Official only 11 factions will be playable!!!

[Leet Eriksson]

Yes i read it in the Res Romanae,11th March,it says there will be 11 playable factions from 6 cultures.

Hmmm hopefully that number will increase pre-release becuase seriously i don't think 11 factions are enough.....

[RisingSun]

That's a step down from VI. I'm disappointed. It seems every week CA decides to release some information which makes me question a little more whether I'll buy RTW...

[The Wizard]

They probably mean 11 playable campaign factions, as most magazines and sites state. I hope we'll have those 20 in MP... I want the fair-skinned Skythian hordes Darius feared so much



~Wiz

[ShadesWolf]

Would anybody like to guess which they are

And secondly would Rome count as one or three factions....

[Leet Eriksson]

well here is a rough estimation:

there will be 6 cultures and i suspect them to be Eastern,Roman,Celtic,Gallic,Germanic and Greek.

ok we know we will be able to play the 3 houses,so that leaves 9 more factions,in the main page they said you can play the sucessor kingdoms and thats another 3,also it mentioned the armies of carthage,that leaves 5 factions,i'm betting 1 will be based in britain(sure bet,becuase developers are british)and one will be a gallic faction and one will be germanic.the last one is probably an iberian faction.

[Alrowan]

fiasal, celtic and gallic are one and the same just about, youll find that the galic will be the name of a celtic faction, and the britons another

[The_678]

And I'm pretty sure that Egyptian is it's own culture isn't it? Maybe they mean only 11 eleven MAJOR factions, but with some simple modding the others will be playable. This also leaves them room to make the other factions playable in an expansion like the Aragonese or Sicilians.

[Leet Eriksson]

Quote[/b] (Alrowan @ Mar. 14 2004,17:04)]fiasal, celtic and gallic are one and the same just about, youll find that the galic will be the name of a celtic faction, and the britons another
yikes,i thought they were different...hmm well i guess we might remove gallic culture...

Any suggestions of what cultures will be in game?i might not be right tho,so i'd like to listen to others opinions about it.

[Spino]

6 Cultures:

1) Eastern
2) Eastern Barbarian
3) Egyptian
4) Greek
5) Roman
6) Western Barbarian

11 Playable Factions (according to CA the list is NOT finalized):

1) Briton
2) Carthage
3) Gaul
4) Germania
5) Egypt
6) Macedonia
7) Parthia
8) Rome - Brutii
9) Rome - Julii
10) Rome - Scipii
11) Seleucid Empire

I think Briton and Germania are the two 'swing' factions CA is still debating over. Personally I would replace Briton and possibly even Germania with Pontus and/or Iberia (or maybe even Illryia) but when you consider the number of Total War fans that are British it is safe to say Briton will be locked in as a playable faction. Germania, despite the historical reality that saw it being a multitude of uncooperative and bickering tribes may also be playable because of populist appeal. Geographically speaking Iberia might make more sense than Germania as it nicely rounds out the playable factions spread about the map. Geopolitically speaking Pontus would make much more sense than Germania because it would offer us the ability to control one more advanced civilization in close proximity to the Mediterranean.

[RisingSun]

I think they should take out Egypt and give us Iberia or another successor kingdom...

[Sir Robin]

I agree with Spino that these are the factions we will have to choose from.

Hopefully with a little modding the minor factions can be made playable too. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[ShadesWolf]

From what I can remember from an Early campaign map I saw, wasnt the British faction also including Belgium.

Hence it could be said that this combined faction were Celts and are the Belgae

Therefore you would have two Celtic factions

And btw I thought the cultures were

6 Cultures:

1) Eastern
2) Carthage
3) Egyptian
4) Greek
5) Roman
6) Barbarian

[Voigtkampf]

I just keep my fingers crossed, hoping that the game will be easy to mod, so we could switch the factions, making them all playable. Nothing but gloomy news about R:TW lately…

[Rosacrux]

The one modding I shall do shall be to remove the absurdity called "Egyptian culture" and "Pharaoh-like Egypt" and give the kingdom of the Lagids it's proper image, units and stuff.

GAH http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif

[Nowake]

Let me Gah you a bit.


I mean, I see people here talking about an iberian faction .. Now really, except for the SAertorius revolt, and he founded a roman state, they were never really a power. They merely supplied Hannibal with troops and Caesar with loot. So .. how about Dacia? They surely were more of a threat.


As about the cultures, my guess:

Roman
Greek
Egyptian
Barbarian
Carthagian
Eastern

although, I must add, the Barbarian culture shoud be split between celtic and thracian.

Factions:

Roman - Julii
Roman - Brutii
Roman - Scipii
Carthage
Macedonia
Egypt
Gaul
Germania
Dacia
Parthia
Brittania

although I would replace the last one with anything that ould hold a spear.

[Rosacrux]

Nowake

Shouldn't we primarily be concerned with the accuracy and modestly correct depiction of the factions they actually are placing in game? There is always time for new factions in an expansion or by modding.

But let's please stop the absurdity that roams freely around in the face of:

- console-like settings, such as having to "unlock" the non-Roman factions by finishing Roman campaign first

- Egypt depicted as some weird 3rd dynasty out-of-time monstrosity, while at the time it was a hellenistic kingdom, belonging to the Greek cultural group

- Barbarians units being mostly some berserker-like obscene stupid gits, rather than historically accurate.

So, besides the local audiences who would like to see Germanic, Britonic, Hiberian, Dacian or any other backwater sub-culture of barbaric Europe, there are those people who wish for a modest level of historical accuracy and an all-around fan game to play.

Well, let me tell you, this game looks like its targeting the -14 audience right now... and dropping rapidly. By the day it comes out, the target group shall be prolly -6 year olds and the game shall be renamed to "STUPID-Total Bore" http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif

[Nowake]

The Gah part was not adressed specifically to you. It was more like: "Let me throw my 2 cents in .."

So, besides the local audiences who would like to see Germanic, Britonic, Hiberian, Dacian or any other backwater sub-culture of barbaric Europe, there are those people who wish for a modest level of historical accuracy and an all-around fan game to play.

Backwater sub-culture? Of course, I shouldn't bother, your reaction derived from misunderstanding my post, but still. Nowake knows his history and others history and enough history in general to make clear statements and to detect he wrong ones. The dacians were much more evolved than germans, hiberian and britons; the gauls may have been as spiritualy rich. As to historical accuracy, well, on numerous occasions I remarked the hellenistic nature of Aegypt under the Ptolemyes and the national pharaonic army that CA is trying to form. But this was a thread about factions, so my comment was in his place.

[Rosacrux]

Quote[/b] (Nowake @ Mar. 15 2004,03:37)]The Gah part was not adressed specifically to you. It was more like: "Let me throw my 2 cents in .."

So, besides the local audiences who would like to see Germanic, Britonic, Hiberian, Dacian or any other backwater sub-culture of barbaric Europe, there are those people who wish for a modest level of historical accuracy and an all-around fan game to play.

Backwater sub-culture? Of course, I shouldn't bother, your reaction derived from misunderstanding my post, but still. Nowake knows his history and others history and enough history in general to make clear statements and to detect he wrong ones. The dacians were much more evolved than germans, hiberian and britons; the gauls may have been as spiritualy rich. As to historical accuracy, well, on numerous occasions I remarked the hellenistic nature of Aegypt under the Ptolemyes and the national pharaonic army that CA is trying to form. But this was a thread about factions, so my comment was in his place.
Sorry about the "sub-cultures", it was actually not meant as that. I am just extremely annoyed by the way RTW is proceeding... damned, a game with the potential to become the single best computer game of all times, goes down the drain of the mass-market - lowest denominator drain and CA doesn't even lift an eyebrow.

What I just was pointing out that they have to change the whole philosophy of their project, and that the main focus should be correcting the gazillions of errors already present, not adding more by adding the Dacian and for instance making their Unique Unit a Jannisary or a Cossak http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-clown.gif

[The_Emperor]

Given we only had 12 Playable factions in the original MTW that sounds about right to me.

Expect to see lots of small independent factions mulling around (like how Novgorod is in MTW).

Maybe we will get more factions unlocked later in an expansion? (like how Hungary Aragon and Sicilly were unlocked for VI).

At any rate they said that all 20 factions should be playable in Multiplayer, that means we get around 9 AI controlled independant factions on the map...

To me that doesn't sound quite so bad.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Chosen Axemen??? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-shocked2.gif Non-Ptolomeic Egypt??? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-shocked2.gif Locked Factions??? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-shocked2.gif Iberian Bull Warrior??? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-shocked2.gif
WTF???? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/jawdrop.gif

What is happening to Rome Total War?????? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wreck.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wreck.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wreck.gif

BUÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁÁ http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-bigcry.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-bigcry.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-bigcry.gif

Are CA's guys on drugs??? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-mad.gif



Quote[/b] ]Well, let me tell you, this game looks like its targeting the -14 audience right now... and dropping rapidly. By the day it comes out, the target group shall be prolly -6 year olds and the game shall be renamed to "STUPID-Total Bore" http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif
I fear the worst... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-end.gif



Quote[/b] ]What I just was pointing out that they have to change the whole philosophy of their project, and that the main focus should be correcting the gazillions of errors already present, not adding more by adding the Dacian and for instance making their Unique Unit a Jannisary or a Cossak http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-clown.gif
I'm afraid it's coming to that point http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif

[Sir Robin]

Ouch... there seems to be a little hostility in here.

Honestly I do not mind historical "innacurracies."

I am merely an amatuer historian and already have a rough idea of the strengths of particular cultural groups and nations in this era.

I agree with Spino about the playable factions.

1) Briton
2) Carthage
3) Gaul
4) Germania
5) Egypt
6) Macedonia
7) Parthia
8) Rome - Brutii
9) Rome - Julii
10) Rome - Scipii
11) Seleucid Empire

I don't mind a "pharonic" look to the egyptian/amratian/ptolemaic faction. Hopefully they will stil have elephants and phalanxi just with a "Return of the Mummy" look.

As far as Dacia I think it will be a minor faction or be a playable faction instead of Parthia.

Does anyone still know where the pic showing the different faction flags is at?

My main concern at this point is how easy it will be to "mod" the minor factions so they can be played.

I am kind of curious as to who the minor factions will be.

Let's see... twenty-one factions total, eleven playable, with one of the minor factions being the purple SPQR Roman Senate faction. That leaves nine minor factions.

What nations do you think the nine minor factions will consist of?

[The Wizard]

Ok, let's start counting.

1)Romans - Julii
2)Romans - Scipii
3)Romans - Brutii
4)Carthage
5)Gaul
6)Britannia/Germania (point of debate I would think)
7)Achaea (free Greek city-states)
8)Antigonid Empire (Macedonia)
9)Seleucid Empire
10)Ptolemaic Empire
11)???

I would guess this is the debated spot. The logical choices, to me at least, would be: Parthia, Dacia, Pontus. Those three all had their importance in the day.

Pontus had Mithridates the Great, and was quite important in its heyday.

Parthia appears as the replacement of Achaemenid Persia (even though they were of a different culture and left Achaemenid principles to rot outside the ruins of the ancient Persian capitals) not long after the beginning of the game, and can be added as a faction right from the beginning, making a very slight concession to historical accuracy.

Then there's Dacia. I would find it a bit strange if this would be the eleventh faction. It did not become dangerous or threatening to the region until quite a bit into the time of Imperial Rome. Why add it as a faction, as a replacement of Parthia or the Pontus? Sorry Nowake. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

I would go for Parthia over the Pontus. Parthia lasted longer, was more of a threat to Rome and the factions occupying the east before Rome conquered it than the Pontus. Mind you, Parthia gobbled up quite a bit of the Seleucid Empire, absorbed the Kushan empire, and was a constant threat to the Mauryan empire, right up until that nation's demise. It also trounced the Romans for a very long time, even losing its capital Ctesiphon three times and surviving.

It just seems as the logical choice to me. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-yes.gif



~Wiz

[Sir Robin]

Unlike MTW, RTW will apparently only have one era. The greatest problem as far as selecting/creating playable/non-playable factions is they did not remain unchanged over the three centuries covered by the game.

Minor or even non-existent nations near the beginning of the game may have become major powers or been wiped out by the end of this era.

Since most players will at least have a rudimentary understanding of this time, be ambitious, and love battle; they will probably have the entire map conquered in half the time alloted. Outside of measures the AI takes in MTW or probably even with them the human player's software victims will not survive nearly as long as their historical counterparts.

Because of this and to simplify things it may be best to work with factional playability in their order of power when the game begins.

While we can expect the Britons to be playable because of the fan base, any other faction besides the romans could be excluded.

I expect the nations Spino listed to be included because at at the time RTW begins, IIRC, they were the most powerful nations in the region covered by RTW.

[The Wizard]

Link me up to somewhere it states that there won't be any different eras?

Because IIRC, I remember having seen a comment some time ago on this forum where one of the devs stated that there will be indeed eras once more.




~Wiz

[Spino]

Some of you guys really need to calm down. There is no evidence at all to support the claim that CA is dumbing this game down to appeal to the pre/early teen, click and kill crowd. What CA is doing is making RTW more accessible to the masses by incorporating a massive amount of in-game tutorials and advisors. CA has certainly made some questionable decisions from a historical point of view (Ptolemaic Egyptian era units with early dynasty Pharaonic headgear, Gaulish 'Chosen Axemen', etc.) but I have seen nothing that says RTW's historical parallels will be any worse or different from that found in Medieval Total War and its Vikings expansion pack. And when you consider that we have been assured by the developers that RTW will be much more 'mod friendly' than MTW then there is even less to get upset about. Right now I'm more concerned about CA's strange decision regarding prerequisite campaign victories that will unlock playable factions.

Regarding RTW's cultures CA has already stated, definitively, that there are 6 cultural styles in RTW. I listed all six of them in my earlier post. Those six are it in a nutshell. This was not conjecture on my part but information taken directly from the actual developers who put the list in posts both here and in the official forums. Unless we hear the developers state otherwise then consider the cultures etched in stone.

The 10 Minor factions:

1) Armenia
2) Dacia
3) Greece
4) Iberia
5) Illryia
6) Numidia
7) Pontus
8) Rome - Senate
9) Scythia
10) Thrace

And of course we cannot forget everyone's favorite debug mode faction...

11) Rebels

Pontus and to a lesser extent Illryia should both be considered as playable major factions, much more so than Briton or Germania. Pontus was founded roughly around 300 B.C. by Mithradates I, a Persian satrap in the service of Antigonus I, one of Alexander's successors. Pontus grew to become a bonafide competitor and threat to Rome's eastern interests, especially when it allied with Armenia around 60-70 B.C. and threatened Rome's foothold in Asia minor. Regarding Illryia since the game now begins sometime around 300 B.C. instead of at the outbreak of the 1st Punic War (264 B.C.) we will definitely see Pyrrhus of Epirus (which I believe, according to the screenshots I've seen of the in-game maps, has been incorporated into Illryia's domain) and his wild career of campaigning and usurping. It would be nice to be able to recreate his many campaigns, not least of which saw his pachyderms and phalangites rampaging on the Italian peninsula in 280 B.C. Perhaps CA will make Pyrrhus' campaign into an historical campaign?

Greece as represented in RTW is actually an amalgamation of both the Achaean and Aetolian Leagues. When combined and in possession of some or all of the Peloponneseus I think one can make a fairly persuasive argument in favor of this ahistorical entity being considered a playable major faction. If the united tribes of both Briton and Germania are in the running for a major faction spot then why not a united Greece? I can see the populist appeal to play Greece being quite strong. When you think of the ancient western world Greece and Rome immediately come to mind. When you think of soldiers of the ancient western world there is a good chance the first thing to come to mind is the image of a Greek Hoplite, especially the Spartan variety which will definitely be in the game. I can see countless strategy gamers wondering why they cannot control Greece and build their own army of 'invincible' Spartan warriors

Dacia did not come into its own as a civilized power until the 1st century B.C. and did not pose a serious threat to Rome until the 1st century A.D. Given this I think it is perfectly justified to consider Dacia a minor faction in RTW.

On an aside, converting the Scythians into a playable faction should really be fun for anyone looking to command an almost entirely cavalry based force. Barbarian hordes of the steppes and all that. I could be wrong but I believe the Scythians will be the only faction to be represented in the Eastern Barbarian cultural style.

I really hope CA will make it much easier for us to add additional factions into RTW than it was in Medieval. The city states of Syracuse and Massilia (Marseilles) deserve more than a Rebel status. I would also like to see more western and eastern style barbarian factions sprinkled throughout Europe and Asia.

Don't mean to pull this thread off the subject but with all these factions comes a windfall of units. CA has confirmed via the Res Romanae that there will be roughly two hundred different units in the game This is an increase of roughly 50 units over the last official estimate Given that all four of the Roman factions will share roughly the same units we're looking at roughly 11 unique units per faction

[The Wizard]

Epirus will be in the game? As a part of Illyria? Innacurate...

Epirus was a hellenistic kingdom in central Greece, which had restled itself from Antigonid control after Antigonus' unfortunate death at Issus. As far as I know, it was only free of Antigonid domination under Pyrrhus, and fell after his death. It did not come back to independence thereafter. I could be wrong, Pyrrhus' campaigns don't really interest me all that much.

But my point is: Epirus does not deserve to be part of the Illyrian faction, for Illyria was not Greek but a Hellenized culture not unlike Thrace.



~Wiz

[Spino]

Quote[/b] ]Epirus will be in the game? As a part of Illyria? Innacurate...

Epirus was a hellenistic kingdom in central Greece, which had restled itself from Antigonid control after Antigonus' unfortunate death at Issus. As far as I know, it was only free of Antigonid domination under Pyrrhus, and fell after his death. It did not come back to independence thereafter. I could be wrong...

Then perhaps Epirus will be incorporated into the Greek faction along with the Achaean & Aetolian leagues. I based my shaky assumption on a screenshot of the strategic map which showed the smaller 'jump map' depicting the territories in western Greece in the same color of the Illryian faction. I must assume the AI controlling Illryia had taken over Epirus from the Greeks during an earlier turn.


Quote[/b] ]Pyrrhus' campaigns don't really interest me all that much.

Too each his own but it's going to be hard for CA to ignore a man Hannibal declared as being one of the greatest generals of all time

[Kraxis]

Quote[/b] (Spino @ Mar. 15 2004,14:24)]I could be wrong but I believe the Scythians will be the only faction to be represented in the Eastern Barbarian cultural style.
Initially my view eaxactly.

But the more I thought about it, the more I came to realize that it wasn't fulfilling the role. At least not to me.

So, I considered the Thracians as part of the Eastern Barbarian culture. It is not as bad as one might think at first. The thracians tribes interacted greatly with the scythians and they borrowed customs of each other. They even had the love for the same thing, great horses.

And to further that line, I think Dacia might be part of it too, as Dacia was an offshot of the thracian culture. Even the Falx was a thracian weapon before anyone noticed there was a placed called Dacia.

Along that line we could also add Illyria, but I know little of Illyria. To what extent it got Hellinized, leaving its own culture. But if the hellenic culture only was skin deep then, I would find it ok. But that would conflict with Epirus and Pyrrhus (would love a campagin with him).

[MiniKiller]

Quote[/b] (faisal @ Mar. 14 2004,15:19)]Yes i read it in the Res Romanae,11th March,it says there will be 11 playable factions from 6 cultures.

Hmmm hopefully that number will increase pre-release becuase seriously i don't think 11 factions are enough.....
i belive that this is wrong, i read that all 20 factions in will be playable. i even saw a pic with 20 faction shields. its no biggie, we will just edit it to make em playable anyway.

[Kraxis]

Mini, all will be MP playable.

[The_678]

Does anybody know where that screenshot is that showed all the factions and the map? I remember seeing it a few months ago and that pic might solve alot of questions.

[The_678]

Nevermind I just found it at Totalrome.com and it just shows the shields. Those shields might be useful for determining whos in though.
http://www.totalrome.com/images/menus/rome_tw_m_001.jpg

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

Unfortunately not, since there are 21 faction shields there. Does this mean CA were originally planning 21, but were forced to cut back?

[Sir Robin]

The twenty-one factions is the total factions in the game. Including both playable and non-playable factions.

I am not seeing an obvious "rebel" except perhaps the trident in the bottom right.

The description also seems to indicate "default" starting points for each faction. While the faction symbols may have changed it does give a rough idea of what each faction might be.

http://www.totalrome.com/images/menus/rome_tw_m_001.jpg

Sorry for the big picture but I was not sure how to just cut/paste in the faction symbols.

First row:
Julii(Roman), Brutii(Roman), Scipii(Roman)
Second Row:
Senate(Roman), Greek(Greek)?, Eqyptian(Egyptian)
Third Row:
Macedonia(Greek)?, Carthage(Greek), Seleucids(Greek)?
Forth Row:
Parthian(Eastern)?, Dacian(East Barb)?, Scythian(East Barb)
Fifth Row:
Briton(West Barb)?, Germania(West Barb)?, Gual(West Barb)?
Sixth Row:
Armenia(Eastern)?, Numidia(Egyptian)?, Ilyria(Greek)?
Seventh Row:
Iberia(West Barb)?, Pontus(Eastern)?, Thrace(Greek)?

What do you think?

[Spino]

Shocking news regarding the factions list

To get a grip on the shield symbols I queued up a video taken from a Gamestar disc someone posted in the official or Legiontotalwar forums some time ago. It is from this same video that the screenshot of the faction selection screen posted in this thread was taken from. At one point the reviewer was kind enough to run his cursor over several of the shield symbols and as he did so the faction's name would display at the bottom of the screen. After constantly pausing and rewinding the video and using the information all of us have seen in numerous screenshots I finally figured out which shield belongs to which faction...

Julii, Brutii, Scipii
Roman Senate, Macedonia, Egypt
Seleucid Empire, Carthage, Parthia
Pontus, Gaul, Germania
Britannia, Armenia, Dacia
Illryia, Numidia, LYDIA
Iberia, Thrace, Rebels

So the good news is that CA has given us one more faction for Asia Minor in the form of Lydia. The journalist ran his cursor directly over the shield symbol for Lydia so there is no mistake about it.

But the bad news is WHERE ARE THE GREEKS?? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/eek.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif And when I mean Greek I mean Epirus/Achaean League/Aetolian League/Peloponnesus Greeks

Now before you say, "Spino, don't be silly, the Greeks are represented by the Trident symbol" please keep in mind there are a few screenshots of the older strategic map out there that depict the Trident symbol flying over settlements in northern Europe (in the same area as several Germanic settlements). It seems rather unlikely that they were settlements conquered by a far flung Greek navy. Furthermore in another one of those Gamestar videos the camera pans over the strategic map, eventually passing directly over Greece and Macedonia. All of the cities in Greece are in Macedonian colors If the Trident shield is reserved exclusively for all rebel factions then we are left with the reality that there is no 'true' Greek faction? Has CA gone so far as to relegate most of mainland Greece to rebel status or have they really decided to lump all of Greece under the Macedonian banner?

To grant Macedonia control of all of Greece at the onset of the game is simply ridiculous and would remove much of the heated geopolitical bickering that made that region so interesting during the RTW period. To make a Greek faction (major or minor) that is an amalgamation of Epirus & the Achaean and Aetolian leagues is no less absurd than transforming the various independent tribes that constituted the peoples of Briton and Germania into MAJOR PLAYABLE FACTIONS

If CA does rectify this situation I hope it is not at the expense of the Lydian faction. The more factions the better.

I certainly hope my conclusions are wrong and CA has planned all along to have an actual Greek faction in the game. If CA and Activision are so worried about marketability how on Earth could they have made this kind of oversight?

[Rosacrux]

Spino, if your assumptions and observations are correct... then I most certainly feel extremely dissapointed... would be on par with the rest of the garbage CA seems to find amusing to do, so it can turn this potentially great game into a Cinecita:Total Bore, colorful, meaningless, silly extravaganza.

I hope, I only hope, you are wrong.

[Basileus]

I hope your wrong aswell Spino, ive been looking forward for so long now for this game, well lets see if we get any conformation from CA about this

[Sir Robin]

Remeber thought that this was an early version of RTW. It has been said before, by the devs IIRC, that the final factions had not been decided on yet.

I do hope the Greeks will appear at least as a minor faction.

[The Wizard]

Quote[/b] (Kraxis @ Mar. 15 2004,22:48)]
Quote[/b] (Spino @ Mar. 15 2004,14:24)]I could be wrong but I believe the Scythians will be the only faction to be represented in the Eastern Barbarian cultural style.
Initially my view eaxactly.

But the more I thought about it, the more I came to realize that it wasn't fulfilling the role. At least not to me.

So, I considered the Thracians as part of the Eastern Barbarian culture. It is not as bad as one might think at first. The thracians tribes interacted greatly with the scythians and they borrowed customs of each other. They even had the love for the same thing, great horses.

And to further that line, I think Dacia might be part of it too, as Dacia was an offshot of the thracian culture. Even the Falx was a thracian weapon before anyone noticed there was a placed called Dacia.

Along that line we could also add Illyria, but I know little of Illyria. To what extent it got Hellinized, leaving its own culture. But if the hellenic culture only was skin deep then, I would find it ok. But that would conflict with Epirus and Pyrrhus (would love a campagin with him).
Actually, Thrace can be added to the list of "Hellenistic cultures". By the time the game picked up, Thrace and Illyria were hellenized cultures that did not share much with their Skythian cousins.

Heh, the Romans called Eastern Europe and the area to the north of the Kaukasus "Skythia Maior" and "Skythia Minor" respectively...

About Spino's post: Well, that's... interesting. Lydia? W T F? L y d i a ? Did I just read that right? Can someone point out what the hell a faction is doing on that - by the way quite old http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif - screenshot that was conquered approximately two hundred and fifty years before the onset of RTW?



~Wiz

[Kraxis]

I don't mind if the Greeks will be rebels with greek units.

But someone mentioned that Epirus might be put under Illyria (a screenshot is supposed to show this), in which case we have another Hellinized faction. And we have Pyrrhus. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

But even if all this is true and the worst anyone can fear. It is old. And I remember the devs asking if the re-reused dragonbanner (Germania) should be changed to various other things. So most likely the Germanians won't have that anymore.

But I am very let down that there wasn't a Scythian faction in is draft. I do hope it is in now. I don't know much about Lydia in this time, but personally I would want the Scythians instead, both for variety and because of personal preference, but also because I feel that region will get a bit crowded with Lydia, Armenia, Pontus, Thrace, Macedonia and the Seleucids in close proximity to each other.

[Nowake]

Quote[/b] (Kraxis @ Mar. 16 2004,00:48)]
Quote[/b] (Spino @ Mar. 15 2004,14:24)]I could be wrong but I believe the Scythians will be the only faction to be represented in the Eastern Barbarian cultural style.
Initially my view eaxactly.

But the more I thought about it, the more I came to realize that it wasn't fulfilling the role. At least not to me.

So, I considered the Thracians as part of the Eastern Barbarian culture. It is not as bad as one might think at first. The thracians tribes interacted greatly with the scythians and they borrowed customs of each other. They even had the love for the same thing, great horses.

And to further that line, I think Dacia might be part of it too, as Dacia was an offshot of the thracian culture. Even the Falx was a thracian weapon before anyone noticed there was a placed called Dacia.

Along that line we could also add Illyria, but I know little of Illyria. To what extent it got Hellinized, leaving its own culture. But if the hellenic culture only was skin deep then, I would find it ok. But that would conflict with Epirus and Pyrrhus (would love a campagin with him).
Tarrak, now, of course, each time I argue, all people tend to view my thoughts as subjective, and there are up to a point. But in the last few months I documented myself thoroughly on Dacia, and I have acces at many books depicting archeological discoveries which were never seen on the net.


Everyone that sais Dacia sais falx, and, that's it. Well, it's not at all it. If you read the few descriptions of the ancients, you'll remark the odd look they had over them. They saw them as almost civilised, because of their priests that resembled the druids alot, because of their religious fanaticism and because of their belief in mortality. The spiritual part of the dacian culture developed very differently from the thracians and should be taken into consideration. They were the link between the celtic druids and the greek mysteria.

[Spino]

Quote[/b] ]I don't mind if the Greeks will be rebels with greek units.

Well if rebels in RTW are anything like rebels in MTW then this is not an option. This would make the Greek provinces ridiculously generic. CA has already stated that most of the units in the game will be faction specific, not province specific so rebel controlled Greek territories and armies would be devoid of anything typically Greek and are sure to raise a few eyebrows.

And speaking of rebels, exactly how are their generic settlements going to be depicted on the strategic map if they are not based on any specific cultural style? Will there be rebel variants for each of the six cultural styles in the game?


Quote[/b] ]But someone mentioned that Epirus might be put under Illyria (a screenshot is supposed to show this), in which case we have another Hellinized faction. And we have Pyrrhus.

That was me. I believe I was in error. I found those screenshots of the strategic map on my hard drive and took a long hard look at them. The area in Greece is hard to discern but it seems Epirus is actually owned by Macedonia which reinforces the video of the strategic map which showed Macedonia owning all of Greece.


Quote[/b] ]But I am very let down that there wasn't a Scythian faction in is draft. I do hope it is in now. I don't know much about Lydia in this time, but personally I would want the Scythians instead, both for variety and because of personal preference, but also because I feel that region will get a bit crowded with Lydia, Armenia, Pontus, Thrace, Macedonia and the Seleucids in close proximity to each other.

Yes, Lydia as a faction seems very anachronistic and would be a bit much given the other factions in the region. Since the Scythians were a definite factor in western Asian geopolitics they should definitely be in the game as one of the few Eastern Babarian cultures.

Now that I've calmed down and gotten a good night's rest I see no reason why CA would bother to count Rebels in the overall number of factions. I don't believe they did this for Medieval so why start now? If CA says there are a total of 21 major & minor factions then we should logically exclude Rebels from that number.

[Sir Robin]

I have alot of fun hypothesizing about what might be in the game.

So let's see we have so far...

Cultures:
1. Roman
2. Greek
3. Egyptian
4. Eastern
4. Western Barbarian
5. Eastern Barbarian

Playable factions(cultures):
1. Julii (Roman)
2. Brutii (Roman)
3. Scipii (Roman)
4. Carthage (Greek)
5. Macedonia (Greek)
6. Seleucids (Greek)
7. Egypt (Egyptian)
8. Parthia (Eastern) Corrected...
9. Gual (West Barb)
10. Germania (West Barb)
11. Briton (West Barb)

Non-playable factions(cultures):
12. Senate (Roman)
13. Pontus (Greek)
14. Armenia (Eastern)
15. Dacia (East Barb)
16. Illyria (Greek)
17. Numidia (Egypt)
18. Lydia (Greek)
19. Iberia (West Barb)
20. Thrace (Greek)
21. Rebels (None)

Does this look right? Faction 21 may or may not be rebels.

They could overcome the unit issue by having units be region specific as well as faction specific. Such as Athens always being able to build phalanxes unless owned by a phalanx-less faction.

Cool... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif

[The Wizard]

Parthia is Eastern and I believe Carthage deserves its own culture.



~Wiz

[Big King Sanctaphrax]

Quote[/b] (The Wizard @ Mar. 16 2004,20:48)]Parthia is Eastern and I believe Carthage deserves its own culture.



~Wiz
I was going to post to that effect, and I seem to remember it being mentioned before by a dev.

[Kraxis]

Yeah, Carthage = Greek is a bit strange. But honestly, I have seen very little of Carthagenian architecture, and what little I have seen points towards Greece (not that that is where they got the style). So while we might not like it at all, we should be happy they didn't toss them into the Egyptian lot.

Spino, I don't think that CA would have any problems with creating rebel cultures based on geographics. So that Greek rebels will have the greek culture, while Germanian rebels will have the western barbarian culture. It is not perfect, but it is better than generic rebels (which would also be odd since the rebels have names).

Also, if the units are not region specific at all, how does one explain the Spartan Hoplites (if they are still in the game)? Not easy, as they would not really be Spartan if trained outside of the area.

The issue with presenting the Rebels as a faction is not new, it was there in STW. And I liked that. It gave a little background info on them, that was nice. Of course the RTW Rebels will be just a bit more diverse than those of Shogun. But hey, would that be bad anyway?

Sir Robin, Parthia is Eastern in culture, not Eastern Barb. Eastern Barbs are unplyable as it is right now.

And finally, Nowake/pr fire. You can say Falx = Dacia all you want, but the Thracians still ran around with a similar weapon long before Dacia evolved. The Thracians loved putting the heads of slain enemies onto these heavy weapons, so if the Dacians did that too it only lends to the similarity of culture.
Further, you can rave all you want about their culture being something special (I still just think it was a refined Thracian culture with a bit Scythian into it and possibly some Celtic), but what other culture than Eastern Barb would you pick? Greek? Roman? Western Barb? None of those fit at all, then at least Eastern Barb has some basis in the Thracian-Dacian connection.

[Leet Eriksson]

Kraxis,i think that architecture in carthage that looks similiar to greece is probably the result of the romans conquest of carthage,burning it down and rebuilding it,i might be wrong though.but looking at the geographic location of the place,it also indicates carthaginians relied mostly on reed bricks to build their buildings not marble or stone.

[alman9898]

I remember seeing somewhere that there will be 24 factions. I think it may have been PC Gamer.

[Sir Robin]

I hope it wasn't PC Gamer.

Considering the MP Campaign snafu I wouldn't count on much in their preview.

So if rebels vary culturally or by "city" as far as unit availability that would resolve the "vanilla" rebel concerns with MTW.

I just hope we don't get the all artillery rebellions anymore.

[Nowake]

And finally, Nowake/pr fire. You can say Falx = Dacia all you want, but the Thracians still ran around with a similar weapon long before Dacia evolved. The Thracians loved putting the heads of slain enemies onto these heavy weapons, so if the Dacians did that too it only lends to the similarity of culture.
Further, you can rave all you want about their culture being something special (I still just think it was a refined Thracian culture with a bit Scythian into it and possibly some Celtic), but what other culture than Eastern Barb would you pick? Greek? Roman? Western Barb? None of those fit at all, then at least Eastern Barb has some basis in the Thracian-Dacian connection.


You got me wrong. I wasn't saying that Dacia should be included in the Eastern Barbarian culture, it belongs there. But you said something about the falx being the only distinctive characteristic of the dacians. which is not true
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Kraxis]

Quote[/b] (Nowake @ Mar. 17 2004,02:16)]You got me wrong. I wasn't saying that Dacia should be included in the Eastern Barbarian culture, it belongs there. But you said something about the falx being the only distinctive characteristic of the dacians. which is not true
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
Ah... but no, I didn't say the falx was the only thing destinctive. At least I didn't intend to, as the post you quoted clearly indicates.

Heh, it seems we have been standing on the same side of the fence... fecing. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[jean_s]

The latest screenshot with the strategical map shows clearly two big regions(the brown ones)where only Dacia could be. At least so I think http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif .look in the left- down corner.

http://www.strategyinformer.com/misc....ar,50,1 (http://www.strategyinformer.com/misc/screenshot-viewer.shtml?rometotalwar,50,1)

[Sir Robin]

Nice catch...

Didn't even think of looking at the mini-map on that shot.

Looks to be eleven different faction colors to.

[The Wizard]

Mind you, that's quite an old screenshot.



~Wiz

[RisingSun]

I really-really-really-really-really-really-really hope they make the provinces much smaller than that... All of France has four god damned provinces... If they're that large, conquering Europe will be a piece of friggin' cake...

[Kraxis]

I can see 12 colours, and we can't even see the eastern med and all the eastern factions. So I think it a fair representation. Also, mind you that the game has gone some time and so factions might have died out (but which ones?).

[The Wizard]

Quote[/b] (RisingSun @ Mar. 24 2004,16:03)]I really-really-really-really-really-really-really hope they make the provinces much smaller than that... All of France has four god damned provinces... If they're that large, conquering Europe will be a piece of friggin' cake...
Those aren't provinces but regions, if you ask me. There is no longer a province-by-province movement system, but rather a 360° movement system for all armies, making it a whole lot more interesting stragetically, rather than the slightly more complicated chess of old.



~Wiz

[Sir Robin]

Yes but no one from CA has given us much deatil about this.

Provinces are no longer used to measure movement. However we have not gotten anything concrete stating that provinces no longer exist at all.

It would be nice to have fluidic borders based on cities and "influence" a la CivIII. However every strategic screenshot with a mini-map still shows provinces.

From what I have seen and read so far it appears that there will still be some form of "provinces." If you control the capitol city I guess you control the province.

RTW appears to be more focused on conquering cities than provinces. However we have yet to hear how many "cities" will be in each province/region/county etc...

If there are multiple cities per province/region/county, then I have no problem with it. If there is only one city per province then we will have the same strategic goals as in MTW. Only now it will take longer to get there and be harder to hold.

We have not heard anything suggesting that borders are fluid based on population, influence, etc...

I just hope the city/province/region/whatever count is significantly higher than in MTW.

[The Wizard]

IIRC, the FAQ states that the borders of a faction are determined by cities and their importance. Let's look it up....

EDIT:: Ok, found it.


Quote[/b] ]The biggest change you'll notice is on the campaign map. The 'Risk-style' provinces have disappeared to be replaced by point-to-point movement for armies, and settlements with their own regions (hinterlands) that they draw on depending on the size of the settlement. A big, advanced city will have more influence on its surrounds than a small town. Armies and characters on this map are now fully animated and march (or sneak, in the case of spies) to fulfil your orders.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif



~Wiz

[Orda Khan]

Quote[/b] (RisingSun @ Mar. 14 2004,21:42)]That's a step down from VI. I'm disappointed. It seems every week CA decides to release some information which makes me question a little more whether I'll buy RTW...
This quote mirrors my thoughts. Just what is the point of having non playable factions? I remember my disgust on finding Mongols would be non playable when waiting for MTW, many Mods later they become playable but in Late only http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-inquisitive.gif Now what do you call that?? Variety is what we need and my feelings are, if they can't provide that then let's have only one faction like STW ( yeh, yeh different Clans maybe but all had same units ) The last thing I want is another shambles like MTW

.....Orda

[Longshanks]

I could be wrong but I believe the Scythians will be the only faction to be represented in the Eastern Barbarian cultural style.

Hopefully you are, Numidia should be Eastern barbarian as should Cyrenaica, at least if either province appears as an idependant nation. I haven't seen the map, so maybe they will be controlled by Carthage & Egypt.

[Galestrum]

perhaps the "regions or provinces" are only used for building region specific troop types?

[Sir Robin]

Scary...

Just read the first developer diary. "If you conquer the city you conquer the province."

Well I guess that settles how many cities there are per province. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

Even if province/region size varies depending on importance of the city looking at the mini-map showing screenshots doesn't give us as many as we hoped for. Only four cities/provinces for all of France?

Honestly we will just have to wait and see...

[jean_s]

...right. And what a wait http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-gossip.gif

[Nowake]

Quote[/b] (jean_s @ Mar. 25 2004,09:08)]...right. And what a wait http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-gossip.gif
Salve comrade


As the others said, we still have to wait and see, the provinces are not there anymore, who knows what may have changed?

[Kraxis]

I just took a more careful look at the map... At first it saddened me to notice that the three main cities of the Germanic faction fit fairly well with the 'provinces' of the minimap.

Then I noticed something that is of interest to us all.
Seemingly there can be more than one town/city per 'province'. Notice how Denmark is one 'province' but that there are two settlements... And the northwestern Germanic area also had two towns (seems smaller than the bigger ones to the south and east). But only one town/city in each area has the banner of the faction flying, this could indicate a major and minor town/city.

But this is an old build, so anything couls have changed.

[Spino]

Quote[/b] ]But only one town/city in each area has the banner of the faction flying, this could indicate a major and minor town/city.

One can only hope. On the one hand only one city per region certainly gives the strategic AI an easier time of figuring out what it needs to do and where to send its armies. On the other hand numerous cities and towns per region allow for a more realistic creation of large armies in a short period of time, especially in heavily populated regions that historically did just that.

[jean_s]

I would bet for more than one town in a region. ...and also I might place a little bet on a variable border of every region (smth like in Sid's Civilisation).