Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: [Submod] Female Generals

  1. #1

    Default [Submod] Female Generals

    Hello everyone,

    This is a simple update to the Female Generals submod that is currently available through the "Official Submods" collection. It includes a fix that gives women the same traits as men upon recruitment, so that they now will be generated with the same Brawler, Commander, and Intellectual skill trackers that men are recruited with. It also ensures that all commanders follow the same Cursus Honorum path; women no longer have a unique four-stage career, but follow the same progression that any commander does. In short, it should pretty much remove any mechanical difference between the sexes.

    This mod should be placed at the top of the load order in the Mod Manager. I have only tested this mod with Carthage, Rome, Sparta, Athens, Massilia, Syracuse, and Rhodes, to about 100 turns. Please let me know if there is any unexpected behavior or if I have missed any unforeseen issues.

    DeI Female Generals.7z

  2. #2
    z3n's Avatar State of Mind
    Patrician Artifex Modding Staff Director

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    3,601

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Nice work, I'm already a fan. Do you have any further plans for expansion?
    The AI Workshop Creator
    Europa Barbaroum II AI/Game Mechanics Developer
    The Northern Crusades Lead Developer
    Classical Age Total War Retired Lead Developer
    Rome: Total Realism Animation Developer
    RTW Workshop Assistance MTW2 AI Tutorial & Assistance
    Broken Crescent Submod (M2TW)/IB VGR Submod (BI)/Animation (RTW/BI/ALX)/TATW PCP Submod (M2TW)/TATW DaC Submod (M2TW)/DeI Submod (TWR2)/SS6.4 Northern European UI Mod (M2TW)

  3. #3

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    I'm not sure there's much to add to this; it's a pretty simple mod. I'm open to ideas if there are other things that people would like to have added, though!

  4. #4
    Jake Armitage's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    apartment 6
    Posts
    3,152

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Nice

  5. #5

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Thanks for this.

  6. #6

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    you must've been lingering in the Discord to hear me complaining one or sixteen times about the trait disparity in female generals. Thanks so much for this

  7. #7

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Thank you! I’ve also been hoping for something like this. May I ask, is this in lieu of the official submod, and is it compatible with the female barbarian generals only version? I’d probably self identify as a SJW, but I also like my historical immersion, so I play with that version.

  8. #8

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    I haven't played any TW games in a while but saw this post on the first page of TWC...

    RTWII has female generals? Why? Apart from Boudicca that was a queen i can't really think of any female generals in antiquity?

  9. #9

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    I removed this mod after checking that with it, I have female greek generals for recruiting. It's a NO NO for me.

  10. #10

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Quote Originally Posted by Anubis88 View Post
    I haven't played any TW games in a while but saw this post on the first page of TWC...

    RTWII has female generals? Why? Apart from Boudicca that was a queen i can't really think of any female generals in antiquity?


    they also didn't speak english, but we all have to accept some unrealistic elements to make the game better

  11. #11

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Is it possible its causing crashes when a female general dies? Mine died in battle, and at the start of the next turn it crashes.

    Thank you for the mod!

  12. #12

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Quote Originally Posted by AndariusHaliusScipio View Post
    they also didn't speak english, but we all have to accept some unrealistic elements to make the game better
    This is probably the most flawed logic I have seen in a while lol

  13. #13
    Alwyn's Avatar Frothy Goodness
    Content Director Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    7,793

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Welcome to TWC, Drifter, and thank you for making your mod available!

    Quote Originally Posted by Anubis88 View Post
    I haven't played any TW games in a while but saw this post on the first page of TWC...

    RTWII has female generals? Why? Apart from Boudicca that was a queen i can't really think of any female generals in antiquity?
    As for the 'why' question, I'd guess the answer is that there were some players who asked for it, and because it was strange that factions which were historically led (or had armies or fleets commaned) by women couldn't have them in the game. It seemed odd that we could play Egypt but Egypt couldn't be ruled by Cleopatra VII - especially as a trailer for Rome II featured Cleopatra. It seemed odd that we could play as the Iceni (and other factions which historically had female commanders), but weren't allowed to have female commanders.

    A lot of people also couldn't think of any female generals other than Boudicca. When I looked into this, I found that Boudicca wasn't the only one. If you're interested in finding out about historical female generals from this era, you might want to read the Helios article, Rewriting history or representing history? Women as leaders and commanders in ancient societies, which is here.
    Last edited by Alwyn; November 17, 2019 at 04:42 AM.

  14. #14

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Quote Originally Posted by AndariusHaliusScipio View Post
    they also didn't speak english, but we all have to accept some unrealistic elements to make the game better
    Hahah dude what...

    @Alwyn
    Yes there were other rulers of course, even Zenobia for example comes to mind. But having the women as generals/queens was almost always due to various extreme reasons, often when there weren't really any other options. To have this as a default option just seems very ahistorical to me. The OP says he tested the mod for Carthage, Rome etc... That would never have had female generals during the games timeframe.

    The article also mentions like 10 female generals, some of them with poor sources that just seem to mention them as a curiosity. Still, we are talking about something like 500 years, and we probably had 10.000 men generals in that timeframe, and 10 female, if there were 10. And the ones i know of led small armies/tribes, not powerful states like Rome, Carthage or even Sparta and Athens.

    That said, i'm not trying to start anything here, just really wanted to know what it was all about. And it seems it's just the SJW things i expected, and nothing else unfortunately. I could probably find 10 people under the age of 12 in antiquity that lead armies as well, but you don't see that added since it's just something that happened too rarely. I fear for new TW games, and modding communities that come along. I really do. I fear in 5, 10 years we will have women and people of color in the Roman Legions, not just in the mods but in the default games. Hopefully i'm wrong.

  15. #15
    Alwyn's Avatar Frothy Goodness
    Content Director Patrician Citizen

    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    7,793

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Quote Originally Posted by Anubis88 View Post
    @Alwyn
    Yes there were other rulers of course, even Zenobia for example comes to mind. But having the women as generals/queens was almost always due to various extreme reasons, often when there weren't really any other options. To have this as a default option just seems very ahistorical to me. The OP says he tested the mod for Carthage, Rome etc... That would never have had female generals during the games timeframe.
    You wrote that women became queens for 'extreme' reasons - I imagine you're right that this happened. As I understand it, Boudicca became queen because her husband died and she had only daughters, to me this situation sounds ordinary rather than 'extreme'. In the unmodified game, Carthage, Rome and many other factions can't have female generals or rulers. It's understandable that Rome doesn't, but Carthage was said to have been ruled by a queen, Dido at its founding, so i can understand the idea behind this mod.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anubis88 View Post
    The article also mentions like 10 female generals, some of them with poor sources that just seem to mention them as a curiosity. Still, we are talking about something like 500 years, and we probably had 10.000 men generals in that timeframe, and 10 female, if there were 10. And the ones i know of led small armies/tribes, not powerful states like Rome, Carthage or even Sparta and Athens.
    Yes, the article mentions about 10 female generals which we have evidence for. If the rate of female rulers and commanders was 0.1%, which you seem to be suggesting (10 is 0.1% of 10,000), then someone playing as Rome wouldn't normally encounter any female rulers and commanders. However, historically, the Romans fought several - Boudicca of the Iceni, Amanirenas of Kush, Zenobia of Palmyra, an unnamed queen of the Brigantes and Mavia of the Saracens.

    You may be right that there were around 10,000 generals in this time frame. We could assume that the commanders who we don't know about were all men, however women in some factions could be rulers and commanders, so this assumption would sit uncomfortably with the historical evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anubis88 View Post
    That said, i'm not trying to start anything here, just really wanted to know what it was all about. And it seems it's just the SJW things i expected, and nothing else unfortunately. I could probably find 10 people under the age of 12 in antiquity that lead armies as well, but you don't see that added since it's just something that happened too rarely.
    Some people believe that this was motivated by politics. As I see it, the simplest explanation is that female rulers and commanders were added because of the expectations created by the Cleopatra trailer, because some players asked for them and because they existed historically. I haven't seen a trailer for Rome II featuring children under the age of 12 leading armies, nor did players ask for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Anubis88 View Post
    I fear for new TW games, and modding communities that come along. I really do. I fear in 5, 10 years we will have women and people of color in the Roman Legions, not just in the mods but in the default games. Hopefully i'm wrong.
    There already are units which didn't exist historically (as far as I know), such as artillery for barbarian units and Sacred Band units for Carthage existing after the historical Sacred Band were disbanded. I see these as examples of plausible 'what-if' scenarios. We know that Celts were skilled craftsmen and there's no reason to believe that they couldn't have learned how to construct a catapult or ballista. If Carthage had won the Punic Wars, perhaps the Sacred Band would have been re-founded. It's normal for Total War games to have these kinds of elements.

    I don't see any reason why CA would offer or players would want women in Roman Legions. (To be fair, in Rome II, it's possible to recruit both male and female gladiators into Roman armies, which seems unhistorical.).

    As for people of colour in Roman armies, maybe there were a few, maybe there weren't any. I don't think we can know for sure. I've read that there is evidence of North Africans serving on Hadrian's Wall and that the Romans used mercenaries from Africa such as Numidian cavalry, but I don't know what their skin colour was. We know that the Roman Empire included substantial territory in Africa, and I've read that "The legions II Traiana and III Augusta, based in Egypt and Numidia respectively, appear to have been used as a pool for reinforcements throughout imperial history" (source). This doesn't prove that there were - or could plausibly have been - black soldiers in Roman armies, it simply suggests that it's not impossible to imagine.

  16. #16

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Oh God, this nonsense again. Please everyone read in full the Helios article that Alwyn linked to before arguing about this. That way we can at least have an informed debate about legitimate historical disagreements instead of modern revisionist nonsense.

    I’m going to set aside the women generals thing for the moment because there’s some even more absurd stuff that just went down. Anubis, it takes some pretty wild SJW revisionism to suggest that Numidians, Arabs, Jews, Cappadocians (Persians), and others were not PoC. So if you mean to challenge the presence of sub-sarahan Africans in the legions you could be right (or not), but if you think the legions were all Italians and Northern Europeans (Anglo-Saxons?) you need to review a map of the Mediterranean. The Romans didn’t have a concept of “white” so they wouldn’t have noted the differences. Their driving distinctions were between “Roman” and “Provincial” or “civilized” and “barbarian” - and of course most importantly between classes within any society. But they obviously had soldiers in the legions serving as auxiliaries and regular legions recruited from ethic populations that today we would definitely call PoC.

  17. #17

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Drifter, before this gets sidetracked too much, may I re-ask if you plan to do a version of this for the barb-only female generals? Also, I don’t know if this is possible, but I would really love to carve out Ptolemoi to allow female leaders as well, while leaving the rest of the Greeks and Romans male-only. (Because I like history, where women were considered normal leaders and commanders in many - but not all - cultures).

  18. #18

    Default Re: [Submod] Female Generals

    Quote Originally Posted by nhvanputten View Post
    Oh God, this nonsense again. Please everyone read in full the Helios article that Alwyn linked to before arguing about this. That way we can at least have an informed debate about legitimate historical disagreements instead of modern revisionist nonsense.

    I’m going to set aside the women generals thing for the moment because there’s some even more absurd stuff that just went down. Anubis, it takes some pretty wild SJW revisionism to suggest that Numidians, Arabs, Jews, Cappadocians (Persians), and others were not PoC. So if you mean to challenge the presence of sub-sarahan Africans in the legions you could be right (or not), but if you think the legions were all Italians and Northern Europeans (Anglo-Saxons?) you need to review a map of the Mediterranean. The Romans didn’t have a concept of “white” so they wouldn’t have noted the differences. Their driving distinctions were between “Roman” and “Provincial” or “civilized” and “barbarian” - and of course most importantly between classes within any society. But they obviously had soldiers in the legions serving as auxiliaries and regular legions recruited from ethic populations that today we would definitely call PoC.
    Yes we are getting sidetracked here, so this is the last thing i will post.

    Ofc i'm not arguing that provincial legions shouldn't be of various ethnicities. I'm talking about Italian Legions as in the game start before the Romans went crazy conquering everyone in sight. If you raise a legion in Egypt from the local population it should of course have Egyptians in it. Nobody is desputing that. What i fear is that we will have forced inclusivness, which is shown in other games other media outlets. There is a WWII game that the name escapes me that has women being front line Commandos of the allied forces. I mean if you want to add women why not add them as the heroic guerilla fighters that they really were in basically all countries? Why have them lead WWII regular army troops? Also, have you seen the new Achilles in BBC's Troy? Or Queen Margaret of Anjou again in a TV series? This is what awaits us.

    Oh and lastly as my last part of this thread @Alwyin

    You do bring some good points, but some of them are flawed. As with Carthage for example; i used to know quite a bit on the topic a few years back, not so much anymore, but still, afaik the Sacred Band wasn't disbanded, it just doesn't get mentioned in the sources anymore, so it is possible it existed, at least as an internal unit inside of Carthage. And you mention Dido as an example of a Queen of Carthage, but if she was the Queen she was basically the leader of some colonists that established a small town in Africa on Numidian territory, not of a a mighty Empire that ruled many city states and their hinterlands.

    But again, my main point wasn't saying that there were not female rulers, but that there were almost no female generals, that weren't also rulers. I mean sure you can find the odd celtic tribe that had one in a battle, or as written in the article a Parthian female general that stopped a rebellion somewhere. But it's such an exception to the rule that it feels insanely forced to me for it to be in a game such as this.

    The simple truth is that women were second class citizens in Antiquity in most if not all societies in Europe. That doesn't mean that they weren't important. If we talk about Rome, we have women that wielded crazy powers behind their husbands who were basically just puppets in some cases. But this is a discussion about Female Generals leading armies in antiquity, and what really bothers me, female generals leading armies of Carthage and Rome. It's just not historical in the slightest.

Posting Permissions

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