General culture questions

[Piisamirotta]

Pagan is not equal to Primitive. These Germans have adopted Late Roman tactics and underwent later similar changes as in Ottonid Germany, which means there's not a huge differente in warfare between 1066 Germany and Lux Invicta 1066 Thiudenland.

This is not true. The most heavy-cavalry abusive age in Europe were the Middle Ages, and they lacked precisely strong central powers. The lack of strong central powers was the main condition for the rise of feudalism, but this did not stop the rise of heavy cavalry as the central piece of the battle's organisation.

There's nothing counter-intuitive to the concept of a German federation of tribes-turned-empire in which cavalry plays a strong role both as sign of status and an effective smasher of enemy lines.

Ok,that makes sense. Did not use the term centralized powers in the more modern meaning of a strong state, meant more as opposed to the even more decentralized tribal structures. A duke in a feudal realm had more centralized power I think than a leader of equivalent status in a more tribal society, might be wrong about that as well too though.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

Ok,that makes sense. Did not use the term centralized powers in the more modern meaning of a strong state, meant more as opposed to the even more decentralized tribal structures. A duke in a feudal realm had more centralized power I think than a leader of equivalent status in a more tribal society, might be wrong about that as well too though.

If you go down enough, sure, a small group might be "centralised", but the mod doesn't deal in small groups, it deals in big holdings and kingdoms. Dukes, counts or kings (most of the times there's really no distinction, not until the XIVth Century) they all had to resort to the same tactics to get things done and taxes delivered: personal relations based in traditional ideas or religious values, family ties and intimidation, which is not far from what gangsters resort to nowadays.

There's no centralism at any level in the years 900-1300. More than tribal structures? Maybe, but the only difference is the acceptance of the situation by everyone else, the legal sanction of the aristocracy and the Church backing this order up.

My point being: there's no reason to call Pagan Germans "primitive" or "ancient", and they surely don't live in what you think of when you imagine "tribal structure". Remember that Rome had tribes too, and it had a tribal system which was the source of Republican legions (Tribe is a Latin word, from which Tribune comes from). So there's that.

Sorry if I sound harsh, I'm not tryin to, really. (I reread the text and realised I may be a bit pushy, but it's not my intention!).

 

[Piisamirotta]

If you go down enough, sure, a small group might be "centralised", but the mod doesn't deal in small groups, it deals in big holdings and kingdoms. Dukes, counts or kings (most of the times there's really no distinction, not until the XIVth Century) they all had to resort to the same tactics to get things done and taxes delivered: personal relations based in traditional ideas or religious values, family ties and intimidation, which is not far from what gangsters resort to nowadays.

There's no centralism at any level in the years 900-1300. More than tribal structures? Maybe, but the only difference is the acceptance of the situation by everyone else, the legal sanction of the aristocracy and the Church backing this order up.

My point being: there's no reason to call Pagan Germans "primitive" or "ancient", and they surely don't live in what you think of when you imagine "tribal structure". Remember that Rome had tribes too, and it had a tribal system which was the source of Republican legions (Tribe is a Latin word, from which Tribune comes from). So there's that.

Sorry if I sound harsh, I'm not tryin to, really. (I reread the text and realised I may be a bit pushy, but it's not my intention!).

No, it's not ok, didn't feel you're harsh. Primitive isn't necessary a negative term in military connections, which was mostly what I was referring to. Guerrilla warfare, both the prehistoric endemic kind and the historic and modern kinds are usually considered a more primitive form of waging war, but they can be much more efficient than more modern approaches.

There's no centralism at any level in the years 900-1300. More than tribal structures? Maybe, but the only difference is the acceptance of the situation by everyone else, the legal sanction of the aristocracy and the Church backing this order up.

This was more what I was going for, the Church and the legal status of the aristocracy, which are somewhat tied together I think. English is a second language and I don't always make myself clear. The teutons in the mod, for example, with their pagan religions which I'd think are not really organized, wouldn't have the same kind of society. Maybe one where wealth and power are not as concentrated. And with wealth not as concentrated, and a looser, more tribal-type society I think they'd probably be more likely to have a more primitive way of fighting, namely raiding with infantry as their way of fighting war. Maybe light cavalry, heavy cavalry as the main striking force just feels somehow wrong. Of course, I may be totally wrong here, that's just the kind of feeling I got.

 

[richvh]

The original cultural buildings were designed by Shaytana, so if the pagan Germans favor heavy cavalry, it's Holy Writ.

 

[turnad]

The original cultural buildings were designed by Shaytana, so if the pagan Germans favor heavy cavalry, it's Holy Writ.

You know you guys can be creative and go against Shaytana's previous word?

 

[DarkReborn]

You know you guys can be creative and go against Shaytana's previous word?

But that doesn't mean we should.

 

[Numahr]

It is almost a philosophical question. We do change some Shaytana's design choices, sometimes. But we do so when we feel we have a good "mandate" to do so, like: new game mechanic appeared in an extension or Shaytana neglected a specific area. Otherwise we see no point in changing a design which overall is quite consistent and, let's be honest, quite brilliant. Otherwise, what would be the point of continuing his mod? Some details such as what a specific culture provides in terms of troops can always be changed by end users in easy-to-edit text files, if one feels the neeed, anyway.

 

[turnad]

But that doesn't mean we should.

I just mean, I see you guys say your not going to do something because Shaytana didn't do it, or leave something as is just because they originally made it as such. I just hope its not stifling creativity. I don't mind the germans and their troops, in fact agree with it. I just wonder if your playing around when you go by the "Word of Shaytana" or if your serious.

 

[Cèsar de Quart]

Also, it's fun to have a Prophet.

 

[Attalus]

One day one shall make an AAR with a Shaytanic character and bring Light to the World !

 

[richvh]

One day His Shaytanic Majesty shall return to the forums to judge those who have carried on His work. Those who have maintained its purity shall be raised up to sit upon His right hand and bask in the light of Lux Invicta, while those which have defiled it shall be sacrificed upon a Sword of Victory.