Play as a Female Warrior in War of the Vikings

Recommended Videos

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,538
4,128
118
Jasper van Heycop said:
Two handed axes were sometimes used, but mostly as improvised weapons (peasants lugging their wood clearing tools to war). However a well armed and armoured Huskarl (as we see in the screenshots) would use a big shield in combination with a sword, a sword was the a mark of a professional soldier, someone who could buy and maintain a tool that's largely useless except on the battlefield. Axes are, like the horned helmets (thankfully absent here), largely an invention by christian artists to make the "pagans" look more barbaric, when they were in fact armed with far more sophisticated weapons than their Saxon counterparts.
Hmmm...do you happen to know if they were used by the Saxons? Because when I was at uni, the dark ages group there mentioned double handed axes being used by wealthy individuals, but I can't remember exactly which.
 

Ariseishirou

New member
Aug 24, 2010
443
0
0
Sonichu said:
that hows the human brains are usually wired by the nature.
No, that's how society views men and women - that men are tough and can take it, that women need special protection. In reality, the rape and murder of a man is just as horrific as the rape and murder of a woman. It certainly is to me, and would be to any thinking person in the modern age.

Sonichu said:
Also, Arab Muslims are unlikely to rape men due to their extreme stance on gayness.
This is so brilliantly naive I barely have the words to respond to it. Men who rape other men are often heterosexual.
 

Ariseishirou

New member
Aug 24, 2010
443
0
0
Single Shot said:
Ariseishirou said:
Single Shot said:
they are never recorded as being on front lines.
Untrue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shieldmaiden#cite_note-Harrison-2
To quote the relevant part of your own link:

Skylitzes records that women fought in battle when Sviatoslav I of Kiev attacked the Byzantines in Bulgaria in 971.
And the two real examples in there are
...Enough to prove your statement that "they are never recorded as being on front lines" was completely false.
 

Single Shot

New member
Jan 13, 2013
121
0
0
Ariseishirou said:
Single Shot said:
Ariseishirou said:
Single Shot said:
they are never recorded as being on front lines.
Untrue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shieldmaiden#cite_note-Harrison-2
To quote the relevant part of your own link:

Skylitzes records that women fought in battle when Sviatoslav I of Kiev attacked the Byzantines in Bulgaria in 971.
And the two real examples in there are
...Enough to prove your statement that "they are never recorded as being on front lines" was completely false.
Did you read all of my first Post?

Single Shot said:
I should point out that there are a few sketchy reports of female Vikings taking up arms to defend their homes after other defences had fallen, but they are never recorded as being on front lines.
So you're claiming that "women taking up arms to defend their homes when all other defences have failed" isn't what happened at the Siege of Dorostolon when over 20,000 people are thought to have starved to death under the siege? It seems like that's the very definition of "taking up arms to defend their homes" Please read and comment on whole posts, or at least whole sentences, instead of cherry picking quotes.

Now for clarity, I do not count people who live directly in the battlefield in that because they did not choose to be there, and did not choose to fight. They only did so because any other option was curtain death.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 16, 2010
19,538
4,128
118
Jasper van Heycop said:
Maybe for ceremonial or dueling purposes but not likely on the battlefield. Both Vikings and Saxons (and most other Dark Age armies) fought in close formations called shieldwalls, a weapon that needs to be swung in wide arcs is highly impractical in such a situation.
I was led to believe that people armed this way would fight in their own units instead of shieldwalls. Hmmm...have to look this up...

From wiki, about the Battle of Hastings:

"The English army consisted entirely of infantry. It is possible that some of the higher class members of the army rode to battle, but when battle was joined they dismounted to fight on foot.[l] The core of the army was made up of housecarls, full-time professional soldiers. Their armour consisted of a conical helmet, a mail hauberk, and a shield, which might be either kite-shaped or round.[72] Most housecarls fought with the two-handed Danish battleaxe, but they could also carry a sword.[73] The rest of the army was made up of levies from the fyrd, also infantry but more lightly armoured and not professionals. Most of the infantry would have formed part of the shield wall, in which all the men in the front ranks locked their shields together. Behind them would have been axemen and men with javelins as well as archers."
 

WouldYouKindly

New member
Apr 17, 2011
1,431
0
0
Let's try to reclaim this thread from this stupid argument of whether or not the soviets had women in a combat role. Is thread derailing against the rules?

I like the attention to detail and following along with the cultures as to how they would be equipped.

Personally, I think a better choice would be how Eowyn would have been equipped if she had been allowed to serve openly. She'd have had a fine suit of armor, probably quite similar to her brother Eomer's armor. It makes more sense because she actually put on armor when she fought. Arya never did and if she wore something heavier than a leather vest, it would slow her down and effect her swordplay.
 

Lotet

New member
Aug 28, 2009
250
0
0
Jasper van Heycop said:
Lotet said:
Jasper van Heycop said:
Not very historically accurate, but then accuracy was tossed out the window the moment they decided to include two handed axes, it just isn't a practical weapon and vikings would choose anything else really.
A raging battlefield, with hundreds, maybe thousands dying all around you, the Chaos of War, but a big chopping axe? How unrealistic thus realism has been thrown out the window, ALL realism is gone.

Like my exaggerations?
I don't see what you're getting at here really? I just tried to point out that the people claiming it's not historically accurate to include women don't have a point if the first screenshot already features an inaccurate portrayal of both armament and tactics used
My point was that 2 Handed Axes are an odd point to say that "accuracy was tossed out the window"

No Viking EVER used a 2 Handed Axe in Battle. NEVER. You've just thrown realism out the window!
Using BOTH hands to wield an axe!?

Of course you didn't use caps and exclamation marks.

capcha: 'over the top'
relevant?
 

Chemical Alia

New member
Feb 1, 2011
1,658
0
0
I think this is a nice addition to include playable female models that are reasonably designed. It's good to see these kinds of options being available to those who want them are starting to become a thing.

Now, let's get back to talking about rape and the horrors of Nanjing and stupid unrelated shit like that because we just can't have some fun with our video games.
 

Trillovinum

New member
Dec 15, 2010
221
0
0
Lunncal said:
Surely you must agree that deliberately spreading misinformation in order to sell a game as historically accurate is a crappy thing to do? That's what seems to be happening here.
I accept that stance. As a history teacher myself I agree that selling something as historically accurate while it is actually not is not a good thing.
However, if they just say something is 'historically inspired' that would be ok.
 

Dragonlayer

Aka Corporal Yakob
Dec 5, 2013
971
0
0
This game looks pretty cool, but I can't help but feel incredibly cynical about this, as if this is just now mandatory PR for upcoming games: "Hmmm, need to drum up publicity for our game: I know! Release a article that just says FEMALE CHARACTER MODELS INCLUDED and watch the views come rolling in!"
 

Not G. Ivingname

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6,368
0
0
hazabaza1 said:
Yeah alright this is really cool and everything but holy shit

Look at that guy! He did a flying kick upwards. You don't do that shit. He's gonna snap his nuts open or something!
Saxon: You can't defeat me! This high ground gives me +3 to all my defensive stats and allows me to add +2 to all damage rolls!

Viking 1: THIS! IS! NORWAY!

*Kick*

Saxon: AHHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh-*Crunch*

Viking 2: Awesome kick dude... dude?

VIking 1: OH GODS, MY LEGS, MY BALLS, MY PELVIS! OH FUCK, DEATH MUST HURT LESS THAN THIS! DX

OT: I do like they are allowing to play as either gender, and I hope they stick to their promise to not send out bikini vikings to fight.
 

white_wolf

New member
Aug 23, 2013
296
0
0
It sounds like an interesting game if I ever get a good enough PC for gaming I'd like to give it a try just because of the setting and I can be a fem character its the other reason I like the idea of mount and blade as well. I really loved how he said he wanted the fem characters to be ready for battle not comic con that was hilarious I say something similar often when asked how I'd like a fem lead to be made for battle. If they decide to port this over to the consoles down the line I would definitely pick it up and give it a try.