Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 57 of 57

Thread: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

  1. #31
    master of the wierd people Member Ibrahim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Who cares
    Posts
    6,192

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    yeah it may be, but there is always someone who might want it.
    I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.

    my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).

    tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!

    "We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode " -alBernameg

  2. #32
    EBII Hod Carrier Member QuintusSertorius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    23,141

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Hmm, when should I add Thracia (Tylis, Byzantion and Buridava)? They were allied to Rome for a long time, but not actually conquered, I don't think. Unless someone's got better information than me?

    Says on the EB website under the Thracian auxiliaries that:

    During the advanced second century BC, Thrace and most of the Balkan peninsula came under roman dominance, although it stayed an independent client state and did not became a formal province unit 46 AD.
    It began on seven hills - an EB 1.1 Romani AAR with historical house-rules (now ceased)
    Heirs to Lysimachos - an EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR with semi-historical houserules (now ceased)
    Philetairos' Gift - a second EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  3. #33

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Hmm, when should I add Thracia (Tylis, Byzantion and Buridava)? They were allied to Rome for a long time, but not actually conquered, I don't think. Unless someone's got better information than me?

    Says on the EB website under the Thracian auxiliaries that:
    It's not in the SPQR victory conditions, so perhaps you shouldn't conquer it at all and leave it to the Eleutheroi?

  4. #34
    EBII Hod Carrier Member QuintusSertorius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    23,141

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordmaster View Post
    It's not in the SPQR victory conditions, so perhaps you shouldn't conquer it at all and leave it to the Eleutheroi?
    I might have a job getting it from it's current owners, Koinon Hellenon, since they're the faction-creator.

    I don't plan to wipe out KH either, so that might be a constant source of problems.
    It began on seven hills - an EB 1.1 Romani AAR with historical house-rules (now ceased)
    Heirs to Lysimachos - an EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR with semi-historical houserules (now ceased)
    Philetairos' Gift - a second EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  5. #35
    Not your friend Member General Appo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    As far away from you as possible. Scuzzbucket.
    Posts
    1,645

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    I think that making it a client kingdom would be okay, though when exactly I´m not sure.
    The Appomination

    I don't come here a lot any more. You know why? Because you suck. That's right, I'm talking to you. Your annoying attitude, bad grammar, illogical arguments, false beliefs and pathetic attempts at humour have driven me and many other nice people from this forum. You should feel ashamed. Report here at once to recieve your punishment. Scumbag.

  6. #36

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    I think Epidamnos should be there too in 229 BC. I'm gonna look this up when I've got the chance, but I think it should be considered part of what fell to the Roman sphere after the first Illyrian war. Have you got better sources on that than UNRV?

  7. #37
    White Panther (Legalize Weed!) Member AlexanderSextus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    THIS! IS! JERSEY!
    Posts
    613

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quintus: OK, i changed the Marian Reforms province requirement to 35 provinces, but now i need to know what the turn number for 130BC is, and i need to know what code to type so that the unconditional reforms start @ 90BC as opposed to owning 90 provinces. I'm really cautious when it comes to editing the script, I dont wanna kill my game.
    Do you hate Drug Cartels? Do You believe that the Drug War is basically a failure? Do you think that if we Legalized the Cannabis market, that use rates would drop, we could put age limits on cannabis, tax it, and other wise regulate it? Join The ORG Marijuana Policy Project!

    In American politics, similar to British politics, we have a choice between being shot in our left testicle or the right testicle. Both parties advocate pissing on the little guys, only in different ways and to a different little guy.

  8. #38
    EBII Hod Carrier Member QuintusSertorius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    23,141

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quote Originally Posted by Swordmaster View Post
    I think Epidamnos should be there too in 229 BC. I'm gonna look this up when I've got the chance, but I think it should be considered part of what fell to the Roman sphere after the first Illyrian war. Have you got better sources on that than UNRV?
    Nothing I've read is terribly clear on what happened with Epirus' provinces generally; you might well be right that Epidamnos specifically should be taken in the 229 war, and thus only Ambrakia is taken in 167.
    It began on seven hills - an EB 1.1 Romani AAR with historical house-rules (now ceased)
    Heirs to Lysimachos - an EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR with semi-historical houserules (now ceased)
    Philetairos' Gift - a second EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  9. #39
    White Panther (Legalize Weed!) Member AlexanderSextus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    THIS! IS! JERSEY!
    Posts
    613

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    i hope you can answer my question, if its not too much trouble, quint.

    SUPERBUMP
    Do you hate Drug Cartels? Do You believe that the Drug War is basically a failure? Do you think that if we Legalized the Cannabis market, that use rates would drop, we could put age limits on cannabis, tax it, and other wise regulate it? Join The ORG Marijuana Policy Project!

    In American politics, similar to British politics, we have a choice between being shot in our left testicle or the right testicle. Both parties advocate pissing on the little guys, only in different ways and to a different little guy.

  10. #40
    EBII Hod Carrier Member QuintusSertorius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    23,141

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    130BC is turn ([272-130=142]*4) 568.

    No idea how you add a date to the unconditional part; I'd just alter the province-trigger to a smaller number.
    It began on seven hills - an EB 1.1 Romani AAR with historical house-rules (now ceased)
    Heirs to Lysimachos - an EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR with semi-historical houserules (now ceased)
    Philetairos' Gift - a second EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  11. #41
    Member Member Skandinav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    132

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    189 BC = Ambrakia ( Raid )
    154/139 BC = Oxtraca/Lusitania ( Type IV Government, roman province from 27 BC )
    137 BC = Tyde/Galaecia ( Type IV Government, made a roman province by Augustus, ca 27 BC )
    121 BC = Viennos ( Optional Type IV Government then Type III until Augustus and the Principate, or ca 27 BC )
    61 BC = Lose then regain Oxtraca/Lusitana
    61 BC = Lose then regain Viennos

    ( Sources : Hermann Kinder & Verner Hilgemann, dtv - Atlas zur Weltgeschichte Band 1, and Ernst Bruckmüller & Peter Claus Hartmann, Putzger Historischer Weltatlas. My impression of the government type of the allebroges in the late republic I have from Gaius Julius Caesar´s Commentarii de Bello Gallico )


    There must be a date missing in the list between these two, at which to lose Segesta :

    "217-203/191: Lose then regain Segesta, Mediolanium, Patavium"

    "154: Segesta"


    Also, wouldn´t it be more appropriate to divide Makedonia into client kingdoms instead of a protectorate in 167 BC as the macedonian kingdom ceases to exist and at the same time make for a more fluent transformation into a roman province after the rebellion 148 BC ( which perhaps also should be on the list, given that a bit such info is already given sporadically ) ?
    Last edited by Skandinav; 08-02-2008 at 09:15.

  12. #42
    EBII Hod Carrier Member QuintusSertorius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    23,141

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Changes made. Makedonia is a difficult one; hard to have a rebellion with an army if the faction is dead in 167.
    It began on seven hills - an EB 1.1 Romani AAR with historical house-rules (now ceased)
    Heirs to Lysimachos - an EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR with semi-historical houserules (now ceased)
    Philetairos' Gift - a second EB 1.1 Epeiros-as-Pergamon AAR


  13. #43
    Member Member Skandinav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    132

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Changes made. Makedonia is a difficult one; hard to have a rebellion with an army if the faction is dead in 167.
    Well, I always sustain factions and in this case I usually have Makedonia in Pergamon and/or other places in Anatolia after taking their lands, an alternative could be to simply have the slave faction rebel in Makedonia in 167BC ( and build up a fitting army for them perhaps ).


    Quote Originally Posted by QuintusSertorius View Post
    Hmm, when should I add Thracia (Tylis, Byzantion and Buridava)? They were allied to Rome for a long time, but not actually conquered, I don't think. Unless someone's got better information than me?

    Says on the EB website under the Thracian auxiliaries that:
    Buridava is a part of dacia, I believe, and was not held before the Dominate.

    168 BC : Byzantion ( Type IV Government from the end of the Third Macedonian War ( 168 BC ), roman province from 46 AD, it seems to have had periods of automony under the civil wars of the Late Republic and during the Principate )

    168 BC : Tylis ( Same as above )

    64 BC : Pantikapionm ( Type IV Government )
    64 BC : Chersonesos ( Type IV Government )

    29 BC : Naissos
    29 BC : Kallatis


    Minor changes to already existing dates on the list :

    To the best of my knowledge the creation of the Syrian Province ( Antiocheia, Damaskos, Sidon ) was when Pompeius conquered it and reorganized the eastern provinces in 64 BC ( the end of the Mithridatic Wars ) and not 66 BC.

    A few more chronological details on Caesar´s conquest of Gaul :

    58 BC : Aventicos
    58 BC : Bibracte

    57 BC : Bratosporios
    57 BC : Cenabum

    56 BC : Darioritum
    56 BC : Lemonum
    56 BC : Burdigala

    55 BC : Bagacos

    53 BC : Vesontio

    52 BC : Avaricum
    52 BC : Gergovia

    ( All : Type IV Government, roman province from 43 BC )
    Last edited by Skandinav; 08-28-2008 at 02:12.

  14. #44
    Member Member Skandinav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    132

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Edit : Double Post
    Last edited by Skandinav; 08-02-2008 at 23:22.

  15. #45
    Member Member Skandinav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    132

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    46 BC : Kirtan/Numidia
    64 BC : Kotais ( Type IV Government, alt. protectorate )

    Before finally being made a province in 30 BC, Egypt was a protectorate/Client State of Rome, does any know when it was made so ?
    As it seems to have been so before the First Triumvirate I would find it likely to be connected to Pompeius and his reorganization of the East in 64 BC, but I cannot seem to find out exactly when.

    Armenia was also made a Client State in 64 BC and this is Hayasdan territory in EB, but which settlements ? Armavir and Ani-Kamah seems fairly certain to be included, but what about Karkathiokerta, Mtskheta, Kabalaka and Phraaspa ?
    Last edited by Skandinav; 08-06-2008 at 16:21.

  16. #46
    Biotechnlogy Student Member ||Lz3||'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Mexico
    Posts
    1,669

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quote Originally Posted by Skandinav View Post
    46 BC : Kirtan/Numidia
    64 BC : Kotais ( Type IV Government, alt. protectorate )
    It would be nice to refresh the time-line with those dates... CK, and Province I mean... shame both Skandinav and Quintus left the forums
    Spoken languages:

    Mini-mod pack for EB 1.2 for Alexander and RTW
    (just download it and apply to get tons of changes!) last update: 18/12/08 here
    ALEXANDER EB promoter

  17. #47

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    I have problems with finding these Towns in my game, can someone simply just tell me the region and ll send a spy ahead please.

    Mastia
    Kirtan
    Boccharis
    Baitar

    Is there somewhere a map with a very detailed year by year developement of the roman empire somewhere?

    Thanks
    ETIENNE

  18. #48
    EB TRIBVNVS PLEBIS Member MarcusAureliusAntoninus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    The State of Jefferson, USA
    Posts
    5,722

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Take a look a the EB map here:
    https://www.europabarbarorum.com/downloads_artwork.html
    Most of those cities are in Iberia.

    Other than the little things posted in threads like this, there is no great map of expansion.


  19. #49

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Did anyone manage to do this timeline at the end? And till when?

    I am always having difficulties in around 200bc
    Etienne

  20. #50

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quote Originally Posted by jtareb View Post
    Nice job. The only issue I have is Vindibona being taken in 157bc. I thought the Romans did not advance to the danube until Augustus had come to power. It was either Agrippa or Tiberius who advanced the empire to the danube although a player might go ahead early and make them client states.

    I agree about the marian reforms. As there was no clear clean cut date for the change historically i changed my script to make the reform unconditional about 155bc. Given the time it will take to completly overhaul my armies and barracks it will be about 130-120bc before i can field marian armies. I also changed the provincial limit to 35 as that will cover what the romans had historically by that time. A player might even change that to 100bc to reflect Marius coming to power and his utilization of head count soldiers as opposed to the old property-class units.
    Meh, I'd place the reforms on the date that property requirements were scrapped.
    Μηδεν εωρακεναι φoβερωτερον και δεινοτερον φαλλαγγος μακεδονικης

  21. #51

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    When should tolosa be taken people?

    Etienne

  22. #52
    Member Member Macilrille's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Aarhus, Denmark
    Posts
    1,592

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    You can argue for 118 BC when Narbo was founded and the Volcae-Tectosages of Tolosa became allies, but they rebelled when the Cimbrii turned up and was conquered by Caepio. Leading to his infamous theft of gold from their holy lakes/the treasury at Rome. Edited to add what I previously forgot; that it happened in 106 BC.
    Last edited by Macilrille; 10-12-2009 at 15:40.
    'For months Augustus let hair and beard grow and occasionally banged his head against the walls whilst shouting; "Quinctillius Varus, give me my legions back"' -Sueton, Augustus.

    "Deliver us oh God, from the fury of the Norsemen", French prayer, 9th century.
    Ask gi'r klask! ask-vikingekampgruppe.dk

    Balloon count: 13

  23. #53

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quote Originally Posted by etipac View Post
    Did anyone manage to do this timeline at the end? And till when?

    I am always having difficulties in around 200bc
    Etienne

    No, Quint hit a bug in around 200 odd I think, I had a game like this till around the third Punic war, but it became fairly unstable and keeping the rest of the world in line was a bit of a pain.

    It is a shame Quint is no longer around, I liked his AAR's.

  24. #54

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    What's the source for taking Bononia in 270 BCE? I cannot find it in UNRV, and other sources all point to capture in 225, lose to Hannibal, retake in 198.

    Thank you!

  25. #55

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Quote Originally Posted by Skandinav View Post
    46 BC : Kirtan/Numidia
    64 BC : Kotais ( Type IV Government, alt. protectorate )

    Before finally being made a province in 30 BC, Egypt was a protectorate/Client State of Rome, does any know when it was made so ?
    As it seems to have been so before the First Triumvirate I would find it likely to be connected to Pompeius and his reorganization of the East in 64 BC, but I cannot seem to find out exactly when.

    Armenia was also made a Client State in 64 BC and this is Hayasdan territory in EB, but which settlements ? Armavir and Ani-Kamah seems fairly certain to be included, but what about Karkathiokerta, Mtskheta, Kabalaka and Phraaspa ?
    Egypt wasnt really a client. it was more of a vassal or satellite state (subtle differences to client state). I believe the Romans slowly began to gain influence in Egyptian matters after Egypt appealed to Rome in response to the invasion of Egypt by Antiochus IV Epiphanes (line in the sand) around 168 BC

  26. #56

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    armenia and egypt where protectorates/vassal states :| they still had enough autonomy to rebel/cut relations with the protector

  27. #57

    Default Re: A historically-accurate Roman conquest timeline

    Hello all,

    So I went out on a limb and made a version of the historical Roman timeline, following Quintus's in the early years but with much more detail later on.

    Please check it out and let me know if you have any comments or suggestions!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO