Incline Battle Brothers + Beasts & Exploration, Warriors of the North and Blazing Deserts DLC Thread

[Zariusz]

This grenade looks like a dried dragon testicle.

 

[Murk]

Lindwurm nads turned into Lindwurm nades.

 

[Barbarian]

Alchemist background perhaps?

Quite curious about the new middle-eastern themed backgrounds, weapons and armor. They already have curved swords in the game.

 

[hivemind]

Warrior of Allah background:
noble/combat

starting stat rolls:
avg resolve:
80(no ghost or witch can stand against the purity of the call of lailahaillallah)

avg mattack:
63(sword guided by God)

avg mdef/rdef:
-10(we welcome martyrdom)

avg fatigue:
90(diet consist of too many pastries)

background events:
theological debate with monk, historian or minstrel background
gives charity to beggar or cripple increasing morale for both of them
converts disowned noble, wildman and raider to the true faith giving them +5 resolve permanently
beheads every cultist, graverobber and gambler causing a resolve boost for himself but morale hit for lowborn backgrounds
converts melon fucker and pimp to eunuch

 

[hivemind]

fucking degenerate time leech game

give me back my morning

FUCK

 

[Reinhardt]

starting stat rolls:
avg resolve:
80(no ghost or witch can stand against the purity of the call of lailahaillallah)

But what about jinn?

 

[FreeKaner]

The arms, armours and clothing here looks like 16th century Ottoman type. Why didn't they use medieval Arab armour and clothing?

I actually thought this being one game that uses period appropriate and influenced arms and armour for an European fantasy, they might have been one game to actually use proper medieval middle-eastern arms and armour as well, not be like every other game and setting that uses 16th century Ottoman ones. I hope they'll at least display the actual diversity of arms and armour of medieval middle-east, instead of giving everyone scimitars which in itself wasn't something common in medieval middle-east.

 

[Brancaleone]

The arms, armours and clothing here looks like 16th century Ottoman type. Why didn't they use medieval Arab armour and clothing?

I actually thought this being one game that uses period appropriate and influenced arms and armour for an European fantasy, they might have been one game to actually use proper medieval middle-eastern arms and armour as well, not be like every other game and setting that uses 16th century Ottoman ones. I hope they'll at least display the actual diversity of arms and armour of medieval middle-east, instead of giving everyone scimitars which in itself wasn't something common in medieval middle-east.

First clear evidence of that kind of plate+mail armour is from half of 15th century Persian sources, plus other much earlier references (although no 100% sure). It's not something distinctively Ottoman (apart from Middle East, it had quite some success also in the Indo-Persian area). And quite a lot of the armour already in the game is of the15th century type, so it's perfectly in line with the rest.

 

[FreeKaner]

First clear evidence of that kind of plate+mail armour is from half of 15th century Persian sources, plus other much earlier references (although no 100% sure). It's not something distinctively Ottoman (apart from Middle East, it had quite some success also in the Indo-Persian area). And quite a lot of the armour already in the game is of the15th century type, so it's perfectly in line with the rest.

Plated-mail itself is at earliest in second half 15th century which I think is already very late for rest of what is used in this game since the armour in the game is not 15th century at all but 12-14th century. European 15th century armour would be full plate armour which I didn't see in this game. Moreover the one he is wearing is a distinctively disc plate which doesn't exist before 16th century in that form and except in Ottoman Empire, various other forms of disc plate also exists in 16th century in Russia, Persia and India. It's a type of armour made in compromise design with appearance of gunpowder weapons in the field, comparable to European breastplates. The type of vest he is wearing is also Ottoman in appearance and so is his sword.

In fact, I would be willing to bet the artist used one of these pictures as the reference, which is late 16th century Ottoman:

Regardless, I think the theme and general aesthetic of this game is clearly and distinctly high medieval with influences from fantasy and history before with very obviously pre-gunpowder era arms and armour. So including post-gunpowder type of arms and armour breaks the coherence. It is like including 12th century crusader in mail and bucket helm side by side with a tercio pikeman in breastplate and morion helmet, very anachronistic and nonsensical, as former was meant to protect against cutting weapons and latter was made with firearms in mind.

 

[TT1]

After Blazing Deserts a new DLC will be released, called Rising Sun. It will introduce Samurai, Ninja, fighting monks and Drunk Kung Fu.

Roadmap:

- Rising Sun
- Deep Jungles
- Lost Empire
- Wild Tribes (introducing mounts)
- Land of Rain & Fog
- Islands
- Battle Sisters
- Battle Brothers II (now with multiplayer) exclusive EPIC Games

 

[Serious_Business]

Fuck off historical coherence boy

 

[Barbarian]

"Historical coherence" was thrown out the window already the minute they introduced zweihanders and other landsknecht inspired equipment.

Nobody gives a shit. It is not a historical game.

 

[Harthwain]

European 15th century armour would be full plate armour which I didn't see in this game.

There is a reason for that:

Coffe wrote:
Would you guys ever consider adding in a late medieval DLC featuring full plate armor, more lethal weaponry, and maybe even horses? (Goblins got them wolfriders )

Never say never, but I don’t think so. We are expanding the Battle Brothers universe in different directions, but we try stay within certain boundaries. One boundary is the (very rough) visual time frame and the restriction to infantry combat.
The reason against too much late medieval period gear is to maintain a consistent look throughout the game. The reason against horses is actually only gameplay related. We explained on several occasions how horses would break the basic way the tactical combat works. Wolfriders are an exception as they move very differently to horses and are more of a “fantasy style enemy” compared to the more realistic human fighters.

Cheers!

Source

There is more stuff discussed in the linked thread.

 

[FreeKaner]

The two guys above disagree, it is time to add Napoleonic uniforms as armour as visual coherence doesn't matter.

Besides, as the posters above clearly lack the understanding to grasp the matter at hand, this is not about what is historical, as it is true this is not a historical game. This is about theme. If you are making a DLC that tries to base itself on real life medieval middle-east, then it would make sense to make them wear medieval middle-eastern arms and armour to stick to that particular cultural and aesthetic milieu. Secondly this is about having a coherent style, weapons and armour serve a function based on what they would encounter in the battlefield, if your game has weapons and armour from a period where there would be firearms in battlefield they were then obviously designed with that in mind, if you don't have firearms in the game then it becomes nonsensical. It's like having people in WW2 uniforms fighting with medieval swords, side by side with other people that are in otherwise in period and function accurate medieval arms and armour. This turns the game into a disneyland ninjas vs. pirates type of clusterfuck with no coherence.

Of course, since it is not a historical game this shouldn't matter and we might as well add British redcoats and Roman legionnaires while we are at it, in fact why stop there we might even add samurai robots too. Why care about aesthetic and logical coherence? Turn everything into a theme park where you have all the archetypes and stereotypes.

 

[Strange Fellow]

Why care about aesthetic and logical coherence?

I can show you.

people in WW2 uniforms fighting with medieval swords

ninjas vs. pirates

we might as well add British redcoats and Roman legionnaires while we are at it, in fact why stop there we might even add samurai robots too.

This bothers normal people.

16th century Ottoman armour

This bothers people with history degrees.

 

[Delterius]

Historical coherence" was thrown out the window already the minute they introduced zweihanders and other landsknecht inspired equipment.

It would be p. weird if they added zweihanders in the Matryoska Dolls update tho.

 

[FreeKaner]

This bothers people with history degrees.

There is as much time between crusade era middle-east and ottoman as 100-years-war and redcoats. Same type of reason for difference in arms and armour too, existence of firearms. I would be as bothered to see a German cuirassier in the cover art of the original battle brothers.

In fact, since people here have more knowledge of the European history, here is European armour from the same time period as the one displayed in that DLC cover art:

Considering people are also generally more aware of the distinction between Medieval period and Renaissance, it should be obvious how distant it is. Would people not be bothered by three musketeers in a game supposedly set in medieval France? In fact, so many are so strictly opposed to inclusion of firearms into medieval games as that appears modern to them but they seem to have no qualms in adding everything else that was directly caused by firearms. Adding that type of armour is basically same as adding matchlock arquebuses and wheellock pistols into the game, as that is the type of weapon people wearing those armours would encounter if not personally use.

 

[hivemind]

arabs didnt advance as much during the same period so it makes sensethat its less jarring to use their armour from a wider time frame

 

[Harthwain]

The two guys above disagree, it is time to add Napoleonic uniforms as armour as visual coherence doesn't matter.

Pretty sure they both said "historical coherence". Historical coherence =/= visual coherence.

In fact, since people here have more knowledge of the European history, here is European armour from the same time period as the one displayed in that DLC cover art:

The point is: it doesn't matter what period they take the armor from, as long as it seems to fit in the overall theme the game is going for. Looking at the DLC cover art neither armor seems out of place for a medieval-oriented game for me (chainmail reinforced with a few plates, chainmail with gambeson underneath it, studded leather armor).

 

[Strange Fellow]

FreeKaner I'm saying that unless the anachronism is percieved by people who have no knowledge of this stuff (i.e. it has to look nebulously "out of place") we won't give a shit. But by all means rage on and keep the sloppy Germans in line.

 

[FreeKaner]

Pretty sure they both said "historical coherence". Historical coherence =/= visual coherence.


The point is: it doesn't matter what period they take the armor from, as long as it seems to fit in the overall theme the game is going for. Looking at the DLC cover art neither armor seems out of place for a medieval-oriented game for me (chainmail reinforced with a few plates, chainmail with gambeson underneath it, studded leather armor).

The response of the devs regarding the plate armour applies perfectly well. If it is supposed to be thematically and visually based on medieval middle-east, specifically crusader era then it shouldn't have a different style from much later. It's no different than making a vikings dlc and giving them gothic plate armour because they are both vaguely northern European from vaguely late medieval period.

Why use that when there exists a vast varied source of arms and armour from medieval middle-east? Would you okay with giving Vikings gothic plate or even brigandine? After all it is late medieval and not historic so we might as well. However clearly that would be jarring even if it would fit the extremely loose standard of medieval-oriented game and it would be more sensible to give vikings the appropriate arms and armour they would be using to be thematically and visually coherent to the DLC they would be making about vikings.

Here as visual aid, would you be absolutely fine if they made a viking focused DLC with the vikings in longboats wearing this as armour?

It is from Northern Europe, it is late medieval, it is not plate and it is within same era as most of other arms and armour in the game. In fact it is even less inaccurate because it wasn't designed with firearms in mind.

 

[Harthwain]

The response of the devs regarding the plate armour applies perfectly well. If it is supposed to be thematically and visually based on medieval middle-east, specifically crusader era then it shouldn't have a different style from much later. [...]

You don't understand... Yes, it is supposed to be thematically and visually based on a certain medieval period, but not time-wise: style-wise. So as long as the armor in question looks the part it can be "from much later", regardless of when it was actually made. I guess you being history/armor-buff makes it impossible for you to separate the visuals of the armors from the time period they were used in, but it can't be helped.

 

[FreeKaner]

You don't understand... Yes, it is supposed to be thematically and visually based on a certain medieval period, but not time-wise: style-wise. So as long as the armor in question looks the part it can be "from much later", regardless of when it was actually made. I guess you being history/armor-buff makes it impossible for you to separate the visuals of the armors from the time period they were used in, but it can't be helped.

So if I was a person who couldn't tell European full plate from medieval European armour, it would be absolutely perfectly fine to make a viking themed DLC with everyone in gothic plate? The argument essentially comes down to "we are ignorant and can't tell arms and armour entire centuries and cultures apart so it doesn't matter", is this really the standard that should be aspired?

It's so different from actual medieval middle-eastern arms and armour:

No big circular plate discs in the chest, no curved swords with curved handles.

The reason why it looks "fine" and "appropriate" to you is not because it is similar, because big steel plates and curved swords are kind of an obvious difference but because you and in general most everyone apparently has the wrong idea about what medieval middle-eastern arms and armour looked like. Instead they seem to think 16th century Middle-eastern and Indian arms and armour is what it was.

The argument that it is actually appropriate in style is same as making what is supposed to be medieval men-at-arms look like conquistadors and say it is actually appropriate because it is based on a specific style rather than time. So to clarify I don't care if it is perfectly accurate time-period wise, I care that it doesn't fit the visual style of what should be medieval middle-east. The fact it is also from much later than rest of the game and based on armour design that was made with firearms in mind also makes the game feel incoherent thematically.

 

[Zariusz]

- Land of Rain & Fog

Why would anyone want to go to Britain?

 

[Zariusz]

Maybe lets just ignore Arabs and lets go straight to chad Persians.