Medieval mod IV v4 beta: Path to Glory

[Big_John]

wes hasn't done the new faction graphics yet. he needs some help, so feel free to volunteer.

as to the 1000 florins, it was odd, because playing as the french, i never attacked anyone except the english, for which the pope warned me, but i kept recieving 1000 florins every other turn, or so. i could be imagining things, but it seems like the french get this grant more frequently than the other catholic factions that i've played as.

[WesW]

The flickering cavalry is due to a mistake I made when I switched their eras last week. It doesn't affect gameplay or abilities, but if you want to fix it, find KnightsofGascon in the units text. Change the 4 to a 7 where it has: CUSTOM4, YES, YES, KHorse .
The Saint George unit is right below, and there you change the 7 to 4. That's it.

I use edit plus for my work. It lets you create a syntax file which color-codes all the entries in it, when you set it as the default for text files. Over the years I have built up an extensive file, customized for the game texts, and it is invaluable for finding entries and marking bugs.
Email me, and I'll send it to you. I think it's a much better method than using template systems like the Gnome editor.

The settings for the Carrack are correct. It's designed primarily for the High era, when it's the only ship capable of sailing over deep water, and thus exiting the Med. It's primarily there for the player when he wants to completely conquer the map as one of the Mediterranean factions.

I was worried about misspelling Languedoc when I was making it on the map, but I was worried about the u in gue. That may have subconsciously made me screw up the end of it. It so happened that I was looking at the maps I used as references a couple of hours ago, and noticed that I have Trans-danubia and Pannonia switched, so I guess I'll fix those sometime and upload a new file.

I actually spent a long time yesterday adjusting the provincial borders, mostly replacing my fiddling with the original LMB designs. The stuff I do just never looks as clean as the professional work. The only thing that was significant, though, were the expansion of Mazovia and the reconfiguring of Tyrolia and Carniola.
Those two encompass the Alps much better now, and should give a better impression of their purpose, which is control of the mountain passes. I think the addition of such strategic locals is really going to add more depth to the game.

[Big_John]

i think your map work looks as good as the CA stuff. but that's just my opinion.

hey wes, if i wanted to try my hand ay making shields for the new factions, how exactly would i go about it? i have readbif, but it seems rather limited.. any suggestions?

[Aenlic]

I, too, like your maps just fine, Wes. They look great.

Ok, thanks for the clarification on the carrack. The Danes can build both caravel and carrack; but the caravel comes sooner by one shipyard; and it too can make the deep sea journey. That's what confused me.

I have not had any CTD's in the last few days. Beats me what caused it, initially.

I figured out what was causing my Excel loads of the building production to be off by a column. It was seeing the spaces in the text string names for buildings like military academy and royal palace as delimiting points. Easily fixed.

[poirot]

Hmm

There seems to be way too many peasants in the standard armies, while the rebels and the re-emerging factions sport heavy cav and infantry. Seems to be less realistic to have the rebels and re-emerging factions sport elite troops.

Oh, the seige cannon crew is too powerful - a seige cannon crew of 12 men single handly defeated an entire unit of Mongol Heavy Cav!

[WesW]

Hmm

There seems to be way too many peasants in the standard armies, while the rebels and the re-emerging factions sport heavy cav and infantry. Seems to be less realistic to have the rebels and re-emerging factions sport elite troops.

Oh, the seige cannon crew is too powerful - a seige cannon crew of 12 men single handly defeated an entire unit of Mongol Heavy Cav!

I looked through the units settings, and I agree that peasant rebellions shouldn't have elite troops, so I took them out. I disagree about the rebels and re-emerging factions, however. I think that both of them have always had elite troops in their mixes.

The AI gets an accuracy bonus when targeting your troops in the field, which probably accounted for that encounter. I don't think I have done anything to the artillery stats.

You shouldn't be seeing any peasants in the AI armies, unless they are the result of rebellions.

[Aenlic]

Wes, I've been researching various flags and emblems in the hopes of helping with the unit colors. Frankly, Viking Horde's flags for his XL mod are the most accurate for all factions. The only quibble I might have would be replacing the Grand Duchy flag for Lithuania from the 13th century with the stylized yellow "Tower of Gediminas" on red from slightly earlier. But the Vytis flag Viking Horde uses is certainly fine, too.

I think the only faction missing from VH's flags would be for the Almoravids. BKB came about as close as it's possible to get to the plain white flag used by the Almoravids with the Quranic shahada written on it (like that on the Saudi flag) in black. The verse won't scale well, so it looks like BKB just used the last bit of lettering. Seems to work fine.

If Viking Horde is willing to let you use his, then that problem is solved. They are all very nicely rendered.

[Big_John]

hey guys, i've decided to help wes out with the graphics. assuming wes can use graphics from BKB's and VH's mods, i'm going to try my hand at the factions that aren't covered. i'm just about to have a look at what VH and BKB did for their graphics. i'm aiming for quasi-historicality for the flags. as for the almoravids, i've already made the graphics, because i didn't really like the look of the existing one (BKBs?). but it was just my preference, and i didn't have a good idea, so i slapped a koranic "allāhu" on a white background. here's what a couple of the shields look like:
https://img58.imageshack.us/img58/60...board020rc.gif

what do you all think? is it lame? is it offensive? should wes just use BKBs if he gets permission?


ok, i just looked at VH's graphics, i really like his new "glory" shields, and if wes can use those, he should. of the other shield types (e.g. castle flags, battle flags, stratmap shields), the ones that i think could be changed are (note: i don't know if wes will implement all of these factions):

almohads: i can't find out much about the flag beyond a plain white flag. i have an idea for putting a rosette on a white field; i saw a wargamer do that to represent the al-muwahiddun. here's a prelim mock-up. thoughts?
https://img58.imageshack.us/img58/31...board018dq.gif

burgundians: use the "ancien" coat of arms, the alternating gold and blue diagonals (maybe leave the red border off).

byzantines: either use the gold cross on a red field with the "beta" firestalls:
https://img89.imageshack.us/img89/84...board031jb.gif
or use the double headed eagle, though that came after the fourth crusade, iirc.

denmark: use 3 blue lions "passant guardant" on a gold field.

egypt: might have an overhaul in mind for the egyptian faction. need to confer with wes some more.

golden horde: use the red crescent over a grey disk on a white field.

irish: use brian boru's flag (gold "woman harp" on a blue field).

lithuanians: gold "towers of gediminas" on a red field.

novgorod: don't have a good idea yet, but the current one is the modern coat of arms...

serbia: maybe use the purported red double-headed figure (eagle?) on yellow field from the "Monumenta Cartographica Jugoslaviae II"?

turkey: similar to egypt, i have an idea to overhaul this faction a bit.



any thoughts?

[poirot]

Wes, would it hassle you to add the Ilkhanate as well? It would make the late period more interesting.

[poirot]

hey guys, i've decided to help wes out with the graphics. assuming wes can use graphics from BKB's and VH's mods, i'm going to try my hand at the factions that aren't covered. i'm just about to have a look at what VH and BKB did for their graphics. i'm aiming for quasi-historicality for the flags. as for the almoravids, i've already made the graphics, because i didn't really like the look of the existing one (BKBs?). but it was just my preference, and i didn't have a good idea, so i slapped a koranic "allāhu" on a white background. here's what a couple of the shields look like:
https://img58.imageshack.us/img58/60...board020rc.gif

what do you all think? is it lame? is it offensive? should wes just use BKBs if he gets permission?


ok, i just looked at VH's graphics, i really like his new "glory" shields, and if wes can use those, he should. of the other shield types (e.g. castle flags, battle flags, stratmap shields), the ones that i think could be changed are (note: i don't know if wes will implement all of these factions):

almohads: i can't find out much about the flag beyond a plain white flag. i have an idea for putting a rosette on a white field; i saw a wargamer do that to represent the al-muwahiddun. here's a prelim mock-up. thoughts?
https://img58.imageshack.us/img58/31...board018dq.gif

burgundians: use the "ancien" coat of arms, the alternating gold and blue diagonals (maybe leave the red border off).

byzantines: either use the gold cross on a red field with the "beta" firestalls:
https://img89.imageshack.us/img89/84...board031jb.gif
or use the double headed eagle, though that came after the fourth crusade, iirc.

denmark: use 3 blue lions "passant guardant" on a gold field.

egypt: might have an overhaul in mind for the egyptian faction. need to confer with wes some more.

golden horde: use the red crescent over a grey disk on a white field.

irish: use brian boru's flag (gold "woman harp" on a blue field).

lithuanians: gold "towers of gediminas" on a red field.

novgorod: don't have a good idea yet, but the current one is the modern coat of arms...

serbia: maybe use the purported red double-headed figure (eagle?) on yellow field from the "Monumenta Cartographica Jugoslaviae II"?

turkey: similar to egypt, i have an idea to overhaul this faction a bit.



any thoughts?

I like the current shield for the Golden Horde, although a shield with a blue wolf is better. The color banner of the Mongols under Genghis Khan is blue, representative of the legend of the wolf and the deer.

[poirot]

An early Mongol flag circa 1310

[Aenlic]

Looks great, Big John!

The best info I've been able to find are here:

http://www.angelfire.com/ak5/alexflags/ Nice info here. This is where I saw the Towers of Gediminas for Lithuania.

http://www.nationalflaggen.de/flags-...gs/search.html

Also, here, for historical discussions and some pics. Use the search feature for individual factions. This is the site that discusses the Almoravids and Almohads.

I think the allahu is fine in place of the much longer shahada ("There is only one God and Mohammed is his prophet") which the Almoravids used as a battle standard. It looks very nicely done, Big John. Getting the lettering to scale properly came out nice.

The Almohads seems to present some confusion, especially since many medieval writers simply made stuff up for areas they didn't really know. Such was the case, it seems, for the Almohads. But historically, I think the yellow interlocking squares on a red background would work; since that was the flag used by the Marinids who succeeded the Almohads, who supposedly also used it.

For Novgorod, there doesn't seem to be any decent historical basis to use. There is a pic on the FOTW site for Novgorod of a 16th century battle flag which is a white saltire on blue, with a smaller red saltire in the center. That might do.

For Byzantium, the Paleologos double-headed eagle is probably a bit too late, though it'll do. It's certainly in the same period, just high or late. Perhaps the standard of Emperor Nikoforos Fokas from the 10th century? It's a variation of one of Constantine's battle flags. A white Chi-Rho on top of a white couped cross on a blue background.

The red double-headed eagle for Serbia sounds good. That's the oldest known for the Serbian Empire.

All the rest sound great. I think for Egypt, CA just combined the gold flag of the Mamluk's with the crescent and star of the Ottoman period. It's another area devoid of historical information.

[Big_John]

thanks for the feedback guys! poirot, for the horde, all the (possibly dubious) sources i have indicate something like this https://img70.imageshack.us/img70/1686/gold8mw.png

remember, the golden horde isn't "the mongols" per se, but a unification of the white and blue successor kingdoms. btw, having the ilkhans in the late era is a cool idea! it probably won't be implemented for the first release. but maybe wes will look at it for later releases?

aenlic, good call on the almohads, that rosette was pretty fanciful, lol. but i'm thinking black or orange interlocking squares on a white field would be better?

i'm familiar with both those sites (and many more ). for novgorod, what about the yellow and blue flag shown below the 16th century battle standard? i could put it on a white field to retain the triangular shape.

so, are my byzantine flags no good? the double-headed eagle was adopted after the fourth crusade, which is the starting point of the high era. while "2 out of 3 ain't bad", i wouldn't mind using a more accurate flag for the early period at least (though, i'm not sure what i have is more accurate).

there actually is a bit of info out there on egyptian and turkish flags, but i'm waiting to see what wes wants to do with those factions before proceeding.

keep it coming guys!

[Aenlic]

Well, for the Almohads, it would almost certainly have to be a red background. As far as I can determine, only the Almoravids used the white background. From the Almohads on, it seems to have been always red. The only argument from the various "authorities" seems to be what was on that background. The checkerboard pattern seems to have been a mistaken use of the Marrakech arms, and the scissors seem entirely fanciful. So the interlocking squares of the Marinids, that look essentially like a Star of David, seemed the most accurate for the Almohads. The question would then be what color for them.

For Novgorod, it seems like anything is possible. Your idea sounds fine to me. The yellow and blue on a triangle may be as accurate was we can get.

Byzantium is a problem for no good reason. I just can't believe that we don't have accurate information on the flags used prior to the Paleologos double eagle. We know practically everything else about every emperor, from his wives, concubines, and indigestion to who thought he was too gassy and rude; but no one seems to know what flag was used between Nikoforos Fokas in 969 and Michael VIII after the 4th Crusade in 1261. Since Michael's flag is the most well-known and is well within our time period, it makes sense to go with the double eagle. I don't think we're going to find anything more accurate for the early period.

I did find a nice flag for the Armenians while rumaging around on the internet. It's the standard of the Rubenian Dynasty from 1080 -1375, and thus fits perfectly within our time frame. Found it here:

http://www.umd.umich.edu/dept/armenian/gifs/12.gif The colors are a bit faded, but it should be a red lion on a white flag.

It all looks great.

[Big_John]

i know what you mean about the byzantines, aenlic. i have no problem with the double-headed eagle, it appears to have been used by nobles in byzantium (though not by the emperor, nor to symbolize the state) before the reconquest of constantinople in 1261 anyway. just fyi, though, here's a bit about the cross figure i used in that mock-up.

As for the tetragrammatic cross, even though it was considered at the time by some to be the arms of the Paleologue family, it was in fact the arms of the Byzantine empire. The motif of a croos between four objects is derived from Constantine's labarum and has long figured on Byzantine coins, since the 6th c.

The B's of the tetragrammatic cross have been mostly interpreted as flints or firestones (purekbola in Greek), but also as letters. It is possible that they were initially letters, and later assimilated to firestones. The interpretation of the four B's standing for the motto "Basileus Basileon Basileuon Basileonton" (king of kings, ruling over those who rule) may well be posterior.

http://www.heraldica.org/topics/national/byzantin.htm

i like it mostly because it looks similar to the latin empire's flag. it almost looks like the crusaders took the tetragrammatic cross of the byzantines and replaced the "betas" with crosses. as if to say, "we've 'christianized' you!"

could you point me to a source for the almohads using red flags? i thought i read that they used primarily white flags...

the rubenid flag is pretty much what vikinghorde used for the armenians. it looks pretty good, imo.

btw, here's what i've done for the chernigovians (which wes may use in place of the cumans). the symbol is the ensign of prince mstislav, founder of the principality of chernigov:
https://img263.imageshack.us/img263/...board019xm.gif

[Aenlic]

I used the FOTW site for my interpretation of the Almohad flag. http://www.nationalflaggen.de/flags-...hist.html#summ

While the mention of the interlaced squares used by the Marinids and Almohads before them comes in the section on white flags, later on you'll see that the Marinid flag is later stated as being the yellow squares on a red background. And all of the other flags seem to also be red. Although this site states that the Alaouites were the first to use a red flag in the 17rth century, this is contradicted by other places on the same site. Specifically, the banner of the Moorish Guard of Henry IV of Castille in the 1450's was a white six-pointed star and crescent on a red background. I suppose it can go either way on this, since the most certain information is really only that the eight-pointed interlaced squares emblem was the Almohad favorite. Backgrounds are probably secondary, and it might show much better on white anyway.

The Chernigovian flag looks great, BTW!

The cross with B's looks good too. I just wondered how well it would scale down onto battle shields and such.

[Big_John]

ah ok. maybe we can make it black triangles on an orange flag, and that way we don't have to change the faction colors! thanks for your input, i'll try to find out more about almohad symbols.

you may be right about the byz flag.. i'll take a look at it in-game at some point. here's what the battle flag looks like, 180% zoom:
https://img320.imageshack.us/img320/5237/byz26ve.gif

[WesW]

Ah, historical strategy games, where men can exercise their inner nerds to their heart's content.

Big John and I have been trading private messages regarding the faction flags, but since the discussion has grown here, and some points came up there which I intended to discuss publicly, I have pasted in some sections of our exchanges below, so we can keep everything together here in this thread.

Wes:
You have certainly run with the topic here. If I had known you were so eager, I would have given you more info and specifications.
Most all of the stuff you proposed can be done, like different names for the Egyptians for each campaign, and even different flags, though the flags would be a lot of trouble, actually.

John:
what is difficult about having different flags in different eras? is this anything i can help you with modding? i don't have any experience, but i'm.. eager.

New reply:
Well, in typical CA fashion, some of the flag links are hardcoded to the faction's name, while some are editable in the campaign files. The hardcoded ones are some of the most important, too, like castle and battle flags.
Therefore, in order to change flags from era (campaign) to era, you have to make entirely new factions, and this runs into the 31 faction limitation for each campaign. To have more overall factions than that, you have to make separate unit, building, hero, and faction-specific files for each campaign. Though tedious, it's actually not all that time-consuming to do once you decide upon everything. However, it is something that you shouldn't get into until all the bugs and such are solved, which is why I wouldn't want to do it until after the first release.

Wes:
As far as changing faction names to the local spelling, this was brought up last year when we were formulating the map, factions, etc., and I think that it would cross the line between historical flavor and confusion or clutter. Localized names for units helps to add variety and specificity when you have 20 versions of mounted sergeants, but faction names really wouldn't do anything, because people would just translate them into the English names in their heads and go on as before.

John:
no prob, it's just something i would like personally. you're right that most people would probably be confused by it. btw, is it difficult to mod the faction names? i would definitely like to do that, for my own copy of your mod.

New reply:
No, it's not hard at all. Just open up the Medmod default faction specific file in the Loc\eng folder, and change the names in the various lists. Just be careful not to delete any entries or re-arrange the names.

Quote:
Here are the twelve new factions. The others were basically there to take up provinces which would otherwise be rebels, but I think the system of barring the rebels from constructing units better suits my aim.

FN_ALMORAVID
FN_BULGARIAN
FN_CHERNIGOVIAN or CUMAN
FN_GENOESE
FN_KIEVAN
FN_LATIN
FN_LITHUANIAN
FN_OUTREMER
FN_PORTUGUESE
FN_SCOTTISH
FN_SWEDISH
FN_TEUTONIC

The eras page of the Excel spreadsheet lists provincial ownership by era, though I have made some changes for the Late campaign.

John:
check out my post in the medmod thread. there are really only a few that, imo, need some re-doing. do you have a timeline in mind? do you need graphics from me by a deadline or anything?

New reply:
No, there is no set deadline. I don't want to delay the public release because of improved graphics, but by the time I am ready for that you'll be studying for the LSAT, so there is no rush.

Wes:
That said, I wouldn't mind having the Serbs back in, and I have been researching the Bohemians, though this would be something to discuss in the forums. They wouldn't be in the first release, though, since no more factions can be added without going to era-specific files ala the XL mod.

Wes:
However, your comments have got me thinking about combining Scotland and Ireland into one faction, possibly with Wales too, until they and Ireland are taken over by the English. They would be a Celtic Confederacy, similar to the Genoese. It would stretch things historically, but might be a nice enhancement to gameplay by making English expansion into those lands much harder and more historically accurate.

John:
i have to say i don't like that idea. but, if you want to go down that route, do you have an idea for graphics for a pan-celtic faction? gameplay wise, you probably have a point, but i wouldn't like the ahistoricality of it (but i may be off base in that regard anyway). btw, do the genoese represent a confederacy? i thought they were an independent republic at the time?

New reply:
The Genoese faction, and the Venetians too, are actually an amalgamon of the patchwork of city-states that existed in Italy during the Medieval age. You can check out any map from this period to see what I mean.

The area covered by the game was divided into hundreds of fiefdoms which were at least semi-independent during this time, so most of the factions in the game are given control over areas which were actually vassels or loosely allied. For the central European factions, they are given control of some areas that were completely independent.
This is where you have to step back and remember that this is a game and not a historical sim. I love making the game as historical as possible, but the first priority has to be on gameplay. The game, and many mods, represent this patchwork by starting the factions with one or two provinces and surrounding them with rebels, which I feel is bad for gameplay for multiple reasons.

As for a Celtic confederacy, I would use the graphics from the Viking Campaign for the Celts. With the way things are now, the first thing I do as the English is consolidate my hold on the Isles, so I can concentrate on the continent. Historically, the English often did this as well, which was why the Scots rose up so often. If they managed to defeat the holding force in Northumbria, they could rampage at will until the Continental forces were recalled. As it is, you never have this happen to you because Scotland, Wales and Ireland are isolated and thus easy to pick off.
All three provinces have their ports in the Irish Sea, so you could give them a couple of ships to connect them and you would have a force capable of offering some unified resistance, especially in the Early era, which is the most popular campaign.
Thinking this through has got me wondering about making land bridges to Ireland from Scotland and Wales. Does this sound like a good idea?

[WesW]

Wes, would it hassle you to add the Ilkhanate as well? It would make the late period more interesting.

Unfortunately, I can't add any more new factions for this first release. I don't like splitting up the Mongols, either, since I want them to be strong.
I have decided to add the Chernigovians to the Late campaign, however, and give them Moldavia. What areas did the Ilkhanate control? If they bordered Moldavia, I might combine them to create a more viable faction.

[Russ Mitchell]

Wes, Chernigov was wiped off the map by the Mongols - the only reason the Muscovites ascended to any importance is that they bent the knee to the Mongols, rather than resisting and being wiped out as were (the VASTLY more powerful) Kiev and Chernigov. Chernigov doesn't exist in Late, and when it did exist, it sure as heck wasn't located in Moldavia. That's like putting the Cumans in Burgundy.

[poirot]

The Ilkhanate controlled Persia, Mesopotomia, and eastern syria. The Sultanate of Rum and Armenia were its vassal states. The XL mod has a new province (carved from Syria) called Mesopotomia, and the BKB mod has the IlKhanates as a playable faction in the Late Period. However, BKB had the Ilkhans as a Muslim faction and the Golden Horde as a Pagan faction; while that is true to some extent, the Ilkhans actually persecuted Muslims, while like another forumer pointed out, the Golden Horde after Berke adapted Islam as its state religion. Oh, the Oriental troops (ex. Chinese infantry) should be with the Ilkhans, because Kublai allied with the Ilkhans, while the Ilkhans fought constantly with the neighboring Golden Horde.

[Aenlic]

Interesting stuff. Thanks, Wes.

On the issue of putting Chernigovians in Moldavia, I have to agree with Russ. However, putting the Cumans there instead is perfectly acceptable, I think. That area was controlled by the Cumans after they pushed out the Pechenegs, from about the beginning of the early era in the game until they were absorbed by Wallachia, NE Bulgaria, and the farthest SW expansion of the Horde territories, sometime in the middle of the late era. Graphics for the Cumans present a problem, though. I haven't been able to find anything specifically Cuman for them. Since they were a Turkic tribe in origin rather than a Rus or Slav tribe, it makes finding a good flag harder.

For your proposed Celtic Confederacy, which I like, a symbol which might be used is the Celtic Cross. The Celtic Catholic Church certainly had as great or greater an influence in those areas than the Roman Catholic Church early on. That would be one unifying force which might create such confederation. Had the Synod of Whitby in Northumbria in 663 gone the other way, England might have gone with the Celtic Rite instead of the Roman, and the history of Europe would be very different today.

Land bridges for Scotland to Ireland to Wales would seem like a good idea if you do go with a Celtic Confederation. As it stands now, Ireland pretty much just sits there undisturbed and non-hostile througout the game in other mods with an Irish faction. You could consider the land bridges to be the Isle of Man, too. Which might open up the possibilty of using the triskelion for the Celtic Confederation symbol, though I prefer the Celtic Cross.

[Big_John]

russ and aenlic are correct. the principality of chernigov was essentially destroyed in 1239 by the horde. they did exist at the early and high starting points. on your map, wes, it should start with chernigov and ryzan in early and, technically, just chernigov in high. gone in late. though, i don't know what the faction slot considerations are.

as for graphics, so far i've completed the byzantines, the almoravids, the latin empire, chernigovians, kievans and the burgundians. imo, everything except the battle flags looks pretty good. i think i need to make some of the battle flags more schematic. but, what do you guys think (see below)? are they trash? if you have any ideas for improving them, i'm all ears! here are some prelim byzantine graphics in-game. some of the pics are of VHs faction graphics (using the XL mod), for comparison.

campmap flags.
https://img59.imageshack.us/img59/69...board019tw.jpg
http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/4...board024pf.jpg
http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/5...board035fo.jpg

serbs and armenians from XL for comparison.
http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/2...board043nj.jpg
http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/1...board059da.jpg

custom-battle shields.
http://img111.imageshack.us/img111/4...board071xw.jpg

battle flags; my byz with the venetians from XL.
https://img259.imageshack.us/img259/...board018lz.jpg
https://img259.imageshack.us/img259/...board028za.jpg


i'm not really looking for responses to the faction graphic choice itself. i have no problem making/using the double headed eagle that the byz adopted after retaking constantinople. but what i'm really asking about is the quality.


wes, if you implement a 'celtic confederacy' faction, i think aenlic's idea of a celtic cross is as good as any.

[Aenlic]

Looks great, Big John. The Byzantine graphic scaled very well.

[bozkirsovalyesi]

medieval great turk emperors flags


golden horde: (1242-1503) 1242-1262 pagan ... 1262-1503 muslim




avars: (565-835) pagan




timurlu: (1370-1512) muslim




gazneli: (1001-1187) muslim




harzemshah: (1097-1231) muslim




hazar: (620-965) 620-800 pagan .... 800-965 jews




karahanli: (848-1040) 848-924 pagan 924-1040 muslim





great selcuklu: (1040-1157) muslim




anatolia selcuklu: (1075-1308) muslim




ottomans: only early periot (1299-1362) muslim




in medieval turks: (only medieval 476-1453 ... only west asia - europe - north africa)



east europe

sabars 503-568 (north caucasia-lower volga river basins-don river basins) .........pagan
avars 565-835 (hungary-romania-austria-ukraina-slovakia) ..........pagan
bulgars or ogurs 584-665 (ukraina-don river basin) .........pagan
tuna bulgars 661-923 (later slav faction 923-1018) (balkans)........661-864 pagan.. ..864-1018 ortodox
volga bulgars 7. centry-1237 (middle volga river basin) ........pagan.. 921-1237 muslim

hazars 620-965 (north caucasia-lower volga river basin-don river basins-east ukraina) ......... pagan.. ..800-965 jews
peçeneks 889-1091 (ukraina-romania-balkans).......... pagan
kumans 1054-1242 (or polovtsi or fallben) (north türkistan-north caucasia-lower volga river basin-don river basins-ukraina-romania) .........pagan
altinordu 1242-1503 (or golden horde. not mongol.. turk faction) (east europe) 1242-1262 pagan ......1262-1503 muslim
kazan 1437-1556 (old volga bulgarians) (middle volga river basin) .......muslim

[Big_John]

thanks for the info bozkirsovalyesi, that's a big list!

for the first release, i don't think wes will be changing the muslim setup excet to add the almoravids (in early). once wes moves to era specific maps (as far as i understand) he'll be able to implement more factions. what i would like to do is have two era-specific turk factions, the selçuk sultanate of rum in early and high, and the ottomans in late. i want to split the egyptians into 3 factions, the fatimid caliphate in early, the ayyubid sultanate in high, and the mamluk bahriyya sultante in late.

i don't know if wes will be able to do that, but that's what i'm hoping for.

[Eternal Champion]

This all is quite facinating and can hardly wait to see the finished product.

@ Big John - Your graphics look good, keep up the good work.

@ Wes - I also like your idea of a Celtic Confederacy as this would significantly enhance game play. I also agree that enhancing game play is what mods are truly all about. The real genius of a mod, if you will, comes with the game balancing and AI enhancement of each one. This is the real magic for my money.

[Big_John]

thanks for the compliments ont he graphics guys!

i will endeavor to keep it up.

[WesW]

OMG, the details just never end with this mod. Expect a big update about Monday.

There are some aspects of the new factions that weren't finished by the group that fashioned them last year, and I could really use some help from those of you with specific knowledge of these groups.
Basically, the research members couldn't find info on appropriate titles for the faction offices for these factions:

FN_ALMORAVID
FN_BULGARIAN
FN_CHERNIGOVIAN
FN_CUMAN
FN_GENOESE
FN_KIEVAN
FN_LATIN
FN_LITHUANIAN
FN_SCOTTISH
FN_TEUTONIC

The Celts will need new names, too.

There are also some factions with no famous kings and/or heroes. You really need to have historically accurate ones to begin each campaign, and a couple of heroes would be nice, too. E, H and L refer to Early, High and Late eras.

Those with no famous kings are:
Almoravid (E)
Genoese (All 3)
Outremer (H&L)
Bulgarian (H&L)
Chernigovian (E&H)
Cuman (L)

Those with no heroes are:
Novgorods (E)
Teutons (H&L)
Bulgarians (H&L)
Chernigovian (E&H)
Cuman (L)

Also, I have changed the Admiralty to the Repository, a place to store such items as the crown jewels along with the royal treasury. It's benefits are Acumen and Loyalty. (The Admiralty was obviously supposed to benefit ships, but I guess CA couldn't get it to work properly.)
I don't have any historical names for this title, other than a reference to the Tower of London for the English. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

[Aenlic]

Now that's a project I can sink my teeth into that doesn't require graphics skills! I'll see what I can dig up for you, Wes. Looking forward to the new update!