PDA

View Full Version : EB - Countdown to Open Beta: Aedui



khelvan
05-08-2005, 07:29
Greetings Europa Barbarorum fans!

As we grow closer to the release of our open beta, we wish to stress for you the unfinished nature of our work. While the conceptualization and research for our mod has been underway for over a year, it is only very recently that we acquired the skill necessary to convert these dreams into a practical implementation; and we have been hampered every step of the way running into further limitations. Such as the one that caused us to miss our initial expectation of last month. However, we are working hard, and the mod is almost at a point we would consider playable, and quite fun.

Please forgive the lack of attributions here; Psycho and Prometheus worked on a good number of these, but this is a team effort. All of our artists are all very talented, and each artist will be properly recognized for contributions in our readme files. Also, please forgive both the unfinished look of some of the units, and the improper grammar/spelling - these are all considered WIPs. Today the focus is on the faction.

http://img113.echo.cx/img113/2493/gauls4shield12848241pz.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)http://img113.echo.cx/img113/1825/aedui0020ay7dn.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

This week we are proud to present the Aedui, one of the two major Gallic confederations of tribes in our time period.

We hope you are looking forward to something a bit different, this week. While we will include the gratuitous eye candy, we also want to give you a glimpse of the amount of work and information that will be going into the mod. Here is a sample of that work, one of our new faction descriptions.

Aedui:


You have come to power by way of election, and we honor you, as the selected master of our people. You are the Vergobret, chief magistrate of the Aedui, and the leader of all fair and just tribes of Gaul. The lesser magistrates, the representative chieftans, and assemblies of the people, have declared you as our leader in this time. As such, you have been found to be the most wise, most skilled, and most forethinking of all of our aristocracy. Let us hope that is true, because we need you. We are threatened. The Arverni, with their heathenous god-king, wish to incorporate all of Gaul under his rule. The free tribes are ever looking to expand their lands. The Germanic tribes are expanding rapidly and overrunning the edges of the lands, and the Romans, still angered by the sack of Rome, wish to exact revenge upon all Gauls, regardless of their loyalties. We must be prepared to fight, and we will need a cunning leader.

Our immediate concern should be the nature of Gaul itself. While the Arverni are sometimes open to reason, they are power hungry. The free tribes we can buy or conquer, and incorporate them into our greater whole. I'm sure many will prefer the path of joining us, and will see it as their greatest option. However, war with the Arverni is inevitable, and will almost surely be devestating, even in victory. If we can postpone it and build our army, perhaps we can conquer Gaul while at great advantage. We have a fair mix of soldiers at our option. They are brave; good infantry and quality cavalry, capable of defeating many foes when properly led. A problem of expense must be expressed, however. Gaul is rich, but we control too little for it to be of great good to us. Our client tribes in the south are endangered. Cut off from our bulwark, they cannot defend themselves long, and reinforcing them will require either long roads through indepedent tribes, or trying to pass directly through Arverni territory. We should be forethinking, of course, and see beyond the immediate conflict as well. With the Arverni subdued or conquered, our most immediate concern may then turn to the Germanic tribes. They are good for trade and business, but they are viciously expansionist, and wouldn't have need of trade with us if they conquer Gaul; and they know this. If we do not conquer them outright, we should at least enforce our borders. Taking the Belgae and using them to strengthen our borders against invasion may be a path to explore. The eastern tribes aside, the Romans may be a threat. They may not seem a huge issue at the time, but they yet harbor resentment against Gaul. Perhaps we could take advantage of their current situation; they may have a number of potential enemies. We could ally with them long enough to destroy the Romans, but in doing so we risk strengthening a potentially unforeseen enemy. Alternatively, we could seek to ally with the Romans and use them against the Arverni, but opinions of that matter are quite split. In the north, the Britons do not seem much of a problem, but sometimes they get ambitious. The British isles are rich, and northward expansion is not ill-advised; an island fortress against the expansions of enemies will at least provide us with a final redoubt if our plans fail.

There was a time when Keltoi controlled great amounts of land. They were confederated, allies. But that fell apart, and all we are doing now is holding onto the last strains of a great history. That can be changed, though. We still have life in us, and great smiths, warriors, and a glorious culture. We deserve the glory that was robbed from us by centuries of collapse and infighting. Uniting Gaul is only the first step in forging a grand empire. Our people have a great system of leadership. We elect great leaders, we select our own kings and judges and chiefs. We allow people their own lives. Our gods demand it. And that is good. They also demand the utter destruction of our enemies. And that is also good. Those who oppose us, who try to destroy us, are evil. There can be no argument of this. We act in accordance of the divine laws of the gods. Those who act against them must be destroyed. Those who offend the gods, must be eliminated. We must crush them, and do so devoid of mercy for them. Such enemies are below swine, and should be slaughtered in the manner befitting them. And our enemies are numerous, and your warriors' thirst for the blood can be sated a thousand times over. However, their impetousness can be a threat. While your eldest and best trained warriors are disciplined, the younger have the tendency to dash headlong into the path of the enemy, and replacing the dead can be difficult; it is expensive, and only so much of the population is available to fight. To truly forge an empire, you will have to press every advantage as far as you can. You will have little opportunity to relax until you can establish a united, strong, country with strong defenses. It seems almost impossible, but all great undertakings should be. The impossibility of this situation is what makes it glorious, and will ensure our dominance for centuries to come.


History;

In the wake of the collapse of the Cubi-Biturge confederation, many of the Celtic tribes fell into near total anarchy. Some, like the Aedui and Arverni, found this to their advantage. They allied, conquered, or absorbed nearby tribes, forming powerful confederacies and kingdoms. These kingdoms and alliances often came into conflict over lands, rights to resources, etc. They had varied governments, but based along a similar model; an elected leader, over other elected leaders and representatives. The kingdoms were based on a kind of republican-monarchy with amounts of anarcho-capitalism. However, the exact powers of those officials varied. The Gauls had a particularly complicated history. The Aedui and Arverni were capable expansionists with comparatively large dominions in contrast to many of their contemporaries, were heavily affected by (and heavily affected) mediterranean cultures, and were in great contestation to one another, both feeling they possessed rightful rule of all of Gaul.

Culturally the Gauls, both the Aedui and Arverni, were fond of poetry, metalwork, linens, stonework, music, sports, philosophy, and warfare. They favored warfare to such an extent that most other hobbies centered around it. Poetry and stories often described heroes in vivid detail, works depict soldiers, both their own and foreign enemies, and sports often exemplify skills necessary in combat. Their economic model was a type of anarcho-capitalistic lifestyle, with religion encouraging charity but never enforcing it. Taxes were taken mostly to provide their leader with a home, improve settlement defenses, and pay their warriors and champions. Soldiers were paid based upon experience, and it was not uncommon for a particular warrior to recieve a large gift for performing a heroic action, such as a pile of silver, a new weapon, or a shirt of maille. Feasts were a common event, with all of a tribe being invited to partake in great dinners including games, music, and duels between champions.

As in any Celtic kingdom, their leader is elected, not hereditary. The tribes elect a chief, chiefs in an area elect a chieftan, chieftans elect kings over a larger area, and the kings elect the high king. The Aedui also elected magistrates, as their actual kingdom is somewhat small. Their sense of a quasi-democratic 'empire' precluded them from introducing too much land into the direct rule of the Aedui tribe themselves. The magistrates were elected from chieftans and kings, or from experienced judges, priests, or other 'higher' professions. Chiefs and chieftans acted as assembled representatives of their respective tribes, and were expected to act and conduct themselves in a manner to the benefit of their tribe. Despite this, the Aedui themselves continuously held substantial amounts of power over their allied tribes; Aedui were often elected to the positions of the three magistrates, called Gobre, or to that of the high magistrate, the Vergobret. The actual kings had little power outside of business and the military. They were military leaders, and part of the reason for their election was because they had a great deal of money, and often controlled businesses, allowing them to reward their soldiers and champions. The powers of the magistrates were similar to those of a king, as they held power over numerous tribes, though mainly as organizers. Since multiple kings and many noble houses had control of the 'Aedui' regions of Gaul, they required a man to organize them; thus, all kings in a region would answer to an appropriate magistrate, with reports of expedentures, soldiers, income, and other information pertinent to the running of a country. The people also elected local judges, called brehon, who elected higher judges, called verehon. They had power over even the kings and magistrates in matters of legality. The brehons could be removed if they were suspected of being unfair, and were punished most harshly if they abused the law. The higher one's station in society, the worse their punishment under the law. The concept of prisons for domestic criminals did not exist; even foreign prisoners were simply sent to slave markets to be held, and if they were not ransomed, were sold. Criminals would be fined, and if the fine could not be paid, they had to act as a servant of the offended family until it was paid, or be outcast. In the case of murder, if he was outcast, he could be legally killed by the offended family. In any case, the judge oversaw these disputes, and listened to arguments and evidence from both sides, and decided what party was in the wrong. If a prosecutor failed in a serious legal case, such as a murder, they would be fined slightly for false accusation, so as to dissuade false accusers.

The religion of the Gauls involved dozens of minor local gods, demigods, hero worship, and major deities that would be worshipped over huge regions. Law was central to their religion, and this is evidenced in their legal system and gods. Most of their deities tended to be war, health, or legal gods, and their heroes tended to vary between warriors or great poets and storytellers, and always obeyed the law, which was considered divine. Among the most important deities to the Aedui were Lugos, a heroic smith god, and Teutatis, a tribal god most favored by indepedent tribes, as he was a furious god, defending the tribes who supported him, but destructive of all those who did not. Both were highly ritualized deities; Teutatis was very cruel to outsiders, while Lugos encouraged trade with foreingers. The Gauls also collected the heads of dead enemies, not just as trophies or signs of bravery, but because of their belief that the soul resided in the head. To control a man's head, they believed, meant that his soul had to be your slave in both this life and the next. The 'druido', the actual druids, did not come to Gaul until around 220 BC; they were an outgrowth of eastern fire cults, and a testament to just how far and wide Gauls traded over, especially considering that many do not think that Gaul interacted with much of the world beyond their own immediate surroundings. However, an essentially identical class (which we casually call druids) was present before hand, and their influence was quite strong. The appearance of the 'real' druids greatly increased the popularity of yearly fire festivals, the largest being Beltane.

The Gauls were conquered or absorbed by the Romans. During the Roman conquests, they fought both as defenders and alongside the invaders. The Gauls had expanded from their home, though, and settled the kingdoms of Tylis and Galatia in Asia Minor. Galatia lasted longer than Gaul and was peacefully absorbed, as it had been a Roman ally. The legacy of the Gauls is quite extensive. It was Gallic influence that introduced many elements into the Roman military, and their proliferation as mercenaries led to their usage in almost every major conflict (whether as Gauls or as Galatians) during the period simulated here. So many Galatians found employ with the Ptolemaic Empire, that the Fayuum region of Egypt is still largely populated by tall, blonde hair, blue-eyed people; blood descedants of the Gauls. Gauls formed a great deal of the early Goidilic culture, in concert with Britons, Belgae, Gaedalic Iberians, and the natives. The conquest of Gaul is notable for its difficulty, even after the tribes turned on one another (causing the death of almost all Gallic professional warriors). The subsequent, short-lived rebellion by the Arverni chief recalled by his title (not his name) Vercingetorix, was the last breath of the Gallic lands, and though ill-fated, is a sign of the fortitude of the Gallic people who, even though they never experienced successes on that scale, continually rebelled or otherwise expressed disobedience for a long period. Even after conquest, Gallic soldiers, poetry, wine, and other crafts and arts were highly favored throughout the Roman empire as some of the finest available.

Here we have some shots of the Aedui in action:

http://img108.echo.cx/img108/4967/actionaeduiattack22si.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
http://img108.echo.cx/img108/7282/actionbrihentinattack5uv.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
http://img108.echo.cx/img108/9958/actionleattack6fo.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
http://img108.echo.cx/img108/4166/actionbotroasmelee38hd.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

Now, Gallic units are a bit different from others. Due to the highly tribal nature of the Celts, very few of these units will be available in all of the Aedui-owned area. Most are only located in a small area, and some (notably the Belgae and Helvetii units) must be conquered before they are available.

http://img121.echo.cx/img121/5859/bataroas4kt.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
The Bataroas (Bah-tah-rows; 'Warband', literally Warrior Soldiers) are the main medium infantry of northern Gaul. Young men, but wealthy enough to afford swords, they form the core of northern shock infantry. They are not unexperienced, but they are very impetous still, having not gained 'sufficient' glory in war yet. They are regular soldiers, not farmers or traders who are banded together at times of war to fight. As such, they are more capable warriors, who train in their down time, so they are not as prone to flee combat as lesser infantry.

Historically, northern warriors of Gaul were varied by tribe, much as they had were varied in all of Celts society. However, when their king called on the tribes to go to war, these men were always ready. They had no other trade; these were not craftsmen, fishmongers, or farmers. They were warriors, and nothing else. They were paid well in silver, weapons, armor, and treasures, as well as free to plunder during war. These infantry would form the core of any Gallic force coming out of the north.

http://img121.echo.cx/img121/1379/belgaebatacorii9oz.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
The Belgae are terrifying warriors. Even their younger men are well trained, disciplined, and willing to fight. Braver than most warriors equal their societal status, the Batacorii (Bah-tah-kur-ee-eye; Fighting Troop) are good spearmen, and fine light infantry, well worth their cost. Even experienced warriors fall into the Batacorii, basic warriors of the Belgae, but fully honorable. Those warriors too poor to enter the ranks of the swordsmen of the Belgae armies, the Batacorii is a fine position to fall into.

Historically, the Belgae were a number of extremely fierce tribes that were highly indepedent. However, they were fairly well trained, their violent behavior toward most outsiders forced them to learn tactics and the finer points of warfare to defend themselves from their many, many enemies. The lower warriors would fight bare chested almost always, even in winter, though they actually wore cloaks to the point of the battle, then would toss them aside to fight. Belgae spearmen were lower warriors, but very important to the Belgae's warring. They were quasi-professionals who formed the bulk of the Belgae's forces.

http://img121.echo.cx/img121/6655/belgaemilnaht2ai.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
The Belgae Milnaht (Mel-not; Great Men) are a very fierce group of warriors. With lands in the north of Gaul, south of Britain, and middle of Hibernia, the Belgae have spread themselves over a fairly wide area. They are a fair mix of Britons and Gauls, with portions of the more civilized Gallic culture mixed into the more tribal and fierce culture of the Britons. They still wear bronze helmets and sometimes employ bronze weapons as back ups. However, they use a great deal of iron in swords, spear, javelin and arrow heads, and chain shirts worn by their nobles. The professional warriors of the Belgae are bare chested warriors with a long, bronze rimmed shield, and bronze helmet, and sometimes painted with the elaborate designs popular to the Britons. Their ferocity and skill with their swords and shields make them capable of standing against slightly heavier warriors. They are also capable of sapping, and have a penchant for undermining walls, making them valuable to any army of Britons marching into Europe, where they are bound to encounter stone fortifications. If the Gauls or a tribe of Britons ever managed to incorporate Belgae regions into their lands, they would undoubtedly try and use them in battle.

Historically, the Belgae were a number of extremely fierce tribes that were highly indepedent. However, they were fairly well trained, their violent behavior toward most outsiders forced them to learn tactics and the finer points of warfare to defend themselves from their many, many enemies. The lower warriors would fight bare chested almost always, even in winter, though they actually wore cloaks to the point of the battle, then would toss them aside to fight. Among the Belgic tribes were the Nervii, easily among the most fierce of all the Celtic peoples, and many of the first Celtic invaders into Ireland. The Belgae fought using three main manners, their fierce forward charge, their skilled and methodic ambushes, and their hit-and-run skirmish tactics. They were also skilled sappers and tacticians, but above all remembered is the charge. The Belgae could break near any enemy with a fierce charge, and if they could not, their good skill with their weapons and shields allowed them the power to stand and fight.

http://img121.echo.cx/img121/632/botroas3fp.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
The Botroas (Boat-rows, Sword Soldiers) are the basic medium infantry of the southern tribes of Gaul, but also of the south of Britain. They are well trained, with a fair amount of experience, and good quality swords, with javelins to soften an enemy before a charge. Like near all Celtic warriors, they are loyal to a tribal head, who is himself loyal to numerous mounting tiers of nobles, leading to the king. These form the core of the southern armies. Like most Celtic shock infantry, the brunt of their attack is in the charge.

Historically, the Botroas were the younger professional warriors of southern Gallic and Briton tribes. The similarity between the two was very close; somewhat odd, as the northern Gallic tribes equivalent was dressed and armored so differently. In Gaul, these men would be Aquitanii, Boii, and similar tribes. In Britain, they were the Casii, Dumnonii, and other southern tribesmen. Their lack of armor would leave them vulnerable, but they had great mobility, and their youthfulness included a desire to prove themselves to their people, making them somewhat lacking in fear, or, perhaps, simply more afraid of disgrace than they are of death.

http://img121.echo.cx/img121/581/malagaeroas0bn.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
Mala Gaeroas (Mah-lah Guy-rows; Southern Spear Soldiers) are the file warriors of the southern tribes of Gaul and Britain. The Gaeroas all utilize well-made long spears, and a few decent javelins, making them both fair melee warriors and impromptu skirmishers. Their versatility, and low relative expense, mean they are a fine warrior band for enterprising warlords looking to expand their lands. They have some experience with combat, but are not yet hardened to battle. However, they are trained well enough to march in a good formation, something actually lost on greater warriors for the Britons. Their longspears may seem a bit unwieldy, but this is likely to help them in combating cavalry and chariot horses as a unit. While unarmored, they have large rectangular shields, which provides them a good amount of protection. They are fairly well trained with these shields, and they provide a fair amount of protection from ranged attacks, but the lack of armor makes them quite vulnerable to flanking.

Historically, spearmen in Britain and Gaul would have been the young to middle-age warriors, who had not risen greatly in prestige, or who had chosen to continue to fight as a lower warrior. They would use well-made, but not truly exceptional spears, and javelins for skirmishing. This allowed their most basic warriors to perform two duties, and allocate other soldiers to more specialized positions. Their equipment would be self maintained, and they would be expected to keep their weapons and shield in good condition. They likely paid for their own equipment, but spears and javelins are relatively cheap, the most expensive part of their equipment was likely the shield. These warriors represent the most basic professional warriors of almost all of the southern tribes. They would be highly viable for warchiefs who couldn't afford to bring in many swords or other weapons for his tribe.

http://img121.echo.cx/img121/9512/leuceepos4xj.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
The Leuce Epos (Luch/Luke Ee-pus, Light Horsemen) are the basic cavalry of Gaul. So named, not because of their equipment, but swiftness of their horses. They are capable medium cavalry; good quality mounted warriors, regularly trained, and very good with their javelins. Otherwise, they are competent melee warriors and good for hit-and-run attacks, as well as useful for flanking.

Historically, the Leuce Epos were volunteers for the cavalry force, and had to qualify in a series of trials before being allowed to fight as a cavalryman. These trials included throwing their javelins, while riding, through a ring, several times consecutively. This was to ensure their capability with javelins in battle, as the initial attack would likely be a number of javelins being thrown at the enemy.

http://img121.echo.cx/img121/1200/brihentin5so.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
The Brihentin (Bree-hen-ten; Gallic 'Knights') are very good quality heavy cavalry, but limited in number due to their great expense. They have a strong charge, and are capable in a melee with their long slashing swords. Higher noblemen, they can afford the best equipment, the best armor, and are often accompanied by large armies. They have trained since youth in both mounted and foot combat, and are among the most capable of all Gallic warriors. While Brihentin are hardly flawless, and truly elite cavalry will probably defeat them, they are readily able to defeat most infantry and smash lighter cavalry.

Historically, Brihentin were the children of aristocrats and nobles. They trained extensively in combat, but were not as great as the truly elite cavalry soldiers of other cultures. This is possibly because, despite training from youth, they spent a great deal of time practicing non-martial pursuits, as Gallic nobles were expected to know a great deal of poetry, stories, religion, and foreign affairs. As such, the Brihent did not have all of his time to dedicate to warfare, but when he was not training otherwise, he spent his time learning to fight.

http://img156.echo.cx/img156/7365/soldurii1fz.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
Among the Aquitanii, there are great warriors, the Soldurii (Sol-dor-ee-i; Fearless Ones, from which 'Soldier' comes). The Soldurii ranged in their equipment at times, from extremely heavily armored, to entirely unarmored. However, their fearlessness and skill at arms preserved them many times, either way. They are skilled at near everything, and are usually able to defeat many more than their own number.

Historically, the Soldurii were a great warrior band. They faced death with no fear, and trained unceasingly. They pledged their lives to one another, each one pledged to defend one other. If one died, the other was expected to die to; if not the same battle, then by ritual suicide afterward. They shared their fates, and did so willingly. Caesar notes that no Soldurii backed down from his oath when it came to it; if their partner died, they died, willingly. This view of death, the lack of fear needed, spurned them to fight until they could not anymore; their loyalty to eachother and their leader would be most impressive.

http://img156.echo.cx/img156/7196/morigaesum4iw.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)
The Mori Gaesum (Mor-ee Guy-sum; Sea of Spears) form a strong phalanx. They are an elite of the Helvetii, well armed, trained, and armored, and very disciplined. They are capable in close combat, with Celtic longswords, and their phalanx is formed tightly with long spears, and capable against both infantry and cavalry, but are extremely vulnerable to flank attacks. Their morale is good; the Helvetii are proud warriors, sometimes too proud. However, even if defeated, the Mori Gaesum are likely to take many enemies with them.

Historically, the Helvetii were strong warriors, and very disciplined. Many Celts admired Greek culture, and as the theuros was adapted from the Celtic oval shield, the Helvetii phalanx was an outgrowth of the phalanx used by the Greeks. The Helvetii were exceptionally disciplined and well trained, and their elite best warriors fought in a tight phalanx, with good quality armor, large Celtic shields, and longswords for fighting in close.

We hope you enjoyed this week's preview and look forward to our faction showcase next week. I know that there may be controversial units here; I am happy to address questions, but try not to make assumptions before you have questioned us.

Please note that unless stated otherwise, ALL pictures shown in our news posts are of works in progress. We continue to improve on all parts of EB, and will do so long after our initial release.

As always, if you have questions or comments, the best place to post them would be here:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=70

Or here:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index.php?showforum=60

We give special thanks to http://www.imageshack.us who provide us with a simple, foolproof, and free way to show you all these pictures each week.

Have a wonderful day!

Sincerely,

-the EB team

unseen11
05-08-2005, 08:28
Yes it's the barbarians turn. Love those units and the fact they will be region specific.

Dâriûsh
05-08-2005, 08:56
Very impressive. ~:)



Regards.

Dooz
05-08-2005, 09:58
All this clamoring about the update being late and only 2 replies?! I'm disappointed... (because... you know... my disppointment is all-mighty around these here parts...)

The Gauls are now finally PLAYABLE people! Rejoice! Be firm in that truth! And follow me... TO VICTORRRYYYYYY!!!!! :medievalcheers:

Prof
05-08-2005, 11:49
it's amazing work again.

but in caesar's bello gallico they are called haedui with h

Ranika
05-08-2005, 12:21
Yes, but in the Gallic language, they were the called 'People of the Aedu' or 'Aeduae', or 'Aedui' (but not 'Aeduii'; the 'i' ending is like a substitute for 'ae' endings, which is a kind of method of abbreviating 'people of'). Aedui would sound more familiar to most, so it was decided to use in favor of Aeduae or any number of alternatives (there are a huge number of endings). Many Gallic tribe names are similar or essentially identical to the Latin versions of them, as the Gallic language had heavily affected Latin (and likely vice versa) due to their long period of varying coexistence and warfare in the Italic peninsula. It seems likely many names the Romans used for places were taken form the Celts of the region (such as Ordoviceae/Ordovices; such a name is not properly Latin or early P-Celtic, though it would show up late, but it sounds like a Gallic title, and the southern Britons spoke Gallic, so their names for the tribes of Briton would likely be the names chosen by the Romans to call them; possibly also a source for some Germanic names). The Latin variants of certain Gallic names add an H in front of them quite often, but I studied Celtic linguistics, not Latin, so I have no idea why they'd do that. However, the Gallic language starts no proper title with an 'h' followed by an 'a'; 'ha' only occurs within words, as it's used as a type of compound-vowel (pronounced as 'ay', like in Noeha; Noo-ay). If Caesar uses it in this sense, perhaps he mistook his understanding of the language, as one pronuciation would be 'Ayd-wee'; thinking that it should be precluded by an 'H' to make the 'ay' sound, but it's unnecessary in this case, as it is a possible pronunciation of 'ae' anyway.

Temple
05-08-2005, 12:31
:smitten:

Dux Corvanus
05-08-2005, 12:38
Anyway, 'h' seems to have been mute in Latin -as it is in modern Spanish, it's main use being the breaking of diphthongs, or distinction among similar words. In this case, haedui could be a corruption of ahedui, to avoid pronouncing it like ædui, or -more likely- the 'h' was added to make a distinction from other similar name.

For example, in Spanish, the verb herrar (to put a horse its horseshoes) has a 'h' because of etymology (from the word hierro -iron), but also to make it different from errar (to make a mistake), though they're pronounced exactly the same way.

Rodion Romanovich
05-08-2005, 12:43
Wonderful! I love those two belgae units and also the Leuce Epos and Brihentin, and of course the Soldurii! Only disappointment was that I didn't get to see any of their archers...

TheTank
05-08-2005, 12:53
Wow........cool update....My wish is granted .....thank you Kelvan ~;)
Do the Audui also get archers, slinger's and light horse units?!

Ranika
05-08-2005, 13:04
Sorry about the lack of archers; missile units for the Celts are all heavily WIP in right now, so, please be patient, and I'm sure the next time we display a Celtic faction (the Britons, glee), you'll get to see the models we'll be using for both the Gallic and British missiles. Until then, we're very pleased you like the work we're doing. On the specific query of the Mala Gaeroas; the description was based on an earlier version where we used rectangular shields, of the type used by the Botroas, the final descriptions will be longer, more informative, and have the correct information. In response to light horses; unnecessary. The Gauls did have some lighter cavalry, but the favored cavalry troop was the medium cavalry Leuce Epos (ironically called 'light horse'). Given that we have model and unit limitations (which are we stretching to the limit as it is), until we can find a way to squeeze in a bit more, I'm afraid we'll have to pass on them. Gauls will have chariots though, they were present at Telamon.

I'm very pleased the Soldurii were well recieved. It's been a bit of a sticking point for myself on how to depict them. From what we know of them, they fought sometimes as fanatical, unarmored swordsmen and spearmen, and other times as heavily armored infantry. We opted for the the heavily armored variant, the Gauls already have a lot of unarmored troops, and that does not properly represent them. By 120 BC, there is a notable massive increase in the use of chain; in game terms, this means late game armies of Gauls need access to more heavier armored units. But, of course, they're still going to have access to unarmored and lightly armored swordsmen and spearmen, forming cheaper warbands, where as the heavier armored troops represent a significant movement toward an increasingly more professional army. While professional troops were present before hand, they were a minority, backed up by light demi-professionals, and levies. You have not seen every Gallic unit here, we still have a few surprises, a few regionals, and some really interesting stuff we're still working on. A late game Gallic army will be able to tout a ton of variety, based on special tribal troops (such as Soldurii or Mori Gaesum), drawn from their most notable, true historical soldiers; if it stood out as unique among the Gauls, we're doing what we can to include them. Sadly, due to limitations, cuts will be made, some tribes will not be fully realized as we'd like, some entire cultures (not factions, but cultures like Belgae and the like) will be cut down to only a few units, but the whole Celtic (and barbarian portion, for that matter) of the mod is really going to give a different look at the barbarian cultures. Vanilla Rome homogenizes their troops into to easy to understand stereotypes, and completely ignores the vast, complicated variety of soldiers they were fielding, which varied heavily based on access to numerous resources, local culture, climate, etc. Not all Gauls fought shirtless. Not all Britons spiked their hair. Not all Germans fought with axes. We're doing what we can to show off as much variety in the cultures as we can. Each unique region will hopefully have at least one unique regional (that's not a promise, but it is a minor goal). Major unique regions (in respect to their cultures; Caledonia may not be unique to the Roman perspective, but to the Britons, they were a wholely different people) will feature at least a regional unit. While we don't intend to reinforce the concept of all barbarians as single petty tribes (Gauls formed notable, large alliances, as described here; Dacians/Thracians were united under Burebista) duking it out, we do intend to display the variety of warriors available due to the sub-cultures inherent in each area, as you can hopefully see here.

Shigawire
05-08-2005, 13:13
Anyway, 'h' seems to have been mute in Latin -as it is in modern Spanish, it's main use being the breaking of diphthongs, or distinction among similar words. In this case, haedui could be a corruption of ahedui, to avoid pronouncing it like ædui, or -more likely- the 'h' was added to make a distinction from other similar name.

For example, in Spanish, the verb herrar (to put a horse its horseshoes) has a 'h' because of etymology (from the word hierro -iron), but also to make it different from errar (to make a mistake), though they're pronounced exactly the same way.

Actually, the letter H was indeed pronounced by the Romans. H was pronounced only by educated speakers even in the classical period, and references to its loss in vulgar speech are frequent. And Spanish is a descendant of "vulgar latin."

Moros
05-08-2005, 13:57
This was so worth waiting an extra day for! Damn I love those Belgae and Helvetii!
Great work guys can't wait to see them in action against some legionaires!

About that H; so you think they'd say Ominus instead of HOminus? :dizzy2:
perhaps vulgar latin indeed but Caesar didn't write vulgar latin.

Radier
05-08-2005, 15:08
Cool update and good work! ~:cheers:

Can´t wait for the Germanic tribes...

Birka Viking
05-08-2005, 16:16
Very good job again EB.... ~:cheers:

Dux Corvanus
05-08-2005, 16:28
About that H; so you think they'd say Ominus instead of HOminus? :dizzy2:

Exactly.


perhaps vulgar latin indeed but Caesar didn't write vulgar latin.

We don't know what Caesar exactly wrote. No originals have come to us, but copies made by who knows who and when.

Anyway, the mute 'h' must have been a widespread phenomenon, since no Latin-derived tongue pronounces it. Nor French, nor Italian, nor Spanish, nor Portuguese, nor Romanian, nor Catalonian, etc. If vulgar Latin, must have been a rather standardized vulgar Latin.

Aspired sounding 'h' is mainly found in Semitic and Germanic-derived tongues. I'm thus inclined that the loss of sound occured very early in Latin history, probably before Cæsar's times, and that mute 'h' was common among intellectual classes by then.

To be sincere, I just can't imagine Cæsar saying 'khominus' [' x o: m i: n u: s] instead of the widely accepted [' o: m i: n u: s].

Furious Mental
05-08-2005, 16:52
Awesome update. In one of the screen shots it looks as though the Soldurii fight in a phalanx holding their spears overhand. Or am I looking at another unit?

The Stranger
05-08-2005, 16:58
amazing. but now special buildings in gaul. that's a bit depressing. but still amazing units

Byzantine Prince
05-08-2005, 17:16
Is it sjut me or is taht new map enormous!?!? ~:eek:

Shigawire
05-08-2005, 18:01
We don't know what Caesar exactly wrote. No originals have come to us, but copies made by who knows who and when.

Anyway, the mute 'h' must have been a widespread phenomenon, since no Latin-derived tongue pronounces it. Nor French, nor Italian, nor Spanish, nor Portuguese, nor Romanian, nor Catalonian, etc. If vulgar Latin, must have been a rather standardized vulgar Latin.

Aspired sounding 'h' is mainly found in Semitic and Germanic-derived tongues. I'm thus inclined that the loss of sound occured very early in Latin history, probably before Cæsar's times, and that mute 'h' was common among intellectual classes by then.

Well, Dux, if Caesar was a lowly peasant he would possibly have pronounced it ominus instead of hominus. But I think we all know the caliber of the family he came from.

Only after the palatalization of the Latin language did the H start to become mute, the G and C became palatalized, diphtongs became palatalized. This is not something that happened until during and after the barbarian invasions. That is why so many Romantic (Latin-derived) languages have mute Ha's. Many texts of classical Rome mentions (rather derisively) that the lower classes are incapable of pronouncing the Ha due to their lack of education. To not pronounce a Ha was considered undignified.

Moros
05-08-2005, 18:07
And my mother abd father are always complaining I don't learn my latin enough and that I shouldn't be on the computer that much. But you see I'm learning something here!

Dux Corvanus
05-08-2005, 19:43
This is not something that happened until during and after the barbarian invasions. That is why so many Romantic (Latin-derived) languages have mute Ha's.

Ok. I accept that the Roman elite could aspire the Ha's. But I can't understand exactly the point in the quote:

Curiously, most of those barbarian invasions were starred by Germanic tribes. And curiously, most languages derived from Germanic tongues have strongly aspired Ha's in their phonetic baggage. Isn't it a little strange that Germanic invasions happen to have an inverse effect on vulgar Latin? ~:confused:

Besides, I don't see why palatalization should have such an origin, since gutural and fricative phonems were not at all absent from barbarian tongues -and aren't either in modern romantic languages. What's most, Germanic tongues look rather phonetically gutural to me.

Palatalization should born from a fluid accent adaptation of language, not from Germanic influence.

As for Cæsar lineage, well, aristocracy doesn't guarantee the pertenence to a cultural elite. I'm rather sure that Cæsar was too busy a man to personally write 'The Gallic War' or whatever. He was more likely a 'dictator'... in all the senses of the term. Some erudite would write it down in the classical form whose texts we all have translated when at school. ~;)

Anyway, you're the expert, so I trust your conclusions over mine. I just look for some discussion, 'cause I find it entertaining and amusing. Just warming my fingers, and so... :bow:

why do you think I'm a single man? ~;p

BobTheTerrible
05-08-2005, 20:16
Is it going to ruin the game for you if there's no "h" in the faction name? I think this is a very minor issue to be concerned with...

runes
05-08-2005, 20:29
the region specific idea is BRILLIANT, not just for historical terms, but also for gameplay.

it will make taking and holding different territories more important, and more significant.


i.e.

crap, the AI took such and such a place, now they can build X unit and destroy me, i better get my ass into gear, i need that unit!

but one question, say some unit (a special sword unit or something) is built in a province, once you take it, it's available there correct? and ONLY there? and once/if you lose that territory you can no longer build said unit?

khelvan
05-08-2005, 20:36
but one question, say some unit (a special sword unit or something) is built in a province, once you take it, it's available there correct? and ONLY there? and once/if you lose that territory you can no longer build said unit?Yes.

Big_John
05-08-2005, 23:17
are all region-specific units available to all factions?

khelvan
05-08-2005, 23:21
No, all are evaluated on a per faction, per unit basis. In addition, the government installed in that province will make a difference.

Big_John
05-08-2005, 23:38
ok good.. i think i should have known that.

edit: will every faction be able to install 'governments' in conquered regions? and will the choices of governments vary from faction to faction? also, can a player change the government in his regions once they are set?

Shigawire
05-09-2005, 00:07
Dux, I never stated what was the cause of the palatalization, I stated that the period of morphology in the latin language towards palatalization happened to coincide with these invasions.

Instead of assuming how latin is pronounced based on your own language - and or making random guesses, and instead of asking me, just read Marcvs Fabivs Qvintilianvs. He mentions details about proper pronunciation in his books, especially "Institvtio Oratoria."

Dux Corvanus
05-09-2005, 00:41
Dux, I never stated what was the cause of the palatalization, I stated that the period of morphology in the latin language towards palatalization happened to coincide with these invasions.

Ok, I misunderstood.


Instead of assuming how latin is pronounced based on your own language - and or making random guesses, and instead of asking me, just read Marcvs Fabivs Qvintilianvs. He mentions details about proper pronunciation in his books, especially "Institvtio Oratoria."

Ok. :book:


Errors in sound on the other hand can be detected by the ear alone; although in Latin, as regards the addition or omission of the aspirate, the question may be raised whether this is an error when it occurs in writing; for there is some doubt whether h is a letter or merely a pause, practice having frequently varied in different ages. Older authors used it but rarely even before vowels, saying aedus or ircus, while its conjunction with consonants was for a long time avoided, as in words such as Graccus or triumpus. Then for a short time it broke out into excessive use, witness such spelling as chorona, chenturia or praecho, which may still be read in certain inscriptions: the well-known epigram of Catullus will be remembered in this connexion. The spellings vehementer, comprehendere and mihi have lasted to our day: and among early writers, especially of tragedy, we actually find mehe for me in the older MSS.

Qvintilianvs; Institvtio Oratoria, Liber Primvs


Uh oh, this doesn't seem a defence of sounding h to me, but a constatation of the contrary use, even more in pre-Quintilian times. ~;)

khelvan
05-09-2005, 00:49
will every faction be able to install 'governments' in conquered regions? and will the choices of governments vary from faction to faction? also, can a player change the government in his regions once they are set?Yes.

GoreBag
05-09-2005, 00:55
An excellent update. My caveats, though, are about the words. There are quite a few spelling errors ("impetuous", "chieftain", "inexperienced" and others), although I assume that "maille" was spelled that way on purpose.

Also, the history text and 'briefing' text, if I may call it that, seem to lack a proper direction in and of themselves. The paragraphs don't stay focused around an area, and it makes it seem more like a rant than a historical report.


On the unrelated note: Didn't IVLIUS speak Greek anyway?

Urnamma
05-09-2005, 02:27
:balloon2: Ranika is Irish. The English he learned was British English. He also has a first language other than English, so please PM him about any spelling errors.

GoreBag
05-09-2005, 03:06
I didn't think a PM was necessary. I assume these things will go into the mod themselves, so I pointed them out. Also, how was I to know that Ranika wrote it?

Ranika
05-09-2005, 06:06
Sorry. The descriptions are only drafts though, and I mostly wrote them while tired; they'll be editted and corrected before the final modification. I do try to use the American English (I prefer its spellings), but some words I have trouble shaking the additional letters (maille, armour sometimes, colour, etc.). My spelling in English leaves something to be desired when I'm tired, so don't take it as a sign of poor quality work on our part, they were purely my own mistakes.

khelvan
05-09-2005, 06:46
It is my fault, I usually do some editting before I post things. Please forgive me for not doing so this time.

Furious Mental
05-09-2005, 07:09
"Unexperienced" is actually a word you know.

Temple
05-09-2005, 07:18
Yeah, but Ranika wrote Inexperienced.. Which is a word too, if I'm not entirely mistaken..

Akatchi Barkarot
05-09-2005, 11:17
Helvetii...nice name for a barbarian unit. Its very close to word Helvetti meaning umm...can i say this word? Hell :)

Big_John
05-09-2005, 11:25
bartix, however, is not a word... in any language.

Aymar de Bois Mauri
05-09-2005, 13:07
Helvetii...nice name for a barbarian unit. Its very close to word Helvetti meaning umm...can i say this word? Hell :)It's not a unit name, it's a population.

GoreBag
05-09-2005, 14:31
No apologies are necessary. Spelling mistakes and revisions are always made before any release, and I was simply pointing them out, hopefully to aid in correction.

@ Ranika: American spellings? Blasphemy!

jerby
05-09-2005, 15:56
havent got teh time to read all posts, but the soldurii hold their spears like phalanx infantry in rtw. is it WIP? permanent or what?

Aymar de Bois Mauri
05-09-2005, 16:16
havent got teh time to read all posts, but the soldurii hold their spears like phalanx infantry in rtw. is it WIP? permanent or what?Due to CA's spear/sword infantry switch bug no infantry unit, except those in phalanx mode, can fight with sword and spear without crashing the game. So, until CA sorts that bug out they will be using it.

That is an aproximation to the shield wall they used.

Crazed Rabbit
05-09-2005, 16:32
Well, EB just looks more and more amazing with every news update!

Just one question:
You said that the Celts really started using mail in large quantities around 120 BC, and that units will be added to reflect this. Is this a Marian Reforms type of thing, requiring the Aedui get certain prerequisites before they can build the new units?

And if it is, will the Marian Reforms of the Celts/Tsorim/etc. be tied to the Roman Marian Reforms? Or will all the reforms going on be seperately triggered?

Crazed Rabbit

Ranika
05-09-2005, 18:03
For the moment it just means that Gauls will gain access to more chain units at higher levels of development; chain was originally used by chieftans, kings, and elite soldiers, for the most part, but in latter periods, preceding the conquest of Gaul, more and more regular soldiers could afford chain armor.

Neongod: Yeah, lots of people say that (well, something to that effect). Don't care, the brevity of the American spellings pleases me, though, ironically, I forget to use them sometimes.

The Stranger
05-09-2005, 18:04
I thought gauls had a kind of hammer troops

Ranika
05-09-2005, 18:06
We didn't show everything the Gauls are getting here (note the lack of archers/slingers/any type of missile unit except for javelins). There are plenty of things that the Gauls get we haven't finished yet.

The Stranger
05-09-2005, 18:21
ok...

Steppe Merc
05-09-2005, 20:35
Due to CA's spear/sword infantry switch bug no infantry unit, except those in phalanx mode, can fight with sword and spear without crashing the game. So, until CA sorts that bug out they will be using it.
What? I thought they fixed that... So units still can't use spear/swords properly? Idiots...

Byzantine Mercenary
05-10-2005, 17:05
I was just wondering how pyrrhus and the estruscans will be handled in EB they were both fighting rome from about 281BC.
will the Estruscans be a seperate faction?
perhaps Brutii with new units set as an enemy of rome?
after all they wer not destroyed until 250BC.
and will you give the greeks southern italy as in RTR

khelvan
05-10-2005, 17:24
I was just wondering how pyrrhus and the estruscans will be handled in EB they were both fighting rome from about 281BC.
will the Estruscans be a seperate faction?
perhaps Brutii with new units set as an enemy of rome?
after all they wer not destroyed until 250BC.As yet undetermined. But "Etruscan" encompasses a few peoples. Who exactly are you referring to here, that were destroyed in 250BC?

and will you give the greeks southern italy as in RTRNo.

Reverend Joe
05-11-2005, 07:10
A quick suggestion:

The description seems a bit... um... long. Put bluntly, that's the longest faction description i've ever seen. This is not meant to be insulting, but is there any way it can be shortened a little?

edit: huh- 50 posts. Whoop de damn doo.

khelvan
05-11-2005, 07:26
The description seems a bit... um... long. Put bluntly, that's the longest faction description i've ever seen. This is not meant to be insulting, but is there any way it can be shortened a little?I for one encourage our guys to write even more. If you don't want to read a long faction description, you don't have to. That is why they have the shorter "flavor" text first. The historical info is there to help people understand what these factions were like, it is part of the educational information we promised to provide.

Put bluntly; no, and in fact we would encourage even longer ones if our faction guys weren't so busy. It can always be skipped by those who don't like to read, but if it isn't there many others will miss out.

jerby
05-11-2005, 14:57
who will get tarentum at the start? I thought the Romans didn't conquer it until 200 Bc or something.

Byzantine Mercenary
05-11-2005, 16:45
I got the aforementioned information about the Etruscans from this website

http://www.roman-empire.net/republic/carthage.html#firstpunicwar

This website also mentions that denarii were not introduced until around the second punic war, it gives a very long acount of the punic wars that you may find useful

Its main homepage also has a lot of information about the roman empire (http://www.roman-empire.net) that you may find useful

cunctator
05-11-2005, 18:55
who will get tarentum at the start? I thought the Romans didn't conquer it until 200 Bc or something.

For the first time Tarentum was conquered by the romans in 272BC after the end of the phyrric war. Later hannibal captured the city in 212BC with the help of some inhabitants. In 209BC it was reconquered by rome.

jerby
05-11-2005, 20:48
ok, so then its all up to the starting date of EB: If Pyrrus is there, tarantum should(...) be greek/macedonian.would be great if EB started in 350: very tiny rome, big persia, alexander, minor carthage, Spartans. but then again: seleucids, ptolo's, armenia and Parthia will all be gone. Perhaps for western factions then...but hé
but then, looking at the ideas of EB, the new Campaign thingies, the units, the new game-depth in campaign, the bugs-removed. Looking at all that I COULDN'T care less about wich starting date they pick...

Steppe Merc
05-11-2005, 22:32
350 BCE would be a totally different game, and would encorparate far more units than we would be able to create with the model and faction limitations.

Stormy
05-11-2005, 22:46
And different factions.

Big_John
05-11-2005, 23:10
And different factions.and a different start date....


.. i got nothin'.. :shame:

Reverend Joe
05-12-2005, 05:55
Put bluntly; no, and in fact we would encourage even longer ones if our faction guys weren't so busy. It can always be skipped by those who don't like to read, but if it isn't there many others will miss out.

Geez, Khelvan, lay off, would ya? I was just trying to state an opinion...
As for myself, I always read the faction descriptions, not to mention all the descriptions for the units and buildings. I'm not some idiot who hates erading and wants to get straignt to the action. I am a very avid reader. I'm just saying that the description is very long.
If you want to take such a condascending attitude, just come out and say what you think of my comment. And if you don't like hearing my opinion, just say, "F**k off, meatwad, we don't want to hear your uneducated, backwards opinions anymore." I won't be happy, but I'll know where you stand.
By the way, don't take my rant too seriously. I can just have a fowl temper, not to mention a fowl mouth, sometimes.

Big_John
05-12-2005, 06:43
whoa! calm down dude, you needn't be so defensive. re-read khelvan's post with a dispassionate tone and you'll see that he was in no way saying or intimating "f**k off". i can see how you might have taken khelvan's quoting of your phrasing ("put bluntly") as mocking/condescending, but i'm sure he didn't mean it that way. he was simply trying to explain his answer to your question better than just replying with "no". ~:grouphug:

Reverend Joe
05-12-2005, 07:07
Yeah, you're probably right. I'm just used to people taking a condascending attitude with me. I dunno why, but it happens a lot to me.

khelvan
05-12-2005, 07:51
I tend to answer questions in the tone they are asked. As you can see, I used your phrasing, so if you found mine to be condescending, it is only because yours was first.

I didn't intend it to be so, I just used the phrasing you used.