Distinct Nationalities

[Licken Chicken]

It seems rather obvious that the Swadians have been modelled after certain Western European feudal civilizations (Late Midieval Britain, France and Germany), whereas the Vaegirs, while still looking european, have a more distinct, Asian-steppes flavor to them (Mongolians, Tartars etc.) While these differences don't amount to much on the battlefield, they certainly add a lot of character to the game. In light of this, why don't you take this to the next degree, and further augment each nations differences?

Why not keep the Swadians the way they are, but give the Vaegirs a much stronger eastern feel. Perhaps different weapons and armor. While this may be way to much to ask, and may require far to much from the devs, it could potentially add a lot to the game. Just think about it. The Swadians: plate mail, lances and crossbows. The Vaegirs: scale mail, katana and shuriken. All of a sudden, joining an army might be a lot more important than just how close you are to a certain count.

While this would fundamentally alter the nature of the game, it would significantly add to the environment by creating more player choices and more oportunities for envolvement. Joining one nation over another would actually matter -- not only in terms of combat, but in terms of style and elements of roleplaying. Finally, this could open the door for more distinct nationalities to be introduced later down the road (romans, vikings, whatever).

Any thoughts?

 

[Wanderer]

Sounds like a fun idea for the folks doing the mods more then something to directly develop during Beta while the gameplay is still being built...

... however, it sounds decent. Especially if you really start messing with the sub-text of the game, such as the Swadians having light hunters and big heavy warhorses, and the Vaegirs having the more nimble but long journeying traveling horses and such.

 

[[P]aradox]

The Vaegirs: scale mail, katana and shuriken.

Now you're just making them Japanese. Anyone else seen enough katanas in games to last them a lifetime? I'm sure they'd be real useful against a broadsword, one swing and your shiny sword of a thousand folds is angel dust, smoke it if you got it. I'd rather the Vaegir kept more to the Mongol look; I'd like to see lacquered armor, recurve bows (the most powerful in the world), and more scimitars.

 

[NorphTehDwarf]

Hell yeah! The recurve bows would be very nice if they gave you some kinda bonus to your mounted archery ability, too.

 

[GreenKnight]

Too many katanas? No such thing. It's a different kind of weapon than the European variety, but very cool all the same. And given time, or perhaps mods, I'd definitely get a kick out of the introduction of some sort of Far Eastern type culture. But as for the Vaegirs...no, I don't think so. What you're describing is mainly an aesthetic difference, and as far as I'm concerned, we have that already. Making them into proper Mongols would, as far as I can tell, would pretty much be redundant. The Khergits already fill that role.

The Vaegirs...yeah, they reflect some of those same cultural sensibilites, but they're also sort of European. That nebulous nature allows you some flexibility. You can try a number of different looks to suit your fancy without making you look extremely odd next to your troops. My character...he looks pretty much like a sea raider on a horse, but that's not too far off, and I figure that maybe down around Wercheg, you'd see some Vaegirs with that blood anyway. Right now, it works. Implement the changes you suggest, and I look like a dope, unless I get to play as a Sea Raider...which would be fine with me, provided they could be given some horses. As is, however, no. It'd just be too alienating for me.

 

[Licken Chicken]

Don't you feel that both the Swadians and Vaegirs are too similar, though? If not in looks, then certainly in gameplay. I mean, why join one army over another for any reason other then roleplaying or petty convenience (you don't want to march to a Swadian town etc.)

The example I gave with Katana and shuriken was just that, an example. It could be anything. Different Mongolian armors and bows sound great. The point still stands however, there isn't enough to differentiate the two armies other than superficial detail. If this isn't a problem now, it could very well become one.

On a side note, the dude who said a broadsword would smoke a katana clearly has no idea what he's talking about. A katana could easily cut through a broadsword, or any blade for that matter, like a hot knife through butter.

 

[GreenKnight]

Okay, I'm pretty sure the gentleman who said the bit about the katana vs. broadsword was in error, despite a broadsword generally having a heavier blade, but I also think you've seen a few too many samurai movies. A katana was a very sharp, 3 pound razor blade. Nothing more, nothing less. It was made to slice through skin and bone, not metal. As for your other points, I admit that you can basically accomplish all the same things with Vaegirs and Swadians, but it's not always true. The Swadians have better armor, but Vaegirs, in the upper levels, seem to hit harder. It's a tradeoff, but a clear difference. Archers vs. crossbowen. Based on what I've seen and heard, that amounts to a fairly major difference. With regards to the claim that there's no motivation to join either side...most of the people on this forum seem to have made a choice. Yeah, the differences need to be spelled out, but an overhaul like you suggest seems to me to be neither necessary, nor attractive.

 

[[P]aradox]

On a side note, the dude who said a broadsword would smoke a katana clearly has no idea what he's talking about. A katana could easily cut through a broadsword, or any blade for that matter, like a hot knife through butter.

Medieval broadswords were basically big slabs of metal designed to smash bone and crush organs. Katanas were light and thin weapons intended to penetrate, at most, lacquered leather. If a knight on horseback charged a samurai on horseback and broadsword met katana on-edge, the outcome is pretty obvious. Too many people make out katanas to be frikkin' lightsabers. Sharp does not mean better. I can't cut through a butter knife with a razor blade no matter how hard I try.

Now, in the right hands a katana could prove a deadly weapon against a European knight, but M&B isn't built for that kind of exercise of skill. In M&B knights would stomp samurai ass.

 

[Licken Chicken]

I see what you're saying about the Swadians and Vaegirs GreenKnight, perhaps I relied too much on hyperbole to make my point. While it is true that differences, such as the ones you pointed out, do exist, I still feel like they are fairly minor in nature. Maybe that's the way they were intended to be. Maybe that's the way people like it. I don't know. What I do know is that it can make for some monotonous gameplay.

As for your point about people on this forum having strong ties to their nation of choice, don't you think that this could be due to the fact that MAB is drawing from a rather small pool of fairly involved players? Will you really be able to say the same for the general public? Even if Swadians and Vaegirs differed only in name, people on this forum would most likely still be strongly attached to one side over another.

 

[corksacker69]

gonna have to jump on the D&D newb bandwagon here and vote aye on katanas and other eastern weapons. like china/japan did some trading with europe did they not? even if it took a year to sail all the way there and back.

 

[Licken Chicken]

Medieval broadswords were basically big slabs of metal designed to smash bone and crush organs. Katanas were light and thin weapons intended to penetrate, at most, lacquered leather.

What are the grounds for such a claim? First off, if Katanas could only slice through lacquered leather, as you claim, why would they be used against Samurai, who's armor was often made from steel or iron? Second, before a Katana was finished, it would be tested by cutting through a variety of materials. One such material was none other than human beings (corpses or live prisoners sometimes). Katanas wouldn't just cut people, they would cut them in half. Furthermore, they could often cut through more than a single person at once. In fact, the number of people a Katana could cut through in a single blow was marked on the bottom of the blade near the hilt. It was not rare for a Katana to cut through two or three people in one fell swoop. This is a tremendous feat that, in all fairness, could not be replicated by a claymore. Don't believe me? Do five minutes of research on google.

 

[GreenKnight]

No one's saying a katana wasn't an impressive weapon. However, there were still certain things it wasn't designed for. Meeting edge to edge, a katana would, in all likelihood, fare poorly. The leading edge, in the interest of ability to maintain sharpness, was forged extremely brittle. That's why blocking another sword was generally done with the sides. As for samurai armor, I admit I should re-do my research, but I'm pretty sure Paradox is in the right. I saw a bit on Samurai armor once on the History Channel. There was bronze in it, but in general, that was largely the decorative bits. The armor itself was largely made of other materials, such as lacquuered leather.

 

[Licken Chicken]

I'm not sure why we're talking about Samurai armor and weaponry... but whatever.

You're wrong about Samurai armor. Samurai armor went through everal key phases of development. Of these phases, the age of Sengokujidai saw the strongest armor. Armor made in this time contained large portions of heavy metal, such as iron and steel. Yes, much of Samurai armor was composed of lacquered leather, bamboo and other materials woven together by silk, but this does not change the fact that Samurai breastplates, as well as other pieces of armor, were made from strong metals.

Why is this important? Because Katana could cut through Samurai armor. Not only could they cut through Samurai armor, the blades were often tested by cutting through four inches of bamboo. If Katana can cut straight through four inches of bamboo in one strike, I think they could more than easily handle Midieval plate mail.

But the point is moot because even if they couldn't in real life, that doesn't mean they couldn't in Mount and Blade. Mount and Blade is not entirely realistic. I've seen a dude take an arrow to the head and keep on fighting. In real life, that just doesn't happen.

And I don't know who would win if a Katana and a Claymore met edge to edge, but does that really matter? I'm sure if a two-handed axe met edge to edge with a long sword, the sword wouldn't stand a chance; but does that find it's way into Mount and Blade? Absolutely not.

 

[ShangTang]

Hate to tell you. But medieval plate mail is far toughe than 4 inches of bamboo. Katana's were last ditch defense weapons. Usually the order of weapons for Samurais in battle was spear, bow, then katana. Somebody has been watching too many movies.

 

[Licken Chicken]

I think you're drastically underestemating how strong a bamboo shoot with a four inch diameter is. People seem to insist, time and time again, on the invincibility of fluted plate. Think I've watched too many movies? On what grounds was plate mail unbreakable?

And again, even if it was totally unrealistic, why does that matter in a computer game where a man can recieve a healthy dossage of axe to the chest and still go on fighting?

 

[GreenKnight]

If a katana was introduced into this game, then realism would be suspended in the same way it is for every other weapon. A slash would hurt, regardless of whether it necessarily should have penetrated the armor or not. The argument we're having is basically about whether a katana would cut right through a broadsword, and the general concensus here is that it would not. Steel is tougher than bamboo, and while no one's saying plate mail is unbreakable, it DID get damn near impregnible. Sword slashes and such like we see in this game were totally useless. That argument aside...katana in the game? Sure. Making the Vaegirs more Asiatic? No thank you. I think that at least in terms of the overall look of the two forces, they're drastically different enough. No one could ever mistake a Swadian militia man, with his padded cloth, from a Vaegir footman.

 

[Destichado]

Oi Vey! Not another goddamn knights-vs-samurai pissing match...

Chicken, go to Swordforum, MyArmoury, or Netsword. Argue with the professionals and practicioners who can post pictures of the results of REAL cuts against bamboo, tatami, beef quarters and steel drums.
FYI, green bamboo is much softer and easier to cut than dry bamboo, and I can cut through a four inch shoot with my sabre, viking typeX or my Venetian two-hander.
GK -I take it you're another Archiver?


Keep the katanas the hell out of the best (only) truly medieval game we've got. Go play Dynasty Warriors or Shinobi if you want kabbage kutters. *grumble*



And As for the Vaegirs, I've been thinking of them as Rus. It would fit, don't you think? A clash between the herder steppes nobility and the aggrarian lowland gentry? Very archetypal. Very nice. KEEP THIS!

 

[Worbah]

The Vaegirs: scale mail, katana and shuriken.

Now you're just making them Japanese. Anyone else seen enough katanas in games to last them a lifetime? I'm sure they'd be real useful against a broadsword, one swing and your shiny sword of a thousand folds is angel dust, smoke it if you got it. I'd rather the Vaegir kept more to the Mongol look; I'd like to see lacquered armor, recurve bows (the most powerful in the world), and more scimitars.

Vaegirs resemble Vikings/Celts/Russians a lot more than mongols. The Black Khergit are the mongols.

 

[GreenKnight]

Vaegirs resemble Vikings/Celts/Russians a lot more than mongols. The Black Khergit are the mongols.

Then I'm not the only one who saw sort of a Norse influence there? After I took a serious look at all the nomad and steppe caps, I had to admit there was a fairly strong Asiatic influence, and since the Vaegirs seem to be a horse people, I've sort of been thinking Huns. But I've definitely seen a few Nordic helmets and shields in there, so I'd kind of like to think that Vaegirs and Sea Raiders share a few ancestors. Maybe the Black Khergit Kingdom borders the Vaegir lands, and the Vaegir culture grew up as sort of a combination of those two peoples.

 

[Pharaoh Llandy]

Medieval broadswords were basically big slabs of metal designed to smash bone and crush organs. Katanas were light and thin weapons intended to penetrate, at most, lacquered leather.

What are the grounds for such a claim? First off, if Katanas could only slice through lacquered leather, as you claim, why would they be used against Samurai, who's armor was often made from steel or iron? Second, before a Katana was finished, it would be tested by cutting through a variety of materials. One such material was none other than human beings (corpses or live prisoners sometimes). Katanas wouldn't just cut people, they would cut them in half. Furthermore, they could often cut through more than a single person at once. In fact, the number of people a Katana could cut through in a single blow was marked on the bottom of the blade near the hilt. It was not rare for a Katana to cut through two or three people in one fell swoop. This is a tremendous feat that, in all fairness, could not be replicated by a claymore. Don't believe me? Do five minutes of research on google.

The difference of being that human flesh is not as hard as metal. Cutting through the middle of 3 people at once would involve a katana going through mainly soft tissue and internal organs. If the blow is above the pelvis, the only resistance to a katana would be the spinal column, comprised of segmented discs. This is not like taking a blade through a solid piece of bone. If the spinal column were a solid piece of bone humans would not be able to walk as they would be inflexible.

As has been mentioned, katanas and many eastern swords were honed to an extremely sharp edge for slicing and stabbing. Unless wielded by superman, I doubt a katana would be able to slice through human bone without some hacking as the weapon was just not designed for it.

Broadswords and double-handed swords and the like were design to deal cutting AND crushing damage, and would shatter a bone before slicing through it. They were sharp, but not as sharp as a katana because they didn't need to be. But they were heavier, and wielded with more force and quite possibly less finess.

If samurais or ninjas or whatever had katanas made out of titanium, they may have gone through a knight's plate armour like butter. But a samurai against a fully armoured mounted knight with a lance or a broadsword and a shield? I think you're being a little unrealistic. As [P] said, they aren't lightsabres.