Just because the creators aren’t fans of accuracy, doesn’t mean that we should stop complaining about it, quite the contrary!
1 Like
There’s always a civ that is counter OP.
That’s very, very mistaken. It’s India/Pakistan with a foreign king, a typical feature of their history. It’s basically 100% western India. “Hindustanis” simply replace the former civ name “Indians”.
China should have what? ‘Caravanserai’?? Hell no.
2 Likes
Persian Tatars? No my friend, these civ give it not in history. The Tatars are one of a lot of Turk peoples and has nothing to do with Persian peoples. A further mistake.
2 Likes
Huh, seems almost like the developers found an actual civ to develop that can’t be described as just another civ living in a new place.
I give the developer, probably above all Forgotten empires, a bad mark. The civs they release with and after the Definitive Edition are often not properly reworked. The best example is the Caravanserai for the Indians, which is quite inappropriate, as explained well in this thread.
Furthermore, all recently released 4 Indian civs look the same in terms of graphics for most of the buildings, which drastically disturbs the gameplay. The developers were too lazy, to finally do any work in this regard and to build identical building sets for each civ, as exemplary modders have already done.
The gaming community here is great, with lots of good ideas, although the game really does not deserve that. I hope, the developers will make these adjustments, to save the honor of this game for the future.
Because constantly bringing out new civs, that practically do not differ optically, they also give the recently appeared Burgundians a wrong civ name, the right one would be Walloons or Flemings for the area in Belgium, is a very bad job. I do really like seeing new civs, but they should then also be fundamentally edited in the important matters and not only in terms of game mechanics but also graphically.
2 Likes
Walloons being the civ name but giving them Flemish militia would have been much more incorrect than a civ base on the Burgundians/Burgundian State including the Burgundian Netherlands. Given your username I suspect we both touched on that period in history class.
And I don’t really get your complaint about the building graphics? That’s how this game works, there are architecture styles that each cover several civs.
4 Likes
The burgundian area is not at Belgium but in France in border to Switzerland. There was also a mod, that introduced the Burgundians as a playable civ. Playing this people as a Belgian mercenary, shows the great lack of knowledge of the Developers in this game.
I think so too, but then you would still need private tuition, because your statement is wrong.
The complaint is justifiable. I do not know of almost any game, that covers multiple civs with one building graphic. Only people, who do not know much about the matter, do that. If, as in the Age of Empires example, the larger community sees itself over it, they should do it. I will not do it anymore and do not buy any more dlcs, if nothing changes here. And believe me, there are certainly people, who think the same about that.
You just agreed with me, pretty sure it’s unintentional tho.
China should definitely have the uu building as the land silk road started from there.If Tibet is added someday they too should have it.
Did the Chinese build any Caravanserai? I’m just curious because I couldn’t find anything. If you know I’d love to see.
I know this period doesn’t get nearly the amount of attention it deserves in our schools (again, just going to assume you’re from Rotterdam here), but Erasmus himself actually lived in the Burgundian Netherlands. (In his youth, the Habsburgs period began during his lifetime.) There’s a direct link to it in the main statblock on his personal Wikipedia page, both in the English and Dutch version. The Burgundian/Habsburgs era is also known as the period of the 17 Netherlands. It all takes place just a bit before the Spanish period that precedes the Dutch revolution (the 7 Netherlands, different period). If you’re looking for a relevant enough power from the medieval era in which you can include Dutch and/or Belgian influences the Burgundian State is probably the option that makes the most sense. Especially given how attached people even today are to the term. “Brabantse worstenbroodjes, lekker Bourgondisch genieten.”
Were the Burgundian rulers themselves from the Netherlands? Nope. Were they behind the Flemish revolution which resulted in the battle of the golden spurs? I must admit I’m a bit hazy on that particular development, but given that that battle took place before the Burgundian era and was if anything anti-foreign powers probably not. Is it reasonable to make the civ like the developers did anyway if the alternative is making a Flemish civ, calling them Walloons and expecting people to accept it as a relevant medieval power? Yes, yes i think it is.
I hope I demonstrated above why this is not just a little silly but also a tad ironic given your username.
2 Likes
No sorry man, i am not from Rotterdam.
Thank you for your implementations about the Burgundians. You can look at things differently, but it is certainly true, that the Burgundy theme with the Walloons and Flemish is often not discussed in schools, which is why it is relatively difficult to interpret it and to draw the right conclusions from it.
1 Like
To make matters worse the whole period just feels like a bit of a confusing mess, even when reading up about it. I guess that’s just typical for the medieval period.
…which may or may not say something about the main topic of this thread as well.
2 Likes
Ok, so after reading a bit more about the topic I can not understand why people are saying that “caravanserai don’t belong to India” when they were built by the Mughal empire not only on the grand trunk road but also on the silk road (at least according to UNESCO). There are even some of them in southern India outside of the Mughal empire. So yes, they do belong to India.
The only thing I can understand is the frustration that the Hindustani get them first and I hope that caravanserai can become a regional building for a few more civs after we see its effect in the game and it’s adjusted properly.
2 Likes
The bottom line is, ALL the famous caravanserai are in Iran, Turkey (and Egypt, Uzbekistan) and it’s an inherent part of the entire culture. They’re still visited by millions of folks a year.
Caravanserai not belonging to Persia, Saracen and Turks is outright grotesque.
It’s as simple as that.
1 Like
paladins are a uniquely french concept
arbalests were mostly used in Italy
howdah is an arabic/hindi word, yet it’s a tech in the burmese castle
burmese have parthian tactics. parthia is 10 000 km away from burma
silk road is an italian tech (???)
no gunpowder, blockprinting, etc for chinese
trebs for aztecs
this game is riddled with historical inaccuracies
caravanserai describes reststops on the silk road, which goes through india. you guys are overreacting
12 Likes
This right here. This is all that needs to be said
5 Likes
The real bottom line is this argument makes no sense and no one here takes this seriously.
6 Likes
Agreed, this is self-evident. Some people here are trying to pinpoint other in-game historical “fakes” in order to whitewash this inapproriate mistake.
3 Likes
- Do French get paladins? Yes
- Do Italians get Arbalests (and also Genoese Crossbow)? Yes
- Did Burma have deep contact with India? Yes.
- Did Italians participate in the Silk Road? Absolutely yes.
95% famous caravanserai are in Iran, Turkey, Arab countries (former Ottoman Empire) and Uzbek (Turk-Tatar). Now I ask you, do Persians, Saracens, Turks get Caravanserai??
No!! Why?
Aztec and Mayan trebs shouldn’t have been, this is lack of creativity. And can never be used to justify another mistake.
Two wrongs don’t make one right.
3 Likes