What's with all of the female units?

The new Heroes games produced by Ubisoft. Please specify which game you are referring to in your post.

Moderator: Moderators

MattII
Demon
Demon
Posts: 309
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: New Zealand

Postby MattII » Jun 9 2011, 8:21

Slayer of Cliffracers wrote:The only armour the blood fury should have *is* their leg-armour (and the hosiery that it's worn on). The reason is that for a unit like that leg armour is actually the only form of armour that there is any point in wearing, because if you're injured in the legs then you movement is impaired and thus you cannot keep up with your sisters or fight (you are dead basically). All other armour though is just extra encumberance that just slows you down.
You might want to take a look at lamellar as well, because a gut-wound from a stray arrow is going to slow you down just as much as a bruised shin I imagine.

Jac
Peasant
Peasant
Posts: 53
Joined: 02 Feb 2009

Postby Jac » Jun 9 2011, 17:22

Mlai wrote:Men can be ideal, whatever type of ideal you may prefer:
Image Image


How's this for a man?

Image

User avatar
Kalah
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 20000
Joined: 24 Nov 2005

Postby Kalah » Jun 9 2011, 18:21

Are you guys saying that the Snow Maiden is actually a man in drag? :D
In War: Resolution, In Defeat: Defiance, In Victory: Magnanimity, In Peace: Goodwill.

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » Jun 9 2011, 22:41

MattII wrote:You might want to take a look at lamellar as well, because a gut-wound from a stray arrow is going to slow you down just as much as a bruised shin I imagine.


It wouldn't slow you down quick enough that you can't put a serious amount of distance between yourself and the enemy. Also it doesn't prevent you from running around (and thus fighting) in the future in the somewhat improbable event that you actually survive said wound.

Basically the more armour you wear the heavier and less agile you are, thus you are less able to carry out the whole hit-and-run tactic for which you exist.

Which armour is worn then would be decided according to a rather cold military criteria of 'what sort of injury is most militarily harmful.

If a blood fury is injured in their torso then they are far more likely to die than a blood fury injured in the legs. But if a person that survives said injury will probably be of 'military value'.

While a person injured in the legs will likely survive but be of no military value, thus the resources used to care for them are 'wasted'.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.

http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
Pol
Admin
Admin
Posts: 9182
Joined: 29 Nov 2005
Location: IN SOMNIS VERITAS
Contact:

Postby Pol » Jun 10 2011, 6:03

Basically the more armour you wear the heavier and less agile you are, thus you are less able to carry out the whole hit-and-run tactic for which you exist.

Just basically. Because the greatest thing was always to do extra resistent armor with little weight - mithril.

While a person injured in the legs will likely survive but be of no military value, thus the resources used to care for them are 'wasted'.

This is a game. No such things are calculated and it's not needed. They can be calculated, still it wouldn't be having such impact like in RL.
"We made it!"
The Archives | Collection of H3&WoG files | Older albeit still useful | CH Downloads
PC Specs: A10-7850K, FM2A88X+K, 16GB-1600, SSD-MLC-G3, 1TB-HDD-G3, MAYA44, SP10 500W Be Quiet

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » Jun 11 2011, 2:10

This may be a game, but the thread topic has moved into "what is realistic" territory. So he can discuss after-battle logistics.

I agree that while the near-nudity can be explained away as fanaticism to culture and religion, the platform shoes are going too far. However, it doesn't detract game enjoyment from me. It's just not that big a deal to me. On the battlefield, you have old men that can't stand up straight. You have plenty of other melee units that go naked into battle. You have creatures whose wings can't possibly support their bodies in flight. This game is not the Total War series, doesn't pretend to be.

On the note of nudity = authority... I always got the feeling that while the DE exalt the female form... the ones in authority have the privilege of wearing more seductive clothing than the grunts. They're women; they know that the right kind of skimpy clothing makes them look sexier than plain nudity. Since none of the females' clothing have any practical purpose in armour protection, its entire use is for cultural/religious reasons.

DE simply don't believe in armour. Even the Raiders, over time, ditched their large shields in favor of more speed. Combined with their goddess aesthetic, the females take this to an extreme. The reason they still wear shin armour may actually be the same reason we put them in leg armour (and nothing else): they consider that the least sexy parts of the female anatomy (some men may disagree), and therefore is ok to cover up or to make scary-looking (via spikey armour, the same way they might wear spikey claw-gauntlets). They may be trying to emulate the best parts of Malassa in both the woman aspect and the dragon aspect.

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » Jun 11 2011, 22:54

Pol wrote:This is a game. No such things are calculated and it's not needed. They can be calculated, still it wouldn't be having such impact like in RL.


Lot's of military considerations are not calculated in the game, your troops wages being one of the key one's. Doesn't mean that for background/lore purposes they don't 'exist'.

Mlai wrote:I agree that while the near-nudity can be explained away as fanaticism to culture and religion, the platform shoes are going too far. However, it doesn't detract game enjoyment from me. It's just not that big a deal to me. On the battlefield, you have old men that can't stand up straight. You have plenty of other melee units that go naked into battle. You have creatures whose wings can't possibly support their bodies in flight. This game is not the Total War series, doesn't pretend to be.


We don't have any creatures whose wings couldn't possibly support their weight in flight as far as I am aware of.

The platform shoes are going 'too far' not because it is nudity but because they are impractical especially for a unit carrying out the role that they do. Nudity however rather than armour and clothing is actually pretty much ultra-practical.

Mlai wrote:On the note of nudity = authority... I always got the feeling that while the DE exalt the female form... the ones in authority have the privilege of wearing more seductive clothing than the grunts. They're women; they know that the right kind of skimpy clothing makes them look sexier than plain nudity. Since none of the females' clothing have any practical purpose in armour protection, its entire use is for cultural/religious reasons.


The one's in authority don't aim to wear more seductive clothing than the grunts, they aren't aiming at some kind of perfect amount of clothing to attract the maximum amount of sexual attention. They simply wear less clothing overall.

The reason they do this is because as the naked form is normally concealed and cloaked in darkness behind clothing then it is *like* Malassa. The reason they wear so little is because all the other dark elves, male and female alike wear so much.

The clothing which the others are expected the wear is what makes their nudity a badge of status, they are the revealers of what is hidden. To be completely naked however is to claim not merely to be revealing what is hidden but to be that which *is* hidden. Ergo it is to claim that you represent Malassa herself.

Yes this does have the side effect of making them exceedingly sexy, but this is not (officially speaking anyway) for their own personal gratification. Instead this too has a religious function, as the lusts of the male dark elves lead to the desire to 'reveal what is hidden' in it's entirety then these lusts become essentially a form of worship of Malassa. That is to say even the sexual function of their nudity is for religious purposes.

Indeed this is what Shadow Mistresses essentially are trained to do, if you read the bio.

Shadow Mistress Bio wrote:Dark elves are, without exception, captivated by the beauty of the Shadow Mistresses, but few would ever risk any kind of liaison. They know that to do so can have fatal consequences, as these Priestesses are armed with fire whips, and they do not just use them in battle.


Shadow Mistresses function is to attend to the worship of Malassa among the male dark elves. They are selected for their beauty and trained to utilise the sexual potential of the priestesses monopoly on nudity in order to inspire lust but to never ever allow them to access what they are not allowed to see, thus directing their lusts towards Malassa herself. This is rather dangerous for obvious reasons and is why they are armed with fire whips and 'don't just use them in combat'.

Shadow Matriarchs generally preside over the worship of women while Shadow Mistresses generally preside over the worship of men.

Mlai wrote:DE simply don't believe in armour. Even the Raiders, over time, ditched their large shields in favor of more speed. Combined with their goddess aesthetic, the females take this to an extreme. The reason they still wear shin armour may actually be the same reason we put them in leg armour (and nothing else): they consider that the least sexy parts of the female anatomy (some men may disagree), and therefore is ok to cover up or to make scary-looking (via spikey armour, the same way they might wear spikey claw-gauntlets). They may be trying to emulate the best parts of Malassa in both the woman aspect and the dragon aspect.


Given they don't believe it they seem to wear plenty of it. No the reason they (the blood furies) don't wear much armour (and shouldn't) is simply that armour is heavy and their military function does not allow them to be.

The Blood Furies are not exactly especially religious, they are pretty much ordinary dark elf women trained to fight in a certain style. They are allowed to wear little clothing by the matriarchs as a privilage of their status. The armour to wear is most probably going to be determined by practicality not some complicated formula to do with Malassa and 'sexyness'.

If Malassa has anything to do with it, it will simply be that the Blood Furies aren't allowed by the matriarchs to show those parts and they don't wear armour on the other bits in order to flaunt that they are allow them.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.



http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23263
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Jun 11 2011, 23:05

Pol wrote:
Basically the more armour you wear the heavier and less agile you are, thus you are less able to carry out the whole hit-and-run tactic for which you exist.

Just basically. Because the greatest thing was always to do extra resistent armor with little weight - mithril.


Frankly the problem with the armour on both DE races is less about weight then it is about getting a punctured lung (or another injury) from your own armour.
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!
I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €

Image

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » Jun 12 2011, 4:01

Slayer of Cliffracers wrote:We don't have any creatures whose wings couldn't possibly support their weight in flight as far as I am aware of.

I wanted to say something smart-alecky, but since you bring so much to the "thoughtful conjecture" table, I won't act immature like that. I'll just repeat that most of the winged creatures in HOMM5 can't fly on those wings. Unless Ashan gravity is like lunar gravity.

The platform shoes are going 'too far' not because it is nudity but because they are impractical especially for a unit carrying out the role

Umm yes I know that.

Nudity however rather than armour and clothing is actually pretty much ultra-practical.

In Legolas terms probably. But not IRL. If we're still discussing Earth military reality, rather than "hard fantasy" military reality.

The one's in authority don't aim to wear more seductive clothing than the grunts, they aren't aiming at some kind of perfect amount of clothing to attract the maximum amount of sexual attention.

But down below, you talk about the Mistress, whose role "to entice DE men" directly contradicts what you just said here. And also I did say that their sexy armour/clothing are for cultural/religious function. I like your thoughtful conjecture on DE society. But you should try agreeing with other ppl, when you in fact are agreeing with them.

Given they don't believe it they seem to wear plenty of it.

ORLY. I must have missed all the DE soldiers in plate armour plodding along the battlefield. The Assassins don't wear any more armour than Hollywood ninjas would wear. The Raiders are extremely lightly armoured for a charging linebreaker unit.

No the reason they (the blood furies) don't wear much armour (and shouldn't) is simply that armour is heavy and their military function does not allow them to be.

I assume you're still talking about Legolas physics.

The armour to wear is most probably going to be determined by practicality not some complicated formula to do with Malassa and 'sexyness'.

Thundertitan is correct. Blood Fury armour (basically spikey shin guards and gauntlets) are not about weight or practicality.

You want practical armour? You wear something which guards your vital organs and head. Best if that something is smooth, without cool-looking decorations or sharp edges. Because you don't want to hurt yourself, or have it catch shrubbery, fabric, and the enemy's blade.

You want armour for fanboy or ceremonial purposes? You wear armour that makes you look fearsome and agile, but leave your naked torso undefended.

User avatar
ThunderTitan
Perpetual Poster
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 23263
Joined: 06 Jan 2006
Location: Now/here
Contact:

Postby ThunderTitan » Jun 12 2011, 13:09

The Raiders are extremely lightly armoured for a charging linebreaker unit.


I always assumed they're light cavalry, as the DE's seem more like they'd avoid a head on assault, and it fit with their ability to strike at near-by targets that are attacked by allies (i assume the defence lowering ability to represent attacking fast by surprise).
Disclaimer: May contain sarcasm!

I have never faked a sarcasm in my entire life. - ???
"With ABC deleting dynamite gags from cartoons, do you find that your children are using explosives less frequently?" — Mark LoPresti

Alt-0128: €


Image

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » Jun 12 2011, 20:45

ThunderTitan wrote: Frankly the problem with the armour on both DE races is less about weight then it is about getting a punctured lung (or another injury) from your own armour.


Indeed.

Mlai wrote:I wanted to say something smart-alecky, but since you bring so much to the "thoughtful conjecture" table, I won't act immature like that. I'll just repeat that most of the winged creatures in HOMM5 can't fly on those wings. Unless Ashan gravity is like lunar gravity.


And I don't believe you. I don't see any creatures in Ashan with wings too small to be functional (although griffons come close). Explain on what basis you are declaring this.

Mlai wrote:In Legolas terms probably. But not IRL. If we're still discussing Earth military reality, rather than "hard fantasy" military reality.


Since many of the Gauls ran around on the battlefield naked there are RL examples of battlefield nudity.


Mlai wrote:But down below, you talk about the Mistress, whose role "to entice DE men" directly contradicts what you just said here. And also I did say that their sexy armour/clothing are for cultural/religious function. I like your thoughtful conjecture on DE society. But you should try agreeing with other ppl, when you in fact are agreeing with them.


It doesn't contradict anything, I am pointing out the exception to the rule. The Shadow Mistress is the only example in which the relative nudity of the social elite is designed to be sexy. And this is ironically the celibate element of the matriarchate (as far as we know).

The Shadow Mistress wears actually more clothing than the other matriarch units and she always wears other effects (like makeup) because she is aiming to be sexy not merely to show as much flesh as they are allowed too.

My point was that the other 5 units are not wearing so little clothing because it is 'sexy', they are wearing it because those lower down on the social scale aren't allowed to; they are flaunting their nudity as a status symbol. But you implied that they were doing this to be sexy.

Mlai wrote:ORLY. I must have missed all the DE soldiers in plate armour plodding along the battlefield. The Assassins don't wear any more armour than Hollywood ninjas would wear. The Raiders are extremely lightly armoured for a charging linebreaker unit.


They wear chainmail. If you had said the dark elves didn't believe in heavy armour I would had agreed with you. But you said they didn't believe in armour.

Mlai wrote:Thundertitan is correct. Blood Fury armour (basically spikey shin guards and gauntlets) are not about weight or practicality.

You want practical armour? You wear something which guards your vital organs and head. Best if that something is smooth, without cool-looking decorations or sharp edges. Because you don't want to hurt yourself, or have it catch shrubbery, fabric, and the enemy's blade.

You want armour for fanboy or ceremonial purposes? You wear armour that makes you look fearsome and agile, but leave your naked torso undefended.


I agree with you, I am discussing remember how the Blood Fury unit's armour should be redesigned. I pointed out originally that the only part of the Blood Furies armour which made some sort of sense is actually the leg armour, again not exactly as depicted but in essence.

They depend upon being faster and more agile than even naked creatures wearing nothing at all. They don't depend upon their armour for protection, they rely upon the fact that they are so fast that you cannot manage to land a solid blow.

The question is whether they should wear armour at all and if so what kinds of armour should they wear. Remember that they don't aim to stand still long enough for anyone to ever land a solid hacking blow or a stabbing blow on you. What will tend to injure them is glancing blows from relatively weak wide-arc slashes.

If such a blow hits your torso it probably won't be much damage because it likely won't get through the layers of fat and muscle protecting your internal organs. The cost of armouring your torso (in speed) would probably cancel out any benefit that it would bring in protection.

Legs however have things like ligaments and tendons (and kneecaps) which are close to the surface so can be hurt by such a blow and if injured can do permanant damage to your mobility.

Dying isn't really what they are scared of, it's being permanantly crippled and unable to continue fighting.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.



http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » Jun 13 2011, 3:45

(1) If you interpret that charge ability that way, then I suppose that the Raiders can be light cavalry... but that doesn't jive with what their bio says. But since we know the bios were written in game version 0.9, when they had shields... we can deduce that their roles changed as DE found sturdier creatures to be the cannon fodder for them.
If Nival really wanted to depict light cavalry, the upgraded Raiders should have been armed with recurve bows, and have the ability to shoot and move in the same turn. The heavy spears that they use aren't really appropriate for light cavalry.

(2) The wings of a griffon are too small to lift up a creature with half the musculature of a lion. Know how much a lion weighs? The manticore ofc is even worse, having the full body of a lion, plus a chitinous tail scaled up to the size of a lion.
I don't know if I should include the pixies, angels and dragons because they are divine/magical. The only thing that looks like it can fly by physics alone, is the phoenix.

(3) And how did that work out for the Gauls when running up against the Roman columns?

(4) So are you saying that the high-status DE use nudity as status, because... on a metaphorical level it reflects the state of Malassa, rather than on a sensual level? Because I get the impression that the DE find Malassa to be sexy the same way Greeks find Aphrodite to be sexy, so a sexy goddess should want sexy priestesses. Ofc contrary to Aphrodite, Malassa also has more powerful and nastier aspects to her.

(5) Armour on a central area of your body "weighs less" and "limits mobility less" than armour worn on the peripheral areas of your body, i.e. distal limbs. Lever physics.
Ideally, Blood Furies should shave their heads, and wear some sort of smooth light armour on their heads and torsos, and leave their limbs naked or very lightly armoured. Or simply completely naked. Spikey gauntlets and shin guards only serve to weigh down their limbs and catch on things.

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » Jun 13 2011, 16:22

Mlai wrote:(1) If you interpret that charge ability that way, then I suppose that the Raiders can be light cavalry... but that doesn't jive with what their bio says. But since we know the bios were written in game version 0.9, when they had shields... we can deduce that their roles changed as DE found sturdier creatures to be the cannon fodder for them.
If Nival really wanted to depict light cavalry, the upgraded Raiders should have been armed with recurve bows, and have the ability to shoot and move in the same turn. The heavy spears that they use aren't really appropriate for light cavalry.


Patching would could as what is known as a ReWrite which means that the Raiders never ever had shields at all.

Actually it's rather simple. The Raiders ride around on giant lizards with sharp teeth. This means that they don't really need to have heavy armour to function as heavy cavalry. They bite the enemy to pieces.

But said lizards cannot bear the weight of heavy armour.

Mlai wrote:(2) The wings of a griffon are too small to lift up a creature with half the musculature of a lion. Know how much a lion weighs? The manticore ofc is even worse, having the full body of a lion, plus a chitinous tail scaled up to the size of a lion.
I don't know if I should include the pixies, angels and dragons because they are divine/magical. The only thing that looks like it can fly by physics alone, is the phoenix.


The rules for wings are really no different to the rules for parachutes Mlai. Armies have been known to airdrop tanks from the air using parachutes so weight is hardely neccesarily a major impediment.

I take it that the griffons can fold and unfold their wings like birds can. The furled wings (the one's we see) are pretty long actually so unfolded would be pretty broad.

So there are actually no creatures that cannot fly using the wings they have been depicted as having.

Mlai wrote:(3) And how did that work out for the Gauls when running up against the Roman columns?


They did actually conquer Rome at one point Mlai. The Greeks were quite terrified of them in Galatia.

Mlai wrote:(4) So are you saying that the high-status DE use nudity as status, because... on a metaphorical level it reflects the state of Malassa, rather than on a sensual level? Because I get the impression that the DE find Malassa to be sexy the same way Greeks find Aphrodite to be sexy, so a sexy goddess should want sexy priestesses. Ofc contrary to Aphrodite, Malassa also has more powerful and nastier aspects to her.


Yes I am basically.
Aphrodite *is* sexyness. There is no real equivilant of Aphrodite in Ashan's cosmology- the closest you are going to get is Asha, particularly her first 'aspect' that of the maiden. But only the necromancers believe in the 'three aspects' anyway and they only worship the third.

Malassa is the goddess of dark magic, that is to say decay, weakness, pain, madness and above all death. To say that the dark elves worship Malassa because they die, suffer and go mad however is only part of the truth.
They primarily worship Malassa because they don't know what happens when they die, they don't know what is actually true or actually false. And Malassa knows the answer. And she doesn't tell them what she knows.

But those who claim to have been rewarded for their devotion with some scraps of secret knowledge claim ladyship over the other dark elves, these are the matriarchs. To symbolise their closeness to Malassa they wear little clothing because that way they partly reveal what is concealed (the naked female form).
Only depictions of Malassa however are allowed to wear absolutely nothing because they are what is concealed (Malassa). It does however have the perhaps originally unintended effect of rendering the matriarchs sexier than any other woman and mere depictions of Malassa rather sexy.

However the essence of Malassa is actually hostile to any actually satisfied sexual desire. Sexual frustration not sexual indulgance is closer to Malassa. Shadow Mistresses exist as a result of the sexual side-effects of the priestesses adoption of near-nudity. They are the consequence of the priesthoods realisation of the sexual consequences of their near-nudity in rendering them the objects of desire of dark elf men.

Their job is pretty much to expose and crush those who harbour such desires so that all sexual desire for 'the hidden thing' is 'wasted' on cold marble and above all barren statues of herself.


Mlai wrote:(5) Armour on a central area of your body "weighs less" and "limits mobility less" than armour worn on the peripheral areas of your body, i.e. distal limbs. Lever physics.
Ideally, Blood Furies should shave their heads, and wear some sort of smooth light armour on their heads and torsos, and leave their limbs naked or very lightly armoured. Or simply completely naked. Spikey gauntlets and shin guards only serve to weigh down their limbs and catch on things.


That must be why my boots feel so heavy when going up hills in RL.

Is it not the case though that the total weight, including of the torso and head armour matters though?
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.



http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » Jun 17 2011, 12:12

Slayer of Cliffracers wrote:Patching would could as what is known as a ReWrite which means that the Raiders never ever had shields at all.

Huh? But they did have shields. The beta Raiders had shields. The bio says they have shields. Their dwelling shows a Raider with a shield. There was no rewrite; the shield was simply removed from the model.
Actually it's rather simple. The Raiders ride around on giant lizards with sharp teeth. This means that they don't really need to have heavy armour to function as heavy cavalry. They bite the enemy to pieces.

What does the mount's attacking ability have to do with how well the rider is armoured?
But said lizards cannot bear the weight of heavy armour.

That's plausible. The Raider raptors are slimmer than the heroes' dino mounts.
The rules for wings are really no different to the rules for parachutes Mlai. Armies have been known to airdrop tanks from the air using parachutes so weight is hardely neccesarily a major impediment.

Wings and parachutes are completely different things.
I take it that the griffons can fold and unfold their wings like birds can. The furled wings (the one's we see) are pretty long actually so unfolded would be pretty broad.

The griffon's wings are quite adequate if you delete the lion half, and is only left with the eagle.
They did actually conquer Rome at one point Mlai.

Yes, after they've been thoroughly Romanized in warfare tactics and equipment.
Is it not the case though that the total weight, including of the torso and head armour matters though?

Armour nearer to your center of mass/gravity needs less exertion for movements.

User avatar
hatsforclowns
Conscript
Conscript
Posts: 212
Joined: 14 May 2011
Location: Finland

Postby hatsforclowns » Jun 17 2011, 14:36

Half the world's population is female. Is that also "feminism?" "Social experimentation?" "Politics?"

Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwddddddddddd people can be stupid... -_-;

What's next? "Bwaaah! There's too many fir trees in games! Confierism! Favourism! Social experimentation! Politics! Whaaaambbbulaance!!

EDIT: Oh, right...I forgot. This is the crowd that didn't want science-fantasy in a science-fantasy Might and Magic game... -_-;

User avatar
Mirez
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1511
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Location: in the core of the hart of the centre of everything

Postby Mirez » Jun 17 2011, 14:52

hatsforclowns wrote:Half the world's population is female. Is that also "feminism?" "Social experimentation?" "Politics?"

Gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwddddddddddd people can be stupid... -_-;

What's next? "Bwaaah! There's too many fir trees in games! Confierism! Favourism! Social experimentation! Politics! Whaaaambbbulaance!!

EDIT: Oh, right...I forgot. This is the crowd that didn't want science-fantasy in a science-fantasy Might and Magic game... -_-;

Interesting you raise this point because not nearly half of the politicians are female.

Besides womans fighting in a war is something added very recently. It's not suited for a semi-historical game like mmh6.
treants are dendrosexual 0_o

User avatar
Mlai
Scout
Scout
Posts: 152
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

Postby Mlai » Jun 18 2011, 12:37

1. I refuse to call this game MMH. It is H O M M. What, does MMH make it sound more "Xtreme"? It's incorrect grammar. And it's stupid. It's been HOMM since 1-5. The initials can be pronounced. How the F do you pronounce MMH? It sounds like a Fing food additive. Why are you ppl going along with this name change? Stop typing it. Call it HOMM6. Oh and F U, Ubihole.

2. HOMM is a semi-historical game like LOTR is semi-historical fiction...

3. Anyways, I think Politics is the wrong descriptor. More like... Sex Sells.

User avatar
Mirez
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1511
Joined: 28 Aug 2006
Location: in the core of the hart of the centre of everything

Postby Mirez » Jun 18 2011, 17:32

from a retailer's point of view mmh is much better than homm, it makes it sound less lame to newcomers
treants are dendrosexual 0_o

User avatar
Kalah
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 20000
Joined: 24 Nov 2005

Postby Kalah » Jun 18 2011, 22:44

The reason was that they wanted to epxand the franchise, and call all the games "Might & Magic [something]".
In War: Resolution, In Defeat: Defiance, In Victory: Magnanimity, In Peace: Goodwill.

User avatar
Slayer of Cliffracers
Hunter
Hunter
Posts: 549
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Location: Gateshead, England.

Postby Slayer of Cliffracers » Jun 19 2011, 12:38

Mlai wrote:Huh? But they did have shields. The beta Raiders had shields. The bio says they have shields. Their dwelling shows a Raider with a shield. There was no rewrite; the shield was simply removed from the model.


The dwelling version does not have a shield Mlai. But you're half-right the bio mentions a shield.

And given that we do not actually believe that the Blood Furies run around in those platform shoes I guess what the model is depicting as carrying is not neccesarily correct. So the Raiders do have shields.

Mlai wrote:What does the mount's attacking ability have to do with how well the rider is armoured?


Because we are talking about whether the raiders are suitable for a heavy cavalry role or not.

Mlai wrote:That's plausible. The Raider raptors are slimmer than the heroes' dino mounts.


Not that the heroes wear much armour either.

Mlai wrote:Wings and parachutes are completely different things.


Not really. When it comes down to it essentially a wing is only a parachute that flaps, thus cancelling out the downwards drift of the creature.


Mlai wrote:The griffon's wings are quite adequate if you delete the lion half, and is only left with the eagle.


Not at all, unfolded the wings are actually pretty broad and definately enough to carry the creature through the air if it had the neccesary avian adaptations (muscles, fast lungs and hollow bones). Chickens can actually fly and they have smaller wings and even less aerodynamic bodies than the griffons do.

Mlai wrote:Yes, after they've been thoroughly Romanized in warfare tactics and equipment.


The sack of Rome was before the Roman Empire ever existed Mlai. The Romans had to pay a massive ransom, what saved them was the fact the Gauls lacked the neccesary siege weapons to take the central fortess of Rome.

'Woe to the Vanquished' is what the Gaul chief said to the Romans when they complained about the amount they had to pay.

Point is that the Gauls were quite capable of defeating all manner of 'civilized' armies so they were very far from weak. Thus heavy armour (the heaviest armour the Gauls wore was chain mail) is not strictly neccesary at all to win victories even against more heavily armoured foes.

Mlai wrote:Is it not the case though that the total weight, including of the torso and head armour matters though?
Armour nearer to your center of mass/gravity needs less exertion for movements.


You sound like you know what you are talking about. Thing is though Mlai, the armour worn on frong of the legs is not actually that thick or extensive. It's basically a few rather thin plates attatched to a cloth backing. The problem is the way the backing is attatched together with the spikyness and lack of functional segmentation of the plates.
Working on tracking the locations of Heroes IV battles. Stage 6 of campaign map finished, all initial Heroes IV campaigns mapped.



http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/ ... hp?t=11973


Return to “Heroes V-VI”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests