Gloria Victis adds treasure hunting and preps female characters

    
16

It’s been a while since we last checked in with Gloria Victis, so let us see what is going on with this medieval MMORPG, shall we?

Back in December, the team patched in several features into the alpha build, including excavation points (yay, treasure hunting!), dozens of new quests, a pair of new guild castles, more revisions to the territory claim system, and a faster way to jump into inter-guild conflicts.

The first big update to Gloria Victis in 2018 added a “massive” fortress and more looting zones. The team is also excited to give its community a first look at female character models. “Our artists are now working on it full-time to introduce it as soon as possible,” the team said. “It requires reworking all of the armor models to make them fit to female character — it will take few weeks.”

Source: Gloria Victis. Thanks Babagra.pl!
newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Reader
Melissa McDonald

well, at least they are trying.

Reader
Knox Harrington

They’re reworking armor models to fit female character models? I thought this game was trying to be more realistic than a fantasy?

Reader
truethorn

Well in the real world i have a female friend who borrows my armor, but i cannot fit into theirs, so i guess there is still some accounting for size to do.

Reader
Knox Harrington

My point had more to do with the fact that women in the middle ages were only allowed to fill non-combat roles so armor for them was not necessary. Despite what Hollywood would have you believe, Queen Elizabeth did not appear in armor at Tilbury and Joan of Arc did not fight in active combat. But I guess the Gloria Victis folks would rather avoid the negative press and I can’t say I blame them.

Reader
Fluffy Magical Unicorn

Women have always fought.

And that’s just the ones we know about. How many were erased from history?

Reader
Knox Harrington

Compare that to how many men fought though. It’s basically right up there with the amount of hobbits that left the Shire and yet LOTRO has no problem making them a playable race with half a dozen class options as if they were even capable of pitched combat against far more physically dominant enemies. The amount of Uruk-hai I’ve killed with my Hobbit is absurd.

And that book you linked is dubious at best with many of its entrants and the inaccurate citations. There will always be an exception to every generalization but the politically driven narrative of that book tries to make the exception seem like the rule. It’s not and it wasn’t. Even in modern times, women have limited combat roles. That’s not to say that they can’t serve in some capacity but it is very limited compared to what men can do physically.

At a certain point, feminism has to concede ground to hard science that men are physically superior which makes war the province of men. In the American armed forces, every standard for the harder physical jobs in the military had to be lowered for women to pass. It’s also why the Marines’ mixed infantry unit experiment failed. A 125lb woman can not carry the standard 85lbs of equipment and then be expected to carry a wounded 200lb man with 85lbs of equipment off the front line of a battle. An infantry unit is only as strong as its weakest member.

And all-female infantry units simply can not perform as well as their male counterparts, which limits the types of missions they can handle. It has been proven time and time again as the American military keeps trying. It would be great if progressive ideology matched reality but it simply doesn’t in many cases. That being said, there is far more variety in combat roles today than in ancient times so there are more women on average serving now than ever before. The only jobs they really can’t handle are the hardest physical ones like Infantry and Special Forces. Outside of that though, there are women at every level of American Armed Forces and they are some of the toughest people on the planet regardless of gender. But the Amazonian narrative is quite the mythical fantasy.

Reader
Fluffy Magical Unicorn

Wow. You read the book and analyzed its citations that quickly? I’m shocked.

And oh dear god, I won’t even touch the rest of your reply with a ten foot pole except to link this: http://www.warandgender.com/chap2pap.htm

Women. Have. Always. Fought.

Reader
Fluffy Magical Unicorn

While I should note I don’t necessarily agree with all of the stuff in the above link, it’s an interesting read and it points out several things germane to the discussion: that women perform about as well as men.

Women fighting is less rare than the author thinks, as we’re learning more all the time about women participants in war, and my only point is, rather than women’s presence being rare in large scale fighting, that women warriors are more than to be snidely referred to as the ‘realm of fantasy’ and, more importantly, that the game in question is not merely a large-scale warfare simulator from what I can see, so to cry out about the inclusion of women in the game feels more than a little sexist.

Reader
Knox Harrington

I’m not “crying out” about the inclusion of women. I never once said they never fought. I’m merely stating that a massive representation of them on the medieval battlefield is the work of fiction more than fact. The ratio would have to be somewhere around 10,000 to 1, and that’s being generous especially by medieval standards where women weren’t even taught how to hunt much less fight. In a heavily patriarchal society dominated by an even more patriarchal church, the notion that women were a regular part of any working army is the work of modern wishful thinking than reality.

In modern times, female representation in the military is much much better but even still, very few women can pass the physical standards required for the hardest jobs like Infantry and Special Forces. This is a fact. No amount of wishful thinking can change it. The military under Obama’s administration gave them every chance they could and it didn’t pan out. We’ve got plenty of women serving in combat roles now for sure, but there are so very few that can “perform about as well as men” as you put it. It’s not sexism; it’s science.

You can link all the politically skewed crap you want. Objective studies conducted by the military have determined what women can and can’t do. The result being, they can do far more than thought in previous eras but they’re still limited in a few ways. With military recruitment at an all-time low, you better believe that the military has really wanted it to pan out but at the same time, inclusion can not come at the cost of operational effectiveness.

Reader
Fluffy Magical Unicorn

Meanwhile, in reality, the first woman to get into the Rangers is a thing. And it’s fairly obvious you have not read what I linked (or bothered to examine it at all, really) while dismissing it as ‘politically skewed’ while accepting at face value military studies from the same military that has offered that argument against /every/ integrationist step taken.

Reader
Knox Harrington

And you didn’t read my post either where I said “very few women can pass the physical standards required for the hardest jobs like Infantry and Special Forces”. I never said none of them could. There’s actually two women who’ve passed Ranger school, but out of how many men? It has nothing to do with sexism.

They’ve been given equal opportunities for decades but the majority of them have not been up to the standards. So either the standards get lowered and the military gets weaker or the standards stay the same and only the most exceptional women make the cut. Two out of thousands that try.

Men and women are not physiologically equal. How anyone can even argue that they are is beyond me. Liberals are about as obstinate on this matter as conservatives are when it comes to climate change. At a certain point, both narratives have to take a backseat to objective science.

Reader
Knox Harrington

And one final note before I move on from this subject: if Gloria Victis wants to add a bunch of female characters running around in plate armor that weighs as much as they do while wielding zweihander swords as long as they are tall, then they might as well add elves in bikini armor because it’s about as realistic.

Reader
Melissa McDonald

If you’d have said “physically stronger” your assertions would have been more accurate.

Physically superior? Let’s see a man squeeze out a softball-sized object, not to mention the body that goes with it. And be willing to do it again. Sometimes several times during a lifetime.

Reader
Knox Harrington

Yeah women definitely have a much higher pain tolerance. That’s for sure.

Reader
chriskovo .

Its a game who cares? If Women want to run around in plate and whack people over the head with a mace more power to them. And I believe the game has giants and stuff in them so yeah who cares?

Reader
Knox Harrington

They added giants? And here I thought they were trying to be a realistic medieval game. Oh well.