! XD

Female warriors disappear from Sauromatian and Middle Don Scythian burials around the end of the fourth or beginning of the third century BC, and so their inclusion would be anachronistic in EB. It is interesting to note that almost all the female warrior burials found included only arrowheads and spearheads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaywalker-Jack

You could argue though that a lot of barbarian units wouldnt have fought in separate groups. The female units did add bit of variety to things, it'd be great if the team could find a way to use them that's historicaly acceptable. The virgin archers from BI were one nifty looking unit.

---

Dubious. All units in EB are designed to perform in a specific function in an army, in a number of cases as an abstraction based on a specific function or method of recruitment rather than a known, well-defined unit. Female cavalry wouldn't have a separate function.

MeinPanzer's comment about anachronism is also worth considering.

Err, Vanilla's female cavalry served a distinctive purpose. That purpose was to make the player slobber.

EB has the Gaesatae for that though. ~;p

Anyway, I recall once having read a mention that female warriors weren't unknown among the Central Asian nomads either; one ruler apparently sent a squadron of such armoured horse-archers to serve as some Chinese noblewoman's bodyguard as a gesture of goodwill. (Too bad this was a passing reference I saw years ago God knows where...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

EB has the Gaesatae for that though. ~;p

---

women gaesatae anyone? Wouldn't that be a sight:clown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

EB has the Gaesatae for that though. ~;p

Anyway, I recall once having read a mention that female warriors weren't unknown among the Central Asian nomads either; one ruler apparently sent a squadron of such armoured horse-archers to serve as some Chinese noblewoman's bodyguard as a gesture of goodwill. (Too bad this was a passing reference I saw years ago God knows where...)

---

Women warriors were never unknown, just (more or less, depending on culture) rare. But in any case, they wouldn't look much like the videogame slobber-material you usually see; large ammounts of abs aren't exactly conducive to waspish waists, and most men wouldn't find square shoulders attractive either. Oh, and it's a safe bet that any generous-seeming chest is due to pectoral muscle as well as boobs. And a successfully female warrior would probably above average height and certainly above average weight for a woman.


EDIT: Female Gaesatae would pwn all. Imagine the Roman legions on their knees, saying "please rape us"!!!:laugh4: :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoffrey S

Dubious. All units in EB are designed to perform in a specific function in an army, in a number of cases as an abstraction based on a specific function or method of recruitment rather than a known, well-defined unit. Female cavalry wouldn't have a separate function.

---

Wouldnt they be just what you said, an abstraction based on a certain pool of warriors? They wouldnt have a separate function no, but there's plenty of units that do the exact same job as others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MeinPanzer

Female warriors disappear from Sauromatian and Middle Don Scythian burials around the end of the fourth or beginning of the third century BC, and so their inclusion would be anachronistic in EB.

---

Well that's a bit of a blow to our little feminist movement. Does it necessarily rule them out though? The burials fizzle out but they didnt find a sign saying "NO WOMEN AFTER THIS". Lots of EB units dont have weighty archaeological evidence to back them up.
I think Im fighting a loosing battle here but anyway :beam:

I vote for Gaesatae women! :2thumbsup: :dizzy2:

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maeran

To be fair, they probably wouldn't have beards as featured in EB.

---

What is they were Dwarves? :inquisitive:
.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SunShadow

I vote for Gaesatae women! :2thumbsup: :dizzy2:

---

Seconded! :2thumbsup: :laugh4:

(imagines how the screen would look during a massive battle between an all gaesatae army and an all gaesatae women army :idea2: :inquisitive: :oops: )

I vote for Gaesatae women only if they get "scares nearby infantry".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CirdanDharix

Women warriors were never unknown, just (more or less, depending on culture) rare. But in any case, they wouldn't look much like the videogame slobber-material you usually see; large ammounts of abs aren't exactly conducive to waspish waists, and most men wouldn't find square shoulders attractive either. Oh, and it's a safe bet that any generous-seeming chest is due to pectoral muscle as well as boobs. And a successfully female warrior would probably above average height and certainly above average weight for a woman.

---

I rather like the athletic type, personally. :toff:
(And on a related note, as I tend to place some value on credible representation, it tends to annoy the crap out of me character designers most of the time fail to furnish their sword-swingin' heroines with the sort of physique the activity actually produces and requires...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rodion Romanovich

Seconded! :2thumbsup: :laugh4:

(imagines how the screen would look during a massive battle between an all gaesatae army and an all gaesatae women army :idea2: :inquisitive: :oops: )

---

I think in that case team should make new animation for them :2thumbsup:

:laugh4:

I too vote for Gaesate women, if only as a optional cheat thing.
Please????

a poll maybe?:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus

I vote for Gaesatae women only if they get "scares nearby infantry".

---

I don't think "scare" is the correct word :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jaywalker-Jack

Wouldnt they be just what you said, an abstraction based on a certain pool of warriors? They wouldnt have a separate function no, but there's plenty of units that do the exact same job as others.

---

No, I'm afraid that's another matter entirely. Stats may look similar, but every unit in EB (in theory, at least) represents either a distinct historical type of unit in recruitment methods, equipment, locality or separate abstracted historical function. Female noble cavalry would fit neither category.

A better place for female units would probably be the Scythians in Rise of Persia (the archelogical evidence is thier for the time period involved), and amongst the 'Barbarians' in the Three Kingdoms mod for BI.

Oddly, the Sassinsids in BI could have an all women unit, as thier were female officer/governers throughout the Persian domionions. These female soldiers however fought as individuals and not as a body.

Hey, I haven't posted here in the public forums for a very long time, but I'm the faction coordinator of the Sauromatae (and Pahlava) faction for EB. So I'm the guy that that can answer this question best.

We had a unit planned, back in the day, for female nobles. It was scrapped to have an other, more important unit. No idea what unit that was per se, but it was a unit that would have had better concrete evidence, and would have been more likely to have been seen in their armies.

I am convinced that females would have fought occasionally for the Sauromatae, I believe enough evidence has been put foward (primarily archaelogical) to support the notion that some females would have occasionally fought. Certaintly they would have been able to ride and shoot a bow. However, they would not have fought in seperate units, so we decided to have only males, instead of having inaccurate female only units.

As for EB2, having females is again under consideration since we can have multiple skins per unit, but until we are sure that we can control the placement of certian faces on top of certian bodies, we would end up with having a bearded face on a body that has breasts. This is not to say we wouldn have huge, exposed breasts or anything (yes, yes a disapointment to some, I'm sure) but you could probably tell a female from a man, even under a kaftan. So its again up in the air.

Does this help clear it up?