Why Agatha versus Mason order… why ?!



  • Let’s be straight, considering the medieval era, as your full focus on chivalry, there is no other inspiration you obviously used to create your game, especially the 2 factions, but the :
    One Hundred Years’ War between French and British.

    So why did you not use France vs Britain instead of Agatha versus Mason order… You had the historical context, plenty of stories to use to build : maps/games modes/ and so on, the colors (France = blue vs red = Britain) the models to use for armours and weapons for veteran unlocks, funny insults and taunts…

    It would have been so freaking awesome to play such a game, even if you wouldn’t have used much story in it : the historical context would have certainly lifted the game from barely known/played to the current game to own if you like chivalry… There are countless taunting videos on youtube opposing the former French and British empires, you wouldn’t even have to advertise the game : it would have advertised by itself like spreading wildfire !

    And I’m not creating this post because I’m french and always trying to pick the blue :D



  • Because by creating a fictional universe with fictional factions they don’t need to worry about fucking with historical accuracy as well as having the creative freedom of doing whatever the hell they want? I also like playing as a mead-drinking, blood-thirsting Mason Order viking. It’s nice.

    But I agree, getting to play a historically accurate representation of the Hundred Years’ War would be awesome. Maybe we can expect a Chivalry spinoff in the far future that does just that? Chivalry: English Warfare and French Defeats?



  • Maybe someone will make a mod like this? You could post this as a modsuggestion in the custom content category.

    And I think it’s good not to use historical events.
    There will always be people that blame the game for not being historical accurate, no matter how awesome the gameplay is.



  • @SavageBeatings:

    Because by creating a fictional universe with fictional factions they don’t need to worry about fucking with historical accuracy as well as having the creative freedom of doing whatever the hell they want? I also like playing as a mead-drinking, blood-thirsting Mason Order viking. It’s nice.

    Historical accuracy, what the hell are you arguing about ? Is there a story in this game which would have to respect any historical accuracy anyway ?

    What’s important is just the historical context for giving more of the deep ambiance into the game, not the accuracy with history XD

    Take the Medal of Honor example : they took USA vs Afghan terrorists, did they focuse on historical accuracy ? Not at all. The game was about to be cancelled because it’s a current war thus it was hurting a lot of people, not because it was not historically accurate, even if the history was just of a few years old.

    @SavageBeatings:

    But I agree, getting to play a historically accurate representation of the Hundred Years’ War would be awesome. Maybe we can expect a Chivalry spinoff in the far future that does just that? Chivalry: English Warfare and French Defeats?

    I hope there will not be spin offs on the Crecy or Agincourt battles only… 2 battles considering the more than one hundred years’ war is a little short in my opinion. But I understand how people funnily like to think that 2 battles made a war…



  • Character models too. For instance, the vanguards look like knights from the 12th-13th centuries whereas the agatha knight looks like a knight from the 15th-16th centuries. Can’t say what the mason knight looks like. And you couldn’t have the variety of weapons either. Nobody would be packing a norse sword at a time when bastard swords were availible. I personally enjoy the historical mix-and match and this just could not be possible in a game that was attempting to be historically accurate. For me the only thing that goes too far are the rail tracks on citidel, makes me feel like i should have a revolver.



  • Re: Why Agatha versus Mason order… why ?!
    LOL. i don’t care why. all i need to know is - i’m on this team, you’re on the other team. i’m going to try to kill you. that’s all the history i need.



  • @Kaamelott:

    It would have been so freaking awesome to play such a game, even if you wouldn’t have used much story in it : the historical context would have certainly lifted the game from barely known/played to the current game to own if you like chivalry…

    Right, because setting War of the Roses in a real-life conflict and setting helped the game so much in attaining massive success …



  • @Kaamelott:

    So why did you not use France vs Britain instead of Agatha versus Mason order…

    Because nobody would pick the French side.



  • I’m so fucking sick of the angocentricism that demands everything is has to do with England which was a backwater piece of shit till they got their industrial revolution on.

    And english weapons and armor isn’t very cool looking either. The HRE, arabs and persians had the best looking armor and weapons imo.

    Go play War of the Roses so you can be a brit fighting brits.



  • @gregcau:

    @Kaamelott:

    So why did you not use France vs Britain instead of Agatha versus Mason order…

    Because nobody would pick the French side.

    And having “surrender” as a mission objective would be pretty lame.



  • @AngryDave:

    @gregcau:

    @Kaamelott:

    So why did you not use France vs Britain instead of Agatha versus Mason order…

    Because nobody would pick the French side.

    And having “surrender” as a mission objective would be pretty lame.

    HAHAHAHAH :D
    (Brit here).

    And hmm I think fictional universes such as this are better in this sense since you’re completely free to do what you want with it. Otherwise people scream MEHHH THAT NEVER HAPPENED! or MEHHH THAT’S NOT REALISTIC! at everything.

    Nothing wrong with Agathia v Mason, doesn’t exactly harm anything. They can mix and match as many themes as they wish that way.



  • @Helgeran:

    I’m so fucking sick of the angocentricism that demands everything is has to do with England which was a backwater piece of shit till they got their industrial revolution on.

    And english weapons and armor isn’t very cool looking either. The HRE, arabs and persians had the best looking armor and weapons imo.

    Go play War of the Roses so you can be a brit fighting brits.

    +1. i hate angocentricism too, can’t stand it.whatever those angos are doing, they need to be stopped, and stopped right now.
    don’t even get me started on the ANGLOcentrics.



  • @veganman:

    @Helgeran:

    I’m so fucking sick of the angocentricism that demands everything is has to do with England which was a backwater piece of shit till they got their industrial revolution on.

    And english weapons and armor isn’t very cool looking either. The HRE, arabs and persians had the best looking armor and weapons imo.

    Go play War of the Roses so you can be a brit fighting brits.

    +1. i hate angocentricism too .

    pretty sure it would have to be anglo

    but yeah games should stay away from countries due to thousands of years of conflict.



  • Too antagonistic, maybe?

    People in the rest of Europe generally hate England and English people, and people outside mainland Europe generally hate French people (and also a lot of them hate English people); it would hard to balance the teams.



  • I do disagree there old chap, American and European beauties quite adore an English gent… ;)



  • @BobT36:

    I do disagree there old chap, American and European beauties quite adore an English gent… ;)

    I worked in Chicago once, and I got very mixed results. A lot of the ladies LOVED the accent and my other English-y qualities, but a lot of other people really didn’t like me. One guy shook my hand and whispered into my ear “long live the IRA” when he found out where I was from! Also, the guys in bars didn’t like me at all, specially if I was talking to the women.

    Euro nations hating each other is banter in a lot of cases. “Hating” the French in England is probably the only acceptable form of racism in the country (and we enjoy it very much), but nobody means it; they say the same and worse about us (just in a gayer way) ;)

    Obviously there is some genuine bad blood still, Poland and Germany, Czech republic/Slovakia and Germany, The Netherlands and Germany, UK and Germany, Belgium and Germany, etc ;)



  • @Harry:

    One guy shook my hand and whispered into my ear “long live the IRA” when he found out where I was from!

    LOL holy shit! Bet that was a O_O *backs away slowly, moment heh.

    And being hated because the blokes are being jelly that the lasses can’t resist the accent doesn’t count. ;)

    But yes it’s generally friendly with the English v French thing. Still though it keeps any hate out of the game, and again lets the devs freely do what they wish with the factions by keeping it fictional only. Remember that this game has a medieval setting INSPIRED by history, but it was never really meant to be absolutely realistic.



  • @DaciaJC:

    @Kaamelott:

    It would have been so freaking awesome to play such a game, even if you wouldn’t have used much story in it : the historical context would have certainly lifted the game from barely known/played to the current game to own if you like chivalry…

    Right, because setting War of the Roses in a real-life conflict and setting helped the game so much in attaining massive success …

    And learn your history does not hurt : war of the roses is brits versus brits… of course it did not make the game famous but in England -_-

    Considering the stupid amount of people bullshitting my thread I think I got my answer.

    It would have been a freaking good idea though since french and british love to hate each others with passion ;)

    Moreover for people thinking it would have been risky, some time have passed since the last true conflict involving french against british, they totally help each others while the WW1 and WW2. So don’t look for hatred when there’s none, even though you definitely like to put oil on fire… obviously trying to start a flame war ^^



  • @Ready:

    Character models too. For instance, the vanguards look like knights from the 12th-13th centuries whereas the agatha knight looks like a knight from the 15th-16th centuries. Can’t say what the mason knight looks like. And you couldn’t have the variety of weapons either. Nobody would be packing a norse sword at a time when bastard swords were availible. I personally enjoy the historical mix-and match and this just could not be possible in a game that was attempting to be historically accurate. For me the only thing that goes too far are the rail tracks on citidel, makes me feel like i should have a revolver.

    Its the helmet that makes him look like one and the shoulder pads. And everyone thinks he’s wearing full plate armour. Its just plate arms and legs. Both were around in 13th century. Just not many people like using the plated arms.



  • @Kaamelott:

    @DaciaJC:

    @Kaamelott:

    It would have been so freaking awesome to play such a game, even if you wouldn’t have used much story in it : the historical context would have certainly lifted the game from barely known/played to the current game to own if you like chivalry…

    Right, because setting War of the Roses in a real-life conflict and setting helped the game so much in attaining massive success …

    And learn your history does not hurt : war of the roses is brits versus brits… of course it did not make the game famous but in England -_-

    Considering the stupid amount of people bullshitting my thread I think I got my answer.

    It would have been a freaking good idea though since french and british love to hate each others with passion ;)

    Moreover for people thinking it would have been risky, some time have passed since the last true conflict involving french against british, they totally help each others while the WW1 and WW2. So don’t look for hatred when there’s none, even though you definitely like to put oil on fire… obviously trying to start a flame war ^^

    Agincourt. That pisses off the French

    and at one point if you typed “French military victories” into good it came up with did you mean “French military defeats”.

    And they haven’t really one any wars. They have lost everything since the Romans. In WW1 they were saved by the Americans and the British. They were going to lose otherwise. And in WW2 they did surrender. They did win the French Revolution but that doesn’t really count as the opponent was also French. And technically they won the American revolution. Just because they were on the Americans side.

    Just don’t talk about wars with a Frenchman. They aren’t that good at them.


Log in to reply