some questions regarding Pahlava

[tishtar]

hello guys. I asked this on TW center, but even though some guys made very good answers, there were no EB team answers
I am a serious fan of history and the TW series , and thereby EB1. I just loved what you made out of Rome 1 total war and. so I do not have any doubt that you will do your best to provide an enjoyable experience for us. however, I cannot help myself and I just HAVE to ask this questions:
1-will Pahlavan units use Pahlavi(parthian language) language in commands and etc.? what about the general speeches?
2-will you represent Pahlavan culture, with all it's differences with the other more southward Iranian cultures as a general stereotypical "Easterners " or As a different culture?
3-this is more general. will you include med2 agent types such as Princesses? what will you do with the agent videos?
4-is Persian Cataphract your lead designer for pahlava? I really loved what he made from the shallow vanilla parthia.
5-will Pahlava be in the first version of the game?
tnx and sorry if This question have been asked before or if my post has Grammar or Spelling errors.

[Tux]

3. No. Agent videos were planned and in production but the member responsible for them disappeared. Maybe in future releases, for both of the questions.
4. No, he is retired. Though, most of his work is still present.
5. Yes.

Glad you enjoyed Eb1, we plan to do the same and some things even better with Eb2.

[tishtar]

thanks a lot.
but what about the first two questions?are they supposed to be surprises?
how many factions will be playable at launch?

[Tux]

It means I'm not too aware on those areas, so another member will have to answer them.
Around 28.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

Hey tishtar,

For the first question, I'm not quite sure. There was work on a Pahlava voice mod done already for EB1, but it will certailny not include general's speeches. Unless someone proficient in Pahlavi and with decent recording equipment feels compelled to help us with that...

I'm not quite sure I understand your second question. Therefor, I interpret it as either:
a) A question of whether we will represent all factions in the area as generic "easterners", to which the answer is a resounding NO!
b) A question of whether we will have other eastern cultures besides the Pahlava, to which the answer is yes. Of course, there will not be as much unit variation in the first release as we plan for it to be later on, but there will most definately be differences between provinces and regions. We aim to represent all parts of the map equally in terms of historical correctness.

Does that answer your question?

[clone]

Hey tishtar,

For the first question, I'm not quite sure. There was work on a Pahlava voice mod done already for EB1, but it will certailny not include general's speeches. Unless someone proficient in Pahlavi and with decent recording equipment feels compelled to help us with that...

I'm not quite sure I understand your second question. Therefor, I interpret it as either:
a) A question of whether we will represent all factions in the area as generic "easterners", to which the answer is a resounding NO!
b) A question of whether we will have other eastern cultures besides the Pahlava, to which the answer is yes. Of course, there will not be as much unit variation in the first release as we plan for it to be later on, but there will most definately be differences between provinces and regions. We aim to represent all parts of the map equally in terms of historical correctness.

Does that answer your question?

can i ask something too about parthia.i love this faction but in eb their goverments suck
.they start with nomadic goverment (migration) but at they end of the game they have only the reformed goverment which cant be build on all cities only in a specific . is pahlava going to have goverment option like hayasdan(satrapy......) in eb

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

The Pahlava government system has been completely revamped for EB2, to better depict the transition from semi-nomadic tribesmen to a proto-feodal empire.

[clone]

The Pahlava government system has been completely revamped for EB2, to better depict the transition from semi-nomadic tribesmen to a proto-feodal empire.

this is great

[kdrakak]

can i ask something too about parthia.i love this faction but in eb their goverments suck
.they start with nomadic goverment (migration) but at they end of the game they have only the reformed goverment which cant be build on all cities only in a specific . is pahlava going to have goverment option like hayasdan(satrapy......) in eb

I beg to differ... Pahlava government transition was fine in my opinion. Your take might be what you honestly think, but still is somewhat offensive (I should think) to the people that spent the time and effort to get it on the game.

[clone]

I beg to differ... Pahlava government transition was fine in my opinion. Your take might be what you honestly think, but still is somewhat offensive (I should think) to the people that spent the time and effort to get it on the game.
i didnt say it wasnt good for early in the game but late in the game it is bad or outdated (the rest of the mod is excelent.
1 pahlava have only the reformed goverment which is only buildable on a few provinces
2 with this goverment option pahlava at 20 bc if captures athens nomads would migrate next to the central agora =) and then you could build pastoralism ,where? in Athens!
i think all faction should have at least two (or more) goverment option that can build (and will accurate) in all cities like satrapy or roman colonies

[tishtar]

thanks mithridates, thanks tux.
but I disagree with clone. Pahlava wasn't supposed to get some highly organized positive-everything government.
the late game pahlava cavalry beat any other cav in the game hands on, and the hard to get reforms make you feel like you have to change your people's culture for a better future.
IMHO, the government was very good.
Also, EB is mostly about historical Accuracy.
and I am sorry but I can't stop asking :
will you improve the cav system in order to make them more effective in mp?
and mithridates , your interpretation was correct. sorry.
I am really looking forward for the day the first version of this amazing mod comes out.
and thanks again for answering my annoying questions so quickly :2thumbsup:

[clone]

thanks mithridates, thanks tux.
but I disagree with clone. Pahlava wasn't supposed to get some highly organized positive-everything government.
the late game pahlava cavalry beat any other cav in the game hands on, and the hard to get reforms make you feel like you have to change your people's culture for a better future.
IMHO, the government was very good.
Also, EB is mostly about historical Accuracy.
and I am sorry but I can't stop asking :
will you improve the cav system in order to make them more effective in mp?
and mithridates , your interpretation was correct. sorry.
I am really looking forward for the day the first version of this amazing mod comes out.
and thanks again for answering my annoying questions so quickly :2thumbsup:
who said something about positive everything goverment? but something along the lines of satrapy in order to justify expanding in other regions

[tishtar]

the problem is, the pahlavans are known for being good warriors and soldiers, not good governors.
As far as I know, the Arascid dynasty never actually did any important civil improvement. in fact, their few reforms were in the end detrimental to their dynasty, such as giving too much power to the satraps, which resulted in the rebellion of Ardeshir I and the destruction of their dynasty.
the current system makes expanding hard for a pahlavan player, due to lack of both good attacking units in the early-mid game and the sheer expense and difficulty of expansion.
I might be incorrect, because 30-40% of what I said above is my opinion.
however, making expansion for pahlava as easy as for Rome, will be overbalancing the game, and will reduce historical accuracy.
IMHO,pahlava had a sufficient Satrapy government, you shouldn't be able to recruit shivatir-e-Pahlavanig in egypt.
but this might just be what I think, and I am not implying your opinion is wrong in anyway.
this are matters of taste, not factual matters.
good day.
Tishtar

[clone]

the problem is, the pahlavans are known for being good warriors and soldiers, not good governors.
As far as I know, the Arascid dynasty never actually did any important civil improvement. in fact, their few reforms were in the end detrimental to their dynasty, such as giving too much power to the satraps, which resulted in the rebellion of Ardeshir I and the destruction of their dynasty.
the current system makes expanding hard for a pahlavan player, due to lack of both good attacking units in the early-mid game and the sheer expense and difficulty of expansion.
I might be incorrect, because 30-40% of what I said above is my opinion.
however, making expansion for pahlava as easy as for Rome, will be overbalancing the game, and will reduce historical accuracy.
IMHO,pahlava had a sufficient Satrapy government, you shouldn't be able to recruit shivatir-e-Pahlavanig in egypt.
but this might just be what I think, and I am not implying your opinion is wrong in anyway.
this are matters of taste, not factual matters.
good day.
Tishtar

first in some extend you are right.second but as you said they used the satrap system. in the game this doesnt exist. now how strong or weak a goverment is going to be that not my job to deside not that was my intention. the team is going to deside with historical accuracy and ballance in mind. i just said that every faction should have some generic goverment like satrapy mainly for role playing reasons

[tishtar]

erm... it actually exists.
I do not know how you didn't see it, but you can have both parthian colony and client state governments.
alltough that kind of solid expansion government doesn't exist, probably because the parthian system of satrapy was more like client state than actual acheamenid satrapy.
cheers
soheil(Tishtar)