Yes, the Phoenicians/Mesopotamians and the Celts would be needed to make it a more interesting campaign and not just a fight against Greeks and Egyptians (in Dido’s case)…
I wrote that before. I think the Roman should be added later so they can have units or even gods from other pantheons like they historically did.
Celts are definitely needed for that.
2 Likes
Yes, it would have to be Celts and Slavs (for the Balkans section), then Mesopotamians or Phoenicians/Carthaginians, and finally Romans…
Ok, can you explain it ingame, provide and example, does the “slave” tag made the unit yours (or theirs) until X action takes places and then the unit is “release” to your control?
Am i missing something?
Sound like “prisoner” is more game oriented and less problematic
1 Like
I’m not sure what method would work the best. Like if they would be capturable like herdables they would be way to easy to free. You would just have to walk into the Roman woodline with a scout and you won the game. So maybe they have a 5 second timer until they are freed. Free “slaves” then just become villagers for you. Not sure if they could just convert to your pantheons villagers because Atlantean Citizens are worth 2x as much.
Romans could capture new “slaves” by killing enemy units or destroying enemy buildings. Maybe that could also depend on which major god you choose. Of course that would only work while you are below the villager limit.
i don’t understand the point or is this regarding some AoE version? cause AoMR doesn’t have romans and i am relative certain they won’t get romans cause multiple reaons. the biggest i think is the reason if AoMR will get more civs then Mesopotamian and Celts are very high up there and i doubt AoMR will get like 20 civs (and yes i vote romans that “low” as a potential new civ) so i don’t understand the cause of this post cause we will discuss something which neither in the game and has very low to none existend chances (cause - again - of reasons) to get implemented.
I don’t think the chances for Romans are that low. They were even originally planned as 4th pantheon.
The people that dislike Romans are the ones that don’t know much about Roman mythology, because it is not the same as the Greek mythology. There are significant differences.
Romans also would be very difficult to design without reusing any Greek Gods (at most could get away with only repeating Jupiter and Mars?) and most of their potential myth Units are already used by other civs seeing that there’s already 7 Greek mythos Gods worth of monsters (and kraken and sphinx taken by other pantheon) and they already had to made up some for atlanteans
Romans and Greeks are both Indo Europeans so their gods have mostly the same origins. But that is also true for Norse, Celts, Slavs, Persians and Indians. But no one is arguing against those Pantheons.
Yes the Romans said that Jupiter and Zeus where the same but they also said that about Thor. And no one would say that Thor and Zeus are the same god, right?
In some cases they did directly import Greeks gods like Apollo since they didn’t have an equivalent. But the Greeks themselves probably originally imported him from the Trojans. But the Romans also worshipped Isis.
Since the Romans imported foreign gods and also had a lot of auxiliary troops that would be potential for some unique mechanic where they can get human units from other pantheons by worshipping their gods.
1 Like
I read somewhere, can’t verify it, that Mars was much more of a tactician and strategist than Ares, who was pretty much the “WHAAAAAA!!!-God” with short temper and prone to violent tantrums.
What if one of the “Roman” gods was Sol Invictus…
More or Less. Ares was just Violence, none of the other gods other than Aphrodite liked him to the point he got stuffed in a jar by giants and the gods drew lots on who would go get him
Yes, Rome also had its own gods, separate from those they adopted (like the Greek, Celtic, and Egyptian gods)… There were specific gods for daily life:
Nundina, god or guardian spirit of birth and human development. (Something like Zeus/Jupiter)
Educa and Pontina, gods of eating. (Similar to Dionysus/Liber)
Cunina or Cunaria, goddess who watched over children in the cradle and to whom Roman matrons offered libations of milk. (Similar to Hera)
Ossipago, god who strengthens bones. (Hades?)
Abeona, goddess who taught walking. (Athena?)
Fabulinus, Farinus, and Locutius, gods who taught speaking. (Athena 2?)
Iterduca, goddess who took children to school and protected them along the way. (Hera 2?)
Domiduca, the goddess who guided him home from school and protected him on his journey. (Hera 3?)
The farmer invoked the god of fallow land, of tilling, of furrows, sowing, reaping, and threshing. Among the agricultural gods were Rucina, Messia, Tutulina, Terensis, Apulino, Tellumo vervactor, Tellumo occator, Tellumo Messor, etc. (Demeter?)
Livestock farmers had their own deities (which would have been similar to the minor gods of Demeter):
Bubona, who watched over herds of oxen.
Epona, who watched over herds of mares.
Pales, who watched over flocks of sheep.
Flora and Silvanus, guardian gods of shepherds.
Pomona, guardian goddess of gardeners and horticulturists. There were also gods considered negative:
Vekhov, a god of infernal nature (Hades?).
Laverna, goddess of thieves and pickpockets (Hermes?).
Gods of pestilent air (Ares?).
Gods of fever, disease, and other illnesses (Ares 2?).
Lemures or phantoms that aroused great fear in the people (Hades with the shades).
What? Did ChatGPT invent this or have you misspelled the name?
According to the Romans themselves, their name for Hades was Pluto.
1 Like
Maybe I should make a thread about a Roman concept at some point but I’m bad at finding myth units in general.
It would be nice to focus on the uniquely Roman aspects of Mythology that they did not copy from Greeks later but that might be hard because depicting gods as humans was a thing they copied from the Greeks. Before that they did only use very abstract representations of gods. Mars was just like a spear and not a guy with a spear.
The Pluto and Neptune should definitely not be major gods like their equivalents are for the Greeks. Maybe not even Jupiter. Generally the Major Gods don’t have to be the 3 most important gods anyway. Loki had basically no following in real life, he was always more of an antagonist or plot device then someone actually worth worshipping. Maybe Mars, Juno and Minerva or maybe even Quirinus who has no real Greek equivalent would be good options.
A competition between Jupiter and his jealous wife Juno might be a good bases for a AoM campaign. Better then having a bad god wanting to end the world again. Mars would also generally make for a good Major god because of his importance for Rome and it would fit them being a civilisation that like conquering others.
2 Likes
Yes, if we went by cult Hades also wouldn’t be a major and Athena should be instead and maybe Osiris or Horus instead of Seth or Freya instead of Loki (she should have been a Major Goddess instead of Thor regardless but Marvel…), they usually pick either established triads or important protagonist/antagonist in major myths as Major Gods regardless of actual cult
According to Roman Mythology it seems like their Capitoline Triad seems to be either Jupiter, Mars, and Janus/Quirinus, or Jupiter, Minerva and Juno.
1 Like
Juno and Mars seem like good candidates from a campaign perspective.
1 Like
Jupiter, Juno and Mars could be a good combination. It was never a Triad like that directly but they would offer variety.
Janus and Quitinus are pretty unknown so should probably be Minor Gods. Minerva could definitely be a Major god. Maybe she could be the 4th if they want to make 4.
Jupiter would be hard to give a unique identity but also strange if he was a minor god. Mars could easily be focused on human units while Juno is economy focused.
2 Likes
Not so long ago, you were among those who said that Romans were too similar to Greeks. It looks like you just copy pasted an AI answer. Usually, you end each of your paragraphs with ellipsis (…)
3 Likes