I seem to be at war with all of the independent states just from attacking one of them. Are they like one big faction? If not, then how are they different? Should I avoid war with them or just accept it?
Printable View
I seem to be at war with all of the independent states just from attacking one of them. Are they like one big faction? If not, then how are they different? Should I avoid war with them or just accept it?
You will be at war with them for good - the only exception is that the Casse start out at peace with them. You can either break it or use it to your advantage for a while. The rtw engine makes it where you pretty much are ensured of being at war with the eleutheroi all the time though - so get used to that. :grin: Welcome to the forum too!
Is this some sort of joke spam thread? D=
No, it isn't. In MTW, there were several different rebel factions; you could be at war with one and at peace with others.Quote:
Originally Posted by satalexton
I personally treat them like some sort of coalition of city states that doesn't support one another...
namely i train my troops against them, picking them apart 1 by 1. Though interestingly in my campaign the iuovavaeta rebels seem to have almost 2 stacks and are still surviving strong... I'm in like 220 bc so that's a bit wierd, considering the wars that have happened...
man this mod is epic...
What does "Eleutheroi" mean anyways? I never wanted to start a whole topic about it, and this seems like the perfect place to ask.
"Independents", IIRC. Might be wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by lobf
literally "free peoples" - i.e., anyone not associated with one of the factions on the map.
I know on Roma Surrectum that there is the normal rebels for certain places, but in others there is the "free peoples" with whom you can negotiate peace, etc.. but which I believe takes up a faction. Was this ever considered for EB as it annoys me when I am at peace with the eleutheroi as the casse, but when the caldryaes random stack down south attacks me, I lose 1000+ mnai a turn for some people I never even traded with.
Because that faction would work just like any other faction and not like the rebels at all, that wouldn't be too good of a thing to implement. For a short answer, EB has always promised to make all factions playable, so no minifactions in EB.
I just saw, that the Eleutheroi have a capital. In my current game, it is in Eburonum (Mrogbonna). It belongs to the "boii" and it's protected by three huge rebel armys with gold and silver veteran status.
Why is the Eleutheroi capital in Eburonum, is there some historical reason for it?
All factions seem to need a capital even the Eletheroi, it changes quite regularly in my campaigns.
The reason is it's hard-coded for the rebels to have a capital. IIRC Terhazza starts out as the rebel capital, but it can change depending on city revolts and so. The A.I. likes to place it capital in the middle of it's empire, while Terhazza it right on the edge. Weird things occur when a rebelling city is designated as the eleutheroi capital: it can spawn all units regardless of faction or area-of-recruitment.
in Arthurian total war you can get trade agreements with rebel states... or negotiate ceasefires (they come to you with terms, you cant suggest ceasefires yourself)
maybe the EB guys should talk to the ATW guys
That happens when you give the eleutheroi diplomats, I believe. However it is not suitable, to my mind, as a trade agreement or ceasefire negotiated with the slave faction will apply for all rebel provinces not with anyone in particular. In EB terms, I can hardly see how negotiating peace with Ictis would mean that you are also at peace with Mikra Scythia. It was decided that to maintain the illusion that the slave faction is in fact full of distinct mini-factions, they should not get access to their own diplomats. The only exception to this is the Casse, as they start at peace with the Eleutheroi; this was to represent the state of affairs in britain between the tribes at the beginning of the timeframe. It was considered that as the Casse were on an island the effect wouldn't be too absurd.Quote:
Originally Posted by Celtic_Punk
Foot
It would be nice if you could be at peace with some while at war with others, and have trade rights or ally with individual "rebel" city states. That would be more accurate, and this mod is trying to be accurate.
Yes, but you can't. The RTW engine cannot support that. Wishing is all very well, but unfortunately it is not a constructive method of modding any game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumbob22
Foot
EB used to have rebel diplomats that you could negotiate with, back in the v0.7x days. The thing was, however, that the rebels were super rich and would just send their diplomats out bribing all of the player's armies and generals, and that was no fun.
I didn't know that was impossible, I wasn't simply "wishing". Realizing a problem or innaccuracy and then suggesting ideas to fix it is a constructive method. There may be other ways to have a more accurate relationship with the rebel settlements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
I was about to say, well tough luck wrong engine, but your post gave me a crazy idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by Scumbob22
I was thinking about Massalia and other cities who thrived while trading with the ''barbarian" hinterland and it popped up: a building - a trading post say - who could give a X tax bonus (not in %, but a flat bonus) per Eleutheroi provinces adjacent to your own. So it wouldn't be trade, but it would represent the income generated by that trade with the tribes. It's a building that would be good in the beginning of the game, but it's utility would drop as the eleutheroi is gradually conquered.
History wise, it would represent the great wealth that relatively small cities like Massilia, Tanais and Cyrene had, and it would explain their "decline" as the hinterland got settled. It would also explain why many empires (including Rome) would conquer a colonial polis and leave the hinterland alone for a hundred years.
I don't know if it would work, if it's even modable, but I had this stupid idea and I had to write it. Just in case.
BTW Scumbob22, there's a game, called Europa Universalis 3, who try to have an historic and active simulation of the small countries. There's about 200 factions, from all over the world, ranging from the Ming empire to the iroquois confederacy. It looks good but, well, the problem is that all the 1 province factions are all gulped up in the first 50 years of the game by huge countries/blobs. While the idea of a titanic fight of 100 000+ armies in the steppes north of the Caspian Sea between the Ming and Lithuania can be quite engrossing, it's a little bit dull when you play Muscowy and the Ming army is five time bigger than your entire population. After 100 years, the world map looks like several fractals colliding with each other. And game after game it's all the same. The Ming in Russia, Vijayanagar ranges from Pakistan to Indonesia, Spain conquers all the Maghreb, The Mamelouk conquers Africa up to Zanzibar and the rest of the world is splitted up between France, Burgundy, Lithuania and Austria. It grows dull. It grows unmanageable. Damn.
That's a good idea and it sounds possible, although I know nothing about how the game works.Quote:
Originally Posted by dominique
Impossible to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by dominique
Foot