My suggestion for new units.

[Elewyn]

I'm not so educated in Magyars and proto-Magyars as you are. But they must have been related to fino-Ugrians, because it is the only reason why their language is closest to them.

But the most important. You may say whatever you want, but Attila was Hun, not Magyar.

I don't know how did you get thet, but Hungary is from german Ungarn, not from Huns, and Huns in german are Hunnen ;) In czech they are called Madari(from Magyars), or also Uhri (relaed to Ungarn). This is not any prove, just a hole in your theory seen from no expert ;)

[Finellach]

I'm not so educated in Magyars and proto-Magyars as you are. But they must have been related to fino-Ugrians, because it is the only reason why their language is closest to them

Definately. I agree on that. ;)

don't know how did you get thet, but Hungary is from german Ungarn

Actually no. Ungarn is just German version of Hungaria which is thought to come from 'On Ogur' ("ten arrows") which is the name of a Magyar tribal confederation, but the name itself is obviously closely meant to denote Magyar relation with the Huns.

In Croatian the name for Hungary is Madjarska* which is very similar to Magyarország.

*dj should actually be one letter which belongs to South Slavic alphabet, but my PC is set on english so my Croatian symbols don't work. :p

[Drake Maethor]

Hey lads!
You really seem to know a lot about this...

Where did you get all that info? They teached some in school or is just personal research?

[Drake Maethor]

Originally posted by Elewyn
I got your point. I only said I dot know if it can work with actual KoH engine ;) I'm not sure if same unit can look different in actual KoH engine. I've never seen a game where same unit have 3 posibilities how to look like :( but if it's possible with builfings in AoK, so why not?

Well... if it isn't supported in the actual version... then they can add it! ;)
After all, they are making the game... touching here and there...
But not only it can be possible to do it, as you say, but also is an easy thing to do... The units surely have some attribute that indicates from which nationality they are. Then the visual part of the engine just look at this attribute and displays the correct pictures according to the nationality. Nothing complicated...

And yes, there is at least a game where the same unit looks differently, not only according to nation, but also to tech age.
The one I know is Rise of Nations, you can download the demo at www.riseofnations.com and find out what I'm saying. (Also seems like an interesting game). There, for example, African units are black, German generals in WWII have the typical nazi uniforms (including the badge in the arm), Aztec units of the antiquity wear feathers, etc.

[Drake Maethor]

Originally posted by Jarlabanke
Couldn't heavy swordsmen be swordsmen with greatswords for cutting up spear formations

Hey, it can be...
After all, there is only one unit with 2 handed swords that we know of: the Highlanders. Maybe heavyswordmen are another one.

[Elewyn]

don't forget teutonic knights ;)

[Gorgoroth2]

Originally posted by Finellach
First let's state clearly that your theory is just that - a theory.
Now there are couple of theories. First and the most famous one is the one you presented here the other one is stated by me. IMO both have some truth...as it history always showed that various theories may all be true. For example Croats.
Well anyway "your" theory says that Magayrs with Finns, Esthonians, Ostyak and Voguls were linked by linguistic and ethnical kinship. This places the Magyars on plains of Ural an area between Asia and Europe.
This theory insist that the cradle of the Magyars could only have been situated in the Ural region. It was from there that around 2000 B.C. the Finnish branch broke away to finally settle in the Baltic area.

Meanwhile, the proto-Magyars remained on the vast West Siberian steppes with other Ugrian peoples until around 500 B.C. But there is no satisfactory explanation, however, for how the Proto-Magyars, who had been forest dwelling hunters and gatherers along with the other Finno-Ugrians, suddenly became horse-breeders, livestock herding horsemen and fierce horse warriors. Thus IMO this theory hardly holds any ground. This "Finno-Ugrian" theory is based on linguistics alone, without support in "anthropology, archeology or written records" and we already esatblished that many nations today are speaking languages which are diverse and far different than their ethinical origins. I believe that the answer is in the present turkish words in modern Hungarian language rather than the group to which Hungarian language gravitates.

Then we also have the bet known Magyar folk tale that is just a tale, but it obbviously has some truth in it and more substantial proofs as well from various sources. It's the 'Legend of the White Stag'. It says how the two sons of Nimrod, Hunor and Magor were lured into new lands while chasing a white stag. Well to get to the point it says that the descendants of Hunor became the Huns and descendants of Magor became the Magyars. Thus once again we are getting back to the theory I already presented to you just later. ;)

Huns and Magyars were no doubt cousins. This not only says us the name of today Hungary, but also that even the best known Magyar leader was called Atilla the Hun. From where does it says Arapd dynsty are descendants from Atilla? Well I don't know, but I believe they alone probably claimed such a thing.

1. What I have posted it is not a theory, there are lot of languistic/anthropological/archeologial evidence of course.
You should read more on the subject if you are really interested.
Yes indeed, after the Finno and Ugrian family had split, the magyars moved south / west, and they became a horse breeding nations as well, but they kept their hunter - gatheren living style of course. This is well known here in Hungary too, just like anything what I posted. :)


2. What you have posted is not even a theory, its mere speculation by you? :rolleyes:
There is no connection between the Magyars and the Huns or the Turks. Read again what I posted, those are the accepted facts. :)
The Magyar - Hun Nimrod legend is just a fairy tale, every historican know it.

This is a pointless discussion Finellach, I dont wanna prove anything for you, you wanna prove something for me, what are totally fake / absolutely not correct informations.
If you are making theories after fairy tales and such things...well, that wont proove your right. :p



Now a question: What happened with my original account?


"You do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You do not have permission to access the page that you were trying to. Are you trying to edit someone else's post or trying to access administrative features? Check that you are allowed to perform this action in the Forum Rules.
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation."

My account is disabled? If yes, may I ask why?

[Finellach]

There is no connection between the Magyars and the Huns or the Turks

Yes thats why the Byznatines called Magyars 'Turks'. :p
I don't know for you, but this tells me the original Magyars were of asiatic appearance just like their predecesssors and cousins Huns.

What you have posted is not even a theory, its mere speculation by you?

What I posted is actually well known theory, much older than the one you are advocating. ;)

Regarding your account....perhaps you changed your email adress by accident? YOu should contact admins nevertheless and found out what happened.


@Elewyn I noticed you misunderstood me. You made a wrong example. What I was saying about "localization" would only be for generic units like Swordsmen, Light Cavalry, Archers and Spearmen. It would not be that you produce Teutons in Germany instead of Swrodsmen, Templars in France, Saracens in Muslim coiuntries, etc. What I suggested was that speacial unit remain special, but those generic and general units like Archers should become localized so if you produce Archers in Europe they will look "European", if you produce them in Africa they will have certain "desert look" and so on. The same with other "generic units". Hope you understand me now. ;)

[Gorgoroth2]

Originally posted by Finellach
Yes thats why the Byznatines called Magyars 'Turks'. :p
I don't know for you, but this tells me the original Magyars were of asiatic appearance just like their predecesssors and cousins Huns.

What I posted is actually well known theory, much older than the one you are advocating. ;)


The Magyars were met with turkish / bulgarian tribes on their way to the Carpathian Basin.
"They came from the Ural Mountains in Russia and migrated east, then south in contact with Turks and Iranians, taking on a nomadic, herding lifestyle." This is a fact again.
This is the only turkish relation in the history of the Magyar tribes. [turkish words etc.]

Magyars never had asiatic appearance and they had no relations with the Huns, this is absolutely fake. This is an even bigger mistake than the Turk - Magyar connection what you have posted.
This is a weak theory without a single fact, without any genetic/antropoligical/archeological evidence.

You messed up the things. The origins of the magyars are finno ugric, what the byzantine story tellers wrote down, that is a totally different story my friend. :) hopefully you understand the things now, I dont wanna correct you once more. :D

[Gorgoroth]

Originally posted by Finellach

Regarding your account....perhaps you changed your email adress by accident? YOu should contact admins nevertheless and found out what happened.




Oh damn you were right, I did changed my email address. :D

[Elewyn]

Originally posted by Finellach
Yes thats why the Byznatines called Magyars 'Turks'. :p
I don't know for you, but this tells me the original Magyars were of asiatic appearance just like their predecesssors and cousins Huns. Do you think Byzantines were interested and educated in etnicity of nations they had contacts with? They made no diference among all "barbarian" nations. Since they were not christians and came to their "area of sight" from same or similar direction, they had no reason to call them diferent. In early times before 6th century they made also no diference bertween Slavs and Germans etc. and it doesn't mean Slavs and Germans are the same, they just were barbarians from the north, like Huns and Magyars and Turks were barbarians from north east ;)

They were not ethnological experts, they were politics and traders, the only important issues for Byzantines were if they were able to speak to other nations and make some political/trade advantages from contats with them ;)

[Gorgoroth]

In fact the Magyars raided their country allied with turkish tribes, this tells about everything. :)

Story tellers are making fairy stories usually, example some hungarian story teller described the mongols that they were dog headed and things like that, during the Mongol Invasion of Europe.

Facts >>> Tales. Dont forget this. :angel:

[Elewyn]

Originally posted by Finellach
Elewyn thats a good point and you stated very clearly yourself what I've been trying to explain...especially in your second statement. ;) That's strange because I meant it that they have almost no relations ;)

btw. I don't know which of my bad examples you meant.
Swordsmen are swordsmen, available everywhere(and if possible should look diferent in Europe then in Africa. I don't know where you get that misunderstooding. Not the case of Men-at-Arms who are only where no units like f.e. Templars are.
Saracens are IMO something like Men-at-arms

[Finellach]

Byznatines didn't recongize the difference between Germans and Slavs because they looked almost the same. The same with Magyars and Turks. Since Turks were of asiatic appearance Magyars recognized as Turks would means they were also asians...obviously. Magyars are also connected and mistaken as Huns as well because of their appearance which was also obviously strinkingly similar.

Now your theory Gorgoroth has absolutly no proof except linguistic proofs which are not enough to conclude Magyars were Finno-Ugric.
We have clear example of Bulgarians or with recent genetic research Croats as well who have also very complicated history.

As I said I accept both theories as partially true. IMO Magyars were Turkic tribes who probably assimilated some of the Finno-Ugric tribes(people) and took their language, with years they also assimilated large numbers of Slavs which would today place Magyar name in Turkish, language to Finno-Ugric and population to Slavic origins.

Elewyn you misunderstood my suggestion by saying that the engine would require changes in order to produce Templars in Christian lands and Saracens in Muslim lands instead of Swordsmen. I didn't say that. I was refering to the generic units and the localization of the same which would be based on appearance purely.

[Elewyn]

Originally posted by Finellach
Elewyn you misunderstood my suggestion by saying that the engine would require changes in order to produce Templars in Christian lands and Saracens in Muslim lands instead of Swordsmen. I didn't say that. Neither did I! Please, can you send me where I wrote that becasue I don't remember. Why the hell the engine would need changes to produce Templars in christian lands?

and pleas stop arguing

[Finellach]

Originally posted by Elewyn
Neither did I! Please, can you send me where I wrote that becasue I don't remember. Why the hell the engine would need changes to produce Templars in christian lands?

Yes, AI should be smart enough to be able to decide that if you built a swordsmen in arabic building and your kigdom is islamic, he will produce Saracens or Mamluks and if your kingdom is christian he'll produce crusader (or Turcopole) infantry

It is really great, but I am affraid it's too late. I don't know anything about programming, but IMO it will require little diferent engine and there is also one other problem.

I never said anything that touched the things you are mentioning here. What I was saying is that Light Cavalry if produced in(for example) in Egypt will be called Desert Cavalry and will have different looks but in essence this unit would not be anything different than it's European version - The Light Cavalry.

Originally posted by Elewyn
and pleas stop arguing

I am not arguing. :confused:

[Elewyn]

Originally posted by Finellach
I never said anything that touched the things you are mentioning here. What I was saying is that Light Cavalry if produced in(for example) in Egypt will be called Desert Cavalry and will have different looks but in essence this unit would not be anything different than it's European version - The Light Cavalry. I am sorry. Bad expressions of mine. Mamluks shouldn't have been mentioned, also Saracens. My point was: I think that saracens are equivalent of swordsmen (what probably is not true) to correct myself.

Egypt is arabic realm. You can produce there peasants, spearmen, axemen, swordsmen, mamluks, ghulams, archers and light cavalry.
It would be really nice if AI recognizes if player is catholic or muslim (what it may be able-to chose right colors and morale for units in battle). So when muslim Fatimids will produce swordsmen, they'll have arabic look, and cavalry unit will be without any doubt Ghulams. Archers will probably look like planned Desert archers.

But if christian Kingdom of Jerusalem conqueres it, they will recruit arabic looking swordsmen (they still are in arabic realm-arabic look and that unit is same for cristians and muslims), but won't be able to recruit Ghulams. And that's place for Turcopoles (sorry for using that term, I like it better than Crusader cavalry), who will have arabic look, but will fight for christians

I am not arguing. :confused: right, let's call it insisting on statement which almost everybody disagree with? :)
I am very sorry to be so sarcastic

[Finellach]

Originally posted by Elewyn
right, let's call it insisting on statement which almost everybody disagree with? :)
I am very sorry to be so sarcastic

What statement would that be? And who would be everybody? You and Gorgoroth? :p

[Elewyn]

Frujin and Nike too. And did you see that ALMOST there? Everybody who participated this topic in this thread was aggainst (not everybody who participated on this thread!)

But I want to stop this silly argue. Magyars have Finno-Ugric origin and trouugh theyr journey got some Turkic, Slavic and who knows waht elses influence... and you? think yourself whatever you want :yawn:

[Gorgoroth]

Originally posted by Finellach
Byznatines didn't recongize the difference between Germans and Slavs because they looked almost the same. The same with Magyars and Turks. Since Turks were of asiatic appearance Magyars recognized as Turks would means they were also asians...obviously. Magyars are also connected and mistaken as Huns as well because of their appearance which was also obviously strinkingly similar.

Now your theory Gorgoroth has absolutly no proof except linguistic proofs which are not enough to conclude Magyars were Finno-Ugric.
We have clear example of Bulgarians or with recent genetic research Croats as well who have also very complicated history.

As I said I accept both theories as partially true. IMO Magyars were Turkic tribes who probably assimilated some of the Finno-Ugric tribes(people) and took their language, with years they also assimilated large numbers of Slavs which would today place Magyar name in Turkish, language to Finno-Ugric and population to Slavic origins.

Elewyn you misunderstood my suggestion by saying that the engine would require changes in order to produce Templars in Christian lands and Saracens in Muslim lands instead of Swordsmen. I didn't say that. I was refering to the generic units and the localization of the same which would be based on appearance purely.


Finellach....frankly Im a little sick and tired of your ignorance. :D
This is your own opinion, you should put IMO before all of your sentences, because all of these are totally wrong. I dont wanna argue with you once more, all who researched this topic knows that the Magyar origins are totally finno ugric, not turkish and not hunnic.
What will be next? Magyars originated from an other planet? :D :cheers:

Originally posted by Elewyn
Magyars have Finno-Ugric origin and trouugh theyr journey got some Turkic, Slavic and who knows waht elses influence... and you? think yourself whatever you want :yawn:

Now this is correct. Can you tell me that why Finellach is the only one whos posting those nonsense hypothesises? :bday:
Ah well, he propably knows why. :D