Charlemagne great layout, but historically random units...

[Pharaoh]

i dont understand how they made this charlemagne dlc as if they searched their info and knowledge in crapopedia the units are like 200 -300 years older than they where at the time...the armor is just historically untrue and all units look like they just came from over the ural...the helmets are completly random...sometimes celtic from the age rome invaded the north of europe then again you see a mercian or even frankish soldier with a helmet from a rider out of the russian area...but the true begining middle age armor is only on one unit the noble asturian riders or palce guard asturians or whatever they are called...as if at the time it was either nothing or chainmail...while at the time formidable leather armors where made nobles even had full body armors with leather combining the metal parts for better movement... the hlmets just laughable....either viking or forged thousands of kilometers far to the east...?as if the creators have some fetish for europes eastern ends barbarian culture or something...i mean honestly a knight in the 8th and 9th century is no steel tank like later true but in this game you could think they just learned about fire yesterday....it all doesnt add up....

please change or enlarge your history team!!!!

[Mile pro Libertate]

A lot of the assets are from base Attila, hence the overall "Gothic" look.

On the other hand, the spangenhelm (which is what most the units have) was fairly universal from around 500 onward, and mail was the mainstay for armor. Scale and partial plate-leather armor was not as popular as many people think.

It's also not necessarily historically inaccurate to have many men unarmored. Vegetius discusses a growing trend to discard armor and even helmets in the 5th century. The evidence we have seems to show that in the early middle ages most of the hosts were formed from levies that predominantly didn't even have helmets. The core of the host was the "full time" mounted warrior, who of course had a burnie of mail usually and spangenhelm or early nasal helm.

If anything, I think AoC has a little too much late armor for some units, like kite or "Norman" shields, when the units should have round or oval shields.

CA actually did a fairly accurate job with the cavalry too, as most of them are lightly armored and use a slashing sword with javelins. I was thinking they were going to have Norman knights cap-a-pied and couching lance like from the 11th century, but surprisingly most of the cav in AoC is equipped (historically) lighter.

Again, only real historical hangup for me as regards the appearance of the units are the kite shields some of them have; but the overwhelming amount of the sword infantry look like skutatoi or dismounted Lombard cav, which is actually pretty close to what we see historically.

[Pharaoh]

i mean the other helmet its not like i say the game is completly inaccurate and no mail armor was only largly used in the roman army becorse of its rather long producetime its was not as common after the fall of the west roman empire...and sorry but even though you try to use very knowledged retoric and syntax you obviously get your history facts from diverse but made up movies ...the gothic era is round about 300 years later...as the rest of your text is pretty much the same nix up of all and nothing...lots of paraphrasings and bindings you heard in a docu but mixed up all the facts...sry but that thesis of yours needs to be rehearsed...look in to your books and ask your proffessors if you studie allredy that is...if not wait until you know...bro..and dont present this game of thrones crap...

[Fanest]

If CA made faction rosters of only levies ppl would complain even more. Just imagine fighting with tier 1 units whole game. Yeah thats how it would look like.

However its easy to mod faction rosters so if u want to have more historical experience you can do that yourself.

CA cant appease all tastes, but i would say that in Charlemagne they did a very good job. Sure there are some funny names (like big axes) and some inaccuracies like daneaxes which werent in use in this time period, some armors and helmets, but still CA made a step forward from debacles of beehive catapults, gladiatrices and the like in RTW2.

[Arthas]

That's the problem with trying to make the game too historically accurate. I'm sorry but just because in the 5th or 6th centuries most warriors couldn't afford mail or plate armors doesn't mean I want most of my warriors to look like peasents with spears and swords when I play TW.

There's a limit to how much historical accuracy you can put in a game without it becoming to overbearing to the actual fun factor for the majority of people playing.

[Mile pro Libertate]

Originally posted by Pharaoh:

i mean the other helmet its not like i say the game is completly inaccurate and no mail armor was only largly used in the roman army becorse of its rather long producetime its was not as common after the fall of the west roman empire...and sorry but even though you try to use very knowledged retoric and syntax you obviously get your history facts from diverse but made up movies ...the gothic era is round about 300 years later...as the rest of your text is pretty much the same nix up of all and nothing...lots of paraphrasings and bindings you heard in a docu but mixed up all the facts...sry but that thesis of yours needs to be rehearsed...look in to your books and ask your proffessors if you studie allredy that is...if not wait until you know...bro..and dont present this game of thrones crap...

No need to be snarky or pedantic.

Besides, I think you misunderstood much of what I wrote anyway. Like the Gothic part obviously.

Did you think I was referring to Gothic as in architecture, or German armors of the High Middle Ages?

I was referring to how in base Attila CA used Gothic warrior models/textures/assets extensively, and this carried over when they made AoC. So that's Gothic as in the tribes/cultural groups, e.g. Ostrogoths, not Gothic as you think I used it. That's why I put it in quotes. lol.

And I have never watched a single episode of game of thrones. lol.

Don't be so quick to be rude or demeaning to a person when you don't know who they are or what they are about. And don't just invent things like saying I cite movies or documentaries when I did nothing to indicate that. The only thing I cited was Vegetius, so argue that, not what you imagined in your mind.

I was trying to respond to your post in a conversational, friendly way because I'm interested in the arms and armor of the period and the history. There shouldn't be any antagonism here.