New factions?

[Hax]

Saying the Suebi and Epeiros never expanded is kinda unfair. The Casse were also very close to uniting modern England and Wales (says Bovi), and I believe the Luso's were one of the most fierce tribes of Iberia.

[keravnos]

Ok, facts time. Prior to Pyrrhos, Alexandros of Epeiros did try conquering some Italian soil, but died trying. After Pyrrhos, his son tried to reconquer Makedonia but was ousted and lost his kingdom as a result. Later he reclaimed his throne. Up until the Aiakides dynasty ended in approx 230's we see a solid century 336-230's of efforts for Apeirotai expansion. Pyrrhos was the greatest king of Epeiros (or Apeiros as its own inhabitants would speak it), no doubt, but by NO MEANS the only one.

That being said, by your rationale, well only the Romani and Pahlavan should be included.

What would happen if Pyrrhos conquered Sparta? (and he would have, if he pressed on the first night he got there).

KH is based on Chremonidean league, but bearing the name given to the alliance that Philippos of Makedones used when he created the "Hellenic alliance" against the Persians.
https://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o276/keravnos/Keravnos6/KoinonHellenon337BCE.jpg

It is an effort to combine Spartan army, Athens navy and culture and Rhodos' engineering prowess (Antikythera mechanism was made in Rhodos).

Doubting them both is perfectly reasonable. Having them both, however, is obligatory, I think

Whether we have "ΣΥΡΑΚΟΣΙΟΙ" or not is something to be discussed. Don't think we haven't debated your points already. Anyways, at the time we discuss, it would be the "Basileion Syrakosion" we would speak of as the late rulers of Syracuse styled themselves as Hellenistic monarchs (Syrakosia, one of the largest ships created in antiquity was a big "HERE I AM" sign for the rest of the Hellenistic world.

-That being said, there is extremely little evidence for the armies that Syracuse fielded, and that is a direct result of "Romani cleaning" that both Syracuse and Epeiros had to go through. Epeiros was luckier as it styled itself as a "Western Makedonia" of sorts, with Pyrrhos going after "Makedonian throne" as well.

One of the very little fragments of info we have for them is their sending of 1000 elite archers and some oxyboloi (what Romani refered to as Scorpions) along with support troops for them ("Katapeltafetes"=oxybolos primer/shooter and "organopoioi"/"Mechanopoioi"=oxybolos engineer) to aid the Romani at Lake Transimene at 217 BCE.

Anyone else with some literary evidence for the Syrakosioi of the period 272 and after, feel absolutely free to contribute.

[Cartaphilus]

Saying the Suebi and Epeiros never expanded is kinda unfair. The Casse were also very close to uniting modern England and Wales (says Bovi), and I believe the Luso's were one of the most fierce tribes of Iberia.

The Epeiros expansion was short-lived, and the Lusitanian too.

Some things about Pergamon:

Although the great Pergamon expansion was made after the battle of Magnesia (190 BC), the first Attalid ruler, Philetaerus, though nominally under Seleucid yoke, especially after the death of Seleucus (281 BC), had some kind of autonomy and was able to increase his power and influence beyond Pergamon.

His heir, Eumenes I, defeat the Seleucid king Antiochus I near Sardis (in 261 BC) and, although he was never been crowned, have all the powers of a king and greatly expanded his dominions.

The next Attalid, Attalus I, defeat the galatians and became the first king of Pergamon.

And so on.

In the game, Pergamon could start, like the Baktrians, as a seleucid "protectorate". Where is the problem?

[Hax]

I'm not voting against the inclusion of Pergamon, I really love them (and Lysimachos too!) but you're throwing some strange arguments concerning expansion. Just because they didn't expand land-wise didn't mean they didn't have any cultural influence.

[Cartaphilus]

One is a limited number of faction slots

The question is how many (free) faction slots you have and how you want to use them.
Who are your candidates for EB2?

[keravnos]

The Epeiros expansion was short-lived, and the Lusitanian too.



Megas Alexandros' expansion was short lived as well.
His empire didn't last beyond his death.

[Cartaphilus]

Megas Alexandros' expansion was short lived as well.
His empire didn't last beyond his death.


Of course it was.
But "his legacy" (hahaha) survives with the Kingdoms founded by his generals.

What happened to Lusitania after the death of Viriatus or to Epeiros after Pyrrhos?

[Ludens]

The question is how many (free) faction slots you have and how you want to use them.
Who are your candidates for EB2?
There are ten additional faction slots in M2:TW*. Nine of these factions have already been decided upon, the tenth may remain open to give additional scripting options. The list of candidates the team used I don't know. Syracuse and Pergamon were both mentioned as candidates.

As for General Appo's list, the tribes he mentions were the most powerful regional players, while in this period Syracuse had barely any power outside Sicily.

* IIRC there are more, but these have to be non-playable factions, and since EB is close to the unit limit they decided not to use these.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

I'm not voting against the inclusion of Pergamon, I really love them (and Lysimachos too!) but you're throwing some strange arguments concerning expansion. Just because they didn't expand land-wise didn't mean they didn't have any cultural influence.

True!
Pergamon might not have expanded much territorial-wise, but they were one of the major political players around the aegean and western anatolia, and they also, on several occations, confronted the seleucids, who were a threat to them, and this conflict, in its turn, led to their close ties to Rome.

Also, there are an obvious connection between pergamon and the earlier mentioned Lysimachos. Pegamon was, until his death at Korupeidon(I think that is the correct name) in 281, part of Lysimacos realm. The first ruler, that Philetaros, or whatever his name is (I can't remember), was, if I'm not mistaken, Lysimachos treasurer. This man later adopted Eumenes and Attalos, as reputedly he was an enuch and had no kids of his own.
This man died and left his position to Eumenes sometime in the 260:s, and thus, he was the effective ruler of pergamon in the year 272, although under seleucid dominion.

It would also have beneficial effects on gameplay, as, even though the area is rather cramped alreadey, another minor faction in western anatolia may help preventing this area from falling into the hands of the seleucids or the ptolemaioi.
Thus, I think that pergamon would make a great addition to EB, not least because I have, since I first tried the mod, been dreaming of trying to rebuild the lost thracian kingdom of lysimachus.

But then again, there are quite a few other factions as well, that would be fun, so we'll just have to see what turns out...

[Foot]

God this thread has turned into such a bore. Indeed, the absurdity of our faction's choices (and by the way no-one knows, apart from us, who we have chosen) paints a picture of some mad surrealist nightmare-vision. Indeed, it is a wonder at how we managed to produce such an amazing modification of RTW.

So how all those people with their fantastic opinions lay-off for a while and stop making assumptions about who we've chosen and for why. And remember, part of goal is to teach people history, and the mediterranean - despite what the ancients thought - was not the centre of the world. Do something useful for a change instead of bitching about how a faction didn't get in, because we haven't told you who is in and who is out!

Foot

[Cartaphilus]

That's it!, so share your knowledge with us the plebs.

We are trying to give some good (?) ideas about what factions must be included, but we do it blindfold. Nonetheless I have tried to make my suggestions from an historical point of view, not as a fan of any rejected faction.

But, sincerely, what peoples, tribes, cities, nations..., were stronger than the ones we are speaking about in 272BC? Not of course another miserable nomads in damned steppes or in nasty deserts.

Syracuse and Pergamon were powerful cities at that time. That's a fact. Syracuse in the past has been greater but in 272BC it wasn't a village made of huts, but the largest and strongest greek city in the West.
Pergamon will be greater in the future - so better for me.

And the Celtiberian were at least as strong as the Lusitanian. That's another fact.

Indeed, I don't know nine factions better or stronger than these. So please name them.

Well, we all welcome the Mauryans too, but I think I have read ut supra that they will not be in the game. Or Numidia/Mauritania but you are not sure about it too.

I beg you, speak!
:smash:

[blacksnail]

Not of course another miserable nomads in damned steppes or in nasty deserts.
This is probably not the best way to get the Hayasdan FC to answer your question. ~:)

[Cartaphilus]

This is probably not the best way to get the Hayasdan FC to answer your question. ~:)

The Hayasdan are a noble and ancient people, not beggars of the steppes.


:whip:

[Foot]

Yeah, see as Hayasdan FC I take great interest n the masterful people of the steppe as well. So how about you stop insulting entire peoples.

We have chosen our factions, and we will reveal them over time in previews. This is not a thread we started, fans started it. We were never taking public voting on the issue, though certainly we used information and suggestions that people early in the thread were making.

Foot

[Leviathan DarklyCute]

Yeah, see as Hayasdan FC I take great interest n the masterful people of the steppe as well. So how about you stop insulting entire peoples.
Foot's national pride has been offended:smash:

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

God this thread has turned into such a bore. Indeed, the absurdity of our faction's choices (and by the way no-one knows, apart from us, who we have chosen) paints a picture of some mad surrealist nightmare-vision. Indeed, it is a wonder at how we managed to produce such an amazing modification of RTW.

So how all those people with their fantastic opinions lay-off for a while and stop making assumptions about who we've chosen and for why. And remember, part of goal is to teach people history, and the mediterranean - despite what the ancients thought - was not the centre of the world. Do something useful for a change instead of bitching about how a faction didn't get in, because we haven't told you who is in and who is out!

Foot

You make quite a good point there, Foot.
And I must, reluctantly, admit that I am one of the culprits.
Really, all nine factions have apparantly been chosen, so discussing this matter further won't make any difference anyway. Still, it is sometimes hard to resist the temtation of posting some factions that may/may not be in, and discuss why, no matter how futile it is.

I'll go do something useful now.:yes:

[Foot]

We don't mind you making suggestions or guesses. But starting to question our faction choices before we've released even one is just a pain in the proverbial butt.

Foot

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

I know what you mean!
I could maybe elaborate on this further, but I'm doing something useful right now.
(ho-hum)

[Foot]

Foot's national pride has been offended:smash:

Which is strange as I'm from the UK...

Foot

[Cartaphilus]

We don't mind you making suggestions or guesses. But starting to question our faction choices before we've released even one is just a pain in the proverbial butt.

Foot


We don't question choices that we ignore, at least I don't do it.
I just make "innocent" suggestions, and defend them. But I see that you don't welcome suggestions and consider them criticism - and criticize was not my intention. :(

But I think that some useful ideas for the game can emerge of all this mess.

And I hope that you explain (in time) the reasons of your choices and rejections.

[chairman]

"Beggars of the steppe"


'Ride with the horde, the Golden Horde, The Cerulean Horde, the Snow-white Horde, the Horde of a thousand tents, the Horde of ten thousand banners, the Horde of ten myriad Warriors and a hundred myriad horses, Ride with the Horde of Genghis Khan!'

Oh really, so the nomads are "beggars of the steppes" eh? Let me see if I can remember any of those nomads who was significant. Will probably take me all night just to find one.









...... Nevermind, I thought of some.

The Scythians who destroyed the Uartu and razed the great cities of the Fertile Cresent.

The Huns who under Attila, the "Scourge of God", humbled the Regnum Romani and ruled a whole half of Europe.

The Xiongnu who were equals to first great Dynasty of the mighty Middle Kingdom, the Han, and who drove back the Son of Heaven on every occaision.

The Parthians, who alone of all her enemies resisted Roman invasion on every count and who could at will deliver disaster and defeat to children of Aeneas.

The Turks who subjected the whole of eastern Islam and conquered the impregnable city of Constantinople, the New Rome, who now rule in every nation of the steppe and who reached the boundries of Germania.

And numerous others, great and small who commanded the warriors of the steppe to conquer and ride.

But Finally, the Greatest of all, Was GENGHIS KHAN!!
Whose people, the Children of the Wolf, The MONGOLS!!! THE GOLDEN and CERULEAN HORDE!!! Whose livestock were countless, whose lands were endless and whose enemies were headless; these were the greatest conquerors in the World! Even Megas Alexandros was shamed by the extent of their conquests!



I'd go on to make good the reputation of those who live in those "nasty deserts" but I would have to talk about Mohammed and the Umayyads and the Abbasids and the Almohads and the Almoravids and the Ayyubids and the Mamluks and the Saminids and the Ghaznivids and the Ghurids and the Fatimids and the .......

Need I go on.

Actually I feel very sorry for you since if he hasn't done so already, The Persian Cataphract will at some point read this thread, and when he does...

"Oh Great Surena, forgive this poor ignorant soul, for he does no yet know of your might and greatness. Let your mercy to him be an example to all of your great wisdom. From one in awe of the Great Surena."

Chairman

[Cartaphilus]

I agree with you.
But Genghis or Timur weren't born in 272BC.
And the turks didn't exist then (as a threat).
And so on.

Even the huns were not a problem for Europe and the Asian regions of our map at that time - not for China, if the nomad peoples that threatened the chinese were of the same lineage of the future scourge of God.

We are in the 272BC, not in 451AD.

By the way, I love the history of the Great Migrations' Age, and the description of the Attila's funeral that wrote Jordanes is one of my favourites passages of the ancient history - and quite similar to the burial of Beowulf. The huns with their deformed (alien style) heads were awesome warriors! But what did they do in the game time?

I spoke about the game, and in the game with the Sauromatae and the Sakas we have enough (I would admit the Scythians too, but I have other historical preferences).

I don't consider the parthians beggars of the steppes at all.
They were not so "barbarous" as the others, or at least, they assimilated soon the "superior" cultures that they met in their way to empire.

[Ludens]

We don't question choices that we ignore, at least I don't do it.
I just make "innocent" suggestions, and defend them. But I see that you don't welcome suggestions and consider them criticism - and criticize was not my intention. :(
In that case I apologize for my harshness. The way you formulated your suggestions came across as overly confrontational, at least to me. I thought you were criticising the faction list of EB1.

As for Syracuse, yes, it was the most powerful western Greek city state, but I think the team decided rightly not to include it in EB1. The age of Greek city states was almost over: it was nowhere near its former strength and weak compared to Carthage and Rome. Pergamon was a rising power, but in 272 B.C. it was not quite strong enough to challenge it's larger neighbours. I am expecting to see them as a faction in EB2, though.

Oh, and by the way, the Maurean Empire will not make it into the mod, but a Maurean satrapy might.

[Cartaphilus]

No problem.

I amb very grateful with the team, you have given us for free hours and hours of great fun. I like the entire game as it is now (although I don't like to play the Sakas or the Sauromatae campaign).
And I am quite excited thinking about how it would be EB2.
So I apologize if my words sounded like criticism to your ears but my enthusiasm and my poor dominion of english made that sounded like war-cries.

I am satisfied with our actual factions, but if the new game allow more factions, it is inevitable that fans like me make some suggestions.
See my list above. I think it is reasonable, and I don't doubt that some of the factions that I have talked about will be in the game. But we all want to know as soon as possible which will these factions be. We can hardly wait.

:dizzy2:

[Teleklos Archelaou]

I'm certain people will complain (some folks will) that faction X or Y or Z didn't make it into our EB2 faction list, but what is really nice is that with all the new slots we have been able to fill in all of the factions that we as a team feel fully fulfill (try saying that fast three times) the original requirements for EB1 faction selection. Any that were really borderline for EB1 will be in EB2 along with some other good new ones too. The last few slots for EB2 faction selection really did not fulfill all of the "requirements", and overall if any of the last few ones were left out it wouldn't hurt the mod that much I think. It will be nice to have the "stragglers" in the mod, but since some of the last few choices clearly don't fulfill all of the requirements we really won't have to worry as much about "faction X was much more important than faction Y and must be included!" Sure, there will still be complaints, but we are very content overall I think with selection.

I think it compares well to the college football bowl system in the U.S. No really good team is left out, but some 7-6 and 8-5 teams won't get in and although you'll still hear their fans whine it won't matter so much. :grin:

[I Am Herenow]

am I to take it that

All factions have been decided on;
You have decided to use 10 "normal" factions instead of 9 "normal" ones and one scripting one?

[Foot]

Also, am I to take it that

All factions have been decided on;
You have decided to use 10 "normal" factions instead of 9 "normal" ones and one scripting one?

Neither of those points were implied in anything that Teleklos said.

Foot

[I Am Herenow]

Hmm ok

[Tellos Athenaios]

All the new factions which we feel that are ok are according to us ok. Is very similar.

Say we have 5 new factions; then all the new factions equates to 5.
Say we have only 1 new faction; then all the new factions equates to 1.

Math, logic, and grammar are all great fun. :grin:

[Tobolight]

I'm certain people will complain (some folks will) that faction X or Y or Z didn't make it into our EB2 faction list, but what is really nice is that with all the new slots we have been able to fill in all of the factions that we as a team feel fully fulfill (try saying that fast three times) the original requirements for EB1 faction selection. Any that were really borderline for EB1 will be in EB2 along with some other good new ones too. The last few slots for EB2 faction selection really did not fulfill all of the "requirements", and overall if any of the last few ones were left out it wouldn't hurt the mod that much I think. It will be nice to have the "stragglers" in the mod, but since some of the last few choices clearly don't fulfill all of the requirements we really won't have to worry as much about "faction X was much more important than faction Y and must be included!" Sure, there will still be complaints, but we are very content overall I think with selection.

I think it compares well to the college football bowl system in the U.S. No really good team is left out, but some 7-6 and 8-5 teams won't get in and although you'll still hear their fans whine it won't matter so much. :grin:

What are the EB1 faction requirements? I would like to get a mental clue as to what factions could be included in EB2.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Well, one of the earliest requirements was that we choose the faction (up for the vote at that point) that had the "most military (and cultural as well) impact across the expanded map". But you get into a situation where you think "impact before 272 or during 272 or after 272 or at all times?" You can see both sides in the mod, as Pontos and Epeiros provide evidence of (one important before 272, the other after). Another phrase used to help decide during the votes was this. "A faction should be felt across the map, a group that expanded, that attacked, that fought, that caused the formation of alliances to defeat it, or that caused major migrations of many peoples to different areas." Gameplay considerations were not part of the vote, though once the major ones were selected it is impossible to say that that factor did not creep into the votes a little for the last few factions.

By that time (the last few factions' votes), we had changed a little the factors. They still had to be expansionistic and have an effect across the world (not just around the mediterranean) in the timeframe. They also should be unable to be presented as rebels (through unique units and unrest). Finally, we had to acknowledge that a faction's inclusion had to be impacted by the people we had on the team willing to do work for the faction. Those factors were driving the decision in our internal polls.

At this point, further additions of factions really are dealing with smaller groups of people or some of those we don't know as much about (in terms of very detailed military units, etc.) and will have a harder time depicting (Caucasian Iberians, Nabataeans, Massagetae, Bosphorians, Galatians, Illyrians, Syracusans, just to name a few whose names were thrown around from the middle of the map to the east). So very few new factions hit on all those points. We are left with a *lot* of smaller ones. We have tried to keep these points though in picking the new factions, but gameplay, things like rebel-to-faction, filling some of the most problematic "gaps" in the map, how much information we can really get on them, and such are all popping up in some folks' explanations of their votes. We have had long posts with summaries of how our possible factions fit into those points, and how else they might help the mod as a whole also, and in the end it is up to individual members to make their minds up and vote.

[russia almighty]

TA, will any of the new factions be out in the boondocks; Or will they have neighbor relatively close by?

[Tellos Athenaios]

"Watch and wait"... ~;)

[chairman]

TA or TA: whoever answers first:

How many members and which members were part of the voting? Was it the entire team? Only current Faction Coordinators? Some group of senior team members?

Thanks for the explanation.

Chairman

[Foot]

The entire team votes, whether they be historians or not. Coders have to work on the same faction as historians so its only far that everyone get the vote.

Foot

[Teleklos Archelaou]

We really don't have people voting who are not very active. It is visible who votes and if we had a faction barely win and most of the people who voted for it aren't either currently active or aren't posting their opinions at all on the matter then we would have a do-over I think - it hasn't happened, so we are happy with the system as-is. In the distant past we had a requirement of explanations for voting too (i.e., tell why you are voting for each faction you vote for), but it is unnecessary really now. The whole affair is really rather drawn out with a *lot* of discussion from many parties. Pretty cordial too actually. People who are really behind a given faction at the start of a discussion very frequently will totally drop it after all historians have explained the reasons for supporting other factions and they understand how more appropriate it would be to have a different faction in there instead of the one they started out supporting.

[bovi]

The historians of course have more say in which factions are chosen. We have had a lot of possibilities and all those who have been turned down have been for good reason, such as we don't have any information about their military, they were in rapid decline or were primarily interested in areas outside of our theatre, among others. It's hard to disagree with the well put analyses.

[chairman]

Boy what I'd give to be part of that discussion.

Chairman

[Teleklos Archelaou]

It really was fun and interesting chairman! And very few bruised egos or real arguments. Just a lot of posts and research and discussion. Maybe one of the most fun parts about being on the team in my memory, second only to seeing new units posted and hearing new music. Those are some of my favorite things.

[chairman]

That's how I wish the regular forum would be, reasonable debate and gentile conversation. That's why I try to keep my posts as polite and orderly as possible.

Chairman

[kepta]

Cant wait to play the new factions whatever they are. I've played almost all the factions in EB and have learned a ton from the mod. Played EB more then any other mod or game for that matter in my entire life so thanks for this enjoyable mod.

Of course cant leave with out adding my uninformed opinion about a suggested faction. I've always had a passion for the Kingdom of the Cimmerian Bosporus and I just love that part of the world and the mix of influences at the time but I guess they where often under the control of foreign powers.

[Megalos]

Kind of a mini announcement.


Sorry guys, we have decided against adding new factions this time. We felt, as a team, that adding more factions won't particulary impove upon anything, and we will be keeping with the same faction list as EB1.


Hope you understand?

[kepta]

Sounds great they can further flesh out the faction rosters and more factions would just make them hit the unit cap faster. Rather have less factions better represented then more factions with less units.

[JRG]

Kind of a mini announcement.


Sorry guys, we have decided against adding new factions this time. We felt, as a team, that adding more factions won't particulary impove upon anything, and we will be keeping with the same faction list as EB1.


Hope you understand?

this is a joke right?
I thought 9 out of 10 of the factions had been selected.:inquisitive:

[ziegenpeter]

Must be a joke!

[The General]

Well, considering what was just said on the previous page...

[Leviathan DarklyCute]

Well at least add a FAW! Like Numidia or the Celtiberians! So that the game will be more balanced! ;_;

[ziegenpeter]

this is a joke right?
I thought 9 out of 10 of the factions had been selected.:inquisitive:
JRG has got a good point there!

[russia almighty]

Guys,


EB team loves screwing with people's heads. It makes you wonder if they all don't have a degree is psychology.


:)

[Hax]

They also have a degree in sarcasm.

[JRG]

wasn't very funny in my opinion

[Strategos Alexandros]

Was very sarcastic though.

[Sarcasm]

???

[Megalos]

It's not a joke.

[Hax]

...or is it?

*insertdramatictune here*

====

Anyways, to get back on topic. I'd see Syracuse as a candidate, if there were more regions available. Syracuse was only interested in conquering Sicilia and maybe a part of Magna Graecia.

[Sarcasm]

???

[Leviathan DarklyCute]

While you guys enjoy messing with our minds I hope you're also working on those 9 new factions. I sure don't want all the trolling to take over the time you work on them.:juggle:

[Cartaphilus]

...or is it?

*insertdramatictune here*

====

Anyways, to get back on topic. I'd see Syracuse as a candidate, if there were more regions available. Syracuse was only interested in conquering Sicilia and maybe a part of Magna Graecia.

And what factions were interested in rule the whole world?

Alexander was already dead.

[Hax]

Romani, Arche Seleukeia, Ptolemaioi for some degree, Makedonia I think.

Imagine the Victory conditions for Syracuse, would be something like:

Conquer Syracuse, Messana, Lilibeo, Rhegion, Taras, Kart-Hadast, Atiqa, Karalis, Leptis, Alalia.

That's about it?

[kepta]

Well judging by the new steele definetly messing with my mind new faction looks sweeeet.

[chairman]

Confirmed:

Pergamon: Pergamon; Western Greek culture?

Possible:

Arevaci: Numantia; Barbarian culture

Massyli: Kirtan; Semitic culture


Massaesyli: Siga and Lixus; Semitic culture (overall less likey than Massyli)

Mauryan Satrapy of Gandhara: Taksashila and Opiana; Eastern(?) culture

Belgae: Bratosporios and Bagacos; Barbarian culture

Boii: Bononia, Eburonum and Vindobona; Barbarian Culture

Bosphoran Kingdom: Pantikapaion; Western Greek culture (?)

Getting pretty iffy:

Scythians: Olbia; Nomadic culture - Team members have already said that the Scythians were declining so their chances are slim

There aren't really any others that I can see as having any great impact (feel free to kill me for forgetting your favorite non-faction). The Illyrians weren't centralized yet and didn't effect much change, though their pirates would be cool. Syracuse and Massilia have been shut down. Galatia would really have nowhere to expand now that Pergamon is in, and they weren't very aggressive any way, unless they also get Tylis, but that still might not be enough. Tellos seemed to be saying that there was a possibility for a faction at the top of the map, but I don't know of any there unless he meant the Caledonians to balance out the Casse, which was mentioned elsewhere.

On that note, the Goidels seem less likely now that they have lost some of their higher level (some have said fantastic) units. No other Germanic tribes are viable as super-confederations. Another tribe in Gaul aside from the Belgae would be more likely to hurt the chances of a Gallic nation than produce a stable country. If the Arevaci are included, then Iberia will be too packed for another. Two in Africa is enough (especially with the not having an Ethiopian/Nubian faction). No other possibilities in Arabia unless the Team wants a suicidal Nabataean faction owning Petra and Bostra, but getting killed instantly by the Grey Death and Yellow Fever. There is no more room in the Caucuses for an Iberian/Albanian/Colchisian(sp?) kingdom. Bastarnoz were discounted a long time ago, along with Baltics or "Polish". Cyrene suffers similar problems to Syracuse/Massilia and Nabatea. Thrace, AFAIK, has never even been suggested (because it's so far gone). Media Atropatene wouldn't have enough room (unless new provinces were added there or Seleukid territory was given to them). Yeuzhi would still be off map and there won't be any emerging factions (again). Aetolian League would be one measly province between 3 powers.

Sheesh, if Anyone can think of another faction aside from the ones I listed, I'll be impressed. Or just realizing the obvious.

Chairman

[azzbaz]

Garamantians im thinking. They would start off as savages and grow more capable as the game progresses. It was hinted on the EB1 site that they only just missed out?? So who nows. I did some research on them they seem like a challenge to depict accurately, but they would be a great choice gameplay-wise.

[Ludens]

Sheesh, if Anyone can think of another faction aside from the ones I listed, I'll be impressed. Or just realizing the obvious.
I'll take that challenge ~;) . I made a similar list a couple of days agao, with all peoples that had been mentioned as candidate factions (as far as I could remember), along with my assessment on how likely their inclusion was and what their unit roster would look like.

Caledonians are definitely out. There was no such thing as a Caledonian nation and we don't even know how they called themselves. Ranika once mentioned the Brigantes as a Briton candidate, but they seemed low priority at the time and haven't been mentioned recently.

In Arabia, Qataban may be included as well. They were the Saba's main competitor, and I recall reading somewhere they were on the rise during this era. The two new Semitic faction need not be in Africa, after all. Arguing against this is the absence of the Saba faction coordinator. No point adding a faction if there is no-one to work on them.

I also wouldn't discount the possibility of a Caucasian faction. After all, it was strongly suggested there would be another Eastern faction. Dito for the Polish: the Lugii or Lugians were considered for the last EB1 faction slot.

Teleklos recently indicated the Massagetae as a candidate faction, although I am having trouble seeing how they would fit in between Parni, Saka and Bactria. There is actually another candidate faction in that area, that was seriously considered for EB1, but because it hasn't been mentioned since I think it may be intended as a surprise for EB2, and won't spoil it by naming them. Well, that and the fact that I had never heard of these guys, and even Wikipedia barely knew them :clown: .

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

In Arabia, Qataban may be included as well. They were the Saba's main competitor, and I recall reading somewhere they were on the rise during this era. The two new Semitic faction need not be in Africa, after all. Arguing against this is the absence of the Saba faction coordinator. No point adding a faction if there is no-one to work on them.


I think someone said that the nabateans were out of the question, and although Qataban might indeed have been a power to be reckoned with, I think a Charakene-arabian faction would make more sense, especially gameplay-wise, as southern arabia would get pretty crowded with two factions so close to each other.
They would likely start warring with eachother, and become weakened untill ultimately, they both get smotherd by the ptolemaioi.

However, I still favour two north african factions, to mess things up a bit for Kart-hadast. I think they would be a lot of fun to play too! But I will welcome any new faction in those areas. Sab'yn is, after all, one of my favourit factions in EB1.

[Ayce]

Hmm, would the Bastarnoz work as a faction?

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

I'm no expert on the subject, but I don't think that there is enough information about the Bastarnoz to merit a faction. And I don't think they were organized enough to be called a nation either. (However, some of the factions already in weren't either, so one never knows.) They were, if I'm not mistaken, employed as mercenaries from time to time, though.

[Cartaphilus]

Teleklos recently indicated the Massagetae as a candidate faction, although I am having trouble seeing how they would fit in between Parni, Saka and Bactria. There is actually another candidate faction in that area, that was seriously considered for EB1, but because it hasn't been mentioned since I think it may be intended as a surprise for EB2, and won't spoil it by naming them. Well, that and the fact that I had never heard of these guys, and even Wikipedia barely knew them :clown: .

Are you speaking about the tokarians?
:beam:

[Ludens]

I think someone said that the nabateans were out of the question, and although Qataban might indeed have been a power to be reckoned with, I think a Charakene-arabian faction would make more sense, especially gameplay-wise, as southern arabia would get pretty crowded with two factions so close to each other.
Yes, IIRC an EB member said the Nabateans weren't going to cut it because they only became a power late in the mod's time frame and their unity was questionable.

Was Charakene an independent power at this point? I don't think the Seleucids could have maintained a large empire with a rival so close to their Mesopotamian heartlands.


Hmm, would the Bastarnoz work as a faction?
IIRC it was Krusader who stated the Bastarnoz would not be included for the reason Mithridates VI Eupator mentions. However, not so long after that another EB members suggested they were still a candidate, so I am not giving up hope :sweatdrop: .


Are you speaking about the tokarians?
Wouldn't those be ruled by the Yuezhi at this point?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Romani, Arche Seleukeia, Ptolemaioi for some degree, Makedonia I think.

Imagine the Victory conditions for Syracuse, would be something like:

Conquer Syracuse, Messana, Lilibeo, Rhegion, Taras, Kart-Hadast, Atiqa, Karalis, Leptis, Alalia.

That's about it?

No just like with the KH or Aedui or Arverni or Casse or in fact so many factions out there they would have much more of a challenge to take on.

If they were to be included (I kinda lost track of all the factions being discussed internally anyways) they would probably have to reconquer the former Syrakousai territories or establish presence there ('raid') to rise once more...

[Hax]

I'm not voting against Syrakousai, I love it actually (the more Hellenes, the better!). I was merely acting as a 'devil's advocate'

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

Was Charakene an independent power at this point? I don't think the Seleucids could have maintained a large empire with a rival so close to their Mesopotamian heartlands.

They were a seleucid dependency, yes, however, I read somewhere that their rulers called themselves "Kings of the Arabs", which seems to suggest that they were not completely without ambition.
However, as I earlier said, I think Mauretania, or some other north african faction would be better.

[abou]

Yeah, Charakene is a definite no.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

Okay, that narrows it down even more.
After all, knowing who won't be in is second best to knowing who will be in.

[Leviathan DarklyCute]

What's the chance Atropatene will be in?

[ServiliusAhala]

Kimbri, i'm not sure if they were a major thing, but they did atleast have the numbers to threaten Rome. So in any case, they can't be entirely useless. Would make sure the Sweboz had someone to compete around the northern Germany too. Bit like Aedui/Arverni

[brymht]

I know its been shot down due to the limited culture issue, but I still thnk Axum would be an awesome addition, and add the the gameplay more than Bactria.

Is there any grounds for relegating Axum to a Semitic culture setting?

[Hax]

Is there any grounds for relegating Axum to a Semitic culture setting?

Nope, not really. Would be very far-fetched.

[abou]

Is there any grounds for relegating Axum to a Semitic culture setting?The region is semitic in EB1 so it revolts to Saba whenever the Ptolemaioi lose it. We're doing things a bit differently though for EB2 so you'll just have to wait and see.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

Greetings!

I have, after a short absence, returned, to once again haunt this already oh so haunted thread.
After Pergamon was revealed as the first new faction in EB2, my best guess for next faction to be released is a Numidian faction, probably Massylians. However, this is not the reason for my sudden reapperance, rather it is to raise a question concerning the new factions, but that does not really fit into the FAQ-thread.

The question is: Will there be previews for all the new factions for EB2? And will there be previews for the old ones as well, revealing their new "looks", as it were?
Maybe this has been answered somwhere else, but I have not located that place.

[Jiulius]

hello every bodies.

i find this topic really interesting.
i will say what i think could be the best factions to add:
some "germanic" tribe that you already say like: teoutons or other (around 3)
some "gallic" tribe like Boi and others 3-4
than remove the Greek cities and add each faction for each Free greek city.
than i Indian faction could be nice (maurayn i hope the spell it's correct)
maybe a Bostrians
maybe a Numidian kingdom
maybe a Nubians kingdom
maybe some italians tribes not yet under romans.

than i think could be a nice idea add the Sogondians and some other iranian people that strat the game like a Protectorete of Seleucidans. and maybe consider Bactrians too in this situation.

and some other factions like the Lydians or Cilicians under(protectores) the Egipt.

i hope i write in a right way.....sorry for my bad english!:embarassed:

bye

Jiulius

[Strategos Alexandros]

Greetings!

I have, after a short absence, returned, to once again haunt this already oh so haunted thread.
After Pergamon was revealed as the first new faction in EB2, my best guess for next faction to be released is a Numidian faction, probably Massylians. However, this is not the reason for my sudden reapperance, rather it is to raise a question concerning the new factions, but that does not really fit into the FAQ-thread.

The question is: Will there be previews for all the new factions for EB2? And will there be previews for the old ones as well, revealing their new "looks", as it were?
Maybe this has been answered somwhere else, but I have not located that place.

The fact that there was a preview for Pergamon may be an indicator that there will be :beam:

[General Appo]

than remove the Greek cities and add each faction for each Free greek city.
than i Indian faction could be nice (maurayn i hope the spell it's correct)
maybe a Bostrians
maybe a Numidian kingdom
maybe a Nubians kingdom
maybe some italians tribes not yet under romans.


The EB team has said that the KH will remain intact. For culture reasons there will be no fully Indian faction, though perhaps something close to it.
I seems to remember an EB team member saying that there will be no Nabateans or Bostrians, though I could be wrong.
At the very least, I believe we can expect 2 Numidian factions.
Yet again, I believe the Nubians have been stated out of the game, though I could be mistaken.
I clearly remember someone saying that no independent Italian tribes will be in the game as a faction.

[Hax]

than remove the Greek cities and add each faction for each Free greek city.
than i Indian faction could be nice (maurayn i hope the spell it's correct)
maybe a Bostrians
maybe a Numidian kingdom
maybe a Nubians kingdom
maybe some italians tribes not yet under romans.

The Koinon Hellenon will remain as it was, as Appo stated, and neither Nubia (Meröe) nor Maurya will be in due to culture slot problems and the reach of the map.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

The question is: Will there be previews for all the new factions for EB2? And will there be previews for the old ones as well, revealing their new "looks", as it were?
Maybe this has been answered somwhere else, but I have not located that place.
There will be more faction previews, though there is a chance that not all factions will be revealed. A faction or two might be left for a surprise when you first play the first release.

There will most likely be previews about content for existing factions, though there are currently no plans for faction previews of old factions (though there really aren't any plans for any distant previews).

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

I see.
Thanks for the reply!

I'm looking forward to them previews, though!

[Cambyses]

Syracuse, it sounds great. Hopefully they can do what Epeiros and Carthage never seem to do and give Rome a proper run for their money in the early game...

Will this effect the Polybian Reform trigger however? ie it will take a lot longer (for the AI at least) to take the territories required.

Also am I right in thinking Syracuse was originally a Corinthian colony? Maybe some interesting objectives or side story could come in regarding this :2thumbsup:


Another suggestion, dont shoot me for putting it in this thread. Would it be possible to have 2 starting positions for a more challenging game? ie one in 272 BC with things as they currently are, but then another, say, just after the Second Punic War where Rome will be a more powerful opponent for the human to face as a western faction.

I say this as Ive never seen a game where the AI Rome actually goes into Greece or Africa...

[Ludens]

Syracuse, it sounds great. Hopefully they can do what Epeiros and Carthage never seem to do and give Rome a proper run for their money in the early game...
Whoa, if the greatest power of the western Mediterranean is unable to stop Rome, why do you think that a single city state, weakened by civil strife and foreign attacks, will be able to do so? There is a reason why Carthage was included in EB 1 and Syracuse not, you know.


Will this effect the Polybian Reform trigger however? ie it will take a lot longer (for the AI at least) to take the territories required.

Also am I right in thinking Syracuse was originally a Corinthian colony? Maybe some interesting objectives or side story could come in regarding this :2thumbsup:

Another suggestion, dont shoot me for putting it in this thread. Would it be possible to have 2 starting positions for a more challenging game? ie one in 272 BC with things as they currently are, but then another, say, just after the Second Punic War where Rome will be a more powerful opponent for the human to face as a western faction.
It's probably a bit too early to talk about reforms: I expect these will be completely redesigned. I also don't think you can make conclusions about faction expansion based on EB1. M2:TW's strategic A.I. is a bit better and it is capable of naval invasions.

Syracuse is indeed a Corinthian colony.

Teleklos mentioned in another thread that there won't be two EB starting points, simply because it would be too much work to research them both with degree of accuracy that EB desires. However, I am hoping someone will make an unofficial mod (i.e. the EB late project for EB 0.7).

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

Indeed, they should keep EB as it is timewise.
A late era project would be interesting, but then as a separate mod, not part of the original EB2, as they are already reaching faction and untit limits.
Also, the amount of work the EB-team has put down on their mod is absolutely astounding already, so we can't really expect them to make a whole new campaign, just like that.

[ziegenpeter]

Hmm a late Era campaign would be easy wouldnt it?
You don't ad any factions but give those which are still alive the correct territory and all towns are bigger with some more buildings...
?

[Ludens]

Getting accurate (EB-standard) starting positions is going to require a lot of work. The original late project also replaced several conquered faction with diadochi splinter factions (bot the Ptolemeans and the Baktrians were embroiled in civil wars at this point).

[Cambyses]

Ludens,

Totally understand the workload aspect of another starting position. You guys work too hard anyway. :juggle2:

I was looking at things from a gameplay perspective only, but I guess that rather defeats the purpose of EB.

Similiary I was referring to Syracuse in this context. Whatever the historically realities, the fact is in the game AI Romans rarely have any trouble subduing Italy and Sicily. Maybe it isnt a bad thing - I dont know.

Anywa, thank you for your answer, its appreciated. EB is by far the best game/mod Ive ever played, so I trust you absolutely to make the right decisions.

[Ludens]

Anywa, thank you for your answer, its appreciated. EB is by far the best game/mod Ive ever played, so I trust you absolutely to make the right decisions.
Thanks for the trust, but I am afraid it is directed at the wrong person. I am not an EB member.

[russia almighty]

He's just a dude that has done a lot of mod work........

*orders the EB kidnapping talent team to take him

[Ludens]

He's just a dude that has done a lot of mod work........

*orders the EB kidnapping talent team to take him
That'll be amusing. We don't get these assassin-avatars for nothing, you know.

However, I think you've got me confused with Lusted. I am not a modder, I am a moderator.

[artaxerxes]

I apologize if this has been covered before, either in this thread or somewhere else. but this thread alone is SO VAST that I've decided to try my luck and ask:beam:
Anyway: will any factions currently in EB be removed? (please say no) - and how many new factions can we count on appeari8ng in EB 2 - I mean, if no old ones are removed, which I hope not, then I don't suppose there can be THAT many new ones, or am I incorrect. And if old ones are gonna be left out...

And now Im at it - asking questions probably answered somewhere else:oops: :smash: - will the campaign map cover the same area as EB or will it increase/decrease :)

[Ludens]

No factions will be dropped and nine or ten new factions will be included. The map will cover the same area as in EB1, although it will be at least partially redrawn.

[Hax]

Also, the scale of the map will be increased.

[Aztec Warrior]

Is there any chance of Axum (the country south of Egypt) being in EB2?

[Foot]

This has been discussed adnauseum. No Axum will not be represented in EBII. For the answer to "why", read further back in this thread.

Foot

[Meneldil]

Will Axum be included in EB2 ?

Oh wait...

[Cartaphilus]

When will you show another new facion, guys?
I can hardly wait for that moment.

:dizzy2:

[Teleklos Archelaou]

It's not anytime really soon.

[General Appo]

So probably sometime tommorow. Or next year. They´re not really sure themselves.

[artaxerxes]

9 to 10 more factions... Sounds too good to be true:dizzy2: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4: :laugh4:

EDIT: with 'scale of the map will be increased' does this mean that everything will be a bit bigger? Like there'll be room for more setllements in Asia ´Minor because Asia Minor is made bigger? (I always felt the Pelopponessus could use a settlement more, since Sparta and Corinth alone doesn't really give one the impression of an important part of the world where varying powers can fight for decades - of course, this has always been a minor phenomena in an awesome game, so if it remains just 2 settlements, then whatever ;) Nine or ten new factions WHOOOA!)

[General Appo]

Nope. The region limit is the same, the scale will simply be that every region is a bit bigger. So more area to walk around on, but no new area.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Indeed. The map will have the same number of settlements and the edges of the map will basically be in the same place, just with a larger scale.

[Hax]

Somehow, I think the permanent forts option would fit in well here. Also good to represent the Hyrcanian Wall, f.ex.

[sgsandor]

I would love to see Numidia to keep Kart-Hadast busy in North Africa, Pontus with a little more beef a tribe of Germans to help Sweboz, Thrace, And I just saw the Pergamon stelle...truly awesome. I think now that the map is a little bigger and the team will redraw parts and move some settlements we can expect some great things :yes:

[artaxerxes]

Nope. The region limit is the same, the scale will simply be that every region is a bit bigger. So more area to walk around on, but no new area.

Hmm... I'll NEVER get my Seleucids from Persepolis and Gabai ANYWHERE then:smash:

EDIT: I was reading earlier posts and decided to make my own top ten of what factions I want (only made 7, then ran out of wishes, I'm not as excessive as some:P). I know everybody who's anybody regarding EB2 are probably tired to death of these, and in that case, plz ignore it (besides I can't imagine why you'd still check this thread). I know factions have already been selected, I'm just doing this because... well, it's fun to fantasize about upcoming EB2, and perhaps somebody could hint at how big a chance the varying factions that I suggest have of making it :) At any length, its another desperate cry for Syracuse, if nothing else (and if you're tired of that, ignore it, I don't wanna offend anybody, I just love your mod too much, my apologies;))

1. Syracusans (basically I would like some kind of Italiote or Sicilian Greek faction, and this was the most powerful. Only faction I REALLY WOULD KILL FOR (:P), even as I've heard arguments for it being too difficult to research)

2. Pergamum. Duh! ;) <- my second favourite, so I'm so happy it's in :) A balloon to whoever put it there: :balloon2:. If you put Syracuse in as well, I'll keep giving you balloons until the Smilie-menu to my right on the screen runs out of them (:inquisitive:)

3. Bosporan Greeks

4. Galatians (yes, I know Asia Minor will be crowded...)

5. A kind of Thracian faction, fx Tylis (if possible historically)

6. A Numidian or Mauretanian tribe of some kind

7. Bithynoi (yes, I know Asia Minor will be REALLY crowded) (and yes, I know this one has NO CHANCE whatsoever of making it to EB2, when Pergamum and possible also Galatia makes it. I just put it up here, so everybody could see what would happen if a freak like me was making your mod... guess we're all grateful I'm not:smash:)

[Hax]

I think now that the map is a little bigger and the team will redraw parts and move some settlements we can expect some great things

One of the best things I heard. BALLONTIMEZ :balloon:

[WarMachine187]

Indeed. The map will have the same number of settlements and the edges of the map will basically be in the same place, just with a larger scale.

Kinda like RTRs map just without extra land eh.thatll be amazing

[Ibrahim]

I hope you all change the movement points. if we keep em the same, I fear we won't be going far indeed...:shame:

[Abou!]

why everybody not suggest ethiopia and india!!![:idea2::idea2::idea2:]

[Son of Perun]

why everybody not suggest ethiopia and india!!![:idea2::idea2::idea2:]

I suggest you should try reading this thread first, then ask questions:book:

[Geoffrey S]

Almost a Bartix.

[Hax]

Yeah, funny. Something seems off with the name 'Abou!'

[russia almighty]

^I smell either abou getting bored, or a troll account.


Anyway, I suspect there will be a Numidian faction of some sort.

From the rumblings, I also expect the Boii or an Eastern Celt group

Pergamon is definitely lol

Another Iberian group (could be one of the greek city states, or Numantia)

And, the Sarmatians being split into two factions (for two major confederations that existed in the period)

[Ibrahim]

Yeah, funny. Something seems off with the name 'Abou!'

well, judgind that the name is Abou! and that only 1 post was made by him-I say its abou showing a sense of humor. It could be a troll account, but I dunno..:clown:

[Hax]

well, judgind that the name is Abou! and that only 1 post was made by him-I say its abou showing a sense of humor.

What?

Impossible.

[vonhaupold]

I would definitely like to see more action in Iberia. I know the Lusitani and the Poeni are already there, but one or two (even three :verycool:) more factions would spice things up a bit. I am no expert by any means but peoples maybe to be considered are the Turdetani in the south, Astures in the northwest, Celtiberi in the center, and as mentioned before, some sort of Greek colonial power in the east. I understand historical information is probably fairly limited on any more potential Iberian factions, but dreaming is free right?

[General Appo]

Not on these forums. That&#180;ll be 20$ thank you very much.

[Ibrahim]

extra ten $ because I heard it, and I need coca cola...and bread!
meanwhile, yes, I think Abou showing a sense of humor is impossible (in theory), but you never know what may lay under the supposedly sadistic looking fellow in the Avatar.

[Xtiaan72]

Somehow, I think the permanent forts option would fit in well here. Also good to represent the Hyrcanian Wall, f.ex.


Can't tell you how much having permanent forts on the map has improved AI path finding ( and turn times) in DLV 5.6....That mod also has a very large map. EBII would certainly benefit from finding a way to make them work.

[Hax]

I think it would be awesome to have permanent forts used for that. What I usually do when playing with the Seleucids is block the two river crossing with normal forts. Perhaps EB2 can have permanent forts there to represent the Hyrcanian Wall.

[Jolt]

My Nine (Pergamsus is already in) factions for the game:

1. BARTIX!!1one YAY!1!eleven1 (Numidians/Massylia)
2. Nabateaeaaeaeaeaea
3. Instead of putting yet another faction in the erasable British Islands, I'd stick with the Belgae.
4. Scythians
5. Galatia would be awesome
6. Celtiberians/Arevaci
7. Western Greeks/Massilia
8. *Insert Random German Tribe here*
9. Meroe (Why not put it? It'd halt the Ptolomaics from blitzing the Seleucids 75&#37; of the time!)

[paullus]

jolt, great picks. i'm pushing hard for massilia and meroe myself, and I can guarantee that *Random German Tribe,* aka the "Rigotes" is already in.

[azzbaz]

Rigotes?

[HamilcarBarca]

My dream ten would be;

1. Kingdom of Pergamon
2. Kingdom of Syrakousai - Sicily is no fun without a second faction starting on the island!
3. Cisalpine Gauls (Boii & Insubres) - keep those Romans busy!
4. The Kingdom of Masaesyles (i.e. Siga, Numidia)
5. The Kingdom of Turdetania (in southern Spain, Baetis/Guadalquivir valley; you need an Iberian faction)
6. The Arevaci (i.e. Numantia - you need a Celtiberian faction)
7. The Galatians
8. The Dardanians (these tough Thraco-Illyrian people were a constant menace to Macedonia during the 4th & 3rd centuries BC, and they would be a good addition to the Balkans)
9. The Pharaonic Kingdom of Meroe - this faction in the upper Nile/Nubia was at its peak in the 3rd century BC and gave Ptolemaic Egypt a lot of trouble! Lets make the Ptolemies work for a living!
10. Kingdom of Sparta; The existing "Koinon Hellenion" faction needs to be dismantled; the poleis of Sparta and Athens were allies in 272 BC, but this was not typical. Instead, have a seperate Kingdom of Sparta and another Greek faction - maybe Aetolian League, Rhodos or even the Kingdom of Bosporos.

Just a thought. :2thumbsup:

H.

[abou]

Hunh, I didn't know people payed enough attention to me to warrant someone making a fake account.

[Hax]

And the 2008 award for "Worst Impersonation" goes to...

[Tellos Athenaios]

jolt, great picks. i'm pushing hard for massilia and meroe myself, and I can guarantee that *Random German Tribe,* aka the "Rigotes" is already in.

No, that's not fair. Everyone knows you are an ardent supporter of the 'Roman Rebels'. :yes:

[Ibrahim]

No, that's not fair. Everyone knows you are an ardent supporter of the 'Roman Rebels'. :yes:

you lie!!:drama2:
just kidding.
anyways, I think a second arabian faction is nice-Saba is kinda boring at the begining really(only eleutheroi). and it isn't right that they always end up with the peninsula in their hands
I doubt its coming, but I just figured...

[Abou!]

who already suggest Mauretania or middle Europe celt?[Alpine right]

[Jolt]

10. Kingdom of Sparta; The existing "Koinon Hellenion" faction needs to be dismantled; the poleis of Sparta and Athens were allies in 272 BC, but this was not typical. Instead, have a seperate Kingdom of Sparta and another Greek faction - maybe Aetolian League, Rhodos or even the Kingdom of Bosporos.

The reason why Koinon Hellenon unfortunately exists is because of the limit of Faction Slots. The only way I'd still Koinon Hellenon broken up and split into numerous factions would be when they faction slots exceeded somewhere around this number (https://youtube.com/watch?v=17zNW-wz35E).

[Tellos Athenaios]

I am sorry, but in truth; for the Spartans to become a faction the faction limit would have to be roughly equal to aleph-nought; and the province limit needs to be about c.

[Subotan]

Personally? Oh goody, someone cares about my opinion! ^^
Goidils/Caledryns
Celtiberians
Bosporan Kingdom
Something around Pannonia, it's a bit empty
Some other German tribe
Numidians
Nubians
Pergamon
Some Cisalpine Gauls



Well in theory M2TW game engine allows 52 factions, but only 26 can be playable.If you go with only 31 faction than all are playable.

Oooh! Extra factions! If I was to include some others, kinda of half rebels/half real factions that couldn't be played, but were significant enough to trade/ally with I'd include
Syracuse
Aitolia
Some Indian city states. Maybe. (Please don't shout! I don't know anything about Early Indian History!)
Skythia
Massalia
Bithinya
Qataban
An emergent Yuezhi faction (Depending on circumstancecs)
An emergent Han Chinese faction (Again, depending on circumstances)
Galatians
Maccabeans
(These last two could emerge as rebel factions, like the Ostrogoths)

[Aodhan]

I believe that another German Tribe would be great, I mean watching them waste each other with fire hardened wooden sticks at the beginning of the game is just hilarious, but I'm not sure where to put them, I mean its just so cramped in Germany. But I suppose you could put a Belagic faction in the game, that would stop the German blitz west, but I am afraid that that could cause an overcrowding issue in west Germany/ North East Gaul. However the Arevaci could be useful to threaten the Lusotannan movement east, and the Arevaci could follow the time honored Celtic tradition, of mettling in other Celt's affairs, or in this case Gaul’s' affairs.

[Jolt]

Probably, non-playable factions might be evolution of playable AI factions (The turning from Bactria/Greco-Bactria Kingdom into the Indo-Greek kingdom, as someone already said it would be on) Another example would be the turning of Parthia/Pontus/Armenia into the Persian faction, the replacement of AI nomad factions if they conquered sedentary territories and turned sedentary themselves. Well, now that I think of it, it would be a hell good way of taking playable Casse away from the British Isles and instead of turning Britain into Eleutheroi Mountain Island, it could fill it with some non-playable factions. Another good way to implement Non-playable factions would be to make them available if they rebelled in territories which are originally under Faction control in the beginning of the game (For example, Babylonia). Those would be nice of taking advantage of Non-playable factions, though I don't know what's the hard-coded limit for implementing those factions in several different ways.

EDIT: Yet another way would be to create Factions for the migrating peoples into the EB map (Such as the Yue Zhi)

[Aodhan]

Probably, non-playable factions might be evolution of playable AI factions (The turning from Bactria/Greco-Bactria Kingdom into the Indo-Greek kingdom, as someone already said it would be on) Another example would be the turning of Parthia/Pontus/Armenia into the Persian faction, the replacement of AI nomad factions if they conquered sedentary territories and turned sedentary themselves. Well, now that I think of it, it would be a hell good way of taking playable Casse away from the British Isles and instead of turning Britain into Eleutheroi Mountain Island, it could fill it with some non-playable factions. Another good way to implement Non-playable factions would be to make them available if they rebelled in territories which are originally under Faction control in the beginning of the game (For example, Babylonia). Those would be nice of taking advantage of Non-playable factions, though I don't know what's the hard-coded limit for implementing those factions in several different ways.

EDIT: Yet another way would be to create Factions for the migrating peoples into the EB map (Such as the Yue Zhi)

Your idea is interesting but, this mod is about realism so if you were to combine factions like Parthia, Pontus, Armenia into a Persian Empire, you would sacrifice realism, However another way you could fix these issues like the Casse, would be to provide the AI with massive amounts of early game financial aid and make their AI more aggressive, and expand into available space sooner. Another issue that I can see is that if you added non-playable, non-rebel factions to Britain or other places, you could potentially create a situation in which the AI players in Britain could reach an unbreakable stalemate, and the human player would simply come and use a simple divide and conquer strategy. Now your idea of non-playable AIs would work if the Total War AI was twice as intelligent.

[The General]

Your idea is interesting but, this mod is about realism so if you were to combine factions like Parthia, Pontus, Armenia into a Persian Empire, you would sacrifice realism

I don't think he meant that Pahlava, Pontos and Hayasdan should be merged into a 'Persian Empire'.

Or, at least, I hope he didn't.

[Aodhan]

I think you're right "The General," Jolt may not have meant turning the Pahlava, Pontos and Hayasdan into a Persian Empire. I guess moving your family 600 miles away and trying to carefully manage fiscal matters is a real stressor. Thank you for pointing that out.

[Jolt]

I think you're right "The General," Jolt may not have meant turning the Pahlava, Pontos and Hayasdan into a Persian Empire. I guess moving your family 600 miles away and trying to carefully manage fiscal matters is a real stressor. Thank you for pointing that out.

Right. I meant that if the AI controlled Parthia/Armenia/Pontus, got to conquer most of the Persian Empire, some kind of reform would pop up where the said faction who conquered most of the Persian Territory disapeared, and was replaced with the "Persia" Faction, with new units, buildings, etc. Like the Parthian reforms we have around EB 1.

In Brittain, as far as my knowledge about the Total War games goes, I never saw a stalemate happening. Normally one faction conquers the other, or several factions gang up on a single one and eventually destroy it.

[Foot]

As one of the main objectives of EB is to educate the populace, there will be no unplayable factions. Ever.

Foot

[Aodhan]

Right. I meant that if the AI controlled Parthia/Armenia/Pontus, got to conquer most of the Persian Empire, some kind of reform would pop up where the said faction who conquered most of the Persian Territory disapeared, and was replaced with the "Persia" Faction, with new units, buildings, etc. Like the Parthian reforms we have around EB 1.

In Brittain, as far as my knowledge about the Total War games goes, I never saw a stalemate happening. Normally one faction conquers the other, or several factions gang up on a single one and eventually destroy it.

I understood what you were saying about the Pahlava, Pontos and Hayasdan the second time I read it, I get that. But I have seen stalemates though, the Averni and Aeudi never seem to conquer each other, so I fear that multiple factions in Britain could cause a situation similar to the one in Gaul, except worse because there are no external factions around in the early game to draw their attention away from each other, so they would constantly hammer away at each other until they ran out of people to put in the units. Although historically tribal warfare was in a way never ending tribes usually did not aim for battles of total annihilation, and in the Total War system there is no other kind of battle.

[The General]

As one of the main objectives of EB is to educate the populace, there will be no unplayable factions. Ever.

Foot

Understandable, yet also, 'tis a shame.

It would've been awfully neat to represent factions too insignificant to allow Player control the known universe with it, but still significant enough to have deserved a state of minifactionhood (raping the English language, yes, I know...) to represent that they were organized or dangerous enough in their time to cause trouble for the larger factions. I mean, they could've done with only a handful units (perhaps only those locally available), so thorough research would'ven't been necessary.

That said, as I said, it's still perfectly understandable why they won't be included. (Although, I must say, not being able to play a faction wouldn't prevent me from wanting to read more about them - rather, not being able to play them would mean reading about them would be the only means of gaining more knowledge about them.)

Oh well.

[Cartaphilus]

I agree with that. I'll have no problem at all if there are some unplayable factions that add more accuracy and give more balance to the game.

[Foot]

Alright, so where the hell does this information come from


Well in theory M2TW game engine allows 52 factions, but only 26 can be playable.If you go with only 31 faction than all are playable.

I cannot find any reference to it anywhere other than the post above. Anyone know?

Foot

[Jolt]

Alright, so where the hell does this information come from


I cannot find any reference to it anywhere other than the post above. Anyone know?

Foot

Nope. But that'd be awesome, for the reasons I've said.

[Foot]

Nope. But that'd be awesome, for the reasons I've said.

Yes, well as far as I can tell its complete bull.

Foot

[chairman]

Foot, I've heard that info in at least 3 other places on these fora. Don't remember who said it or when or where, but at least one of the people was to be trusted (EB member or CA rep or Forum smart guy or something). Hope that helps (probably won't). It could be bull, but I know I've heard other people say the same thing, so sucks for them if it is.

Chairman

[SFS2006]

52 factions are possible. 26 are playable and the rest are minifactions. One mod tried to use this idea, MTR.
Look at the faction list of MTR: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=93379

In post 62 of the faction list discussion someone explains how this is possible
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=92340&page=4

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

Nah...

52 factions sure sound tempting, but they will just be annoying if you can't play them.
And also, there can only be so many units. It's better to have 30 really detailed and playable factions, than 50 uninspired ones controlled by the AI.
(Not that the EB team would ever do anything uninspired :beam:)

[Teleklos Archelaou]

You could only have 52 factions *one at a time*. That means 26 factions, but really kill one of them so you have 25, *then* depending upon what faction you play as, one additional nonplayable faction is created to fill that 26th spot. That means in any given game there can still be only 26 factions, but a lot of other work would have to be done just so that in one game you get one new faction. If there were really 52 factions on the board at all times, I have a feeling we would definitely be filling them in with real groups, even if some are very sketchy. But as for the "anti-faction" method, well, we won't be doing that.

[AlexanderSextus]

greek colonies (syracuse, massalia, emporion, arse)

[Strategos Alexandros]

AFAIK Emporion and Arse would be part of a Massalian faction if there was one so I suppose it could be a contender.

[russia almighty]

The 52 factions thing can be done in BI.


RTR is doing it.


Before you call the lynch squad, isn't the base for M2TW RTW-BI?

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

The key to the whole thing is that you cannot have 52 factions at the same time.

[Krusader]

AFAIK Emporion and Arse would be part of a Massalian faction if there was one so I suppose it could be a contender.

Nope

[Strategos Alexandros]

I thought they were its' colonies?

[Ludens]

The 52 factions thing can be done in BI.

RTR is doing it.

Before you call the lynch squad, isn't the base for M2TW RTW-BI?
Nope, they've got 20 factions. It's just that one of these factions differs depending on what faction the player chooses to play with. It adds up to 36 potential factions, IIRC.

The M2:TW engine is indeed based on a modified version of the R:TW engine.


I thought they were its' colonies?

As I recall it, Emporion was indeed a colony of Massalia, but this does not imply that they formed a single entity. IIRC when Massalia went to war with Carthage, Emporion remained neutral. This does not suggest a strong bond.

[Krusader]

I thought they were its' colonies?

Was in a hurry, but then forgot to go back and change.

Yes, Arse & Emporion were colonies of Massilia, but in a similar way as Taras was a Spartan colony and Syracuse a Corinthian. There were ties between them, but from what Sarcasm found out, that when Carthage & the Etruscans allied to expel the Greeks from Alalia in Corsica (which they did) Arse & Emporion sent no ships to aid Massilia.
So this shows they were most likely independent from Massilia.

[Aodhan]

Krusader just said essentially what I was going to say about Massalia but he beat me to it.

[Jolt]

Was in a hurry, but then forgot to go back and change.

Yes, Arse & Emporion were colonies of Massilia, but in a similar way as Taras was a Spartan colony and Syracuse a Corinthian. There were ties between them, but from what Sarcasm found out, that when Carthage & the Etruscans allied to expel the Greeks from Alalia in Corsica (which they did) Arse & Emporion sent no ships to aid Massilia.
So this shows they were most likely independent from Massilia.

I wonder how did Sarcasm came to get that information? As far as I'm aware documents about that war are very sketchy.

[Sarcasm]

Magic. Or reading the classics. One or the other.

[Aodhan]

I have been thinking about the Koinon Hellenon argument – league or balkanization. While I recognize representing them, as a unified league isn’t wholly accurate it is still quite possibly the best way to represent them in light of the limitations imposed by the Total War system. If Koinon Hellenon is broken into it’s constituent city states it would end up as several independent and static states which would essentially be little more than minor speed bumps (with the exception of Rhodes which would be a slightly larger speed bump) for human players. Since the Total War system does not permit creation of a loose confederation with shifting alliances, agreements and conflicts such as Hellas was at the time. If divided into so many independent states Hellas would not produce its historical center of political and economic gravity and seriously impact play balance. In short an over-centralized Koinon Hellenon is better for game play than a bunch of speed bumps.

[Jolt]

Magic. Or reading the classics. One or the other.

It'd be more useful if one would actually post the name of the classic work which has that information.

For all I know, you could have seen it in a universitary thesis.

I'm not so sure magic did it though.

[Sarcasm]

Oh, I remember you now. You're the guy who added me on MSN badgering me with questions for sources without actually doing any research for yourself, expecting me to have everything in hand.

Hmmm, yeah. Do an effort &#187; Herodotus, Garc&#237;a y Bellido, Dixon and Casson at the very least.

[Jolt]

Oh, I remember you now. You're the guy who added me on MSN badgering me with questions for sources without actually doing any research for yourself, expecting me to have everything in hand.

Hmmm, yeah. Do an effort &#187; Herodotus, Garc&#237;a y Bellido, Dixon and Casson at the very least.

Yeah, I'd be the guy who added you in the MSN, but that's as far as it goes. I did no such thing as badgering questions for sources, nor do I even recall having a discussion on sources of any kind really. What I remember was a supposedly friendly talking about the implementation of the frequent ambushes the Iberians did, as well as something about the forging of weapons. Now implying I didn't do research for myself? What for? To talk to you about this game? Eh? Nor do I really expect you to give me everything in hand. As far as I'm aware this game thrives for historical accuracy, and historical accuracy doesn't come over the top of ones head. As was said around this forum, the team was going to make an effort to explicit the bibliographies or sort from where they got information on various aspects for EB II. So paleeze.

[Kataki]

So, EB2 will have 26 factions?

Also this team says they have 31 factions that are playable, including playable minifactions..I'm not sure i even understand what mini-factions are, but having 5 more factions to conquer is always a plus :P

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?p=3258432#post3258432

[Foot]

No, EBII will have 31 factions. Please don't consider the uninformed opinions of fans to be kosher information of the direction of EBII. Besides we've mentioned often enough that there will be 10 new factions for EBII, which makes 30 playable factions and 1 slave faction.

Foot

[Sarcasm]

Yeah, I'd be the guy who added you in the MSN, but that's as far as it goes. I did no such thing as badgering questions for sources, nor do I even recall having a discussion on sources of any kind really. What I remember was a supposedly friendly talking about the implementation of the frequent ambushes the Iberians did, as well as something about the forging of weapons. Now implying I didn't do research for myself? What for?

We seem to have a different recollection (or is it perspective?) about those conversations. You implied several times that Iberians and specifically Lusitanians were incapable of fighting in a battle-line. Whenever I mentioned an instance of when something like that occurred, you immediately asked for sources, as if I should have them ready right there, just like you did here...and yet, you have no intention of researching anything for yourself. Should I be more fore coming, and waste my limited and precious time in providing you the sources in this situation?

I think not.

[Jolt]

We seem to have a different recollection (or is it perspective?) about those conversations. You implied several times that Iberians and specifically Lusitanians were incapable of fighting in a battle-line. Whenever I mentioned an instance of when something like that occurred, you immediately asked for sources, as if I should have them ready right there, just like you did here...and yet, you have no intention of researching anything for yourself. Should I be more fore coming, and waste my limited and precious time in providing you the sources in this situation?

I think not.

Wrong. As you very well stated by the words "implied" simply mean that I said something that it was not exactly that. What I did mean in that they would rarely fight in a battle line under native leadership in the way I saw it, and with the frequency in RTW. (If you also recall correctly, this was even way before EB Open Beta was released), you brought up some examples (The only one I remember you saying was Púnico), and that's as far as you are correct. I didn't demand or ask for any sources, as I said in my previous post. And how is it so that you know of my intentions to researching the said subjects or not? Seeing how you jump to conclusions, I'm beginning to believe there's more magic and less classics in the answer... Even so, you have proven your point, even if there wasn't one to begin with. Just a one time chat some years ago, which is now being used to demean myself. Oh well, tough luck.

[Foot]

Take it to the PMs people.

Foot

[Jolt]

Take it to the PMs people.

Foot

Right. I apologize. This conversation is over, anyhow.

[Kataki]

No, EBII will have 31 factions. Please don't consider the uninformed opinions of fans to be kosher information of the direction of EBII. Besides we've mentioned often enough that there will be 10 new factions for EBII, which makes 30 playable factions and 1 slave faction.

Foot

Oh 31 is plenty enough for me ;). I was just pointing out what another mod said M2TW was supposedly capable of to see how true it was.

[Strategos Alexandros]

Was in a hurry, but then forgot to go back and change.

Yes, Arse & Emporion were colonies of Massilia, but in a similar way as Taras was a Spartan colony and Syracuse a Corinthian. There were ties between them, but from what Sarcasm found out, that when Carthage & the Etruscans allied to expel the Greeks from Alalia in Corsica (which they did) Arse & Emporion sent no ships to aid Massilia.
So this shows they were most likely independent from Massilia.


Bit late, but you learn something new every day.

[HamilcarBarca]

Yes, Arse & Emporion were colonies of Massilia, but in a similar way as Taras was a Spartan colony and Syracuse a Corinthian. There were ties between them, but from what Sarcasm found out, that when Carthage & the Etruscans allied to expel the Greeks from Alalia in Corsica (which they did) Arse & Emporion sent no ships to aid Massilia.

While Massalia and Emporion were both colonies of the Phocaean Greeks, the city of Arse(ken)-Saguntum was actually an indigenous Iberian settlement - NOT a Greek settlement.

H.

[Hax]

Perhaps the Phocaeans subjugated the city and took it over?

[General Appo]

I have understood it as such that Arsé itself was a a Iberian city, it´s major port, Saguntum, was a greek one. It could have been the other way around with. I think I read it in a thread I myself started. I shall search for it.

Edit: Yep, here´s the thread: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=100444&highlight=Emporions+Colony

And here´s the post of interest:


Arsé was NOT a greek city, it is was an Edetani oppida. However, the port town that served it (much like Portus and Ostia for Rome, or Piraeus and Phaleron for Athens) was essentially populated by Greek and Hellenised traders, and was probably their main source of revenue. These guys probably had enough political influence to convince the oppida's leadership to act much like Emporion and other Greek colonists elsewhere, and side with Rome against Carthaginian hegemony.

The fact that it was a major fortification controlling the main coastal road, that would conceivably side with the enemy once hostilities commenced, meant the city would inevitably be subjected to an 8-month siege. There's actually still enough evidence on the extensive punic circumvalation works and even Hannibal's main camp that allows us to reconstruct them with some degree of certainty.

When Hannibal finally destroys the fortified city in 219, killing, enslaving or dispersing its population, the port takes it's place as the major settlement in the area. It's only quite a bit after the Romans take over that the name Saguntum comes into play.

BTW, other Greek settlements include Portus Menusios, Portus Menesthei, Mainake, Heraklia, Alonis, Akra Leuke, Artemision, Hemeroskopeion and Rhode, just north of Emporion.

[Cartaphilus]

In Emporion the greeks and the iberian people (indiketes) lived more or less "together" (as in Arsé) under greek and iberian laws, as it is told by Strabo (Geography III, 4, 8).


One suggestion more: as I told in other thread, the starting situation of Balearic Island could be more adjusted to the reality if you use Type III or IV gov. building instead of Type I - but I don't know if you will change the whole thing of gov. buildings.

[dominique]

Since it's Europa Barbarorum, I would like to see more Barbarian factions... :laugh4:

On the top of my head;

-The Thracians, who could play a beautiful game between the Getai, the Epirotes and the Macedonians. It could be the Celto-thracian kingdom of Tylis, or not.

-The Boii, who had a very interesting story and are a gameplay factor to control the Sweboz AND Rome and Epire.

-The Illyrians. There must be a reason why the Romans and the Greeks weren't able to subjugate the region until Augustus. Also, Dalminion and Segesta must be arder to grab.

-The Salyans: A Celto-Ligurian tribe. A lot of evidence was found in Entremont recently, evidence that points that this people has reach the organization of a Polis. It took a consular army to take it and raze it.

-The Arivacians: The tribe that fought Rome for a hundred years until the bloody siege of Numantia where Gaius Marius learned his trade.

-Numidia: Massinissa, Jugurtha. 'Nuff said. :laugh4:

-Axum and Meroe: They build Obelisks!!! Pyramids!!!!! :egypt:

-Laginians: In 270 Ireland was just conquered by the laginians, according to O'Rahilly. However, since before Niall of the Nine Hostages in 378 AD there is scant evidence of an organized polis in Ireland...

-Insubres: Come on, they were no Aedui in Mediolanum, they were Insubres! Keep the Aedui's dirty paws out of Gallia Cisalpina! Of, by the way, they also are the guys who brought the gaesatae in history, at Telamon.

And some greek thingies, if you like it. Of course. Pergamon's been already announced. So, you could add Syracuse and Massilia (if you don't put the Salyans), Cyrene.

Of course, the problem with these possible greek factions is the lack of room for expansion, so, their job is to eventually die. Unless you are a die hard maniac who find that playing hayasdan is a piece of cake.

=============
And the advantage is that all these factions requires no new unit.

[General Appo]

*ahem* Read the thread (or just any random page of it really) and you´ll see why most of those factions won´t be included. I´m afraid I don´t have the time to give any detailed answers though. Just´d like to add though, that the Getai are Thracians, and that the Thracians as a whole certainly weren´t unified at this time to represent a faction.

[russia almighty]

I could have sworn the Getai are the Dacians.


Or at least the powerful main tribe of that group.

[General Appo]

Yeah, but the Dacians are Thracian...

[captainmarcus]

just throwin this one out there how about the nubians in meroe just south of Egypt they would be intense

[Hax]

No.

Look at the first page.

[AlexanderSextus]

Numidia almost seems as if it is BADLY needed. There has to be someone to keep the Qarthadastim from eatng up N. Africa. They do it in almost every campaign.

[General Appo]

Indeed, I´d say the Numidians is the one faction which is mostly direly needed for EB2. Though of course, two numidian factions wouldn´t hurt either...

[Che Roriniho]

This gives me an idea!

I have a suggestion as to how to get 52 playable factions. Why not have two campaigns which are identical, except with Campaign A only the first 26 factions are playable, and with Campaign B the last 26 are playable. Sort of like what RTR 7.0 wants to do, except with two campaigns instead of 20.

With Kingdoms promising multiple campaigns, you could just have:


EB Main Campaign (A to L)
EB Main Campaign (M to Z)

in your main menu and, hey presto, 52 playable factions.

The only thing is, I'm not sure you'd be able to squeeze in a realistic amount of units for 52 factions with the same space you had for 21 or whatever factions, but anyway, here's my suggestion if you need it.

That's is actually a bloody good idea. I'd PM this to someone. (haven't read past this, so don't know if it has been dismissed further down the page)

Hopefully it's possible. should be.

[Ludens]

That's is actually a bloody good idea. I'd PM this to someone. (haven't read past this, so don't know if it has been dismissed further down the page)

It's not going to happen, I am afraid. It's too much work to get all 52 factions up to EB-quality, and the EB team wants all factions to be playable at the same time.

[ibleedgrenchese]

1. Numbia (A must and possible reforms with Carthage)
2. Pergamon (Pretty much already annouced)
3. Another Iberian Faction (Would be a good mix to the map)
4. Another brit island faction (Suggestion: Caledonion or Goidilic)
5. illyria
6. Scythia/Alans (rival to Sauromatae)
7. Indian faction (lengthen the map a bit)
8. Celtiberians
9. Bosphoran Kingdom (Interesting position and pretty wealthy)
10. Chatii (Madmen tribe be fun to be but very challenging)

or rid of the Konion Legion and divide it into Sparta and Athens the rest become under them or there own rebel cities

Honoruable Mention = Georgian faction, Ethiopia, and Meroe

Plus i believe famous generals should be scripted in like ceaser and Hannibal

[General Appo]

Pergamon (Pretty much already annouced)

Pretty much? How pretty much can it get?

And the scripted generals stuff has already been gone over many times, EB is about simulating alterante history, not just recreating it. If you want that you can watch a documentary.

[dominique]

*ahem* Read the thread (or just any random page of it really) and you´ll see why most of those factions won´t be included. I´m afraid I don´t have the time to give any detailed answers though. Just´d like to add though, that the Getai are Thracians, and that the Thracians as a whole certainly weren´t unified at this time to represent a faction.

Well well well. Ain't that funny?

I guess, writing a suggestion post in a suggestion thread is not what I should have done... I don't get it though. I've read most of the 24 pages of the thread... And I've seen a lot of suggestions. There was some debate to their legitimacy but, still...

I think it's not relevant, since they are suggestions!!!


I´m afraid I don´t have the time to give any detailed answers though.

Fine by me. Since your answer on the Thracians was a little bit thin, I just wonder what other great arguments you could have written to smite down my suggestions?


Just´d like to add though, that the Getai are Thracians, and that the Thracians as a whole certainly weren´t unified at this time to represent a faction.

Now. I'll show you how this is thin.

Yes the Getai/Dacian/Agrianian/Odrysai are all Thracian "tribes". It's true. They weren't unified. It's true.

AS were the KH, the Saba, the Aedui, the Arverni, the Sarmatians, the Sweboz...

The reason under my suggestion was that there has been a political entity in Thracia in all the period covered by EB. Either it's the Odrysian kingdom, the Tylis kingdom, the Sapaiean kingdom, the kingdom of Thracia... It was finally annexed by the Romans in 46, well into Claudius reign. And culturally and politically it was very different in Thrace than in Dacia. No Zalmoxis, to keep it simple.

There is a lot of new faction slots opened by MTW2. It would be a shame if all these slots are taken by hellenic/hellenistic factions. There are already too many, almost half of the factions available. The game is called Europa Barbarorum by Jove!

Most of them would be "kill me please" factions anyway. Ah humbug.:inquisitive:

[Ludens]

I guess, writing a suggestion post in a suggestion thread is not what I should have done... I don't get it though. I've read most of the 24 pages of the thread... And I've seen a lot of suggestions. There was some debate to their legitimacy but, still...

You'll understand that after 24 pages we are a bit tired of answering the same suggestions over and over again, though? I had kind of given up posting in these kind of threads since no matter how thorough my explanation was of why, say, the Caledonians wouldn't be included, someone would suggest them again two or three pages further. Especially Meroe, which has been discussed to death.

That said, Tylis is a good suggestion, which I haven't heard before. Not sure how important they were, though. I am not an expert, but did they, or any Thracian kingdom, accomplish much in between the death of Lysimachos and the rise of the Geto-Dacian kingdom?


Yes the Getai/Dacian/Agrianian/Odrysai are all Thracian "tribes". It's true. They weren't unified. It's true.

AS were the KH, the Saba, the Aedui, the Arverni, the Sarmatians, the Sweboz...

Nonsense. The Suebi, Aedui and Averni are historical confederacies. The KH is based on the Cremonidean alliance. The Saba are a single city!

[General Appo]

Ludens pretty much said it all, but I´d just like to add that you said:
"-The Thracians, who could play a beautiful game between the Getai, the Epirotes and the Macedonians. It could be the Celto-thracian kingdom of Tylis, or not."

To me, that sounded like you thought that the Getai weren´t Thracians, a common misbelief, and so I simply said that the Getai were Thracians and that the Thracians at a whole weren´t unified enough to represent a faction. I never said anything about Tylis.

Also, I can not believe that you have read most of the pages of this thread and still suggest Meroe, ´cause I must have seen dozens of explanations by EB team members and other why Meroe will not be in the game.

[Xtiaan72]

I"m really hoping for some city states especially Syracusai. I hope some of the factions are small because they are so much fun for experienced players and would be a blast to role-play/AAR.

But I know the EB team will make excellent choices in all their infinite wisdom!:balloon2:

[Atraphoenix]

thracians were also a good addition, berbers and numidia of course also... more germenic tribes , illirians....

[Connacht]

The factions I thought that would be nice to add in a new version of EB, the first times I was playing it, were/are:

1 - Pergamon (announced for EB2, yeah)
2 - Galatians (more people down there in Asia Minor could level the area, although the faction risks to be destroyed soon since it's surrounded everywhere)
3 - an Illyrian confederation or similar if possible (pillow between Romani, Getai and Epeiros, particularly those green guys that always conquer the whole Balcans)
4 - Numidia (I would have mantained them instead of adding Sabaeans... however, they're a must, and they could also form a pillow in North Africa since the Carthaginians expand too much and too soon in the region)
5 - Belgae (pillow between the two Gaul factions and the Sweboz)
6 - Celtiberians (pillow between Lusotannan and the two Gaul factions, maybe also Carthage and Rome if they try to expand in Spain)
7 - Boii (pillow between Sweboz, Getai, Epeiros/Illyrians, Romans and the rest of Central-Eastern Europe)
8 - another Britannic faction, maybe a Goidlic one if Caledonians can't form a faction (so that Casse won't more feel lonely in Britannia)
9 - Reign of Syracuse (it would probably be crushed by Carthaginians and Romans, if not even Epeirotes, but this is historical; then you may say that we shouldn't use a slot for a faction that would be historically destroyed by the end of the 3rd century BC, but as a human faction Syracuse probably will be one of the hardest and most fun factions of all)
10 - dunno, maybe another German faction in the East for balancing the area if possible, or a Thracian settlement that can expand in the rest of Thracia (not a whole united federation) and form a pillow between Epeiros/Makedonia and Anatolia, or somebody in Africa like Nubians or Ethiopians or whichever else you want
11 - Alien emerging faction that lands somewhere in the map with laser troopers, plasma tanks, photon torpodoes launchers and headhurling giant flaming pig riders with lorica segmentata.

[Che Roriniho]

The problem with Meroe is that their unit selection would be very poor, and they would be quickly dominated by the Ptolemies. Not a very good choice for game balance.

DAMN! I've just spent the past hour looking for info so I can do a nice Drawing to give Foot and his teams some Idea's. Damn. If they were to be included, it would be similar to the 'Ancient' Egyptians, ie, blue and gold head-dresses for the Generals, that sort of thing.

Foot, or whoever, if you want me to do one, just PM me.

[Tellos Athenaios]

11 - Alien emerging faction that lands somewhere in the map with laser troopers, plasma tanks, photon torpodoes launchers and headhurling giant flaming pig riders with lorica segmentata.

Huh? "Give me a typical fan-made Bartix", you say? :inquisitive: You forgot: the Squirrels!

[Connacht]

Huh? "Give me a typical fan-made Bartix", you say? :inquisitive: You forgot: the Squirrels!

Oh my rotfl, I don't know what you are talking about, so I've just searched infos about this "Bartix" and what I found is this (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=47080) amazing topic...

[General Appo]

DAMN! I've just spent the past hour looking for info so I can do a nice Drawing to give Foot and his teams some Idea's. Damn. If they were to be included, it would be similar to the 'Ancient' Egyptians, ie, blue and gold head-dresses for the Generals, that sort of thing.

Foot, or whoever, if you want me to do one, just PM me.


Seeing as Foot has said maybe 49 times that Meroe won´t be in the game no matter freaking what (well, unless CA releases an engine patch that increases the number of culture slots to 40 and the faction ones to 278) I´d say that it would be kinda pointless.

[Xtiaan72]

The factions I thought that would be nice to add in a new version of EB, the first times I was playing it, were/are:

1 - Pergamon (announced for EB2, yeah)
2 - Galatians (more people down there in Asia Minor could level the area, although the faction risks to be destroyed soon since it's surrounded everywhere)
3 - an Illyrian confederation or similar if possible (pillow between Romani, Getai and Epeiros, particularly those green guys that always conquer the whole Balcans)
4 - Numidia (I would have mantained them instead of adding Sabaeans... however, they're a must, and they could also form a pillow in North Africa since the Carthaginians expand too much and too soon in the region)
5 - Belgae (pillow between the two Gaul factions and the Sweboz)
6 - Celtiberians (pillow between Lusotannan and the two Gaul factions, maybe also Carthage and Rome if they try to expand in Spain)
7 - Boii (pillow between Sweboz, Getai, Epeiros/Illyrians, Romans and the rest of Central-Eastern Europe)
8 - another Britannic faction, maybe a Goidlic one if Caledonians can't form a faction (so that Casse won't more feel lonely in Britannia)
9 - Reign of Syracuse (it would probably be crushed by Carthaginians and Romans, if not even Epeirotes, but this is historical; then you may say that we shouldn't use a slot for a faction that would be historically destroyed by the end of the 3rd century BC, but as a human faction Syracuse probably will be one of the hardest and most fun factions of all)
10 - dunno, maybe another German faction in the East for balancing the area if possible, or a Thracian settlement that can expand in the rest of Thracia (not a whole united federation) and form a pillow between Epeiros/Makedonia and Anatolia, or somebody in Africa like Nubians or Ethiopians or whichever else you want
11 - Alien emerging faction that lands somewhere in the map with laser troopers, plasma tanks, photon torpodoes launchers and headhurling giant flaming pig riders with lorica segmentata.

Totally agree with you about Syracuse... It would be my first choice to play if it's in the new version....I love that story about Archemedes and "The Claw"... They inspire the imagination... The defense of Syracuse was like " The Alamo" of the ancient world. Plus a lot more is known about them than some of these other factions...

But the sad truth is that they are already in or they aren't in at all!

[General Appo]

I believe it has been said that Syrakousai will no be a stand-alone faction. Sorry guys.

[Hax]

It's a shame indeed. However, the might of Syrakuse was a former shadow of itself, especially after the death of Agathokles.

[Xtiaan72]

I believe it has been said that Syrakousai will no be a stand-alone faction. Sorry guys.

that is indeed a shame....But perhaps a mimi-mod can be worked out to swap Syracuse for another faction if a player likes...For players that are into the Punic Wars and like playing on that part of the map ( central med, Greece)

When you say "stand alone" does that mean that it may be included as non-playable faction?

[Hax]

All factions will be playable, I believe they have stated that. I could be unsure, but I believe that MAA has also said one slot might be reserved for a scripting faction -shrug-.

[Ludens]

All factions will be playable, I believe they have stated that. I could be unsure, but I believe that MAA has also said one slot might be reserved for a scripting faction -shrug-.

Correct on both counts.

[Xtiaan72]

Noobie question but what does scripting faction mean?

[General Appo]

I don´t know the details but in EB1 after the inclusion of the Saba whom occupied the Roman Senate´s faction slot, certain scrips from some reason just didn´t work anymore, such as the one about Alexander´s Tomb, Baktria breaking away and I believe the Anabasis.

[Xtiaan72]

Ahhh. So the equivalent in MW2 would be using the papal faction as the "scripting faction" no doubt?

[Ricardo the Patriot]

My top hope is for a Bosporan faction, because of the interesting position and mix of Hellenic and Steppe culture.

One of those Greek cities in Iberia might be interesting too.

[Captain Trek]

One of those Greek cities in Iberia might be interesting too.

Huh? :inquisitive:

[Ludens]

Huh? :inquisitive:

Emporion and Saguntum (the port of Arsé) where Greek colonies founded by Massalia. It has been suggested they could be turned into one faction, a la the Koinon Hellenon. However, an EB member stated in this very thread that they weren't very close. When Massalia declared war on Carthage, its colonies didn't bother to send aid. In addition, these communities were rather dependent on their Iberian/Gallic neighbours, and were more traders than world conquerors.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

thats true.

If an Iberian (Iberian peninsula, that is, not caucasian Iberia:beam:) faction is indeed to be added, I think some Celtiberian tribe, for instance the Arevaci, would make more sense. Especially considering the problems they caused for the romans during their campains in Iberia. The iberian peninsula was full of warlike native tribes, but the greek influence was primarily ristricted to the costal areas.

[Majd il-Romani]

I personally want to see:

the scythians to counter the Sarmatians
bastarnae if possible, popluate the NE map a bit more
a Germanic tribe to rival Sweboz, possiby Teutons
a british tribe to counter casse
an Irish tribe (or maybe even 2!) to fight over Hibernia
Another Arbian tribe to rival the Sabeans OR the Nabataean kingdom
The Mauryan Indian Empire. kinda like Parthia in vanila Rome, way at the edge of the map
an celt-Iberian faction to rival Lusitanians
an Ilyrian Faction OR maybe Pergamon
the 2 Numidian Kingdoms
the Belgae

allof these factions would definatley balance out various regions and make EB another 100x more addicting than it already is

[Meroveous]

Which new factions would you like to see in E.B?

I would really like to see the Yuezhi/Wusun as a faction. The idea of Steppe nomads with a culture that is closely related in language and dress to the ancient Celts and ancient Greeks would be an interesting addition.

[Ludens]

I would really like to see the Yuezhi/Wusun as a faction. The idea of Steppe nomads with a culture that is closely related in language and dress to the ancient Celts and ancient Greeks would be an interesting addition.

The Yuezhi were one of the original factions in EB1 open beta, but where quickly replaced by the Saka. The problem was that they possibly weren't on EB's map at the starting date (although this is debatable) and in any case only became interested in the EB area a century or so later. The EB team has stated repeatedly that there will be no emerging factions, so they most likely won't be in EB2.

It's a pity, because I think they would have made a nice addition, but I can see where they are coming from. As for their relations to the Celts, I don't think I am qualified to comment.

[Ibrahim]

I personally want to see:

the scythians to counter the Sarmatians
bastarnae if possible, popluate the NE map a bit more
a Germanic tribe to rival Sweboz, possiby Teutons
a british tribe to counter casse
an Irish tribe (or maybe even 2!) to fight over Hibernia
Another Arbian tribe to rival the Sabeans OR the Nabataean kingdom
The Mauryan Indian Empire. kinda like Parthia in vanila Rome, way at the edge of the map
an celt-Iberian faction to rival Lusitanians
an Ilyrian Faction OR maybe Pergamon
the 2 Numidian Kingdoms
the Belgae

allof these factions would definatley balance out various regions and make EB another 100x more addicting than it already is


1-they are using the same provinces (almost), as in EB1-so the irish factions aren't a particularily good idea.
2-and Maurya would hardly show in EB2-you would have to extend the map east 9the EB team was very explicit IIRC; same map, bigger scale)
3-pergamon is already in, so no need for the maybe...
4-To my knowlege, the Cimbri & teutones were apparently celtic(which is strange, but not entirely impossible)

:

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

Hmmm...

Then what about Cappadocia?
If I'm not mistaken, Ariarathes made Cappadocia an autonomous state sometime around 270 b.C.
They were involved in the affair of Asia minor to some extent, but I am not sure to what extent they had an army that would be able to do anything, really.
They were under seleucid rule in 272, though, so it might not be such a good Idea, but then again, so were the Bactrians. Anyway, it would be interesting if someone knew a bit more about them.

[Majd il-Romani]

1-they are using the same provinces (almost), as in EB1-so the irish factions aren't a particularily good idea.
2-and Maurya would hardly show in EB2-you would have to extend the map east 9the EB team was very explicit IIRC; same map, bigger scale)
3-pergamon is already in, so no need for the maybe...
4-To my knowlege, the Cimbri & teutones were apparently celtic(which is strange, but not entirely impossible)

:

OK I understand the rest but still Parthia had like 3 provinces iirc in vanilla, no reason maurya can't be the same...

and whaddaya think of the rest of the ideas

[MeinPanzer]

I would really like to see the Yuezhi/Wusun as a faction. The idea of Steppe nomads with a culture that is closely related in language and dress to the ancient Celts and ancient Greeks would be an interesting addition.

The Yuezhi were not even slightly related in language and dress to the Celts and Greeks. The only relation at all was that Celtic, Greek, and Tocharian were all Indo-European, which is to say that they are not closely related at all. As far as dress is concerned, the only relation between the Celts, Greeks, and Yuezhi was that they all wore clothes.

Wusun would be a totally different matter, and even less closely related to western factions. All this is moot, though, as neither faction in its position c. 272 BC would be on the EB map.

[Meroveous]

The Yuezhi were one of the original factions in EB1 open beta, but where quickly replaced by the Saka. The problem was that they possibly weren't on EB's map at the starting date (although this is debatable) and in any case only became interested in the EB area a century or so later. The EB team has stated repeatedly that there will be no emerging factions, so they most likely won't be in EB2.

It's a pity, because I think they would have made a nice addition, but I can see where they are coming from. As for their relations to the Celts, I don't think I am qualified to comment.


Their material culture, as in use of plaids and conical hats for religious figures, was similar to the Celts. Their use of funerary masks was similar to the Greeks. Their centum language was quite distinct as the Indo-Iranians speak a satem language. So all of that would make them a unique faction in that region. The Tarim Basin (which is on the EB map).

As far as an emerging faction, they forced the Saka out of the Illi Valley and Lake Issyk Kul circa 175 BC, so they were a regional force with a distinct culture that was more urbanized than that of the Saka.

[Meroveous]

The Yuezhi were not even slightly related in language and dress to the Celts and Greeks. The only relation at all was that Celtic, Greek, and Tocharian were all Indo-European, which is to say that they are not closely related at all. As far as dress is concerned, the only relation between the Celts, Greeks, and Yuezhi was that they all wore clothes.

Wusun would be a totally different matter, and even less closely related to western factions. All this is moot, though, as neither faction in its position c. 272 BC would be on the EB map.

The use of conical hats and plaids was noted by professor Mair, head of East Asian studies at U Penn, as being something similar in dress to what the Celts wore. The funerary masks were seen by his team as also being reminiscent (sp) of Mycenaean (sp) culture. There are material similarities. As far as language all three groups speak a centum, as opposed to satem, languages, which are related albeit distantly.

The same professor Mair believes that the Wusun and Yuezhi were a very closely related people, and that their cultures probably became even closer following the Yuezhi migration. It might also explain why Pompeius Trogus associates the Asiani (Asin/Wusun) with the Tocharians (Tukhara) in his writings.

The Saka surround the Tarim Basin on the map, and that is where the Yuezhi and Wusun were located before the former ousted the Saka from Issyk Kul in 175 BC.

[MeinPanzer]

Their material culture, as in use of plaids and conical hats for religious figures, was similar to the Celts. Their use of funerary masks was similar to the Greeks. Their centum language was quite distinct as the Indo-Iranians speak a satem language. So all of that would make them a unique faction in that region. The Tarim Basin (which is on the EB map).

The use of conical hats and plaids was noted by professor Mair, head of East Asian studies at U Penn, as being something similar in dress to what the Celts wore. The funerary masks were seen by his team as also being reminiscent (sp) of Mycenaean (sp) culture. There are material similarities. As far as language all three groups speak a centum, as opposed to satem, languages, which are related albeit distantly.

Firstly, the Tarim mummies that have been found wearing clothing decorated in plaid patterns date to well before the EB timeframe (some 400 years or more earlier), and their identification as Yuezhi or the ancestors of the Yuezhi is highly speculative. Secondly, even if those mummies could be identified with certainty as Yuezhi, their wearing plaid does not in any way connect them to the Celts. Thirdly, what conical caps were worn by Celts? As for the funerary masks, that connects them as much with China as it does with Greece. Tocharian was an Indo-European language, so it was closely related to the Iranian languages spoken by the other steppe nomads and would not be that unique (plus we know very, very little about it during the EB timeframe). Finally, only a portion of the Tarim basin is represented on the EB map, and like with the Indians, the Yuezhi and Wusun would not be able to be properly represented on the map as they were located c. 272 BC.


As far as an emerging faction, they forced the Saka out of the Illi Valley and Lake Issyk Kul circa 175 BC, so they were a regional force with a distinct culture that was more urbanized than that of the Saka.

I don't know about being more urbanized, but yes, they were a distinct culture and a regional force, as were the Mauryan Indians, but like the Indians, it simply isn't feasible for them to be implemented in EBII.


The same professor Mair believes that the Wusun and Yuezhi were a very closely related people, and that their cultures probably became even closer following the Yuezhi migration. It might also explain why Pompeius Trogus associates the Asiani (Asin/Wusun) with the Tocharians (Tukhara) in his writings.

We know so little about the Yuezhi and the Wusun that we can't even say with any certainty who they were ethnically and culturally, let alone how similar or different they became over time.

[Ludens]

OK I understand the rest but still Parthia had like 3 provinces iirc in vanilla, no reason maurya can't be the same...

and whaddaya think of the rest of the ideas

:inquisitive: This not vanilla. A Maurean satrapy has been mentioned as a candidate, but the Maurean empire as a whole is definitely out. The EB map contains only a small part of the Maurean Empire. That empire was also focused on the rest of India, not the EB map. There is no way the challenges and expansion of this faction can be realistically simulated on the current map set-up.

As for the other ideas, the Arrevaci (Celt-Iberians) and Numidians are safe bets. Chances on an Illyrian faction and the Belgae are also good. The rest however are unlikely: the Scyths were in decline and being pushed away by the Sarmatians. I would love to see the Bastarnae, but their inclusion has been denied repeatedly. We may see the Bosporean Kingdom in the same area however. Germans are possible, although even the German FC has admitted the inclusion of the Sweboz was a bit of stretch. They weren't particularly sophisticated in 272 BC and with the exception of the Suebi did not operate above tribe level. The Teutons are IIRC rather obscure to: we'd be more likely to see the Cimbri or the Cherusii. There certainly are not going to be four factions on the British isles. Erain (the pre-Goidelic Irish) have been mentioned as a candidate a couple of times, but not recently. Ranika favoured the Brigantes, but that was the last we heard from them.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

There's been some talk about either the Boii or the Lugii as well, to fill up the vast area of Eleutheroi provinces in eastern europe, as well. And some very subtle hints about some eastern faction. This could however refer to the Mauryan Satrapy which Ludens mentioned.
The fact that someone from the team also hinted that there would be two new factions in the saba/cathage cuture group, seems to imply that there will, apart from thye rayther plausible numidian faction also be another, Mauretania, perhaps... or maybe Nabateans. However, if there are to be 10 or 9 new factions, there must be yet more surprises waiting for us in the shadows...
But this is all just guesswork.

Gaaahhh!
EB team; Deliver me from this agony and reveal your factions!!!

(Just kidding!:laugh4:)

[paullus]

The fact that someone from the team also hinted that there would be two new factions in the saba/cathage cuture group, seems to imply that there will, apart from thye rayther plausible numidian faction also be another, Mauretania, perhaps... or maybe Nabateans.

Who dared give that away??? Now you know about Nubia!!! Or was it Cyrenaica?

MP: the bit on the pointy hats is probably in reference to the Halstatt period golden conical hats. That's one heck of a huge stretch, but I'd guess that's what Mair was thinking of--either that or he was talking out of the whole between his cheeks.

EDIT: and guys, in case y'all were wondering, we haven't even settled on all the new factions...so make your cases, we're definitely still listening. we're also working on the map...

[Meroveous]

Firstly, the Tarim mummies that have been found wearing clothing decorated in plaid patterns date to well before the EB timeframe (some 400 years or more earlier), and their identification as Yuezhi or the ancestors of the Yuezhi is highly speculative. Secondly, even if those mummies could be identified with certainty as Yuezhi, their wearing plaid does not in any way connect them to the Celts. Thirdly, what conical caps were worn by Celts? As for the funerary masks, that connects them as much with China as it does with Greece. Tocharian was an Indo-European language, so it was closely related to the Iranian languages spoken by the other steppe nomads and would not be that unique (plus we know very, very little about it during the EB timeframe). Finally, only a portion of the Tarim basin is represented on the EB map, and like with the Indians, the Yuezhi and Wusun would not be able to be properly represented on the map as they were located c. 272 BC.



I don't know about being more urbanized, but yes, they were a distinct culture and a regional force, as were the Mauryan Indians, but like the Indians, it simply isn't feasible for them to be implemented in EBII.



We know so little about the Yuezhi and the Wusun that we can't even say with any certainty who they were ethnically and culturally, let alone how similar or different they became over time.

I never said they were Celts. I said their culture is a related one, as are all Indo-European cultures, and the conical hats were found in France, I believe, and are believed to have been used by priests.

As far as language, no they are more closely related to Celtic, Greek, Italic or Germanic as those are centum as opposed to satem languages, the Indo-Iranians speak a satem language and Tocharian is a centum language.

We are actually not as woefully ignorant about them as you make it seem. The Chinese had written about them extensively, and as China has become more open we have learned much more about them as an ethnic group. Their culture is still a bit of a mystery, but the Chinese and Trogus tied them to the trading cities encircling the Taklamakan desert.

True only part of the Tarim is seen on the map. However if the map is expanded, considering the Americas would be gone, the entire Tarim could be included and the Saka removed from Issyk Kul and placed further west by the Illi Valley, which is a bit more accurate.

[Foot]

True only part of the Tarim is seen on the map. However if the map is expanded, considering the Americas would be gone, the entire Tarim could be included and the Saka removed from Issyk Kul and placed further west by the Illi Valley, which is a bit more accurate.

The EBI map has 199 provinces. M2TW maximum allowed provinces is 199. We cannot include anymore, regardless of america being gone or not.

Foot

[MeinPanzer]

I never said they were Celts. I said their culture is a related one, as are all Indo-European cultures, and the conical hats were found in France, I believe, and are believed to have been used by priests.

Plaid clothing, conical hats, and death masks are aspects of material culture that can and do appear independently in different cultures simply because they are basic concepts. These do not make their cultures related, even if those mummies could be identified as Yuezhi.


We are actually not as woefully ignorant about them as you make it seem. The Chinese had written about them extensively, and as China has become more open we have learned much more about them as an ethnic group. Their culture is still a bit of a mystery, but the Chinese and Trogus tied them to the trading cities encircling the Taklamakan desert.

The problems is that many declarations are made about linking archaeological finds to ethnic groups, like the Yuezhi, but this is difficult with sedentary groups in a region like the Tarim basin where different groups mixed, let alone a group like the Yuezhi who moved quite a bit. They are still very mysterious, and what little the Chinese have written about them in the Shiji and the Hanshu is enlightening but often lacking in details.

[Turnus]

and guys, in case y'all were wondering, we haven't even settled on all the new factions...so make your cases, we're definitely still listening.


Hmm really? In that case I think I'll a present a few factions that have been talked about very little (obviously I have no idea if they have already been accepted or rejected by the team):

The Treveri (also have various alternate names in both Latin and Greek):

These would be a Celto-Germanic tribe situated between the Sweboz and the current Gallic factions. They would thus have access to both Germanic units and Celtic units, and were in particular famed for their cavalry (in De Bello Gallico). Their victory conditions could be all of Gaul and Germany. They would be a good inclusion for their variety of units, both Celtic and Germanic, and would hinder the expansion of the Sweboz. Including them would also mean that you are adding a new Celtic faction and a new Germanic faction without taking up 2 faction slots! Of course, some may say the Belgae do it better, but I assume they are already in...

The Insubres:

This would be an exclusively Cisalpine Celtic faction (at the start of the game that is). This would mean that the Aedui would lose Mediolanum (as it was the Insubrian capital), and thus would focus more on Gaul itself (this is more accurate also?). The Cisalpine Gauls were particuarly troublesome to the Italic peoples, and would be very enjoyable to play (I say this while playing an Aedui campaign in which I moved all my forces into Italy at the start of the game, abandoning Transalpine Gaul). Their victory conditions could be all of Italy (and the islands), Sicily, Southern Gaul, and the city of Carthage. As they conquer Italy, they gain access to a whole new unit roster, including mixed Celtic-Hellenic infantry. The best part of playing a barbarian faction is smashing up the civilised factions and adopting their more developed arms and technology, which is why I also suggest the next faction:

Tylis:

Although their expedition into Greece was defeated in 279, and they were again beaten by Antigonos Monopthalamos soon after, these Celts continued to expand into Thrace, and could be preparing for another invasion of Greece. Their migration into this area caused great changes, and the player could continue this migration further. Their unit roster would be extremely varied, with Celtic, Thracian, Hellenic, and Scythian units in the immediate area. Their victory conditions could be all of Thrace, Illyria, Greece and the Aegean, and Asia Minor from the Aegean to Galatia. They were conquered in 212 BCE, but so was Carthage (realistically), only ten years after that date.


The inclusion of these factions would not take up many unit/model/building slots. Each of these factions was more historically important (and I think would be more enjoyable to play) than factions such as the Casse or the Saba, which will nevertheless remain in EBII. All of these factions would provide different playing experiences to those of every other faction in the game (which is more than can be said for Epeiros/Makedonia/KH or Aedui/Arverni or Ptolemaioi/AS), and thus are all important additions to EBII for both historical accuracy and gameplay.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

EDIT: and guys, in case y'all were wondering, we haven't even settled on all the new factions...so make your cases, we're definitely still listening. we're also working on the map...

I can't believe you gyus still listen to us after 25 pages of Meroe, Mauryans and Bartix, but if this is still the case, I'll have a go at it.'

I have compiled this from varius sources, primarily encyclopedias such as Encyclopedia Britannica, NE (swedish), and some Wikipedia too, although I'm not to fond of it. I've also used some other works of reference concerning ancient warfare and geography. And then, of cource, Herodotos!:book:

So, here goes:


Cappadocia

Cappadocia was incorporated into the realm of Perdiccas ca. 322 b.C, having been left relatively untouched by Alexander the Great.
However, after the defeat of Perdiccas’s Anatolian forces by Antigonos, the descendants of the earlier satrap of Cappadocia, Ariarathes, were soon reinstated as rulers of the southern part of the region, i.e. Kappadokia, not Kappadokia Pontika, which became the kingdom of Pontus.
The kingdom of Cappadocia would remain under the same dynasty for ca 200 years, and most kings were named Ariarathes.
After the battle of Ipsos in 301 b.C, the Cappadocian kings were forced to accept Seleucid Overlordship, but still remained fairly autonomous.

In 272 b.C, the ruler of Cappadocia was named Ariamnes II. He seems to have received further autonomy around 270 b.C, as, sometime after 250 b.C, his son, Ariarathes III assumed the title of King.
The Cappadocian kings remained relatively Seleucid-friendly until the defeat of Antiochos III at Magnesia in 190 b.C, after which the Cappadocian kings shifted their allegiance to the Romans.
During the 3rd and 2nd century b.C. they were regularly involved in the wars of the region, particularly against Pontos, and they were members of several alliances formed during the period.

After Ariarathes VII was murdered around 100 b.C, (apparently on the orders of Mithradathes VI Eupator of Pontus), a Pontic puppet ruler was appointed. During the following tumult in Anatolia, Cappadocia came under Pontic, Armenian, and ultimately, Roman control, though still ruled by puppet kings, loyal to the Romans.
However, after the last of these kings, Archelaos, Emperor Tiberius incorporated Cappadocia into the Roman Empire (ca. 17 A.D.).
Apparently, the Cappadocian kings inscribed the years of reign on their coins, making it easier to reconstruct their line of kings.

Kings of Cappadocia during the EB time frame in chronological order (according to Wikipedia):

• Ariamnes II 280-230 BCE
• Ariarathes III 255-220 BCE
• Ariarathes IV Eusebes 220-163 BCE
• Ariarathes V Eusebes Philopator 163-130 BCE
• Orophernes 157 BCE
• Ariarathes VI Epiphanes Philopator 130-116 BCE
• Ariarathes VII Philometor 116-101 BCE
• Ariarathes VIII 101-96 BCE
• Ariarathes IX ca. 95 BCE
• Ariobarzanes I Philoromaios 95-ca. 63 BCE
• Ariobarzanes II Philopator ca. 63-51 BCE
• Ariobarzanes III Eusebes Philoromaios 51-42 BCE
• Ariarathes X Eusebes Philadelphos 42-36 BCE
• Archelaus 36 BCE-17 AD

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Kings_of_Cappadocia"

A possible unit rooster for the Cappadocians would include some cavalry, as Cappadocia was famous for its horses. One could consider the “Cappadocian Cavalry” unit already available to Pontos, and perhaps some lighter, skirmisher-type cavalry. Otherwise, the Cappadocians would have a primarily “eastern” unit rooster with some Persian and native Anatolian units, though influenced by Hellenic military traditions. They would also have rather easy access to both Galatian and Scythian auxiliaries.
The only description of Cappadocian warriors that I have found comes from Herodotos, in his description of the army of Xerxes during his European campaign. This is of course a description of a typical Cappadocian warrior some 200 years before the EB era, but it might still convey some rudimentary ideas of what the Cappadocians looked like.
According to Herodotos they carried the same armament as the Paphlagonians, i.e. short spears, small shields, and “plaited” helmets (however that works):inquisitive:. In addition, they also carried javelins and
daggers. Apparantly, they also wore traditional boots.

Gameplay-wise, the Cappadocians would begin with only one settlement; Mazaka. From here, they would have the choice of either advancing eastwards or westwards.
Should they go eastwards into Syria or the lower Caucasus, this would give them access to some better Persian-style units, and Scythians (and eventually some Hellenic units), but would most likely bring them into conflict with the Seleucids, Hayasdan and possibly even the Phalava, should they advance beyond Mesopotamia.
Should they go westwards, on the other hand, they would quickly get access to powerful Galatian units, but this would bring them into conflict with the numerous minor kingdoms in western Anatolia, such as Pontos, Pergamon and maybe even Makedonia. The Seleucids would be a constant threat in this direction too, but their Anatolian possessions might be an easier prey than their eastern heartlands.

Still, there are negative sides to this faction as well. Compared to many other contemporary kingdoms, their area of influence was somewhat limited, and even though their kings at times showed a will to expand (gaining influence over, for example, Cilicia, even though temporarily), they never managed to build any greater “empire”. One of the reasons for this might be that for much of their history, they were under either Seleucid or Roman vassalage.
Also, their position is a very dangerous one, locked between the Hai, AS, Ptolemaioi, and Pontos, and very close to the heartlands of the “Grey Death”:skull:.

Still, I think that they would make an interesting addition to EB, as they were obviously active during the period, and are rather easy to find information on.
As always, I do stress that this is just a suggestion, and the EB-team is free to ignor this, if they so wish.:beam:

[Che Roriniho]

I can't believe you gyus still listen to us after 25 pages of Meroe, Mauryans and Bartix, but if this is still the case, I'll have a go at it.'

I have compiled this from varius sources, primarily encyclopedias such as Encyclopedia Britannica, NE (swedish), and some Wikipedia too, although I'm not to fond of it. I've also used some other works of reference concerning ancient warfare and geography. And then, of cource, Herodotos!:book:

So, here goes:


Cappadocia

Cappadocia was incorporated into the realm of Perdiccas ca. 322 b.C, having been left relatively untouched by Alexander the Great.
However, after the defeat of Perdiccas’s Anatolian forces by Antigonos, the descendants of the earlier satrap of Cappadocia, Ariarathes, were soon reinstated as rulers of the southern part of the region, i.e. Kappadokia, not Kappadokia Pontika, which became the kingdom of Pontus.
The kingdom of Cappadocia would remain under the same dynasty for ca 200 years, and most kings were named Ariarathes.
After the battle of Ipsos in 301 b.C, the Cappadocian kings were forced to accept Seleucid Overlordship, but still remained fairly autonomous.

In 272 b.C, the ruler of Cappadocia was named Ariamnes II. He seems to have received further autonomy around 270 b.C, as, sometime after 250 b.C, his son, Ariarathes III assumed the title of King.
The Cappadocian kings remained relatively Seleucid-friendly until the defeat of Antiochos III at Magnesia in 190 b.C, after which the Cappadocian kings shifted their allegiance to the Romans.
During the 3rd and 2nd century b.C. they were regularly involved in the wars of the region, particularly against Pontos, and they were members of several alliances formed during the period.

After Ariarathes VII was murdered around 100 b.C, (apparently on the orders of Mithradathes VI Eupator of Pontus), a Pontic puppet ruler was appointed. During the following tumult in Anatolia, Cappadocia came under Pontic, Armenian, and ultimately, Roman control, though still ruled by puppet kings, loyal to the Romans.
However, after the last of these kings, Archelaos, Emperor Tiberius incorporated Cappadocia into the Roman Empire (ca. 17 A.D.).
Apparently, the Cappadocian kings inscribed the years of reign on their coins, making it easier to reconstruct their line of kings.

Kings of Cappadocia during the EB time frame in chronological order (according to Wikipedia):

• Ariamnes II 280-230 BCE
• Ariarathes III 255-220 BCE
• Ariarathes IV Eusebes 220-163 BCE
• Ariarathes V Eusebes Philopator 163-130 BCE
• Orophernes 157 BCE
• Ariarathes VI Epiphanes Philopator 130-116 BCE
• Ariarathes VII Philometor 116-101 BCE
• Ariarathes VIII 101-96 BCE
• Ariarathes IX ca. 95 BCE
• Ariobarzanes I Philoromaios 95-ca. 63 BCE
• Ariobarzanes II Philopator ca. 63-51 BCE
• Ariobarzanes III Eusebes Philoromaios 51-42 BCE
• Ariarathes X Eusebes Philadelphos 42-36 BCE
• Archelaus 36 BCE-17 AD

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Kings_of_Cappadocia"

A possible unit rooster for the Cappadocians would include some cavalry, as Cappadocia was famous for its horses. One could consider the “Cappadocian Cavalry” unit already available to Pontos, and perhaps some lighter, skirmisher-type cavalry. Otherwise, the Cappadocians would have a primarily “eastern” unit rooster with some Persian and native Anatolian units, though influenced by Hellenic military traditions. They would also have rather easy access to both Galatian and Scythian auxiliaries.
The only description of Cappadocian warriors that I have found comes from Herodotos, in his description of the army of Xerxes during his European campaign. This is of course a description of a typical Cappadocian warrior some 200 years before the EB era, but it might still convey some rudimentary ideas of what the Cappadocians looked like.
According to Herodotos they carried the same armament as the Paphlagonians, i.e. short spears, small shields, and “plaited” helmets (however that works):inquisitive:. In addition, they also carried javelins and
daggers. Apparantly, they also wore traditional boots.

Gameplay-wise, the Cappadocians would begin with only one settlement; Mazaka. From here, they would have the choice of either advancing eastwards or westwards.
Should they go eastwards into Syria or the lower Caucasus, this would give them access to some better Persian-style units, and Scythians (and eventually some Hellenic units), but would most likely bring them into conflict with the Seleucids, Hayasdan and possibly even the Phalava, should they advance beyond Mesopotamia.
Should they go westwards, on the other hand, they would quickly get access to powerful Galatian units, but this would bring them into conflict with the numerous minor kingdoms in western Anatolia, such as Pontos, Pergamon and maybe even Makedonia. The Seleucids would be a constant threat in this direction too, but their Anatolian possessions might be an easier prey than their eastern heartlands.

Still, there are negative sides to this faction as well. Compared to many other contemporary kingdoms, their area of influence was somewhat limited, and even though their kings at times showed a will to expand (gaining influence over, for example, Cilicia, even though temporarily), they never managed to build any greater “empire”. One of the reasons for this might be that for much of their history, they were under either Seleucid or Roman vassalage.
Also, their position is a very dangerous one, locked between the Hai, AS, Ptolemaioi, and Pontos, and very close to the heartlands of the “Grey Death”:skull:.

Still, I think that they would make an interesting addition to EB, as they were obviously active during the period, and are rather easy to find information on.
As always, I do stress that this is just a suggestion, and the EB-team is free to ignor this, if they so wish.:beam:

I'd like to have a go with these. they sound quite interesting, like a Numidia in the East. Small, surrounded by tricky peeps, but certainly fun. I'm placing a wager on Numidia and the Boii to be included, along with the Bosphoron Kingdom. I've said before, but I'll say again, the Lugii (Vandals). These not only fill a gap (The Baltic), but there would be a nice josting in Eastern Europe between them, Swezboz, and the Boii. This would also prevent any one of them becoming super-powerful. If not the Boii, then maybe the Helvetii?

[Ibrahim]

I'd like to have a go with these. they sound quite interesting, like a Numidia in the East. Small, surrounded by tricky peeps, but certainly fun. I'm placing a wager on Numidia and the Boii to be included, along with the Bosphoron Kingdom. I've said before, but I'll say again, the Lugii (Vandals). These not only fill a gap (The Baltic), but there would be a nice josting in Eastern Europe between them, Swezboz, and the Boii. This would also prevent any one of them becoming super-powerful. If not the Boii, then maybe the Helvetii?


but wouldn't the place be kind of congested in Anatolia? I mean with 2-4 small kingdoms in one area, gameplay wise may be too quick for most tastes..who knows? i gather by my family and immediate friends.
now a bosphoran kingdom would be nice, but I will wait and see what the EB team will come up with next.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

but wouldn't the place be kind of congested in Anatolia?

Indeed it would be, which is one of the downsides with this faction. However, they would not reduce the amount of eleutheroi territory in anatolia, as the province Kappadokia is currently owned by the AS, so there would still be ample space to expand without having to start a war with another faction.
To the west, there is galatia and Bithynia, while to the east, they have lesser Armenia and Pontos Parlaios (sp?).

[Majd il-Romani]

EDIT: and guys, in case y'all were wondering, we haven't even settled on all the new factions...so make your cases, we're definitely still listening. we're also working on the map...

OK well since there are 9 factions left with the confirmation of Pergamon:

1: the Scythians (I still think this could be possible, a kind of "regain your old glory" campaign) so the sarmatians can be countered and don't start invading Germany, Armenia, and Greece all at once by 190BC
OR the Bosporan Kingdom for the same reason as Scythians, plus the NE map needs more factions

2: The Belgae as a counter to both Gauls and Suebi
OR even more interesting a Celto-Germanic culture

3: another British tribe to counter the Casse like maybe the Erain or Caledonians, it'd be pretty cool to have this little war going on between 2 factions over the 2 islands

4: the Nabataean kingdom to help stop the yellow and grey deaths

5: A Mauryan Satrapy (NOT THE WHOLE DAMN EMPIRE, just a small satrapy I meant)

6: an celt-Iberian faction to rival Lusitanians and Carthaginians

7 & 8: the 2 Numidian Kingdoms to populate Africa and fight Carthage as well as each other

9: Nubians to help stop yellow death

Whaddaya think about the new and revised list? As you can see I'm not that big of a fan of the tiny Greek city-states (Syracuse, Cyrene, etc)

[abou]

If you think that a Nabataia could do much of anything to stop the Seleukids or the Ptolemies in a TW game, then you are delusional. Same for the Nubians.

[Krusader]

If you think that a Nabataia could do much of anything to stop the Seleukids or the Ptolemies in a TW game, then you are delusional. Same for the Nubians.

You'd work great as a diplomat :laugh4:

Although, I agree. With the TW engine it would be hard to make Nubians and Nabataians to have a chance against AS & Ptolemaioi, mostly due to supply lines and not that "good hit & run game mechanics". Ptolemaioi would be able to reach most modern Jordan/northwest Saudi-Arabian territories in one turn (especially if city hopping), making it difficult for trait morale penalties to kick in. Nubia...well an educated guess says that their unarmoured troops wouldnt fare that well against the Ptolemaioi either, as the Ptolemaioi would be able to send stacks down and since climate isn't properly represented it would be onesided (Thorakitai VS Nubian warriors in loincloth).

[Majd il-Romani]

If you think that a Nabataia could do much of anything to stop the Seleukids or the Ptolemies in a TW game, then you are delusional. Same for the Nubians.


well they did manage to hold off until Trajan's rein...

but I agree on Nubia

[Son of Perun]

If you think that a Nabataia could do much of anything to stop the Seleukids or the Ptolemies in a TW game, then you are delusional. Same for the Nubians.

I can't agree with this. During gameplay Saba often captures Ethiopia by rebellion and in my experience the Ptolemaioi are not able to conquer it back. Nabatea/Nubia/Cyrene would give more balance to the area (the Seleucids have to fight on about 5 fronts, the Ptolemies only on one)

[Tellos Athenaios]

well they did manage to hold off until Trajan's rein...

but I agree on Nubia

But you forgot to take into account the crucial part of his sentence: in a TW game... Possible, to survive? Well, that's what it's a TW game for; so yes. But likely? No. It took a few rather nasty armies to keep Baktria, Pahlava and Pontos in the race in 1.x ...

[Ibrahim]

well, I'll just wait and see. the wger lines are drawn, and I plan to win (no, wger-lines have nothing to do with "wagers(bets)"). its a form of debate really.

@ mithridates: I'm still a little uncertain. but since you reminded me of the fact thatr kappadocia is in what is now EB1.1 seleukid terrtory, then i guess it should work.

[Space_Ed]

I'd like to see Syracuse as a faction. I'm sure you guys can work it out so that Syracuse isn't expansionistic but Syracuse was definately a lot more than an insignificant city. They had different alliances with Rome, Carthage etc and I am pretty sure that it was a big trading city. Also I think some Archemedian weapons would be brilliant.

Belgians

Numidians

Insubres

Another British faction

Galatians

Celtiberians

That leaves two more...

[Majd il-Romani]

But you forgot to take into account the crucial part of his sentence: in a TW game... Possible, to survive? Well, that's what it's a TW game for; so yes. But likely? No. It took a few rather nasty armies to keep Baktria, Pahlava and Pontos in the race in 1.x ...


ya your right either yellow death or saba take nabataia around like 245BC so maybe nabatu wouldn't be such a good idea unless maybe they can get phalanxes/estern units, kind of a mix of AS, ptolmey, jewish, and arabian units and also make tham very expansionist so thay at least manage to maintain a small power base in judaea/syria/arabia/whatever

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

@ mithridates: I'm still a little uncertain. but since you reminded me of the fact thatr kappadocia is in what is now EB1.1 seleukid terrtory, then i guess it should work.

Yes, I think it would. Also, it would make the situation in eastern anatolia a bit more interesting too: not just a pushing-match between AS and the Ptolemaioi, with Pontos making occational insurrections from the north. This, plus the fact that there are already quite a few units that could make up their unit rooster in-game, so they would not take up so many unit-slots, could actually make them a candidate for a faction. The EB-team might think otherwise, though. I am, after all, by no means an expert on Cappadocia, so my research is somewhat rudimetary and there might be other conditions, that I have overlooked, which would make them unfit for this purpose.

On the issue of Nabatea: Sure, they might gain controll of Nabatea and Sinai, which would give them a power base to build on. However, as they are primarily focused on light troops, they might be a fun challenge to play for a human player, but the AI would probably need a lot of financial and military help, to be able to survive, given that they will have to fight a two-front war against both ptollies and AS, with merely light arabian levies. Especially the Ptolemaioi, as they have their backs covered, and thus can concentrate all thier forces in the levant.

[Jolt]

If you think that a Nabataia could do much of anything to stop the Seleukids or the Ptolemies in a TW game, then you are delusional. Same for the Nubians.

Meroe AND the AS could do a better job at stopping the Ptolies than just the AS. Same goes for Nabataea. Meroe could actually build full stack armies which the Eleutheroi can't. While Meroe would have a one front war to dedicate all it's cannon fodder to, the Ptolies would have to take care of the AS as well as Meroe, and if they couldn't do it quickly, then there would be the possibility of having Carthage up their legs for a three front war. As for Nabataea, I'm not sure how it would turn out.

[abou]

Dude, really? I mean, really? What could Meroe do that a few rebel cities couldn't? The AI is a bit smarter in M2TW than in RTW. Meroe wouldn't attack a strong Ptolemaic kingdom, but you better believe that the latter would attack the former. Even at their weakest Egypt could mobilize thousands upon thousands of troops in emergencies. Besides, do you know what type of troops Meroe would have? Yeah, try sending some spearmen with wicker shields against a phalanx.

I don't mean to be a dick, but when I keep seeing the same factions mentioned again and again that have already been shot down it gets old. At least Nabataia has some viability. Meroe has none. They are so below the military horizon it isn't even funny. It would be like when Poland sent a cavalry force against German tanks.

[Che Roriniho]

Dude, really? I mean, really? What could Meroe do that a few rebel cities couldn't? The AI is a bit smarter in M2TW than in RTW. Meroe wouldn't attack a strong Ptolemaic kingdom, but you better believe that the latter would attack the former. Even at their weakest Egypt could mobilize thousands upon thousands of troops in emergencies. Besides, do you know what type of troops Meroe would have? Yeah, try sending some spearmen with wicker shields against a phalanx.

I don't mean to be a dick, but when I keep seeing the same factions mentioned again and again that have already been shot down it gets old. At least Nabataia has some viability. Meroe has none. They are so below the military horizon it isn't even funny. It would be like when Poland sent a cavalry force against German tanks.

Hear hear. Shame though. If we could have unlimited factions, Meroe WOULD be fun to play, but as far as Historical Accuracy is concerned, it's bullshit.

Boii and Numidians of somesort would be almost needed. Numidians would need reforms (possibly March of Time) for when that roman centurian (foret the name) went over to train them. I would actually love to ply them (but not before playing the new Makedon, Baktria, and Romanoi!)

[Son of Perun]

What could Meroe do that a few rebel cities couldn't?

Same goes for Saba, Casse...such argument has no logic.


I don't mean to be a dick, but when I keep seeing the same factions mentioned again and again that have already been shot down it gets old. At least Nabataia has some viability. Meroe has none. They are so below the military horizon it isn't even funny. It would be like when Poland sent a cavalry force against German tanks.

It would be interesting to hear why Nabataia has more viability than Meroe, afaik it was kingdom weaker to Kushite kingdom in all aspects whether it comes to population, military or wealth. I understand that some members of EB team might be a bit tired of this issue but that does not approve them to speak about Kushites like they were a bunch of dirty african savages. They were in fact more developed than some of the factions currently in EB. I agree that Meroe certainly won't be in EB2, but it is mostly due to engine restrictions and not their "viability".

Sorry to say that but Meroe is going to be mentioned again and again considering how uncertain the facts about Meroe are and the number of people who would like to play as such an exotic faction.