Europa Barbarorum

[biguth dickuth]

Of course. You're right. For the factions I've been responsible for, I will still have to wait for RTW's release to see what will be necessary to ad to the historical descriptions, culture and units, as well as to see how moddable RTW will be. That will limit the amount of work that remains to be done by everyone (researchers and modders alike).

Of course we'll have to wait for the game, as you said. It's only then that we'll know exactly how much modding labour will be required. I just meant that having the necessary data at hand, when that happens, will make things easier...
Although i'm on an exam period i'm still a bit :jumping: about the game and will be more after it is modded.


Yeah, Biguth, I'll post em. I just never got around to it. I've also got a whole bunch from Celts, which demonstrate how the Celts /really/ looked like, not the foolish way CA has done them. I'll get them up ASAP.

Thanks Steppe Merc! I hope i wasn't too annoying. My post was meaning to stir the waters (just in case they were getting stale ~;p ) and see how the project is going. And i'd love to see those drawings anyway!

[Steppe Merc]

Nope, not annoying at all. Hopefully they'll be up be tommorrow.

[Steppe Merc]

Grr. I scanned them, but can't figure out how to post them!

[biguth dickuth]

Grr. I scanned them, but can't figure out how to post them!
For them to be constantly available in the forums you have to upload them on some webpage (if you have any) and use the links from there.
If you use links from your hard drive they will only be avilable when you're in the forums.

If you don't have a webpage of your own where you can upload them i suggest you ask for the contribution of some of the moderators so as he might upload them for all of us....hopefully!! ~;p

[Steppe Merc]

Right. I'll probably upload them tommorrow, though.

[Angadil]

Hi everyone,

the Scythians and Sarmatians are going reasonably well. Oleander Ardens and I have produced tentative lists for both them. OA focused more on the Scythians and I on the Sarmatians, but we cross-checked our efforts on a regular basis, discussing and criticizing the other's work. I've just been awfully hectic for the last weeks (preparing a long work trip) so I have not been able to visit the forum as often as I would have liked and it seems OA has been going through busy times as well. Nonetheless, lists of units for the Scythians and a potential Sarmatian faction (which I believe could be a good addition) are already there, waiting for final adjustments dependent on the details of the released game.

Cheers
A.

[Steppe Merc]

Yeah, we need the Sarmatians.

[Colovion]

I'm willing to help fill any research holes that need looking after. As I'll be playing this mod I feel kind of selfish sitting back and watching this thread grow and not contributing anything.

Steppe Merc, here's a couple file hosting sites:

https://www.photobucket.com/
http://www.hpphoto.com

[Steppe Merc]

Yay. Thank you. :bow:

[Steppe Merc]

Here are the Celts. I'll keep each book (Celts, Sarmatians and Parthians) in seprate posts. I'll edit later on to add in descriptions of the pics.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt1.jpg
Early La Tene warriors, late 5th century BCE
Right, these chaps are slightly earlier than our time period, but I liked it as it showed the clothing and armor quite well, as well as showing that they all have shirts on. The old guy is a chieftan, and notice in addition to his sword he has mutliple spears. The Guy on the right is a well off warrior, while the one on the right is a simple free tribal warrior. All wear checked or striped clothes.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt2.jpg
Gallic Warriors of the Middle La Tene 35d- 2nd BCE
The naked guy is one of the Gaesatae, actaully a tribe that was famous for fighting naked. These would be similar to the Naked Fanatics, but note that he doesn't have the punk rock hairdo. The other foot soldier is frome the Marne district, and again has a shirt. The horsmen has the famous eagle helmet, and it's wings flap as he rides. He is quite well equpiied , and has iron mail. This would probably be a noble unit, but not that of the generals. Note the two javilens.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt3.jpg
Gallic Cavlarymen of the Late La Tene period, 1st century BCE
Some more Cavalry men. They again, all have shirts. They are more poor soldiers, their helms actaully being scavenged from Romans. In the desc there's an excellent part of Celtic horse strategy:
"These riders would normally throw their javelins immediately before contact; the heavier thrusting spear would be used at close quaters, and finnaly the sword might be drawn"
In the back, there's a dude with a celtic war trumpet that has a boar on it, possibly inspiring CA's choice to have on the unit flag of the Gauls a boar.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt4.jpg
British Chariot and Crew, 55 BCE
A beutiful picture of a chariot, sorry that the middle's a bit cut off, as it's a two page spread. The poorer driver (the one with woad on him) would manuever the chariot at incredible speeds, while their nobleman passenger would throw javellins. They would dismount to fight against infantry, while the driver would move the chariot off ready to pick up the nobleman.


https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt5.jpg
Celtic Light infantry types 1st century BCE, 1st century CE
Light infantry types, these do have no shirts, but that's because their all light infantry, and likely poor. The slingers were quite common, while the bowmen were rarer. The light swordsmen were supposedly quite good, but were deffeated by Germanic auxalries. The javileneers are young men not yet strong enough to trade swords with the grown men, so they used javilens instead as their main weapon.

[Steppe Merc]

Parthians.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/parth1.jpg
Parthian Cataphracts 1st century BCE
These are the cataphracts. They used their kontos with two hands, going very slowly at an 'ambling pace'. Note that the one on the left is better equipped. The level of armor depended on the noble man's wealth, and often horses were un armoured. The most popular early armor was scale, either of hard leather, horn or iron, depending on the richness of the noble. Each man provided his own armor, so little standarisation exited at all. After the inital charge, after the weaking up by the horse archers, they would switch to their great swords. Note that the current Cataphract would likely be best for a generals unit, for their should be at least three units of cataphracts, varying in strenght, cost and skill.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/parth2.jpg
Light Infantry Types
These are actaully from the Sassanaiains, but they kept their infantry essantially the same as their Parthian fore bears. However, ignore the catahphract. The spearmen was pretty much worthless, a poor peasant with a spear and sheild better suited for garrison duty or gaurding baggage trains than open battles. The archer is a Syrian Merc, and is of far better quality than of the spearman. The slinger is from Anatolia, and a highlander of very good quality despite his lightness. The Javileener is a Kurd, and is also a highlander, thus of good quality. Note: NO PAJAMAS!

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/parth3.jpg
Parthian Horse Archers
These are horse archers, mainly poorer nobles. They are extremely similar to their Scythian and Sarmatian brethren, and have a similar love for colors. Note the gorytos, the combo quiver/bow case. And look: NO PAJAMAS! Apparently they loved their long hair, and often went helmless in pictorial evidence, and as you can see have quite long hair. They all have the superior compound or complex bow, and have a marked suporiority to non- Eastern nomadic peoples in their bows.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/parth4.jpg
The picture before were Parthians petty noble archers, while these are true nomads, mercanaries employed by their more civilized brethren. The white guy with blond hair is an Iranian nomad, and has one spear and a sword along with his bow, as opposed to the foriegn Turco-Mongol archer who has multiple javilens and a lasso with his bow. The guy with the dorky hat is a standard bearer. Again: NO PAJAMAS.

In conclusion, the Parthians should have more varied units, and NO PAJAMAS!

[biguth dickuth]

Excellent!!
Thanks a lot Steppe Merc!! ~:cheers:
I expect these to help a lot when creating the looks of the modded units with a "unit-dresser" or any other skin-making utility, once the game comes out!

[Steppe Merc]

Yeah, I'll get the Sarmatians up as soon as I find the book. ~:mad:

[Steppe Merc]

Right, added descriptions. More knowledable people, please add your imput!

[biguth dickuth]

Actually the pajama-clothed guys with the hood on (like the one in my avatar!) look a lot like some soldiers of the Achaemenid persian empire. I guess that CA recreated some of them (perhaps for the needs of Time Commanders) and then decided to use the graphic on some of the eastern soldiers of the game.
There is a chance (a small one) that some infantrymen had kept the fashion of the achaemenid times but the parthian horse-archers would certainly NOT dress like that. Nor would they look, of course, similar to later byzantine cavalrymen (like some parthian horse-archers in certain vids (e.g. Carrhae) with their cone-helmets with chain-mail protectors of the neck and chain-mail shirt with leather stripes.)
The drawings of the related osprey books have been created after a good amount of historical research and i tend to trust them more than the fantasy of a skin-designer!

[Steppe Merc]

Yeah, I figured that's why they did it. Another thing, all the nomads need to be more colurful. We should put their faction color on their saddle cloth or something.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

More knowledable people, please add your imput!
Well, what can I say? Osprey books are priceless for Historical info, Angus draws beautifully and you know how to gather great info... :thumbsup:

[Steppe Merc]

:bow: Thanks. Today I'll scan and post the Sarmatian pics. Any one else with Osprey, please post pics too!

[The_Emperor]

Excellent stuff on the celts... Exactly the sort of pics I was looking for but couldn't find.

At any rate you have pointed out roughly the same points that i did. ~:wave:

[Nowake]

Salve people,


Missed for quite a while now (haven't even tried the demo yet :tomato: ) So what's new around here? Say if I should update my descriptions on the dacians.

[biguth dickuth]

Salve people,


Missed for quite a while now (haven't even tried the demo yet :tomato: ) So what's new around here? Say if I should update my descriptions on the dacians.
I remember that your description of the Dacians was very good indeed and we can trace the thread easily using the "search" utility.

If, on the other hand, you have some additions or alterations or you just want to transfer it here in order for it to be "handy", go ahead!! :charge:

[ick_of_pick]

Dickuth, I believe Palmyra existed between 64 BC and 273 AD, and thier armies consisted of basically the same thing as the Parthians and Sassinians. The Assyrians did reunite too late for the timeframe of the game though, about 35+ AD, and I also have some details on thier army, if you're interested of course...

Ick

[biguth dickuth]

Dickuth, I believe Palmyra existed between 64 BC and 273 AD, and thier armies consisted of basically the same thing as the Parthians and Sassinians. The Assyrians did reunite too late for the timeframe of the game though, about 35+ AD, and I also have some details on thier army, if you're interested of course...

Ick
Of course i'm interested and i believe others are too!!
So go ahead and post whatever info you've got. It's welcome! ~:)

About Palmyra, in my post about your suggestion you'll see that i didn't say that Palmyra is out of the timeframe of the game but that it appears too late in it. Therefore, since there aren't any "early", "high" and "late" campaigns but only one that starts at 270BC and ends at 14AD, adding Palmyra in the game from the beginning (aka 270BC) would not be very correct, in historical terms.
Of course, if there is a way to make new factions emerge at certain points during the campaign, then i'd happily mod it in and make it emerge at 64BC.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Of course i'm interested and i believe others are too!!
So go ahead and post whatever info you've got. It's welcome! ~:)

About Palmyra, in my post about your suggestion you'll see that i didn't say that Palmyra is out of the timeframe of the game but that it appears too late in it. Therefore, since there aren't any "early", "high" and "late" campaigns but only one that starts at 270BC and ends at 14AD, adding Palmyra in the game from the beginning (aka 270BC) would not be very correct, in historical terms.
Of course, if there is a way to make new factions emerge at certain points during the campaign, then i'd happily mod it in and make it emerge at 64BC.
I agree. Contrary to MTW, that tryed to relate European Middle Age political turmoil and variation by using three different ages, the very fact that RTW doesn't allow that splitting, IMHO, disallows Palmyra from being included in the game.

I'm not saying this to hostilize anyone but, we have to take into consideration one thing: unnecessary work isn't good for the completion of the MOD. We have to make sure that the MOD is Historically correct as much as possible, but without letting Historical quirks spoil the completion of the MOD. If Palmyra was included, that would mean more 3d unit modelling and texturing, more descriptions, another culture to caracterize, etc...

So, because it is only of significance in the end of the game period, it makes no sense to include it. Only if we could find a way to make it appear like the Swiss or Burgundians in MTW, would it be viable.

[Steppe Merc]

Has there been any ideas if whether or not there's ideas to spilt the Gauls, Germans, and similar factions into smaller tribes? So instead of a highly unrealistic 1 Gallic faction, mabye three?

[Colovion]

Has there been any ideas if whether or not there's ideas to spilt the Gauls, Germans, and similar factions into smaller tribes? So instead of a highly unrealistic 1 Gallic faction, mabye three?


Hmmm, I don't know - there were an awful lot of tribes:


The principal tribes of Gaul (with the modern survivals or locations) were: Abrincati (Avranches); Aedui; Allobroges; Ambiani (Amiens); Andecavi (Angers, Anjou); Atrebates (Arras); Baiocassi (Bayeux); Bellovaci (Beauvais); Bituriges (Bourges, Berry); Cadurci (Cahors, Quercy); Carnutes (Chartres); Catalauni (Châlons); Cenomani (Le Mans, Maine); Eburovici (Évreux); Helvetii; Lemovices (Limoges, Limousin); Lingones (Langres); Lexovii (Lisieux); Meldae (Meaux); Namnetes (Nantes); Nervii; Parisii (Paris); Petrocorii (Périgueux, Périgord); Pictones or Pictavi (Poitiers, Poitou); Redones (Rennes, Breton Roazon); Remi (Reims); Ruteni (Rodez); Santones (Saintes); Senones (Sens); Sequani, in the Franche-Comté; Silvanecti (Senlis); Suessiones (Soissons); Treveri (Trier, French Trèves); Tricassi (Troyes); Turones (Tours, Touraine); Veneti (Vannes, Breton Gwened).

http://www.bartleby.com/65/ga/Gaul.html

[ick_of_pick]

The Palmyran military was almost exactly like the Parthian and Sassinian army, basically just horse archers and cataphracts, so there would be very little moddeling there, just the creation of a faction flag. post-empire Assyria should probably not be included, as they were a religious and mercantile state with only local mercenaries for an army.

[biguth dickuth]

The Palmyran military was almost exactly like the Parthian and Sassinian army, basically just horse archers and cataphracts, so there would be very little moddeling there, just the creation of a faction flag. post-empire Assyria should probably not be included, as they were a religious and mercantile state with only local mercenaries for an army.
Ok, perhaps it isn't necessary to create new units and 3d models for a palmyran faction so the extra labour won't be much, but this isn't really the issue.

If you think about it, at 270BC the Seleucid kingdom was an empire and including a palmyran faction which didn't exist at the time detracts plenty of land from it, which wouldn't be historicaly correct.
Now, as Aymar also said, if we find a way to make new factions emerge, like the Burgundians and the Swiss did in MTW, then i'd happily agree with you to include Palmyra and have it emerging at 64BC.
I wouldn't like to put in from the beginning a faction that appeared 200 years later!
So what do you think? Do we have an agreement?

[Steppe Merc]

Hmm... that is a huge amount of Tribes. But I still would be for mabye splitting them up a little bit...
Also, what about the Italian Allies? Any plans on adding them in, or will we keep the three families?

[Orda Khan]

Well it must be said, I am really looking forward to RTW release so you guys can go to work on this project :yes:
This is fascinating reading and sounds far more like the game I expected.

One question....Will you be looking for a way around the locked factions? You can guess why I ask

.....Orda

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Well it must be said, I am really looking forward to RTW release so you guys can go to work on this project :yes:
Good to know... :thumbsup:



This is fascinating reading and sounds far more like the game I expected.
I think I speak for most of the people that contributed to EB when I say: Thank you for your words... :bow:



One question....Will you be looking for a way around the locked factions? You can guess why I ask

.....Orda
Of course we can guess why (Scythians) and of course we'll try to unlock them all. :wink2:

[Steppe Merc]

Here's the Sarmatians. Sadly, the plates are all centered around 1st BCE to 2nd CE, since this is when the most information is know. However, I have included some plates, for while they may be a bit out of our time frame, I feel they are still important.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/sarmatian1.jpg
Don Frontier, 5-4th Century BCE
A bit to early, but you get the picture. Note the 'Amazon', and here use of the lasso, for which they were aparently famous for. Note the Scythian on the ground, and his colurful outfit. Apparently the Sarmatians were a bit less colorful, but this is again early than our timeperiod, and I feel they advanced colorfuly as the years progressed. All in all the Sarmatians are quite similar to the Scythians, except slightly poorer weapons. Apparently some Sarmatians were tattooed in child hood. Note the 'Amazon' is nothing near like the one showed at the com.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/sarmatian2.jpg
The Divine Sword, Pontic Steps Late 1st BCE to 1st CE
This is a relgious cermony, worshipping the Divine Sword, which apparently the Scythians did as well. They also worshipped the wind, for one gave life while the other took. Check out the armour on the heavy horsman, and his spear. The red guy is a noble.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/sarmatian3.jpg
This is a foot soldier of the Bosphoran Crimea. Not sure if they'll be included, or if they should be, but here he is.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/sarmatian4.jpg
Trajan's First Dacian War 101-102 CE
These are again out of our time zone, but they show quite well the weilding of the two handed contus and the Parthian Shot (which, of course, others used besides the Parthians).

This isn't much, I know, but they should be essentially similar to the Scythians. However, the Sarmatians should be in hear, as well as the Scythians (since I don't think their overrun quite yet).

[Orda Khan]

I like that last plate, the bow for once, is near to accurate in scale. Angus McBride doesn't seem to be able to manage this, instead recreating something along 'Cupid' lines.

Also, most Asiatic composite bows were fired using the thumb draw which can add six inches to arrow length over those fired by the more well known 'split finger' method.

Did the Sarmatians favour the bow as a primary weapon? I'm no expert on them, I was just wondering as the Alans favoured the javelin over the bow; until they were conquered by the Huns. After this they adopted the Horse Archer/Heavy Cav combination

.....Orda

[Steppe Merc]

While the Alans were related to the Sarmatians, the Sarmatian's main weapon was the composite bow. Their armies were similar to the Scythians and the Parthians: large numbers of horsearchers, smaller number of heavy horse, and the infantry were almost always of poor quality.

[Orda Khan]

Yes....I did a little digging and read a nice account of Sarmatian armour. They split hooves into pieces which they fashioned into a scale breast plate, which was reportedly equal to those of the Greeks.
It would seem they possibly absorbed rather than ousted the Scythians, as the 'Royal Scythians' were among the most dominant of four main groups of Sarmatians

......Orda

[Colovion]

PSYCHO V sent me a PM which had some good ideas. he's still a junior member so I'm posting this for him. ~:)


Gday

You could split the Gauls in four. The Aedui confederacy in the north, the Arverni alliance in the south & south-east, the Cisalpine Gauls in northern Italy and the Celtiberians in Spain.

The Britons could be split in three. The Catuvellauni confederacy in the south of Briton and north of Gaul, the Brigantes in the middle of Briton and a few rebels / Caledonii in the far north.

The same could be done for the Germans, though I can't recall all the divisions adequately to make some suggestions off the top of my head. Definitely worth having a large Seubian faction.

Just a suggestion.

my2bob

[Steppe Merc]

I was wondereing were Physco went to! I've missed him for a while!
And Orda, yeah, I read an extremly similar thing. They also made some poorer quality scale armour out of hardened hides.

[Orda Khan]

On a different note for possible consideration....The General's Standard. Back in STW I loved the various Standards, you had something to look for on the battlefield. In MTW it became just another flag with nowhere near as much significance. Ok the Imperial type banners suit factions like Rome but is there any way to reproduce something resembling a Tuqh Standard for these Steppe factions?

.......Orda

[Colovion]

On a different note for possible consideration....The General's Standard. Back in STW I loved the various Standards, you had something to look for on the battlefield. In MTW it became just another flag with nowhere near as much significance. Ok the Imperial type banners suit factions like Rome but is there any way to reproduce something resembling a Tuqh Standard for these Steppe factions?

.......Orda

I think it would be a worthy cause but the thing about that is that there wouldn't be enough historic standerds to produce enough. If we wanted to do that for any number of tribes - like the Gauls with their many tribes, (perhaps just using each city for each standard but still being one faction)... we'd have to guess or take symbols found in their native histories that have been preserved and use them in that way. It would deffinately give a sense of disunity within the factions that were in essence just warring tribal bands brought together under your rule.

I really don't think there would be anything to lose on this one - I mean the Gauls have a Red Boar as their standard, surely we could find other, different ideas for standards incorporate as well.

Will we be able to do something lilke that though? that's the important question.

[Silver Rusher]

As a guild member I am opposed to the appalling unrealisticness of RTW barbarians. Especially the headthrowers... :surrender:

I would like to become a supporter of Europa Barbarorum, but two things...

1) Only if it actually improves the gameplay, as well as just making the barbarians super-realistic

2) I have no space left on my sig... :knight:

[Steppe Merc]

Well, we believe that improving historicalness improves gameplay. But I think our main ideal is to make it the game it should have been: more historical and more fun.
And I'm sure you could just type it in your sig if theres no room for the flag. ~D

[biguth dickuth]

As a guild member I am opposed to the appalling unrealisticness of RTW barbarians. Especially the headthrowers... :surrender:

I would like to become a supporter of Europa Barbarorum, but two things...

1) Only if it actually improves the gameplay, as well as just making the barbarians super-realistic

2) I have no space left on my sig... :knight:
As Steppe Merc also said, the purpose of this project is to improve gameplay. If the new units, that will probably be added, prove to create problems in gameplay we can always adjust their stats and prices until these problems are solved. Other than that, i can't see any other possibility of the future demo to hurt gameplay.

[PSYCHO]

:hide:

Hey all,

May be too early to call but from the screen shots posted all over the net, it looks like the barbs are going to need some serious work. Do we have anyone who can skin yet? ...or know which programs we could use for such?

Just to revisit some old ground. Some suggestions for the Gauls Here (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=33254)

Probably suggest the Arverni and the Heavy cav to appear post an event similar to the Marian reforms for Rome.



Failing that, here was a suggested quick (last minute) fix list I posted to CA about couple of weeks before Gold. At least these would have added a little more factional diversity / eye candy.

----------------------------------------------------------------
*Give all the Britons and Gauls (Celts apart from the ‘peasants’) a torque around their neck. I’m surprised we haven’t seen one of these as yet.
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/resources/image/large/ps261195.jpg

* Make the war-cry “Stinking Rats” a huge roar that can be heard from the other side of the battlefield.

* Include the carnyx for the Celts.

* Include a similar rhythmic shield bashing in unison thingy that can be done on the march for high morale Gauls and Germans. Baritus for Germans.

* Enable the Gauls and Germans to form ranks, shield walls etc

* Give all the Briton & Gallic shields some Celtic designs with a few swirls and squiggles.

* Make the Briton / Gallic Warband shields slightly bigger with a boss running it’s length
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/resources/image/large/ps179137.jpg

* Give the Briton Chariot Warrior (non-Driver), Briton equipment and a shirt.
http://www.brigantesnation.com/celticart/Celtic/PeakedHelmet1.JPG
http://www.brigantesnation.com/celticart/Celtic/PeakedHelmet2.JPG
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/resources/image/large/ps233381.jpg
http://www.histomin.com/lineevd/mpevcg35.jpg

* Give the Briton Swordsman the same helmet

* Give the Briton Heavy Chariots, Horse / Pony armour
http://www.freephotohost.net/is.php?i=2029&img=7836Briton_Chariot_Fittings.jpg

* Incorporate these Briton arms for either Briton Warchiefs or some other elite (non-woad warrior) units.
http://www.brigantesnation.com/celticart/Celtic/HornedHelmet.JPG
http://www.brigantesnation.com/celticart/Celtic/BatterseaShield.JPG

* Give the Gallic Swordsmen a Helmet and Oval shield
http://www.nhm-wien.ac.at/NHM/Prehist/Collection/Images/Abb22.jpg
http://www.celtic-smith.cz/images/prilba1.jpg
http://www.arms-armor.cz/catalog/files_products/th_sh054.jpg

* Give the Gallic Warguard a Gallic Boar Helmet and Shirt
http://www.celtic-smith.cz/images/prilba2.jpg
http://www.celtic-smith.cz/images/helmaakanec.jpg

* Give the Gallic Cavalry a Helmet (Post Marian)
http://www.medieval-weaponry.com/media/ah6090.jpg

* Give the Gallic Noble cavalry a Gallic mow, Chain Mail, Cloak and Gallic Raven Helmet
http://www.unc.edu/celtic/catalogue/grave/ravenhelmet.jpg
www.jrue.com/albums/userp...n%20II.JPG

* Depict the Gallic Druid Warrior more along these lines
www.jrue.com/albums/userp...II%7E0.JPG

* Give the Celts the option to build Oppida of stone and wood that can be manned.
http://kidslink.bo.cnr.it/irrsaeer/lat/oppida/dismurus2.jpg
http://kidslink.bo.cnr.it/irrsaeer/lat/oppida/dismurus3.jpg
http://www.ckrumlov.cz/obr/region/histor/2586b.jpg
http://www.jewelion.com/oswestry/pictures/hillfort.jpg

* Go to town creating cool / crazy horned, winged, feathered helmets for the Gallic Chieftains

* Give the Germans more fur and leather, the German Warband a long Hexagonal shield
www.jrue.com/albums/userp...German.jpg

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

my2bob :skull:

..oh, and thanks fellas ~;)

[The_Emperor]

I second Psycho's sugguestions for the Britons.

[Colovion]

Those are all very good ideas. I wish it was possible to make the Gauls, brits and Germans not as uniform as the more regimented civs - like with a variation in shields, clothing, helms etc...

From reading some reviews it seems that Carthage is rather weak compared to the other factions and after the Marian reforms Rome is really the only true power because the new legions just roll over everything. IIRC the Urban Cohorts even give the Spartan "beyond elite" a run for their money and bring them close to, if not total, defeat (head on charge here). Something about these two points makes me cringe that the game isn't very balanced.

I'm also getting afraid that the game is limited in modablity because there aren't make unit skins to begin with that if we need to create another unit for a particular faction (say the severely underpowered Gauls) it will be more difficult than MTW because it's not just 2D sprites here.

Here's hoping for the best though. ~:smoking:

[The_Emperor]

Historically Carthage didn't have a very good military and had to rely on Mercenaries and tactics to win against Rome. I suspect that this is what CA are leaning towards with the Carthaginian style.

Think of them as MTW's Byzantium with a Late period start!

I think Egypt and the Barbarians are the main problems that need rectifying in the mod.

[Orda Khan]

It just makes me wonder even more, with all this wealth of historical information, how the 'Barbarian' units turned out so bad.

The ability to form a very strong spearwall is a must.

.....Orda

[biguth dickuth]

Those are all very good ideas. I wish it was possible to make the Gauls, brits and Germans not as uniform as the more regimented civs - like with a variation in shields, clothing, helms etc...

From reading some reviews it seems that Carthage is rather weak compared to the other factions and after the Marian reforms Rome is really the only true power because the new legions just roll over everything. IIRC the Urban Cohorts even give the Spartan "beyond elite" a run for their money and bring them close to, if not total, defeat (head on charge here). Something about these two points makes me cringe that the game isn't very balanced.

I'm also getting afraid that the game is limited in modablity because there aren't make unit skins to begin with that if we need to create another unit for a particular faction (say the severely underpowered Gauls) it will be more difficult than MTW because it's not just 2D sprites here.

Here's hoping for the best though. ~:smoking:
I don't know about the urban cohorts... Are they actually historical or are they an uber-unit just to make sure the romans win the game no matter what?

Also, from what you say, am i to understand that there is no "unit-dresser" application after all, unlike what we were promised? If this is true then modding the unit skins may get really hard....

About Psycho's post, i find most of his ideas excellent as they will give much flavor to the Gallic and Briton factions. It would be best if CA had taken them into account. I think we can still manage to use some of them in the mod, however.

[Orda Khan]

Well if this Mod is ever to be used other than a SP campaign, it seems the old MTW v1.0 'one player, one faction' nonsense has returned :furious3: :wall:

.......Orda

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Fortunatelly, even if there is no friendly skining editor within RTW, I am able to skin 3d models in comercial 3D programs. Although quite a lot harder and slower, it can be acomplished, but I still need to see in what format will the meshes have be saved to be able to work in RTW.

I better start practicing, because I haven't made it in a while... :thinking:

[Steppe Merc]

I haven't seen any in built modding tools, but I'm not in the mood to go snooping around right now.

[Steppe Merc]

Playing as the Parthians, it isn't quite as bad as I feared. I can play as all factions (modded it), and the horsearchers act very well: firing on the move, when they charge the enmy they fire their bows. It's a built in feature, rather than a clicky one. At least the Sarmatians are mercanaries, and I've recruited a few of their heavy cavalry. I have yet to use them to see if they use their kontos correctly, but I know the Cataphracts' spear are far to small, one sided and are used with one hand.
Oh, one huge problem: the Generals have light javilen throwers, rather than cataphracts, for some crazy reason.

[ick_of_pick]

Biguth, I found the name of the second Assyrian empire, it was founded in 87 BC and was called Adiabene by the greeks, but "Assyria" by the mesopotamians. They successfully fought of the Romans, Persians, Armenians, and palmyrans for over a century, and existed until after Jesus's death, but they eventually merged with Armenia when the Romans and Persians began fighting it out over the whole region, If you want military facts just respond...

ick

[Steppe Merc]

More problems: Scythians are not nearly colorful enough, and seriously limited in their troops, as are Parthians. There are no heavy horse archers for the Parthians, nor are their medium lancers. And both should have a lancer/archer unit as well. And Parthians, of course need to lose the pajamas.

[biguth dickuth]

Biguth, I found the name of the second Assyrian empire, it was founded in 87 BC and was called Adiabene by the greeks, but "Assyria" by the mesopotamians. They successfully fought of the Romans, Persians, Armenians, and palmyrans for over a century, and existed until after Jesus's death, but they eventually merged with Armenia when the Romans and Persians began fighting it out over the whole region, If you want military facts just respond...

ick
Hi ick_of_pick!
Yes, i'd be glad to read about it so feel free to post whatever you want.

Now, i'd really like to know if a faction-emerging capability is inherent in the game and whether it is moddable (hopefully) or hardcoded. But i guess this is something that will be answered after the game gets played a little more and the first ambitious modders start checking the various possibilities given to us.
Personaly, i'm planning to get the game around mid or late october so i won't have the chance to check it on my own till then.

[ick_of_pick]

The Assyrians had based thier military on that of the old empire, but they did adapt new ideas based on thier encounters with various other armies. The army was based on shock tactics, heavy spearmen forming a shield-wall, while heavy cavalry struck weakpoints in the enemy formation. Almost all their soldiers were armored, even the archers. The cavalry was the elite of the army, and the obsolete chariots were replaced with cataphracts, and mounted archers. The mounted archers were not trained like parthians, and were intended to pin the enemy flanks so the heavy infantry had an 'anvil' to smash the enemy main body on. The cataphracts were used more freqeuently then there were previously, and the kings bodyguards were called the "qurbuti," literally: "close to me." They were fully barded cavalry, similar to cataphracts, armed with lances and bows, and sometimes fought on foot as well. Assyrian bows were notoriously powerful, and were supposedly capable of firing over 650 meters with a target arrow, and 400 meters with an armour-piercing war arrow.
The biggest weakness of the Assyrian army was dealing with light cavalry and skirmishing tactics, and they suffered the worst defeats at the hands of the scythians, who were masters of this sort of fighting. So the Assyrians suck to close combat and sieges, and repeatedly defeated the Romans who tried to take northern Mesopotamia several times in the first century.

The ruling class converted to Judaism in the early first century, which created the misconseption that Adiabene was a "Jewish" kingdom, but the population was never close to being predominantly Jewish, and the leaders quickly switched to Christianity after the Nestorian church was founded. After the Sassinians and the Romans continually fought over the land, Assyria was conquered again, this time by the Romans and was merged with Armenia, and fell under the government of the Armenian King.
In 412, the Assyrians revolted against the Persians (who were now in control of the land), but were defeated and the Persians captured and castrated some 400 Assyrian leaders.

Ick

heres a link to some history:
http://aanf.org/America/assyrians/assyrians_assyria.htm

[Steppe Merc]

More problems: All the bows are self bows, no compositese. Scythian horse archers just look like the rest of the barbarians, shirtless and all, plunked on a horse. No colors, no long flowing hair, just the same. Also, there are two highly inacurate female units for the Scythians: 1. the Scythian noblewomen, as seen before. There's also a Head hunting maden, with a bigass axe, with the same breast cups as the noblewomen. No bow even!
Not enough scale armour, to much lamalae and chain.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

More problems: All the bows are self bows, no compositese. Scythian horse archers just look like the rest of the barbarians, shirtless and all, plunked on a horse. No colors, no long flowing hair, just the same. Also, there are two highly inacurate female units for the Scythians: 1. the Scythian noblewomen, as seen before. There's also a Head hunting maden, with a bigass axe, with the same breast cups as the noblewomen. No bow even!
Not enough scale armour, to much lamalae and chain.
Oh, well !! More units to model correctly... :juggle:

[Steppe Merc]

Yup. The Scythians are, alas, in the Barbarian mode, rather than the Eastern. They should look far more like the Parthians than the British, but the don't.
Another thing is that Thrace is serverly weak in cavalry, for some insane reason. I thought they had very good cavalry, but I don't see any. In fact, I think most of the 'barbarians' suffer from cavalry shortage, despite the fact that most, if not all had very good cavalry.

[Colovion]

That is really too bad about the Scythians.

Anyone know how to add quotes to the game? this one would be perfect:

The Scythian soldier scrapes the scalp clean of flesh and softening it by rubbing between the hands, uses it thenceforth as a napkin. The Scyth is proud of these scalps and hangs them from his bridle rein; the greater the number of such napkins that a man can show, the more highly is he esteemed among them. Many make themselves cloaks by sewing a quantity of these scalps together.....Such as the Scythian customs with respect to scalps."
---- Herodotus, History

If you want to add it to your own game - or add any of your other quotes you enjoy to the game add it to: RTW/Data/text/quotes.txt at the bottom.

[DisruptorX]

More problems: Scythians are not nearly colorful enough, and seriously limited in their troops, as are Parthians. There are no heavy horse archers for the Parthians, nor are their medium lancers. And both should have a lancer/archer unit as well. And Parthians, of course need to lose the pajamas.

To be fair, its the purple colour that makes the pajames look really dumb. If you hire the mercenary eastern warriors, they have green clothes and a white turban, it looks alot better. Pontus also gets blue ones, which still look better than the purple ones.

[Colovion]

perhaps we should just change partians to all black or something. It would be pretty simple I would think and they probably wouldn't look as pajama-ish

[Steppe Merc]

No. The Parthians and Scythians should be extemely colorful. The faction color should be on the saddle cloth or something, and the rest of the body colorful.
And before any one says it's to confusing, it's far more confusing to have mercanaries the same green color. And the pajamas are just wrong, color won't change that. They should have no hats on at all. Look at my pics, thats how they should look.
edit: Err, I didn't mean to be rude or anything. I'm just really sick, and sorry if I came off rude. I meant it would be a bad idea, didn't mean to insult anyone. And Colvion, I thought that they took scalps... makes the Headhunting Maidens even stupider...

[Orda Khan]

Scythians look like Gauls and Britons???!!!
Shirtless and stuffed on a horse???!!!
~:mecry: ~:mecry: ~:mecry:

.....Orda

[Colovion]

No. The Parthians and Scythians should be extemely colorful. The faction color should be on the saddle cloth or something, and the rest of the body colorful.
And before any one says it's to confusing, it's far more confusing to have mercanaries the same green color. And the pajamas are just wrong, color won't change that. They should have no hats on at all. Look at my pics, thats how they should look.
edit: Err, I didn't mean to be rude or anything. I'm just really sick, and sorry if I came off rude. I meant it would be a bad idea, didn't mean to insult anyone. And Colvion, I thought that they took scalps... makes the Headhunting Maidens even stupider...

I'll never forgive you - you made me cry., ~:mecry:

I didn't know about the Headhunting Maidens. It makes sense that they hunt for heads - but as a unit on the battlefield that's just retarded.

It's stupid that prettymuch all of the Nations that aren't Hellenized or speaking Latin got the short end of the stick - not just for unit strength but for the depiction of them.

[Steppe Merc]

Sorry for making you cry, Colovion. ~;p
I might be able to live with the 'Amazons' if they had bows, and dressed like a normal Scythian, but huge axes and golden breast cups are unexceptable.
And Orda, it's true. The heavy horse don't look that bad, but the normal archers are litteraly the barbarian archers on horses. And as of yet I haven't located any modding tools at all...
So far it looks like MTW is more moddable than Rome, from what I can see. :wall:

[DisruptorX]

Scythians look like Gauls and Britons???!!!
Shirtless and stuffed on a horse???!!!
~:mecry: ~:mecry: ~:mecry:

.....Orda

The scythian noble horse archers and heavy cavalry have eastern styled armour, they don't look like europeans. I'm playing a scythian campaign right now, they are one of the most enjoyable factions to play as.

[Orda Khan]

The scythian noble horse archers and heavy cavalry have eastern styled armour, they don't look like europeans. I'm playing a scythian campaign right now, they are one of the most enjoyable factions to play as.

Yes some units look ok and I'm glad they are fun, gives me something to look forward to

......Orda

[Steppe Merc]

Orda, did the Scythians have blond hair? They don't in the game, but I was under the impression that some Parthians and Scythians had blond hair...

And did you know the Scythians are immune to frostbite? That's right, in the dead of Russian winter, I fought too battles with my brave, shirtless Scythians... you'd think they'd have learned to put on some clothes by now.

[Orda Khan]

~:joker: ~:joker: Nice one Steppe Merc, I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks men stripped to the half look bloody daft running around in the snow. It is for this reason alone that I would never have made a shirtless unit. And yes I do think even the hardest Germanic would reach for his woolies when it's -15 outside ~;)

Hair colour is something that has proven to be inconclusive or very intriguing to say the least. Light hair and eyes and also a high nose-bridge ( translated as deep socket eyes in Chinese manuscripts ) has been reported in many of the typical 'nomadic nations'. Whether there were blonde ( as in yellow ) haired nomads, I am not sure.
Chinese references to nomads with red hair are plentiful however the transliteration can become vague with Chinese. The 'red' actually refers to brown. Chingis Khan is described as having brown hair and green eyes and so too his sons. Rashid ad Din described how the Khan was amazed that the infant Qubilai had black hair, suggesting it harked back to an old uncle.
THe same reference to brown ( red ) hair is true of the Kirghiz and Hsiung Nu and there has been mention of fair hair and blue eyes among the Hepthalite Huns.
Taking this into consideration and also the fact that most of these peoples were somewhat mixed in origin, with subjugated nations absorbed, it would not surprise me if some fair haired warriors rode with Scythian armies and also the Parthians

.......Orda

[Colovion]

The only faction that I can see having a shirtless unit is the Egyptians.

but they're bollocks anyway

I have no problem with the Gauls/Brits/Germans having shirtless warriors as long as it's not winter - but I highly doubt that you can seasonally change soldier's outfits.

[Steppe Merc]

For the Celts, other than the Gestatae (or however you spell it), mabye the 'peasants' and slingers/javilneers/skirmeshers could be shirtless, as well as the Woad painted warriors.
The Germanic peasants mabye could be shirtless, though I know little of the Germans.
As for the Scythians, well last I looked Russia is really cold, even in the Summer, so my guess would be give them all shirts, please!
And does anyone know anything about the Dacians and the Thracians? They are potrayed, as yet again barbarians, except with falxes. Now, I always thought that the Thracians had really good cavalry, but they don't have any good cav units at all.
edit: Hey did you guys know that theres an Amazon village in North Russia? Oddly enough, they have chariots, wear Cornithiean Helmets and have the same idiotic breast cups. It's official: CA went WAY too far with the fact that some Sarmatian and Scythian women fought....

[DisruptorX]

The only faction that I can see having a shirtless unit is the Egyptians.

but they're bollocks anyway

I have no problem with the Gauls/Brits/Germans having shirtless warriors as long as it's not winter - but I highly doubt that you can seasonally change soldier's outfits.

I like the way the Egyptians foot soldiers have the head-dress and their style is based off the new kingdom of Egyptian antiquity.

Its historically incorrect in a blatant semi-comical, self-aware kind of way.

[ick_of_pick]

Is it possible for us as the "total war" community to possibly put all our facts, historical findings, and suggestions in one straightforward message to the games devs, and possibly get some of our recommended changes made for whenever the expansion comes out? because I know that there is going to be one and we should try and take advantage of that opportunity.

Ick

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Is it possible for us as the "total war" community to possibly put all our facts, historical findings, and suggestions in one straightforward message to the games devs, and possibly get some of our recommended changes made for whenever the expansion comes out? because I know that there is going to be one and we should try and take advantage of that opportunity.

Ick
Rest assured, a correction on the part of CA is NOT going to happen. :no: We'll just have to do it hourselves...

I say this because EB was created many months ago to try and correct RTW's factions prior to release. That didn't do ANY good for the Barbarians or Ptolomeic Egypt. So, it's not going to happen by CA's initiative... :sad:

[Steppe Merc]

We have to do it ourselves. We gave CA a go, and they failed in a lot of ways. We need to fix those failures, and improve on what they got right.

I like the way the Egyptians foot soldiers have the head-dress and their style is based off the new kingdom of Egyptian antiquity.
Er... Excuse me while I go and try and wash my ears of this blasphemy.
And you do no the whole point of this mod is for historical correctness, right?
So there wont be anymore of these: :egypt:

Odd that no one commented on the depections of the Amazons that I found...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Er... Excuse me while I go and try and wash my ears of this blasphemy.
And you do no the whole point of this mod is for historical correctness, right?
So there wont be anymore of these: :egypt:
Relax, Steppe Merc!!! Although I don't share, in any way, his point of view, he did said:

Its historically incorrect in a blatant semi-comical, self-aware kind of way.



Odd that no one commented on the depections of the Amazons that I found...
Since I still don't have the game, I really shouldn't comment, but from your description it's just another CA blunder to be scratched... :rolleyes:

Why, oh why???!!!! :wall:

[Steppe Merc]

Sorry Disruptor, didn't see the last part of the quote. :bow:
Here's a hug to apologize. ~:grouphug:
~D

[ick_of_pick]

I agree that we would probably do a better job when it comes to historical accuracy, but (not to be pessimistic) how professional could we make it? I understand that we could find devoted people to change 3d models, but making units from scratch is kind of strange, and not to mention, the whole in-game picture, info, and such?
Changing skins and adding factions is the only thing that I see us actually being able to do, as all you need is a flag and a name list. Just some thoughts, and I would be more then happy to be proven wrong here...

Ick

[Steppe Merc]

Well, CA has yet to tell us how moddable it is. I have recently been talking to the experience modder, Duke John, and (I think) sent him some files from rome, for him to look at. Keep our fingers crossed. ~:handball:

[ick_of_pick]

Stepp Merc, Do you know of any way to contact CA to provide suggestions? Not that they are particularly open to outside suggestion, but a little accurate advice or questioning would never hurt, such as asking them how they could have possibly left out Palmyra, the Assyrian kingdoms, or a Sarmatian faction who happened to be united for a long time without being attacked or engaging in aggresive conquest, and were apparently very valuable mercenaries. CA did a good job with the number of factions, but did make some errors, or just take shortcuts they didn't think anyone would notice.

Ick

[DisruptorX]

Relax, Steppe Merc!!! Although I don't share, in any way, his point of view, he did said:

Its historically incorrect in a blatant semi-comical, self-aware kind of way.



What I meant by "I like" was "I find humour in". I would actually prefer to historically correct uniforms. It always seems weird to se the egyptians in RTW because I was always under the impression that you had to be a "VIP" to wear the headresses. I wouldn't want to be wearing those things in battle, in any event.


Sorry Disruptor, didn't see the last part of the quote. :bow:
Here's a hug to apologize. ~:grouphug:
~D

lol. np.

[biguth dickuth]

I agree that we would probably do a better job when it comes to historical accuracy, but (not to be pessimistic) how professional could we make it? I understand that we could find devoted people to change 3d models, but making units from scratch is kind of strange, and not to mention, the whole in-game picture, info, and such?
Changing skins and adding factions is the only thing that I see us actually being able to do, as all you need is a flag and a name list. Just some thoughts, and I would be more then happy to be proven wrong here...

Ick
Units have been created from scratch numerous times for the needs of the several mods based on the MTW engine. I doubt it will be too hard for the community to do it again.

I am currently preparing a proposed unit-list for the Seleucid faction as what i've seen about them in the several reviews of the game don't satisfy me very much. I'm also planning to prepare one for the Ptolemaic faction.
However, since i'm planning to have a small weekend trip, they will probably be ready and posted next week.

Στο επανιδείν!! :beatnik:

[ick_of_pick]

Well I'm glad to hear that we have devoted experienced people who are willing to provide us with decent models, but seeing as how I know very little about modding, and a lot about history, all I can do is provide suggestions, point out details and answer questions. If anyone who is going to work on this mod need info on factions that I think should exist (Palmyra, Assyria, Sarmatia) just post, and then I'll be free to ramble on... :)


Ick

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I agree that we would probably do a better job when it comes to historical accuracy, but (not to be pessimistic) how professional could we make it? I understand that we could find devoted people to change 3d models, but making units from scratch is kind of strange, and not to mention, the whole in-game picture, info, and such?
Changing skins and adding factions is the only thing that I see us actually being able to do, as all you need is a flag and a name list. Just some thoughts, and I would be more then happy to be proven wrong here...

Ick
Well, without an official RTW skin editor, skinning will be as hard as modelling the 3d model in external programs. Although hard and lengthy, it's possible. At least I am capable of doing it.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

What I meant by "I like" was "I find humour in". I would actually prefer to historically correct uniforms. It always seems weird to se the egyptians in RTW because I was always under the impression that you had to be a "VIP" to wear the headresses. I wouldn't want to be wearing those things in battle, in any event.
Good. I didn't quite fully understood. You're right. Those headresses were only used in official or religious cerimonies by the upper-classes.

[Steppe Merc]

Aymar, would you like me to send you some RTW files for you to look at? I did so for the Duke, and I'll gladly do so for you or anyone else interested.

[Orda Khan]

Just a quick note. Scythian Horse Archer Captain.....Blonde hair

.......Orda

[Steppe Merc]

Do you mean that they do, or that they should? I haven't seen any blond generals yet in the battelfield...

[Steppe Merc]

The Duke has figured out how to make new unit textures! Yay!

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=37203

[Orda Khan]

I sent my general and heir back to calm down the locals in his settlement and left his army in the capable hands of a Scythian horse archer Captain and he was blonde. I made a custom battle last night and my General was also blonde. Where do the screenshots get saved to? I can't find them and I took some gorgeous pics too. If I can't find them I'll make another of the General so you can see.

.....Orda

[Steppe Merc]

I have no idea how to do screenies. I wish I did... Orda, have you seen the horrible Amazons yet? If not, once we find out how to do screenies I could post them... There very sad.

[Orda Khan]

Yeh I can imagine they are, I've not seen them yet. My advice is kill them fast and pretend it was a bad dream ~;)
Screen shots have always been F2 and were saved in TGA folder. I am told now that they are captured by using the print screen button. I took quite a few last night but could not find a folder in the RTW directory so I'll have to look into this some more.
You can however take a single screen shot by hitting print screen. Open up a program such as PSP and select ' paste as new image ' Your screen shot will then be opened ~;)

....Orda

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Aymar, would you like me to send you some RTW files for you to look at? I did so for the Duke, and I'll gladly do so for you or anyone else interested.
Thanks for the suggestion, but I prefer for some MODMaster (WesW, Duke John, BKB) to translate all those info into something I can work with. It would be too much of a guesswork if I did it by myself.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

The Duke has figured out how to make new unit textures! Yay!

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=37203
Great info!!! Thanks, Steppe Merc !!!

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Yeh I can imagine they are, I've not seen them yet. My advice is kill them fast and pretend it was a bad dream ~;)
Screen shots have always been F2 and were saved in TGA folder. I am told now that they are captured by using the print screen button. I took quite a few last night but could not find a folder in the RTW directory so I'll have to look into this some more.
You can however take a single screen shot by hitting print screen. Open up a program such as PSP and select ' paste as new image ' Your screen shot will then be opened ~;)

....Orda
Preciselly. From what I've heard, there is no dir to save screen captures. For each pic you'll have to "print screen" and multitask to a photo editor.

[DisruptorX]

Preciselly. From what I've heard, there is no dir to save screen captures. For each pic you'll have to "print screen" and multitask to a photo editor.

My screenshots have been even more ghetto than that: "print screen" followed by paste in MS paint. ~D

[Orda Khan]

My screenshots have been even more ghetto than that: "print screen" followed by paste in MS paint. ~D

Works just as good DisruptorX ~:) Notice I just said PSP? ( mine is still PSP4 that I downloaded as freeware back in STW days ~D I always liked it because it's simple and pretty bomb proof )

Something does not compute here, because there is a TGA folder in the Data folder. I opened the folder to find it is empty, now that tells me it must be intended for screenshots. I ran a replay last night and did a few F2 shots....no luck. I ran it again and tried print screen ....no luck. Sooner or later I'll have the answer, I just have to post some screenshots of Scythian horse archers murdering Seleucid Cataphracts :sneaky:

I must admit I do like the Scythian Nobles and Noble horse archers, quite acceptable IMO

......Orda

[Orda Khan]

Scythian screen shots ....

This is my blonde 'Barbarian Warlord'

http://www.mizus.com/hosted/Orda/gen.jpg


....and Scythian Noble Horse Archers. I like this unit a lot, nice lamellar armour and judging by the sleeves, colourful, patterned clothing

http://www.mizus.com/hosted/Orda/sc3.jpg

......Orda

[Colovion]

wow - I love those HA's!

[Steppe Merc]

Now why couldn't the normal horse archers be as good as that? And seriously, CA has a thing against long hair. I haven't really seen anyone with hair longer than my own (shoulder length). The practicaly all have buz cuts! ~:eek:

[Orda Khan]

Yeh the Noble horse archers are really nice. Now then, don't turn on me while I come to CA's defence. I don't know anything really about PC's or programs but I would imagine unique unit graphics for each faction would seriously affect the size and performance of the game ( maybe I'm wrong, just guessing ) so a 'common' unit, coloured to whatever faction I can accept for reasons such as this. Heck, I don't want to have to spend huge amounts on PC upgrading in order to play. So we have the common horse archer as a choice for various factions. I said before I would not make a shirtless unit and this is because at sometime we will fight a winter battle. I don't think anyone would strip off to do this and therefore I'd give them a tunic. Being as the armoured variety are so called 'Nobles' I would also accept the ordinaries as light weight with little or no armour. Their hair isn't too bad, it's shoulder length-ish and braided and my current Leader and one of his sons has really long black hair ( albeit in his game portrait )
The sad part about these peoples is that most of what we know is derived from Roman sources, in the case of the Huns there is scant evidence other than biased Roman reports. Now how are we to get an honest opinion when the Romans considered themselves the epitome of civilisation? Can we expect an honest description of nations they considered 'barbarian'? Archaeological finds have given us some idea but not enough IMO. Herodotus makes fascinating reading, however I would expect the truth to be somewhat different much is no doubt exaggerated for shock value, much in the same way as sensationalised media reporting nowadays.
Take a look at the silver shield pikemen...they have long black hair. The Spartans should have long hair also and braids. I honestly think that most nations did back then, I certainly don't like the punk styles that's for sure and Naked Fanatics are a joke no matter if accurate or not.
I think this Mod should concentrate on improving the typical barbarian factions and crazy Egypt. This would be easier to achieve and perhaps adding to it if all goes well.
If it's any consolation, I've had this same frustration since the Mongols arrived in STW ~;) but at least the horse archers fire on the move now and very sweet it is too

.......Orda

[Steppe Merc]

Yeah, It's sweet untill you start chasing routing units with them. They kill so many of your own units, even after the unit your chasing is dead.
I still don't like the hair, but it's an opinon. But do you think that the Scythians should have the same horsearcher as the Parthians/Pontus/Armenians? I think that they should all have a shirted, long haired guy with no hat/hood. Probably darker haired since a lot more had darker hair than light.

Now then, don't turn on me while I come to CA's defence.
I don't mind CA support as long as it's thought out and non-rabid. ~;) And yours certaintly is. I still disagree though mainly because each faction's units needs a seprate skin in the first place. From what I can see, it isn't just one skin and whichever faction has it it puts in the colors. I think there's a Gaul unit skin, a german one, etc. Since there's seprate ones to begin with, I think that there should be a bit more variety, though I can't expect a miracle. ~D

[Boohugh]

If you kill every single enemy soldier in a campaign battle (i.e none manage to run away), when the battle stats come up, only your army is shown.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Hi, guys!

I don' know if you've been paying attention at the TWC forums, but this thread is of interest to us:

The great 'make the game more realistic' thread. (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=10207)

Check it out...

P.S.: Tell me what do you think of their ideas for that MOD.

[khelvan]

I used to be involved in that effort, and I don't like several things that are being done, such as making ships take longer to build (when the Romans and Carthaginians mass-produced them), playing with base farm levels to make the growth rates normalized across all provinces (instead of reducing it by a proportionate amount across the board, keeping some provinces rich and some poor in terms of farming), and reducing trading income.

Otherwise I think the ideas they're using are great. I am doing something similar, but I don't have the modding expertise that Gaius and Zappa have, so it is taking me a long time to figure things out. Plus I don't have a skinner so any unit changes have to wait.

By the way, what is "Europa Barbarorum?" I can't see any description of what you guys do here in the first few pages, and I did read the entire thread (yet).

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I used to be involved in that effort, and I don't like several things that are being done, such as making ships take longer to build (when the Romans and Carthaginians mass-produced them), playing with base farm levels to make the growth rates normalized across all provinces (instead of reducing it by a proportionate amount across the board, keeping some provinces rich and some poor in terms of farming), and reducing trading income.
I also don't agree with those sugestions. But different people see different solutions to the same problem.


Otherwise I think the ideas they're using are great. I am doing something similar, but I don't have the modding expertise that Gaius and Zappa have, so it is taking me a long time to figure things out. Plus I don't have a skinner so any unit changes have to wait.
We are doing that too, and none of us has more than a passable experience in moding. But I can model and skin 3d models, although it has been a long time since I've done it. As for RTW's skinning problem, it will all depend on CA releasing a skinning editor or a 3d mesh import/export module.


By the way, what is "Europa Barbarorum?" I can't see any description of what you guys do here in the first few pages, and I did read the entire thread (yet).
Strange, I though it was obvious. Oh, well!! :thinking: Let me explain then...

This EB group had the initial intention of trying to make CA correct some Historical "Barbarian" factions that are really poorly portraied in the game. After a while it became a thread for correcting most Historical mistakes that RTW had (including the Egyptian faction). Unfortunatelly CA had their own plans. It served no purpose to correct the final release of RTW. After that, the group has been redirected to make a "historical-correct" MOD for RTW. Although most of our Historical research has been made, we're still studying RTW modability. Therefore, we hope to release it as soon as possible.

So, if you like, you can spread the word with others about what EB is. I didn't think we were so unknown to most of the people at the ORG.

[khelvan]

Well, I can do one better, I can join your efforts. Here is what I have been doing to date:

-Rename Spain to Iberia
-Rename Egypt to Ptolemaic Kingdom
-Change Greek Cities to Aetolian League (Which will also include Sparta - Macedon will now represent Macedon + Achaean League)
-Athens to rebel/neutral
-Messana to rebel/neutral
-Syracuse to rebel/neutral
-Brutii and Julii to lose one province each to the Senate
-Roman navies reduced to one ship each
-Carthaginian navy to gain quite a few ships
-Carthage gains several provinces based on what they owned in 270 BC
-Ptolemaic Kingdom to lose ahistorical chariot units
-Several province changes in Parthia, Seluecid, Scythia, Thrace, and Dacia
-Samarobriva to go to rebels

I can go into more detail, but not having read this whole thread I don't know exactly what you guys are doing yet. The heart of what I wanted to do is next...

-Incorporating a "kill rate" and "movement speed" modification

For obvious reasons

-Reducing population growth rates by a uniform proportion across the board by reducing base farm levels and population bonuses from buildings (my initial figure was 50%, but this may be too drastic, more testing is needed)
-Imperial Palace will require army barracks, armorer, and scriptorium to build

The Marian reforms are triggered by building the Imperial Palace. Together these two changes should push the reforms back to a more historical timeframe. Again, more testing is needed. Also, growth rates seem ahistorically high.

When I found a skinner to help out, I was going to do this:

-When building initial barracks, only auxiliaries would be possible. Next level would build the early republican units - hastati, principes, triarii, roraii, accensi , as described by Livy (c. 340 BC). Next level would build the later republican units as described by Polybius (c. 150 BC) - hastati, principes, triarii.

Missle units would be leves early, velites later, and funditores. Roman archers are removed, as there is no historical evidence to suggest that Roman archers were ever employed. Cretans, yes, but not Romans.

I had more plans, but again I need to read this whole thread. Has anyone compiled a comprehensive list of things you planned to do to save me some time (so I can read the 350 posts later? :) )? Let me know if you think our efforts coincide, or what you think would be ahistorical about my ideas.

Thanks,

-khel

Edit: Incidentally, the sources I have drawn (primarily) from are -
"Greece and Rome at War," Peter Connolly
"The Complete Roman Army," Adrian Goldsworthy
"The Making of the Roman Army - From Republic to Empire," Lawrence Keppie

I should also note, my intention was to release a mod changing what I could for now, in steps. All of the above is relatively simple. Adding new factions and provinces and the like is not, so I was going to work with what we had and do the more extensive work later. -Cheers

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Well, I can do one better, I can join your efforts.
:surprised: It's an honour for us that you do so. :bow:


Here is what I have been doing to date:

-Rename Spain to Iberia
-Rename Egypt to Ptolemaic Kingdom
-Change Greek Cities to Aetolian League (Which will also include Sparta - Macedon will now represent Macedon + Achaean League)
-Athens to rebel/neutral
-Messana to rebel/neutral
-Syracuse to rebel/neutral
-Brutii and Julii to lose one province each to the Senate
-Roman navies reduced to one ship each
-Carthaginian navy to gain quite a few ships
-Carthage gains several provinces based on what they owned in 270 BC
-Ptolemaic Kingdom to lose ahistorical chariot units
-Several province changes in Parthia, Seluecid, Scythia, Thrace, and Dacia
-Samarobriva to go to rebels
All good moves. Great work you've made so far.

But let me ask you some questions. BTW, I personally haven't got RTW yet - it's released in the 15th of October in my country.

Carthage:

What provinces to Carthage? In 274BC, Carthage had only presence in Sicily and North Africa.

Ptolomeic Kingdom:

They should not be the only ones to loose their chariots. Besides the Briton light chariots (that trowed javelins IIRC), Kraxis told me that, at that period, only the Seleucids had experimented with chariots.

The rest of the Egyptian culture, looks and units must be completelly revamped. Currently, that faction is ridiculous.


I can go into more detail, but not having read this whole thread I don't know exactly what you guys are doing yet. The heart of what I wanted to do is next...

-Incorporating a "kill rate" and "movement speed" modification

For obvious reasons
Yes, of course. I believe the ideal would be for us to be able to tweak each unit stats (walking, running, charging speed, hit points, attack and defense), but those stats are in quite a different form from MTW.


-Reducing population growth rates by a uniform proportion across the board by reducing base farm levels and population bonuses from buildings (my initial figure was 50%, but this may be too drastic, more testing is needed)
To make it more accurate by increasing linearity? Gamers reports about the speed growth of the population seem to focus on that point.


-Imperial Palace will require army barracks, armorer, and scriptorium to build

The Marian reforms are triggered by building the Imperial Palace. Together these two changes should push the reforms back to a more historical timeframe. Again, more testing is needed. Also, growth rates seem ahistorically high.
I totally agree. I was going to do that exact same thing: to increase pre-requisites.


When I found a skinner to help out, I was going to do this:

-When building initial barracks, only auxiliaries would be possible. Next level would build the early republican units - hastati, principes, triarii, roraii, accensi , as described by Livy (c. 340 BC). Next level would build the later republican units as described by Polybius (c. 150 BC) - hastati, principes, triarii.
But this would imply several units that would have to be defined like this:

-Early Hastatii; Early Princeps; Early Triarii.
-Late Hastatii; Late Princeps; Late Triarii.

With different stats and graphics?


Missle units would be leves early, velites later, and funditores. Roman archers are removed, as there is no historical evidence to suggest that Roman archers were ever employed. Cretans, yes, but not Romans.
Agreed. Archers were only used by Rome in the late Empire and most of them came from the Eastern regions of the Empire.


I had more plans, but again I need to read this whole thread. Has anyone compiled a comprehensive list of things you planned to do to save me some time (so I can read the 350 posts later? :) )? Let me know if you think our efforts coincide, or what you think would be ahistorical about my ideas.
Don't worry. I was going to make a sketch of what we have done so far, to help us to start making MOD decisions, as well as keeping the Historical info organized. I don't have time today, since it is quite an extensive work to gather all that info, but I hope to have that ready tomorrow. Stay tuned...


Edit: Incidentally, the sources I have drawn (primarily) from are -
"Greece and Rome at War," Peter Connolly
"The Complete Roman Army," Adrian Goldsworthy
"The Making of the Roman Army - From Republic to Empire," Lawrence Keppie
Good sources. BTW, I have to contact some of the other EB members. Lately, most of them have been to distracted by RTW's release, to post or contribute to this thread... :wink:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I should also note, my intention was to release a mod changing what I could for now, in steps. All of the above is relatively simple. Adding new factions and provinces and the like is not, so I was going to work with what we had and do the more extensive work later. -Cheers
Sounds like a good idea. Incremental steps have the advantage of performing most bug-solving problems before other aspects are considered. I, however, cannot tell you yet what can we do, before relating the info to the others.

[frogbeastegg]

Ok, busy with guide, book, life etc and half asleep because it's nearly midnight here. Apologies for semi literate writing here, and for general froglessness of the project. I've not even ebeen able to read the last few posts on this page yet.

Main historical bugbears we might be able to fix that I've encountered so far include:
-unit skins, especially anything wearing mail with a split down the front making it nice and easy for the wearer to be stabbed in the groin. Take a look at the Roman principes for a good demo. This seems very common on units of all cultures.

-unit skins, again all the misc errors in armour, such as the hastati's mail shoulder guards. Ok, this is Roman but so far I've only played a short Julii campaign. So busy, only had the game 5 days. The Roman errors bug me just as much as the druids and other barbarian stuff. Maybe we can do something there too? Bare chested barbs, naked fanatics with clothes (not that I want real naked fanatics!), Romans wearing trousers in a time where they were really considered unmanly, head hurlers - you know, the usual.

-Egyptians. I tried to play this faction; I lasted two turns. I can't stand it. They aren't barbarians but surely we can include them?

-'people' pictures, you know the generals etc. Many of the British and Gaulish ones I have seen are a bit ... odd. The Egyptian ones are perfect for that 3000BC mod I want someone to make.

-No way to use pre Marian legions in the campaign. I spent most of my short camp using armies of hastati with general's cav and velites in support.

-Roman wardogs, bah! I just pretend the unit doesn't exist in my build queue. I can tolerate certain factions using them, since there is evidence for some tribes using them, but Romans?! Sorry, again Roman rather than the intended targets, but froggy is a Roman fanatic.

Actually it's probably easiest to simply say all the obvious historical discrepancies bug me. I can't contribute much currently, I'm afraid, but I will try to keep up with developments. Now I'm off, before I fall asleep on my keyboard. :zzz:

[khelvan]

:surprised: It's an honour for us that you do so. :bow:

Please, the honor is mine. Besides, I really do not want to go it alone; it was a matter of design philosophy differences and a personal conflict which caused me to go back to my original plan of starting my own mod. Given my lack of experience in that I am finding the going difficult. Keep in mind that these are what I WANT to do, but the effort is still ongoing. For instance, what you would think would be a simple change (Naming Spain Iberia) has ramifications for about 20 different files. Since I am not familiar with which actually need to be changed and which don't (i.e. what makes the display on screen and what is merely a file reference), I am changing every reference. As you can imagine, this is a lot of work.

If I can work with a group of people who, to put it nicely, play well with others, I am happy to. I am also happy if someone can show me research that supports that what I am doing is historically incorrect - my goal was always to get as close to the reality of the time (in context) as possible. I admit that I know next to nothing about Europe's barbarians and so I have hesitated in planning changes for them (except for some province changes, since I can look at a map, and removing units like the Headhurlers).



Carthage:

What provinces to Carthage? In 274BC, Carthage had only presence in Sicily and North Africa.

I disagree. Carthage had holdings on the Iberian peninsula as well, and Sardinia. I have several maps which all show Carthage having a presence in those places, like to this one:

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/maps-evolution-Med.htm

Take a look at the map circa 270. This map is the basis for most of my changes to what Carthage (and Egypt) own at the beginning of the game.

For brevity's sake, I will use the settlement names rather than province names. With regards to the Iberian peninsula, I planned on giving Carthage Carthago Nova in addition to Corduba (renamed to Gades, since Corduba did not exist in 270 BC). I will also give them Lepcis Magna and Cirta. I have toyed with giving them Tingi, but I think this is too much and the maps show them having only a small presence there.

I have not decided whether to give Nepte to the Numidians, or who should own Siwa at present. I am thinking Siwa either goes to Ptolemaic Egypt, or possibly even Numidia. The Numidians were almost completely subjugated by Carthage, and I am not sure how far their reach was in any case. Many Carthaginian cities were under constant threat of revolt as they were cruel masters, and I am not sure how to simulate this at present. Input would be much appreciated here.


Ptolomeic Kingdom:

They should not be the only ones to loose their chariots. Besides the Briton light chariots (that trowed javelins IIRC), Kraxis told me that, at that period, only the Seleucids had experimented with chariots.

The rest of the Egyptian culture, looks and units must be completelly revamped. Currently, that faction is ridiculous.

I agree, but I need to take baby steps. There are many ahistorical units I would like to change or remove, such as making war dogs only available to certain factions that historical evidence supports used them in actual battle (such as the Greeks) and not the Romans, and tweaking them to be a bit less powerful.

The work is just too much for me, as I'm really just learning, unless there are others who feel like doing some as well.

When it comes to Egypt, I can remove many of the units, but I can't do skins, and I would need much input on how to change them to be historical anyway. In any event they need to be toned down, and the first step is removing some of the units like chariots. Of course, to me it appears that Halicarnassus might belong to the Egyptian faction. Again, input is needed. I can change the Egyptian culture to a Greek one, without much of an issue.


Yes, of course. I believe the ideal would be for us to be able to tweak each unit stats (walking, running, charging speed, hit points, attack and defense), but those stats are in quite a different form from MTW.

I never modded MTW, so I can't speak to the differences. What I can tell you is that I can mod everything but the movement speeds. The only way I know of to do that is to do the overall modifiers for terrain, as others have already done. That is the way I would do so in this mod, until tools are available to change units individually.


To make it more accurate by increasing linearity? Gamers reports about the speed growth of the population seem to focus on that point.

Please elaborate, as for some reason I am not sure what you mean.


But this would imply several units that would have to be defined like this:

-Early Hastatii; Early Princeps; Early Triarii.
-Late Hastatii; Late Princeps; Late Triarii.

With different stats and graphics?

Yes, that would follow. I am afraid I see no way to get around that (as of now), as the units were named similarly (the Polybius units were an evolution of those that Livy describes). The stats are easy, the graphics are not (for me, at least). If my goal of doing things in steps is somewhat agreeable, we could easily have the early and late units in game in no time, but they would look the same. Unless, of course, one of you can skin well.


Agreed. Archers were only used by Rome in the late Empire and most of them came from the Eastern regions of the Empire.

I wanted to rename the auxiliary archers, post Marian reforms, sagittarii. However, this would imply Roman units. I have been debating how to handle the units drawn from the Roman empire but not Romans themselves, such as some of the archer and cavalry units they employed. Making them mercernaries is one option.

Speaking of cavalry, I had a notion to remove all but one of the cavalry types from each period, and make them much more expensive. According to Polybius, cavalry made up 1/10th or less of the Roman legion, and it was used purely in a secondary role, to ensure the flanks were held and to, in conjunction with the velites, run down fleeing enemies. I may even tweak them to be less powerful. Self-sufficient infantry were the heart of the legion.


Don't worry. I was going to make a sketch of what we have done so far, to help us to start making MOD decisions, as well as keeping the Historical info organized. I don't have time today, since it is quite an extensive work to gather all that info, but I hope to have that ready tomorrow. Stay tuned...

Good sources. BTW, I have to contact some of the other EB members. Lately, most of them have been to distracted by RTW's release, to post or contribute to this thread... :wink:

Please let me know. My background and skills lie in the numbers behind the game, such as understanding and playing with economic models (My MBA comes in handy after all! :), and unit balance. Coding is somewhat foreign to me, so it has been slow going, and I have almost no artistic talent. I would love to work together with some people with complementary skills.

Cheers,

-Khel

[PSYCHO]

Gday all.

Ok, NOW! I’m getting excited!

With these Celtic designs on this Roman shield..things are starting move

http://members.optushome.com.au/reconspy/longshield_warcry.jpg

!! :charge:

[PSYCHO]

Here’s my recommendations: :charge:


BARBARIAN MOD

This is a fix to the existing Rome Total War

· Make the following unit changes
· Make the Gauls and Britons begin as allies or on very friendly terms.
· Make the Belgae in Gaul a very strong rebel group with Gallic horse, Skirmishers and Briton Swordsmen (as per mentioned)


GAULS:


A) Give all units (except peasants) a torque around their neck
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/resources/image/large/ps261195.jpg


B) Give the ‘Warband’ a shield with a boss (centre bit) running it’s length and include some celtic designs.
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/resources/image/large/ps179137.jpg


C) Change all round shields to have a similar boss as mentioned above, remove studs around edges, star burst patterns etc and include some celtic designs.


D) Give the ‘Swordsman’ a Gallic helmet, a long sleave shirt and shield with Celtic designs
http://www.nhm-wien.ac.at/NHM/Prehist/Collection/Images/Abb22.jpg
http://www.arms-armor.cz/catalog/files_products/th_sh054.jpg


E) Give the ‘Chosen Swordsman’ a Gallic boar helmet and a chain mail vest (with shoulder straps) over a long sleave shirt. Keep mow but remove beard and strappings around lower legs. Note ‘C’ Give the shield a small band of black and white cheque pattern with two dots each side
http://www.celtic-smith.cz/images/prilba2.jpg


F) Give the ‘Noble Cavalry’ a Gallic raven Helmet, Short sleave chain mail shirt over a long sleave shirt and cloak fastened at shoulder with broach. Keep mow but remove beard and strappings around lower legs. Note ‘C’
http://www.lastsquare.com/MiniCatalog/Largefigs/lftmp-15.jpg


G) Make the Gallic ‘Druid’ an Infantry version of this guy with a long Gallic sword
http://www.irregularminiatures.co.uk/images/54mm_Heavy_Gallic_Cavalry_5.jpg


H) Make the ‘General’ an elaborate version of ‘F’ with maybe some wings on his helmet and remove the beard from the Forester Warband. Replace the unit flag with a boar standard, unit leader with an infantry version of 'F'. Add hornblower
http://arquebus.com/trad_90mm/JW90152.jpg



BRITONS:


I) Repeat ‘A’ and ‘B’


J) Give the ‘Swordsman’ a Briton helmet (with small cheek guards) and shield (sides of which would be coloured)
http://www.brigantesnation.com/celticart/Celtic/PeakedHelmet1.JPG
http://www.brigantesnation.com/celticart/Celtic/PeakedHelmet2.JPG
http://www.thebritishmuseum.ac.uk/compass/resources/image/large/ps233381.jpg


K) Give the ‘Chosen Swordsman’ a Thames styled helmet, elaborate shield, long sleave shirt and cloak fixed at the shoulder with a broach. Keep the mow but remove the beard and strappings around lower legs.
http://www.brigantesnation.com/celticart/Celtic/HornedHelmet.JPG
http://www.brigantesnation.com/celticart/Celtic/BatterseaShield.JPG


L) Dress the ‘Light Charioteers’ more like this
http://www.histomin.com/lineevd/mpevcg35.jpg


M) Dress the Heavy Charioteers the same as the Rider (non-driver) above but give the Rider a vest of chain mail, a cloak fastened at the shoulder by a broach and a shield as in ‘K’


N) Give the ‘Druid’ a War Hammer and small square buckler / shield


O) Make the ‘General’ an elaborate version of ‘K’ (though he’ll be mounted) with some elaborate bronze plate armour. Replace unit standard with stag horn standard, Unit leader with infantry version of Rider 'M'. Add hornblower



GERMANS:


P) Give the ‘Warband’ / phalanx a hexagonal shield. Same as the ‘Naked Fanatics’ but remove the celtic designs and replace with the sun burst motif used by the original ‘Chosen Swordsmen’; and shorten their spears a little.
http://members.aol.com/hubhobbie/kcelt1.JPG

Q) Give the ‘Night Raiders’ a beard, remove the Gallic plats and give them a pony tail.


R) Give the ‘Chosen Axeman’ a fur slung around their shoulders.



EUROPA BARBARORUM MOD

This is for our ultimate historical mod and involves additions of completely new units, changing hiring methods, map mods, fortification mods etc

· Add Gergovia as an Oppida (if unable, give stone walls) and make rebel
. Add Bibracte as an Oppida (if unable, give stone walls)
· Add the following region specific Gallic troops
. Britons and Germans to follow…



THE GAUL FACTION


LIGHT INFANTRY


Senone Slingers : (Light Infantry)

Above Average Valour, Easily Fatigued, Dubious Morale under heavy casualties
(Long plated hair, Gallic moustache, torque, naked chest, trousers in ‘faction colours’, shoes, Sling, Pellet pouch slung over shoulder, Short Celtic Sword, Very small buckler usually slung over back).
These adept skirmishers can hurl lead slugs at high speed over good distances. They are particularly good at attacking lightly armed troops. They can fight with sword if forced, but they prove to be ineffective in hand-to-hand warfare.
(Can be raised anywhere in Transalpine Gaul)


Aquitanian Archers: (Light Infantry)

Average Valour, Easily Fatigued, Low Morale
(Shorter darker hair, Gallic moustache, torque, long sleave shirt to thigh over trousers in ‘faction colours’ and tied around waste with belt, shoes, bow, quiver of arrows hung off left hip, short Celtic sword, No Shield). These troops come from the smaller, more passive tribes of Southern Gaul. Good at showering the enemy with archery fire, they will soon run if engaged in hand to hand fighting.
(Can be raised in Southern Transalpine Gaul)


Bodvoritus (‘Running Wrath’): (Light Infantry)

Extremely Impetuous, Extremely Undisciplined, Good Morale, Very Good Stamina, Good Attack
(Long flowing hair, naked tattooed torso, Gallic moustache, torque, armlets, chequered trousers in ‘faction colours’, shoes, arm guards, dirk and medium length (Halstatt) sword).
The ‘Bodvoritus’ tend to come from the Brannovice (‘frenzied ones’) tribe. The Brannovice were a client to the Aedui and were renown for their berserk behaviour in battle. They would drink a ‘magical’ potion before entering battle which gave them ‘special’ courage, stamina and protection from the pain of wounds. Once worked up into a frenzy, they would often fight in a similar fashion as the Picts some centuries later. Working in pairs, one would throw themselves on the enemy’s weapon whilst the other struck the encumbered down.
(Can be raised from central Transalpine Gaul)



MEDIUM INFANTRY


Southern Warband: (Medium Infantry)

Impetuous, Above Average Valour, Easily Fatigued.
(Shorter hair to nape of neck and spiked up with lime, Gallic moustache, torque, bangle around each wrist, naked chest, cloak fastened at right shoulder by broach, tartan trousers in ‘faction colours’, shoes, spears, long Celtic sword, rounded rectangular shield with Celtic swirl design)
The Southern Gallic Warband are cheap and quick to raise. Along with the Northern Warband they provide the bulk of the Gallic force. They throw their spears before charging home with sword and have a good initial assault.
(Can be raised anywhere in Cisalpine Gaul and Celtiberia)


Northern Warband: (Medium Infantry)

Impetuous, Above Average Valour, Easily Fatigued.
(Long hair platted, Gallic moustache, torque, naked chest, armlets, bangle around each wrist, trousers in ‘faction colours’, shoes, spears, long Celtic sword, oval shield)
The Northern Gallic Warband are cheap and quick to raise. Along with the Southern Warband they provide the bulk of the Gallic force. They can work in close or open formation and are trained to form shield walls if necessary. They can throw or thrust with their spears before charging home with sword. Sapping Ability
(Can be raised anywhere in Transalpine Gaul)


Veneti Bagaudam (‘Guerrilla Fighters’): (Medium Infantry)

Disciplined, Average Valour, Dubious Morale, more easily achieve ambushes, receive bonus to attack when directly from ships or at night.
(Bronze helmet with thin horns, short dark hair, Gallic moustache, torque, short sleave shirt in ‘faction colours’ with chequered borders to thigh over trousers and tied around waste with belt, short boots, spear, Celtic sword, strange squarish shield with wavy sides).
The Veneti (‘Clansmen’) were a maritime tribe that traded and raided the oceans centuries before the first Vikings. They were adept guerrilla fighters who excelled in using the terrain to their advantage / sneaking up on their enemies. They also excel at ambushes, night and amphibious operations.
(Can be raised from Veneti Territory)


Dubis Dusios (‘Black Demons’): (Elite Medium Infantry)

Impetuous, Very High Valour, Good Stamina, Very High Morale, Good Attack
(Bronze bowl helmets adorned with purple crest, short dark hair, shaggy black (goatskin like) shoulder-less tunic to above knee bound by thick Iberian belt, arm guards, greaves made of the same black material wound around shins and carves, excellent quality iron short two edged swords, dirk, Celtic oval shield in ‘faction colours’).
The ‘Dubi Dusios’ are Elite Celtiberian warriors from Spain. They are chosen from among the ranks for their skill, fitness and bravery in battle. Though rough and ready, these Celtiberians are fierce ferocious fighters that can hold their own against almost any opposition.
(Can be raised from Celtiberian ‘Gaul’)


Bodubatae (‘Raven Warriors’): (Elite Medium Infantry)

Excellent Discipline, Good Valour, Good Stamina, High Morale,
(Bronze Raven helmet, long hair, Gallic moustache, golden torque, golden armlets, bronze armbands, naked chest, red tartan trousers to ankles, cloak in 'faction colours’ fastened with large golden broach on right shoulder, short boots, long thrusting spear, long Celtic sword, Oval Shield).
The Aedui ‘Bodubatae'are a Royal Body Guard, an elite infantry unit made up from the best warriors of the Aedui confederacy. They invoke the Female War Goddess Morrigan (Who was believed to take the form of a Raven to steal away men’s souls, hence the helmet). Their role, similar to the Roman Praetorian Guard, is to serve the highest office in the land, the Gallic High King. Well trained, drilled and disciplined they are expensive and difficult to raise but make up for their small numbers by their impact in battle. They can form a testudo, shield wall or a phalanx with their long spears.
(Can be raised from Aedui Territory)
http://www.hobby-online.com/g1204.jpg



HEAVY INFANTRY


Arverni Arjos (‘Nobles’): (Heavy Infantry)

Good Discipline, Low Valour, Easily Fatigued, Good Morale
(Iron ‘Gallic’ helmet, long hair, Gallic moustache, torque, wrist guards, shirt of mail over long sleeve tunic gathered by belt at waist, tartan cloak in ‘faction colours’ gathered on right shoulder with broach, trousers, short boots, long thrusting spears, long Celtic sword, oval shield).
The Arverni (‘Superior Ones’) are a large powerful tribe who have become extremely wealthy through trade with the Mediterraean. As such, they have a large body of nobility who are afforded the time and wealth to prepare well for battle.
The Arverni Arjos sport the finest equipment available and train daily in its use. They can form a testudo or shield wall quickly and prove to be sturdy force in any line of battle.
(Can be raised from Arverni Territory post Marian reforms)
http://www.slitherine.co.uk/Legion/Images/CeltNob_WarriorCeltWar.jpg


Carnute Cingetos (‘Warriors): (Elite Heavy Infantry)

High Valour, High Morale, Good attack, Cause Fear against other Gallic units, Large Additional Valour and Morale Bonus against non-Celtic factions.
(Iron helmet with forward facing horns, long hair, Gallic moustache, torque, arm guards, chain mail shirt over long sleeve tunic gathered at waist by belt, stripped trousers in ‘faction colours’, Royal Blue cloak fastened on breast, short ankle boots, Long Celtic Sword, Round Shield).
These ‘Cincetos’ are Elite fighters who hail from the land of the Carnutes, the heart of the Druidic religion in Gaul. As Druids, they invoke the Gallic god Cernunnos (‘The Horned One’ hence the helmets) to give them courage in battle. Trained in the Druidic schools and Carnute military colleges, they are extremely expensive to raise but are fanatical volunteers that will fight to the death, especially against non-Celtic factions. [These units become slightly cheaper if at war with non-Celtic invaders.]
(Can be raised from Carnute Territory)



CAVALRY


Leuce Epos (‘Light Horse’): (Medium Cavalry)
Disciplined, Good Valour, Good Morale
(Iron bowl Helmet with tri swirl cheek guards, long hair, Gallic moustache, torque, armlets, bangle around each wrist, long sleave tunic in ‘faction colours’ over trousers and tied at waist by belt, shoes, round shield with cheque pattern, throwing spears, long Celtic Sword).
The Gallic ‘Leuce Epos’ constitute the bulk of Gallic cavalry. The term ‘Leuce’ was applied more due to their swiftness of foot than their equipment. Able to either throw or thrust with spears before engaging with sword, they form an effective mobile force.
(Can raise from any Celtic Area)


Brihentin (‘Elite Cavalry’): (Heavy Cavalry)

Disciplined, Good Valour, Easily fatigued, Good Morale, Excellent Attack
(Iron ‘Gallic’ helmet with faction-coloured plume, long hair, Gallic moustache, torque, arm guards, chain mail shirt over long sleeve tunic gathered at waist by belt, trousers in ‘faction colours’, cloak fastened on right shoulder by broach, short ankle boots, medium spear / lance, long Celtic Sword, Round shield).
The ‘Brihentin’ are chosen from among the tribe’s nobility for their prowess in battle. These troops are well armed and experienced in battle. They are trained to couch their lance before closing with their long swords. Extremely expensive to raise, they prove invaluable to any astute War-chief.
(Can be raised anywhere in Transalpine Gaul)



MERCENARIES


Gaesatae (‘Spearmen’): (Elite Light / Mercenary Infantry)

Impetuous, High valour, Easily fatigued, Good Morale, Very Good Attack, Long spear throwing range.
(Iron Helmet with boar crest and black horse hair trail, long hair, Gallic moustache, Long Hexagonal Shield, throwing spears, Long Celtic Sword, large golden torque, armlets, bracelets and anklets, Large well built and naked but for a small flap in ‘faction colours’ at front and back of groin (for the kiddies)).
These are a group of elite warriors that have left their tribal allegiances to sell their services to the highest bidder. They believe their nakedness allows their fighting mogo to flow.
(Can be hired at great cost from anywhere that has a Gallic shrine)


Ordocorii (‘Hammer Troops’): (Elite Medium / Mercenary Infantry)

Disciplined, Good Valour, Good Stamina, Average Morale
(Short Horned (Thames styled) helmet, Long dark flowing hair, Woaded face and arms, Gallic moustache, Golden torque, Heavy Wrist guards, Sleeveless shirt and vest of chain mail over trousers, belt at waist, Tartan cloak, shoes, heavy war hammer, round shield)
The Ordocorii come from the Ordovices (‘Those that fight with hammers’), a Briton tribe situated on the Western coast of the Isle (Wales). They lack central government and tend to seek fortune where-ever they may find it, willingly crossing the channel to offer their services to their Gallic cousins.
They invoke the Celtic god Sucellus (‘Hammer god’) prior battle and tend to possess an acute hatred of Rome.
(Can be hired at great cost from any Gallic coastal province)


Mori Gaesum (‘Sea of Spears’): (Elite Heavy / Mercenary Infantry)

Excellent Discipline, Good Valour, Very Good Morale
(Tall spiked iron helmets, long dark hair, Gallic moustache, torque, arm guards, red tunic with chequered borders gathered with belt over trousers, cloak same colour as trousers, shoes, Pikes, long Celtic sword, large rectangular shield with rounded edges)
The ‘Mori Gaesum’ are mercenaries raised from among the Helvetii (Swiss). These Helvetians were very well organised into units with good leadership and discipline. Of all the Gauls, they were the most experienced and effective in the employment of the Phalanx. Much like other Gallic tribes that use close formation tactics, they will drop their spears once the enemy formation is broken and charge home with the sword.
(Can be hired at great cost from Helvetii territory)
http://www.r-kproductions.com/products/P54133.jpg


Teutones: (Elite Light / Mercenary Cavalry)

Disciplined, Excellent Valour, Good Stamina, Excellent Morale
(Hair dyed red and in pony tail, full beard, naked chest, short cloak, trousers, shoes, throwing spears, small square shield)
The Teutones are German Mercenaries willing to cross the Rhine and sell their blood for gold and glory. Equipped with sturdy Gallic mounts, they are fast and ferocious and can often outfight more heavier armed opponents.
(Can be hire at great cost from German territory)




…Germans and Brits to follow
my2bob ~:cheers:

[Oleander Ardens]

Things seem to move ideed...

Hello, I was rather busy playtesting RTW, so that I could see how all of it worked out; Love the engine and strategical gameplay, but seems that there are a good deal of things there to do...


@Psycho V: I completly forget to send you my info about the Italic Gauls..

Recently I was reading a mighty ~;) book about the tribes/people of the Italian Penisula in the preroman era, as I wanted to increase my knowledge about the Raetians. Now there were also the Celts in, with a great deal of info about the various findings of the single tribes.

For example it showed that the Senoni used regulary the pilum, which they adopted from the inneritalian (umbrian?) tribes, and bronze celto-italic helmets. Less is known for the Shields, but I have seen very Scutum-like italic shields from much earlier than the celtic invasions, so the theory of the italic/roman adoption of celtic shields is once doubtful again..

Anyway we should add special Senonii and Boii warriors which are armed in celtic-italic fashion, with the Senonii having more wealthy warriors than the Boii...

I will post more and the ref. soon...

BTW: I also saw I very interesting celtic helm...

Cheers
OA

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Please, the honor is mine. Besides, I really do not want to go it alone; it was a matter of design philosophy differences and a personal conflict which caused me to go back to my original plan of starting my own mod. Given my lack of experience in that I am finding the going difficult. Keep in mind that these are what I WANT to do, but the effort is still ongoing. For instance, what you would think would be a simple change (Naming Spain Iberia) has ramifications for about 20 different files. Since I am not familiar with which actually need to be changed and which don't (i.e. what makes the display on screen and what is merely a file reference), I am changing every reference. As you can imagine, this is a lot of work.
Well, I can more than imagine. I've modded MTW. Numerous alterations like that, had to be made to make the MOD work. In several lines in the same txt file and in several files.


If I can work with a group of people who, to put it nicely, play well with others, I am happy to. I am also happy if someone can show me research that supports that what I am doing is historically incorrect - my goal was always to get as close to the reality of the time (in context) as possible. I admit that I know next to nothing about Europe's barbarians and so I have hesitated in planning changes for them (except for some province changes, since I can look at a map, and removing units like the Headhurlers).
Then you've come to the right place. Most of the people cooperating at EB have vast knowledge on the history of certain populations. As for the Historical details of the "Barbarian" factions, do not worry about that. That is already covered. Just look at some of the work that PSYCHO just posted. :wink: And there is a lot more on this thread, by other people...


I disagree. Carthage had holdings on the Iberian peninsula as well, and Sardinia. I have several maps which all show Carthage having a presence in those places, like to this one:

http://www.barca.fsnet.co.uk/maps-evolution-Med.htm

Take a look at the map circa 270. This map is the basis for most of my changes to what Carthage (and Egypt) own at the beginning of the game.
You're right. My wrong.


For brevity's sake, I will use the settlement names rather than province names. With regards to the Iberian peninsula, I planned on giving Carthage Carthago Nova in addition to Corduba (renamed to Gades, since Corduba did not exist in 270 BC). I will also give them Lepcis Magna and Cirta. I have toyed with giving them Tingi, but I think this is too much and the maps show them having only a small presence there.

I have not decided whether to give Nepte to the Numidians, or who should own Siwa at present. I am thinking Siwa either goes to Ptolemaic Egypt, or possibly even Numidia. The Numidians were almost completely subjugated by Carthage, and I am not sure how far their reach was in any case. Many Carthaginian cities were under constant threat of revolt as they were cruel masters, and I am not sure how to simulate this at present. Input would be much appreciated here.
As far as I can see, I agree.

As for the Numidians, subjugated is a strong word, I guess. IIRC, the Numidians were vassals, "bought" with promisses often, but never really subjugated.

As for the cities revolts, I remember that, in MTW, we could regulate the amount of revolts and what type of revolt (and type of units in the revolt) would ocurr in a province. It was all modable in the txt files. Pretty sure that RTW hasn't the same structure though.


I agree, but I need to take baby steps. There are many ahistorical units I would like to change or remove, such as making war dogs only available to certain factions that historical evidence supports used them in actual battle (such as the Greeks) and not the Romans, and tweaking them to be a bit less powerful.

The work is just too much for me, as I'm really just learning, unless there are others who feel like doing some as well.
Do not worry. I wasn't criticizing. Just venting some frustration about CA's depiction of Egypt. The work you've done so far is quite good, in such a short time.


When it comes to Egypt, I can remove many of the units, but I can't do skins, and I would need much input on how to change them to be historical anyway. In any event they need to be toned down, and the first step is removing some of the units like chariots. Of course, to me it appears that Halicarnassus might belong to the Egyptian faction. Again, input is needed. I can change the Egyptian culture to a Greek one, without much of an issue.
The change of culture would be nice. But that faction is going to need a LOT of further work.

As for the skinning, I should post a announcement in the Dungeon to try to atracct some more modders, now that we've concluded most of the historical research and are getting ready to make the changes to the files itself.


I never modded MTW, so I can't speak to the differences. What I can tell you is that I can mod everything but the movement speeds.

The only way I know of to do that is to do the overall modifiers for terrain, as others have already done. That is the way I would do so in this mod, until tools are available to change units individually.
Everything, but the movement speeds? Certainly everything on the txt files. You're not talking about skins and animations. It's a pitty I don't have RTW yet. I'll probably just ask someone to send me the txt files. My knowledge of MTW modding might help to identify some modable features in RTW. I will also ask for the graphic (pak) files, to perform some skinning experiences.


Please elaborate, as for some reason I am not sure what you mean.
People say that the population grows exponentially with just a bit of help, rapidly raising squalor and discontentment problems. What I was asking was if your idea was to reduce the rate of growth to make it linear, not exponential. That would allow a more sustained pace with less of an abrupt behaviour in regard to populational growth.


Yes, that would follow. I am afraid I see no way to get around that (as of now), as the units were named similarly (the Polybius units were an evolution of those that Livy describes). The stats are easy, the graphics are not (for me, at least). If my goal of doing things in steps is somewhat agreeable, we could easily have the early and late units in game in no time, but they would look the same. Unless, of course, one of you can skin well.
Was there any significant difference in the graphics? Can you post any descriptions or pics of those particular units? If there were no particular differences, then it probably won't be a problem. Besides, most Roman units can be graphically altered without difficulty. The real difficulty will be the Ptolemaic faction. We'll have to base our models on the Seleucid units.


I wanted to rename the auxiliary archers, post Marian reforms, sagittarii. However, this would imply Roman units. I have been debating how to handle the units drawn from the Roman empire but not Romans themselves, such as some of the archer and cavalry units they employed. Making them mercernaries is one option.
I don't think that would be a problem. IIRC, they weren't mercs, they were enlisted professional soldiers like legionaires. Enlisted from the best archers of the Eastern provinces. IMHO, since they were really part of the army, Sagitarii is a good name.


Speaking of cavalry, I had a notion to remove all but one of the cavalry types from each period, and make them much more expensive. According to Polybius, cavalry made up 1/10th or less of the Roman legion, and it was used purely in a secondary role, to ensure the flanks were held and to, in conjunction with the velites, run down fleeing enemies. I may even tweak them to be less powerful. Self-sufficient infantry were the heart of the legion.
Yes, I agree entirelly that something must be done about the Roman cav. Weakening the Roman cav is a possibility, but all cav units must be weakened too (although by a smaller amout). They are currently nothing what the period cav was. They look more like WarpSpeed-Super-Medieval-Knights. For the Roman cav, in particular, the best step, IMHO, would be to make Roman cav much more expensive and buildable in two or three turns. So, people would be forced to use much more Infantry, like the Romans did, instead of rellying too much on cav. That would feel more Historical.


Please let me know. My background and skills lie in the numbers behind the game, such as understanding and playing with economic models (My MBA comes in handy after all! :), and unit balance. Coding is somewhat foreign to me, so it has been slow going, and I have almost no artistic talent. I would love to work together with some people with complementary skills.
So would I. :nice: Too bad there aren't any around... :joker:

Now, seriously, I'm going to post a recruitment thread in the Dungeon. Maybe we can gather more skinners and modders. :computer:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Gday all.

Ok, NOW! I’m getting excited!

With these Celtic designs on this Roman shield..things are starting move

You should be excited. Skinning is now possible. Although it won't solve all our problems, it's a step forwards. :grin:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Here’s my recommendations: :charge:


BARBARIAN MOD


EUROPA BARBARORUM MOD


…Germans and Brits to follow

my2bob ~:cheers:
:surprised: :surprised: :surprised:

:stunned: :stunned: :stunned:

:fainting: :fainting: :fainting:

This is a LOT of work, PSYCHO!!! And this just for three or four (Belgae) factions!!!

It will take some time to change all skins just for the Barbarian MOD. But I will try to depict some protoypes as soon as possible. :wall: :computer: :wall: :computer: :wall: :computer:

[The_Emperor]

It is also worth noting that there was a tribe of Britons called the Belgae who had migrated from Gaul, so including a couple of units of that sort of style into the British faction would be good.

As for Light Chariots, they should hurl Javelins and not use bows. Historically the Britons never used archery and relied heavily on stone slingers and javelins.

Also I think Psycho posted info about some Celtic wood & stone defenses that warriors can stand on, if the resources were present the Celts would construct fearsome defences. (The northern tribes in Scotland especially had very tough hillforts incorporating stone into the defences)

I would strongly endorse the inclusion of these as a level above the current height of settlement defence the "Wooden wall" which as it stands is pitiful in the game.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

BTW, PSYCHO!!! ~:wave: Unfortunatelly, RTW doesn't allow for more than one special hability per unit. So, you, Stefan and the people involved in the Celtic, Germanic and Briton research, have to decide what will be the special hability of each Celtic, Germanic and Briton unit (testudo, shield wall, phalanx, etc...), if they have any.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Things seem to move ideed...

Hello, I was rather busy playtesting RTW, so that I could see how all of it worked out; Love the engine and strategical gameplay, but seems that there are a good deal of things there to do...
I also have been busy reading the player's tests. It seems that RTW needs far more extensive moding that we expected and also a couple of consciencious patches. :sad:

But at least skinning is now possible... :grin:

[khelvan]

As for the Numidians, subjugated is a strong word, I guess. IIRC, the Numidians were vassals, "bought" with promisses often, but never really subjugated.

As for the cities revolts, I remember that, in MTW, we could regulate the amount of revolts and what type of revolt (and type of units in the revolt) would ocurr in a province. It was all modable in the txt files. Pretty sure that RTW hasn't the same structure though.

You don't happen to have a source or quote talking about the Numidians, do you?

As to the revolts, there is a rebel faction with its own resources and AI leadership. This faction's units and name changes with the region the rebels are found in. The faction file has information similar to the following in it:

rebel_type Gaetuli //Numidia
category peasant_revolt
chance 3
description Gaetuli
unit carthaginian peasant
unit numidian javelinmen
unit numidian cavalry
unit numidian cavalry
unit generic rebel general

rebel_type Libyans //Macedon
category peasant_revolt
chance 0
description Libyans
unit egyptian peasant
unit egyptian peasant
unit egyptian peltast
unit egyptian peltast
unit egyptian peltast
unit egyptian archer
unit egyptian archer
unit egyptian chariot
unit generic rebel general

It appears to me that I can manipulate what you have described based on the information in this file.


Do not worry. I wasn't criticizing. Just venting some frustration about CA's depiction of Egypt. The work you've done so far is quite good, in such a short time.

The change of culture would be nice. But that faction is going to need a LOT of further work.

Again, keep in mind, the only things that were easy (read: I could send a mod complete with today) were the initial growth rate changes, the changing of the initial faction starting positions, the removal of some ahistorical units, and some renaming of cities. Frankly, I still haven't tackled the task of renaming a faction; I am overwhelmed by the amount of work involved.

I was merely pointing out that there are immediate changes that I can make to Egypt (changing its name, culture, and some of its units) that will have a great effect on it. I did NOT want to make it less rich, as historically it was a very rich area. Unless you disagree?

Of course further changes are necessary, but again, I'm just looking at what can be done now to make things more enjoyable for those who hate historical innaccuracies.


Everything, but the movement speeds? Certainly everything on the txt files. You're not talking about skins and animations. It's a pitty I don't have RTW yet. I'll probably just ask someone to send me the txt files. My knowledge of MTW modding might help to identify some modable features in RTW. I will also ask for the graphic (pak) files, to perform some skinning experiences.

Well, I meant everything that you listed except for the movement speeds. I know the skins can be changed easily, though I don't have the skill to do it. Assuming someone has the ability to work with a .CAS file to extract the animations/3D model, I think that those can be worked with as well.


People say that the population grows exponentially with just a bit of help, rapidly raising squalor and discontentment problems. What I was asking was if your idea was to reduce the rate of growth to make it linear, not exponential. That would allow a more sustained pace with less of an abrupt behaviour in regard to populational growth.

If I understand what you are saying properly, I believe you are incorrect. The growth rate is a simple percentage rate per turn. This varies from, say, a -2% to about 7%. It is not exponential by any stretch of the imagination. It uses the same principles as putting money in the bank. If you get 5% every six months it will still grow quite quickly, but it isn't exponential.

If, at the start of the game, you raise your taxes to keep the growth rate at about 1%, you will not have to worry about rapid city development causing too much squalor, unrest, and revolts. (This can be done through good play, not modification ;) At some point you will hit the city's upper limit to which it can support population, and then you will have to face those things without some careful juggling. However, this servers a purpose and it would be a mistake to modify that out.

I have not found squalor to be a problem. It is simply used to provide an upper limit on population growth (depending on the fertility of the province) and a way to limit the economic gains from a huge city. Otherwise the person who grows Carthage to 45,000 people and rakes in the cash would become extremely powerful. Instead, s/he has to take steps to make sure the people don't revolt, which costs money. This SHOULD be an issue for large cities in the period we're discussing, especially where those cities were far from the home lands.

Now, I do find that cities grow unnaturally quickly. If you set the taxes to low, build a farm upgrade or two, have a big garrison, and generally keep the people as happy as possible in a city, you can grow it more than 10% a year. This IS rapid growth; I would go so far as to call it ahistorical. My goal in lowering growth rates across the board is twofold: To slow down the pace of the game in terms of conquests, making population become more important (as you have to drain it to get troops, and manage it carefully to grow certain cities), and to increase the length of time it takes to get to the Marian reforms. If I lower it enough, it will be a real struggle to try and raise population in some cities that are not on fertile ground - I see this as a good thing. If I lower it too much, all the provinces start to look and feel the same, as the bonuses from upgrades and character traits now have MUCH more effect than the fertility of the province. Lowering those bonuses is tough, as some are hard coded.


Was there any significant difference in the graphics? Can you post any descriptions or pics of those particular units? If there were no particular differences, then it probably won't be a problem. Besides, most Roman units can be graphically altered without difficulty. The real difficulty will be the Ptolemaic faction. We'll have to base our models on the Seleucid units.

Livy describes units that are markedly similar in manner of arms and armor to those that Polybius describes. Livy is just about the only source we have for the units and structure of c. 340 BC. I can give you a more detailed description later, when I feel like typing it all out.


Yes, I agree entirelly that something must be done about the Roman cav. Weakening the Roman cav is a possibility, but all cav units must be weakened too (although by a smaller amout). They are currently nothing what the period cav was. They look more like WarpSpeed-Super-Medieval-Knights. For the Roman cav, in particular, the best step, IMHO, would be to make Roman cav much more expensive and buildable in two or three turns. So, people would be forced to use much more Infantry, like the Romans did, instead of rellying too much on cav. That would feel more Historical.

There may be room for more than one cavalry unit. Have you read about the extraordinarii?

[khelvan]

BTW, PSYCHO!!! ~:wave: Unfortunatelly, RTW doesn't allow for more than one special hability per unit. So, you, Stefan and the people involved in the Celtic, Germanic and Briton research, have to decide what will be the special hability of each Celtic, Germanic and Briton unit (testudo, shield wall, phalanx, etc...), if they have any.

Actually, from the unit file, we have the following descriptive text - "followed by the formations possible for the unit. One or two of square, horde, phalanx, testudo, or wedge." This implies to me that each unit can use TWO of these formations.

My hope is that we can add different formations (such as that the roman legions used to break a charge and/or their "orb" defense), and add MORE (than two per unit) formations. Unfortunately, much of that may be hard coded.

[Steppe Merc]

Excellent work Physco! I'm glad you saw those shields that I posted for celtic sheilds! I'll repost my previous Osprey pics, since they seem to have disapeared. Sadly, the Eastern Factions also need work, and I think that the Parthians and the Scythians also need help. A lot of help.
I'm horrible at the modding, but I'm trying, and will post any efforts that I make foward. Welcome back Pyscho, long time no see! ~D

[PSYCHO]

Yes, brilliant job on those shields!!!

If we could some how replace the Roman boss with a Celtic one it'd be perfect!

Also like what they did with the tartan. Probably should consider changing the Warband duds to faction coloured tartan and just leave the bright stripes for one or two of the 'elite' units. Hmmm... thoughts?

:charge:

Steppe, can you invite him to pass by here and have a chat?

(My misunderstanding; edited to save having to post again)

[Steppe Merc]

Oh, sorry I misled you. It wasn't me that did it. I posted an Osprey pic with a shield that was used for that unit. The chap who did it is Reconspy, he did some really funky stuff, and he's worth chatting to I think. I haven't even figured out how to copy paste stuff on the textures yet. I'll not give up though!

[PSYCHO]

:surprised: :surprised: :surprised:

:stunned: :stunned: :stunned:

:fainting: :fainting: :fainting:

This is a LOT of work, PSYCHO!!! And this just for three or four (Belgae) factions!!!

It will take some time to change all skins just for the Barbarian MOD. But I will try to depict some protoypes as soon as possible. :wall: :computer: :wall: :computer: :wall: :computer:



Aymar de Bois Mauri, I'd actually be pretty happy with just the 'barb' mod to the existing units. I think this is what we should initially shoot for ..with a few other tweaks to the game.

The other 'Europa' mod / suggestion is, as stated, an ideal and it would take much much more effort to produce.

my2bob

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

You don't happen to have a source or quote talking about the Numidians, do you?
You can try this:

Numidia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numidia)

Jugurta (http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_jugurtha.htm)

These were just made with a quick search. If you want I'll try to find more obvious ones. But the prevalent idea that pops up in my head, by my readings, is that the Numidians weren't really subjugated in any period of History. Vassals yes, conquered no. I might be wrong though...


As to the revolts, there is a rebel faction with its own resources and AI leadership. This faction's units and name changes with the region the rebels are found in. The faction file has information similar to the following in it:

rebel_type Gaetuli //Numidia
category peasant_revolt
chance 3
description Gaetuli
unit carthaginian peasant
unit numidian javelinmen
unit numidian cavalry
unit numidian cavalry
unit generic rebel general

rebel_type Libyans //Macedon
category peasant_revolt
chance 0
description Libyans
unit egyptian peasant
unit egyptian peasant
unit egyptian peltast
unit egyptian peltast
unit egyptian peltast
unit egyptian archer
unit egyptian archer
unit egyptian chariot
unit generic rebel general

It appears to me that I can manipulate what you have described based on the information in this file.
Great info. It seems that changing rebelions is much easier than in MTW.


Again, keep in mind, the only things that were easy (read: I could send a mod complete with today) were the initial growth rate changes, the changing of the initial faction starting positions, the removal of some ahistorical units, and some renaming of cities. Frankly, I still haven't tackled the task of renaming a faction; I am overwhelmed by the amount of work involved.
We'll just have to separate tasks.


I was merely pointing out that there are immediate changes that I can make to Egypt (changing its name, culture, and some of its units) that will have a great effect on it. I did NOT want to make it less rich, as historically it was a very rich area. Unless you disagree?
Nope. I do agree. There are other ways around the problem. Specially after a Ptolemaic unit change.


Well, I meant everything that you listed except for the movement speeds. I know the skins can be changed easily, though I don't have the skill to do it. Assuming someone has the ability to work with a .CAS file to extract the animations/3D model, I think that those can be worked with as well.
I can do it, when I get RTW.


If I understand what you are saying properly, I believe you are incorrect. The growth rate is a simple percentage rate per turn. This varies from, say, a -2% to about 7%. It is not exponential by any stretch of the imagination. It uses the same principles as putting money in the bank. If you get 5% every six months it will still grow quite quickly, but it isn't exponential.

If, at the start of the game, you raise your taxes to keep the growth rate at about 1%, you will not have to worry about rapid city development causing too much squalor, unrest, and revolts. (This can be done through good play, not modification ;) At some point you will hit the city's upper limit to which it can support population, and then you will have to face those things without some careful juggling. However, this servers a purpose and it would be a mistake to modify that out.

I have not found squalor to be a problem. It is simply used to provide an upper limit on population growth (depending on the fertility of the province) and a way to limit the economic gains from a huge city. Otherwise the person who grows Carthage to 45,000 people and rakes in the cash would become extremely powerful. Instead, s/he has to take steps to make sure the people don't revolt, which costs money. This SHOULD be an issue for large cities in the period we're discussing, especially where those cities were far from the home lands.

Now, I do find that cities grow unnaturally quickly. If you set the taxes to low, build a farm upgrade or two, have a big garrison, and generally keep the people as happy as possible in a city, you can grow it more than 10% a year. This IS rapid growth; I would go so far as to call it ahistorical. My goal in lowering growth rates across the board is twofold: To slow down the pace of the game in terms of conquests, making population become more important (as you have to drain it to get troops, and manage it carefully to grow certain cities), and to increase the length of time it takes to get to the Marian reforms. If I lower it enough, it will be a real struggle to try and raise population in some cities that are not on fertile ground - I see this as a good thing. If I lower it too much, all the provinces start to look and feel the same, as the bonuses from upgrades and character traits now have MUCH more effect than the fertility of the province. Lowering those bonuses is tough, as some are hard coded.[QUOTE=khelvan]
Ok. I trust your analysis and agree that it is probably a good balancing factor. No need to change.

[QUOTE=khelvan]Livy describes units that are markedly similar in manner of arms and armor to those that Polybius describes. Livy is just about the only source we have for the units and structure of c. 340 BC. I can give you a more detailed description later, when I feel like typing it all out.
OK.


There may be room for more than one cavalry unit. Have you read about the extraordinarii?
Nope.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Actually, from the unit file, we have the following descriptive text - "followed by the formations possible for the unit. One or two of square, horde, phalanx, testudo, or wedge." This implies to me that each unit can use TWO of these formations.

My hope is that we can add different formations (such as that the roman legions used to break a charge and/or their "orb" defense), and add MORE (than two per unit) formations. Unfortunately, much of that may be hard coded.
But in the battle interface, is there room for two formation buttons?

IIRC, as an example:

Carthaginian Sacred Band - Phalanx - Guard

Not two formations, only one. And a defensive behaviour. :confused:

[PSYCHO]

But in the battle interface, is there room for two formation buttons?

IIRC, as an example:

Carthaginian Sacred Band - Phalanx - Guard

Not two formations, only one. And a defensive behaviour. :confused:


Guess you could remove the guard function for some impetuous units and replace with a 2nd function?

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Oh, sorry I misled you. It wasn't me that did it. I posted an Osprey pic with a shield that was used for that unit. The chap who did it is Reconspy, he did some really funky stuff, and he's worth chatting to I think. I haven't even figured out how to copy paste stuff on the textures yet. I'll not give up though!
Hi, Steppe!!! I've seen Reconspy's work at TWC and it is great. I would like to have him on the team.

As for the skinning, you just have to get the Unpaker at TWC and open the graphics file containing the unit textures. After that, you just open a image editor like Paint Shop Pro or Photoshop and you can change the textures. You'll need a plug-inn for your image editor to read CA's image format. IIRC, it's available at The Dungeon (in RTW's modding topics - DJ's RTW guides) and at TWC. Then, after reworking the texture you'll just have to save in CA's format.

Hope it helps.

For a more detailed step-by-step consultation, check Duke John's RTW guides at The Dungeon...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Aymar de Bois Mauri, I'd actually be pretty happy with just the 'barb' mod to the existing units. I think this is what we should initially shoot for ..with a few other tweaks to the game.

The other 'Europa' mod / suggestion is, as stated, an ideal and it would take much much more effort to produce.

my2bob
I knew you were a perfectionist. I'm glad you're also a realist... :wink:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Guess you could remove the guard function for some impetuous units and replace with a 2nd function?
I guess it could be done. However khelvan did not mention that there was something like Guard in those options. So, it might be hard-coded. In that event, it will be impossible to change it.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Monk has sent me this PM:


Greetings Aymar!

I'm sure you know how life can be...and time gets constricted very often around here anymore. But, i have had rtw since it came out and have managed to play quite often (despite being pressed for time) and have made a lot of observations and mods myself to help balancing.

Here's just a few things i've noted(sorry but i only have about 5 minutes before i go out the door, if you want to post this in the EB topic then you're free too...i'm pressed for time right now)

- change Spain to Iberia

- Give Carthago Nova to the Carthaginians (not the Spanish!) I'm not sure if it's acurate, but i find it strange the spanish would have a city named after carthago...

- make pre-marian roman infantry available earlier with the militia barracks (reason: i ended up conquering Gaul with only Hastati in my first campaign. by the time i got Principes i was already invading Iberia, then when i got Triarii the marian reforms kicked in so there was really no point by then.)

-Double boat costs, maybe even tripple them. (reason: The Ai will ship spam, and a player who is focused on land will have a hell of a time even fighting against the odds. E.g: Spain had *huge* navies in my jilii campaign, but weak armies, so i just marched over land and thrashed them)

-Movement rates can't be turned down too much, otherwise when the unit is Exhausted and they try to route, they move at a snails pace. I have personally modded and i find them fine (when i have more time i'll post them), imho The kill rates are much more important.

that's all for now, i got to get going...i'll post the rest of what i've observed and my ideas in the EB topic when i return.
I can give my oppinion:

- change Spain to Iberia

Agreed, of course.

- Give Carthago Nova to the Carthaginians (not the Spanish!) I'm not sure if it's acurate, but i find it strange the spanish would have a city named after carthago...

Agreed. Another CA blunder?

- make pre-marian roman infantry available earlier with the militia barracks (reason: i ended up conquering Gaul with only Hastati in my first campaign. by the time i got Principes i was already invading Iberia, then when i got Triarii the marian reforms kicked in so there was really no point by then.)

But that would make Romans more powerfull and we don't want an even more OP faction. If that is implemented, balance must be made with increased cost and time to build.

-Double boat costs, maybe even tripple them. (reason: The Ai will ship spam, and a player who is focused on land will have a hell of a time even fighting against the odds. E.g: Spain had *huge* navies in my jilii campaign, but weak armies, so i just marched over land and thrashed them)

Yes, a possibility. That will make the AI spend more on armies...

-Movement rates can't be turned down too much, otherwise when the unit is Exhausted and they try to route, they move at a snails pace. I have personally modded and i find them fine (when i have more time i'll post them), imho The kill rates are much more important.

IMHO, both must changed. Regarding speed, cav and light inf charge and run. Regarding kill speed, an increased value of defense and HP across the board might do the trick.

[ick_of_pick]

I was courteously contacted regarding the E.B. project and was asked for my input regarding the Middle Eastern Factions, which are not very complete.
Here are some changes that need to be made to The Middle Eastern Factions, other then removal of P.J.'s :

Parthians:
Generally good, except for the whole pajama thing.
The Persians should look more Aryan.
Persian Cavalry should have more ammo.

Armenians:

Should NOT have cataphract archers, Armenian bow technology was almost as bad as the Romans, and they almost never trained archers of any kind let alone mounted ones.

Armenia should not have Arab cavalry or camels at their disposal, because no desert dwelling nomad in his right mind would have wandered so far up north.

Everything else is fine, especially the infantry.

Seleucids:
Probably the Most well made of the geographically Eastern Civilizations, and I'm not kidding. The only problem is that they shouldn't have cataphracts, because Macedonian style armies needed cavalry with endurance and speed to support the pike phalanx not more brute force. Not to mention the historical fact that they were almost never used.

They should also have access to the Arab units, such as cavalry and camels, because they made extensive use of them against the Egyptians.


Additions:
Now there SHOULD be Palmyra and Adiabene (Assyria) and it won't be that difficult to add them. They should both be protectorates under the Seleucid empire when the game begins.

Palmyra:

Adding them will be the easiest, their army was basically all cataphracts, and their flag was a plain, dark blue, and they would have had the same types of names as the Carthaginians.

Units:

The General should have a very heavily armored cavalry bodyguard, Cataphracts or the "Eastern General" unit.

Cataphracts and Cataphract archers.

Horse archers.

Some type of foot archer, as well as the generic Middle Eastern light infantry.

Also, limited siege ability, similar to the Parthians.

Full access to Arab units.



Assyria:


As for Assyria, we can call it the Roman name: "Assyria," or the Greek name: "Adiabene." The decision is up to whomever mods them in if it ever happens. Now we have been conveniently provided with the fortress-city Hatra, which became the Assyrian capital after Nineveh fell.

The Assyrian Flag was supposed to represent a Phoenix, and looked something like a disk with wings.




Assyrian Units:

Cavalry:
General: Assyrian Royal Bodyguards (Qurbuti) were fully armored lancers that rode barded horses, but the Assyrians used more the sophisticated lamellar armor, not scale mail like the Parthian heavy cavalry.

Horse archers: should definitely be included, the main Assyrian tactic was to use mounted archers to pin the enemy flanks so the main body of the enemy had no choice but to receive the lancer charge.

Infantry:
This is where things get interesting. The Assyrian infantry were heavily armored unlike other Middle Eastern Peoples, and were almost all armed with bows or slings. This is interesting because I don’t think Rome total war has any bow-armed Hybrid units to use as an example, but we could always make three different units. All heavily armored, but one armed with bows, one with bows, and the other armed with spears and shields.
The Assyrians favored the shield wall as a close combat infantry tactic as it limited the enemy’s ability to maneuver, so something along the lines of a phalanx with spears and large tower shields (if they even exist) would make sense.

Elite infantry were dismounted Qurbuti. The main difference between these guys and the standard infantryman were the humongous shields they carried. The shields covered about 80% of the body, but it made them very slow in combat.

So in general, the Assyrian units should be:

Cavalry:
Royal Guard, or Qurbuti, call it what you like: very heavy, fully barded lancers, sword as a secondary weapon.
Horse archers: the generic one that’s already been provided will suffice.
Assyrian Cavalry: A light/medium cavalry similar to the Carthaginian “long shield” cavalry, partially armored man, unarmored horse, no shield, Armed with both a light lance and a bow.

Arab units should also be available.

Infantry:
Assyrian infantry: Semi-heavy spearmen, with long thrusting spears, shield wall, or phalanx.
Guard (Qurbuti) Infantry: Heavy pikemen, large shield, very aggressive, no phalanx ability but should have a very high attack. Secondary short sword.

Ranged:
Armored Archers: Basically heavily armored foot archers. These guys are the core of the army. (Assyrian composite bows were very powerful, with an effective range of 250-650 meters.) should be decent in melee too.
Armored Slingers: Again, just really tough slingers, not good for much else.

Siege:
Full access to siege units; were talking about the only people who could surpass the Romans at city busting.


If a list of Royal Assyrian/northern mesopotamian names are needed just respond.

Thanks,

Ick

[khelvan]

But in the battle interface, is there room for two formation buttons?

IIRC, as an example:

Carthaginian Sacred Band - Phalanx - Guard

Not two formations, only one. And a defensive behaviour. :confused:

I don't see why the "special ability" button can't be a toggle. i.e. Off, Testudo, Wedge, and so on. The wording of the info above doesn't make sense without the ability to have them form at least two formations. If you are interested, since you don't have the game, here is the entire comment text from the unit file. Beware of spam (sorry):

;
; RTW Unit Details spreadsheet-generated unit descriptions
;

;Data entries are as follows
; Type The internal name of the unit. Note this not necessarily the same as the on screen name
; dictionary The tag used to look up the on screen name
;
;Category and class define the rough type of the unit. They're used for setting some
;default attributes and for determining where units go in formation amongst other things
; category infantry, cavalry, siege, handler, ship or non_combatant
; class light, heavy, missile or spearmen
;
; voice_type Used to determine the type of voice used by the unit
;
; soldier Name of the soldier model to use (from descr_models_battle.txt)
; followed by the number of ordinary soldiers in the unit
; followed by the number of extras (pigs dogs, elephants, chariots artillery pieces etc attached to the unit)
; followed by the collision mass of the men. 1.0 is normal. Only applies to infantry
; officer Name of officer model. There may be up to 0-3 officer lines per unit
; ship Type of ship used if applicable
; engine Type of siege engine used by unit
; animal The type of non ridden on animals used by the unit
; mount Type of animal or vehicle ridden on
;
; mount_effect Factors to add when in combat against enemy units that have the specified mounts
; Up to three factors may be specified, which may be classes of mount, or specific types
;
; attributes A miscellanious list of attributes and abilities the unit may have. Including
; sea_faring = can board ships
; hide_forest, hide_improved_forest, hide_long_grass, hide_anywhere = defines where the unit can hide
; can_sap = Can dig tunnels under walls
; frighten_foot, frighten_mounted = Cause fear to certain nearby unit types
; can_run_amok = Unit may go out of control when riders lose control of animals
; general_unit = The unit can be used for a named character's bodyguard
; cantabrian_circle = The unit has this special ability
; no_custom = The unit may not be selected in custom battles
; command = The unit carries a legionary eagle, and gives bonuses to nearby units
; mercenary_unit = The unit is s mercenary unit available to all factions
;
; formation soldier spacing (in metres) side to side, then front to back for close formation
; followed by the same measurements in loose formation.
; followed by the default number of ranks for the unit
; followed by the formations possible for the unit. One or two of
; square, horde, phalanx, testudo, or wedge
;
; stat_health Hit points of man, followed by hit points of mount or attached animal (if applicable)
; Ridden horses and camels do not have separate hit points
;
;Details of unit's primary weapon. If the unit has a missile weapon it must be the primary
; stat_pri From left to right
; attack factor
; attack bonus factor if charging
; missile type fired (no if not a missile weapon type)
; range of missile
; amount of missile ammunition per man
; Weapon type = melee, thrown, missile, or siege_missile
; Tech type = simple, other, blade, archery or siege
; Damage type = piercing, blunt, slashing or fire. (I don't think this is used anymore)
; Sound type when weapon hits = none, knife, mace, axe, sword, or spear
; Min delay between attacks (in 1/10th of a second)
; stat_pri_attr
; primary weapon attributes any or all of
; ap = armour piercing. Only counts half of target's armour
; bp = body piercing. Missile can pass through men and hit those behind
; spear = Used for long spears. Gives bonuses fighting cavalry, and penalties against infantry
; long_pike = Use very long pikes. Phalanx capable units only
; short_pike = Use shorter than normal spears. Phalanx capable units only
; prec = Missile weapon is only thrown just before charging into combat
; thrown = The missile type if thrown rather than fired
; launching = attack may throw target men into the air
; area = attack affects an area, not just one man
;
;Details of secondary weapons. If the unit rides on, or has attached animals or vehicles
;then the secondary weapon details refer to their attacks. If the unit has missile weapons
;the secondary weapon will be the one used for melee
;If the unit has a primary melee weapon, it may have a secondary side arm
; stat_sec As per stat_pri (a value of no means no secondary weapon)
; stat_sec_attr As per stat_pri_attr
;
; stat_pri_armour Details of the man's defences
; armour factor
; defensive skill factor (not used when shot at)
; shield factor (only used for attacks from the front of left)
; sound type when hit = flesh, leather, or metal
;
; stat_sec_armour Details of animal's or vehicle's defenses (note riden horses do not have a separate defence)
; As per stat_pri_armour, except that the shield entry is ommited
;
; stat_heat Extra fatigue suffered by the unit in hot climates
;
; stat_ground Combat modifiers on different ground types. From left to right
; scrub, sand, forest, snow
; stat_mental The base morale level, followed by discipline and training
; discipline may be normal, low, disciplined or imperuous. Impetuous units may charge without orders
; training determines how tidy the unit's formation is
;
; stat_charge_distance Distance from the enemy that the unit will begin charging
; stat_fire_delay Ectra delay over that imposed by animation, hetween volleys
;
; stat_food No longer used
; stat_cost Number of turns to build,
; Cost of unit to construct
; Cost of upkeep
; Cost of upgrading weapons
; Cost of upgrading armour
; Cost for custom battles
; stat_ownership List of factions and cultures that may have this unit


- make pre-marian roman infantry available earlier with the militia barracks (reason: i ended up conquering Gaul with only Hastati in my first campaign. by the time i got Principes i was already invading Iberia, then when i got Triarii the marian reforms kicked in so there was really no point by then.)

But that would make Romans more powerfull and we don't want an even more OP faction. If that is implemented, balance must be made with increased cost and time to build.

Well, Rome -should- be powerful, very powerful, don't you agree? I think the pre-Marian infantry needs to be tweaked anyways, but hopefully you will consider the idea I have regarding the Livy/Polybius units. Here, I will transcribe some text from Connolly for you:

"But here once again Livy gives us an invaluable glimpse of the legion organisation. All legionaries now use the Italic oval shield (scutum). The phalanx had been abandoned and the legion was now split up into three lines. The rear line had 15 companies (ordines) each subdivided into three parts (vexilla). At the front were the cream of the veterans (triarii). GBehind these came the younger and less distinguished men (rorarii) and behind these the least dependable soldiers (accensi). This literally means reserves. The triarii were armed with spears. Livy does not say what the others had.

Each of the three vexilla consisted of 60 men, two centurions and a standard bearer (vexillarius) who carried a flag-type standard, possibly resembling those of the Samnites.

The middle line was made up of 15 units (maniples) of heavy infantry (principes). These were the cream of the army - men in the prime of life. The front line (hastati) were also heavy infantry composed of young men coming up to the prime of life. They were also divided into 15 maniples. Attached to each maniple of hastati were 20 light-armed troops (leves) armed with spear and javelin. The legion strength was 5,000. Each unit of the rear line had 186 men. Each unit of principes and hastati must therefore have had a little over 60 men. These units were probably all composed of double centuries. Allowing 30 men per century, plus officers and supernumeraries such as rear-rank officers, standard bearers, trumpeters etc., we arrive at a total of about 5,000 men. Livy does not say how the principes and hastati were armed. In Polybius' day they had heavy javelins (pila) and swords. We know that pila were in use at this time and must assume that they were armed with these.
...
Livy claims that the round shield (clipeus) had been abandoned about the same time as the legionaries began to receive pay - i.e. during the siege of Veii at the beginning of the 4th century BC. He is in fact claiming that the phalanx had been abolished. The phalanx had been trampled into the ground at the Allia and it was probably for this reason that it was discontinued and the whole army was armed with the larger scutum which was now reinforced with an iron rim.
...
Although the vestiges of the old class sytem still remain, classes one, two and three seem now to be grouped together and divided by age and not wealth: the youngest form the hastati, those in the prime of life the principes, and the oldest the triarii. The rorarii still seem to be the old fourth class and the accensi and leves, with their proportionately higher numbers, make up the fifth class.
...
In the new army the prime offensive weapon of the legionary must by now have been the heavy javelin (pilum). The old spearmen still existed in the triarii, rorarii, and accensi. But now over a third of the army had been moved up to the front, probably armed with pila to break up the advancing enemy.

The three lines are drawn up in quincunx formation, like the black squares on a chess board. The 15 centuries of hastati are at the front with a gap between each. The principes are drawn up similarly covering the gaps. The units of the rear line similarly cover the gaps in the line of principes. The battle starts with the skirmishers (leves) trying to break up the enemy formation with their light javelins. As the enemy advances the lightly armed troops withdraw through the gaps and the hastati charge, throwing their heavy javelins and then closing in with their swords. If this fails to break the enemy, they retreat into the gaps between the principes, who similarly charge. If both lines are beaten, they withdraw on the triarii and retire through the gaps in the line. The triarii then close the gaps and the whole army retreats. Livy's suggestion that the triarii also charged is probably an attempt to disguise the fact that the early Roman army sometimes lost battles. The old Roman adage, 'to have come to the triarii', meant that things had reached a terrible state.


Whilst the hastati and principes were fighting, the triarii knelt on one knee with their left leg forward. Their large oval shields rested against their left shoulders covering them from enemy missles. Their spear butts were stuck in the ground with the spears pointing obliquely forward, Livy says, 'like a palisade.' Not unless all else has failed did they enter the battle. It is noteworthy that the standards were with the rear line, so that if the units operating out front were scattered, they knew the ordines on which to fall back. Livy does not tell us whether there were one or two centurions to each maniple of principes and hastati, or in fact none.

During the first 200 years of the republic Rome probably suffered many defeats. The patriotic Livy usually says that bad weather 'stopped play' to account for the Romans not gaining a victory. The greatest of these defeats was the disaster at the Allia (390 BC). These defeats, and the Allia in particular, may account for the strongly defensive character of the 4th-century legion. The more mobile formation of the hastati principes was probably an answer to the fast-moving armies of the Celts and Samnites. The javelineers at the front may have been particularly designed to withstand and break the force of the Celtic charge."

I hope that helps describe the early republican legion. I forsee the accensi and rorarii as the replacements for peasants and the city watch, respectively. I see the next upgrade making the early hastati et al., and the next making the late units. I see the first missle range making leves, the next making velites and funditores. What do you think?

I should note that in the entire section regarding the 4th century BC to Polybius' day, Connolly makes no mention of cavalry at all. I am unsure of how to handle this in game terms.

As to Rome being too powerful, I suggest that each faction (but for possibly the Senate) be reduced to one ship each at start. In addition, making Messana neutral and granting the Senate one of each of the Julii and Brutii holdings should both weaken the Roman factions at start and strengthen the Senate for a tougher civil war.

Combined with a strengthening of some of Rome's traditional enemies, especially Carthage, this should make things much tougher for the Roman factions.

extraordinarii - "From the allies the best third of the cavalry and the best fifth of the infantry were selected to form a picked unit called the extraordinarii. This was a crack force used for special assignments. They also made up the covering force for the legions on the march." Drawn from Polybius, in Connolly.

-khel

[Mouzafphaerre]

-
Greetings,

Per Dom Aymar's PM I'm here. I'm none of an expert in any of the topics you have been covering but can help you on conceptual basis if you wish.

For the least, I'm a supporter of your cause (historical accuracy).

BTW, I can't play RTW since my configuration isn't up to handle it and unfortunately no upgrade will happen in the nearest future.

Last spring, some of us ORG members attempted a workshop to form a knowledge base on naming (people, places, units etc.) related to my "Modlet". Solo, the creator of the idea, registered an adware forum. Although it did receive some recognition, the attempt practically failed due to extremely low level of contribution. Nevertheless, the forum is here:

http://data.forumhoster.com/forum_mtw/index.php?
_

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

This is taken from a post AvramL send me:


I haven't had much time to think about it, but the first glaring thing would have to be the exlusion of the tribus saxones and viscus gothi areas from the German player's starting provinces, also the barbarians all look kind of bland to me, nothing but trousers and bare chest (where are the cloaks and tunics?, hell I wouldn't even mind some furs)
Well, he might be surprised after seing PSYCHO's post... :wink:

As for the tribes, what do you think? Wasnt the original idea to mingle all Celtic, Germanic, Briton, etc... tribes in each of those factions, like in RTW, but portraying different tribal identities through the different regional tribal units?

[Monk]

- make pre-marian roman infantry available earlier with the militia barracks (reason: i ended up conquering Gaul with only Hastati in my first campaign. by the time i got Principes i was already invading Iberia, then when i got Triarii the marian reforms kicked in so there was really no point by then.)

But that would make Romans more powerfull and we don't want an even more OP faction. If that is implemented, balance must be made with increased cost and time to build.



Well, that was only an idea...i was just trying to point out that it's sometimes impossible to even form the elements of a pre-marian legion as by the time you get everything you need, the Marian reforms are almost on you.



-Movement rates can't be turned down too much, otherwise when the unit is Exhausted and they try to route, they move at a snails pace. I have personally modded and i find them fine (when i have more time i'll post them), imho The kill rates are much more important.

IMHO, both must changed. Regarding speed, cav and light inf charge and run. Regarding kill speed, an increased value of defense and HP across the board might do the trick.

Oh yes, i agree 100% that both must be modded. I was only saying that if momvent rates are turn down to much, it's impossible for routing troops to escape from even infantry (tested this myself). Currently my movment rates are the following:

grass_short 0.9
grass_long 0.8
sand 0.8
rock 0.8
forest_dense 0.6
scrub_dense 0.8
swamp 0.6
mud 0.9
mud_road 0.9
stone_road 0.9
water 0.525
ice 0.55
snow 0.6

Some may find this too fast, but i think it's a good starting point if nothing else...

My Kill rates are 1/2 of what the game shipped with, and i find it just fine. The battles last much longer and there's actually a chance to use tactics.

Another thing i think should be done (or at least looked at), is removing Campus Sakae from the control of the Parthians. No idea if it's accurate, but one thing i've noticed is that the city gets the parthian player/AI into money trouble VERY fast, and it can be hard to keep the city and get out of the economic negatives again. (not tested myself but i've noticed numerous posts about this) What we could do is put the troops who ussualy start up in Campus Sakae in Arsakia, or Susa.

[Steppe Merc]

Agreed. Give Campus Sakae and Sarmatae to the Sarmatians (new faction). No idea what colors they would be, but they could pretty much be identical to the Scythians, who of course need to look a lot different from what they currently do.
Good news, Reconspy agreed to help us! ~:cheers: For some reason he can't post here, but it will hopefully be fixed. Back to the modding, I go!

[Colovion]

I really want the Scythians and Sarmatians to be well (re)done.

Here's some info to help:

Link (http://www.applet-magic.com/sarmatians.htm)

"Most adversaries were overwhelmed by the Scythian battle tactics. It was only the Sarmatians who found a successful counter-strategy to withstand the Scythians. The Sarmatian warriors and their mounts were protected with armor. Usually the armor consisted of metal plates of bronze or iron sewn onto leather garments. This armor enabled the Sarmatians to withstand a Scythian attack. After a Scythian onslaught the Sarmatians would attack the Scythians with fifteen-foot-long lances. The Sarmatians were probably the originator of the armored knights of medieval Europe."

Scythians (http://greek-gods.tripod.com/Scythians.htm)

http://www.livius.org/sao-sd/scythians/scyth.jpg Scythian Foot Archer

Scythians 2 (http://www.cannabisculture.com/magazine/jul95/scythians.html)

"Many Royal Scyths wore bronze helmets and chain-mail jerkins of the Greek type, lined with red felt. Their shields were generally round and made of leather, wood, or iron, and were often decorated with a central gold ornament in the form of an animal, but other tribesmen carried square or rectangular ones.

- All used a double-curved bow, shooting over the horse's left shoulder; arrows had trefoil-shaped heads made, according to date, of bronze, iron, or bone. Arrows and bow were carried in a gorytos (bow case) slung from the left side of the belt.

- Their swords were generally of the Persian type, with an intricately ornamented heart-shaped or triangular crosspiece. ...the sheaths were often encased in gold worked into embossed designs and offset with paste or ivory inlay and gems.

- Their knives were of various shapes and lengths, some being curved in the Chinese manner. They wore the dagger attached to the left leg by straps, and many carried spears or standards surmounted by bronze terminals depicting real or imaginary beasts.

- The Scythian's horses were also outfitted in beautiful and ornate costumes, and were seen ridden for the first time among many of the peoples they descended upon.

Sarmatians (http://www.livius.org/sao-sd/sarmatians/sarmatians.html)

"They were strong enough to demand tribute from the Greek towns on the northern shores of the Black Sea. However, relations were not always bad. The Greeks traded with their neighbors and sometimes joined forces with the tribe when they felt threatened by the Scythians. These wars were very successful. The Scythians more or less disappear from history, and their country was from now on known as Sarmatia.

In the early first century, Sarmatians are mentioned as allies of king Mithradates, the ruler of several countries near the Black Sea and one of the most dangerous enemies of the Roman empire. In 66, he was defeated by Pompey the Great and expelled from Asia Minor. Mithradates continued his war from the Crimea, still supported by the Sarmatians, but was ultimately forced to commit suicide. The Sarmatians continued the anti-Roman alliance with his son Pharnaces, who was defeated in 47 by Julius Caesar at Zela"

Here's a load of info on the Mythology which should be helpful in creating Temples to various gods.

Scythian/Sarmatian Mythology (http://public.kubsu.ru/~usr02898/sl2.htm)

And of course here is the Wik (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarmatians)

[Steppe Merc]

Excellent stuff! I posted some sweet pics a bit ago, but they dissapeared. I guess I'll re post them...

[Steppe Merc]

Right, there's a junior patron Stormy, who pointed out some real problems with the Thracians. I'll post his info here:


Do I have to Re-register to become a full member ? or is it like a certain number of post then I can become a full member ~:confused:

More pics ( wish I can take them to the Europa Barbarorum thread )

Thracians

http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1338_face.jpg
Thracians Light Calvary.
Ingame got some militia calvary that looks like alot of greek or numidian calvary I think it should be skinned to look something like this.

http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1341_face.jpg
Spearman or Warband with a spear and a round shield. To replace the fake thracian hoplites ingame ?

http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1340_face.jpg
Another Thracian peltast but I like the art pic one better. ( if you ask me )

http://www.miniaturewargames.com/images/sarahpeltast.gif
More unique looking peltfast

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Thracians/ABI4802.jpg
Thracian Noblemen ( will look good with a re-skinned general ) small pic but you can see they have the thracian hat.

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Thracians/ABI4804.jpg
Thracian Peltast ( more peltast I know but its more pics )

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Thracians/ABI4805.jpg
Thracian Archers

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/JohnHansen/Thracians/JHI4802.jpg
Thracian General

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/JohnHansen/Thracians/JHI4803.jpg
Thracian Horsemen ( look like archers )

http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/JohnHansen/Thracians/JHI4809.jpg
You can see more thracians with the unique looking shield and curved in the front sword and thracian hat.

Sorry for the pics in this thread guys. I cant post in the others yet but this is some help.

[Colovion]

I propose giving all Thracians that unique looking shield and taking it away from the Druids. I like the Unique peltast more than the toga-clad one.

Good pics.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I propose giving all Thracians that unique looking shield and taking it away from the Druids. I like the Unique peltast more than the toga-clad one.

Good pics.
Yeap. I agree on both acounts. The spearmen can be adapted from the hoplite with a specific re-skinning. But it would be better if we had bigger art depictions of the cav and general bodyguard.

[Omegamann]

I propose giving all Thracians that unique looking shield and taking it away from the Druids. I like the Unique peltast more than the toga-clad one.

Good pics.

Keep in mind that the pictures shown here are Thracians in the classical period.
They are most fitting in a timeframe of 450-400 BC. Afterc being conquerd by Macedon and fighting in Alexanders army and the armies of his successors they lost much of their typical attire and were mostly hellenised.
They also picked up the celtic longshield for their heavy infantry during the many clashes with invading celts.
Under roman occupation they would either look quite greek or be outfitted by the romans as auxillia with the standard roman equipment.

for further reading:
The Thracians from Osprey
Thrace website (high load times) (http://www.thrace.0catch.com)
Xenophons Anabasis

[Steppe Merc]

How Hellenised were they really? I can't immagine them being total Greek clones... and why would they lose their exellent cavalry?

[DisruptorX]

The thracians look really mis-matched and motley as a full army. They actually do get Macedonian style phalanx units...but then they also get naked guys with big swords. Their units kind of clash with each other. Also, their generals and unit commanders are macedonian style, which means that you have those guys leading shirtless barbarians. It looks weird..

[Colovion]

The thracians look really mis-matched and motley as a full army. They actually do get Macedonian style phalanx units...but then they also get naked guys with big swords. Their units kind of clash with each other. Also, their generals and unit commanders are macedonian style, which means that you have those guys leading shirtless barbarians. It looks weird..

I think that sounds pretty cool

[Stormy]

Thracians were Hellenised but they still are their own Civ ( I don't think they were greeks, Hellenised yes but greek no ). I say Re-skin them for the luv of the game!! ~D

http://www.miniaturewargames.com/images/sarahpeltast.gif


Thracians (http://www.miniaturewargames.com/thracianpeltastsinart.htm)

________________________________________________________________
4. The Dacians and the Thracians:

The Dacians are often considered as the northern branch of the Thracians. This fact is mostly based on several ancient Greek texts. When the Greeks, who used to call their northern neighbors with the name of Thracians, met the Getae and noticed certain similitudes in language and customs, they considered them a Thracians tribe.
But, the political history, the archeological findings and especially the little that we know of the two languages, prove that the Thracians and the Dacians are two distinct peoples, well individualized, that spoke two different Indo-Europeans languages and that were only related to one another.
The Thracians, those who were always called so, inhabited an area bordered by the Vardar River, the Balkan Mountains, the Aegean Sea, the Sea of Marmar and the Black Sea, being the southern neighbors of the Dacians.

Good site, Covers Scythians, Thracians amd Dacians and some photos too for the modders. (http://www.geocities.com/cogaionon/article2.htm)

:duel: I say it again the more stuff modded will add a unique feel to the game and feel is important for these kind of games. ( you got to have the feel of being that civ )

[Stormy]

~D Whoo hooo I'm free to chat anywhere now :charge:

[Stormy]

Repost. I did this in another thread
___________________________

The Thracian Bastarnae is perfect becouse of the thracian Shield and thracian front curved sword.. Thing is making a cloth thracian hat will be the only small problem. Adding new clothing or even a cape shouldnt be much of a problem ( only re-skinning )

More pictures of thracian head wear and shields.

http://ehost.users.btopenworld.com/HCH/images/at2v1fro.jpg

http://ehost.users.btopenworld.com/HCH/images/at2v2fro.jpg

http://ehost.users.btopenworld.com/HCH/images/at2v2bac.jpg

http://ehost.users.btopenworld.com/HCH/images/atheadv1.jpg

http://ehost.users.btopenworld.com/HCH/images/atheadv2.jpg

http://ehost.users.btopenworld.com/HCH/images/atshield.jpg

[Stormy]

Scythians:


Scythian foot archers ( could replace the half naked one from ingame )
http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~kuijt/miscellania/Singles/Mus14.JPG
http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~kuijt/miscellania/Singles/Mus11.JPG

Scythian noble cavalry ( could replace the generic barbarian one from ingame )
http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~kuijt/miscellania/Singles/Mus17.JPG
http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~kuijt/miscellania/Singles/Mus16.JPG

Scythian spearman
http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~kuijt/miscellania/Singles/Mus12.JPG
http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~kuijt/miscellania/Singles/Mus15.JPG
http://www.umiacs.umd.edu/~kuijt/miscellania/Singles/Mus13.JPG
___________________________________________

Some more Scythian figure photos:

General and Nobles ( I do think the Scythian body guards are perfect the way they are, I shall look again but the general needs tweaking ? )
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Skythians/ABSkythians05.jpg

Scythian Horse Archers ( could replace the half naked horse archers )
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Skythians/ABSkythians02.jpg
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Skythians/ABSkythians03.jpg
______________________________________

Some Scythian Art units:

Scythian Foot Archer ( could replace half naked one )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/852_face.jpg

Scythian auxiliaries
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/851_face.jpg

Scythian Horse Archer ( could replace the shirtless horse archer for the Scythians )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/835_face.jpg

Scythian Calvary ( Fast spear strike calvary )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/836_face.jpg

http://www.yoyonet.net/attach/2004/03/10/217769-Scythian-embed.jpg

Scythian Nobleman ( Body Guards for Gen )
http://www.hmsneo.org/Tulsa2k1/Disc1/img16.jpg

Again a scythian foot archer ( could replace the half naked one from ingame )
http://www.hmsneo.org/Tulsa2k1/Disc1/img17.jpg

Called a Scythian toast by figure makers. ( could be a general ?? )
http://www.hmsneo.org/Tulsa2k1/Disc1/img15.jpg

Scythian King ( whoa! look what I found, Makes a perfect general and could replace the generic one from ingame )
http://members.shaw.ca/mmsi/2002/images2/mbsk2.jpg

Weapons: just extras. Not really necessary to add.

Scythian Bronze Axe head
http://www.barakatgallery.com/Auction/ItemImgs/x0463a.jpg


~:cool: you guys gonna hate me for this bombardment

[Colovion]

I love that King as a General idea - and the guy with the shoulder pads in the 'toast' pic has some nice armour ideas.

[Steppe Merc]

I just saw that you posted them yourself. Good thing I checked! Good stuff you've got there. Today I'll repost me pics that disapeared, and some more stuff.
A lot of the Scythians there look very Asian, while I though they were more along the Celtic Germanic stock. Mabye we could have a unit that the Parthians, Sarmatians and Scythians could train as a mercanary that's a more Asiatic mercanary?

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

~:cool: you guys gonna hate me for this bombardment
Glad to see you've been promoted to Member. :thumbsup:

As for the bombardment, we still want the good info, but you should maybe put in more posts instead of a single one.

Great job, BTW... :yes:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

This has been sent through PM, to me, by Junior Patron Ranika:


Well, I do have one idea that I don't believe I saw addressed in the thread, and perhaps it could be posted or shared with some one, and that's the use of specific colors for units. It's probably nitpicking, but it is realistic. Gauls and Britons both used specific colors and numbers of colors to designate ranks, worn on pants, cloaks, or long sleeved shirts, or on their shields. Ignoble warriors wore one (if they were slaves), two, or three colors. Nobles wore four to six colors.

For Gallic non-noble units (basic warriors and such), dark red, dark blue, dark yellow/gold, plain white, and black, should not be used. Likewise, nobles should not have light red, light blue, light yellow, or brown on any 'checked' or 'striped' clothing (the parts of clothing that desiginate rank, such as pants or a long-sleeved under shirt). Nobles can still wear brown, but it did not appear in their 'patterned' clothing. These rules are still used today in some parts of Ireland, that were more cloistered from British influence, during ceremonies and the like.

As an addendum the 'forbidden' colors CAN be used on shields, as designs, but the base field should not be one of those colors. I'm not certain what the Britons used, but Eamoir of Dal Riada remarked that the last of the old British warriors in Caledonia and Strathclyde still used the system to designate ranks.

[Steppe Merc]

I agree that the units need more color. The faction color could go on a shield or saddle cloth, rather than the whole outfit. The same also would apply to the Parthians, Scythians and Sarmtians.

I found this in a thread. It has some interesting things, and I'm going to DL it to check it out.


Hi,

Together with Gaius Julius I made the Rome: Total Realism mod that can be found on twcenter and strategy informer. We have been busy rebalancing the campaign and trying to make all the names and units historically accurate. The first version of the mod has been released and that was mainly a rebalance version. A new version is in the making.

We are currently busy to add historical units to make the campaign more interesting. Since the file structure does not allow (or at least does not support it very well) several mods to be active at once, we would like to turn this into a super mod for which everybody can add new and interesting things.

We are not out for fame and glory. We will never steal your credit for a unit. We just want to have as much new stuff into one easy to use mod as possible, because that will ensure that more people will be able to enjoy all your additions.

I hope more people will want to join our team and help us create the biggest, baddest mod you can find.

Anyway, here's the readme for version 1. The mod itself can be downloaded here:

http://www.strategyinformer.com/downloads/rometotalwar.shtml#id739

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;;;;;Gaius Julius & ZaPPPa - Rome: Total Realism v1.0;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

--- If you have any questions, or wish to report a bug, please contact Gaius Julius at hannibalbarca@gmail.com or ZaPPPa at jbfloor@planet.nl



This mod REQUIRES the official Rome Total War patch v1.1. Install the patch first, and then install this mod.


To install, simply extract to your Rome main folder. All of the needed files should extract to the correct folders themselves. Make SURE you make a back up of ALL the files ending in .txt in this folder. No graphics will be over written, but .txt files WILL be. We cannot be held responsible for any over written files. if they are accidentily over written, you will have to reinstall the game.

In the campaign\rome_total_realism folder additional map_.tga files can simply be copied from the imperial campaign foder. We left all but the Roman ones out to keep the zipfile as small as possible.

To play, start Rome and choose Single Player. Select Provincial Campaign, and then the rome_total_realism option.


;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;; GENERAL CHANGES & FIXES;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

- Macedon and Pontus are now unlockable after a successful Imperial Campaign. They also have custom maps in the faction selection screen.

- Egypt is now The Ptolemaic Empire. Spain is now Iberia.

- Greek Royal Pikeman now use pikes, instead of simple spears. Thanks to Eldaran for creating this fix first!

- Wardogs are now EXCLUSIVE to the Barbarian factions. Roman factions can no longer produce these animals.Added Wardogs ability to Hide In Long Grass and Run Amok. Changed Attack from 14 to 12. Changed cost of upkeep from 40 to 100 to replicate replacement of handlers costs, etc, while still not making them an impossible choice to train. Decreased handler/dog ratio to 8/24.

- All buildings build times extended by 1 turn, except the basic level of wall defences.

- CHANGES MADE TO CARTHAGE: Added Diplomat nearby to Carthago. Carthago Nova starts with a port & a Governor's Villa (Spain was big interest to Carthage, it must have had a damn port), upgraded Carthago's port to a Shipwright. Added a number of ships to bolster their sea defences. Increased 'Iberian infantry' Defensive Skill by 1, and rose attack by 1, and raised recruit cost to 280. Changed the Civ. type to Sailor Caesar. Added assorted buildings to different cities, to make them more technologically advanced. Changed Carthago's population to 7300. Gave the provinces of Numidia, Tripolitania, and Baetica to Carthage, as this was the correct state of the empire at the time of the first Punic War.

- CHANGES MADE TO EGYPT: Altered the Civ. faction type to religious mao. removed a number of buildings from Egypt's various cities, as they were EXTREMELY well advanced compared to nearby (and pretty much every other) factions. Removed many natural resources in their beginning territories. Lowered beginning population amount for each city.

- CHANGES MADE TO NAVAL WARFARE: All ships take 60 population cost. All ships costs have been inflated. the Decere has been replaced with the Quadrireme, and the Corvus Quinquereme is now the best ship buildable. Boats are now named Warships, and Large Boats are named Large Warships. Warships are roughly equal to a Bireme, while Large Warships are only slightly weaker in defense than a Trireme.

- CHANGES MADE TO THE GREEK CITIES: Families have been reworked, so, to replicate 2 seperate leagues, you can choose which families have power in the faction by choosing heirs and leaders. Syracuse is now rebel, along with Pergamum, & Apollonia now belongs to The Greek Cities.

- CHANGES MADE TO THE ROMAN FACTIONS: Hastati, Principes, and Triarii are ALL recruitable with a Militia Barracks. They are now represented in three forms; Early, Contemporary, and Late. Early Hastati, Hastati, Late Hastati. The lowered stats reflect this. Early troops are available with the Militia Barracks. 'Normal' troops are available with City Barracks. Late troops are available with Army Barracks. The Late troops have the regular, CA supplied stats.

- Reduced Base farm Fertility Levels across the whole entire board for a slower, more realistic population growth rate. This, in turn, extends the games longevity.

- Adjusted character trait bonuses. The Good commander trait gives 1 less command bonus, but gives 1 Troop Morale Boost.
- Diminished all cavalry's charge bonus to about 66% of what they once were. This will stop units from routing as easily, but not go as far as to make cavalry flanking negligible.

- Equites stats have been lowered from a 7,4 attack, to 6,3. Defence has been lowered from 3,5,4 to 4,2,3. Previously they had the best defensive rating out of all early cavalry, and only 1 point lower than Long Shield Cavalry. All early Barbarian Cavalry defence has been raised by 1 point to 3,4,4. Equites unit number has been lowered from 27 to 18.

- Praetorian Cohorts now have the same attack value as a Legionary Cohort, but have slightly improved armour levels to reflect their status of being elite, but not super human. Urban Cohorts have the same armour value as Praetorian Cohorts, but have an improved attack. Overall, though, this has been diminished slightly.

- Macedonian and Egyptian family names have now been reworked and made correct.

- Eastern war elephants now use the Indian model, and not the African.

- Lowered the probablity of a Senate assigned mission. Lowered the reward money that you are given for a successful mission. All offices held durations have been shortened to 3 years. Pontifex Maximus can ONLY be held once by any single character.

- Increased the probability of some natural disasters occuring. Storms can now happen over land as well as sea.

- Diminished trade values of all resources by 1.

- Changed the name of 'Pharoah's Bowmen' to 'Ptolemaic Heavy Bowmen'. Diminished stats to have less of an attack than Gaulish Huntsmen, but better defense and armour.

- Libyan Spearman now have the ability 'Phalanx'.

- Corinth is now stronger garrisoned to reflect its historical state as a 'frontier' town.

- Velite Gladiator no longer trainable. Mirmillo & Samnite Gladiators no longer trainable, but recruitable as mercenaries.

- Removed the 'Head Hurlers' unit.

- Senate begins game with more units as not to be so much of a push over.

- Syracuse is now a rebel city.

- Reduced handler/incendiary pig ratio to 8/24 for both Roman and Greek factions.

- Gave Belgica to the Rebels. The Britons only have their British provinces, and they will have to fight to expand. This is to make the major barbarian factions the Germanics and Gauls.

- Added Centurions/Signiferis to the proper units.

- Integrated adonys' 'Killing Rate Mod' for longer battles, and a slower kill rate. No unit attributes are changed with this, only the KILL RATE is slower. For a more in-depth explanation of this, please visit the following link: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=9877

- Integrated Apollonius' 'Movement Rate Mod' for a more realistic movement rate. For more information on this mod, please visit the following link: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=9703

- Edited the Barbarian Peasants to be a more logical choice. Raised attack to 2, charge bonus to 2, group size to 80, and lowered upkeep cost to 90. Compared to the more 'civiliszed' civilians, the barbarians were very weak. For instance, Carthaginian peasants have an attack of 3 and a charge bonus of 2. I left these at normal.

- Removed the use of Arcani.

- 'Gaesatae' are only available to the Gauls, as was true of history.

- Removed the use of 'Egyptian Chariots' and 'Egyptian Chariot Archers'.

- Removed the use of 'Screeching Women'.

- Lowered Druids attack from 13 to 10 and charge bonus from 5 to 3, and lowered their recruit cost to 440, to make them more of a general back-up role, to accompany their troops mainly in a chant, and not to actually engage in combat.

- Changed the name of 'Trier' to 'Treverum' for the German city.

- Changed the name of Rome to Roma.

- Changed the name of 'Corduba' to 'Gades'. Corduba was founded by Rome in 164 BC. Gades (Cadiz) was an ancient city belonging to Pheonicia, then Carthage.

- Changed the name of Carthage to Carthago.

- Renamed 'Bull Warriors' to 'Iberian Infantry'.

- Changed the name of 'Naked Fantics' to 'Gaesatae'.

- Changed the name of 'Heavy Peltast' to the proper name of 'Thureophoroi' for The Greek Cities.

- Changed 'Macedonian Cavalry' to 'Prodromoi'.

- Changed the name of 'Cataphract Camels' to 'Heavy Camels', as Cataphract sounds misleading.

- Changed the name of 'Spanish Mercenaries' to 'Iberian Mercenaries'.

- Changed the name of 'Nile Spearmen' to ' Machimoi'. Reskinned.

- Changed the name of 'Desert cavalry' to 'Ethnic Cavalry'.

- Changed the name of 'Pharoah's Guard' to 'Agema'.

- Changed the name of 'Barbarian Peasants' for all factions to reflect their race. Gaulish Barbarian Peasants become Gallic Peasants, Dacian Barbarian Peasants become Dacian Peasants, British Barbarian Peasants become Breton Peasants, Scythian Barbarian Peasants become Scythian Peasants, and German Barbarian Peasants become Germanic Peasants.

- Changed the name of 'Barbarian Cavalry' for all factions to reflect their race. Gaulish Barbarian Cavalry become Gallic Light Cavalry, Scythian Barbarian Cavalry becomes Scythian Light Cavalry, etc.

- Changed the name of 'Barbarian Noble Cavalry' for each faction to reflect their race. Dacian Barbarian Noble cavalry becomes Dacian Noble Cavalry, etc.

- Changed the name of 'Barbarian Warlord' for each faction to reflect their race. British Barbarian Warlord becomes Breton Warlord, etc.

- Changed the name of 'British Light Chariots' and 'British Heavy Chariots' to 'Celtic Light Chariots' and 'Celtic Heavy Chariots'.

- Changed name of 'Nile Cavalry' to 'Cleruch Cavalry'.

- Faction AI settings have been changed. Full credits go to .Spartan
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=11196&st=20&

;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;;;;;;;; NEW & ADDED UNITS ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;

- GALLIC INFANTRY: These are gallic troops only available to Carthage to train. These soldiers contribute to a deverse Carthaginian army.

- NUBIAN MERCENARIES: These are Nubian Spearmen, available to any faction for recruitment in the Nile Delta, Middle Edgypt, or Thebais.

- FUNTIDORES: These are slingers for the Roman factions. In the time before the Marian reforms, the Romans made use of 'slingers', not archers.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I just saw that you posted them yourself. Good thing I checked! Good stuff you've got there. Today I'll repost me pics that disapeared, and some more stuff.
A lot of the Scythians there look very Asian, while I though they were more along the Celtic Germanic stock. Mabye we could have a unit that the Parthians, Sarmatians and Scythians could train as a mercanary that's a more Asiatic mercanary?
IIRC, your initial idea is correct. I believe Scythians were exclusivelly of Caucasian origin. Greek and Persian chronicles report just that, although I can't be really sure where I've read it. As for if they had some mingling with Asiatic populations, I'm not sure. Maybe some Xioung-Nou tribes migrated sooner than we think into the West... :thinking:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I found this in a thread. It has some interesting things, and I'm going to DL it to check it out.
Yes. I have been paying attention to both of their threads. The speed of their work is fantastic!!! :stunned:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Although this is taken from an old list, it serves us as a template to order the different research groups. It's not up to date. To keep confusion at a minimum, I would like for the people NOT included in this list (specially newcommers) to post their preference in research.


Celtic Briton research group:
The_Emperor
Big King Sanctaphrax
frogbeastegg


Celtic Gaul research group:
PSHYCO
Nowake


Germanic research group:
Stefan the Berserker
Monk


Dacian research group:
Revenant69
Nowake


Celti-Iberian research group:
Parmenio
Aymar de Bois Mauri


Parthian/Scythian/Sarmatian research group:
---------
---------


Ptolemaic Egypt research group:
---------
---------


Game accuracy information:
Cebei
Teutonic Knight


I would really like the several group responsibles to pronounce themselves about the other's participants ideas. Please indulge me... :help:

[Stormy]

Scythians were a indo-european ( Caucasian peoples )

map
http://www.silk-road.com/maps/images/scymap1.jpg
As nomadic peoples both Scytrhians and Sarmatians were around the areas of modern day ukriane - Tajikistan


Sarmatians are going to be added no?

If so will be nice to add

Lusitanians, Illyrians, Libyans, Syracusans, Nabataens and Athenians???
If so much later.. we should get these skins/models down for the ingame civs first.. I got a few map pages showing many provinces that are not ingame for the future C.Map modder even more steppe and persian/parthian provinces if one day some one makes more to the map expanding east.

[Stormy]

One more thing ppl. I remember watching time commanders and they had huns and goths civs in it. Will these come in a future expansion pack ?

I will post some dacians next..

Posted alot of Thracians and Scythian pics.. Dacians next

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Sarmatians are going to be added no?
I want that, but since the group initially started as a "European Barbarian" (Celtic, Briton, Germanic) correction, we'll just correct those factions first. After the corrections to the original RTW have been made, the rest will follow.


If so will be nice to add

Lusitanians, Illyrians, Libyans, Syracusans, Nabataens and Athenians???
If so much later.. we should get these skins/models down for the ingame civs first.. I got a few map pages showing many provinces that are not ingame for the future C.Map modder even more steppe and persian/parthian provinces if one day some one makes more to the map expanding east.
The Lusitanians are in... :angel: ...after all I had to contribute with the History of my own region, right? :grin2:

Just check page 6 of this same EB thread - post #162. :wink2:

Regarding the others, let's not get to ambitious. Maybe in a future version of the MOD, if they have any relevance for the period in question. IMHO, they don't... :sad:

As for the map, it's too premature for something like that. Besides this map is bigger than the one in MTW. Time will tell if we'll need it or not...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I love that King as a General idea - and the guy with the shoulder pads in the 'toast' pic has some nice armour ideas.
Agreed. All three of them can be of use to us.

[ick_of_pick]

Aymar, if we are going to start adding civs, and creating research groups, we need one for the middle east, as they are lacking some historical accuracy. Iv'e already posted my information earlier, but the only factions that do not have anyone working on them is Armenia, and the not-yet-existent Assyria and Palmyra.

Ick

[Stormy]

:book: ok back to the units..

Some Dacian Art Images

Dacian Falx ( as you can see the falx blade with a helmet, The ingame one is very close. I think maybe adding the sycthian Axemen Helmet on the Dacian Falx to make it look less bare )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1140_face.jpg

Dacian Archers ( should replace the generic barbarian one from ingame, Will look nice with the same cloth head wear like the Dacian warband )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1139_face.jpg

Dacian Warband ( should replace the generic Barbarian spearmen )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1138_face.jpg

Dacian Light Horse
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1137_face.jpg


Model pics*

Dacian Commanders ( I think the one in the white will make a perfect ground commander and the one with the banner a perfect general on horseback )

Dacian Skirmishers
http://www.wargamesfoundry.com/library/dacians/Ad&s2.jpg

Dacian Archers ( should replace the generic barbarian one from ingame )
http://www.wargamesfoundry.com/library/dacians/Ad&s4.jpg

Some more Dacian Falx ( Once again the one ingame will look nice with a small tweak adding the steel helmet from the Scythian axemen I think )

More of the same from above but different figures.

Dacian Spearmen
http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18a.jpg http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18i.jpg

http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18b.jpg http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18j.jpg
http://www.wargamesfoundry.com/library/dacians/Ad&s3.jpg

Dacian Peltast ???
http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18c.jpg Http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18k.jpg

Dacian Falx
http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18d.jpg http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18e.jpg

Dacian Archers
http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18f.jpg http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18n.jpg

http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18o.jpg http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18g.jpg

Dacian Banner holder ( could replace the generic blue face barbarian one from ingame )
http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18h.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Othr5/willers18p.jpg

Misc:

Dacian Helmet
http://www.geocities.com/cogaionon/large/l85.jpg

Dacian headman and Roman soldier
http://www.geocities.com/cogaionon/large/l69.jpg

Some small movies in AVI format ~D

http://members.lycos.co.uk/cogaionon/small/clip01.jpg
King Decebalus (1.4 MB) (http://members.lycos.co.uk/cogaionon/videos/clip01.avi)

http://members.lycos.co.uk/cogaionon/small/clip03.jpg
The Romans attack a Dacian fortress (1.7 MB) (http://members.lycos.co.uk/cogaionon/videos/clip03.avi)

[Stormy]

Movies don't work from here but here is a Dacian website with the movies and many info

Dacia (http://www.geocities.com/cogaionon/)



:duel:

[Colovion]

Aymar, if we are going to start adding civs, and creating research groups, we need one for the middle east, as they are lacking some historical accuracy. Iv'e already posted my information earlier, but the only factions that do not have anyone working on them is Armenia, and the not-yet-existent Assyria and Palmyra.

Ick

Assyria

In this timeframe Assyria was in a kind of Dark Age and probably shouldn't be in the mod. Perhaps I'm not the right person to look at for this information but I searched, largely in vain, for a wealth of information on the Assyrians during the timeperiod after 612 B.C. There were Assyrian city states like Arba-Eilo which, to a point, withstood Parthians and Sassanians but generally the Assyrians were ruled over.

See there is also this link:

Link (http://www.atour.com/news/national/20000703a.html)

That states that most Assyriologists don't look after 612 B.C. in terms of factional representation but lean this way:


"The disappearance of the Assyrian people will always remain a unique and striking phenomenon in ancient history. Other, similar kingdoms and empires have indeed passed away but the people have lived on... No other land seems to have been sacked and pillaged so completely as was Assyria."

Of course they as a people were not whiped out but were probably just converted by Babylonian and Persian influences until eventually only a few areas still carried Assyrian culture influences (Arba-Eilo). Even the Selucids were influenced by the Assyrians:


The area of the Seleucid kingdom initially largely covered that of the Assyrian Empire, and its capital soon moved from Babylonia to Syria/Assyria.

After reading through the link it seems that Assyria, after it's fall - was never again in control of their Empire. Mainly the urban centers had been de-populated or re-populated with other nationalities. The rural areas still held a large portion of Assyrian culture but they didn't influence teh Gov't or the policies of the populace besides through the Language and script which the majority still used.

If the Assyrians are to be used this is where their base of opperations would be:


The country of the Assyrians borders on Persis and Susiana. This name is given to Babylonia and to much of the country all around, which latter, in part, is also called Aturia, in which are Ninus

It may not even be worth using them seeing as they were not a ruling body at this point in time but only a supressed majority in some areas.

Let me know what you think.

[ick_of_pick]

Colovion, I understand your viewpoint, but I'm not talking about the Great Assyrian Empire of Niniveh, I'm talking about the Assyrian Kingdom of Adiabene centered in Hatra. The city exists in the game, but the kingdom does not. I also stated that it probably should be a protecterate of Seleucia when the game begins. As for thier "dark age," yes, I agree that it definitly was not a time of prosperity, until the year 87 A.D when they established thier independence from the Perisans. Armenia wasn't exactly "free" over the span of this game either, but they were included as a kingdom. I appreciate your thoughts though, and could really use some help trying to get them and Palmyra included in the mod.
If you look up "Adiabene", you'll probably find something about a Jewish kingdom, which isn't exactly true. A few memebers of the Assyrian Royal family converted to Judaism and started spreading it to Greece, Armenia, Persia, and Egypt, and it became popular among various royal families. But a few years later, Jesus Christ was supposedly crucified and the Assyrian King Narsai I converted the kingdom of Adiabene to Chirstianity.

Ick

[Colovion]

Alright thanks a lot. I haven't played in the area which I"m researching in the game yet so application to the game isn't yet in my head yet to the provinces etc... I'll do more research on the Assyrians and Palmyra and get back with more info later.

Thanks again.

[Stormy]

Assyrians sounds like a good idea since you guys said they were around as a nation in the time and in its dark age. How would these Assyrian units look ?
I mean the ones I seen are like 2000 or 1000 or 500 years before the RTW time period.

________________________________________________________
Here are some interesting off topic from gaming.

Hatra in northern Iraq Kurdish area.
http://whc.unesco.org/news/images/hatra_irak.jpg

http://www.bristolfoe.org.uk/wildfire/iraq/hatra.jpg

http://mojoiq.portland.co.uk/pics_north/iq_hatra_x.jpg

___________________________________________________________--

Back to the game

New Assyrian Units
745BC-609BC

http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/831_face.jpg

http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/834_face.jpg

http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/833_face.jpg

http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/808_face.jpg

http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/832_face.jpg

The closest to RTW time period that I found. I think these units in these art pics look fantastic but realistic to the time period ? I don't know.

[Steppe Merc]

I want that, but since the group initially started as a "European Barbarian" (Celtic, Briton, Germanic) correction, we'll just correct those factions first. After the corrections to the original RTW have been made, the rest will follow.
I still think that the Parthians, Scythians and Sarmatians would also fall under these... But as long as we evauntuly fix them, it's all good.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Aymar, if we are going to start adding civs, and creating research groups, we need one for the middle east, as they are lacking some historical accuracy. Iv'e already posted my information earlier, but the only factions that do not have anyone working on them is Armenia, and the not-yet-existent Assyria and Palmyra.

Ick
Yes, I understand what you mean. I put the list just for us to know the people we have working on the different factions, since there are some new posters that would like to help. It acts as a pointer for them.

Regarding the added research groups, consider them as a possibility for a later version of the MOD. We can start planning in advance, although we'll still be concentrating on the initial factions for the first release of the MOD.

I'm still not sure about Assyria and Palmyra due to their lack of influence or late spawn in History.

[Colovion]

What we have to decide with adding factions is not to really make sure that all the factions which were in the timeframe are in it but that all of the major influential powers are in the mod. Sure in certain areas one or the other faction might have been an influence but how much effort are we going to put into creating an entirely new culture, soldier base etc.... if they get whiped out in the first few turns?

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Assyria

In this timeframe Assyria was in a kind of Dark Age and probably shouldn't be in the mod. Perhaps I'm not the right person to look at for this information but I searched, largely in vain, for a wealth of information on the Assyrians during the timeperiod after 612 B.C. There were Assyrian city states like Arba-Eilo which, to a point, withstood Parthians and Sassanians but generally the Assyrians were ruled over.

See there is also this link:

Link (http://www.atour.com/news/national/20000703a.html)

That states that most Assyriologists don't look after 612 B.C. in terms of factional representation but lean this way:



Of course they as a people were not whiped out but were probably just converted by Babylonian and Persian influences until eventually only a few areas still carried Assyrian culture influences (Arba-Eilo). Even the Selucids were influenced by the Assyrians:



After reading through the link it seems that Assyria, after it's fall - was never again in control of their Empire. Mainly the urban centers had been de-populated or re-populated with other nationalities. The rural areas still held a large portion of Assyrian culture but they didn't influence teh Gov't or the policies of the populace besides through the Language and script which the majority still used.

If the Assyrians are to be used this is where their base of opperations would be:



It may not even be worth using them seeing as they were not a ruling body at this point in time but only a supressed majority in some areas.

Let me know what you think.
After reading your post and the link, I agree with you. The author makes a very compeling analysis of the power struggle in the Assyrian/Babylonian/Mede/Persian territory as well as of the similarity amongst those cultures. The prevalent idea is that, although Assyrian population and culture were unafected and in some ways remained influential, they were, as a nation, stripped of their power during later foreign rullers. Accordingly, they became integrated in those later Empires, becoming a group within a population. Although there is a mention to a resurgence in national identity, there is, IMHO, no way to verify that this mean they had independance from their rulers for a significant amount of time. This, merged with the fact that we would find it difficult to distinguish them as a particular faction within RTW, having the cultures mingled so much, makes me believe they have no place in the MOD. We could, however, make some regional units that can be hired as mercs or recruited as levies, if anyone finds evidence of them having existed in a military situation and being unique looking.

Palmyra, on the other hand, according to the info posted, is a better candidate to became an included faction. However, one must take into account that this nation only appears late in the time period of the game. Accordingly, only if a "spawn event" could be achieved, like the Swiss and Burgundians in MTW, there would be the possiblity of inclusion.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Colovion, I understand your viewpoint, but I'm not talking about the Great Assyrian Empire of Niniveh, I'm talking about the Assyrian Kingdom of Adiabene centered in Hatra. The city exists in the game, but the kingdom does not. I also stated that it probably should be a protecterate of Seleucia when the game begins. As for thier "dark age," yes, I agree that it definitly was not a time of prosperity, until the year 87 A.D when they established thier independence from the Perisans. Armenia wasn't exactly "free" over the span of this game either, but they were included as a kingdom. I appreciate your thoughts though, and could really use some help trying to get them and Palmyra included in the mod.
If you look up "Adiabene", you'll probably find something about a Jewish kingdom, which isn't exactly true. A few memebers of the Assyrian Royal family converted to Judaism and started spreading it to Greece, Armenia, Persia, and Egypt, and it became popular among various royal families. But a few years later, Jesus Christ was supposedly crucified and the Assyrian King Narsai I converted the kingdom of Adiabene to Chirstianity.

Ick
I understand your concern, since the Armenian were included. But you'll have to prove to me, if possible by comparation with Armenia, that they must be included in the game.

Please undestand me, I'm not ditching any possibility of historical enrichment and accuracy, but the MOD is already extensive enough to make us all have a massive work ahead of us.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Assyrians sounds like a good idea since you guys said they were around as a nation in the time and in its dark age. How would these Assyrian units look ?
I mean the ones I seen are like 2000 or 1000 or 500 years before the RTW time period.

The closest to RTW time period that I found. I think these units in these art pics look fantastic but realistic to the time period ? I don't know.
Preciselly. The closest is 400 years away. Is that correct? Or are we commiting the kind of mistake that CA did with the New Kingdom Egypt?

A new faction completelly out of the time frame of the known units? Or can we be sure of the units of the "Jewish" Kingdom of Adiabene? :confused:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

What we have to decide with adding factions is not to really make sure that all the factions which were in the timeframe are in it but that all of the major influential powers are in the mod. Sure in certain areas one or the other faction might have been an influence but how much effort are we going to put into creating an entirely new culture, soldier base etc.... if they get whiped out in the first few turns?
A very good point. Can we include a new faction in a already crowded area? Let us remember:

-Pontus
-Seleucids
-Parthians
-Armenians

If we include Assyria and Palmyra, they are going to be small, weak kingdoms. They might go out in the first few turns. Is that a good decision to make? Specially if we take into consideration that each new faction takes hundreds of hours of work for a lot of guys in the EB group?

[Stormy]

"we include Assyria and Palmyra, they are going to be small, weak kingdoms. They might go out in the first few turns"

That is a good idea. Nothing to strong but weak factions. Numidians in game are not that strong too they dont do much. Making them like numidia and some other ingame faction is a good idea just to have them there. ~D some Skinned Assyrians and Palmyrans units ? I can help out with photos :bow:

On another note want me to post some ptolemaic egypt-greek units pics and seleucid units some are non greek from occupied areas.

Got alot of parthian pics too and some pontus even numidians and carthaginians ( their sacred band and few other units can use some skinning for the future.. even numidians )

I also read in other forums some people wanting to remove the in game egyptian units for all greek units ? if so I will be sad to see them go :embarassed: after all the majority of people in that kingdom was egyptian.

[ick_of_pick]

Both Assyria and Palmyra should be weak kingdoms, and only a human player will survive with them. But seeing as how the game starts only about 200 years after the fall of Nineveh, the military style would not have changed much. The size of the army however would be definitly shruken, as thier territory was vastly smaller and the Assyrian population was always tiny, even during the hight of the empire. Assyrians were very militaristic, and thier army should be very powerful, but equally difficult to train and maintain. This way they will have to rely mostly on mercenaries to conduct any sort of aggresive behavior, and thats something the computer's not good at.
I've made a basic outline of unit types for both Assyria and Palmyra and the pics that were posted are pretty good. The thick leather on the horses was used to distinguish different regiments, and served as tough, flexible armor. Only the bodyguards had fully barded horses, but its hard to find any pictures of Assyrian Cavalry lamellar.
The Palmyran and Assyrian flag will be easy to make. Palmyra was just a plain, dark blue, and the Assyrian flag was a simple pheonix.
I should sum up unit types for the Assyrians, Armenians, or Palmyrans, but if anyone wants, they can see my post a little while back, it's basically got all the info you need about them.

Ick

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

The Palmyran and Assyrian flag will be easy to make. Palmyra was just a plain, dark blue, and the Assyrian flag was a simple pheonix.
I should sum up unit types for the Assyrians, Armenians, or Palmyrans, but if anyone wants, they can see my post a little while back, it's basically got all the info you need about them.

Ick
There are other factions that need a complete revamp of their flags. Macedon for instance. They should use the Macedonian Star of Philip II and Alexander the Great, not the Lambda of Lacaedemon (Sparta).

Dito for the Seleucids. Why is a Corinthian Helmet in their flag? :confused:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Sorry for not commenting sooner, but there was something about the RTW buildings that I needed to know.


It is also worth noting that there was a tribe of Britons called the Belgae who had migrated from Gaul, so including a couple of units of that sort of style into the British faction would be good.
I think PSYCHO has already mention that in his post, including some Belgae units.


As for Light Chariots, they should hurl Javelins and not use bows. Historically the Britons never used archery and relied heavily on stone slingers and javelins.
Yes. Quite right. I mentioned that in another thread.


Also I think Psycho posted info about some Celtic wood & stone defenses that warriors can stand on, if the resources were present the Celts would construct fearsome defences. (The northern tribes in Scotland especially had very tough hillforts incorporating stone into the defences)

I would strongly endorse the inclusion of these as a level above the current height of settlement defence the "Wooden wall" which as it stands is pitiful in the game.
I might be wrong but, although JeromeGrasdyke mentioned that the modability of RTW extended to the buildings, there seems to exist some problems with CTD after a modification has been made to them. I'll try to get further info to see if the problem can be solved.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I was courteously contacted regarding the E.B. project and was asked for my input regarding the Middle Eastern Factions, which are not very complete.
Here are some changes that need to be made to The Middle Eastern Factions, other then removal of P.J.'s :

Parthians:
Generally good, except for the whole pajama thing.
The Persians should look more Aryan.
Persian Cavalry should have more ammo.

Armenians:

Should NOT have cataphract archers, Armenian bow technology was almost as bad as the Romans, and they almost never trained archers of any kind let alone mounted ones.

Armenia should not have Arab cavalry or camels at their disposal, because no desert dwelling nomad in his right mind would have wandered so far up north.

Everything else is fine, especially the infantry.

Seleucids:
Probably the Most well made of the geographically Eastern Civilizations, and I'm not kidding. The only problem is that they shouldn't have cataphracts, because Macedonian style armies needed cavalry with endurance and speed to support the pike phalanx not more brute force. Not to mention the historical fact that they were almost never used.

They should also have access to the Arab units, such as cavalry and camels, because they made extensive use of them against the Egyptians.


Additions:
Now there SHOULD be Palmyra and Adiabene (Assyria) and it won't be that difficult to add them. They should both be protectorates under the Seleucid empire when the game begins.

Palmyra:

Adding them will be the easiest, their army was basically all cataphracts, and their flag was a plain, dark blue, and they would have had the same types of names as the Carthaginians.

Units:

The General should have a very heavily armored cavalry bodyguard, Cataphracts or the "Eastern General" unit.

Cataphracts and Cataphract archers.

Horse archers.

Some type of foot archer, as well as the generic Middle Eastern light infantry.

Also, limited siege ability, similar to the Parthians.

Full access to Arab units.



Assyria:


As for Assyria, we can call it the Roman name: "Assyria," or the Greek name: "Adiabene." The decision is up to whomever mods them in if it ever happens. Now we have been conveniently provided with the fortress-city Hatra, which became the Assyrian capital after Nineveh fell.

The Assyrian Flag was supposed to represent a Phoenix, and looked something like a disk with wings.




Assyrian Units:

Cavalry:
General: Assyrian Royal Bodyguards (Qurbuti) were fully armored lancers that rode barded horses, but the Assyrians used more the sophisticated lamellar armor, not scale mail like the Parthian heavy cavalry.

Horse archers: should definitely be included, the main Assyrian tactic was to use mounted archers to pin the enemy flanks so the main body of the enemy had no choice but to receive the lancer charge.

Infantry:
This is where things get interesting. The Assyrian infantry were heavily armored unlike other Middle Eastern Peoples, and were almost all armed with bows or slings. This is interesting because I don’t think Rome total war has any bow-armed Hybrid units to use as an example, but we could always make three different units. All heavily armored, but one armed with bows, one with bows, and the other armed with spears and shields.
The Assyrians favored the shield wall as a close combat infantry tactic as it limited the enemy’s ability to maneuver, so something along the lines of a phalanx with spears and large tower shields (if they even exist) would make sense.

Elite infantry were dismounted Qurbuti. The main difference between these guys and the standard infantryman were the humongous shields they carried. The shields covered about 80% of the body, but it made them very slow in combat.

So in general, the Assyrian units should be:

Cavalry:
Royal Guard, or Qurbuti, call it what you like: very heavy, fully barded lancers, sword as a secondary weapon.
Horse archers: the generic one that’s already been provided will suffice.
Assyrian Cavalry: A light/medium cavalry similar to the Carthaginian “long shield” cavalry, partially armored man, unarmored horse, no shield, Armed with both a light lance and a bow.

Arab units should also be available.

Infantry:
Assyrian infantry: Semi-heavy spearmen, with long thrusting spears, shield wall, or phalanx.
Guard (Qurbuti) Infantry: Heavy pikemen, large shield, very aggressive, no phalanx ability but should have a very high attack. Secondary short sword.

Ranged:
Armored Archers: Basically heavily armored foot archers. These guys are the core of the army. (Assyrian composite bows were very powerful, with an effective range of 250-650 meters.) should be decent in melee too.
Armored Slingers: Again, just really tough slingers, not good for much else.

Siege:
Full access to siege units; were talking about the only people who could surpass the Romans at city busting.


If a list of Royal Assyrian/northern mesopotamian names are needed just respond.

Thanks,

Ick
OK. If everyone agrees, let's take this as a template for our inclusion of these civs, if the event they get in to future versions of the MOD.

Commentaries and feedback would be apreciated...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

This is a PM send to me by Junior Patron Ranika:


Also, if anyone gets a mind to redo some sound or such in native languages, I do know numerous actual Gallic battle cries, as they were recorded, and some were written down in Lepontic. In the game, one of the general speeches says 'Death death death and shame to the enemy'. That was a real one used by the Aedui, though in Gallic it'd be more like 'Bas bas bas och tamur tare a mira'.

Also, for the Germans, perhaps a reasonable facsimile of Wodenschwert could be made from any Swordsman model used for barbarians. It looks about right, I believe. Though I've never seen artwork of Wodenschwert, I have seen the equipment they use. A round shield, a sword, and a helmet with a 'mask'. Some were armored in chain, others, aside from the mask, were unarmored, with their skin painted using red dyes, and a white powder to give them a kind of ghostly appearance. If unarmored, they wore a pair of pants, but if wearing chain, their legs were PROBABLY bare, or they wore accompanying chain leggings, with a long cloth under shirt that'd go to just above the knee.

I'm not too knowledgable about much about the Germans, I saw most of that when I was doing research for school, but I can't remember where. However, they sound really interesting, so I committed it to memory. Of course, I don't know if they would've called them Wodenschwert, as I'm not too familiar with German linguistics, like when exactly 'schwert' became the word for sword and such.

I would be greatly interested in helping do Gallic research though, as it's what I'm best at. I do know a good deal about the Britons, but I'd also not wish to stretch myself too thin, if I'm allowed to help.
I agree with the sound idea. But we would have to include somebody that understands sound recording and editing. I don't. There are some guys doing that work already at TWC. Maybe we can exchange their sound work by our Historical research?

As for your inclusion into the research groups, I believe you could be included in these two: Celtic-Briton and Celtic-Gaul.

Comments anyone?

[Steppe Merc]

Parthians need to loose the whole pajama thing, and the horse archers should be bareheaded, mabye with a ribbon tying it back. I'm looking for the pics I poseted before, and will repost in a bit. They should also have a lesser cataphract, no horse armor, with mabye scale mail on the rider.
As I said before, for the horse archers, they should be very colorful, the faction color should just be on the saddle cloth.
Mabye they could also get the Cataphract archers currently assigned to Armenia, not to sure though.
And the Scythians also need major help, but their horsearchers really could look like the Parthians' horse archers, since they are both from the same Indo-European stock.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

-
Greetings,

Per Dom Aymar's PM I'm here. I'm none of an expert in any of the topics you have been covering but can help you on conceptual basis if you wish.

For the least, I'm a supporter of your cause (historical accuracy).

BTW, I can't play RTW since my configuration isn't up to handle it and unfortunately no upgrade will happen in the nearest future.

Last spring, some of us ORG members attempted a workshop to form a knowledge base on naming (people, places, units etc.) related to my "Modlet". Solo, the creator of the idea, registered an adware forum. Although it did receive some recognition, the attempt practically failed due to extremely low level of contribution. Nevertheless, the forum is here:

http://data.forumhoster.com/forum_mtw/index.php?
_
Well, Mouzafphaerre, what can I say? I had absolutelly no idea of that forum!! Seems you didn't advertized it enough here at the ORG... :sad:

As for the conceptual work, maybe you could give us some hints as to the best form of coligating the EB thread info? I'm having some problem in getting all this info sorted through. Any ideas? :confused:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Sorry for not answering before, but I was unable to.


I don't see why the "special ability" button can't be a toggle. i.e. Off, Testudo, Wedge, and so on. The wording of the info above doesn't make sense without the ability to have them form at least two formations. If you are interested, since you don't have the game, here is the entire comment text from the unit file. Beware of spam (sorry):
That would be very good if it was a toggle button. Can you dig deeper to see if it is?

I'll analyse the text with bigger detail today and check back to you later.


Well, Rome -should- be powerful, very powerful, don't you agree?
Yes, but more powerfull in later periods and taking into consideration Rome's hability to recruit enourmous amount of lower quality troops in earlier periods. That was one of the characteristics that allowed them to resist Hannibal after having suffered massive defeats in battles like Lake Trasimene or Cannae.

Another important aspect I've mentioned before, was the shifting of power of their armies towards Infantry, like it was Historically. Nerfing their hability to field cav and reducing the efectiveness of such cav.


I think the pre-Marian infantry needs to be tweaked anyways, but hopefully you will consider the idea I have regarding the Livy/Polybius units. Here, I will transcribe some text from Connolly for you:

"But here once again Livy gives us an invaluable glimpse of the legion organisation. All legionaries now use the Italic oval shield (scutum). The phalanx had been abandoned and the legion was now split up into three lines. The rear line had 15 companies (ordines) each subdivided into three parts (vexilla). At the front were the cream of the veterans (triarii). Behind these came the younger and less distinguished men (rorarii) and behind these the least dependable soldiers (accensi). This literally means reserves. The triarii were armed with spears. Livy does not say what the others had.
Javelins maybe? I know some sources that say that the pilum was only used after the end of the First Punic War, largely inspired by the solifera (all metal heavy javelin) used by the Iberians.


Each of the three vexilla consisted of 60 men, two centurions and a standard bearer (vexillarius) who carried a flag-type standard, possibly resembling those of the Samnites.

The middle line was made up of 15 units (maniples) of heavy infantry (principes). These were the cream of the army - men in the prime of life. The front line (hastati) were also heavy infantry composed of young men coming up to the prime of life. They were also divided into 15 maniples. Attached to each maniple of hastati were 20 light-armed troops (leves) armed with spear and javelin. The legion strength was 5,000. Each unit of the rear line had 186 men. Each unit of principes and hastati must therefore have had a little over 60 men. These units were probably all composed of double centuries. Allowing 30 men per century, plus officers and supernumeraries such as rear-rank officers, standard bearers, trumpeters etc., we arrive at a total of about 5,000 men. Livy does not say how the principes and hastati were armed. In Polybius' day they had heavy javelins (pila) and swords. We know that pila were in use at this time and must assume that they were armed with these.
Yes, I'm aware of the Roman tactical order of battle in Republican times as well as later during the Empire. It would be great if we could mimik those tactical topologies within the game itself. We can try to reproduce those unit proportions by manipulating the prices and trainning times, forcing the player to field an accurate army. But, can we manipulate the unit template numbers to those exact proportions, on the real-life Republican Legions?


Livy claims that the round shield (clipeus) had been abandoned about the same time as the legionaries began to receive pay - i.e. during the siege of Veii at the beginning of the 4th century BC. He is in fact claiming that the phalanx had been abolished. The phalanx had been trampled into the ground at the Allia and it was probably for this reason that it was discontinued and the whole army was armed with the larger scutum which was now reinforced with an iron rim.
...
Although the vestiges of the old class sytem still remain, classes one, two and three seem now to be grouped together and divided by age and not wealth: the youngest form the hastati, those in the prime of life the principes, and the oldest the triarii. The rorarii still seem to be the old fourth class and the accensi and leves, with their proportionately higher numbers, make up the fifth class.
So, really not that different from Polybius time, specially concerning the game.


In the new army the prime offensive weapon of the legionary must by now have been the heavy javelin (pilum). The old spearmen still existed in the triarii, rorarii, and accensi. But now over a third of the army had been moved up to the front, probably armed with pila to break up the advancing enemy.

The three lines are drawn up in quincunx formation, like the black squares on a chess board. The 15 centuries of hastati are at the front with a gap between each. The principes are drawn up similarly covering the gaps. The units of the rear line similarly cover the gaps in the line of principes. The battle starts with the skirmishers (leves) trying to break up the enemy formation with their light javelins. As the enemy advances the lightly armed troops withdraw through the gaps and the hastati charge, throwing their heavy javelins and then closing in with their swords. If this fails to break the enemy, they retreat into the gaps between the principes, who similarly charge. If both lines are beaten, they withdraw on the triarii and retire through the gaps in the line. The triarii then close the gaps and the whole army retreats. Livy's suggestion that the triarii also charged is probably an attempt to disguise the fact that the early Roman army sometimes lost battles. The old Roman adage, 'to have come to the triarii', meant that things had reached a terrible state.

Whilst the hastati and principes were fighting, the triarii knelt on one knee with their left leg forward. Their large oval shields rested against their left shoulders covering them from enemy missles. Their spear butts were stuck in the ground with the spears pointing obliquely forward, Livy says, 'like a palisade.' Not unless all else has failed did they enter the battle. It is noteworthy that the standards were with the rear line, so that if the units operating out front were scattered, they knew the ordines on which to fall back. Livy does not tell us whether there were one or two centurions to each maniple of principes and hastati, or in fact none.

During the first 200 years of the republic Rome probably suffered many defeats. The patriotic Livy usually says that bad weather 'stopped play' to account for the Romans not gaining a victory. The greatest of these defeats was the disaster at the Allia (390 BC). These defeats, and the Allia in particular, may account for the strongly defensive character of the 4th-century legion. The more mobile formation of the hastati principes was probably an answer to the fast-moving armies of the Celts and Samnites. The javelineers at the front may have been particularly designed to withstand and break the force of the Celtic charge."

I hope that helps describe the early republican legion. I forsee the accensi and rorarii as the replacements for peasants and the city watch, respectively. I see the next upgrade making the early hastati et al., and the next making the late units. I see the first missle range making leves, the next making velites and funditores. What do you think?
Make me an topic-orientated scheme about the several periods of the Roman Army in the game. Sort it by unit type, tactical order of battle and unit numbers. I'll comment then.


I should note that in the entire section regarding the 4th century BC to Polybius' day, Connolly makes no mention of cavalry at all. I am unsure of how to handle this in game terms.
Preciselly. Accordingly, Roman cav should be expensive, take several turns to train and be inferior to almost all others.

There is, however, the case of allied cav. The Samnites, strangely for a people that inhabited a mountainous region, had the best cav in the Italian Peninsula. They could be included in the Roman units as regional troops, right?


As to Rome being too powerful, I suggest that each faction (but for possibly the Senate) be reduced to one ship each at start. In addition, making Messana neutral and granting the Senate one of each of the Julii and Brutii holdings should both weaken the Roman factions at start and strengthen the Senate for a tougher civil war.

Combined with a strengthening of some of Rome's traditional enemies, especially Carthage, this should make things much tougher for the Roman factions.
Agreed. Rome was never a naval power before the middle of the First Punic War (264BC-241BC). That should give Carthage a breeding space.


extraordinarii - "From the allies the best third of the cavalry and the best fifth of the infantry were selected to form a picked unit called the extraordinarii. This was a crack force used for special assignments. They also made up the covering force for the legions on the march." Drawn from Polybius, in Connolly.
Didn't know that. Yes, they can be included to replace the Flaming Pigs, Wardogs and other non-senses...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

"we include Assyria and Palmyra, they are going to be small, weak kingdoms. They might go out in the first few turns"

That is a good idea. Nothing to strong but weak factions. Numidians in game are not that strong too they dont do much. Making them like numidia and some other ingame faction is a good idea just to have them there. ~D some Skinned Assyrians and Palmyrans units ? I can help out with photos :bow:

On another note want me to post some ptolemaic egypt-greek units pics and seleucid units some are non greek from occupied areas.

Got alot of parthian pics too and some pontus even numidians and carthaginians ( their sacred band and few other units can use some skinning for the future.. even numidians )
OK. Post the pics. But in separate posts, one for each faction, ok? :wink:



I also read in other forums some people wanting to remove the in game egyptian units for all greek units ? if so I will be sad to see them go :embarassed: after all the majority of people in that kingdom was egyptian.
Yes and no. The Ptolemaic Army will field natives, as was in History, but they will not look like New Kingdom Egypt units. There will be no Pharaoh headresses or nonsense like that. Those, with some changes in looks, belong in another period entirelly, in another ancient MOD. Only Historical Ptolemaic units using the armour, weaponery and looks of the Ptolemaic Kingdom will be included in a future version of the EB MOD.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Both Assyria and Palmyra should be weak kingdoms, and only a human player will survive with them. But seeing as how the game starts only about 200 years after the fall of Nineveh, the military style would not have changed much. The size of the army however would be definitly shruken, as thier territory was vastly smaller and the Assyrian population was always tiny, even during the hight of the empire. Assyrians were very militaristic, and thier army should be very powerful, but equally difficult to train and maintain. This way they will have to rely mostly on mercenaries to conduct any sort of aggresive behavior, and thats something the computer's not good at.
I've made a basic outline of unit types for both Assyria and Palmyra and the pics that were posted are pretty good. The thick leather on the horses was used to distinguish different regiments, and served as tough, flexible armor. Only the bodyguards had fully barded horses, but its hard to find any pictures of Assyrian Cavalry lamellar.
The Palmyran and Assyrian flag will be easy to make. Palmyra was just a plain, dark blue, and the Assyrian flag was a simple pheonix.
I should sum up unit types for the Assyrians, Armenians, or Palmyrans, but if anyone wants, they can see my post a little while back, it's basically got all the info you need about them.

Ick
OK. Try to find some more pictures and collate them with your previous descriptions descriptions. If possible, post a pic of both of their territories.

[ick_of_pick]

Here a link to some Palmlyran history including maps:
http://userwww.sfsu.edu/~efairley/#Map%20of%20Palmyra

This map shows the Palmyran empire at its hieght, and not it's minimum extent, but its safe to assume that at the start of the game, they would have nothing but thier own city Palmyra, and would be under heavy seleucid influence, possibly a protecterate.

Assyria: Same story, should only have one city, Hatra. I can't find any maps, just written history.

[Stormy]

All these ideas is flourishing in this thread. I can picture this if its all done this game will look and feel superb.

I seen pictures of seleucid non greek units made up of middle eastern units like archers and spearman/warband like characters similar to that of the eastern infantry.

I post up the parthian units today.

[Stormy]

Ok here they go..

Seleucids 280BC-83BC

Seleucid imitation legionaries the "Argyraspides" ( maybe some minor re-skinning from the all silver one from in game ? )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1298_face.jpg

Auxilia
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1353_face.jpg

Scythed Chariots ( I think they are in game but realistic looking in skin ? I don't know )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1296_face.jpg

Peltast
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1295_face.jpg

Seleucid Heavy Elephant ( in game already but maybe some minor re-skinning? )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1294_face.jpg

Auxilia Thureophoroi
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1293_face.jpg

Pikes ( in game already )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1292_face.jpg

Light Calvary ( this is what some of us here were talking about ? )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1291_face.jpg

Heavy Calvary ( Could replace the cataphract ? )
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1290_face.jpg

Seleucid figures:

The Seleucid Phalanx
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Seleucids/ABII1903.jpg

Heavy Elephant
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Seleucids/ABII1904.jpg

Archers in yellow and Slingers in blue ( They also look middle eastern. These could be their middle easter units )
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/AndyBryant/Seleucids/ABII1905.jpg

Seleukos and his Companions
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg02.jpg

The Agema and Line Cavalry
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg03.jpg

The Phalanx
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg04.jpg

Argyraspides (Silver Shields) or Seleucid imitation legionaries
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg08.jpg

Thureophoroi
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg05.jpg

Scythed Chariot
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg06.jpg

Heavy Elephant
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg07.jpg

Bedouins
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg10.jpg

Asiatic Skirmishers
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg11.jpg

Asiatic Horsemen
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg12.jpg

Galatian War Band
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1297_face.jpg
http://fanaticus.org/DBA/armiesofthefanatici/GeorgeGouveia/Seleucid/II19gg09.jpg

Also I like to say Satrapa1 website is very good when it comes to pictures and info but its all in spanish but the pictures are there.

http://www.satrapa1.archez.com/articulos/antiguedad/Raphia/mapa1.jpg

Looks like a Middle Eastern Seleucid archer
http://www.satrapa1.archez.com/articulos/antiguedad/Raphia/arq1.gif

If you can understand some spanish this site will be easy for you to navigate.

Satrapa1.com Look at the top of the page and you will see La batalla de Raphia - El ejército seleucida ( Pics of Seleucid units ) El ejército egipcio ( Pics of Egyptian units ) and much info (http://www.satrapa1.archez.com/articulos/antiguedad/Raphia/Raphia.htm)


:dizzy2: I tried to knock it all out with one shot hehe next is the Parthians.

[Steppe Merc]

Here is a repost of before with my pics. Sadly, my photobucket thing keeps on wiping out my pics after a bit... if anyone has a better hoster, let me know. After a bit, I'll edit them to give ideas of what we've already seen.

Here are the Celts. I'll keep each book (Celts, Sarmatians and Parthians) in seprate posts.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt1.jpg

Early La Tene warriors, late 5th century BCE
Right, these chaps are slightly earlier than our time period, but I liked it as it showed the clothing and armor quite well, as well as showing that they all have shirts on. The old guy is a chieftan, and notice in addition to his sword he has mutliple spears. The Guy on the right is a well off warrior, while the one on the right is a simple free tribal warrior. All wear checked or striped clothes.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt2.jpg

Gallic Warriors of the Middle La Tene 35d- 2nd BCE
The naked guy is one of the Gaesatae, actaully a tribe that was famous for fighting naked. These would be similar to the Naked Fanatics, but note that he doesn't have the punk rock hairdo. The other foot soldier is frome the Marne district, and again has a shirt. The horsmen has the famous eagle helmet, and it's wings flap as he rides. He is quite well equpiied , and has iron mail. This would probably be a noble unit, but not that of the generals. Note the two javilens.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt3.jpg

Gallic Cavlarymen of the Late La Tene period, 1st century BCE
Some more Cavalry men. They again, all have shirts. They are more poor soldiers, their helms actaully being scavenged from Romans. In the desc there's an excellent part of Celtic horse strategy:
"These riders would normally throw their javelins immediately before contact; the heavier thrusting spear would be used at close quaters, and finnaly the sword might be drawn"
In the back, there's a dude with a celtic war trumpet that has a boar on it, possibly inspiring CA's choice to have on the unit flag of the Gauls a boar.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt4.jpg

British Chariot and Crew, 55 BCE
A beutiful picture of a chariot, sorry that the middle's a bit cut off, as it's a two page spread. The poorer driver (the one with woad on him) would manuever the chariot at incredible speeds, while their nobleman passenger would throw javellins. They would dismount to fight against infantry, while the driver would move the chariot off ready to pick up the nobleman.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/celt5.jpg

Celtic Light infantry types 1st century BCE, 1st century CE
Light infantry types, these do have no shirts, but that's because their all light infantry, and likely poor. The slingers were quite common, while the bowmen were rarer. The light swordsmen were supposedly quite good, but were deffeated by Germanic auxalries. The javileneers are young men not yet strong enough to trade swords with the grown men, so they used javilens instead as their main weapon.

[Stormy]

A small update
____________________________


Thracians
http://www.hat.com/Curr/bx8046.jpg

http://www.hat.com/Curr/t8046a.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/t8046c.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/t8046e.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/t8046b.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/t8046d.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/t8046f.jpg

____________________________________________________________________________________


Dacians
http://www.hat.com/Curr2/bx8069da.jpg

http://www.hat.com/Othr6/kris18a.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Othr6/kris18k.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Othr6/kris18j.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Othr6/kris18h.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Othr6/kris18f.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Othr6/kris18c.jpg

and a Banner holder
http://www.hat.com/Othr6/kris18g.jpg



:duel: ~:cheers: ~D

[Steppe Merc]

Parthians.
https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/parth1.jpg
Parthian Cataphracts 1st century BCE
These are the cataphracts. They used their kontos with two hands, going very slowly at an 'ambling pace'. Note that the one on the left is better equipped. The level of armor depended on the noble man's wealth, and often horses were un armoured. The most popular early armor was scale, either of hard leather, horn or iron, depending on the richness of the noble. Each man provided his own armor, so little standarisation exited at all. After the inital charge, after the weaking up by the horse archers, they would switch to their great swords. Note that the current Cataphract would likely be best for a generals unit, for their should be at least three units of cataphracts, varying in strenght, cost and skill.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/parth2.jpg
Light Infantry Types
These are actaully from the Sassanaiains, but they kept their infantry essantially the same as their Parthian fore bears. However, ignore the catahphract. The spearmen was pretty much worthless, a poor peasant with a spear and sheild better suited for garrison duty or gaurding baggage trains than open battles. The archer is a Syrian Merc, and is of far better quality than of the spearman. The slinger is from Anatolia, and a highlander of very good quality despite his lightness. The Javileener is a Kurd, and is also a highlander, thus of good quality. Note: NO PAJAMAS!

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/parth3.jpg
Parthian Horse Archers
These are horse archers, mainly poorer nobles. They are extremely similar to their Scythian and Sarmatian brethren, and have a similar love for colors. Note the gorytos, the combo quiver/bow case. And look: NO PAJAMAS! Apparently they loved their long hair, and often went helmless in pictorial evidence, and as you can see have quite long hair. They all have the superior compound or complex bow, and have a marked suporiority to non- Eastern nomadic peoples in their bows.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/parth4.jpg
The picture before were Parthians petty noble archers, while these are true nomads, mercanaries employed by their more civilized brethren. The white guy with blond hair is an Iranian nomad, and has one spear and a sword along with his bow, as opposed to the foriegn Turco-Mongol archer who has multiple javilens and a lasso with his bow. The guy with the dorky hat is a standard bearer. Again: NO PAJAMAS.

In conclusion, the Parthians should have more varied units, and NO PAJAMAS

[Steppe Merc]

Here's the Sarmatians. Sadly, the plates are all centered around 1st BCE to 2nd CE, since this is when the most information is know. However, I have included some plates, for while they may be a bit out of our time frame, I feel they are still important.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/sarmatian1.jpg
Don Frontier, 5-4th Century BCE
A bit to early, but you get the picture. Note the 'Amazon', and here use of the lasso, for which they were aparently famous for. Note the Scythian on the ground, and his colurful outfit. Apparently the Sarmatians were a bit less colorful, but this is again early than our timeperiod, and I feel they advanced colorfuly as the years progressed. All in all the Sarmatians are quite similar to the Scythians, except slightly poorer weapons. Apparently some Sarmatians were tattooed in child hood. Note the 'Amazon' is nothing near like the one showed at the com.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/sarmatian2.jpg
The Divine Sword, Pontic Steps Late 1st BCE to 1st CE
This is a relgious cermony, worshipping the Divine Sword, which apparently the Scythians did as well. They also worshipped the wind, for one gave life while the other took. Check out the armour on the heavy horsman, and his spear. The red guy is a noble.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/sarmatian3.jpg
This is a foot soldier of the Bosphoran Crimea. Not sure if they'll be included, or if they should be, but here he is.

https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v486/steppemerc/sarmatian4.jpg
Trajan's First Dacian War 101-102 CE
These are again out of our time zone, but they show quite well the weilding of the two handed contus and the Parthian Shot (which, of course, others used besides the Parthians).

This isn't much, I know, but they should be essentially similar to the Scythians. However, the Sarmatians should be in hear, as well as the Scythians (since I don't think their overrun quite yet).

[Stormy]

Nice pics Merc and I see them fine. It is very hard to get these art photos. The parthians I'm going to post are Figurines pics.

This mod will be super if all this is added ~D
Im looking for some Armenians they seem hard to get.

[Stormy]

Those art pieces looks like Angus Mcbride's art work ~:eek:

[Stormy]

Bosphoran should be added later on I think.
I think the modders should finish the modding of the in game factions first before adding more factions.

Yes some of our pics are a bit to early but does it matter ? I mean I dont really think much changed in the way of dress maybe some minor changes no ?

I dunno but something about the steppe civs and iranian ones I like alot..

The Iranian ( parthian ) units in game with covered faces are of an earlier time no ?

The Armenians need some re-skinning I have few pics of them and need to find the once I seen in the past.

[Steppe Merc]

The clothes that the Parthians wear, save the cataphracts are all pretty much based on the Persian Dynasty that Alexander killed. The Hillmen and slingers are ok as is, but the infantry should be changed. The horse archers should no way at all look as they do, rather bare headed (mabye with a hat), with long, long hair, and multi colors (as the Gauls and Scythians should be to).
The horse archers for both the Scythians and Parthians should look pretty similar, both multi colored, and more Germanic/Celtic looking skin and hair wise. Mabye some blonde units could be in there, though most should be darker haired, but not Asiatic.
I don't know to much about the Armenians save they also had Cataphracts, but I think inferior to those of Parthia.
And yes, most of those are Angus. ~D

[Stormy]

Thanks for the info Merc. I will post some armenian units soon. It will be nice to add more provinces maybe in the future. In the Caucasia region should have new provinces like Iberia and Aghbania and if one can cut half of the Elymais from the first river to the north to the southern in game border of Elymais and that will be the new province of Characene. Corsica could be made into a future province as well as Malat ( Malta ) and ofcourse a few others in europe and anatolia will be a good add on for the future. ~D Show us more Parthian pics good sir.. are these pictures from the osprey series ?

[Steppe Merc]

Yes, they are from the Osprey series. Sadly, it's split between the Parthians and the Sassinid Persians, so these are really the only relavent pics. I'll cruise the internet tommorow, see if I can find some more good pics.
Where did you get those other pics? Not the figures, but the art. It seems quite good...

[chemchok]

@ Stormy

I found this link and thought it might apply to your Assyrian argument. It also has a ceramic figurine that shows the typical riding dress of a Parthian.
the term "Parthian" (http://parthia.com/nineveh/03.htm)

Perhaps the Assyrians were simply a portion of the Parthian empire. Oh, and the one temple picture you posted from Hatra is Hellenistic/Roman in design with local decorative techniques. It was constructed by the Parthians c. 150-200 CE.

Temple Link (http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=8579&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html)

[Stormy]

The smaller art pics are from dbaol.com and the bigger thracian and dacian ones are from the figurine site.

Thanks for the links, I knew something was greek/roman about the Hatra pics I posted.

Merc are you working on the scythian and soon to be added sarmatians units ?
I read something here about work groups but I dont know who they are overall. TY

[Colovion]

Here's some ideas from TWC:

Lief's Gallic Tribes (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=11682)

Stormy has already told him about this thread, but I thought I'd let some people form here know:

Light Infantry (http://fph.fropco.com/forums/uploads/post-3-1097452092.jpg)

Heavy Infantry (http://fph.fropco.com/forums/uploads/post-3-1097459785.jpg)

Modded by Lief. Read the thread, he talks about some other good ideas for the Gauls.

[khelvan]

That would be very good if it was a toggle button. Can you dig deeper to see if it is?

I can try, though it appears that this area is hard coded. Adding a formation such as wedge to the hastati, for instance, does not activate the "special ability" button, and so far I have not found how to do so.

The button appears to work as a toggle in the sense that the unit has two formation and simply switches back and forth based on pressing the button (square to wedge and back again), but the number available may, again, be hard coded.


Yes, but more powerfull in later periods and taking into consideration Rome's hability to recruit enourmous amount of lower quality troops in earlier periods. That was one of the characteristics that allowed them to resist Hannibal after having suffered massive defeats in battles like Lake Trasimene or Cannae.

I think this is merely a question of tweaking unit stats, and making the low quality units (rorarii, accensi, leves) cheap and readily available.


Another important aspect I've mentioned before, was the shifting of power of their armies towards Infantry, like it was Historically. Nerfing their hability to field cav and reducing the efectiveness of such cav.

I agree with this, which is why I have already mentioned some ideas for reducing the availability and power of the cavalry. Only 1/10th of the legion was cavalry, and it was normally used for ensuring the flanks were not turned and running down fleeing enemies...


Javelins maybe? I know some sources that say that the pilum was only used after the end of the First Punic War, largely inspired by the solifera (all metal heavy javelin) used by the Iberians.

I should note that the entire text I italicized came directly from Connolly, it was not my narrative. Given that Connolly's work is by far the best source of information I have found on the subject I am inclined to go with his statement that "we know" the pilum was in use at the time, though he does not name his source. What sources are you referring to?


Yes, I'm aware of the Roman tactical order of battle in Republican times as well as later during the Empire. It would be great if we could mimik those tactical topologies within the game itself. We can try to reproduce those unit proportions by manipulating the prices and trainning times, forcing the player to field an accurate army. But, can we manipulate the unit template numbers to those exact proportions, on the real-life Republican Legions?

Make me an topic-orientated scheme about the several periods of the Roman Army in the game. Sort it by unit type, tactical order of battle and unit numbers. I'll comment then.

Again, not my narrative - you asked for information on the early republican units, and I am giving it to you. If you read through what I posted you noted the differences between what Polybius describes and what Livy describes, I assume. That is, the period currently modelled in RTW and the earlier period (late 4th century) of Livy.

Perhaps it is that I have been driving for 16 hours this weekend to get to my cousin's wedding and back, but I am not sure I understand what you are looking for here. Would you please rephrase it for me?


Preciselly. Accordingly, Roman cav should be expensive, take several turns to train and be inferior to almost all others.

There is, however, the case of allied cav. The Samnites, strangely for a people that inhabited a mountainous region, had the best cav in the Italian Peninsula. They could be included in the Roman units as regional troops, right?

It seems relatively simple to make a unit only available in certain areas. At the least I know how to use a "resource" to accomplish this, though I am sure that more experienced modders (or me, with enough time) can change this directly.


Now, a different question. I see lots of people posting here with ideas, and it has been noted that people are working on various factions - have you been keeping track of this? I would love to help, and it seems to me that at this point it makes sense to start formally setting objectives, doling out work to individuals, and tracking progress. Or...it could just be my software development project manager experience making me antsy about that sort of thing. :)

[Brutal DLX]

Guys,

forget about it. There won't be any changes to the unit designs unless a community mod comes forth with such. For the moment, one would have to be thankful if the program bugs such as grouping, CTD etc are fixed, the rest will be up to the community. I believe you should have submitted your ideas about the units etc. by last year's end, spring at max, everything that came after that date would be too late to incorporate into the game. Still, it's amazing that after so much time to polish & design the game, again so many bugs in gamecontrol, AI as well as unit design are found.. I just don't understand it. The only thing that's working is the battle engine and the strategy map (not including various unit movement bugs).

Bearing in mind the patching policy by Activision for the TW prequels, my hope rests exclusively, as I said before, on the community, to try to turn this game into what it could have been.. for now, we'll just have to do with screeching women in miniskirts and topless spearmen in phalanx formation who are in the shapes of their lives when they march onto the battlefield.
Oh, and not to forget the overconfident AI generals, who are back to form of MTW1.0...
*sigh*

[PSYCHO V]

Think you've confused this with the bitch section mate ...but thanks ~D

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Guys,

forget about it. There won't be any changes to the unit designs unless a community mod comes forth with such. For the moment, one would have to be thankful if the program bugs such as grouping, CTD etc are fixed, the rest will be up to the community. I believe you should have submitted your ideas about the units etc. by last year's end, spring at max, everything that came after that date would be too late to incorporate into the game. Still, it's amazing that after so much time to polish & design the game, again so many bugs in gamecontrol, AI as well as unit design are found.. I just don't understand it. The only thing that's working is the battle engine and the strategy map (not including various unit movement bugs).

Bearing in mind the patching policy by Activision for the TW prequels, my hope rests exclusively, as I said before, on the community, to try to turn this game into what it could have been.. for now, we'll just have to do with screeching women in miniskirts and topless spearmen in phalanx formation who are in the shapes of their lives when they march onto the battlefield.
Oh, and not to forget the overconfident AI generals, who are back to form of MTW1.0...
*sigh*
HE!HE!HE! :grin: I think you're missing the point, Freiherr Brutal DLX !!!

The EB group has decided to make a MOD for RTW. This thread now concerns itself with the Europa Barbarorum MOD for RTW.

[Brutal DLX]

Sorry, but I can't be arsed to read all these pages in my limited free time. I just gave my opinion and, truely, forgot to wish you guys good luck. There is much to fix, but you should wait for what the patch does until starting to do anything. After all, unit info should have been assembled by your members anyway, after all these months...

[The Hun]

Have you noticed the Realism mod at TW Center? It may be a good idea to pool resources and efforts rather than make 2 mods of same type. Realism mod v1.0 is really very good and v2.0 is forthcoming.
I also think that Sarmatians should dominate Scythians in that region as discussed at TW Center, just a name change I suppose

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Sorry, but I can't be arsed to read all these pages in my limited free time. I just gave my opinion and, truely, forgot to wish you guys good luck. There is much to fix, but you should wait for what the patch does until starting to do anything. After all, unit info should have been assembled by your members anyway, after all these months...
No problem! I understand.

As for waiting for a patch, there is a lot of stuff that won't be changed and can be made now, so we're just trying to save time later. When the patch is released we'll just have to make some alterations for the MOD to work with it. That is why we're concerning wourselves more with the graphical and Historical than with gameplay balance, because patches concern more with gameplay stats and bugs.

[Steppe Merc]

I also think that Sarmatians should dominate Scythians in that region as discussed at TW Center, just a name change I suppose
No. There should be the Scythians and the Sarmatians, since they were seprate people, and the Scythians were yet to be totally over run. There should be a Sarmatian and a Scythian faction, though the Sarmatians should be more powerful.

[khelvan]

Have you noticed the Realism mod at TW Center? It may be a good idea to pool resources and efforts rather than make 2 mods of same type. Realism mod v1.0 is really very good and v2.0 is forthcoming.
I also think that Sarmatians should dominate Scythians in that region as discussed at TW Center, just a name change I suppose

Yes, I was involved in that effort for a time. Frankly, they are making choices that are not realism based but gameplay based. They are making some things like some units more realistic but some things not so, so personally I much prefer the direction this community here at the .org is taking.

[The Hun]

There should be the Scythians and the Sarmatians, since they were seprate people, and the Scythians were yet to be totally over run. There should be a Sarmatian and a Scythian faction, though the Sarmatians should be more powerful.

I believe this is what I said.......??
Right now we have Scythians and we see odd Sarmatian Mercs here and there. At this time period I think the Sarmatians were the dominant of the two and because they basically overan and absorbed the Scythians maybe they should get a better fielding.

[Stormy]

Parthian 250BC-225AD


Cataphract
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/24_face.jpg
Cataphract ( left ) horse archer ( center )
http://www.iranchamber.com/history/parthians/images/parthian_army.jpg
http://www.soldiers-russia.com/new_soldiers/roman_empire/pa1_r.JPG
http://www.soldiers-russia.com/new_soldiers/roman_empire/pa1.JPG

Parthian Horse-archer
http://www.iranchamber.com/history/parthians/images/parthian_horse_archer.jpg

Fully Armoured Parthian Cavalry ( Merc posted one before this one. Repost )
http://www.iranchamber.com/history/parthians/images/parthian_armourd_cavalry.jpg

Cataphracts
http://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Images2/Parthian__Sasanian_Catafrati.gif

General, lionskin cloak ( ~:eek: nice looking indeed with the lionskin and will make a perfect mounted general replacing the eastern generic in game one )
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p1.jpg
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/H13.jpg

Horse archers
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p2.jpg http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p3.jpg http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p4.jpg
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p5.jpg http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p6.jpg http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p7.jpg

Cataphract
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p9.jpg
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p10.jpg
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p13.jpg

Dailami mountain tribesman ( spear infantry unit )
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p15.jpg http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p16.jpg

Elymais archer
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/p17.jpg

Armoured camel
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/H15.jpg

:duel:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Yes, I was involved in that effort for a time. Frankly, they are making choices that are not realism based but gameplay based. They are making some things like some units more realistic but some things not so, so personally I much prefer the direction this community here at the .org is taking.
*Maybe we can bend them to our will!!!* :devil:

Opps!!! Got carried away... :blush:

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Parthian 250BC-225AD

Armoured camel
http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/images/H15.jpg
Did this really existed? :thinking: I tought that only the men were armoured, not the camels.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Have you noticed the Realism mod at TW Center? It may be a good idea to pool resources and efforts rather than make 2 mods of same type. Realism mod v1.0 is really very good and v2.0 is forthcoming.
Yes. I'm aware of their work. Very good in some areas. I don't agree in some others though. Unless there is the will and a concertated effort by both groups they will remain separate projects.

[Stormy]

I'm not sure if they existed but they are in game as we know. If anything maybe a bare camel units with an armoured unit ontop to replace the ingame parthian camel for the future could be a good idea.


Parthians 250BC-225AD

Parthian Horse Archer
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/25_face.jpg

Parthain Archer
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/26_face.jpg

[Stormy]

Armenians 300BC-428AD

Armenian Cataphract
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1163_face.jpg

Armenian Light Horse
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1164_face.jpg

Armenian Auxilia
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1165_face.jpg

Armenian Archer
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1166_face.jpg

These are like the only armenian units I found. If some posters of the forum know about more Armenian units please post them up because this is critical ~D

[PSYCHO V]

Sorry, but I can't be arsed to read all these pages in my limited free time. I just gave my opinion and, truely, forgot to wish you guys good luck. There is much to fix, but you should wait for what the patch does until starting to do anything. After all, unit info should have been assembled by your members anyway, after all these months...


Arr Brutal... we've been giving CA unit info for years. This is NOT a recent development.

For the record, CA did actually listen to some of the suggestions and make some changes to their early unit lists. We currently have Britons, Germans and Gauls that look vaguely like they did. Initially it seems all three factions were going to get units that all looked the same with different colouring (aka the banner guy for gauls). So we commend CA for those changes.

The problem, in our humble opinion, is they didn't go far enough. That a huge opportunity was missed to make the many "barbarian" factions not only more historically correct but more visually stunning. Hence the lads have gotten together here to volunteer their time and resources to improve where-ever possible.

With the work being done by Vercingetrix on the 3D side, reconspy, Lief and khelvan, the skies the limit! ~D

[ick_of_pick]

Here is the list of Assyrian names:


Male:
Shamshi-Adad
Ishme-Dagan
Adad-Nirari
Shalmaneser
Tukulti-Ninurta
Ashuruballit (same as Ashurbanipal)
Narsai
Eisho
Adamu
Cephas
Thaddeus
Nimrod
Sargon
Ashur
Tiglath
Atour
Marduk
Adad
Abudemio
Aram
Abel

Female:
Asu (means Asia)
Ishtar
Lilitu
Talitha
Tabitha
Nanena
Teamat
Atoria
Lilith
Abella

Heres the link to some pictures...
http://www.biblepicturegallery.com/Pictures/AssyrianA.htm

Ick

[ah_dut]

I had an idea about the roman levies, like rorarii and acensii (sp?) etc, how about making them mercs only hirable around roman towns? dunno if this is possible and only hireable by Romans. They would be cheap crap and plentiful to simulate rome's large manpower resources, dunno if you all agree with me there

[Steppe Merc]

I believe this is what I said.......??
Sorry, I thought you meant not including the Scythians at all, and just having the Sarmatians. :embarassed:


I had an idea about the roman levies, like rorarii and acensii (sp?) etc, how about making them mercs only hirable around roman towns? dunno if this is possible and only hireable by Romans. They would be cheap crap and plentiful to simulate rome's large manpower resources, dunno if you all agree with me there
As of yet, I haven't seen how to make units province specific....

[Stormy]

Hellenistic Greek
275BC-146BC

Greek Auxilia
http://www.dbaol.com/images/faces/1615_face.jpg

I think all the greeks in game need a unit like the picture above. A unit that will fight like libyan spearmen or eastern infantry . Question, In game alot of non greek units are fighting in a phalanx and is that right or accurate??? I seen barbarians spearman, egyptian nile pikemen and pharaohs guards as well as the carthaginian sacred band and the poeni do it.

[DisruptorX]

I think all the greeks in game need a unit like the picture above. A unit that will fight like libyan spearmen or eastern infantry . Question, In game alot of non greek units are fighting in a phalanx and is that right or accurate??? I seen barbarians spearman, egyptian nile pikemen and pharaohs guards as well as the carthaginian sacred band and the poeni do it.

The Egyptians doing it is accurate, it just doesn't look right because the egyptians uniforms are complete fantasy. The egyptians were a hellenic kingdom.

The only non-greeks I can think of who can use the Phalanx are the Carthaginians and Nubians. The nubian spearmen having phalanx is of course wrong. I don't enough about Carthage to tell you about its accuracy, though.

Barbarians don't have phalanx units. The thracians have phalanx, but they had already been conquered by the macedonians in the past, so would have had a greek influence.

[Steppe Merc]

Not true. The Germans (and mabye Gauls) fought in phanlaxs, as Phscyo will be quick to tell you. ~;)
They weren't exactly per se phalangites, but they fought clustered together with spears, so they should have it, as the Germans do for one unit.

[DisruptorX]

Not true. The Germans (and mabye Gauls) fought in phanlaxs, as Phscyo will be quick to tell you. ~;)
They weren't exactly per se phalangites, but they fought clustered together with spears, so they should have it, as the Germans do for one unit.

I don't want to come off sounding like an idiot, but, that is how you fight with spears in all cases, bunch together and skewer your opponent, right? I was referring to the phalanx formation, with the exact lance angles and long pikes.

Rome doesn't simulate spear combat nearly as well as medieval did, with multiple ranks fighting. You don't need to be in a phalanx to do that...

Correct me if I'm wrong.

[ah_dut]

Khelvan or any other modder, is it possible to make a 'lesser' phalanx formation for non hellenistic formations? (of pikemen) as I would guess they would be less effective than the originals with their (perhaps) lack of discipline, please correct me if i'm historically or gampelaywise wrong.

[khelvan]

If I am reading what you are saying correctly, you want a phalanx of spearmen that is less skilled or more easily breaks (lower morale) than others, correct? Yes, this can be done without a second thought. If you want the units to look differently, this takes more work, due to the skinning. If you want the formation changed, at this time I am not sure if we as modders will be able to do this.

-khel

[DisruptorX]

If I am reading what you are saying correctly, you want a phalanx of spearmen that is less skilled or more easily breaks (lower morale) than others, correct? Yes, this can be done without a second thought. If you want the units to look differently, this takes more work, due to the skinning. If you want the formation changed, at this time I am not sure if we as modders will be able to do this.

-khel

I think he means a non-phalanx formation that can fight in ranks, like the spearmen from MTW. Currently the only unit that does this in Rome is the phalanx, so that is what he thinks would be the easiest to mod to fit this.

[Stormy]

Thanks for all the information good noblemen ~D

"If you want the units to look differently, this takes more work, due to the skinning"

I think this will be a good idea for the future. I imagine the non-Greek phalanx units charging into combat with a pike and also standing their ground and thrusting it with another rush that follows. Carthaginians I can picture doing more of a hellenic phalanx.

[khelvan]

Well, I'll just note some things generally about unit modification.

Things that are easy to mod include unit battle performance, weapon/armor strength, skill, morale, bonuses vs. other units.

Things that require a bit more time and skill are the look of unit skins. (i.e. the texture/color of their armor, weapons, clothes, and so on)

Things that will require a lot more time and effort include the actual unit models (the shape of the unit, weapons, armor, mounts, and so on).

Things that we don't know if we will be able to mod yet include available formations, new formations, and individual behavior within the unit. These may be hard coded.

I hope that helps.

[khelvan]

I am a relative newcomer here, but I would like to propose a few things now that we have begun digging into the game files themselves.

1) Start a new thread, preferrably in the Dungeon, where we can begin the process of working on the mod. This existing Colosseum thread can continue to be a place for historical and unit research. However, it is too crowded to see quickly what must be done, so I think a new thread for starting the work is a necessity.

2) Begin setting objectives for what we want to accomplish, and laying out steps to get there.

3) Determine who wants to take on which parts of the work of the mod.

4) Determine what parts of the mod can be done in parallel, and what dependencies exist. Begin laying out a plan for what work is done in what order.

With the agreement of the good people here, I will set up a thread in the Dungeon for beginning the process, and getting the ball rolling. Since I haven't read this entire monster thread, I apologize if this has been suggested, but in the "work" thread I also suggest we lay out our skills and interests so we know who we are working with.

Cheers,

-khel

[Salazar]

A few sides earlier somebody mentioned the Screaming Women to be modded out, why? There is pretty much historical Evidence for Germanic Women standing behind the Lines screaming, shouting ,shaking their naked Breasts and even killing fleeing Men. Compared to History the Rtw Women with Miniskirts (and NOT TOPLESS as they sometimes were in history) is pretty harmless. So why mod it out?

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I can try, though it appears that this area is hard coded. Adding a formation such as wedge to the hastati, for instance, does not activate the "special ability" button, and so far I have not found how to do so.

The button appears to work as a toggle in the sense that the unit has two formation and simply switches back and forth based on pressing the button (square to wedge and back again), but the number available may, again, be hard coded.
So, the default could be, as an example - testudo- and the special function wedge?

How would we achieve such toggle? What script would be necessary to add to the unit file? Any ideas?


I think this is merely a question of tweaking unit stats, and making the low quality units (rorarii, accensi, leves) cheap and readily available.
Yeap. I agree. It is settled then.


I agree with this, which is why I have already mentioned some ideas for reducing the availability and power of the cavalry. Only 1/10th of the legion was cavalry, and it was normally used for ensuring the flanks were not turned and running down fleeing enemies...
I believe the best way to do it is something like this:

-Equites - 3 Turns - Cost: 2x Standard cost
-Roman Cavalry - 4 Turns - Cost: 3x Standard cost
-Legionary Cavalry - 4 turns - Cost: 3x Standard cost
etc...

What do you think?


I should note that the entire text I italicized came directly from Connolly, it was not my narrative. Given that Connolly's work is by far the best source of information I have found on the subject I am inclined to go with his statement that "we know" the pilum was in use at the time, though he does not name his source. What sources are you referring to?
You've misunderstood me. I'm not dennying Connolly's work, nor Livy's description. In fact, my reply doesn't conflict with them. What period is Livy talking about? He is talking about Pre-Marian reforms, specifically about Early Pre-Marian Republican Roman Army. I believe he is refering to the time right after Allyia, when the Romans decided to forget the use of the Phalanx. What I said was that, by that time, the Pilum hadn't been "invented". In fact, quoting your text and Livy:


Livy does not say what the others had.
But in Connolly's text, he refers that:


In Polybius' day they had heavy javelins (pila) and swords. We know that pila were in use at this time and must assume that they were armed with these.
Polybius time (203 BC - 120 BC): after the 2nd Punic War.

Although not impartial, he was not a Roman and his writings were intended for his fellow Greeks. Livy used him as a reference. Polybius often had excellent sources. As the former tutor of the Scipio Africanus the Younger, the famous adopted grandson of the famous general Scipio Africanus.

Not Polybius investigation work that started in 264BC, time of the beggining of the First Punic War (264 BC-241 BC).

Polybius's account endeavoured to provide a universal history (his Pragmateia) of the period between 220 BC and 146 BC, along with a prologue on Roman history from 264 BC, but unfortunately out of the forty books into which his history is divided, only the first five (covering the period up to 216 BC) survive in total, although there are numerous lengthy fragments and epitomes from the rest of the books. The first two introductory books give a precis of events in the Mediterranean from the Gauls' sack of Rome to the First Punic War, recording the rise of the Roman hegemony.

As for the sources of the idea, nothing like Connolly, but I've read it somewhere and heard it several times in the History Channel (Warriors) (I know, not a very reliable source). If you can read Spanish (Castellano) you might wat to check the last paragraph of this webpage:

Guerreros Ibericos (http://www.historialago.com/leg_iber_01025_guerreros_01.htm)

The First Punic War finished well before Polybius and Livy's time and they do not refer the Pilum as a Roman weapon in that time, or do they? So, effectivelly, the Legions might have adopted the Pilum as an adaptation of the Solifera at the end of the First Punic War, like they did with the Samnite shield after fighting them, with the Gladius Hispaniensis after fighting the Iberians, etc...



Again, not my narrative - you asked for information on the early republican units, and I am giving it to you. If you read through what I posted you noted the differences between what Polybius describes and what Livy describes, I assume. That is, the period currently modelled in RTW and the earlier period (late 4th century) of Livy.

Perhaps it is that I have been driving for 16 hours this weekend to get to my cousin's wedding and back, but I am not sure I understand what you are looking for here. Would you please rephrase it for me?
I was trying to get info to justify the alteration of stats and graphics for the Pre-Marian Republic Legions. Is there really the need to make Early, High and Late Pre-Marian Republican Legions with different stats and graphics? There is a lot of other factions that need dealing with first, specially with unit graphics. And unit graphics take a lot of time. Accordingly, Rome is not a priority in unit graphics. I was asking for you to justify those differences. That was the reason for my question.


It seems relatively simple to make a unit only available in certain areas. At the least I know how to use a "resource" to accomplish this, though I am sure that more experienced modders (or me, with enough time) can change this directly.
Good. That is good news. MedMOD for MTW is based on a "Homelands" concept to make a faction have a much harder time at expanding after a certain dimension. It uses mostly regional units, connected to their own faction, that are impossible to build except in their own "homelands". Accordingly, an Empire has much less places to build elite units and has to use other weaker troops for borders, etc... It also makes the game harder for other reason: if you loose your "homelands", you can't build good units and you're "dead". This forces the AI to be much more Historical accurate and better at defending their borders.


Now, a different question. I see lots of people posting here with ideas, and it has been noted that people are working on various factions - have you been keeping track of this? I would love to help, and it seems to me that at this point it makes sense to start formally setting objectives, doling out work to individuals, and tracking progress. Or...it could just be my software development project manager experience making me antsy about that sort of thing. :)
Agreed. I'll reply to this together with the reply to your other post about this same subject.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

I had an idea about the roman levies, like rorarii and acensii (sp?) etc, how about making them mercs only hirable around roman towns? dunno if this is possible and only hireable by Romans. They would be cheap crap and plentiful to simulate rome's large manpower resources, dunno if you all agree with me there
Historically they weren't mercs, so, why should they be moded like that? Any advantage? There is already a plan to reproduce Rome's large manpower resources with those units...

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

The Egyptians doing it is accurate, it just doesn't look right because the egyptians uniforms are complete fantasy. The egyptians were a hellenic kingdom.
Agreed.


The only non-greeks I can think of who can use the Phalanx are the Carthaginians and Nubians. The nubian spearmen having phalanx is of course wrong. I don't enough about Carthage to tell you about its accuracy, though.
Nope. No Nubian unit can have Phalanx. Give me something to prove the Historical use of Phalanx by the Nubians.

As for the Carthaginians, I still have my doubts about a unit like Sacred Band Infantry, graphical (corinthian helm??) as well as fighting (Phalanx??).


Barbarians don't have phalanx units.
Wrong. Just check Stefan the Berserker's analysis here:

Europa Barbarorum Page 1 - Post #27 (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=33417&page=1&pp=30)



The thracians have phalanx, but they had already been conquered by the macedonians in the past, so would have had a greek influence.
They had, although their system wasn't that based in hoplite warfare. However, their cavalry is poorly represented in the game. It was quite good, actually the best in the Greek region.

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

A few sides earlier somebody mentioned the Screaming Women to be modded out, why? There is pretty much historical Evidence for Germanic Women standing behind the Lines screaming, shouting ,shaking their naked Breasts and even killing fleeing Men. Compared to History the Rtw Women with Miniskirts (and NOT TOPLESS as they sometimes were in history) is pretty harmless. So why mod it out?
You're mistaken. There is Historical evidence that in some situations some German women screamed while showing their breasts, when their men started to route in battle. It was a way for them to see what the women expected, if they lost (rape, death and slaughter of children?). But these were singular ocasions and always while their cities or villages were been attacked, not in open battle. So, there is no evidence for a Military Unit of Screaching Women. That is ludicrous...

[khelvan]

So, the default could be, as an example - testudo- and the special function wedge?

How would we achieve such toggle? What script would be necessary to add to the unit file? Any ideas?

The unit files, and all the other files that begin with export_, have a very specific format which, deviated from, causes the game to CTD upon loading. There is no script able to be added to the unit file that we can make changes in this way. In fact, adding anything foreign at all except for data in the exact format required is impossible. These files appear to literally be an export from a spreadsheet, no doubt part of the CA in-house editting tools.

The trick for changing the formations, or at least how they are handled, must therefore be found elsewhere, and I have not yet found it.


I believe the best way to do it is something like this:

-Equites - 3 Turns - Cost: 2x Standard cost
-Roman Cavalry - 4 Turns - Cost: 3x Standard cost
-Legionary Cavalry - 4 turns - Cost: 3x Standard cost
etc...

What do you think?

I like it; of course we'll need to test and tweak it I am sure. Also, as far as I can tell from all of my reading, would the Romans field more than one type of cavalry? Other than giving incentive to upgrade buildings, and get "better" units, I can't see justification for including more than one type of cavalry pre-Marian and post-Marian. Unless we want to go with the "extraordinarii" elite unit concept.


You've misunderstood me. I'm not dennying Connolly's work, nor Livy's description. In fact, my reply doesn't conflict with them. What period is Livy talking about? He is talking about Pre-Marian reforms, specifically about Early Pre-Marian Republican Roman Army. I believe he is refering to the time right after Allyia, when the Romans decided to forget the use of the Phalanx. What I said was that, by that time, the Pilum hadn't been "invented". In fact, quoting your text and Livy:

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Connolly states that Livy did not say what the Hastati and Principes were armed with. Livy writes c. 340 BC. Connolly goes on to say that in Polybius' day (c. 160 BC) they were armed with pila. He then notes that we know they were in use at this time (Livy's day, c. 340). I was simply saying that we should assume, as Connolly does, that the early Hastati and Principes were armed with pila, unless we find a source that states definitively that they were armed with something else.

Unfortunately, using your source, this would place the adoption of the pila well past Livy (c. 240 BC). However, unless I have missed it, it does not say what the early Hastati/Principes would have been armed with. So we can choose to accept Connolly's assertion that the pila was definitely in use c. 340 BC and assume that the Hastati and Principes were armed with them, or find a definitive source stating otherwise.



I was trying to get info to justify the alteration of stats and graphics for the Pre-Marian Republic Legions. Is there really the need to make Early, High and Late Pre-Marian Republican Legions with different stats and graphics? There is a lot of other factions that need dealing with first, specially with unit graphics. And unit graphics take a lot of time. Accordingly, Rome is not a priority in unit graphics. I was asking for you to justify those differences. That was the reason for my question.

Well, I see no real need to do it. I was merely trying to be as accurate as possible. As to stats, Connolly takes the position that Marius was given credit for innovation that took place over several centuries. In fact, many of the figures given credit for sweeping changes only implemented the "last straw," so to speak. He believes that over the course of the 4th through 1st centuries that the legion underwent constant innovation and improvement.

Given the frequency of warfare and what we see of the end result of such innovation (the changes in weaponry, organization, and tactics), there is no reason to believe that these things happened overnight. So, as far as making "early" hastati/principes/triarii weaker than "late" units, there is plenty of justification. As we have discussed above, I believe that we can make them armed alike. To their look, there is no real reason for me to change them as we would merely be speculating, unless someone can find a quote from Livy or another c. 340 BC that says they should look different from the republican legion c. 160 BC.

Trust me when I say that tweaking the unit stats is a no-brainer. It took me ~ 15 minutes last night to go through and change every unit's defensive skill (I'm playing with ways to slow down combat). This is a simple task. I imagine skinning is a much more involved task.


Good. That is good news. MedMOD for MTW is based on a "Homelands" concept to make a faction have a much harder time at expanding after a certain dimension. It uses mostly regional units, connected to their own faction, that are impossible to build except in their own "homelands". Accordingly, an Empire has much less places to build elite units and has to use other weaker troops for borders, etc... It also makes the game harder for other reason: if you loose your "homelands", you can't build good units and you're "dead". This forces the AI to be much more Historical accurate and better at defending their borders.

Yes, we can do this with resources, if not through some other mechanism. If a province has resource x, it can build units y and z. Not a problem. We can limit the units by culture as well, so you have to be culture c and hold province x to build y and z. However, I am not sure at this time if we can limit it by faction. I will check on this. (I would have to assume so, just make the building that can build the unit only available to a certain faction - I will look)

[ah_dut]

Historically they weren't mercs, so, why should they be moded like that? Any advantage? There is already a plan to reproduce Rome's large manpower resources with those units...
Sorry, maybe not reading into it enough, I think you misunderstand, Aymar, it allows many of them to be 'mobilised' far quicker than normal unit prodution, I'm saying make them mercs so as that you can raise a large, levy army as rome immensely quickly. I believe that they were historically able to raise massive armies quickly from otherwise crushing defeats. being mercs simply allows a roman general to hire a good 5-10 levy units in one turn for emergencies. This allows the romans to defend themselves against incursions far easier and to simulate their large base of manpower. If you have a better idea, i'd like to hear it.

[Mr Frost]

I don't want to come off sounding like an idiot, but, that is how you fight with spears in all cases, bunch together and skewer your opponent, right? I was referring to the phalanx formation, with the exact lance angles and long pikes.

Rome doesn't simulate spear combat nearly as well as medieval did, with multiple ranks fighting. You don't need to be in a phalanx to do that...

Correct me if I'm wrong.


Caesar was quite specific , as were other contemporary observers , that the Germans of the time had troops trained to fight in a phalanx formation and did quite well at it too .

It isn't like the formation requires advanced understanding of greek philosophy and performance arts to perform :scholar: ;p

[khelvan]

Good news! I have successfully changed the requirements of the imperial palace to be large city, scriptorium, army barracks, and catapult range. This, combined with the tweaks I have made to population growth, should ensure that the Marian reforms happen way down the line as opposed to c. 250 BC. I will play test it immediately and let you know what the results are.

In the meantime, I have a question for you all. Given the requirements I posted above, think about how this will affect play balance for all factions. I cannot make it so that only the romans have this requirement for moving up to a huge city (without creating a new building tree for the governor's palace for just the romans, and editting the related references in the other files). This may mean that no AI faction will get to huge cities, or they will have a very difficult time to do so.

What requirements would you like to see in place to build an imperial palace? At this time, this and slowing down growth are our only two ways to ensure that the Marian reforms take longer than they do today.

Thanks,

-khel

[Stormy]

Ok I'm back with some more goodies ~D

Carthaginians

Carthaginian Command ( General with guards )
http://www.geocities.com/nwgrant/dave/images/daves_cart_cav_gen-s.jpg
http://www.geocities.com/nwgrant/dave/images/daves_cart_cav-s.jpg

Carthaginian African Infantry
http://www.geocities.com/nwgrant/dave/images/daves_cart_sp-s3.jpg

War Elephants
http://www.geocities.com/nwgrant/dave/images/carts_el-s1.jpg

Poeni Light Horse
http://www.geocities.com/nwgrant/dave/images/daves_cart_lh-s.jpg

Spanish Infantry ( Caetrati and Scurati )
http://www.geocities.com/nwgrant/dave/images/carts_spanish.jpg

http://www.hat.com/Curr/rc8019.jpg

Scutari
http://www.hat.com/Curr/ssp01.jpg http://www.hat.com/Curr/ssp04.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/ssp02.jpg http://www.hat.com/Curr/ssp03.jpg

Caetrati
http://www.hat.com/Curr/ssp07.jpg http://www.hat.com/Curr/ssp08.jpg

slingers
http://www.hat.com/Curr/ssp06.jpg http://www.hat.com/Curr/ssp09.jpg

http://www.hat.com/Curr/rc8020.jpg

heavy African infantry
http://www.hat.com/Curr/fu8020a.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/fu8020b.jpg

light African infantry
http://www.hat.com/Curr/fu8020c.jpg

Numidian Infantry
http://www.hat.com/Curr/fu8020d.jpg

Carthaginian Command and Cavalry
http://www.hat.com/Curr/bx8056.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Othr3/kup01b.jpg http://www.hat.com/Othr3/kup01d.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Othr3/kup01j.jpg
Commander on foot
http://www.hat.com/Othr3/kup01r.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/c8056i.jpg

Carthaginian Allies
http://www.hat.com/Curr/bx8058.jpg
Story

This set of figures contains some of the more exotic mercenaries who fought for the Carthaginians during the Punic Wars.

In the 4th century Gaul tribes stormed into Italy and thrashed the Roman armies of the time- a hoplite force yet to be formed into the famous Legions. Rome was sacked and from that time until their defeat by Julius Caesar these fierce warriors would pose a constant threat to Roman security. In early times the average Gaul warrior fought fanatically and naked, their hair spiked with white lime wash. By the time Hannibal began recruiting Gauls to his cause only a few warriors continued to fight in this manner. One such group were the elite mercenary Gaisatai. In eastern Galatia (located in modern Turkey) the practice continued with considerable success against the Macedonian successor state of Seleucus.

The Libyan Javelinmen with the unusual hair style represent some of the lighter infantry recruited from Carthaginian subject tribes in North Africa. While Libyans composed the majority of Hannibal's trained heavy infantry it is doubtless that they also contributed other types of mercenaries to the war against Rome. Their distinctive red leather tunics are mentioned by ancient historians as they were also known to serve in Persian and Ptolemaic Egyptian armies.

The Celtiberians were warlike Celtic tribes settled in Spain. As such they showed influences from both cultures; Celtic ferocity and Iberian stubbornness . We have portrayed them with large Celtic style shields and helmets but wearing Spanish cloaks and tunics. These war bands fought in an almost unstoppable wedge formation.

The Lusitani (the figures with the rimmed round shields) were first rate mountain fighters, adept at ambush, raid and skirmish. It should be remembered that Rome continued to fight such Iberian tribes long after the defeat of Carthage. It should also be remembered that Caesar and Pompey first engaged each other on Spanish soil, using Spanish troops as auxiliaries to their legions.

and here are the pics
http://www.hat.com/Curr/c8058c.jpg
http://www.hat.com/Curr/c8058d.jpg

Carthaginian War Elephant
http://ehost.users.btopenworld.com/HCH/images/ecar1.jpg

More Carthaginian units here. 2 pages (http://www.navigatorminiatures.com/carthage.htm)

:duel:

[Krasturak]

And whats wrong with half-naked lunatics running around with impressive two handed weapons?? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-thumbsup.gif


CBR

Krast wonders why anyone would complain about that.

[Ranika]

If it were modded like MedMod, where you can only build units in home provinces, maybe just allow Carthage to construct some of the units of each faction? So, if Carthage has a Gallic province, they can make some Gallic units there (though not all of them), and so on.

[Steppe Merc]

I would... Though I fail to see where you quoting that from. Any who...
Stormy, what do those nekkid guys represent? I thought only the Gaestae fought naked... Oh another thing: in the game, they should have spears, not swords. Their name itself means spear, or dart.

[Steppe Merc]

If it were modded like MedMod, where you can only build units in home provinces, maybe just allow Carthage to construct some of the units of each faction? So, if Carthage has a Gallic province, they can make some Gallic units there (though not all of them), and so on.
Hmm, not a bad idea, at least for some things. The Teutons and the other guys (Cimbri, mabye?) had numerous Gauls join them, and the current mercanary "Barbarian" isn't I feel quite good enough, expectially once we make truly original units for each faction.
In fact, I always used a similar system when I modded my MTW, so that the faction owning the province can train local troops.