I’m all for Bowmen instead of the current Chu Ko Nu. Repeating Crossbows could just be a unique to Chinese addition to Sentry and Irregular call-outs
2 Likes
I don’t think it’s necessary to replace a consulate ally, just add a fifth ally for each Asian civilization, so the Chinese can have isolationism, the Japanese can choose the United States (Gatling Guns, etc.), and the Indians can choose isolationism or another European ally.
What if Indians had a revolt against company rule as their extra option such as the 1857 sepoy revolt?
If they were so widely used, why not much pieces of that period leave to this day? As a comparison, you can find tons of three-eye handcannon in musuems, and used by common people for hunting until the last century. The fact is that Zhugenu Crossbow is a weapon unsuitable for mass use by the military. Not to mention that the pieces used by garrison may be large fixed repeating crossbow, which mostly be seen on paintings depicting naval battles.
No, 虎蹲炮(Crouching Tiger Cannon) is not a mortar-like firearm and never served as siege artillery in history. Hand Mortar in game is 碗口铳(Wankouchong), change its model would be fine if you insisit to keep this unit, even no need to write another article for “history”.
1 Like
其实“ 以骑射得天下”也只是乾隆训斥八旗子弟堕落的气话啦，从那些描绘战争的图卷看，实际部队组成也没什么很特别的，而且还大量使用火器
（事实上只要是正儿八经的军队，构成就没什么很花里胡哨的地方吧？实在不懂硬搞稀奇古怪的“特色”有什么意义
1 Like
This may be a surprise to you, but artefacts made from iron have more longevity than artefacts made from bamboo and string.
Wankouchong is an archaic Yuan era weapon and not nearly as cool as a “Crouching Tiger Cannon”. It’s not like artillery in the game corresponds to super realistic roles anyways.
While I know the current name is too generic I think it is somewhat unnecessary to change. Niaoqiang literally means “bird gun”, which came from the Chinese at the time beliefed that this type of weapon could be used to hit birds in flight, but in essence, the term directly refers to arquebuse so there is no inaccuracy in it.
Besides, I think calling it niaochong was more common than niaoqiang.
A generic name can represent a wide variety of local artillery so I’d keep the Hand Mortar.
If there is any chance, the Crouching Tiger Cannon should be a card that gives Hand Mortar an improvement while making it use 2 population.
I don’t want to see Manchu as just a weak cavalry archer.
What I would choose is to have the current Manchu changed to a Mongolian unit like “Mongol Cavalry”, “Mongolian Horseman” or something, with a Mongolian skin and dialogs, and then have its consulate version be named to like Manchu, with the current skin and dialogs, and available in Chinese Isolation.
Keshik, if needed, could be named to Steppe Archer to be in line with the Steppe Rider. Having a more generic name allows it to be used as a regular unit without being explicitly identified with a particular ethnic background.
You can anyway give the valiant cavalry a higher HP and a multiplier against artillery to make up for the lost range, although range is the unit’s greatest feature. In the other hand, changing the Meteor Hammer to shock infantry is a possible way to keep the weapon, for example replacing every 1 Meteor Hammer cavalry in the game with 2 Meteor Hammer infantry.
Honestly, I personally prefer the literal translation of Valiant Cavalry rather than the phonetic translation Xiaoqi, if it’s gonna become a lancer, probably because I think it makes it easier for non-Chinese players to get familiar with this unit, but I can’t speak for non-Chinese players.
You can’t have a war wagon replace a fragile unit like the current Keshik, that’s counterintuitive. Besides, the Ming’s war wagons didn’t seem to be that important in their military activities to be honest.
If the Meteor Hammer must be changed but can’t be a lancer or shock infantry, I’d consider making it a heavy cavalry using a hand cannon on horseback instead. This old gunpowder weapon was still widely used in the Ming. Its damage and/or accuracy can be greatly reduced beyond a certain range if needed, making it most effective within about 5 ranges still.
Just leave the flamethrower alone. I don’t think people really confuse it with artillery. It is a siege unit, and visually it is obvious that it works differently from artillery. In the other hand, it’s cool in a way, and it’s still real even if it’s outdated.
For the Chinese consulate, I’d not only replace German to Chinese Isolation but also add the United States as the 5th.
In my opinion, whether it was the Qing Dynasty’s own isolationism or the United States’ influence on the Qing Dynasty, both were greater than Germany’s influence.
It makes sense for Chinese Isolation to have discounts on banner armies, and it could bring at most 5 new units, like:
- Three-eyed Gunner: musketeer type unit that can fire 3 shots in a quick succession similar to the Carbine Cavalry.
- Langxian Pikeman: heavy infantry that is slow but has high melee damage with a multiplier against heavy infantry.
- Guandao Cavalry: heavy cavalry that uses a bulky guandao glaive to thump enemies, and can be introduced as a consulate version of a new mercenary Woldo Cavalry from Korea but with a Chinese skin and dialogs.
- Manchu: as above, a consulate version of mercenary Mongol Cavalry.
- Taiqiang Gun: the Chinese wall gun that was mostly not used on walls but rather in a carried formatas carried by 2 soldiers as a kind of mobile short-range artillery, could against infantry and buildings with a role like the Abus Gun.
Apparently the Japanese could also share the United States ally. And the Indians could get the Dutch, so they share 2 options with Chinese and share the other 2 options with Japanese. This way, each civ has one unique option, while the other options are equally available to 2 civs.
1 Like
你硬是不承认从军队到民间都觉得连弩这东西更像玩具的话，我无话可说。如果连弩真的实用，绝不会出现制作工艺失传这种事，但现实就是失传了。
虎蹲炮和碗口铳是完全不同定位的炮械啊……虎蹲炮是平射，用来对付步兵的，只有碗口铳是曲射用来攻坚（不过更常见是用在海战）。另外碗口铳一直用到明朝中期，之后中国就开始改用西式炮械。假如你想要“特色”而又保持单位定位，唯一选择就是“碗口铳”。
清朝最著名的臼炮估计是南怀仁（Ferdinand Verbiest）指导仿制的“威远将军炮”：
你还是看看《大明会典》《皇朝礼器图式》这种正经资料吧……
2 Likes
The repeating crossbow was indeed not a regular military weapon in history. But I still support keeping it, after all, it is a symbol of Chinese civilization in this series. At this point it means more to the game than to history.
In the game, even if we no longer use it as a soldier’s weapon, we can change it to a militia weapon.
As I stated above, the Hand Mortar does not really need a name change. The Crouching Tiger Cannon can be used as a card about it, just like the Wankouchong. This should be the simplest way.
作为民兵的武器也只是勉强，即便是乡勇民兵，在清朝也普遍用上了火绳枪，假如不考虑西方人对它莫名其妙的执着心态，保留连弩这种东西真的没有任何意义
3 Likes
有的人一边觉得目前游戏里的亚洲文明过于杂糅和怪异，一边又因为所谓传统和猎奇心态而保留错误的刻板印象，只能说有点双重标准了
2 Likes
这类态度往往是：
别人的偏见，离谱；
自己的偏见，合理。
怎麼說呢，就我個人是完全理解連弩在歷史上的問題，可是也能理解在AoE系列超過四分之一世紀的時間，它出現在許多作品之中，已經產生了對於遊戲自身的意義。我想，這是亞洲文明的其他問題所無法相提並論的。
若用步弓手替換它，那肯定是更準確的，我當然也不反對。會說支持保留連弩，無非是出於理解和包容遊戲自身的此一文化，而不是出於歷史的理由。
另一方面，作為一個娛樂作品難免都會有些噱頭，這對歐洲人也是一樣。看看達文西的坦克，甚至比連弩還稀奇呢。
哪些過於刻板而應該修改，而哪些尚不屬於大問題而仍可包容，這自然就因人而異，畢竟每個人對問題的輕重緩急感覺不同是正常的。
在我看來，儘管連弩實際上不常用且過時但畢竟確實存在過，是中國文明的問題裡相對很小的，而且在歷史準確問題之外它另外還有著對遊戲自身的特殊意義，相較之下，刻板的和尚主題我認為是更嚴重的。希望這不會讓你們認為我雙重標準吧。
1 Like
朋友，并没有针对你，你远不至于双标。但这个论坛里相关话题下从来不缺我所说的那种双标。
You are taking things too seriously. It is totally reasonable to prioritize realism. But it is also reasonable to push back against historical nitpicking that detracts from the fun of the game and turns it into a historical simulation.
It should be obvious why removing an exciting and unique unit like a Chu Ko Nu in favour of a very generic and boring Bowman might not be wanted.
OK, I might be taking this too seriously. Except for the Zhuge Crossbow and light mortar, I think our attitude towards other content is actually similar.
2 Likes
Either term would be good, it just doesn’t work well to do a direct translation because “bird gun” doesn’t carry the same meaning in English. Arquebusier is accurate, but I think the name would be better used for a unit outside China.
Obviously not, that’s why I said it should replace Keshiks plural. The 3 Keshiks in the Ming banner could get replaced with 1 War Cart (it never made sense for the Ming army to be full of Mongols anyway). My understanding is that the Ming had rather weak cavalry so the war carts were to compensate when fighting the steppe peoples (similar to Russian Gulyay-gorod tactics). China’s already got 3 other cavalry so I think there’s room for something more unconventional instead of just another heavy cavalry.
Keshiks being a fragile unit in the first place isn’t very accurate. They were elite Mongol bodyguards not weak units. Moving them to the age 3 banner and having War Carts serve as the early light cavalry could let them have better stats to match their historical role.
There’s also nothing wrong with them being explicitly Mongolian, the Qing had lots of Mongol banners. The only reason I entertain the idea of switching them with Manchus is that it’s kinda of odd for a civ based on the Qing to not have them in their roster. That could also be done by just giving them a card or age up that enables the mercenary similar to the Iron Troop card.
Replacing 3 Keshiks with 1 wagon is a difficult balancing work, and it also breaks the characteristic that the regular units in the Chinese roster are weak and cheap. Besides, there is the Mongolian Army which includes only 2 Keshiks.
Almost all the banner armies’ names in the game are not accurate. But it might be hard to force on being accurate, otherwise you’d have eight names made up of Bordered/Plain and Yellow/Red/White/Blue pairings. The current ones are more like placeholders, without having much substantive meaning, so if needed, it would obviously be better to just rename the Ming Army and/or the Keshik, without having to change units and risk affecting balance.
Every Chinese dynasty had wagons serving in their military, but to be honest the records of use of war wagon tactics is not famous and outstanding in the Ming, such like General Qi did plan to use them in his defense against the Mongols, but because of the peace agreement, this tactic had almost no actual combat experience. Instead, it is in the the Han Dynasty that the Chinese made outstanding use of war wagons against nomadic peoples.
The Ming still had their nomadic allies, so it makes sense to rename Keshik to a more generic Steppe Archer. Besides, archery on horseback was practiced by also the Han Chinese living near the frontier and was even required in the imperial military examinations. In my opinion, cavalry archers would be pretty more familiar to the Chinese than war wagons. Even handcannon cavalry could be more common, meaningful and important to the Ming military than war wagons.
And a wagon would still be … a cavalry unit. The heavy cavalry tag helps to get close to and kill artillery.
When the civilization is mainly based on the Qing, it is reasonable to have 4 regular cavalry units in the roster.
But they were bodyguards of Mongol Empire instead of later Mongol tribes. It’s medieval. Strictly speaking, it shouldn’t even be in the game.
The Meteor Hammer is so special in that it provides melee damage at a range, which is a generic mounted archers cannot provide. Ideally the replacement could still be a heavy cavalry with about 4-5 ranges to provide the same service as the current Meteor Hammer, reducing changes to gameplay and balance.
Even if it cannot be a lancer with a very long lance or a shock infantry using a meteor hammer, being a heavy cavalry that bombard enemy with a hand cannon in a close range would still be a lot more fun to me than being a generic mounted archer.
The card should enable Manchu instead of Iron Troops, honestly. The latter can be enabled through Koxinga if needed.
As I have stated repeatedly, I’d like to change the current mercenary to have a Mongolian theme with a new Mongolian skin and dialogs, which is more in line with the romance of the powerful Mongol mounted archery in the AoE series, and also reflects the fact that the Mongols also had served not only China but Russia and other Inner Asian powers. Then, make Manchu the consulate version of this Mongolian cavalry archer mercenary, with the current skin and dialogs. There is no objection to become shipments and be enabled from the Home City, but the new Manchu should ideally be trainable at the consulate in China Isolation, which makes sense when the court valued its own steppe traditions more than new things from overseas.
1 Like
Bashkirs could be a good replacement for the Manchu
I don’t know if the developers are worried that if China can train Manchu cavalry archers at will, it will be too reinforcement. Therefore, anti-cavalry has always been China’s weakness before.