Roman Rhegium and Taras?

[Danzifuge]

i just ran into some sources that state that rhegium and taras were in roman hands by 272 b.c.

(note the part "282 b.c... romans enter rhegium")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Heraclea#Background

(note the part "275 b.c... fall of magna graecia three years later")
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Beneventum_%28275_BC%29

(note the part "He had scarcely embarked before Tarentum surrendered to the Romans (272 BC).''
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_War#Battle_of_Beneventum

for these reasons i believe taras and rhegium should be in roman hands at the start of the scenario. if for nothing but historic reasons, also because it will speed up the inevitable conflict between rome and carthage in sicily. also due to the ai's almost unwavering tendency to concentrate almost entirely on eleutheroi towns, taras seems to remain in epirote hands for much too long.

EDIT: on second thought perhaps moving the start date to 276 b.c. may be more interesting as it allows the plausibility of a historic pyrrhic war and gives land in sicily to epirus, so they'll have to start fighting the carthaginians right away.

[johnhughthom]

Tarentum fell toward the end of 272 after the death of Pyhruss(sp?) I believe, so a Roman Taras would mean no Epirotes probably.

[Danzifuge]

Tarentum fell toward the end of 272 after the death of Pyhruss(sp?) I believe, so a Roman Taras would mean no Epirotes probably.
yeah i could not find sources for the time of year it occured, but it seems to me if it fell at the start date of the campaign it should be in roman hands at the beginning than remain in epirote hands for 20+ years, which is what happens when the ai controls both factions. if the eb mod team truely wanted a pyrrhic led epirus they would start the campaign at 278 b.c. or so, rather than the date of his death. starting the campaign at 278 b.c. would also make controlling epirus a bit more challenging as well as increases their wealth as they would also control territory in sicily.

i've also noticed in a source that the war with carthage ended in 276 b.c. why then do they start at war with them in the campaign?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhus_of_Epirus#Ruler_of_Sicily

another historical inaccuracy i find here is from 275 - 272 b.c. pyrrhus invaded and successfully defeated macedon. although antigonus still controlled the coastal towns, the allocation and size of provinces in the campaign seem to reflect a fully intact macedon.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigonus_II_Gonatas#Antigonus_against_Pyrrhus

if thessalia and aitolia were reduced a bit making room for a larger epeiros (province) this would be more historically accurate as epirote lands traditionally extended into the the central and southern mountains of greece and also would reflect the conquest by pyrrhus. thessalia was essentially a strip of land along the coast that separated the macedonian homeland from attica. it extended inland a bit but not as far as into central greece as it is now.

also i would split the macedonian homeland into two parts, one being the western half controlled by epirus (see above source, note the possession of aegae, very near pella) and the eastern half being reduced a bit in the north giving part of it to odrysai. the city in the eastern half could be phillipi or abdera.

this is of course all just my opinion but the various sources i mentioned as well as sources of maps of the ancient world seem to support it.
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/Articles/Maps/images/Map_Ancient_Macedonia_800pix.htm
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/Articles/Maps/images/Map_Ancient_Northern_Greece_800pix.htm

[keravnos]

EB starts at the beginning of 272 BCE. Romani conquered Taras at the end of 272 BCE.

[General Appo]

It´s a bit sad that the Romans often struggle to obtain Taras and Rhegium, and so seldom becomes the great power it became in history, but to me it´s worth it, as Epeiros without Taras would be quite boring. Besides, in my Epeiros campaign I shipped Pyrrhos to Italy and allowed him to deal with the Romans once and for all.

Edit: Just thought of something, the Romans did send a garrison to Rhegium 280 bc (the one that rebelled and exists in EB) so one could say "The Romans enter Rhegium 280 BC". Of course, 282 is a bit wrong.

[d'Arthez]

iEDIT: on second thought perhaps moving the start date to 278 b.c. may be more interesting as it allows the plausibility of a historic pyrrhic war and gives land in sicily to epirus, so they'll have to start fighting the carthaginians right away.
It creates other problems. Mostly Makedon and KH in a historical sense.

[Danzifuge]

It creates other problems. Mostly Makedon and KH in a historical sense.
i see what you mean. i just read the accounts of the invasions of the ptolies and gauls in macedonia. macedonia would be had pressed to recover under those circumstances within the limits of the game as the ai or even the human player. however 276 b.c. would still be a feasible date, as it coincides with the retaking of the macedonian throne and all of sicily but the most western half would still be in epirote hands. as the war between macedon and epirus didnt happen yet, this would also free up a hand for epirus to fight the romans and carthaginians. the macedonians would also be free to concentrate on the greeks. one or two stacks of gallic warriors in the macedonian homeland would also be an appropriate challenge for them.

[Disciple of Tacitus]

Please take no offense whatsoever to what I am about to say.

Please do not quote Wikipedia as your source and expect the EB Develop Team to come running to answer your questions.

That said - it is my duty as a member of the EBF Council of Ten - you have brought up some good questions in a more then civil manner and the conversation is refreshingly civil.

If I may now put my two cents in, I don't know enough about the time period/area to give you any answers, but am learning a bit from the ongoing discussion.

From a Western Civilization standpoint, it is interesting how all focus at this time is on the up and coming Rome when so much action is going on in Greece/Asia Minor.

From your posts, I am taking it that you would like to see a better positioned Epirus? I am most interested b/c I tried an Epirus Campaign and it didn't go so well and I didn't like the units I started with and I wanted to play Sab'Yn and Rome and Lusotannan and ... well, you get the picture.

Also, it seems to me that most Epirus human players head East. Why not West? Any comments on that... anyone?

[Strategos Alexandros]

I went both ways in my campaign but the west failed miserably until the romans took Taras and it revolted, giving me a shiny new army of Samnite heavy infantry and Iphikratean phalanx.

[Moros]

According to my historical atlasses, my university course on Roman histroy, and everything I've ever read about phyrrus and Rome say that Taras indeed fell to roman hands in 272 BC. Rhegium even later.

[Disciple of Tacitus]

I went both ways in my campaign but the west failed miserably


Ahhh ... me too.



until the romans took Taras and it revolted, giving me a shiny new army of Samnite heavy infantry and Iphikratean phalanx.

hmmm. didn't get that. Just a constant rain of heavily armed romans falling from the north. As you know - not fun.

[Strategos Alexandros]

They kept using a single depleted unit of slingers as garrison - I let them retake it twice so that I had nearly a full stack for free!:smash:

[Dhampir]

When you take Taras as the Romans, the script informs you that Rhegium was in the hands of Roman rebels or something like that.

[Korlon]

Also, it seems to me that most Epirus human players head East. Why not West? Any comments on that... anyone?

I would bet most Epeiros campaigners would like the Romans to get stronger before they finally attack. In my case, I went east simply because it's much more profitable taking the Aegean than the Adriatic. Though, by the time I take over the entirety of Greece, I usually have enough mnai to recruit two armies and take both at the same time. In my new campaign, I recruited a few phalanxes and hoplites to just hold Taras and it did hold. Now I just sent a full stack to Taras and it's laying siege to Capua.

And like it was said, changing the starting campaign date makes it a little iffy for the presence of certain factions.

[konny]

Also, it seems to me that most Epirus human players head East. Why not West? Any comments on that... anyone?

The only successfull campaign I had with Epeiros was when concentrating on Italy & Sicily first. From my Roman campaigns I knew that I would swim in money once I controll Bella Italia, and as Epeiros you get everything you need from Magna Graecia plus Samnites and Camillan Hastati from Central Italy. I was even able to send a smaller force back to Epeiros during the war in Italy to reconquer one of the two towns I had lost to the Maks. After that I had enough money and men and blitz Greece and Makedonia.

[Hax]

That's odd. I always kinda let go of Italia and focused everything on Makedonia. Metalleutikon Kentron in Pella, hell yeah.

[d'Arthez]

You can do both. But it is probably best Mnai wise to conquer at least Pella and Demetrias (doable in the first turn), before paying any attention to the Romans. Dalminion and to a lesser extent Segestica can later serve as income enhancers with mines.

It must work quite well, when you are conquering all the cities on the Adriatic with ports.

Not going to try though, as I am waiting for 1.1

[Irishmafia2020]

On my very first EB game ever, I started out as Epiros (I like their culture and starting position) and I destroyed the Macedonian faction on turn three since all of their FM's were engaged in fighting me. I quit the campaign in disgust because I like to keep all of my defeated foes alive as pets in single provinces... Needless to say, the next several campaigns I have played have convinced me that my quick victory was a fluke, and now I am itching to play a proper Epirote campaign... And by the way, you can always mod in Epirote control of a Sicilian town by using Show_cursorstat and relocating the rebel garrison out of the town, and an Epirote FM into it for the start of the game. I won't go into details beyond that, but the only file you would have to mod would be the Desc_strat, and you can search the mod forums for more info (as I did to learn how in the first place)...

[Danzifuge]

Please take no offense whatsoever to what I am about to say.

Please do not quote Wikipedia as your source and expect the EB Develop Team to come running to answer your questions.

That said - it is my duty as a member of the EBF Council of Ten - you have brought up some good questions in a more then civil manner and the conversation is refreshingly civil.

If I may now put my two cents in, I don't know enough about the time period/area to give you any answers, but am learning a bit from the ongoing discussion.

From a Western Civilization standpoint, it is interesting how all focus at this time is on the up and coming Rome when so much action is going on in Greece/Asia Minor.

From your posts, I am taking it that you would like to see a better positioned Epirus? I am most interested b/c I tried an Epirus Campaign and it didn't go so well and I didn't like the units I started with and I wanted to play Sab'Yn and Rome and Lusotannan and ... well, you get the picture.

Also, it seems to me that most Epirus human players head East. Why not West? Any comments on that... anyone?
Yeah i had considered the reaction to consistently quoting wikipedia, but in my experience most everything in there about history (not related to religion or nationalism) was pretty accurate when crossreferenced with other sources.

and yes it is my opinion that epirus should be strengthened. i'm sure most hardcore players here could tear up the romans and subdue the greeks simultaneously, but then again those same hardcore players probably could do the same with any faction.

the main issue i'm findig here is that by 272 b.c. pyrrhus had whittled the macedonians down to but a few coastal cities and had actually taken the macedonian throne (but not commanded it). i have no desire to start macedonia off in such a piss-poor position, but if the start date were moved back to say 276 b.c. we could still have a united macedon (the throne was recently retaken) and epirus could gain territory in sicily to allow realistic engagements with the carthaginians and romans. the problem with 272 b.c. is mostly that historically the pyrrhic wars were over and pyrrhus was about to be killed by a roof shingle and/or decapitation.

btw heres a separate reference that seems to confirm the wikipedia entries
http://www.e-classics.com/pyrrhus.htm

as for the discussion about rhegium being in roman hands, i admit after further study the situation appears that making rhegium a roman city would be inappropriate considering only a garrison was sent there to protect the city (281 b.c.) subsequently, these thugs would later usurp power and ally with the messanan rulers (some merc thugs). only after pyrrhus death (272 b.c.) would the romans restore order back to the people of rhegium and punish the roman soldiers.
http://books.google.com/books?id=yFoGAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA948&lpg=PA948&dq=decius+rhegium&source=web&ots=t1jz4fEo61&sig=Z_l4l4sQrHlxnKUcgQVbCCd-tho&hl=en
the only discrepencies i've noted is the date the garrison arrived in rhegium, 281 b.c., is noted as 282 b.c. in the wikipedia source. and the date of pyrrhus' death, almost universally noted as 272 b.c., is said to be 271 b.c.

[Danzifuge]

And by the way, you can always mod in Epirote control of a Sicilian town by using Show_cursorstat and relocating the rebel garrison out of the town, and an Epirote FM into it for the start of the game. I won't go into details beyond that, but the only file you would have to mod would be the Desc_strat, and you can search the mod forums for more info (as I did to learn how in the first place)...
i think youre missing my point. if i were to mod epirus into sicily, i would also have to mod the start date to be historically accurate. if i mod the start date, i would then have to mod the entire map. these are things i know next to nothing about. i'm not demanding these changes be made in 1.1, i'm simply suggesting for historical accuracy and more historical fun for epirote players that pyrrhus, one of the three greatest generals of the ancient world, be allowed to fight his wars in italy and sicily historically and not start the game when he dies from a "roofing accident", historically.

i may have gone overboard, historically speaking of course.

[antisocialmunky]

I think XGM has something like that set up. You should try it.

Search for Extended Greek Mod.