View Full Version : removed units
General Aetius
09-25-2008, 09:38
What units which I can get in custom game were removed from the campaign factions? and why, if anyone still knows, were they removed? Thanks.:beam:
general aetius
None. Its the other way round. Factions have access to more units in the campaign game compared to what they can select on the custom battle. This was because we've just got so many units that it swamped the custom battle unit selection screen. Of course, make sure that when you play custom battles you use the EB multiplayer-shortcut and when you play the campaign game you use the EB singleplayer-shortcut of the trivial script.
Foot
I think he means the iberian armoured assault infantry and their goidilic kin...
Three units had their recruitment disabled on the campaign map: the Dosidataskeli (Vasci armoured shock infantry), the Dubosaverlacica (Ebherni armoured shock infantry) and the hammer-wielding Ordmalica (Goidilic shock infantry). The Dosidataskeli were removed not because their existence was questioned, but because it was a royal unit of a minor tribe and hence would have been very uncommon. As far as I know, no reason has been given for the removal of the Goidelic units, but someone outside of the EB team campaigned for their removal because he could not find the evidence used in their conception.
General Aetius
09-25-2008, 13:14
That is kind of sad:no: those Goidilic shock infantry are the only reason I would ever want Ireland. anyway thanks for the help:beam:
General Aetius
No Dosidataskeli? Fewer Goidilic units in Ireland?
Damn! I've been playing as the Lusotannan for nothing now!
No Dosidataskeli? Fewer Goidilic units in Ireland?
Damn! I've been playing as the Lusotannan for nothing now!
I feel the same way. I've abandoned my Lusotannan campaign now.
Can anyone make a save-compatible mod that allows them to be recruited again? I don't have near the modding skills required.
I think they should make a return in EBII, but just make their regeneration rate extremely long, or just make them only recruitable as rare mercenaries. Same with the Irish dudes.
Grriffon
09-26-2008, 01:11
I'm also pretty sad the super heavy iberians and the awesome irish are gone. someone send help!
Mithridates VI Eupator
09-26-2008, 12:07
I think they should make a return in EBII, but just make their regeneration rate extremely long, or just make them only recruitable as rare mercenaries. Same with the Irish dudes.
That's a very good idea! I thought they were a fun and very good-looking unit, but spamming them destroys the elite "feeling" about them.
If they were, as Ludens says, a royal guard unit, perhaps their number thus could be limited to one or maybe two at a time. If the EB-team plan to implement limits for some units, that is.
Jaywalker-Jack
09-26-2008, 16:16
I'm sure it's possible to re-enable them, I don't know how to do it myself but I imagine it just involves tweaking a file or two. I doubt the units were removed as such, just switched off in the code.
Maybe one of the more seasoned DIY modders around here can advise?
EDIT: Zeibek, as far as I know altering unit recruitment for a faction is save-game compatable, in other words don't delete your Lusotanna saves just yet.
Celtic_Punk
09-27-2008, 00:52
yes id also like to know how to re-enable all the goidlic units. I started a goidlic campaing (as casse) and now that i hear i cant use all the units its kind of a waste.
whatthehell6
09-27-2008, 01:15
To re-enable those units, Dosidataskeli and Dubosaverlacica and Ordmalica, simply open the file
-EB->Data->export_descr_buildings.txt
-Ctrl & F to search
-Put in "dosidataskeli" and search for it
-At the end of the line where it comes up you'll see "and hidden_resource not_here"
-Remove all instances of that and save file.
Repeat for "ordmhornaght" and "duboGaiscaocha". Though I'm not sure if this is save game compatible, someone else may know that. (I think it is though).
Hope that helps. :2thumbsup:
Repeat for "ordmhornaght" and "duboGaiscaocha". Though I'm not sure if this is save game compatible, someone else may know that. (I think it is though).
It is. Don't forget to make a back-up though, just in case.
:wall:
just because they want to incude something that to you is ahistorical pivately, doesn't mean you should stop them, or get pissed. their choice, not yours.
just because they want to incude something that to you is ahistorical pivately, doesn't mean you should stop them, or get pissed. their choice, not yours.
What the hell are you talking about?
What the hell are you talking about?
I responded directly to you're last post, where you showed clear disgust at what some players were doing. all I said was don't bother. (the head banging smilie):inquisitive:
no need to be rude here BTW.
I responded directly to you're last post, where you showed clear disgust at what some players were doing. all I said was don't bother. (the head banging smilie):inquisitive:
no need to be rude here BTW.
I meant to say that your English wasn't clear.
Edit- And this is a pointless discussion until someone brings up sources. So I'll wait.
Sources proving that you can change what we altered? As this is what this discussion is about. I don't think those sources exist.
Foot
Sources proving that you can change what we altered? As this is what this discussion is about. I don't think those sources exist.
Foot
Okay then. I mean, you know what I'm talking about, but okay.
Yeah, I do know what your talking about. But hijacking a thread where someone is asking for help is not really fair. Agreed?
Foot
Yeah, I do know what your talking about. But hijacking a thread where someone is asking for help is not really fair. Agreed?
Foot
I wouldn't exactly call it hijacking until this point :P Anyways, yeah. Not so important right now.
Olaf The Great
10-03-2008, 00:54
Ethiopian Axemen.
Koinion Hellenon Cavalry Bodyguard.
Koinion Hellenon Spartan Bodyguard(The -real- one)
"Pontic" Eastern Bodyguard(The Javelin throwing half Cataphracts, I liked them)
Replaced Goildilac units(only models and skins slightly changed)
The entire Germanic old Roster.
Badly bugged rebel general/officer?(I fought a orange and black ninja in thermon as KH in 7.2
There, all the missing units :D
Feels good man
Ethiopian Axemen.
Koinion Hellenon Cavalry Bodyguard.
Koinion Hellenon Spartan Bodyguard(The -real- one)
"Pontic" Eastern Bodyguard(The Javelin throwing half Cataphracts, I liked them)
Replaced Goildilac units(only models and skins slightly changed)
The entire Germanic old Roster.
Badly bugged rebel general/officer?(I fought a orange and black ninja in thermon as KH in 7.2
There, all the missing units :D
Feels good man
Dont forget the African Armored Elephants!
Dont forget the African Armored Elephants!
they had those? when?
Crinthian hoplites were gone since .72, unless you were referring to 1.0 onward. IIRC, disposed of since the generic hoplite negated the need for them.
gamegeek2
10-05-2008, 20:24
yeah, they should either be super-rare mercenaries, etc.
Idea for the Dubosaverlacica: triggered by a reform when the Lusotanaan conquer Iberia or after a certain time; the technology for them only arrived after the Vasci tribes invaded Hibernia. And the evidence DOES exist, just that there is only 1 suit ever found.
Spendios
10-05-2008, 20:28
Dont forget the African Armored Elephants!
We never had african armored elephants
MarcusAureliusAntoninus
10-05-2008, 20:30
IIRC, back before EB had its own elephants and the vanilla elephants were used there was an armored african elephant.
The Corinthian Hoplite wasn't really removed. It was just slightly reskinned/restated and then renamed the Hoplitai.
Carthaginian General
10-05-2008, 20:40
But why isn't there an Armored African Elephant? It makes no sense that the Ptolemaioi wouldn't put armour on the largest elephant in the world... especially when the Seleucids did... I mean, there's no logical answer to why AFAIK. They could afford it, they had access to the Bush elephants and the Seleucids do ingame. :inquisitive:
Also, is it just me or is the Bush elephant smaller than the Seleucid/Indian ones? why is this?
Possibly because they never did historically? I do know that African Bush elephants are notoriously hard to tame, so I am actually surprised that they are in the game at all.
Carthaginian General
10-05-2008, 21:08
Possibly because they never did historically? I do know that African Bush elephants are notoriously hard to tame, so I am actually surprised that they are in the game at all.
Me too, but since they're in... I mean... it's kinda weird. Why would they never use armour on them when they've managed to more-or-less tame them? I'm not arguing for/against their inclusion, I just think it's weird that they don't have any armour on them when the Seleucids and Indians do.
https://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee138/tls5669/128.jpg
I wish Carthage could recruit this unit
Carthaginian General
10-06-2008, 00:33
https://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee138/tls5669/128.jpg
I wish Carthage could recruit this unit
Carthage recruiting them isn't possible, since they didn't use Bush elephants, but the Ptolemaioi could realistically have used them. So I'd say ''I wish Ptolemaioi could recruit this unit'' instead :P
]Also, is it just me or is the Bush elephant smaller than the Seleucid/Indian ones? why is this?
these elephants are either forest elephants Loxodonta cyclotis, or maybe the extinct north african elephant (a subspiecies of the bush elephant), Loxodonta africana pharaohensis, not to be confused with classical bush elephants, Loxodonta africana. they are supposed to be smaller. and yes, they are probably more readily trained than the bush elephants, but still more dificult to train, and smaller than, the indian elephant, Elephus maximus. now, I did hear of the existance of the Syrian Elephant, Elephus maximus indicus, but its a misnomer; they weren't really syrian.
yes, this is some of the stuff I have to know.
Carthaginian General
10-06-2008, 01:09
these elephants are either forest elephants Loxodonta cyclotis, or maybe the extinct north african elephant (a subspiecies of the bush elephant), Loxodonta africana pharaohensis, not to be confused with classical bush elephants, Loxodonta africana. they are supposed to be smaller. and yes, they are probably more readily trained than the bush elephants, but still more dificult to train, and smaller than, the indian elephant, Elephus maximus. now, I did hear of the existance of the Syrian Elephant, Elephus maximus indicus, but its a misnomer; they weren't really syrian.
yes, this is some of the stuff I have to know.
I used to discuss this stuff a few years ago, so no problem with the ''have to know'' part :P
Indeed, the name of them (Indicus) implies that they were Indian, like you said. As far as I know the Ptolemaioi didn't have access to the kind of North African elephant the Carthaginians used, but I don't know. This means that they either imported Indian elephants only, which has been disproven, or they went to Ethiopia and retrieved the Elephants from there, like it happens to say in this description:
https://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r21/Salem1234/ABE.jpg
And that's my question. Why do African Bush Elephants have worse stats than the Indian ones, and why aren't they armoured? This is kinda like making a copy better than the original, if you know what I mean. No rephrasings, no dodging, no excuses, just tell me why they're worse than the Indian ones and aren't armoured, please :yes:
Oh, and they're not smaller than the Indian ones. But they're strangely enough, not larger either. Guess it's got something to do with coding.
https://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r21/Salem1234/ABE2.jpg
MeinPanzer
10-06-2008, 01:19
Me too, but since they're in... I mean... it's kinda weird. Why would they never use armour on them when they've managed to more-or-less tame them? I'm not arguing for/against their inclusion, I just think it's weird that they don't have any armour on them when the Seleucids and Indians do.
We don't hear about either the Ptolemies or the Indians armouring their elephants in historical sources.
Carthaginian General
10-06-2008, 01:20
We don't hear about either the Ptolemies or the Indians armouring their elephants in historical sources.
So why are there Indian armoured elephants? And this still doesn't answer my other question, why are Bush elephants worse than Indian ones?
MeinPanzer
10-06-2008, 04:03
So why are there Indian armoured elephants? And this still doesn't answer my other question, why are Bush elephants worse than Indian ones?
I didn't think there were, but if there are, they are not supported by any evidence that I am aware of.
Carthaginian General
10-06-2008, 07:08
I didn't think there were, but if there are, they are not supported by any evidence that I am aware of.
There we go. Now my other question remains. Why are Bush elephants worse than Indian ones?
Gododdin O'Ceallagh
10-06-2008, 09:46
The largest African Elephants are from farther south in East and Southern Africa, the desert Elelphants of Namibia being the biggest. The Ptolemies African Elephants were known to be smaller than the Indian Elephants used by the Seleucids, I have read this in some descriptions of the Battle of Raphia.
GO'C
Carthaginian General, chill. Sometimes it just takes a while for us to get there.
The Ptolemies trained both the African bush (larger than the Indian species) and forest elephants, but seemed to have overwhelmingly used the latter. Both were available south of Egypt and, in fact, Ptolemais-Theron was founded as an outpost for the men assigned in herding elephants for the Ptolemaic elephant corps.
The Ptolemies don't seem to have used fully armored elephants like the Seleukids did, but they possibly used semi-armored versions with the legs covered in laminated plates. Why not fully-armored versions then? Maybe cost, maybe the heat of Egypt, or maybe temperament of the two African variety of elephants compared to the Indian. To be honest, we just don't know other than we have no evidence of them being fully armored.
As to why the bush elephants have weaker stats than the Indian is something that I don't know. I imagine they shouldn't, but if that is the case that they do then it is probably a mistake in the stats.
Carthaginian General
10-06-2008, 12:00
Carthaginian General, chill. Sometimes it just takes a while for us to get there.
The Ptolemies trained both the African bush (larger than the Indian species) and forest elephants, but seemed to have overwhelmingly used the latter. Both were available south of Egypt and, in fact, Ptolemais-Theron was founded as an outpost for the men assigned in herding elephants for the Ptolemaic elephant corps.
The Ptolemies don't seem to have used fully armored elephants like the Seleukids did, but they possibly used semi-armored versions with the legs covered in laminated plates. Why not fully-armored versions then? Maybe cost, maybe the heat of Egypt, or maybe temperament of the two African variety of elephants compared to the Indian. To be honest, we just don't know other than we have no evidence of them being fully armored.
As to why the bush elephants have weaker stats than the Indian is something that I don't know. I imagine they shouldn't, but if that is the case that they do then it is probably a mistake in the stats.
Excuse me, I'm not picking on the EB team or anything :2thumbsup:
Hmm. Makes sense that the heat affected their choice. Don't think we've heard of Ptolemaic Kataphracts either for that reason. But oh well, doesn't matter. The legs being covered sounds quite plausible but I guess there's no evidence for that either. And even then, I wouldn't expect the Seleucids to have used fully armoured elephants that much either. Heat and the cost of assembling such armour for the rather stretched Seleucids... nah. Guess that's why they cost so much.
Guess I'll modify their stats a bit and make a backup of the original when I'll want to play multiplayer then, while waiting for some official to correct this. I gave them 66 Charge, 3 points more than the Armoured Indian Elephants, and 8 Attack, 3 more than the AIE, representing their larger tusks.
Carthaginian General
10-06-2008, 12:36
Sorry for the double post, but how can I overwrite the stats already there? it just refuses to change and goes back to default everytime I modify the stats.
We have evidence of hemikataphraktoi elephants (just the leg coverings) in terracotta by the Seleukids. How much the Seleukids used fully armored elephants is not something that can really be known. It can be assumed that the there was probably at least a small portion that would take the field, but definitely not the whole elephant corps.
See the frequent issues about EDU changes.
Carthaginian General
10-06-2008, 17:52
See the frequent issues about EDU changes.
Thanks a lot! :)
Tartaros
10-06-2008, 19:10
polybius writhes about the ptol/sele elephants at the battle of raphia
#84
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/5*.html
the ptol loose against the sele
but no one really know why: if it was physical - than the indians must be somehow stronger or better armoured, smell - probably they were under drugs (for example: hannibal used alcohol) or simple the pure numbers.
it´s more interessting that the sele elephant victory doesn´t have any result in the main battle like 275 against the galatians
MeinPanzer
10-07-2008, 00:45
We have evidence of hemikataphraktoi elephants (just the leg coverings) in terracotta by the Seleukids. How much the Seleukids used fully armored elephants is not something that can really be known. It can be assumed that the there was probably at least a small portion that would take the field, but definitely not the whole elephant corps.
So you interpret the striations on the Myrina war-elephant figurines' legs as armour? If so, what do you take the very similar-looking folds around the back of the head to be?
And would you be able to say which sources you've drawn on for armoured Indian elephants?
Yeah, I would say so. The striations on the neck could probably be considered armor as well considering the presence of the carotid arteries and jugular veins. One solid thrust there and you would have your elephant bleeding out on you.
As far as the fully armored Indian elephant goes, the partial terracotta published by Sekunda in his book on the Seleukid army is the best visual piece we have (also the only one I know of). There is also the mention in the Macc. books of an armored elephant - I believe during the battle at Beth Zechariah
MeinPanzer
10-07-2008, 01:31
As far as the fully armored Indian elephant goes, the partial terracotta published by Sekunda in his book on the Seleukid army is the best visual piece we have (also the only one I know of). There is also the mention in the Macc. books of an armored elephant - I believe during the battle at Beth Zechariah
Oh, sorry, I misunderstood. I thought when you were talking about armoured Indian elephants, you meant elephants being used in the Indian army, i.e. under the Mauryans or Shungas.
Yeah, there's that fragmentary bronze figurine that Sekunda publishes (also in Scullard's book), the mention in 1 Maccabees about Beth Zechariah, and also Livy's description of the Seleucid elephants at Magnesia as having frontlets; I don't think there are any others, unless I'm mistaken.
Ha, that makes sense. I was thinking to myself for a moment about whether you were really MP for a moment. :laugh4:
Ah, bronze, not terracotta though. My mistake on that.
gamegeek2
10-07-2008, 02:29
:focus:
The Dosidataskeli were the inspiration for the almost equally rare Thorakitai Agematos Basilikou, who were also recruited by the Seleukids in extremely small numbers (about 1,000 would be fielded at a time). I know those have historical documenting, but their source should be shown in the game if at all possible.
I recommend a reduction in their numbers, to maybe even the size of a general's bodyguard. In fact, why not make them regional bodyguards for Cantabria/Asturia, and be rare mercenaries. Ditto on the Dubosaverlacica.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.