Author Topic: [news] rome 2 has got woke and is going broke.  (Read 1321 times)

funny how people only seem to care about "historical accuracy" when it comes to including women and minorities in games

goddamn I realize I sound like an ess jay double-u when I say this but seriously
« Last Edit: September 28, 2018, 01:18:23 PM by Electrk.. »

You tell me that roman female generals existed.

I say it never happened.

Because it didnt
« Last Edit: September 28, 2018, 12:42:17 PM by kanew2000 »

Come on guys, name 1 roman general that is female.

It was a case of it being 4 am and forgetting details. Rome had the occasional female soldier or women who would tour wars like Vipsania Agrippina. They didn't have female generals, I was thinking of the other factions. Ancient Greece banned women in the military, and Rome didn't allow them either afaik... but....
Quote from: The article that Tony read before posting this topic
The update, which has seen as many as 15 percent of all military generals that appear in the game now female, with the exception of Rome, Carthage and Greek

So Rome, Carthage and Greece don't get female soldiers ingame. This leaves Arverni, Egypt, Iceni, Macedon, Parthia, Suebi, Pontus, Seleucid, Baktria, Getae, Armenia and Massilia.

Arverni: Celtic women often bore arms and would fight in militia, and I don't believe it was impossible they would have women generals.
Egypt: Ancient Egypt had pretty different ideas about equality, I'm fairly sure if there were women leaders of the country, there could've been female generals.
Iceni: Not very many sources here other than a queen that led a few offenses.
Macedon: Specifically the Macedon army was all male I believe, so it probably wouldn't make sense to have women generals.
Parthia: There are records of royal and non-royal Parthians who would partake in campaigns, especially high ranking officers.
Suebi: Not enough information on google
Pontus: Also greeks, also banned women from the military afaik
Seleucid: I did see a couple PDFs on google that went into detail about Seleucid royal women and their role in combat, but if you really care further, you can look yourself.
Baktria: Not enough information on google
Getae: They're a Thracian tribe, so that basically speaks for itself. They did have women in the army as far as I know.
Armenia: Not enough information, but a couple things pointed towards supporting ancient Armenia having female soldiers
Massilia: Not enough information.

So in all, it's a loving video game. If women showing up bothers you and you care this much about historical accuracy, you would have known that Rome, Greece and Carthage don't have women soldiers, much like they didn't in real life.

Come on guys, name 1 roman general that is female.

This is now your only defense point to a stuff-tier opinion.

The short answer is it's a video game. The long answer is the quote from the dev team that basically says that Rome 2 is historically authentic, not historically accurate.
And if you're confused as to what "historically authentic" means, it means that the methods of war are historically accurate but the people/places involved may not be. This is because it's a game that you play. Not a movie you watch.

If you really wanted a historically accurate "Rome Simulator", you'd be fighting the same battles in the same places with the same people and the same outcomes as happened in history. Not really a game angle any dev wants to hard lock their game too.

Tony, if you dont like women so much why not be gay?

Rome 2 is historically authentic, not historically accurate


ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooh

k