New factions?

[Majd il-Romani]

I know that Foot will be pissed and probably trample me, but the laugh is worth the risk...

New Factional Ideas:
Aztec Empire - would populate the American map a bit more, last time I played EB, there were practically NO factions there!
Samurai Japan - I was SO surprised that this wasn't in EB1. It was probably left out so the Saba could be in
Zulu Nation - Come on, Shaka was just rising at this time!
The USSR - The NE corner of the Vanilla EB map has like 1 faction, why not put this in

:clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown:

[Foot]

Wow! My life must be so dull, but I just cannot see the humour in that from any point of view.

Foot

[Celtic_Punk]

Soooo foot, what are the confirmed factions?... if rome is gunna be in this time round... i just might have to kill you. :clown:

So yeah which are the NEW confirmed factions?

[bovi]

So yeah which are the NEW confirmed factions?
Pergamon (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=103202).

[eddy_purpus]

I know that Foot will be pissed and probably trample me, but the laugh is worth the risk...

New Factional Ideas:
Aztec Empire - would populate the American map a bit more, last time I played EB, there were practically NO factions there!
Samurai Japan - I was SO surprised that this wasn't in EB1. It was probably left out so the Saba could be in
Zulu Nation - Come on, Shaka was just rising at this time!
The USSR - The NE corner of the Vanilla EB map has like 1 faction, why not put this in

:clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown::clown:

HAHAHAHHA
ARE YOU MAKING FUN OF FOOT ?:furious3::dizzy2::thumbsdown::thumbsup::stunned::tongue::lipsrsealed2::furious::download::feedback :
hahahahahha
what a dumb proposition dude...
really



REALLY !

[Hax]

Dude. Relax.

[Styles]

Kimbrii
Boii
Bastarnae
Skirii

[Celtic_Punk]

Mmm Pergamon would be a good addition. help populate asia minor. but africa is a little lonely..

Is there enough evidence to support a Numidian faction?

[Majd il-Romani]

Is there enough evidence to support a Numidian faction?

I dunno, not enough evidence I think, they werent mentioned at all in any Roman, Greek, or Carthaginian texts, and the only evidence we have is Vanilla RTW :clown:

[General Appo]

I will bet you anything (except EB of course) that at least one Numidian faction will be in EB2.

[zurab]

Kartli ( Caucasian Iberia)




:)

[zurab]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_Iberia

Kartli ( Caucasian Iberia-Georgia)

Roman period

This close association with Armenia brought upon the country an invasion (65 BC) by the Roman general Pompey, who was then at war with Mithradates VI of Pontus, and Armenia; but Rome did not establish her power permanently over Iberia. Nineteen years later, the Romans again marched (36 BC) on Iberia forcing King Pharnavaz II to join their campaign against Albania.

While another Georgian kingdom of Colchis was administered as a Roman province, Iberia freely accepted the Roman Imperial protection. A stone inscription discovered at Mtskheta speaks of the first-century ruler Mihdrat I (AD 58-106) as "the friend of the Caesars" and the king "of the Roman-loving Iberians." Emperor Vespasian fortified the ancient Mtskheta site of Arzami for the Iberian kings in 75 AD.

The next two centuries saw a continuation of Roman influence over the area, but by the reign of King Pharsman II (116 – 132) Iberia had regained some of its former power. Relations between the Roman Emperor Hadrian and Pharsman II were strained, though Hadrian is said to have sought to appease Pharsman. However, it was only under Hadrian's successor Antoninus Pius that relations improved to the extent that Pharsman is said to have even visited Rome, where Dio Cassius reports that a statue was erected in his honor and that rights to sacrifice were given. The period brought a major change to the political status of Iberia with Rome recognizing them as an ally, rather than their former status as a subject state, a political situation which remained the same, even during the Empire's hostilities with the Parthians.

[Foytaz]

TBH I can't see any good reason for adding another hellenic faction as Pergamon f.e. They were just bystanders with no real influence and power.
As for 'barbaric' Europe maybe one more germanic tribe to counterbalance Sweboz would be a good move.
Africa belongs to Ptolemaoi and Karthadast so faction like Numidia sounds reasonably to mess up in there.
In the far east, I don't know?, Pahlava, Bactria and Saka Rauka are enough for me.

I'd be glad to see more diversification of already existed factions instead new ones....

but the last word belongs to EB Team:2thumbsup:

[Cyrus]

What about the basc people,they were fierce warriors and they expanded a lot historically,also they would balance off iberia wich is always either carthaginian or lusotann.

[Phalanx300]

TBH I can't see any good reason for adding another hellenic faction as Pergamon f.e. They were just bystanders with no real influence and power.
As for 'barbaric' Europe maybe one more germanic tribe to counterbalance Sweboz would be a good move.
Africa belongs to Ptolemaoi and Karthadast so faction like Numidia sounds reasonably to mess up in there.
In the far east, I don't know?, Pahlava, Bactria and Saka Rauka are enough for me.

I'd be glad to see more diversification of already existed factions instead new ones....

but the last word belongs to EB Team:2thumbsup:



Why another Hellenic faction? Well fact is that they had quite some power. We might even see more Hellenic factions for EB in future (hopefully: Syracuse, Massilia, Kyrene, Bosporos and some others :juggle2:)

[Foytaz]

Why another Hellenic faction? Well fact is that they had quite some power. We might even see more Hellenic factions for EB in future (hopefully: Syracuse, Massilia, Kyrene, Bosporos and some others :juggle2:)

I hope EB Team won't implement them as they were nothing more than pawns for Makedonia, Epeiros, Arche, Ptolemaoi and latter on SPQR. Adding those will only slow down the game and make unneccesary boring intervals due the campaign.

[Phalanx300]

I hope EB Team won't implement them as they were nothing more than pawns for Makedonia, Epeiros, Arche, Ptolemaoi and latter on SPQR. Adding those will only slow down the game and make unneccesary boring intervals due the campaign.

Pawns? You aren't serious are you?:dizzy2:

Rome is the best example of a city state, look at what it accomplished. :furious3:.


:sweatdrop:

(I like the org smilies :2thumbsup:)

[Cataphract_Of_The_City]

I hope EB Team won't implement them as they were nothing more than pawns for Makedonia, Epeiros, Arche, Ptolemaoi and latter on SPQR. Adding those will only slow down the game and make unneccesary boring intervals due the campaign.

That's ridiculous. If anything Pergamon rulers used the infighting between these powers to keep themselves independent for almost 150 after the start of EB's timeline. This was a major achievement considering that the area was coveted by all these powers. If anything, all these powers were used by Pergamon so it could stay independent.

[Foytaz]

That's ridiculous. If anything Pergamon rulers used the infighting between these powers to keep themselves independent for almost 150 after the start of EB's timeline. This was a major achievement considering that the area was coveted by all these powers. If anything, all these powers were used by Pergamon so it could stay independent.

and that's what I'm reffering to!!!. All they've achieved is petty survival between surrounding muscle-states. They're pawns or to be more polite client-states and you'd get used to aknowledge that fact!!!.
Pergamon biggest:laugh4: achievement was causing war between SPQR vs Arche, despite the fact the war was inevitable anyways.

[zurab]

imo NEW 10 factions :)

1. Bosporus Kingdom
2. Kartli ( Caucasian Iberia) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_Iberia
3. Numidia
4. Tyre ( or confederation of Phynikian states-ally to Carthage)
5. Caucasian Albania or Arran (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caucasian_Albania)
6. Pergamon
7. Maesia or maybe Triballi?
8. One more iberian tribe in Spain
9. One more germanic tribe
10. One more celtic tribe


:egypt:

[Strategos Alexandros]

and that's what I'm reffering to!!!. All they've achieved is petty survival between surrounding muscle-states. They're pawns or to be more polite client-states and you'd get used to aknowledge that fact!!!.
Pergamon biggest:laugh4: achievement was causing war between SPQR vs Arche, despite the fact the war was inevitable anyways.

They did hold a fair amount of Asia Minor at one point, and IIRC some of Thrace too.

[Hax]

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/images/guild/buttons/viewpost.gif (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=2062482#post2062482) and that's what I'm reffering to!!!. All they've achieved is petty survival between surrounding muscle-states. They're pawns or to be more polite client-states and you'd get used to aknowledge that fact!!!.

Yeah. Except the fact that they pretty much held all of Mikra Asia to the Taurus Mountains at one point. They were really just a pawn, you're right. I'm sure the EB team will have to delete Pergamon from the faction roster now. Your evidence is clearly overwhelming.

[Foytaz]

Yeah. Except the fact that they pretty much held all of Mikra Asia to the Taurus Mountains at one point. They were really just a pawn, you're right. I'm sure the EB team will have to delete Pergamon from the faction roster now. Your evidence is clearly overwhelming.


They did hold a fair amount of Asia Minor at one point, and IIRC some of Thrace too.

yes they possessions were really asthonishing compared to Arche, Ptolemaoi and Pontus and they played key role in regional politics, not mention that states like Arche or Makedonia are always considered their voice as so much important. Buch of petty states with size of two satrapies must be very important for EB2 balance.
The very evidence of yours based at territorial holdings is not even ridiculous but...
Well then, elaborate what those petty client-states did achieved, except for being subservient due these 150 years (EB timeframe) that make them so important for the whole gameplay accuracy.

[bovi]

I hope EB Team won't implement them as they were nothing more than pawns for Makedonia, Epeiros, Arche, Ptolemaoi and latter on SPQR. Adding those will only slow down the game and make unneccesary boring intervals due the campaign.
...
yes they possessions were really asthonishing compared to Arche, Ptolemaoi and Pontus and they played key role in regional politics, not mention that states like Arche or Makedonia are always considered their voice as so much important. Buch of petty states with size of two satrapies must be very important for EB2 balance.
The very evidence of yours based at territorial holdings is not even ridiculous but...
Well then, elaborate what those petty client-states did achieved, except for being subservient due these 150 years (EB timeframe) that make them so important for the whole gameplay accuracy.
You are missing that EB's primary goal is to recreate the ancient world as precisely as possible and increase knowledge about history, not cater to any particular type of player.

[Foytaz]

You are missing that EB's primary goal is to recreate the ancient world as precisely as possible and increase knowledge about history, not cater to any particular type of player.

Agree about cares for historical accuracy but quantity over quality 'technology' won't lead anywhere good. After all EB2 is completly up to it team and that's great about it. What I'm trying to say that petty client states are perfect for mini-mod rather than huge project EB2 aims to.

[Hax]

Pergamon wasn't a "petty client state".

[General Appo]

Foytaz, have you read Stele 6? Perhaps if you did it would change your view of Pergamon.

[Jolt]

Pergamon wasn't a "petty client state".

It was a petty client state, allowed to exist only by the sole good will of our Great Lord Zeus, who didn't managed to arrange more armies to Seleucia/Bithynia/Macedonia/Galatia so they could wipe them off the map. All part of Zeus plan, I say!

[Cyrus]

Excuse me but i beleve i posted "i think the basc people would be an other good tribe for iberia" any comments? i dunno like if it could be possible or not?

[Sir Edward]

Excuse me but i beleve i posted "i think the basc people would be an other good tribe for iberia" any comments? i dunno like if it could be possible or not?


You believe, your not sure if you posted or not? I'll help you out by doing a simple function called a search. Post number 229 by Sarcasm in this very thread gives a very insightful explanation in to why the Basque will not be a faction in EB II. I have to say while what the spanish government (and to lesser extent the french governement) has done to snuff out the unique culture of the Basque is upsetting that does not mean history should be rewritten in to making this people in to something they never were.

IMHO the Arevaci of the Celtiberians would be a better faction choice to represent the diversity of people located on the Iberian Peninsula during EB II timeframe.

[Strategos Alexandros]

Agree about cares for historical accuracy but quantity over quality 'technology' won't lead anywhere good. After all EB2 is completly up to it team and that's great about it. What I'm trying to say that petty client states are perfect for mini-mod rather than huge project EB2 aims to.

Just out of interest, what faction would you suggest instead?

[bovi]

I'd be glad to see more diversification of already existed factions instead new ones....
So, none.

[Viking_Wårlord]

MORE GERMANIC FACTIONS!

Sorry but I had to...2 Germanic factions aren't enough, do at least 3.(You weren't bothered by doing 4Celtic factions!)

Support from Viking_Wårlord and I'm now going back to Ribe:book:(finished raiding the eastern coast of England):wall::sweatdrop::smash::smash:

[Viking_Wårlord]

I also think a Jewish faction would be great but it wouldn't stick with the era I think...unless I'm wrong!

[Ludens]

MORE GERMANIC FACTIONS!

Sorry but I had to...2 Germanic factions aren't enough, do at least 3.(You weren't bothered by doing 4Celtic factions!)

I also think a Jewish faction would be great but it wouldn't stick with the era I think...unless I'm wrong!

Well, there was the Maccabean rebellion, but it's not going to be included because it occurred well after the starting-date and lasted just 20 years. They weren't world-conquering material either. As for the reasons why there are more Celtic factions: it's because the Celts were politically more sophisticated and therefore more likely to form an empire.

BTW, please don't double post. Use the edit button.

[Foytaz]

Just out of interest, what faction would you suggest instead?

I think Hellenic world is fullfilled for good, already present ones are enough for now.
Numidia wouldn't be bad choice anyways as one of most important players in western afican coast, plus they outlived Carthage and have given couple of nasty surprises to Romans latter on in time.
Some people often mention second germanic basis faction, maybe that's good idea too.
And on the other hand if Pergamon is in already then why not add Syracuse f.e.???, lots of similarities don't you think???

[Viking_Wårlord]

"it's because the Celts were politically more sophisticated and therefore more likely to form an empire."

False, Celts had no political structure....a part from being a tribe of course, the Celts were never united and more often hated themselves even more than they hated rome!

For what's of Germans, they did have a political structure as Tacitus describes a 'regular meeting of chieftains each time of the year'...he was then talking of the 'Þing'(or thing)...indeed a meeting that was used to put an end to wars between different tribes and to solve problems.
The Þing would be known as ÅlÞing to the Vikings, the Icelandic place of these meetings was called 'Þingvellir'...and it still is today.

So Germans did have a political structure...Sorry but you're wrong.

[Foot]

"it's because the Celts were politically more sophisticated and therefore more likely to form an empire."

False, Celts had no political structure....a part from being a tribe of course, the Celts were never united and more often hated themselves even more than they hated rome!

For what's of Germans, they did have a political structure as Tacitus describes a 'regular meeting of chieftains each time of the year'...he was then talking of the 'Þing'(or thing)...indeed a meeting that was used to put an end to wars between different tribes and to solve problems.
The Þing would be known as ÅlÞing to the Vikings, the Icelandic place of these meetings was called 'Þingvellir'...and it still is today.

So Germans did have a political structure...Sorry but you're wrong.

Actually you are wrong on both accounts. Ludens did not say that Germans did not have a political structure, he said that their political structure was less sophisticated.

Celts certainly did have a very complex political structure, the Aedui were ruled by a senate-like structure, as were many other tribes. The Galatians were ruled by four kings, which would have required a very complex constitution. The Gallic tribes would meet every year in the land of the Carnutes to discuss diplomacy under the auspices of the druidic council.

What we do lack on the Germans is detailed evidence (both textual and archaelogical) of the tribes during the beginning of our timeframe. It is only when tacticus reports on them that they really start entering the roman record, and that is some way after our start date.

Foot

[Viking_Wårlord]

Actually you are wrong on both accounts. Ludens did not say that Germans did not have a political structure, he said that their political structure was less sophisticated.

Celts certainly did have a very complex political structure, the Aedui were ruled by a senate-like structure, as were many other tribes. The Galatians were ruled by four kings, which would have required a very complex constitution. The Gallic tribes would meet every year in the land of the Carnutes to discuss diplomacy under the auspices of the druidic council.

What we do lack on the Germans is detailed evidence (both textual and archaelogical) of the tribes during the beginning of our timeframe. It is only when tacticus reports on them that they really start entering the roman record, and that is some way after our start date.

Foot

:book:Celts had their 'rix' elected by the druidic council....druids were also charged of education,poetry and healing...their political influence was great>druids had knowledege,the others didn't!

We do not lack of evidence about Germanic political organization, what we lack is how we trust those who've written about their political strucutre because they were all Roman and may have exagerated their writings.


Though I was right about the Þing because we still find it in the republic of Iceland (the parliament is called 'ÅlÞing,check for yourself)!:smash::smash:

[General Appo]

Numidia wouldn't be bad choice anyways as one of most important players in western afican coast, plus they outlived Carthage and have given couple of nasty surprises to Romans latter on in time.
Some people often mention second germanic basis faction, maybe that's good idea too.



Okay, that´s 2 factions, 8 to go. And remember, it can´t be Pergamon, or any faction in the Hellenic world at all.
Man, I´m just so excited to see where you´re gonna find place outside the Hellenic world to cramp in 8 new factions.

[Taliferno]

Okay, that´s 2 factions, 8 to go. And remember, it can´t be Pergamon, or any faction in the Hellenic world at all.
Man, I´m just so excited to see where you´re gonna find place outside the Hellenic world to cramp in 8 new factions.

Just off the top of my head:

1: Numidia (Western part)
2: Veneti
3: Caucasian Iberia
4: A Celtiberian tribe
5: Ulaid or Erain
6: Remanents of the Scythians
7: Belgi
8: Northern part of the Mauryan Empire
9: Illyrian tribe
10: A German Tribe

So yes, it is kind of possible to have 10 new non hellenic factions (though some hellenic influenced) in EB2, but its quite difficult sorting out which tribe was were in the time period or if they even existed yet. This is probably the reason why most of the guesses on this thread have been included a high proportion of hellenic factions as much information about what they were up to at the time is on the web.

If you think one or two people complaining about hellenic factions is bad, wait for the hundreds complaining about the "barbarians" (if the new factions included is like the one above)

I for one like hellenic factions though and hope a few are included. Also means they can share at least a few basic units from EB, leaving more room for new units in EB2.

[Foytaz]

[QUOTE=General Appo;2063440Man, I´m just so excited to see where you´re gonna find place outside the Hellenic world to cramp in 8 new factions.[/QUOTE]

Go north and east and you'll find them. Lack of evidence about germanic tribes would be a problem thoug.

[Cyrus]

You believe, your not sure if you posted or not? I'll help you out by doing a simple function called a search. Post number 229 by Sarcasm in this very thread gives a very insightful explanation in to why the Basque will not be a faction in EB II. I have to say while what the spanish government (and to lesser extent the french governement) has done to snuff out the unique culture of the Basque is upsetting that does not mean history should be rewritten in to making this people in to something they never were.

IMHO the Arevaci of the Celtiberians would be a better faction choice to represent the diversity of people located on the Iberian Peninsula during EB II timeframe.

Well i am certanly sorry if i haven't read every single one of the 1041 posts of this thread,also i don't know if you are familiar with the sarcastic expression "i belive" it may mean i'm not shure but in this case it means i know.

[Conqueror]

1: Numidia (Western part)
2: Veneti
3: Caucasian Iberia
4: A Celtiberian tribe
5: Ulaid or Erain
6: Remanents of the Scythians
7: Belgi
8: Northern part of the Mauryan Empire
9: Illyrian tribe
10: A German Tribe


Keep in mind that these (not just some but all of them) should be both:

1. more powerful/influential than Pergamon at their peak during the timeframe and
2. with enough information available on them to be feasibly represented as factions,
in order to justify giving Pergamon the boot (going by Foytaz's argument that Pergamon wasn't significant enough to deserve a place in EBII).

[General Appo]

Indeed. If Pergamon was "just a petty client-state" then surely the Illyrians must be...well, utterly unimportant compared to Pergamon at least.

Btw, Mauryan empire will not be in because of reasons explained about 30,000 times.

[Foytaz]

Keep in mind that these (not just some but all of them) should be both:

1. more powerful/influential than Pergamon at their peak during the timeframe and
2. with enough information available on them to be feasibly represented as factions,
in order to justify giving Pergamon the boot (going by Foytaz's argument that Pergamon wasn't significant enough to deserve a place in EBII).

isn't number of provinces hardcoded actually???, so tell me prey how do you implement those Pergamon, Bosphorus and Gods know what else in Asia Mikra?, mind that Arche, Ptolemaioi, Makedonia and Pontus had their holdings as well. Doesn't it mean you'll have to merge other provinces to keep their numbers in balance according to 10 new hellenic factions???
It'd become EB - Hellenes instead of EB2 imo.

[Phalanx300]

The Provinces for alot of new factions are probably already there(in EB1 map). And also, how can these new factions not be 1 city factions? Enough factions of EB1 are. So you don't have to look out for the Province limit. :yes:

[Foytaz]

The Provinces for alot of new factions are probably already there(in EB1 map). And also, how can these new factions not be 1 city factions? Enough factions of EB1 are. So you don't have to look out for the Province limit. :yes:

One-city factions do sound good for EB2-minimod but would be weird in complex mod imo. Anyways everything about EB2 is up to the team so our quarrels are pure academic:2thumbsup:

[Strategos Alexandros]

I don't think that they should all be Hellenic factions. I would like to see Pergamon, a Bosphorean facton and possibly Massalia but given the choice I would put the inclusion of another Celtic or Germanic faction over that of Bosphorus or Massalia. And to answer your question about provinces, there are already provinces for Pergamon, Syracuse, Massalia and Kyrene as well as two provinces for Bosphorus. I don't think all five of these should be in, but...
Edit: Casse, Getai, Sweboz, Pontus, Saka, Saba, Lusotannan, Hayasdan and AFAIK Pahlava are all one city factions. And besides, quarreling is fun :D

[Viking_Wårlord]

"I would put the inclusion of another Celtic or Germanic faction over that of Bosphorus or Massalia. "

Why the hell do we need another Celtic faction?:wall:
There's already 4 of them!:furious3:
And only 1 Germanic!:help:

We should put 2 more Germanic factions, a Basque faction,a proto-Slavic one and ,if possible; a Jewish faction!:shame:

[Foot]

oh yes, thats right I forgot to answer you earlier.

In cases of emergency the druids would pick a king to face the problem, however in all other cases the Vergobret (in the case of the Aedui) or other leader of the magistrate would be picked by nobility. And as for only druids possessing any knowledge, what evidence do you have of this? Particularly as it was the celtic blacksmiths who renowned as the some of the greatest in the world, whose expertise equipped the romans.

You certainly won't be seeng a Basque or Proto-Slavic faction as we know nothing about these groups during our timeframe. As for a Jewish faction, they did not appear as an independent state until well into our timeframe, and were certainly not expansionistic once they became independent.

I must also ask you to remove the first signature pic you have. This one is reserved for members of the EB Team. The others are, of course, okay.

Foot

[Taliferno]

"I would put the inclusion of another Celtic or Germanic faction over that of Bosphorus or Massalia. "

Why the hell do we need another Celtic faction?:wall:
There's already 4 of them!:furious3:
And only 1 Germanic!:help:

We should put 2 more Germanic factions, a Basque faction,a proto-Slavic one and ,if possible; a Jewish faction!:shame:

What other two German tribes do we know enough about at EBs start date?

Which proto-Slavic tribe at the start date?

No independant Jewish faction existed at the start date. To include them they would need to be included as an emergant faction, which has already been ruled out a number of times on this thread, if you've read it.

[Sarcasm]

I like how he keeps saying "we".

[dromychaetes]

Hi, I'm kinda new here, I've had the patience to read only the firs page as everyone was arguing about a new "german" tribe, I saw someone tried to explain that there was not any germanic tribe then, cause "german" means in latin "twin" like in "twin brothers", the term used by the latins to define the 2 tribes in in Poland and East Germany today, I think the marcomanii and the teutons. so germanic people didn't even exist as an identity. Ok, now, about new factions, I don't know if anyone mentioned earlier, but I didn't see the Dacians in the first EB, instead of them where the thracians, who where not the same thing. So, if you want to be historical accurate the dacians where neighbors with the tracians in the south and in the west they had the Boii and Tauriscii, galic tribes. There where famous for their archers, for falx dacica and sica... but I think most of you know that. and Dromichaites was the dacian leader who defeated Lysimachus in cca. 280 B.C. so that would be a start.

thanks for reading and I hope I didn't repeat what someone else wrote earlier, I'll try to read the hole topic.

[Tellos Athenaios]

We do not have any 'Thracians' in EB. We do have the Getai, one of the many Thracian/Dacian tribes. It should perhaps be noted that what we call Getia Koile (with its provincial capital of famous Sarmiszegethusa) is better known as Dacia.

[dromychaetes]

So it will appear as the "Getai" wich is the greek name for the roman name "Dacia"?

[machinor]

AFAIK Latin for "twins" is "gemini" (like the star constellation) and not "german".

[dromychaetes]

Well Iordanes in "Getica" says that german means "twin". ;)

[dromychaetes]

there are not many sources on the internet, but according to University of Notre Dame's site:

germanus -a -um [having the same parents]; m. or f. as subst. [own brother , own sister]. Transf., [brotherly, sisterly; genuine, real, true]. Adv., germane, [faithfully, honestly].

[a completely inoffensive name]

Just to let you know, don't double post, there is an edit button for adding stuff on.

Unless you cant edit as a junior member, in that case, I am an idiot and disregard this entire post.

[dromychaetes]

can't do it. probably cause I'm new here. I'll install EB1 again to remember about it, and hope to have another few ideas about the new game. If the developers are interested in details about the dacians, I'm here and now a bit about it. feel free to ask.

[Strategos Alexandros]

"I would put the inclusion of another Celtic or Germanic faction over that of Bosphorus or Massalia. "

Why the hell do we need another Celtic faction?:wall:
There's already 4 of them!:furious3:
And only 1 Germanic!:help:

We should put 2 more Germanic factions, a Basque faction,a proto-Slavic one and ,if possible; a Jewish faction!:shame:

There aren't 4 Celtic factions, there's 3. And Germanic factions are very difficult to research, although I would like another one.
Why not another Celtic faction anyway? Don't you think Galatia or the Brigantes would be fun?

[Styles]

Kimbern, Teutonen und Ambronen: Die Kimbern, Teutonen und Abronen waren germanische Völker, die ursprünglich in Jütland beheimatet waren. Gut 100 Jahre vor Christus begann ihre lange Reise. Immerwährende Kälte und Hunger waren der Grund, weshalb sie Jütland verließen, und nach Süden aufbrachen. Ihre Reise ging über Schlesien, Böhmen, Ungarn, Rumänien, Italien- rund 8000km legte der Treck in ca. 20 Jahren zurück. Sie lebten hauptsächlich von Fischfang und Überfällen. Wo sie auch verbeikamen hinterließen sie Angst und Schrecken.

"Es ist schlaff und dumm, sich mit Schweiss zu erarbeiten, was man sich mit Blut erkämpfen kann. Kimbern & Teutonen

Tacitus bezeichnete sie als "Tiere auf zwei Beinen". Bei Noricum (Noreia), besiegten sie 113 v. Chr. ein römisches Heer. Sie zogen dann westwärts über den Rhein nach Gallien und vernichteten, nachdem ihnen Rom die Bitte um Zuweisung von Land abgeschlagen hatte, weitere drei römische Heere (109, 107 und 105 v. Chr.) und trafen erst bei den Keltiberern auf Widerstand. Sie vereinigten sich im Gebiet der unteren Seine mit den Helvetiern und drangen auf verschiedenen Wegen in Italien ein, wo Rom ihnen das Gebiet nördlich des Po überlassen musste. Am Ziel ihrer Reise und Träume angelangt, wurden sie 102 v. Chr. von Marius bei Aquae Sextiae und Vercellae (Norditalien) vernichtet.

Well its german could someone translate it?

[Ibn-Khaldun]

Kimber, Teuton and Ambronen: The Kimber, Teuton and Abronen were Germanic peoples who originally were home in Jutland. More than 100 years before Christ began their long journey. Perpetual cold and hunger were the reason why they left Jutland, and set out to the south. Their journey was over Silesia, Bohemia, Hungary, Romania, Italy, about 8000 km, the trek in about 20 years ago. They lived mainly by fishing and robberies. Where she also verbeikamen they left behind fear and horror.

"It is limp and stupid, with sweat to develop what we can fight with blood. Kimber & Teuton

Tacitus described them as "animals on two legs." When Noricum (Noreia), they defeated 113 BC, a Roman army. They then moved westward across the Rhine after Gaul and destroyed after Rome asking them to allocate land amputated had another three Roman armies (109, 107 and 105 BC) and met only when the Keltiberern opposition. They united in the territory of the lower Seine with the Helvetii and penetrated in various ways in Italy, where Rome them the area north of the Po had to leave. At the destination of their journey and dreams arrived, they were 102 BC by Marius at Aquae Sextiae and Vercellae (northern Italy) destroyed.


Thank the Google translate! :laugh4:

[Hax]

Where she also verbeikamen they left behind fear and horror.

Where they went, they left horror and fear behind.

[dromychaetes]

This is a thread for new factions, but if you want, we can open a new thread where we can discuss about these people... From what it says above, they where living in Denmark today, and moved southward to a kinder climate. but is much to talk, cause my opinion is that the germanic people didn't even exist back then, in ancient times, and about the early medieval germans... I don't have enough documentation to have an opinion, except perhaps the ghots, who where actualy getai or dacians, living in S-E side of Romania today. Anyway, the date they start moving is 160 years later from 272, when the game starts. It would be just a discution for our own knowledge.

[dromychaetes]

ok... I haven't played EB1 for a year now and I had to reinstall it to remember. I would have to say that the troop tree is too complicated, and that dacians never had phalanx or skirmishers like you put it, with pilla (javelins). If I remember correct they had mostly light cavalry, shields and spears, great archers, good infantry, especially the so called "falxmen" who used Falx Dacica, but the normal infantry mostly used "Sica" a smaller falx. The falx had about 180 cm, and about 90-100 cm of that was the blade, curved and with small channels so that the blood can flow and the blade will remain clean. The sica had only about 60-80 cm, and was used as a normal one handed sword. it was also curved like a sicle. So, in my opinion, skirmishers would have to go, to remain plain infantry, falxmen, maybe an aditional infantry type with sica, archers, maybe 2 types, and cavalry, light, heavy (Tarabostes - they where the dacian nobles) and some horse archers, because the influence of the scythians was present at the time. I'll play it a bit tonight to look around the map and see about the cities, didn't have to much time last night.

[Foot]

If you cannot back-up your statements with sources and evidence they are worthless to us. I'm sorry, but how can we implement anything you say without the evidence to back it up?

Foot

[zurab]

http://conflicts.rem33.com/images/Georgia/Iberia_Strabo.htm

[dromychaetes]

If you cannot back-up your statements with sources and evidence they are worthless to us. I'm sorry, but how can we implement anything you say without the evidence to back it up?

Foot

I can give you some links but they are in romanian and you wouldn't understand much. Usually, I read these information in books, the internet is full of crap. I'll see if I can find some good sites, but I can tell you clear, there where no phalanxes in native dacian army. if there where in some points mercenary hoplites is another thing.

[LuciusCorneliusSulla]

Please tell me you arent considering leaving Syracuse or Pergamon out - their potential was incredible, even if not fully realised. :furious3:
Illyria and Numidia would be a shame to waste too.

These are all foetal nations that could have become great had they not been snuffed out by Rome. Bottom line is that we'll never know the potential that any of them really had, were Rome never to come to power, so you should base your inclusion on two things enjoyability (we are all here to game after all) and availability of information (for factions with factual depth). That means staying tight to the mediterranean basin for the most part.

[Taliferno]

Please tell me you arent considering leaving Syracuse or Pergamon out - their potential was incredible, even if not fully realised. :furious3:
Illyria and Numidia would be a shame to waste too.

These are all foetal nations that could have become great had they not been snuffed out by Rome. Bottom line is that we'll never know the potential that any of them really had, were Rome never to come to power, so you should base your inclusion on two things enjoyability (we are all here to game after all) and availability of information (for factions with factual depth). That means staying tight to the mediterranean basin for the most part.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=103202 Stele 6 confirms that Pergamon will be in EB2

[Foot]

I can give you some links but they are in romanian and you wouldn't understand much. Usually, I read these information in books, the internet is full of crap. I'll see if I can find some good sites, but I can tell you clear, there where no phalanxes in native dacian army. if there where in some points mercenary hoplites is another thing.

We are fully equipped with some romanians so links to books would be great. But please be aware that information found on the internet should certainly be taken with a pinch of salt as it rarely is able to keep up with continuing research or engage with both sides of an argument. We don't use the internet as a resource in EB, but instead rely on primary and secondary texts as well as archaelogical finds. We also don't have dacian phalanxes, but there is a thracian one from the southern tribes who were heavily influenced by the Makedonian military.

But to be quite honest our getian and thracian historians are top-notch and we feel comfortable with the portrayal of that region in EBI and it will largely be the same in EBII.

Foot

[dromychaetes]

I've had the "pleasure" to chat with one on a roumanian forum, and it came to my mind to see what is going on here. if you rely on this kind of people... let me put it in a nice way... you'll get nowhere and EBII will have skirmishers and stuff like that. I don't know if there are any writings of Diodor of Sicily on the internet, I tried to find some, there is presented the first dacian king, Dromichaites, who ruled in the period you're game would start. Firstly, there was no such thing as an assembled army, there where the king's guards, but the military organization was made by every taraboste in his settlement as the dacians where mostly a defensive nation, they didn't go for other lands than their own, so there was not an army like the macedonian or the roman army. It's very much to tell so I don't know if here is the place to discuss it. But my first impresion, and I'm only interested, as a Total War fan, and a romanian, to see dacians in the game as they actually where. The capital is said to be Helis, near Argesus river, left side of Danube, so that would be the main city, the capital of the burii is also presented as other 2-3 settlements, capitals of other dacian tribes.

I was trying to help a bit, but if you think it's not needed and your researchers are helping, not like in EB1, then that's fine with me, the only thing that is important to me is to see Dacia like it was, without those funy greek names for troops and so on.

[Foot]

You probably spoke to Cronos Impera. He is not the lead historian, the very able Paullus is Faction Coordinator for the Getai, and he is also the co-Lead Historian for the EB Team (you can read up on him in Stele #7.

And what language would you like us to use? Dacian and Thracian is unknown beyond a few non-military terms. Greek is the closest we can get, unfortunately.

My only concern is that you come here as a recent member with only 9 posts to your name making all kinds of assertions but so far unwilling to back any of it up with evidence. There is no way of knowing if you are legit or just trying to yank our chain. It is helpful in any internet forum to maintain a healthy level of distrust to any person you don't know.

Furthermore, our Getai faction does not represent the Dacians (as far as I am aware). It represents the Ordes Tribe. I would suggest that you PM Paullus with your concerns in a more coherent form than is available to you here and await his reply.

Insulting members of our team is going to get you no where, btw. Each and every one of them put so much time and energy into this project that to even question them as an individual is offensive. Question the evidence, but do not insult our team members.

Foot

[satalexton]

^congrats foot, ur 8000th post =]

[dromychaetes]

I cannot so far send you books in romanian, they are at the national library, in romanian, I can only give you and the others that do this the titles and the authors. The fact that the getai and the dacians where the same thing is well known. there where however some who said that the getai where the western dacians. About the language, it doesnt look to good if the getai and the greek factions (makedonia and greek cities) use the same language. I don't have the answer for that yet, I'll think about it. and for the fact that I have 9 or 10 or 20 posts, it doesn't matter, all that matters is that the information is correct.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I cannot so far send you books in romanian [...] it doesn't matter, all that matters is that the information is correct.

Are we supposed to just take you for your word until you get that information then?


^congrats foot, ur 8000th post =]

Why isn't he a senior member yet? I have seen senior members with only around 2,000 posts.

[dromychaetes]

well, what is your source of information? have you any real sources to show me that skirmishers with pilla existed back then in Dacia? or that phalanxes where present at the time?

[Foot]

I cannot so far send you books in romanian, they are at the national library, in romanian, I can only give you and the others that do this the titles and the authors.

Of course you cannot send us books! We don't have an office or anything. If you write an essay, do you send the books along with it to be marked by your professor?! No. You use footnotes or endnotes. Same principle applies here


well, what is your source of information? have you any real sources to show me that skirmishers with pilla existed back then in Dacia? or that phalanxes where present at the time?

No. You have to put forward your sources first. Not the other way round. How can we answer criticism if we do not have an argument (supported by evidence) to respond to. If we had to answer everyone's theories (correct or crack-pot) we wouldn't have time to make a mod. It is up to you to put forward an strong and supported argument for a certain representation. If you cannot be bothered to put the time in to do that then we certainly don't have the time to respond to it.

Foot

[Viking_Wårlord]

Here you are, I've changed my signature...

[bovi]

Why isn't he a senior member yet? I have seen senior members with only around 2,000 posts.
What difference would it make? Seniority and the respect it entails is in the minds of the participants and earned by quality posts, a title means nothing.


I cannot so far send you books in romanian, they are at the national library, in romanian, I can only give you and the others that do this the titles and the authors.
Do so. You may also want to type in a translation of some passages that you think are particularly important in the matter, so that people who don't have the book can follow the discussion. For instance:

The ancient historian [name] wrote in his work [book name] that the Dacians eschewed skirmishers, stating that they had religious compunctions against killing at a distance. This is seen in the passage in the 6th chapter, which can be rendered as:
"The Dacian army assembled on the hill and surveyed the foreign invaders. The camp priest prayed to Zalmoxis that the enemy javelins would be sundered by lightning from the sky, so that the ungodly weapons would not spoil the upcoming battle."

You of course realize that this is completely made up. You can also see Cmaqc's posts in the Gaesatae thread on the EB1 forum for a very nice and orderly way to present evidence.

[Ludens]

Why isn't he a senior member yet? I have seen senior members with only around 2,000 posts.

Promotions are actually not determined by post count. Senior member is a special rank that is conferred to about 12 people every half year, generally for major contributions to the community.


Please tell me you arent considering leaving Syracuse or Pergamon out - their potential was incredible, even if not fully realised. :furious3:
Illyria and Numidia would be a shame to waste too.

Pergamon, as stated before, will certainly be a faction. However, team members indicated that Syracuse most likely won't make it. The main problem is that there is barely any information on their military in the post-Alexandrian era. Also, chances are that Syracuse as a faction will end up being simply a speed bump on the way of Rome or Carthage. Archimedes notwithstanding, Syracuses glory days were well and truly over.

Incidentally, the main criteria for faction inclusion in EB are historicity and regional importance. Availability of information is important too, but enjoyability is not a criterion. Now matter how fun it might be, there won't be a Caledonian faction.

[Morte66]

enjoyability is not a criterion

This is a terrible shame.

[bovi]

EB has always been based on the assumption that a realistic and historical presentation is not a damper on playability, but rather increases it. That said, we will not add anything that might be "cool" or "fun" if it jars with these. Such as flaming pigs, for instance.

[Sir Edward]

As interesting as this discussion is I'm not sure this is the right thread for it.

I'll contribute by trying to get the thread back on topic.

1. Pergamon -- preview already available.
2. Bosphorean Kingdom-- a hellenic faction with a nice variety of native scythians & thracians
3. Belgae-- already has a small entry in the EB website, where they state starting territories, would be in a position to disrupt gaul and sweboz expansions, along with through rebellions giving the casse someone to fight in britain.
4. Boii-- an eastern europe celt faction, in my opinion at this time was better organized politically then the alternative illyrians tribe, keeps rome from heading north east to quickly and Epirus focus on the Balkans. EB addded a unit or 2 specific for the Boii in the last update.
5. Arevaci-- celtiberians, highlights the diversity of peoples in the iberian peninsula, metal working, coin minting, urbanized into oppida, subjugated their neighbors, make & broke alliances, a diversity of weapons and fighting styles, led the resistance along with the Belli against the Romans.
6. Atropatene-- an ancient diadochi kingdom in Azerbaijan, I can't find to many records about them but they were independent of the Seleucids. I admit I don't know much about their fighting style but imagine it to be simiar to the Hai and the Seleucids. Would give armenia someone to compete against for control of Caucasus and another thorn in the side of the gray death or an ally/bufferstate against parthian western expansion.
7. Gandhara--Something needs to be done about India, the current system of reelling to parthian control gives disruptive results, akin to what happen with Arabian Peninsula in pre-Saba EB. To represent the Mauryan empire would be out of the question but it would be nice to have a Mauryan northwestern satrap faction in game, taxilla from what i've read was a provincial capital.
8. Massyli-- Numidians faction, guarantees Carthage will have to fight for dominance in North Africa.
9. Nabataea-- Northern Arabian kingdom, access to red sea and arab trade routes, ramained independent until conquest by Traijan, expanded territory north into jordan at cost of weaken Seleucids.
10. Empty-- this faction slot should remain open for scripting purposes.

[Irish]

I would also like to see the Bosporean Kingdom, the Atropatene, and the Numidians. There should be enough information on all of these to make a unit roster... I'll do some research.

[Majd il-Romani]

As interesting as this discussion is I'm not sure this is the right thread for it.

I'll contribute by trying to get the thread back on topic.

1. Pergamon -- preview already available.
2. Bosphorean Kingdom-- a hellenic faction with a nice variety of native scythians & thracians
3. Belgae-- already has a small entry in the EB website, where they state starting territories, would be in a position to disrupt gaul and sweboz expansions, along with through rebellions giving the casse someone to fight in britain.
4. Boii-- an eastern europe celt faction, in my opinion at this time was better organized politically then the alternative illyrians tribe, keeps rome from heading north east to quickly and Epirus focus on the Balkans. EB addded a unit or 2 specific for the Boii in the last update.
5. Arevaci-- celtiberians, highlights the diversity of peoples in the iberian peninsula, metal working, coin minting, urbanized into oppida, subjugated their neighbors, make & broke alliances, a diversity of weapons and fighting styles, led the resistance along with the Belli against the Romans.
6. Atropatene-- an ancient diadochi kingdom in Azerbaijan, I can't find to many records about them but they were independent of the Seleucids. I admit I don't know much about their fighting style but imagine it to be simiar to the Hai and the Seleucids. Would give armenia someone to compete against for control of Caucasus and another thorn in the side of the gray death or an ally/bufferstate against parthian western expansion.
7. Gandhara--Something needs to be done about India, the current system of reelling to parthian control gives disruptive results, akin to what happen with Arabian Peninsula in pre-Saba EB. To represent the Mauryan empire would be out of the question but it would be nice to have a Mauryan northwestern satrap faction in game, taxilla from what i've read was a provincial capital.
8. Massyli-- Numidians faction, guarantees Carthage will have to fight for dominance in North Africa.
9. Nabataea-- Northern Arabian kingdom, access to red sea and arab trade routes, ramained independent until conquest by Traijan, expanded territory north into jordan at cost of weaken Seleucids.
10. Empty-- this faction slot should remain open for scripting purposes.

I agree with all (especially Gandhara. I WANT INDIA!) except for #6 and #10. THere are enough Diadochi kingdoms already how about the 2nd numidian kingdom?
And for 10, We shuld have either the Skythian remnants or another Germanic tribe

[Sir Edward]

I agree with all (especially Gandhara. I WANT INDIA!) except for #6 and #10. THere are enough Diadochi kingdoms already how about the 2nd numidian kingdom?
And for 10, We shuld have either the Skythian remnants or another Germanic tribe

Atropatene was the weakest canidate I put up, I was considering in its place Iberia (East not West). I decided not to include a second numidian kingdom since unique gameplay is a consideration of EB when deciding factions. But the representation of Gaul shows this may indeed be the path EB chooses to take. As for skythian and germanic tribes there aren't too many good options at the start of this time period. One option would be the cimbri but they would not have much room for expansion. The Bastarnae may be another quality choice, not sure how much archaelogical finds have been identified with this group.

[General Appo]

The Bastarnae are really growing on me as a choice for EB2 faction, especially after reading all the rather new findings and reports that indicates that the Bastarnae were quite a lot more important than previously believed to be. Plus, they´ve already got a clear starting province, good expansion room (both gameplay and historically) and wouldn´t need a lot of new units.

[Ludens]

The Bastarnae are really growing on me as a choice for EB2 faction, especially after reading all the rather new findings and reports that indicates that the Bastarnae were quite a lot more important than previously believed to be. Plus, they´ve already got a clear starting province, good expansion room (both gameplay and historically) and wouldn´t need a lot of new units.

Sounds interesting. Could you provide a link to the news items about these finds?

[Dumbass]

Massalia really appeals to me - Civilised faction surrounded by "barbarians". They have an interesting starting position and can expand where ever they want.

[burn_again]

I think Massalia would be a bad choice. They didn't expand much historically and gameplay-wise it would be rather strange if you had to fight a strong greek faction in southern Gaul.

[Styles]

If the Bastarnae are included the Skirii should be part of the faction. They lived in Mazuria at that time.

The Cimbrii/Teutons/Ambrones would make another great faction but they are a bit too close to the Suebi.

[Puupertti Ruma]

I think Massalia would be a bad choice. They didn't expand much historically and gameplay-wise it would be rather strange if you had to fight a strong greek faction in southern Gaul.

Well, gameplay-wise I'dd see fighting a strong greek faction in a region containing only gauls, a very fresh and fun, and showing the diversity of ancient world in a great way. Same reasoning applies to having the Galatians as a faction. There you would have celts to fight in a region full of greeks. And besides, Galatia/Massalia have celtic/hellenic units, whether they are a faction or not.

[General Appo]

Well...the EB Team would have to be very careful to avoid something as extremely unhistorical as Massalia conquering all of Gaul which I fear is what a strong Greek faction in the south of Gaul would do. Nor can they be allowed to be wiped out after 10 years which is another very likely event.
If the EB team could get them to concentrate on just sticking to the coast then maybe it could work, but to be honest I feel that Massalia is the sort of city-state better represented as Eleutheroi, since they during EB´s timeframe never really tried nor could expand.
At most like a few regions west down the coast from Massalia, and even that was never really close to happening during EB´s timeframe. Had the game been set a hundred years earlier or more, then absolutely, Massalia would almost be a must, but now I think they´re better left out. Unless of course the EB team has some amazing plan for it.

Pergamon on the other hand, they certainly tried, could and did expanded a lot.

[Skullheadhq]

Perhaps Teutons and Cimbri as a coalition to outbalance the SweBoz.
Only problem is that they where an people on the move. But they originally came from Jutland.

[Styles]

Same for the Suebi but at the time EBII starts they may have been still in Juteland.

[Ludens]

Same for the Suebi but at the time EBII starts they may have been still in Juteland.

Suebi = Sweboz.

[Cartaphilus]

When do you announce another faction?
It could be a great Christmas present for the fans.
:sweatdrop:

[Styles]

Yes I know Ludens.

the Cimbrii/Teutons/Ambrones could have been still in Juteland in 275 and not all of them left. They arrived at the alps in 113 BC thats a lot of time to reach the south and the Suebi/Suevi arrived in Gallia 71 BC so same could be said about them regarding the "wandering tribe"

[burn_again]

Well...the EB Team would have to be very careful to avoid something as extremely unhistorical as Massalia conquering all of Gaul which I fear is what a strong Greek faction in the south of Gaul would do. Nor can they be allowed to be wiped out after 10 years which is another very likely event.
If the EB team could get them to concentrate on just sticking to the coast then maybe it could work, but to be honest I feel that Massalia is the sort of city-state better represented as Eleutheroi, since they during EB´s timeframe never really tried nor could expand.

Exactly.
A while ago I played a mod of Europa Universalis 2 set in the EB time frame, which had Massalia as a faction. They were pretty strong and dominated Gaul which was pretty annoying (and completely ahistorical) if you played as Gauls or Romans.
The Galatians would be a different thing, they were pretty agressive and had a lot of impact in Asia Minor, while Massalia had more a cultural impact on the gaulic inland, not a military one.

[Ludens]

the Cimbrii/Teutons/Ambrones could have been still in Juteland in 275 and not all of them left. They arrived at the alps in 113 BC thats a lot of time to reach the south and the Suebi/Suevi arrived in Gallia 71 BC so same could be said about them regarding the "wandering tribe"

Wasn't that just a mercenary army? Because IIRC the Marcomanni (who were part of the Suebi confederacy) were still in Germany and a later point and considered to be even more of a threat than the Arminius and his Cherusi.

I think the problem with the Cimbri and even more the Teutons is that so little is known about them. Since they were on the move, they must have been driven out, which implies that they weren't powerful. Yes, they gave the Romans a scare, but this was probably due to sheer numbers and Roman incompetence rather than the Cimbri being inherently powerful.

[Styles]

Ariovistus was a leader of the Suebi and other allied Germanic peoples in the second quarter of the 1st century BC. He and his followers took part in a war in Gaul, assisting the Arverni and Sequani to defeat their rivals the Aedui, and settled in large numbers in conquered Gallic territory in the Alsace region, but were defeated in the Battle of Vosges and driven back over the Rhine in 58 BC by Julius Caesar.


"Some time before 100 BC many of the Cimbri, as well as the Teutones and Ambrones migrated south-east. After several unsuccessful battles with the Boii and other Celtic tribes, they appeared ca 113 BC in Noricum, where they invaded the lands of one of Rome's allies, the Taurisci."


According to the Res gestae (ch. 26) of Augustus, the Cimbri were still found in the area around the turn of the Common Era:

“ My fleet sailed from the mouth of the Rhine eastward as far as the lands of the Cimbri, to which, up to that time, no Roman had ever penetrated either by land or by sea, and the Cimbri and Charydes and Semnones and other peoples of the Germans of that same region through their envoys sought my friendship and that of the Roman people. ”

The contemporary Greek geographer Strabo testifies that the Cimbri still existed as a Germanic tribe, presumably in the "Cimbric peninsula" (since they are said to live by the North Sea and to have paid tribute to Augustus):

“ As for the Cimbri, some things that are told about them are incorrect and others are extremely improbable. For instance, one could not accept such a reason for their having become a wandering and piratical folk as this that while they were dwelling on a Peninsula they were driven out of their habitations by a great flood-tide; for in fact they still hold the country which they held in earlier times; and they sent as a present to Augustus the most sacred kettle in their country, with a plea for his friendship and for an amnesty of their earlier offences, and when their petition was granted they set sail for home; and it is ridiculous to suppose that they departed from their homes because they were incensed on account of a phenomenon that is natural and eternal, occurring twice every day. And the assertion that an excessive flood-tide once occurred looks like a fabrication, for when the ocean is affected in this way it is subject to increases and diminutions, but these are regulated and periodical. "

[Yyrkoon]

What about Axum? You know, Ethiopia. There was an expansionist empire from about the 4th century BC as far as I know. It would slow the yellow death.

[Sir Edward]

What about Axum? You know, Ethiopia. There was an expansionist empire from about the 4th century BC as far as I know. It would slow the yellow death.

:no: please read this thread axum/ethiopia/nubia have been discussed to death & why they won't be a faction in EBII

[Jolt]

What about Axum? You know, Ethiopia. There was an expansionist empire from about the 4th century BC as far as I know. It would slow the yellow death.

I also supported that idea, but apparently it has been discarded since the quality of the Unit Rooster for such a faction would be extremely bad in comparison with the Ptolemies, and thus prone to getting crushed by the Ptolemies every time.

[Hax]

Yup. It would be mostly tribal African warriors with sticks and some swords, though if they could get access to Red Sea Hoplites, it would be very yummy. However, it wouldn't work anyway. The only room for expansion would be north, and to attack the Ptolemies turn 1 would be..suicidal.

[MeinPanzer]

Yup. It would be mostly tribal African warriors with sticks and some swords,

Hardly. They would have about as diverse a roster as the Saba, and though they definitely wouldn't be a major opponent for the Ptolemies, I think that if they were properly implemented, and the Ptolemies properly balanced, they would be able to hold them off.

[oudysseos]

As, of course, they more or less did in real life.

[Taliferno]

In any case, it isn't because Axum didn't have a diverse unit roster (they did, and have about 5 AOR units for that area in EB1) that they aren't being considered for EB2. Its because a precious culture slot would have to be given up to do them justice.

[lobf]

Yup. It would be mostly tribal African warriors with sticks and some swords, though if they could get access to Red Sea Hoplites, it would be very yummy. However, it wouldn't work anyway. The only room for expansion would be north, and to attack the Ptolemies turn 1 would be..suicidal.

Sticks and swords? This seems a little off to me. And the Ptolemies would have been African too, so I don't understand the distinction there.

Edit- And if it was just tribes with sticks how could they have been considered expansionist?

[Celtic_Punk]

Casse were pretty aggressive with their sticks n swords. The lonely Isles needs a new challenge for the Casse i think... Maybe Caledonians? the East is filled up nicely up to western Europe. the only places that seem a little empty are the isles and africa.

I mean the Saka and Skythians mostly faced independant tribes... but thats what it was like for them, if i am not mistaken? So I don't see any real reason to plop a new faction in there. but if possible the Saba should have a new neighbour (if there is supporting evidence of more than just bunch of smaller tribes, that is not my area of knowledge) for a challenge maybe. If not I definitely say either Caledonia or Goidllic, The casse don't really have any challenge to face all by their lonesome, and that usually pushes me away from having a campaign with them. I get quite bored sitting there with no face to my enemy.

Also could it have been possible that the Caledonians took Britain, if pushed into a situation with the Casse where they would have fought over the island? They were brave enough. The only question remains would they have been strong enough. After all EB is about recreating history, and those "what-if---?" questions right?

[Ludens]

Casse were pretty aggressive with their sticks n swords. The lonely Isles needs a new challenge for the Casse i think... Maybe Caledonians? the East is filled up nicely up to western Europe. the only places that seem a little empty are the isles and africa.

Every time someone mentions Caledonians in this thread I get a desire to hit him with those sticks n swords :brood: . Come on people, Caledonia was not a nation, it was a geographical indication. The Caledonians were a bunch of warring mountain tribes, not a unified force like the Aedui confedercy. Yes, they were not subjugated in EB's time-frame, but that was really due to their lack of sophistication (few roads or sizeable towns suitable for a garrison), and the terrain. There were several reasonably powerful and unified tribes in Britain, so why do people keep brining up the Caledonians?

[oudysseos]

Ludens, I dare you to try that hitting with sticks thing in Glasgow on a match night.

[Ludens]

Ludens, I dare you to try that hitting with sticks thing in Glasgow on a match night.

I did specify the location as "in this thread" (which would also imply the period of history as being EB's time frame, although I did not explicitly state this). However, the one time I was in Glasgow on a match night, it did seem to me that the Caledonians were a bunch of warring tribes. ~;)

[Ibrahim]

Sticks and swords? This seems a little off to me. And the Ptolemies would have been African too, so I don't understand the distinction there.

Edit- And if it was just tribes with sticks how could they have been considered expansionist?

he said tribal africans?:inquisitive:

anyways: what hax meant was that the soldier's from that time and place lacked the quality in weaponry that their neighbors had-so their spears when compared to the models used by their neighbors (ptolemioi, saba, AS), were nothing but "sticks".

as for how they could be expansionistic: ever heard of the Zulu? It works the same way. its not a matter of weapons, but rather will.

my advice: don't take everything said literally.

otherwise, I'd have to agree: no Nubians, and no Caledonians; the caledonians were fragmented, and the nubians too militarily weak (technology wise?).

[lobf]

he said tribal africans?:inquisitive:

There's an easy way to find out...


anyways: what hax meant was that the soldier's from that time and place lacked the quality in weaponry that their neighbors had-so their spears when compared to the models used by their neighbors (ptolemioi, saba, AS), were nothing but "sticks".

Source?


as for how they could be expansionistic: ever heard of the Zulu? It works the same way. its not a matter of weapons, but rather will.

Jared Diamond and I would disagree vehemently.


my advice: don't take everything said literally.

I can't stand when people say this. I can only go off of what's said. If what's said isn't what was meant to be said, don't say it.

[Danubius]

Hello ppl :D
I'm new here, just registered, though I started playing EB 1 year ago.
I'm sorry if what I suggested here might have already been suggested, as I haven't read everything here.

EB II and the new factions that might be in it are of big interest to me, so here's my suggestions.

First of all, another Iberian faction. Most of the times I played, the Lusitani became a superpower before 200 BC. They quickly overwhelmed the carthaginians in the south, took advantage of the romans, arveni, aedui and sweboz fighting for supremacy, and conquered most of the teritory between the Iberian peninsula, Skandza, and even went after the baltic areas till the Gava Roxalanna.
Also another faction that becomes overpowerfull is Baktria. They need some more competition there. I don't know if a new faction would be needed, but a stronger Parthia that won't always ally with Baktria till the end of the game.
As I've played alot with the getae, greeks, macedonians, epirots and romans, on the hardest difficulty I've always had to repell later on in the game sieges from both a lusitanian empire in the west and a baktrian one in the east, and to fight the same battles every turn was a real pain :(

Also, I've seen the cimbrii and the teutones. I think it would be a good idea if they would be a nonplayable faction that invades at their historicall time, like the mongols and timurids are in MTW2. It would add more spice to the game, as historically they came out of nowhere and were a surprise for both the celts and the romans of that period.

A very good ideea I've seen here is a new celtic faction near the dacians, either the boii, tauriscii or scordiscii. It would make a more interesting game for the getai, a faction with wich I played alot, and the only serious competition they have most of the time is in the south where there are the epirots, macedonians and greeks.
Scythians and bastarnians would also make eastern europe more interesting, as they would be a big competition for the getae and sauromatae, and they were historically present and very important in the region.

Numidia should be brought back. The carthaginians, although loosing Iberia, always conquer the ptolemaioi who are busy with seleukia in the east, and fall easy prey from the west. Numidia would ballance that. It's a pity they never included it in EB :(
Another ideea would be the kingdom of Mauritania, though research on their armies is very little and would be a real challenge to represent actual units.
A nubian or kushite faction in the south would be great as it did exist in that time period, although it did not have a too big importance, as they were kept at bay by the ptolemaioi and the romans. Still, the ptolemaioi conquer the south too easy. Maybe a small faction of the nubians would ballance that, and they didn't even had a diversified military, so a small number of units like the Aithiopikoi Toxotai, Hanatim Kushim, Aithiopikoi Machairophoroi and Aithiopikoi Hippeis would be enough for them for the start.

And the last I've been thinking are the galatians. They would make Asia Minor alot more fun, as Pergam will be included, galatians should also be included. In EB, the AI arveni, if they get Galatia, they don't last but a few turns, so an independent faction, strong at the beginning so they won't be conquered by their neighbours, would be welcome :D

That's all I've thought of for now lol

[Ludens]

Jared Diamond and I would disagree vehemently.

Since Diamond quite often cites the rapid expansion of the stone-age Polynesians, I am not sure.

Danubius, welcome to the Org and EB ~:wave: .

A lot of your suggestions are good candidates, although you should keep in mind that EB does not add factions in order to balance others. There are better ways of doing that.

A few minor things: in EB's time, the Scyths were almost gone as a major power, superseded by the Sarmatians. They won't be making an appearance. Possible candidates in the area are the Bastarnae, the Bosporean Greek kingdom and the Celtic Lugians. I haven't heard the Tauriscii suggested yet: could you tell us a bit more about them?

As for the Cimbri and Teutones, they may have come as a surprise for the Romans, but that does not mean they came out of nowhere. It's going to be highly ahistorical if a Sweboz player is suddenly confronted with a horde that has spawned in his territory. There may be another German faction (although I think the chances of it are low), but they will be present at the start, as they were historically.

[lobf]

Since Diamond quite often cites the rapid expansion of the stone-age Polynesians, I am not sure.

The Polynesians weren't an expansionist state. They were a group of people who were the first to populate a given area. That's like saying ice-age humans were expansionist because they populated the Americas.

We're talking about established, food producing states duking it out.

[penguinking]

he said tribal
as for how they could be expansionistic: ever heard of the Zulu? It works the same way. its not a matter of weapons, but rather will.

Actually much of Zulu success is due to military reforms in weaponry, including replacing the previously used unwieldy throwing spears with shorter stabbing spears and increasing the size of the shield. This gave them a huge advantage over neighboring tribes.

[Danubius]

Danubius, welcome to the Org and EB ~:wave: .

A lot of your suggestions are good candidates, although you should keep in mind that EB does not add factions in order to balance others. There are better ways of doing that.

A few minor things: in EB's time, the Scyths were almost gone as a major power, superseded by the Sarmatians. They won't be making an appearance. Possible candidates in the area are the Bastarnae, the Bosporean Greek kingdom and the Celtic Lugians. I haven't heard the Tauriscii suggested yet: could you tell us a bit more about them?

As for the Cimbri and Teutones, they may have come as a surprise for the Romans, but that does not mean they came out of nowhere. It's going to be highly ahistorical if a Sweboz player is suddenly confronted with a horde that has spawned in his territory. There may be another German faction (although I think the chances of it are low), but they will be present at the start, as they were historically.

First of all thank you for welcoming me ~:)

You are right, the scythians were not a major power in that time. A Bosphorean Kingdom would be nice, as those 2 cities in the Crimean Peninsula are always a powerhouse of income :applause:
The bastarnae are good candidates in my opinion. They were strong in their region, defeated the dacians in the east and it was very hard for the dacians to finally stop their expansion. They had a major impact in the area as it took hundreds of years for the native dacian population to assimilate them.

As for the tauriscii, they were a celtic tribe, most likely related to the boii and the scordiscii, that were neighbours of the dacians in the west. It's an interesting thing that we in Romania have the 2 words bou (pl. boi), meaning castrated bull and taur meaning bull. Also in old latin there are the forms of taurus and bovinae/bovis, so this has made many historians come to the conclusion that the boii and the tauriscii were closely related, and were maybe gives those names asociated with cattle because of their helmets being ornate with horns. The scordiscii were also closely related to the boii and tauriscii. They founded Singidunum (Belgrad) and had near another city named Taurunum (now part of Belgrad, but in the ancient and medieval period was a distinct city). Again the connection with cattle.
Historically, the boii, tauriscii and scordiscii formed a coalition most of the time against the dacians. They were highly influencial to my ancestors because it is believed they first introduced iron craftmanship and weapons to the dacians. They were only conquered by the getae-dacians when Burebista managed to unite most of the dacian and getae tribes, thus forming a strong army able to defeat the celts in the west.
This says much about these 3 celtic tribes and their importance and strenght in the region. Of course you can't have 3 small factions to represent them, so maybe the best is the boii since historically they were the strongest in the region (having branches of them migrating even to Italy and Gaul), but also with units representing the tauriscii and scordiscii.

And yes it might be a problem for the sweboz if the cimbrii and teutones invade later on from nowhere. I did not say they were a surprise for other germanic tribes, only for celts and romans. You could fix this problem by making the cimbrii and teutones faction already allied to the sweboz when they appear. This way they would avoid attacking the sweboz and migrate south to pick on the celts and romans. In MTW2 for example, if you manage to ally with the mongols or timurids shortly after they invade, most of the time they avoid you, pass trough your territory and then attack other factions.

And since we were talking about celts, how's about making a Helveti faction? :smash:~D

[Ludens]

The Polynesians weren't an expansionist state. They were a group of people who were the first to populate a given area. That's like saying ice-age humans were expansionist because they populated the Americas.

We're talking about established, food producing states duking it out.

You're absolutely right. I apparently wasn't quite awake yesterday evening.


And yes it might be a problem for the sweboz if the cimbrii and teutones invade later on from nowhere. I did not say they were a surprise for other germanic tribes, only for celts and romans. You could fix this problem by making the cimbrii and teutones faction already allied to the sweboz when they appear. This way they would avoid attacking the sweboz and migrate south to pick on the celts and romans. In MTW2 for example, if you manage to ally with the mongols or timurids shortly after they invade, most of the time they avoid you, pass trough your territory and then attack other factions.

And since we were talking about celts, how's about making a Helveti faction? :smash:~D

Interesting information about the Taurisci. However, the number of factions is limited, so it's going to be the Boii most likely. The Helvetii would IIRC be a part of the Alpine Boii confederacy. As for the Cimbri, why do you insist they must be emerging? Don't you think they were living somewhere and started moving because their neighbours or natural disasters displaced them?

[Danubius]

Interesting information about the Taurisci. However, the number of factions is limited, so it's going to be the Boii most likely. The Helvetii would IIRC be a part of the Alpine Boii confederacy. As for the Cimbri, why do you insist they must be emerging? Don't you think they were living somewhere and started moving because their neighbours or natural disasters displaced them?

Yes what you say is true. The only problem is we don't know where exactly the cimbrii, teutones and the smaller tribe of the ambrones, the 3 main tribes that migrated, were originally located. Sources say in Jutland, but it has not been determined exactly and cannot be determined exactly. We must also take into consideration a problem, these tribes made a massive migration for that period, fighting celts (boii, arveni) alpine populations of mixed origins, and of course romans. Now we know that the Jutland peninsula in that period could not support a population that could muster an army wich would later defeat arveni or romans, who could muster a bigger army than 3 tribes originating in Jutland. So most likely these 3 tribes were joined by other tribes of celts and germanics on their way to Italy. Even if they had the whole population on the move, it's very hard to replenish casualties sustained in the several years in wich the migration took place.
That's why I think they should emerge as strong hordes, because if they start from the beginning, they will most likely be weak, unless the script is changed so that their faction starts with an advantage. But this would be unhistorical, since they did not have an advantage upon any of their neighbouring tribes in 270 BC.

Also I have a question :juggle2:
If the boii are to be eventually added as a faction in EB II, will they have horned symbols on their shields and maybe their elite units horned helmets? Of course not hollywood style horned helmets, but something like this (although it was found in Britain, I'm sure it was not something spontaneous there):
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/Celtic_Horned_Helmet_I-IIBC_British-Museum.jpg
Because it's clear they had a bull symbol, hence the names related to the bull, if we are to consider that their name derives from bull (as ther are also other theories regarding their name).

[MeinPanzer]

anyways: what hax meant was that the soldier's from that time and place lacked the quality in weaponry that their neighbors had-so their spears when compared to the models used by their neighbors (ptolemioi, saba, AS), were nothing but "sticks".

This statement is completely unfounded. Would you like to provide some sources attesting to the lack in quality of Meroitic arms at this time?

[Megas Methuselah]

But this would be unhistorical, since they did not have an advantage upon any of their neighbouring tribes in 270 BC.

Then why include them? IIRC, EB portrays factions that were important at the game's start date. From that point on, history is in the hands of the player.

Besides, the EB Team seemingly avoids emerging factions...


This statement is completely unfounded. Would you like to provide some sources attesting to the lack in quality of Meroitic arms at this time?

Heh heh. You just backed Ibrahim into a corner with a knife at his throat... :clown:

[a completely inoffensive name]

Besides, the EB Team seemingly avoids emerging factions...

Because it would be a pain to rampage through Italy as Carthage only to have 3 army stacks of Romans to appear after taking their last city.

[Ludens]

Yes what you say is true. The only problem is we don't know where exactly the cimbrii, teutones and the smaller tribe of the ambrones, the 3 main tribes that migrated, were originally located. Sources say in Jutland, but it has not been determined exactly and cannot be determined exactly. We must also take into consideration a problem, these tribes made a massive migration for that period, fighting celts (boii, arveni) alpine populations of mixed origins, and of course romans. Now we know that the Jutland peninsula in that period could not support a population that could muster an army wich would later defeat arveni or romans, who could muster a bigger army than 3 tribes originating in Jutland. So most likely these 3 tribes were joined by other tribes of celts and germanics on their way to Italy. Even if they had the whole population on the move, it's very hard to replenish casualties sustained in the several years in wich the migration took place.
That's why I think they should emerge as strong hordes, because if they start from the beginning, they will most likely be weak, unless the script is changed so that their faction starts with an advantage. But this would be unhistorical, since they did not have an advantage upon any of their neighbouring tribes in 270 BC.

You are not exactly helping your case here: if we don't know where they lived, then where should the horde spawn? Or if they were so weak, how did they become so strong? The answer is they weren't, really. It was mostly sheer numbers that made other tribes let them through. A displaced population per definition mobilizes 100% of its fighting-age males, and although these mostly won't be very good, they will fight hard because they are desperate. Yes, they gave the Romans a scare, but this was mostly due to incompetent Roman leadership, and the resultant string of defeats destroyed Roman morale. It actually took only two successful battles by a good Roman general to disperse them.

[General Appo]

This discussion is pretty pointless anyway, as the EB team has already stated that absolutely zero (0) emergent factions will appear in EB2.

[Megas Methuselah]

Because it would be a pain to rampage through Italy as Carthage only to have 3 army stacks of Romans to appear after taking their last city.

I didn't meant to appear as if I support emerging factions, so stop dropping insulting hints on me. :clown:

Besides, that situation is a horde, not an emergent faction. Get your facts straightened out, ACIN.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Emerging/reemerging factions require the horde option. That said, just because you have an emerging faction doesn't mean that you need all factions to horde.

[eddy_purpus]

Originally Posted by Hax View Post
Yup. It would be mostly tribal African warriors with sticks and some swords, though if they could get access to Red Sea Hoplites, it would be very yummy. However, it wouldn't work anyway. The only room for expansion would be north, and to attack the Ptolemies turn 1 would be..suicidal.
Lol at the sticks...
dude use some history ...
sticks = spears
swords= ........ swords ?
hahahahah muahahahha

[Hax]

dude use some history ...

Yes.

"Use" some history.

Also;

stick:
http://www.geocities.com/brisbane_hoppers/images/StickI9.jpg

Spear;

http://www.kingofswords.com/images/resize2.php?image=../images/m/95BOA.jpg&path=../images/m/95BOA.jpg&width=300

Dude, "use" some typing lessons.

[oudysseos]

Pwned

[ziegenpeter]

Then why include them? IIRC, EB portrays factions that were important at the game's start date. From that point on, history is in the hands of the player.

Well, then why did the sweboz made it in before Pergamon? I think gameplay reasons play nevertheless a decent role...

[lobf]

Yes.

"Use" some history.

Also;

stick:
http://www.geocities.com/brisbane_hoppers/images/StickI9.jpg

Spear;

http://www.kingofswords.com/images/resize2.php?image=../images/m/95BOA.jpg&path=../images/m/95BOA.jpg&width=300

Dude, "use" some typing lessons.

You're not still standing behind your (at least partially) racist assessment of "tribal" Africans from Ethiopia, are you?

[Subotan]

Au Wikipedia;


Other historians believe it was the attraction of iron working that drove the Kushites to move their capital south to Meroë, unlike Napata, there were large forests that could fire the blast furnaces. The arrival of Greek merchants throughout the region also meant that Kush was no longer dependent on trade along the Nile. Instead, it could export its goods to the Red Sea and the Greek trading colonies there.

They also fought wars against the Romans and won some battles. How could they have done that if they'd had sticks?

[Marcus Ulpius]

I've checked this thread searching for EBII factions list somewhere, but found none. No such thing was also in a FAQ, so I'll propose some factions although I'm sure they were most likely mentioned by someone before:

Numidians - they've played an active role during the Punic wars and in Carthie African situation, also Africa is more or less empty, so it could make things more interesting there.

Thracians - I know that after Lysimachos defeat they weren't much of a force, but I think adding them may lead to some new interesting options in that region. Btw, Getae were also not a single entity, yet they are in game and uniting the tribes is one of their campaign objectives, for Thracians that could be making Lysimachus dreams come true :)

Pergamon - I'm nearly sure, someone had mentioned it, but it's a pity they were omitted in EB I, the only counter argument is that they will make an already overcrowded Asia Minor hard as hell to play for minor factions.

[Megas Methuselah]

Pergamon - I'm nearly sure, someone had mentioned it, but it's a pity they were omitted in EB I, the only counter argument is that they will make an already overcrowded Asia Minor hard as hell to play for minor factions.

Hooooo boy! You're in for a treat! :clown:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=103202

[General Appo]

Thracians - I know that after Lysimachos defeat they weren't much of a force, but I think adding them may lead to some new interesting options in that region. Btw, Getae were also not a single entity, yet they are in game and uniting the tribes is one of their campaign objectives, for Thracians that could be making Lysimachus dreams come true :)


Ahem. The Getae were Thracians...

Now if you were to suggest a different Thracian tribe, say the Odrysai, now that would be something different.

[Hax]

You're not still standing behind your (at least partially) racist assessment of "tribal" Africans from Ethiopia, are you?

Racist? Yeah, man. Whatever.

Anyway, I apologize for my quick reaction concerning the Kushites. They were clearly not as underdeveloped as I might have originally thought.

[lobf]

Racist? Yeah, man. Whatever.

Anyway, I apologize for my quick reaction concerning the Kushites. They were clearly not as underdeveloped as I might have originally thought.

Well, it's a simplistic, stereotypical view. You wouldn't assume even the least developed European culture used sticks at that time, but for a little-understood African nation you were comfortable with that same assumption.

I know that putting it like this only puts you on the defensive, so I'm sorry. It's really not personal. I just try to point out inconsistencies in people's logic whenever I can.

[Megas Methuselah]

See? If we look hard enough, we'll find some common ground. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2P8hV99cw40) :yes:

[Marcus Ulpius]

Hooooo boy! You're in for a treat! :clown:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=103202

Thanks for the link. Good to see they'll be there.

[Megas Methuselah]

No problemo, Ulpsie. :2thumbsup:

[a completely inoffensive name]

I think along with Pergamon, there will be a faction slot for the Boii to curb middle Europe expansion by the Getai and Sweboz. Also, a numidian faction of some kind so Carthage does not get super powerful by 250 by taking all of Western Norther Africa. Other then that, I have no clue who else would go in. These two factions however I am sure will be in, not for historical accuracy but for the game balance needed that these two would bring to their respective regions.

[Megas Methuselah]

I think along with Pergamon, there will be a faction slot for the Boii to curb middle Europe expansion by the Getai and Sweboz. Also, a numidian faction of some kind so Carthage does not get super powerful by 250 by taking all of Western Norther Africa. Other then that, I have no clue who else would go in. These two factions however I am sure will be in, not for historical accuracy but for the game balance needed that these two would bring to their respective regions.

Yeah, those are all the possible factions I could imagine, too. I wonder what the EB Team has in store for us...

[paullus]

muaaahahahahaha

edit: i'm well aware this post is spam-like and borderline antagonistic. i'll redeem it by saying that work on a couple of our new factions has been progressing nicely, though not yet to the point we'd really have anything preview-worthy.

[Krusader]

muaaahahahahaha

edit: i'm well aware this post is spam-like and borderline antagonistic. i'll redeem it by saying that work on a couple of our new factions has been progressing nicely, though not yet to the point we'd really have anything preview-worthy.

Excellent work on the Han & Qin unit rosters btw paullus.

[Subotan]

muaaahahahahaha

edit: i'm well aware this post is spam-like and borderline antagonistic. i'll redeem it by saying that work on a couple of our new factions has been progressing nicely, though not yet to the point we'd really have anything preview-worthy.
Excellent. I need another history fix soon; if I get cold turkey I end up turning to philosophy.

Excellent work on the Han & Qin unit rosters btw paullus.

:smash:

[Aemilius Paulus]

I hope its not more spamming, Methuselah...


there will be a faction slot for the Boii to curb middle Europe expansion by the Getai and Sweboz. .
That's a fine idea, and I heartily support it, however, how much do we know about the Boii? The EB team would have tough time developing them.

As for Pergamon, am I the only one who does not look too favorably upon their new status as an EB II faction? I mean, they were just one among the thousands of Greek colonies.

[Megas Methuselah]

muaaahahahahaha

edit: i'm well aware this post is spam-like and borderline antagonistic. i'll redeem it by saying that work on a couple of our new factions has been progressing nicely, though not yet to the point we'd really have anything preview-worthy.

If it wasn't for your edit, I would have condemned you for wanton cruelty and needless spam. However, I like the fact that you decided to give us some top secret information. It fills my conceit knowing that my glory is so great as to drive EB members into loosening their tongues.


As for Pergamon, am I the only one who does not look too favorably upon their new status as an EB II faction? I mean, they were just one among the thousands of Greek colonies.

You may well be right, but they were one of the better ones. They did, after all, beat back the Seleucids, eh? Eh?!

[Aemilius Paulus]

I would have condemned you for wanton cruelty and needless spam..

Speak for yourself Meth... Your hypocrisy is worthy of Bush when he remarked on Russia's invasion of Georgia as being "unacceptable conduct in the 21st Century." and "being an unprecedented violation of the rights of a sovereign nation such as Georgia" :laugh4:.

If this was too political for these forums, then the moderator should feel free to delete it (just the invasion part - hopefully not the whole post!).

[Megas Methuselah]

Speak for yourself Meth... Your hypocrisy is worthy of Bush

You know the EB Team's stance against spam. Please stay on topic or I will have you "...hung from tha neck 'till yer feet quit kickin'!"


That's a fine idea, and I heartily support it, however, how much do we know about the Boii? The EB team would have tough time developing them.

Who were they, anyways? An alpine tribe of some sort? Celtic? German? Thai? Also, since this relates to empty areas on the EB map, I'm living in hope of a baltic/or just north of the Getai faction. There is already quite a unit roster up there that can be taken advantage of... :yes:

[Ludens]

As for Pergamon, am I the only one who does not look too favorably upon their new status as an EB II faction? I mean, they were just one among the thousands of Greek colonies.

Not exactly. They were one of the bigger and wealthier city states in 272 B.C., and the most important of the Ionian cities. This gave them the capability to stave of the Seleucids as well as the Galatians, and even go on the offence. At one point, Pergamon controlled a major chunk of Asia Minor, including the Kleruch settlements that were a major source of manpower for the Seleucid Empire. This gave them both the wealth and the manpower to set themselves up as a major successor state. Unfortunately this success was short-lived, but compare it to Syracuse who never managed control Sicily, and was at this point only able to stave of the Carthaginians with help of the Romans.

[Hax]

Pergamian Kingdom:

http://www.daedalus.gr/DAEI/PRODUCTS/INFORMTC/PERGAMOS/PGHIST1.jpg

And you're still doubting?

=======================


Well, it's a simplistic, stereotypical view. You wouldn't assume even the least developed European culture used sticks at that time, but for a little-understood African nation you were comfortable with that same assumption.

Yes, I know, and for that, I apologize.

[a completely inoffensive name]

That's a fine idea, and I heartily support it, however, how much do we know about the Boii? The EB team would have tough time developing them.

How much do we know about the Saba?

[Hax]

Less than we know about the Boii.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Less than we know about the Boii.

Ta Da.

[Aemilius Paulus]

And you're still doubting?


Yes as a matter of fact. There are too many nations around Mediterranean anyway. EB team says they strive to represent everything and everyone equally, even going as far as giving more provinces to the Northern and Steppe areas of the map than most people though was prudent. For that I admire the team. Some areas of the map, such as Eastern Europe are basically crying out for a faction, whereas the area around Pergamon is already crowded as it is. There is already almost no Eleutheroi provinces in that area, and now there is going to be even less. Saba, on the other hand are in an another area that lacks faction.

Anyway, how is the EB Team going to implement so many new factions and units, while keeping the old units when there a limit to 255 models and a total unit limit of 500? That is one question that I did not hear voiced.


Here is what I previously said on this:

What kind of unique units will Pergamon have? Pergamon Hoplites, that have the same skin (with the exception of different coloured and patterned shield)as Greek Classical Hoplites, and with the exception of a different name, plus 1 more attack or 2 more defence skill than the regular Classical Hoplite; Akontistai with a different hat and a different skin tan? :laugh4:

[Krusader]

Yes as a matter of fact. There are two many nations around Mediterranean anyway. EB team says they strive to represent everything and everyone equally, even going as far as giving more provinces to the Northern and Steppe areas of the map than most people though was prudent. For that I admire the team. Some areas of the map, such as Eastern Europe are basically crying out for a faction, whereas the area around Pergamon is already crowded as it is. There is already almost no Eleutheroi provinces in that area, and now there is going to be even less. Saba, on the other hand are in an another area that lacks faction.

Anyway, how is the EB Team going to implement so many new factions and units, while keeping the old units when there a limit to 255 models and a total unit limit of 500? That is one question that I did not hear voiced.


Here is what I previously said on this:

Model limit is unknown but some guy had managed to insert 800 model entries without any crash. So basically 500 unit limit, at least 500 model limit.
Pergamon unit roster has not been finalized, but go read the preview for some thoughts the EB team have.

Pergamon was among five factions the EB team chose at once when we decided to make EB2. They were a significant player in Anatolian politics and we could not ignore that.

[General Appo]

Some areas of the map, such as Eastern Europe are basically crying out for a faction...

Well, apart from the Bastarnae and Boshporian Kingdom, both of which might very well make it into EBII, I don´t really see any possible factions, unless you count the Boii as Eastern Europe.
That´s 2 or 3 factions, where´d you want the remaining 7 to go?

[General Appo]

1 Mauretania
2 Boii
3 Arevaci
4 Boshporian Kingdom
5 Pergamon
6 Bastarnae
7 Odrysai
8 Belgae
9 Massyles/Masaesyles
10 Scripting/Gandharan satrapy/Nabatae/Germanic tribe/something else

My current predictions. Not quite satisfied with them, feel like quite a few are wrong, especially unsure about Odrysai, but I figure I had to put this up sooner or later.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Model limit is unknown but some guy had managed to insert 800 model entries without any crash.

Say whAT!?!? Hardcodes, anyone? Yes, you could do that, but that would require creating new .exe, which is illegal, right?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Huh? Why? 42?

Let's make it clear: RTW DMB is limited to some <=256 (?) models. So if each model were to have a unique ID (which it probably has) this could've been very well done in an address space of just 1 byte (or 8 bits inside some ID value). That corresponds to a max of 256 models by ID-rules anyways.

So since M2TW has moved beyond the 256 limit, naturally an 8 bit/1 byte address space no longer suffices for any ID tagging. Assuming an ID-tagging mechanism which uses separate chunks of memory allocated for this specific purpose, then we're onto at least double the address space (2 bytes) or: 2^16 =65536 models. If we don't, then from 'this guy's experience' we may deduce that at least 2 bits were added to the address space, upping the limit to at least as much as 1024 models.

Of course this is theory and the developpers might've very well introduced an arbitrary cap. But now you can see why a limit is not known: efficient limit testing would require you to run a test over twice the amount of DMB data of the previous test. For all practical purposes M2TW offers more model-space than we currently fill; and even if you solve this 'limit' programatically: who'd let his PC munch away for hours to do that? Each test grows with a factor 2 in size until you hit that limit. Then you'd have to recursively reduce difference towards either a previously known good test or bad test (depending on the outcome of the latest test) and thereby approach the real limit.

Say the limit was 11:
1 < good
2 < good
4 < good
8 < good
16 < bad
12 < bad
10 < good
11 < good
Tried both 10 and 12 so can't reduce any further: 11 must be the limit.
Now try that on: a limit of (2^13 - 3) which equals 8189. Keep in mind: each test requires a full write file/check with M2TW/evaluate result cycle.

[Aemilius Paulus]

:jawdrop:


Are you serious?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Yup. I'm definitely not going to do that in the forseeable future. :wink:

Foot told me the M2TW DMB lists its own 'cap' of sorts, but whether that's used as a hint/check for the M2TW engine to create the required amount of model object representations more quickly & efficiently or whether the sky really is the limit... IDK.

EDIT: Just imagine my 'model' is actually correct - imagine then that the limit was 2 bytes -> 65536 models. Now with this 'efficient' testing you would get at this cap 65536 during the 'first phase' while you're simply doubling test-data.
Next step (131072 models) would yield 'bad'. Okay, let's reduce... next step 98304 yields still bad... can you imagine the time that would take? Not to mention hardware?

[MeinPanzer]

Less than we know about the Boii.

Hardly. We have plenty of archaeological (figural and non) and epigraphic evidence for many aspects of Sabaean culture, including religious, social, and war-related activity; the same certainly cannot be said for the Boii.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I thought it was still uncertain if the Saba even originated in Southern Arabia or Eastern Ethiopia.

[Ludens]

Well, apart from the Bastarnae and Boshporian Kingdom, both of which might very well make it into EBII, I don´t really see any possible factions, unless you count the Boii as Eastern Europe.

Don't forget the Lugii/Lugians in southern Poland. They were in the running for inclusion in EB1, but lost out to the Sabyn.

[Aemilius Paulus]

I thought it was still uncertain if the Saba even originated in Southern Arabia or Eastern Ethiopia.

Does that matter for EB purposes? We don't know where Etruscans came from, but we know sure know a lot more about them than about other civilizations, like the Eastern European ones for instance. Mostly all that matters is everything about what the civilization was at about 272 BC.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Does that matter for EB purposes? We don't know where Etruscans came from, but we know sure know a lot more about them than about other civilizations, like the Eastern European ones for instance. Mostly all that matters is everything about what the civilization was at about 272 BC.

Which we know less about then the Boii.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Which we know less about then the Boii.

We know less about Etruscans than Boii? Is that what you meant?

Are you sure? True, Etruscans are mysterious, but we have countless Etruscan artifacts and we have even found inscriptions in their alphabet, which we sadly cannot decipher, but I am quite certain that if the US military worked on deciphering Etruscan alphabet as much as they work on cracking Russian and Chinese codes, then we would already be reading those inscriptions with ease.

[a completely inoffensive name]

We know less about Etruscans than Boii? Is that what you meant?

Are you sure? True, Etruscans are mysterious, but we have countless Etruscan artifacts and we have even found inscriptions in their alphabet, which we sadly cannot decipher, but I am quite certain that if the US military worked on deciphering Etruscan alphabet as much as they work on cracking Russian and Chinese codes, then we would already be reading those inscriptions with ease.

oops I forgot to edit that quote, to only say the last part about knowing only what they were like in 272 B.C. To which I meant to imply that we know more about the Boii in 272 then the Saba in 272, and that the Boii is guaranteed a spot because of our knowledge of them compared to others already in game and its necessity for game balance in middle Europe. I wasn't referring to the Etruscans.

[MeinPanzer]

oops I forgot to edit that quote, to only say the last part about knowing only what they were like in 272 B.C. To which I meant to imply that we know more about the Boii in 272 then the Saba in 272, and that the Boii is guaranteed a spot because of our knowledge of them compared to others already in game and its necessity for game balance in middle Europe. I wasn't referring to the Etruscans.

Since you are so insistent on this point, would you care to summarize why you think there is more evidence for the Boii c. 272 BC than there is for the Sabaeans?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Since you are so insistent on this point, would you care to summarize why you think there is more evidence for the Boii c. 272 BC than there is for the Sabaeans?

Idk, twice as many sources in the Boii wikipedia page then the Saba page? Seriously though, I am not an expert on either but I was around when Saba was introduced and a lot of people were like why? And apparently they needed a faction there to keep AS and Ptole from spreading into that region instead of fighting in Palestine and Syria, not because of any major historical importance.

If you check my original posts you will also see I said that that the Boii will be in mostly due to game balance and not major historical accuracy. Someone said, well how much do we know about the Boii then and I replied less then the Saba, because I have played the Saba in game and it is not anywhere near the level of historical content as any of the other factions. I have read before from others that the only major info on the Germanic tribes comes from Tacitus and is way in the future from 272, yet when I have played Sweboz there is a lot of historical information. So if EB seems to have more info on the Germanic tribes in 272 then supposedly a major red sea trading nation, then why should I expect the Boii another major tribe to have less info then the Saba?

[MeinPanzer]

Idk, twice as many sources in the Boii wikipedia page then the Saba page? Seriously though, I am not an expert on either but I was around when Saba was introduced and a lot of people were like why? And apparently they needed a faction there to keep AS and Ptole from spreading into that region instead of fighting in Palestine and Syria, not because of any major historical importance.

I don't think I need to be writing this, but Wikipedia is a very poor source for any sort of historical information, especially on a specialist subject like ancient South Arabian civilizations. I know that the EB team has had a hard time getting experts to join the team who can help with the Sabaeans, so the Sabaeans of EBI are not really a good reflection of the historical evidence, unfortunately.


If you check my original posts you will also see I said that that the Boii will be in mostly due to game balance and not major historical accuracy. Someone said, well how much do we know about the Boii then and I replied less then the Saba, because I have played the Saba in game and it is not anywhere near the level of historical content as any of the other factions. I have read before from others that the only major info on the Germanic tribes comes from Tacitus and is way in the future from 272, yet when I have played Sweboz there is a lot of historical information. So if EB seems to have more info on the Germanic tribes in 272 then supposedly a major red sea trading nation, then why should I expect the Boii another major tribe to have less info then the Saba?

There's some information from sources on events contemporary to the EB timeframe about historical events related to the Germanic tribes, but the only evidence on most of their culture comes from Germania, which was written c. 100 AD. There is far less actual historical information about the Sabaeans than the Germans or the Boii, but much more cultural information (i.e. civic institutions, religion, social practices). Since the difficulty in EB is recreating the culture as a whole and not the history after 272 BC beyond general trends (since that, for the most part, is up to the players), there are many more resources relating to the Sabaeans available to the team than relating to the Boii or the Germans.

As for the gameplay considerations, those are their own separate matter, but you seem to be conflating history and practical gameplay applications here when your historical basis is wrong.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Ahh, so what you are saying is that the lack of info on the Saba is not due to a lack of archeological information and references by others, but due to a lack of people on the EB team who are knowledgeable about the culture?

[Cartaphilus]

Almost 60 pages of thread and we have only Pergamon revealed.
:laugh4:

Nice job, men.
I'll be whipping myself till next preview:whip::whip::whip:

[Ibrahim]

Ahh, so what you are saying is that the lack of info on the Saba is not due to a lack of archeological information and references by others, but due to a lack of people on the EB team who are knowledgeable about the culture?

pretty much:clown:


so, many will think that the Boii will be in EBII?

Ineresting idea. should balance the east german area neatly.

@meinpanzer: may you supply any information on Saba's army (besides what EB has)? I have already modded the cavalry, and need them checked it out. PM or post, it don't matter. neither does time-not in a hurry this time.

[Ludens]

Seriously though, I am not an expert on either but I was around when Saba was introduced and a lot of people were like why? And apparently they needed a faction there to keep AS and Ptole from spreading into that region instead of fighting in Palestine and Syria, not because of any major historical importance.

If that was the reason, then they would simply have added strong rebel armies to the region like they did in the Alps. The Saba were included to represent the Arabian people, whom may not have been as spectacularly successful as the Hellenes (at least, not in this era), but whom had a pretty sophisticated urban civilization and were major traders. Also, this gave the cities in the area a proper founding faction, as previously they would rebel to the Ptolemaioi or the Parthians, neither of which was realistic.

Gameplay considerations do play a role when considering candidate factions, but they take second seat to history. The Sabeans certainly were not added on flimsy historical basis. Yes, they may not have been the power that Pergamon was, but on the other hand the Hellenes are already very well represented, and the Arabs barely.

Balancing a faction is, to my mind, no argument at all for including another one. That can be done by creating powerful rebels, changing recruitment zones, etc. Expending a faction slot is really the last option.

[Cartaphilus]

After the Pergamon preview, the main bets of the thread are:

-Numidia
-Boii
-Arevaci

The other factions mentioned are more hypothetical:

-Mauritania
-Belgae
-Bosphorean kingdom
-Bastarnae
-Scythia
-Galatia
-Goidelics
-Siracusa
-Massalia.
-Nubia
-Indian satrapy
-Yue-zhi
-Etc

This is the basic summary of 60 pages of interesting and funny "iddle" talk.:beam:

[MeinPanzer]

Ahh, so what you are saying is that the lack of info on the Saba is not due to a lack of archeological information and references by others, but due to a lack of people on the EB team who are knowledgeable about the culture?

From what I've heard, yeah. That's not to denigrate the EB team though - specialists in South Arabian archaeology and epigraphy are very few and far between, and they are an even more insular and close-knit group than almost any other group of specialists I've encountered. The EB team has done their best with what they have, which has still done a very good job of representing the situation in South Arabia at the time.

[a completely inoffensive name]

From what I've heard, yeah. That's not to denigrate the EB team though - specialists in South Arabian archaeology and epigraphy are very few and far between, and they are an even more insular and close-knit group than almost any other group of specialists I've encountered. The EB team has done their best with what they have, which has still done a very good job of representing the situation in South Arabia at the time.

Hmmm, interesting. Why are they so insular and close-knit?

[Ibrahim]

Hmmm, interesting. Why are they so insular and close-knit?

It has to do with the size of their branch of linguistics/archeology/any science or social setting, etc. not many are into this. so, in order to support themselves/get help, they support each other. I can personally vouch for that: working with the AP bio students in one class on a seperate project from another, I quickly became friends with the whole class, and vice versa-and the competition between classes waqs notoriously vicious, since neither side wanted to bother with the other (i.e, grew insular). or take how tribes act; the smaller ones (like some tribes in the amazons or New guinea), tend to get close knit, cohesive, and insular. Bigger groups have more weight, so they can be more outgoing, surplused, and often incohesive (like a city can be-socially).

In conclusion: any small group that has a particular specialty or skill does tend to bond together due to the small size, common interest, and need to support and prop one another.:book:

did I just describe a sociological phenomenon?:wall::wall:

[MeinPanzer]

Hmmm, interesting. Why are they so insular and close-knit?

Pretty much because of what Ibrahim wrote. South Arabia was a historically fairly isolated region (mostly just interacting with other parts of Arabia and parts of eastern Africa), so specialists in ancient Arabia do much less work on interactions between cultures and civilizations than almost any other study of the ancient world. Arabian specialists are as small in number as, say, scholars of ancient India, but they do not have to focus nearly as much on other areas of study. Consequently, it seems that Arabian specialists interact much more with each other and form a closed group. Not to mention that in order to do any serious work, one must be familiar with a century or more of intensive and often very complex chronological research and be able to read Sabaean, which is not widely taught.

[General Appo]

-Yue-zhi


Ahem. The Yuezhi didn´t enter the map until about 100 years after the game´s start, and since there will be no emergent factions I very much doubt they will be in as an independent faction.
I think they will still be represented as in EBI with the appearance of a few überstrong rebel armies, possibly scripted better in EBII so they will actually do anything except just sit around or just take a single town, but hardly as an actual faction.

[Cartaphilus]

Ahem. The Yuezhi didn´t enter the map until about 100 years after the game´s start, and since there will be no emergent factions I very much doubt they will be in as an independent faction.
I think they will still be represented as in EBI with the appearance of a few überstrong rebel armies, possibly scripted better in EBII so they will actually do anything except just sit around or just take a single town, but hardly as an actual faction.

Don't say "ahem" too quickly, my friend.
I said that these were the factions the people have speculated about in the whole thread.
But this is very far from my own opinion.
I don't think that the yuezhi will be in the game.

[zurab]

1. Tyrus
2. Caucasian Iberia
3. Syracuse
4. Bosporus
5. Marcomanni(???)
6. Iberian tribe
7. Numidia
8. Bithynya(?)




http://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?vpar=54&pos=0#Greek Coins Coins

nice link btw)))

[Strategos Alexandros]

What is Tyrus?

[theoldbelgian]

what about the belgae confederation? historical buffer against Germanic invasions in Gaul
gave a very good account against Caesar
another rebellion after wards under ambiorix which forced the romans to take some aspirins
already got a few unique units in EB
sure they weren't imperialistic except for the invasions in Britain to give birth to the casse
and come on people
do you know nicer people then the good old Belgians :D

[zurab]

What is Tyrus?


Týros(greek) is TYRE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyre,_Lebanon

It was often attacked by Egypt, besieged by Shalmaneser V, who was assisted by the Phoenicians of the mainland, for five years, and by Nebuchadnezzar (586–573 BC) for thirteen years, without success, although a compromise peace was made in which Tyre paid tribute to the Babylonians. It later fell under the power of the Persians.

In 332 BC, the city was conquered by Alexander the Great, after a siege of seven months in which he built the causeway from the mainland to the island[13], but it continued to maintain much of its commercial importance until the Christian era. The presence of the causeway affected water currents nearby, causing sediment to build up, making the connection permanent.

In 315 BC, Alexander's former general Antigonus begins his own siege of Tyre[14] , taking the city a year later [15].

In 126 BC, Tyre regained its independence[16] (from the Seleucids) and was allowed to keep much of its independence when the area became a Roman province in 64 BC[17] .

[Jolt]

Well, it's a simplistic, stereotypical view. You wouldn't assume even the least developed European culture used sticks at that time, but for a little-understood African nation you were comfortable with that same assumption.

I think by sticks and stuff Hax meant something like this (http://rapidttp.com/milhist/vo044cpb.gif)?

[General Appo]

Týros(greek) is TYRE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyre,_Lebanon

It was often attacked by Egypt, besieged by Shalmaneser V, who was assisted by the Phoenicians of the mainland, for five years, and by Nebuchadnezzar (586–573 BC) for thirteen years, without success, although a compromise peace was made in which Tyre paid tribute to the Babylonians. It later fell under the power of the Persians.

In 332 BC, the city was conquered by Alexander the Great, after a siege of seven months in which he built the causeway from the mainland to the island[13], but it continued to maintain much of its commercial importance until the Christian era. The presence of the causeway affected water currents nearby, causing sediment to build up, making the connection permanent.

In 315 BC, Alexander's former general Antigonus begins his own siege of Tyre[14] , taking the city a year later [15].

In 126 BC, Tyre regained its independence[16] (from the Seleucids) and was allowed to keep much of its independence when the area became a Roman province in 64 BC[17] .

Emmm....first of none of except the last note is within EB´s timeframe, and secondly the fact that the city got its ass kicked by 3 different guys hardly seems to justify its inclusion as a faction.

Tyre was long, long, long, really really really long gone its primetime and IIRC was just a moderately wealthy city complete at the whims of the greater powers of its area.
They never really had any expansionist ideas either, even during its hey-days it was mostly trading and small colonies.
Had the game been set say...1000 BC to 600 BC, then sure, Tyre (or perhaps rather a whole Phoenician faction) would probably be a good choice, but as of now I´ve yet to see a single even mediocre reason for its inclusion as anything beyond a region capital.
Heck, you said yourself the city wasn´t even independent until 126 BC!

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

I think the inclusion of the Boii would be great and would finally do away with the need for these absurd super stacks they currently have in Central Europe. But my dream is to see the Galatians as a playable faction... Who knows? A Celtic Empire in Asia would be a very juicy prospect.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Meh, there is already one new faction in Asia Minor: Pergamon, in addition to the many other factions that are around or already in Asia Minor, so the Galatikoi are no longer an option really. Makes no sense to spam one area of the map, while leaving others entirely empty. Not to mention that the Galatikoi were not especially expansionist, which is the main criteria for smaller factions. I mean, they did plenty of raiding, I am certain, but no large scale organized invasions. Except for the original Gallic invasion that brought the Galatians to whee they were of course.

[Ludens]

1. Tyrus
2. Caucasian Iberia
3. Syracuse
4. Bosporus
5. Marcomanni(???)
6. Iberian tribe
7. Numidia
8. Bithynya(?)

IIRC the Marcomanni were part of the Suebi (Sweboz) confederacy, and already in EB1. As for Tyre, I don't think it was much of a power of Alexander sacked it. Certainly, it didn't have any imperial ambitions. Probably just as well, with two very Imperial and very powerful neighbours.

[lenin96]

1.Boii
2.Numidian faction
3.Arevaci
4.Lugii
5.Another British faction
6.Thracian faction

[impspy]

I'd like to see a celtic faction in the Nothern British Isles (sots, picts)

[lenin96]

I don't think the celts in northern britain were expansionist and were devided fighting each other, but if there is another british faction (i hope there will) i would rather it be a welsh or another english tribe

[oudysseos]

Just about factions in general: if the EB1 factions are all kept as they are for EB2, and with the addition of Attalid Pergamon, we have so far

6 Macedonian/Succesor States (including Epeiros)
In terms of completeness, with the addition of Pergamon, the gang's all here as far as the Macedonian States of 272 BC goes.

3 Celtic Factions and 1 German Faction
There were many more strong Celtic groups than the Averni, Aedui and Casse, and if I can consider them together with the Sweboz, there definitely seem to be room for more Celts/Germans; Belgae, Boii, Cimbri, Teutones: everyone has their favourite.

3 Iranian-speaking Peoples
It seems to me that the Saka, Sauromatae and Pahlava cover most of the bases as far as steppe riders go: there were still significant areas of Scythian control into the EB time period, but their 'great power' status had definitely waned. Someone correct me here if I'm wrong.

2 Devolved Persian/Alexandrine Satrapies (Hayasdan & Pontus. 3 if you want to include the Pahlava here rather than above)
Hayasdan and Pontus are only two of many former satrapies-turned-kingdoms: there's also Commagene, Bithynia, Sophene, Osrohene, Atropene, Cappodocia, Colchis, Adiabene, Galatia: probably most of these were too small or insufficiently independent to merit full faction status, but a case could maybe be made.

1 Dacian/Thracian Faction
The Getae were not alone in Thrace/Dacia: the glory days of the Odrysian Kingdom were gone but some independent identity remained; perhaps a case could be made for the Triballoi, Scordisci or someone else.

1 Iberian Faction
There clearly was a heck of a lot more going on in Iberia than just the Lusotannan: I'd bet money that at least one of the new factions will be here: Cantabri, Averaci, Aquitani, Celtiberi. There could possibly be overlap here with a new Celtic faction

1 Arabian Faction
I'd guess there won't be another Arabian/Axumite/Meroe faction, mostly 'cos the team has said there won't be.

Carthage
Rome

There's only one Rome, ditto Carthage.

1 Greek Faction
In real life the Greek players on the stage at the time were the leagues in Aitolia and Achaea, neither of which really included Athens or Sparta. "Koinon Hellenon" is a construct of the EB team to represent a temporary (and unsuccessful) alliance between the two latter city-states, some of the stated reasons for doing so being an unwillingness on the part of the team to overload Greece with cities (you'd need at least one more in the Peloponnese for the Achaeans) and a similar unwillingness to give up a faction slot to have two virtually identical factions (at least as far as culture and unit rosters go). There has been statements by the team that the KH will stay, although it may be changed somewhat, and at least a broad hint in Mithridates Aitolian League thread that there may be another Greek faction. This may all be deliberate misinformation to keep us from thinking that we know what's going on. :joker:


9 to be revealed

Now team-members have said that 'filling in the map' is not how they go about choosing new factions, but I think that completeness does play some role. For example, they have decided not to leave out one of the successor kingdoms. Within the types of factions that I have outlined above, EB already has most of the major developed states of the time (leaving aside small, independent city-states such as Syracuse, Massilia, and so on). The kinds of factions that are least well represented (in proportion to their numbers in real life) are the various tribes of Iberia, Gaul, Germany and the Balkans. There were a dozen tribes in Gaul, according to Caesar, about the same in Iberia, and a good half-dozen that I know of further east. So i bet we'll see at least one more Celtic faction, perhaps in Iberia.

So from the 9 slots left:
1 for scripting purposes is rumored
2 for the Cimmerian Bosporos (I hope :pleased:)
3 one at least for Iberia (I am guessing)
4 for the Lugians in southern Poland (were in the running for EB1)
5 for Massylia/Massaesylia/Mauretania seem like a good bet
6 for the Belgae
7 possibly for someone like Commagene/Bithynia?
8 possibly for Aitolian League/ another Mainland Greek faction (unlikely but hinted at)
9 ?

So there's 3 to 5 new factions that'll be hard to predict, eh? For what it's worth, from the EB website, the factions that are subsumed into the Eleutheroi include but are not limited to
Pergamon, Belgae, Scythians, Massylia, Massaesylia, Garama, Mauretania and Nabataea.
Of these Pergamon is already in. I'd guess that of the 4 African factions one will make it in.

[Megas Methuselah]

I don't think the celts in northern britain were expansionist and were devided fighting each other, but if there is another british faction (i hope there will) i would rather it be a welsh or another english tribe

You better be careful, boy. It's generally considered bad form in this forum to make such a statement without stating a source; such actions could be returned with people flaming-ly demanding sources. I'll be the first. :clown:

Really? That's interesting, do you have a source to prove this?

[General Appo]

Probably not, which is kinda the problem with the Brittish Isles at the time, there are so few sources for them. And no, I don´t have a source for that, just the word of the EB team (and we all know how trustworthy they, right?).

[lenin96]

Yeah i did't have any sources but other people have said the same things and have had sources to back their claims, but i should have done the same thing.

[lobf]

Yeah i did't have any sources but other people have said the same things and have had sources to back their claims, but i should have done the same thing.

As I remember, it's not a widely held belief.

[Ebikiyo of Kophen]

What about.. say, a reenstatement of the Yuezhi or a Turko-Protomongoloid race (Forgive me, but I lack the knowledge and resources of the common EB forum goer). Or how about changing the AI Baktrians about the Indo-Greek Kingdoms by giving them Taksashila and making the unit roster more Indian. On that note, we could add the Mauryans, seeing as how they had at least some influence on the Indus valley. But, if we had to choose them, we might as well expand the map to include the rest of Saka territory (Yes, sadly, I went there) and the early Yuezhi, and I bet few people really want that. Well, not in a Roman centric game.

And to those who want city-states and mini-kingdoms in. Look, I know they had unique histories, and had some impact, but if you place an independent kingdom near the heart of the wars between two superpowers, you probably will be beaten quickly into a bloody stain on the landscape. I propose instead to put more signifigant cities and kingdoms (The Numids, the Crimea, Pergamum, you know) into another faction like the eleutheroi, only with the ability to attack cities (Although not as frequently as other powers), raise armies effectively, and build up territory. Who knows, Saba might be replaced with a stronger bandito faction.

Of course there's the problem of hardcoded AI...

[Hax]

. I propose instead to put more signifigant cities and kingdoms (The Numids, the Crimea, Pergamum, you know) into another faction like the eleutheroi, only with the ability to attack cities (Although not as frequently as other powers), raise armies effectively, and build up territory.

This is not really a problem. It is possible to code the AI in such a way that the larger factions will not attack the smaller ones (otherwise the HRE in vanilla would have stomped everyone into the ground). This can be used so that the Arche Seleukeia will focus mostly on fighting the Ptolemaioi, and not to fight Pergamon, Pontos, Hayasdan, etc.

I'm also against including a "General Greek City States-faction" (as you call it), since this would not be historically accurate.

[General Appo]

But, if we had to choose them, we might as well expand the map to include the rest of Saka territory (Yes, sadly, I went there) and the early Yuezhi, and I bet few people really want that. Well, not in a Roman centric game.




:furious3::furious3::furious3::furious3::furious3::skull::thumbsdown::embarassed::shame::wall::whip: ::no:

Europa Barbarorum is not a Roman centric game. Europa Barbarorum strives to represent all factions equally within the limits of the game's engine.
Rome: Total War was a Roman centric game. Europa Barbarorum is not. Hence the name, and the proverb which explains the name:
Quisque Est Barbarus Alio; Everyone is a barbarian to someone (actually "another", but what the hell, that just sounds wrong).

[antisocialmunky]

EB is more of a Hellen-centric game but the Eastern Mediterranian was pretty Hellen-centric IRL.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Even more so, now that Asia Minor has been filled with another Hellenic faction.

[General Appo]

It's not any-centric! There are only more Hellenic factions because they were historically significantly more unified and powerful in this era then say most Germanic or Celtic tribes and because sources are far more common about the Hellenic factions.

[Hax]

Guys, relax. Ebikyo actually came with some good arguments, he's not Rastapopoulos here.

[General Appo]

Who? What? When?

I'm sorry, I just saw
Roman centric game. and freaked out.

[Ebikiyo of Kophen]

Relax General. Tis no harm done.

What I meant by "Roman Centric" is that the original game's events and gameplay were more or less tailored for a Roman player. Hell, one game I played had me controling Skythia, Greece, Egypt, Asia Minor, and Spain during the Civil war (Funny Thing: Right before, I was bribing lands from the Jullii in Getai and Pannonia). Europa Barbarorum feels more like a more Hellenistic and "Barbarian" oriented field of play. I said the phrase because I've come across numerous conversations where modders would shoot down a faction because of their influence during Rome's Rise To Power (Not the Yuezhi, but somethen' else).

Also, isn't the Eleutheroi one faction? In fact, if a regular player took the reins of all of the independents, ruling the world might be too easy. The "banditos" faction would operate like the Eleutheroi, in that all of the states would have a different name and separate AI targeting specific factions or states and sending armies to conquer them. They might attack eachother, although that might cause a CTD.

Oh well. No matter what can be said, there is always a valid reason to challenge it.

[lenin96]

The "banditos" faction would operate like the Eleutheroi, in that all of the states would have a different name and separate AI targeting specific factions or states and sending armies to conquer them. They might attack eachother, although that might cause a CTD.


Can someone say if this is possible?, It would be good if it is.

[General Appo]

Wouldn't that be exactly the same like having about 200 different factions? Which isn't possible.

[desert]

The province limit is 199, so I would say 145 (Eleutheroi provinces in game start).

[General Appo]

Sooo...your point besides nitpicking is?

[Subotan]

1. Pergamon (Obviously)
2. Numidian faction, either Massylia/Syphax OR Garamantes
3. Goidils/Siluri
4. Lugii
5. Nabatea
6. Celt-Iberians
7. Helvetii/Belgae
8. Illyrian Tribe?
9. South Arabian Tribe?
10. Atropatene
11. Masilla

Compiled thanks to this guy's maps
http://worldhistorymaps.info/maps.html

And in particular
http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_300bc.jpg
http://worldhistorymaps.info/images/East-Hem_200bc.jpg

Sources
http://worldhistorymaps.info/TAL_Sources_pg1.html#bc300
http://worldhistorymaps.info/TAL_Sources_pg1.html#bc200

Ofc, one of those won't be included, but I think that those are the most likely contenders.

[SpawnOfEbil]

Well, a 'nomad' faction has been confirmed. But where?

[desert]

Oh, Appo - you're simply too much! :laugh4: :yes:

May the Jagstaffel 11 be with you.

[Megas Methuselah]

Stop spamming, desert.


Well, a 'nomad' faction has been confirmed. But where?

Really?! Nice! Can you gimme a link? :smile:

[desert]

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=111049

There you go, Methuselah.

Also, right back at ya'.

[Megas Methuselah]

Wow, a nomad faction? Africa? Arabia? Imma go check out that thread. Thx a lot, desert! :beam:

[General Appo]

Oh come on, are you people actually trusting Moros?

[gamegeek2]

EDIT: nvm, not allowed to disclose information.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Oh come on, are you people actually trusting Moros?

Yes.

[Beefy187]

EDIT: nvm, not allowed to disclose information.

Aww do share :beam:

Please...:smash:

Please :whip:

I still would like to see a Indian Faction and Syracuse though. But I see AtB is working on the Indians :2thumbsup:

[Megas Methuselah]

Oh come on, are you people actually trusting Moros?

Heh. When I found the post and noticed it was Moros who released this information, my hopes collapsed like water on rocks. I still trust the EB Team, of course! Just not Moros...

[desert]

Eh? What has Moros ever done to warrant such suspicion?

Or is he this guy - https://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr309/desertSypglass/eee.png

[bobbin]

has any else noticed Tellos's new sig picture? is that a new faction symbol underneath the black fog?:sweatdrop:
and occultus is the latin for hidden/concealed. maybe i'm just reading into things too much.:dizzy2:

[General Appo]

Most likely Tellas and Moros have entered the ranks of the Europa Barbarorum Information Department, EBID, legendary for the amount of absolute bullshit and disinformation they spread.

[a completely inoffensive name]

People shouldn't ask "seriously Foot, what are the new factions man?" or other stupid questions. I am not saying don't ask questions, but honestly, what makes you think any question about something not discussed or talked about by the EB team will make them go "oh, I think we can just tell him/the community and hopefully have it ready by the first release". If they haven't talked about it, chances are it is still in development/ they want to keep it a secret.

[Krusader]

Heh. When I found the post and noticed it was Moros who released this information, my hopes collapsed like water on rocks. I still trust the EB Team, of course! Just not Moros...

You can trust Moros when it comes to this infobit though...

[Tellos Athenaios]

I haven't entered into any ranks lately. Just find the banner a very nice and expressive addition to my signature. Oh, we should definitely do that EB history page some day. :grin:

[Subotan]

I think it's a hammer and sickle.
....

[General Appo]

I cleared it up a bit, still doesn't really make any sense.

https://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee276/GeneralAppo/logosecret5sk0-1.jpg

[lenin96]

https://i232.photobucket.com/albums/ee276/GeneralAppo/logosecret5sk0-1.jpg

It looks like there could be a person behind where it says occultus and I think I can just see its face and other people in the background.

[Megas Methuselah]

I haven't entered into any ranks lately. Just find the banner a very nice and expressive addition to my signature. Oh, we should definitely do that EB history page some day. :grin:

Oh, you must really hate me... :laugh4:

[Hax]

Occultus:

Occultus is a rank reserved for special EB members only. They must first make an offering of blood to the Great God Khelvan, who was taken into the ranks of the Gods about a year ago. Then, each month, just as the red moon passes over the mountains, Khelvan comes to them and tells them what they should do.

[Moros]

Ah it had been way too long since the old EB I occultus madness.

[Ibrahim]

Ah it had been way too long since the old EB I occultus madness.

what was that? any threads I could find?

[cmacq]

Oh, you must really hate me... :laugh4:


They call him legion, for he is many.



CmacQ

[Moros]

what was that? any threads I could find?
I think so. When EB 0.7 hadn't been released yet there were occultus sig's for unrevealed factions. And later when 0.8 was not yet released there were occultus sig's for Saka & Saba. I bet you can find it using the search option.

[antisocialmunky]

Location: Bilisium (Bilzen), Limburg, Belgium (Brussels)

Signs point to Belgae?

[bovi]

Signature changes affect old posts too, so I don't think you'll find any. Still, I'm sure there was much discussion that can be found with a search for occultus.

[theoldbelgian]

Signs point to Belgae?

I think he just lives there
bilzen which lies in the province limburg which lies in the country Belgium what Brussels stands to do there i don't know

a fun fact: this means that you have to read his posts very slow and with a singing voice :P

[Tellos Athenaios]

His location has been up for people to see way before he started sporting the (new) Occultus banners. Whether or not any striking similarities between "Occultus" and "Belgium" make two and two...or even exist... I'll leave that to you to find out.

[Subotan]

Belgae?
...
:D