Can we have a debate about women without getting it locked?

Users who are viewing this thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Akka

Sergeant at Arms
I haven't seen anyone argue for this. Only that some of the Battanian armors are straight-up dwarven fantasty-tier. The selection of armor was always pretty wide.
Pretty sure that I saw a lot of complaints after 1.5.3 or 1.5.4 about the changes in attire for a lot of units, with people saying that the new didn't "fit" (be it culturally or for the time period).
And anyways :
But there is definitely the opposite, people asking for armor way out of era, like Maximillian-style plate that's about as close to today, year 2020, as it is to 1084.
We're still in the same concept. That some things simply don't fit the era, and immersion is better when they do. I actually started a Warband game with the Bannerpage mod, which add a lot of things. Among them was a lot of Renaissance-era soldiers in taverns and in new units. Guess what, this alone was breaking the feeling of immersion enough to make me stop using the mod and get back to just using Diplomacy. Because it was just grating to see pikemen with puffy sliced attire in a medieval setting.

And the point it, nobody would get mad at me due to that. If I said "these Renaissance-era soldiers look out of place", nobody would bat an eye. Everyone would understand my point, even if they disagreed and said that they don't mind themselves, but nobody would start a long lecture about how I'm "wrong" and I'm somehow a lesser person for it.
Samely, if I point how absurd it is that our MC can more or less ignore class hierarchy and start talking to random nobles as if they were the guy in the street, nobody is going to accuse me of being a classist, and most will even agree that being barred from entering the castle until you're noble/renowned enough is actually an immersive and intersting detail that should in fact be expanded upon rather than removed.

But if it's about women's place in the society depicted ? Then you can expect people to suddenly stop understanding the point of immersion and instead start to pretend how it's all about misogyny and all sort of childish grandstanding and acting as if they were themselves some sort of vanguard against the tides of obscurantism.
 
Last edited:
But if it's about women's place in the society depicted ? Then you can expect people to suddenly stop understanding the point of immersion and instead start to pretend how it's all about misogyny and all sort of childish grandstanding and acting as if they were themselves some sort of vanguard against the tides of obscurantism.


It's because of people like Stevehoos. Almost every internet discussion about women in video games also comes with these conspiratorial claims about academia or liberals or the decline of the west or whatever. It's like a milder version of "there are a lot of Jewish people in the media". Even if it's true, just bringing it up and making a big deal out of it makes people associate you with Nazis. Most people don't want to be associated with Nazis, so they don't talk about Jews in the media because only a Nazi would care enough to bring it up. It's a silly side effect of idiotic beliefs pushing their way into the public sphere, but it's just something you have to deal with.

Sword sisters and stick-limbed women in bulky armour are very silly, but so is 99% of the game, so most people just ignore it. Making a big deal out of it and re-re-reposting the same copypasta about how no woman in the middle ages ever led an army whenever this thread comes around just makes it obvious that their main motivation isn't actually historical accuracy or game coherence.
 

Twezie

Sergeant at Arms
WB
Starting the game as an ablosute loser, but few years later you're a lord. How come this is "historical" or "logical" and woman leading parties is not? Just play the game for gods sake
So if you see 2 problems, actually they all become null and void? Of course plenty of stuff that doesn't make sense in this game. Doesn't lessen the importance of this particular topic. But I do agree this is literally at the bottom of the list for things to be looked at - if TW even wanted to be historically accurate, which they don't.
---- Even worse if the media catches wind of this.
Lol you seriously think a journalist anywhere in the entire world cares what a bunch of people are talking about in one of a million forums online?
 

Akka

Sergeant at Arms
It's because of people like Stevehoos.
I'm pretty sure it has nothing to do with him and that people trying too hard too look cool will do the same even without the scarecrows standing in for pretexts.
The white knights don't need anyone to come and play the part in full force, they do that by themselves everytime.
What they should do is to actually confront the hypocrisy of their pretenses.
Sword sisters
Actually, I didn't find the swords sisters to be silly. They were, after all, a tiny fringe amount that could only be recruited in specific circumstances, which themselves would make the person some sort of outcast.
Warbands handling of the whole subject was very good : the place of women in society felt pretty authentic, and the exceptions were pretty believable, including companions and pretenders. It made the game actually deeper and richer, IMO, with the flavor plus the specific mechanisms drawn from it.
and stick-limbed women in bulky armour are very silly, but so is 99% of the game, so most people just ignore it. Making a big deal out of it and re-re-reposting the same copypasta about how no woman in the middle ages ever led an army whenever this thread comes around just makes it obvious that their main motivation isn't actually historical accuracy or game coherence.
BS. People make a huge deal of everything and their mother in every aspect of the game. There are neverending threads about horse archers and how arrows are or are not effective against armours, heated arguments about the effect of a charge, nonstop bickering about how hard or how easy the game is.
The difference is just that people can't white knight armours and arrows, so posturing fall back on the usual bragging/humblebragging rather than hiding behind the veil of "I'm so progressist I'll call everyone else an incel !".

But the true root is as always, ironically, a d*ck-size contest.
 
Last edited:
Before going into the historical accuracy or gender equality debate, why not focus on finding viable solutions for game mechanics that would be affected by this? I see female npcs leading parties as a necessity based on the availability of clan members to lead parties, restricting leadership to males only would hinder clans that don't have enough or could not birth enough for future generations.

I have at least one clan in my 1100 days save that has one male npc, and since marriage between npcs is not yet added, the only options that clan has to lead additional parties are the female npcs, and when that one male npc dies, only female npcs would be available to lead parties.

As for mods, the chance of a newborn being male could be increased, but that might end up being a long term problem as there would be less females and less marriage options, hurting clans longevity. A preference for male npcs could also be added to the decision of who is going to lead the new party (someone said this is already in, but I haven't checked the code).
 
Last edited:

Younes

Grandmaster Knight
WBWF&SNWVC
Imagine trembling at the thought of woman in a videogame.

Probably the same people who call other people snowflakes ❄
 

Remmik

Sergeant
WBNWWF&S
Imagine trembling at the thought of woman in a videogame.

Probably the same people who call other people snowflakes ❄

I haven't seen anyone "trembling," I've seen people complaining that it's dumb/immersion breaking/etc. and I've seen other people throwing an absolute tantrum over how other people want to play the game.
 

sniparsexe

Knight at Arms
I hope this thread won't get locked so I can return here after a month and say "people really fought over women in a fictional world"
 

Etrepcar

Veteran
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Ok, my final thoughts: why are people complaining about women in a fictional world? This is the game (franchise) where Celtic people, French-German like kingdoms, sultanates and random nomads coexist directly next to each other and the biggest concern is women?

The Mount & Blade series were never about "historical accuracy": it's a game set in a fictional world the creator dreamed up one day with only a little inspiration by the real world. So what if the devs want a an equal amount of women and men lords? Warband takes place around 200 years after Bannerlord and a lot could have changed since then in the lore. Maybe women were more accepted as leaders during Bannerlord's time and only became marginalized later?

There is literally no "real" medieval history in this game, it's all made up: for all we know, a civilization of mole people might have existed during any point of the lore. Trying to justify your (conservative) mindset in a fictional video game world is just sad. There are hundreds of other games based on actual history you could complain about.

One more thing: Warband was originally a very different game with only a tiny percent of real world inspiration. It had undead, undead Harlaus, necromancers(!), mysterious bandits, ghouls, only two factions, no villages, only towns and a completely different map. It was called Warrider. Maybe it would have been some kind of weird post-apocalyptic madness where most of the population gets wiped out and only the big centers remain or just your standard fantasy fare? The whole game had just very weird vibes, might be because of the unfinished nature of course, but I think there is more to that.
 
Last edited:

sniparsexe

Knight at Arms
Warband takes place around 200 years after Bannerlord and a lot could have changed since then in the lore. Maybe women were more accepted as leaders during Bannerlord's time and only became marginalized later?
even coastlines are changed in Warband!
 

stevepine

Sergeant Knight
I'm ok with some women in a game like this... as long as it doesn't get silly - I remember in warband when I was playing Floris, I used to go into taverns to recruit and everyone in the tavern - archers, sword sisters, everyone was female. That felt silly.

Of course mount and blade isn't ALL about historical accuracy - but there have to be limits.

Fortunately, I don't think we are in any danger of taleworlds giving us a "woke-topia" so it's ok! : )
 

Akka

Sergeant at Arms
Ok, my final thoughts: why are people complaining about women in a fictional world?
This question has been answered countless times, the fact you just pretend to not understand it (to the point of even asking it when the answer is obvious) pretty much shows you don't care about it, you just want your pretext to play the little "look at me I'm so above it all".

Little life hint : trying too hard to look better only ends up in having the opposite effect.
 

Etrepcar

Veteran
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
This question has been answered countless times, the fact you just pretend to not understand it (to the point of even asking it when the answer is obvious) pretty much shows you don't care about it, you just want your pretext to play the little "look at me I'm so above it all".

Little life hint : trying too hard to look better only ends up in having the opposite effect.

No, I am just curious. Just a simple explanation without the essay length responses. Thanks for the response though, really appreciate it. I thought you people were supposed to be the rationality, reason against the eeevil "cancel culture, SJW" stuff, but I guess that's what rationality is for you.
 

Akka

Sergeant at Arms
Inappropriate behavior
No, I am just curious. Just a simple explanation without the essay length responses.
No you're not, you just play dumb and actually succeed at it. The answers are all over the place, and literally right inside the OP. It's impossible to not get them unless you actively want to. And you don't want to because it would show how empty your posturing is, so you need to insert your narrative rather than actually getting the point.
Thanks for the response though, really appreciate it. I thought you people were supposed to be the rationality against the eeevil "cancel culture", but I guess that's what rationality is for you.
Case in point, you just wanted your little pretext to throw you pre-canned one-liner, like a bot mindlessly spamming the same BS without bothering with what the people are actually saying. Thanks for proving my point, but I really didn't need it.
I hope this thread won't get locked so I can return here after a month and say "people really fought over women in a fictional world"
I've seen people in this forum exchange insults over if a horse could charge through a line of men or not, if an arrow could pierce an armor or not, and I've seen heated online battle in Warcraft forum about the morality of the Horde or Alliance. People can be pretty intense for the most pointless things.
 

LeChat

Master Knight
WBM&BWF&SVC
A universal solution would be to put sliders :

Troops : Male ----+---- Female
Lords : Male ----+---- Female
 

Etrepcar

Veteran
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
No you're not, you just play dumb and actually succeed at it. The answers are all over the place, and literally right inside the OP. It's impossible to not get them unless you actively want to. And you don't want to because it would show how empty your posturing is, so you need to insert your narrative rather than actually getting the point.

Case in point, you just wanted your little pretext to throw you pre-canned one-liner, like a bot mindlessly spamming the same BS without bothering with what the people are actually saying. Thanks for proving my point, but I really didn't need it.

I've seen people in this forum exchange insults over if a horse could charge through a line of men or not, if an arrow could pierce an armor or not, and I've seen heated online battle in Warcraft forum about the morality of the Horde or Alliance. People can be pretty intense for the most pointless things.

Alright, was nice talking to you, really insightful discussion we had.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom