Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 105

Thread: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

  1. #1

    Icon4 Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Why Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) are Asians (Mongoloid)?

    Sarmatians were Iranian tribes of Indo-European origin.

    I don't understand why CA made them as Mongoloid type, as previously in Rome 2 done them correctly.

    Alan units from Attila:





    Roxolani and some other minor steppe factions are copied of Huns:



    Roxolani in Rome 2:



    Sarmatians from Column of Traian:

    Last edited by KLAssurbanipal; February 13, 2015 at 08:09 PM.

  2. #2
    Soothsayer's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Not today NSA
    Posts
    1,809

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Maybe CA believes they just got mixed in with the Huns.
    I WON THIS BATTLE!

  3. #3

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    or maybe... copy/paste Huns is easier than make unique units.

  4. #4
    Soothsayer's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Not today NSA
    Posts
    1,809

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Quote Originally Posted by KLAssurbanipal View Post
    or maybe... copy/paste Huns is easier than make unique units.
    Already talking about the next DLC are we?
    I WON THIS BATTLE!

  5. #5
    Magister Militum Flavius Aetius's Avatar δούξ θρᾳκήσιου
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Rock Hill, SC
    Posts
    16,318
    Tournaments Joined
    1
    Tournaments Won
    0

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    The Huns did mix with the Sarmatians, but it was the other way around: Hunnic features did not become dominant, rather Iranic features began being prevalent in the Huns on the steppes (culturally and physically).

  6. #6

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    I find it hilarious how in the trailers, Attila looks like a German/Turkish barbarian, but in the game they look like Mongols.

    Except they took it a notch further and made everyone else look like Mongols.

    I agree that non-Hunnic tribes should probably look more Iranian/European, but this is probably just a symptom of copy and paste.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Yes we all know that they haven't bothered to create unique units for factions that aren't playable yet. That'll most likely be fixed with an DLC in the near future...

  8. #8
    Soothsayer's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Not today NSA
    Posts
    1,809

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Quote Originally Posted by 6040610 View Post
    I find it hilarious how in the trailers, Attila looks like a German/Turkish barbarian, but in the game they look like Mongols.

    Except they took it a notch further and made everyone else look like Mongols.

    I agree that non-Hunnic tribes should probably look more Iranian/European, but this is probably just a symptom of copy and paste.
    To me now, he looks like he could be Polynesian.
    I WON THIS BATTLE!

  9. #9

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    The only important thing are that they have those mustaches. Facial hair is necessary for my immersion.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Stupid sexy Sarmatians. Also, seriously, Altaic or even Asiatic, not 'Mongoloid'.

  11. #11
    Darios's Avatar Ex Oriente Lux
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dumbrava Roșie, Romania
    Posts
    2,259

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    This is a huge disappointment, especially for a playable faction. The weird thing is that CA actually did the Sarmatians very well in Rome 2. I do not understand why they are Mongoloids now.....

    Another weird thing is that the Alani have four archer units and they are all Germanic. Living in a region where they would have access to Sarmatian, Hunnic, or Dacian warriors and they decide to take archers from the one people who did not look kindly upon ranged warfare?)))
    Under the Patronage of PikeStance


  12. #12

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Looks like one of the down falls of Attila TW is the lack of units/skins. Too much copy and paste across the game. Mongoloid Alans, Caucasoid Nobatians and Axumites, Nordic-Germanic Celts of Britain, man the list goes on. LOL

  13. #13
    Antiokhos Euergetes's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Antiokheia
    Posts
    4,273

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Why does everyone sound surprised by the faction copy/paste? Sadly I was expecting it. Then they can use reciprocity sales on us. They gives us a free DLC or two to make them unique, then we'll feel better about buying the next two or three 'fixes' to unique factions.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Quote Originally Posted by KLAssurbanipal View Post
    or maybe... copy/paste Huns is easier than make unique units.
    As usually happens with much of the stuff of Attila TW that statement is true.
    Through your intercession I hope to see the light of Thy son and the light of everlasting ages !

  15. #15

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Language,genetic, phisically apperance are diffrent things. Alans ,sarmatian,scythins roots were unclear

  16. #16

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    Quote Originally Posted by Kamos View Post
    The only important thing are that they have those mustaches. Facial hair is necessary for my immersion.
    Oh ha ha
    Maybe they wanted to please the Asian crowd?

  17. #17

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alans
    CA in it for the money. They could've used same skins for every faction, even Romans. They should release book "How to milk people: guide for dummies"

  18. #18
    Darios's Avatar Ex Oriente Lux
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dumbrava Roșie, Romania
    Posts
    2,259

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    I really hope that CA did not let themselves become influenced by Turanist theories ex: Scythians/Sarmatians were the ancestors of Turkic peoples and that the Magyars/Szekely were Attila's allies and right hand warriors. That might attest to the reason why the Sarmatians look like Turko-Mongol people and that the Magyars are even in the game.

    There are actually a lot of people in many countries who believe this kind of stuff. I equally don't agree with people who say that Scytho-Sarmatians looked like Germans or Celts (that's 19th century Indo-Europeanism) but Roman historians were adamant in the fact that the Huns were scary largely because they had an appearance that the Romans had never encountered before. Suffice it to say, history clearly established that the Alans were European in appearance while the Huns were more Asiatic.
    Under the Patronage of PikeStance


  19. #19
    Reptilicus's Avatar Civis
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Finland-Jyväskylä,from Serbia originally.
    Posts
    115

    Default Re: Sarmatians (eg. Roxolani, Alans) should be Indo-European, not Mongoloid

    I don't know what's worse,their completely retarded roster,with more Germanic units than actual Sarmatian units(and the Germanic cavalry units having better stats overall except the Agathyrsi elite cav),or the fact that the Sarmatians look Asiatic...


    The only redeeming factor that i see from the review/launch version,they actually put in some Sarmatian style scale and chainmail ,in the way earlier version the Sarmatians used even Hunnic armor,even their cataphracts.


    They shouldn't even be having more than a couple of Germanic units to begin with,the free Alans were quite culturally independent. EVen the Alans that migrated with the Vandals kept their identity up until the time of Belisarius' All-African party

    I do have to say i am very pleased about the Agathyrsi though,and they're amazing units.

    @ Darios i agree,i hope they don't go down that road. Though it's CA we are talking about - they do like to use any possible loophole to put into the game,such as scythed chariots for the Ptolemies in R2 because of a totally non related mention in the battle of Raphia.

    The dev team leader is Hungarian after all,so totally not surprised that we see time travelling Magyars. The tech does go up till the 7th century or so ( with the exception of menaulotoi it seems >_< ),but that faction is just...too out of place
    Last edited by Reptilicus; February 14, 2015 at 06:04 AM.
    Dragon of the steppe

    Reptilicus
    - winner of the TWC olympics Rome 2 tournament,and many more.
    Youtube channel,bringing you true competitive,non generic multiplayer with legendary campaign guides ! https://www.youtube.com/user/ReptilicusJungleLair/

  20. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darios View Post
    I really hope that CA did not let themselves become influenced by Turanist theories ex: Scythians/Sarmatians were the ancestors of Turkic peoples and that the Magyars/Szekely were Attila's allies and right hand warriors. That might attest to the reason why the Sarmatians look like Turko-Mongol people and that the Magyars are even in the game.

    There are actually a lot of people in many countries who believe this kind of stuff. I equally don't agree with people who say that Scytho-Sarmatians looked like Germans or Celts (that's 19th century Indo-Europeanism) but Roman historians were adamant in the fact that the Huns were scary largely because they had an appearance that the Romans had never encountered before. Suffice it to say, history clearly established that the Alans were European in appearance while the Huns were more Asiatic.
    Aryanist theory vs Turanis theory .. Wikipedie isnt reliable source. We can see all people aryan lol
    http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turk...anguagesEn.htm
    Alan languges were smiliar Karachay-Bakar tukish. Karachay-Balkar are turkc people wher live in caucasia
    http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...2#post14361142
    pls read you last page. I dont want to write same thing. You cant see mythologic. You can see scientific in facts

    Quote Originally Posted by CagatayKhan View Post
    Aryanist theory vs Turanis theory .. Wikipedie isnt reliable source. We can see all people aryan lol
    http://s155239215.onlinehome.us/turk...anguagesEn.htm
    Alan languges were smiliar Karachay-Bakar tukish. Karachay-Balkar are turkc people wher live in caucasia
    I find false too. They couldnt be pure mongoloid
    Last edited by Maximinus Thrax; February 14, 2015 at 10:21 AM. Reason: dp/merged

Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •