Thankfully, I don’t have to care about your opinion on this
No, that is one of three things I’ve been complaining about since legacy - the other two are the name Tashunke Prowler and the awful voicelines.
Thankfully you are not in charge of the game, as if you were
You’d remove the ability for everyone to play the civ because some of its names are historically inaccurate.
Thankfully you aren’t, since you seem to have a kindergartener’s grasp on empathy and the ability to learn of an 80 year old conservative who thinks they know everything.
Well you and I disagree there, I suspect the majority of old aoe3 players and pros would prefer mine as it’s just the same game with the old names, whereas you’d remove a civ for the crime of having historical inaccuracies.
How can you in the same thread advocate for creative liberties to bridge their weaknesses yet maintain the position that lakota shouldn’t be playable unless they conform to your scripture?
It is you that lacks empathy, every civ can complain non-stop about historical inaccuracies, doesn’t mean the devs should change the game to appease every political loon.
Guys, guys. Let’s all get along. I can truly understand the disappointment and frustration on all sides but there is no need for us to call each other psychopaths, especially when we are all fans of this amazing game (thanks to ES)
4 Likes
That’s underselling it heavily. Is there any other civ that you could flatly rename, change absolutely nothing, and still have it be just as accurate as it was to start with? Can you rename the Germans to the French and have it still be accurate? Can China be renamed to Vietnam or Siam and still have it be accurate?
Because you can rename the Lakota to the Cheyenne or Mandan and it’d still be just as accurate as it is now.
I am all for this - the root problem, however, is that the civ needs to be the Lakota to start with before you can start taking creative liberties with it to bridge historical gaps.
Just a question, isn’t there a term that covers the Lakotas, Cheyennes, etc., Native American Midwest groups?
They’re all plains nations, and the original term for Sioux was used against them all by the Ojibwe, iirc. Otherwise… not really. The Crow aren’t anything like the Shoshone who in turn aren’t really like the Omaha or the Seven Fires. The various plains nations are quite different from each other.
2 Likes
It’s one thing that they’re actually very different, but it’s another thing what kind of civilization the game wants.
I respect your ethnic identity. But I think what the game really wants is a representative of the plains nations who is good at early cavalry rush, not just one tribe or group. Just as Germans are not limited to Prussians, Austrians or Bavarians, even if some players think that these German countries are very different.
Just wanted to say that things would be much easier to work out if there was a relatively decent term to cover this group of people.
2 Likes
Ironically, I think almost any of the other plains nations would be great for an early cavalry rush centered civ - it’s just that the Lakota and the Seven Fires in general did not make warfare their main mode of establishing their empire. All warfare they did was purely defensive in nature.
The Comanche, Cheyenne, Shoshone, or Crow would be better suited to portraying an early cavalry-rush centric plains nation. The Seven Fires… not so much.
1 Like
I think you wonderfully highlighted how the Lakota have been sadly designed as a generic Plain Native American tribe, gathering all these people’s main traits and clumsily putting the ‘Lakota’ label on it.
Nevertheless, this issue cannot be overcome if unique, all the more famous, assets of the Lakota are constantly vetoed: the Inipi ceremony for example would be an excellent introduction to pure Lakota attributes, speaking to many people. Same with the previously mentioned Adoption we discussed that is both a proven and familiar feature.
Unfortunately, if options start to be constantly rejected, I’m afraid our poor developers would start lacking materials to flesh out this civ. Indeed, I’m worried current historiography isn’t deep enough to truly bring out aspects clearly differentiating a Plain Native civ from another. As an example, the Očhéthi Šakówiŋ history before the 1300s is hardly known. Thorough studies of Native Americans’ cultural practices or even numbers are actually quite recent, from the 1990s only for the oldest.
A game like AoE3 is an extraordinary opportunity to vulgarize a civilization’s characteristics: I’ll confidently declare most of us players here learned a lot from the references thrown here and there about each civ. As such, additional allusions to our favorite civ should be assessed taking a step back, rather than being extremely picky and unnecessarily overprotective, except for real quirky or offensive elements (Sioux, Fire Pit) of course.
But yes, in the end the Lakota need a desperate rethinking: the perfectly designed Dog Soldier, from the Cheyenne, as a Lakota unit is perhaps the epitome of the issue.
I’m convinced the studios can achieve a nice rework: the recent PUP with the renaming of unique European cards after specific Houses is an easy but much appreciable reference to each civs’ own attribute. Besides, the studio proved so far it always tried to represent each civ under the best light, and in my humble opinion, I think they did a nice job so far.
Lakota offers plenty of possibilities for our dear devs. There is a lot on the plate however, from possibly renaming, reskinning (Tokala Solider) cards and units, perhaps enlarging the civ to the Očhéthi Šakówiŋ to benefit from further features like agriculture from the Dakota you mentioned, or transform the tipi into an economic building of some sort. Personally, I would love to see references to the Sun Dance, the Ghost Dance, the Čhaŋgléska Wakȟaŋ (medicine wheel) or the heyókȟa you mentioned earlier.
Best,
4 Likes
Yes if you change “wakina” to another language then it becomes another plains people’s unit. Ironically the only unit with a strong cultural image is the dog soldier… and it is Cheyenne. Now they changed it to “Tokala soldier” which now sounds very generic and you can change the name to another language with no problem.
Rifle riders were probably another one because of the use of repeating rifles in the battle of Little Bighorn…oh other peoples participated as well.
And I also find the name “Cetan bow” pretty odd. Imagine “Minotaur spearman” for Greeks or “Tengu swordsman” for Japanese…
True, then perhaps introducing names more judiciously related to the Lakota culture would be wiser?
Like, using one of the Oceti Sakowin tribes’ name for a specific unit such as the Oglagla or the Hunkpapa
The attentions to use Lakota words like Wakina and Cetan are a fair but apparently unperfect attempt, according to me
I mainly had in mind the splendid Dog Soldier indeed: it’s an obvious Cheyenne unit among the Lakota, although I wish it does not disappear. Maybe acknowledging a full Cheyenne ally aspect embedded into the Lakota civ could justify more logically its upholding?
For the Rifle Rider, it has definitively its place in the roster too. Perhaps then the solution would lie not in its renaming, but in the buffing cavalry/hunting cards’ or the Allies cards’ names. After all, it is the unique unit (Ranged cav good v. Heavy Inf) of its type too, so very recognizable
These ideas had been discussed in the past:
1 Like
I’m not even supposed to discuss the Sun Dance, the Ghost Dance, or Inipi among my own family outside specific times or situations. That is why I don’t believe those specific things should be in the game - if it’s hidden from its own members as a sacred thing that shouldn’t be discussed outside the proper ceremonies, it shouldn’t be in a game.
It just means “hawk”. There’s no mythological character behind it.
As far as I’m aware of the options I’ve given, the only things I believe should be actively avoided are the Ceremonial Dances, Inipi itself, and references to boarding schools and the active abuse of our children that occurred from this time period into the present.
Beyond that, everything from the Medicine Wheel to the Kapemni symbol, which is found on much of our art and is the reason tipis are the shape they are, is open to be interpreted into the game.
It’s a perfect example of a Dog Soldier. Something else that’s interesting? The Cheyenne Rider model is an excellent example of what an actual Tokala Soldier would have looked like - they were well known for their buffalo horn headdresses.
1 Like
I see. When I google it usually says a “hawk spirit” so I thought it was mythological.
Maybe swap the models?
About other cavalry: Maybe some Corral units could change the name to depict alliance? Like Cheyenne axe rider and so… IDK what were the alliances between Lakota and other natives so IDK the options, and which allied cultures used more horses.
Some native religious practices have been highly popular parts of their public images for at least a century. I have a children’s educational picture book with a page about healing in the sweat lodge.
It should be fair that a mass-market, Teen-rated game like AoE be generally allowed to give topics the same amount of coverage as a modern children’s book for six-graders (obviously games’ interactivity complicates things). Having a card named “sweat lodge” would be no more intrusion into taboo than telling people it exists.
1 Like
Dude, none of the civs are realistic. It’s a game. They’re trying to span a 1000 year timeline. Do you think the British are close to realistic? They’ve thrown in a mix and made a playable game. This game is amazing compared to when it was first released.
3 Likes
Yeah, I agree. I don’t understand calls for total rework for civs, which is just asking for a whole new game. I understand we are all passionate about history and culture, but a game where a house can spawn a vill, and can ‘magically’ give the house healing abilities with a shipment about a nurse, we shouldn’t look too hard into accuracy.
Otherwise, it wouldn’t be an RTS anymore. Imagine every civ had its unique units and tech tree, buildings and ages because that’s how it was in real life. You would have no idea what counters what, there will be 100 unit types and equally diverse way to set up eco.
2 Likes
i think, as above, that the reason its annoying was that their “representation” was used as a marketing gimmick. No one ever tried to use british representation as a marketing point to appeal to certain demographics. its not so much a double standard as it is a calling out of misleading marketing.
4 Likes