Changing City's Names ?????

[Empire*Of*Media]

greetings !!
i wanted for example , im phalavan, and took for example Alexandreia-Eschet, so i want to put a historical name for it! (as you know those names except Alexanderia in egypt, named again with their original names or renamed).
so how can i change names of settlements ?!! i dont know modding but if the console can do something like this , and you guide me!! i will thank you a lot !!

[Ludens]

I am afraid it's not a good idea to do this in EB. The EB script requires the city names to remain unchanged.

[Ca Putt]

Will be possible and even scripted to some extent in EB2 :)

[Empire*Of*Media]

I am afraid it's not a good idea to do this in EB. The EB script requires the city names to remain unchanged.

you mean there is no way ?!! please i want to know how ?!!!
i dont like the cities started with "Alexander" or any Greek name while the city is Aryan and not even in short ruled Selukids !!
if anyone knows, please inform & guide me, he'll have my thanks & Regards !!

[cahtush]

Will be possible and even scripted to some extent in EB2 :)

Oooh...
Care to "leak" some more inside information on the subject? :P

[Moros]

Oooh...
Care to "leak" some more inside information on the subject? :P
That's not inside information. Some settlements will change names depending on owners.

Empire Of Kurdistan-Medya : it is possible to change the names, but that gives a disfunctional game (due to references to settlement names in important scripts). In other words one should not do it, if one wants a working game.

[Empire*Of*Media]

That's not inside information. Some settlements will change names depending on owners.

Empire Of Kurdistan-Medya : it is possible to change the names, but that gives a disfunctional game (due to references to settlement names in important scripts). In other words one should not do it, if one wants a working game.

can you say speceficly what kind of disfunctional ?!! and where can i edit it ?!

[Ca Putt]

That's not inside information. you are so cruel :drama1: - the number of people who think I'm part of the EB team just was at an alltime high of 1.

Oh the agony!

:clown:

I assume renaming towns will mess up reforms and recruitment, and probably also some traits.

[cahtush]

Don't worry, you will still be an EB member in my Heart~ <3
:on_adore:

[Basileus_ton_Basileon]

what he meant by dysfunctional, is that your game will not work should you attempt it.

[d'Arthez]

Changing names of settlements may result in:
-issues with traits and ancilliaries
-issues with reforms
-issues with provinces that have scripted events, or are tied to factions (for instance Messana and Punic Wars, Byzantion, Halikarnassos etc.)
-issues with AI population replenishment. Have fun against an AI that depopulates all its cities
-government buildings (AI needs the assistance)
-victory conditions

In short the game will be a cakewalk.

[Empire*Of*Media]

Changing names of settlements may result in:
-issues with traits and ancilliaries
-issues with reforms
-issues with provinces that have scripted events, or are tied to factions (for instance Messana and Punic Wars, Byzantion, Halikarnassos etc.)
-issues with AI population replenishment. Have fun against an AI that depopulates all its cities
-government buildings (AI needs the assistance)
-victory conditions

In short the game will be a cakewalk.


so how they created this mod?!
are you sure?! i cant tolerate the false & forcibly came, Greek names in Aryan Cities !!!!

[cahtush]

so how they created this mod?!
are you sure?! i cant tolerate the false & forcibly came, Greek names in Aryan Cities !!!!

What?

I assume you mean germanic, but there are no germanic cities with greek names that i know of.
Or scythian? Many of those cities were greek colonies anyways.

And you shouldn't use the word "aryan" (except in the context of indo-aryan). For one it's a made up term, invented in the 19th century (or something to that effect).
It can also make your post seem kinda racist, but I assume it's just a case of lost in translation.

[Empire*Of*Media]

What?

I assume you mean germanic, but there are no germanic cities with greek names that i know of.
Or scythian? Many of those cities were greek colonies anyways.

And you shouldn't use the word "aryan" (except in the context of indo-aryan). For one it's a made up term, invented in the 19th century (or something to that effect).
It can also make your post seem kinda racist, but I assume it's just a case of lost in translation.


ARYAN CITIES !!! NOT ARYAN RACES !!! Aryan its not just in terms of what Hitler said!! i meant Aryan cities with greek names, like the cities started with Alexanreia or Antiochos or ........ that is in Baktria regions in EB and around those places like that not Germania! Germans in times of Goths were aryan !!

(...Edited by admin) The Words Aryan isnt not made and not 19th century, Aryans first came from India to Iran in some 1400 BC To Iran, and to German Goths around 1th century AD. and we have the epigraph of Behistun inscription (Wikipedia it) in Kermanshan that uses the word and claims Unity of Aryan peoples in 2400 years ago by Darius The Great!! even the name of Iran is a change Of Aryana (The Aryanic-Aryan Lands).
and not just just Goths were Aryan Too, but the extincted Goth's Christianity was ARYAN Christianity !! that was destroyed by Corrupted Roman Catholic Popes !!
(...Edited by admin)

[Ludens]

and not just just Goths were Aryan Too, the extincted Goth's Christianity was ARYAN Christianity !! that was destroyed by Corrupted Roman Catholic Popes !!

Actually, Gothic Christianity was Arianism, not Aryanism. It was named after Presbyter Arius.

As for it being destroyed by the Popes: there's a lot more to that story. The disappearance of Arianism had as much to do with politics as it had with religion.

[Empire*Of*Media]

Actually, Gothic Christianity was Arianism, not Aryanism. It was named after Presbyter Arius.

As for it being destroyed by the Popes: there's a lot more to that story. The disappearance of Arianism had as much to do with politics as it had with religion.


oh! thank you for correcting the mistake ! i thought Arianism is a version of Aryan Christianity!
but no one can deny Goths were Aryan Germans!!

[Basileus_ton_Basileon]

The greek names were there because that's how they were called and name during that period. The greeks ruled that part of the known world in 272 BC.

(...)

[cahtush]

And Alexander had a thing for founding cities (well, taking a small town and making it a lot bigger), as seen in the somewhat absurd amount of cities named "Alexandreia".

[Basileus_ton_Basileon]

And Alexander had a thing for founding cities (well, taking a small town and making it a lot bigger), as seen in the somewhat absurd amount of cities named "Alexandreia".

More like dumping a bunch of greeks (veterans, invalids) into a village/ small town and telling them to turn it into a polis. Alexandros probably treated them (being often strategically situated) as supply dumps, garrisons, and reinforcements than just a city. Kind of reminds me of M2TW's permanent stone forts.

[Empire*Of*Media]

More like dumping a bunch of greeks (veterans, invalids) into a village/ small town and telling them to turn it into a polis. Alexandros probably treated them (being often strategically situated) as supply dumps, garrisons, and reinforcements than just a city. Kind of reminds me of M2TW's permanent stone forts.

exactly!! the Greeks didnt care about anyone like the Persians or Hellenics, they only plundered and stoled from any aspect you see.

[jirisys]

Wait, I don't think he would need to alter the dictionary names of the cities, only the translations. I don't foresee a problem with that.

~Jirisys ()

[Moros]

exactly!! the Greeks didnt care about anyone like the Persians or Hellenics, they only plundered and stoled from any aspect you see.

Actually Hellenistic rule was quite forgiving and open to other ethnicities. Except for various taxes, direct and indirect, the primary thing they asked however was merely loyalty and thus support in cases of warfare or similar troubles. For some reason people have rather negative view on how the Hellenistic kings ruled.

[Maeran]

Probably that whole 'Zeus in the temple of Jerusalem' episode.

Isolated perhaps, but later history has magnified it.

[Moros]

Probably that whole 'Zeus in the temple of Jerusalem' episode.

Isolated perhaps, but later history has magnified it.

Yeah the magnification and distortion of that incident probably didn't help much. Quite ironic when you look at the way the Hasmoneans treated foreigners (Hyracus and the Idumeans).

[Ibrahim]

Probably that whole 'Zeus in the temple of Jerusalem' episode.

Isolated perhaps, but later history has magnified it.

it's what happens when an autocratic ruler gets the idea that he's a god, or inspired directly by him. (hence Antiochos IV "Epiphanes", which means "God manifest", and his less flattering nickname, "Epimanes" (the mad)).

let's face it, Antiochos IV just played right into Hasmonean and Idumean hands there.

[Empire*Of*Media]

it's what happens when an autocratic ruler gets the idea that he's a god, or inspired directly by him. (hence Antiochos IV "Epiphanes", which means "God manifest", and his less flattering nickname, "Epimanes" (the mad)).

let's face it, Antiochos IV just played right into Hasmonean and Idumean hands there.


Yea, intresting is when they called themselves GOD, they had other Gods Too!!!!
Ancient Greek Culture & Religions before Christianity was nauseating!! (except for some Great Philosophers that came from there !!)

[Basileus_ton_Basileon]

Please, please, please...EB is dedicated to factual research, leave religious/political rhetoric out of this place.

[Empire*Of*Media]

Please, please, please...EB is dedicated to factual research, leave religious/political rhetoric out of this place.

and no one did bro !!!

[Moros]

it's what happens when an autocratic ruler gets the idea that he's a god, or inspired directly by him. (hence Antiochos IV "Epiphanes", which means "God manifest", and his less flattering nickname, "Epimanes" (the mad)).

let's face it, Antiochos IV just played right into Hasmonean and Idumean hands there.

Antiochos didn't do anything out of the ordinary. It wasn't an uncommon request to honour some Greek gods and basileus after behaving in a disloyal fashion. From turmoil to revolts and uprisings or supporting an enemy,... it was rather common for them to be punished by limiting freedoms, having garrisons, asking more/new taxes (all for a limited time) and giving such a festival in honour of a God and the king. It's just part of what is called the give and grant model, which promoted loyalty to a polis(,...) by rewarding them with certain rights (having no garrison, removal of a certain tax,...) or gifts (often large quantities of olive oil needed for the Gymnasion). Antiochos IV did nothing out of the ordinary, also remember that it was a request of the (more Hellenized) elite of Jerusalem themselves that started all of the problems. Antiochus IV merely wanted to grant the citizens of Jerusalem favours. He didn't know how divided they were, nor what the impact of his standard actions would have on a people most didn't quite understand. And of course the whole story was blown up in proportion for political gain (legitimation for the Hasmonean dynasty and the way they ruled) and later for religious reasons as well.

Also the Idumeans are from the time of john Hyrcanus. They were not connected with the "jews" at that time (original "revolt" of the Hasmoneans) in history. Until they were forced to be circumcised and adopt jewish culture and religion (if you can even separate these two at the time). If anything the Hasmoneans were more guilty of the deeds they blamed Antiochos IV themselves.

[Ibrahim]

well, yeah, but that doesn't change the fact that he played into the hands of the two people (granted, the Idumeans are later). And I was more thinking along propaganda lines--what was written--rather than the actual rebellion.

And even then, I'm sure his eccentricities didn't help matters--though how much of that is propaganda too is not certain.

[Moros]

well, yeah, but that doesn't change the fact that he played into the hands of the two people (granted, the Idumeans are later). And I was more thinking along propaganda lines--what was written--rather than the actual rebellion.

And even then, I'm sure his eccentricities didn't help matters--though how much of that is propaganda too is not certain.

Well the main sources on Antiochus IV are the Maccebees and Josephos. Except for that we have a little titbit of information from Appian and Livius. The latter says some said the man was insane, though Livius himself says that he just didn't know what he wanted. But he was generous in his donations to cities and in cultivating the gods. So he was rather a prime example of the give and grant model, and did only what he thought was good and what was customary.

[Empire*Of*Media]

exactly!! the Greeks didnt care about anyone like the Persians or Hellenics, they only plundered and stoled from any aspect you see.

ah !! Sorry !! i dont know why for gods sake i wrote HELLENICS !! i wanted to Write IONIANs !!!!

hellenics were the same slaver & Wild & intolerant, when they invaded anywhere like Makedonians !!
i meant IONIANS the tolerant and civilized Greeks!! while the fact is they were ARYAN GREEKS not Original greeks !!

[Ludens]

I have no idea what you are trying to say, but it looks like flamebait.

As the original question has been answered, I am going to go ahead and close this thread.

Thread closed.