the good ol' bright vs dull colour debate

**Cheetah** · 10-13-2006, 01:52

Which one do you prefer?

Bright colours so that you can tell friend or foe easily apart (even if it is historically not correct), or realistic dull colours so that you can see the rust, dust and blood covering your brave soldiers even if it means that friend and enemy blends together in a fast and furious (

) melee.

Or perhaps none of the above, then please explain.

In fact I have an idea. Perhaps bright colours could be switched on and off (like grass, or shadows) so that both type of fans can be satisfied.

**{Don}_Sky{Mh}** · 10-13-2006, 01:57

I prefer bright colours, be harder to see blood. Then again, I am British so I know about the whole Red-Coats idea, a bit. I saw it on Warhammer Dark Omen too, two handed swords that wore mostly red so the enemy couldn't tell how badly hurt they were :D, blood wise, but it would be kinda obvious if you were missing an arm or a leg, or somwhere across that line.

**GrandInquisitor** · 10-13-2006, 02:00

Historical accuracy or not, I loved the Sassanid color scheme. But really, it doesn't matter to me, as long as the mechanics are good.

**Censor** · 10-13-2006, 03:41

Originally Posted by GrandInquisitor

Historical accuracy or not, I loved the Sassanid color scheme. But really, it doesn't matter to me, as long as the mechanics are good.

Neon blue? Funny.

**shifty157** · 10-13-2006, 04:52

I think CA struck a really good balance this time. THere are times when i find it difficult to tell whos troops are whos. When they start getting dirty and bloody they really start looking the same. At first i panicked and got frustrated but then i realized how cool it was because medieval combat was really like that. It makes you wonder how much friendly fire there was in the middle of battle without any uniforms to distinguish the sides.

Overall im very pleased this time around. THeres just enough color to recognize your men. A huge step from the neon pajamas of Rome in my opinion.

**Tamur** · 10-13-2006, 05:01

Completely agreed with shifty on this one. It sometimes get confusing but that's absolutely fine with me. I far prefer getting confused occasionally and relying on the units cards to seeing everyone wearing saturated colours.

**andrewt** · 10-14-2006, 00:31

Originally Posted by {Don}_Sky{Mh}

Then again, I am British so I know about the whole Red-Coats idea, a bit.

Redcoats + brown pants?

**{Don}_Sky{Mh}** · 10-14-2006, 00:36

I did say a bit, didn't I?

**{Don}_Sky{Mh}** · 10-14-2006, 01:01

Oh, one other thing, which is off topic

sorry. Just wondering, has anyone else seen or heard from any of the other {Dons}? I've been trying to get onto the website for ages but it just comes up with a 404 http error or something like that. If anyone knows, please, please, PM ME about it. Thanks!

Sky

**CaesarAugustus** · 10-14-2006, 03:00

I voted for dull colours....................i shudder every time i think about those bright blue and purple colours of the parthians and sassanids. Not to mention the colour uniforms of the barbarians. In the medieval time period, very few armies actually had unifroms, so i think dull, somewhat randomized colours would be best in terms of realism.

**MSB** · 10-15-2006, 09:10

Getting confused between your men and the enemy's men is historically accurate. There were many battles in history where nobody knew who was on their side. In that sort of battle people on the same side ended up fighting each other.

**CountArach** · 10-15-2006, 09:37

Originally Posted by Matthius Julius

Getting confused between your men and the enemy's men is historically accurate. There were many battles in history where nobody knew who was on their side. In that sort of battle people on the same side ended up fighting each other.

That is why I love playing without Banners or Green Arrows. SOmetimes I ave no idea if I am winnin, I just hope I am, and keep chargin my cavalry into where I think the enemy rear is.