Casse Rivals- A proposition

Dear All,
Normally I would post this in the possible factions thread but i have noticed that such propositions usually dissapear beneath a tide of posts dismissing such ideas and once again shouting "Pergamon for a faction" or "Syracuse should be included" so I have posted it here.

In the past I have suggested the inclusion of another British tribe to make the Casse campaign slightly less monotonous (constant battles against the Eleutheroi can become tiring) and prompt the Casse to expand when being played by the AI. Usually such suggestions are dismissed by people saying there is not enough evidence for another British tribe (until the Roman invasion of 43AD we hear almost nothing of the British isles and thus have little information on the society of the Brigantes, Caledones or other large tribal confederations). I have also noticed that few people seem to believe that a Belgae faction could be included again because of lack of information.

I propose the inclusion of the Atrebates as a faction. Now before people start ripping this thread apart here are my reasons for proposing the Atrebates:

1. The Atrebates would requrie little further research as both they and the Casse belonged to the Ayesford-Swarling culture (A Belgic or Belgic influenced form of La Tene culture found in South East Britain).

2. Based on late Numismatic evidence we know that rough extent of Atrebatian territory (although this would neccesitate the creation of a new province to represent this territory).

3. Historically we know that the Casse and Atrebates were often at war, thus prompting an AI Atrebates or Casse faction to start expanding.

4. Two individuals, Diviacus of the Suessiones (c. 100BC) and Commius of the Atrebates (52BC) both ruled the Atrebates and parts of Belgica. Thus the Atrebates could be a trans-channel faction, this would make an Atrebatian campaign both interesting and prevent an Atrebates faction from becoming simply a carbon copy of the Casse.

Please let me know what the rest of you think.

I'm sorry, but this seems to me like an extreme longshot. I do believe that other factions deserve the spot, more than another british tribe.

Also, there has been a lot of debate about the Casse being in the game in the first place, so i really don't see another faction up there

The atrebates indeed appear to have ruled land on both sides of the english channel. However it seems that the Belgae were still on their way to Belgica at our startdate, they didn't yet settle in the lands they'd live in during Caesars time.

And this rivalry would be very quickly over since two one-settlement factions starting next to each others would lead to a soon death of one of these factions, I guess

Having the Casse in the Game is in my opinion quite far stretched so why not having another faction in britain? :book:
As long as it is no goidilic faction with only heavy armoured elite units. :juggle2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seienchin

Having the Casse in the Game is in my opinion quite far stretched so why not having another faction in britain? :book:

---

Mainly because there are numerous other potential factions that are better candidates.

Kudos to Brennus for researching an alternative Briton faction, rather than throwing out the Caledonians again.

I am not convinced, though. "Stopping the expansions of another faction" is a poor reason for spending a faction slot. There's other ways of doing that. Also, if they start out at war, you are most likely merely delaying the problem until one of them beats the other. Lastly, faction expansion is probably going to be different in EB2 because the A.I. is programmed differently.

Not a bad thought, but the major problem is that the game starts in 272 BCE, and there is no evidence of the Atrebates being in Britain that early. The Aylesford-Swarling Culture probably begins around 75 BCE, and some have suggested that the situation that Caesar found in southern Britain was of very recent origin, and may in fact have been greatly influenced by previous events in Gaul. That makes it hard to talk about what a British faction might have looked like had there not been a Roman Hegemony.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ludens

Kudos to Brennus for researching an alternative Briton faction, rather than throwing out the Caledonians again.

I am not convinced, though. "Stopping the expansions of another faction" is a poor reason for spending a faction slot. There's other ways of doing that. Also, if they start out at war, you are most likely merely delaying the problem until one of them beats the other. Lastly, faction expansion is probably going to be different in EB2 because the A.I. is programmed differently.

---

Thank you for the kudus. I suggested the Atrebates not to prevent the Casse from expanding but to do the very opposite, to prompt them to expand. I have noticed in my non-Casse games that the neutrality that exists between the Casse and Eleutheroi at the start of the game oftens prevents the AI Casse from expanding.

I agree with what people have been saying about the 170 year gap or so that exists between the start of the game and the currently accepted date for the Ayelsfor-Swarling culture beginning. What about the Arras culture of the Parisi in Yorkshire? Does anyone know how early that culture is? Again that would be relatively easy to research as the Parisi of Gaul would have had a culture very similar to the Averni and Aedui already present. The only problem is that, unlike the Casse, the Parisi were not major political players in Iron Age Briton (at least according to the few hisotrical records we have).

I sympathise with people who think another British faction is a waste of time, I am just Celt mad.

I also agree with people who argue against a Goidelic faction, although personally I would love to see a Goidelic faction, the archaeological evidence for this period in Ireland is very limited and the historical records (mostly derived from legends and the Annals of Ulster) would not provide accurate information.

Clearly not a lot of popular support around here for another faction in northwest Europe, but I personally agree with Brennus's sentiments. The Atrebates position seems interesting, though if it came down to picking one and only one additional faction for the region, I'd probably prefer to have the Brigantes.

The main draw to Atrebates (to me) would be the possibility of starting with territories on both sides of the English channel. However, it would seem that given the way the current campaign map is in EB1, their holdings on the north side would be synonymous with Cassemorg, which is Casse's only starting province. So unless the EB2 team decides to squeeze another province into Britain (which would mean cutting one from somewhere else, a very unlikely scenario), the Atrebates would realistically be starting with one of the two Belgic provinces. And then you're left with the question, "If we're going to include a Belgic tribe as playable, why the Atrebates when there are other good (and probably better) contenders to represent a Belgic faction?"

I think a Belgic faction would be great, and I strongly suspect that one will be included in EB2, but if we're debating a best choice for a new faction with a British presence, then I think Brigantes are your best choice. I think the main reason to include a "rival" for the Casse is that they're boring to play. I haven't been playing EB very long (maybe a year) and have only been visiting these forums a couple months, but I suspect most players never bother with the Casse, and those that due probably find themselves establishing a hegemony over the British Isles before looking toward Continental Europe, where the real action (and challenge) is. The Casse are not threatened by any other factions for a long time and, besides financial difficulties, there's nothing to prevent them from slowly (or quickly) conquering Great Britain and Ireland. Adding the Brigantes in their titular province would change things a great deal, though admittedly I don't see it making campaigns more interesting for players of other factions.

I know there are candidates for playable factions with much higher priority in terms of historical significance (and information), but if I understand correctly there will be room for at least nine additional factions in EB2, and the only three are confirmed so far, leaving at least six more slots. By the time the team gets down to selecting that final faction or two, I think the Brigantes look pretty good in comparison to the remaining choices.

Excellent points by B Ray, and you are right about Cassemorg. The only problem is finding the evidence for the Brigantes.

I agree with you though the Brigantes would probably be the best option for a rival tribe (after the Atrebates, politically speaking, geographically speaking the Brigantes are a much more sound choice) other major tribes and confederations in Britain appear to have either been ad hoc groups created to resist Rome (the Caledonians) or were subject to the Casse in some form (Silures, Iceni and Catti).

But with the Adrebates, it would be necessary to represent their cultural evolution due to a Belgian migration (between second century BC and the first century BC).

For a Britannic faction, I prefer the Brigantes. A war between the Brigantes (natives) and the Casses (Belgian foreigner) represent better the cultural evolution of the Britain.

Invader versus native Britons? I smell an AAR.

I think it is a pretty hard decision, considering the faction limit. Ideally one would want as much representation as possible from the different tribes, but then this is not possible with the engine. I trust the EB team criteria to decide which factions to include, as they have proven in the past. In my mind, besides historical accuracy which is the trademark of the mod, i think each faction should have some sort of flavour around it, in the army composition/gameplay or other way.

For example the one faction which i don´t like much is the aeudui-avernii, not because i dislike celts, but because they´re too similar to each other. I understand the necessity of having both of them represented to show a more accurate gallia thought. But in my opinion having them with so similar rosters and very similar in everything make me feel like a wasted faction slot. In EBII i would love to see some more differences between them, in both army composition (maybe one faction have more access to cavalry units, or the other have access to swords earlier) and playability (for example in the campaign map, the arvernii with their god-king could be quite different that the aeduii, perhaps different buildings and ways to conquer, or more loyal generals in one system than the other one.)

As for the british isles i think it is worth having a native faction at the very least, and the Casse seems to be indeed the best choice as the most powerful tribe, and one of the most involved in trade that we know of. I think there is no need to add more factions in britain as imho the Casse represents well enough a possible emergent power in britain. Perhaps what could be done is to add many regional units representing different tribes (much like the sweboz have) so that you feel that the rebels you fight are actually other tribes and not just a endless mass of grey enemies.

I would much rather see more variation in the barbarian factions in iberia, where there is only the lusotannan present at the moment, i think adding a celtiberian and a iberian tribe (possibly the arevaci/vasci as the celtiberian and the illerget as the iberian). With that said i recognise the difficult job the team must have deciding among so many tribes (very difficult to have a good representation of all of them) but in the end i trust the EB team to make the right decisions. :)

I would also like to remind everyone that though naval invasions are practically non-existent with the RTW AI, they are not uncommon with the M2TW AI. Now, I love the culture of the British Isles in this period, and another faction there would be wonderful if we didn't have a faction limit, but I think that with the faction limit the team would be better served to place a faction in another, less isolated area of the map that we also have more knowledge about. I do think we will see a new Belgae faction in EB2, however, I believe they will be a mainland faction. Even so, I think this will help balance out Northwest Europe a bit more, especially since naval invasions will no longer be unheard of.

When playing England or Scotland in M2TW vanilla, it was not uncommon to see a Danish (or sometimes Portuguese) naval invasion of the British Isles even within the first few turns of the game, at least on harder difficulties. So, keeping that in mind, I think that even a mainland Belgae tribe could help balance out the Casse in Britain, and even if the Casse come out on top, I think we will start seeing more attempts by the Casse AI to launch naval invasions of the mainland. Which would certainly be nice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brennus

What about the Arras culture of the Parisi in Yorkshire? Does anyone know how early that culture is? Again that would be relatively easy to research as the Parisi of Gaul would have had a culture very similar to the Averni and Aedui already present. The only problem is that, unlike the Casse, the Parisi were not major political players in Iron Age Briton (at least according to the few hisotrical records we have).

---

That's it in a nutshell: the Parisoi and other tribes in the Northumberland/Vale of Pickering area had a distinct archaeological culture from at least 400 BCE: but there is no evidence that they became a major regional power. This makes them somewhat less attractive prospects as factions. The Brigantes were a major regional power, but this seems likely to have happened only after the Roman invasion- there is not much in the record that we can tie to the Brigantes in the 3rd century BCE.

That's the major challenge with British factions: there is a lot of information from the Middle Iron Age but no history: the earliest British individual known to us is Cassivellaunus in the 50s BCE, more than 200 years after our start date. A lot happened in that time, but we don't know the exact details.

Look, if there were no faction limit (and more importantly, no province limit), I'm pretty sure that we'd end up with two native British factions. As it is, I'm not going to give out any hints, but there is a lot of work that has gone into Britain, and I can't wait to show it to everyone. Patience! We are working away at EB2. If you can skin and/or model, we need you!


BTW, the bible for this subject is Iron Age Communities in Britain by Barry Cunliffe. A less expensive alternative is An Imperial Possession by Mattingly or The Britons by Christopher Snyder. It is a fascinating subject with a lot of very good literature.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WinsingtonIII

I would also like to remind everyone that though naval invasions are practically non-existent with the RTW AI, they are not uncommon with the M2TW AI. Now, I love the culture of the British Isles in this period, and another faction there would be wonderful if we didn't have a faction limit, but I think that with the faction limit the team would be better served to place a faction in another, less isolated area of the map that we also have more knowledge about. I do think we will see a new Belgae faction in EB2, however, I believe they will be a mainland faction. Even so, I think this will help balance out Northwest Europe a bit more, especially since naval invasions will no longer be unheard of.

When playing England or Scotland in M2TW vanilla, it was not uncommon to see a Danish (or sometimes Portuguese) naval invasion of the British Isles even within the first few turns of the game, at least on harder difficulties. So, keeping that in mind, I think that even a mainland Belgae tribe could help balance out the Casse in Britain, and even if the Casse come out on top, I think we will start seeing more attempts by the Casse AI to launch naval invasions of the mainland. Which would certainly be nice.

---

Vanilla RTW also saw lots of naval invasions. The Scipii always invaded Carthage while the Brutii crossed over to Greece (and if you sent a diplomat you could bribe them while on the boats and have the Brutii fleet sail your new army with its super general over to conquer...). fx...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Macilrille

Vanilla RTW also saw lots of naval invasions. The Scipii always invaded Carthage while the Brutii crossed over to Greece (and if you sent a diplomat you could bribe them while on the boats and have the Brutii fleet sail your new army with its super general over to conquer...). fx...

---

But other than those two major invasions, which may have been scripted considering they happened every time (not sure on that), I simply don't recall seeing it happen very often. Maybe it's just that I've played vanilla M2TW more recently than vanilla RTW, but when I first got M2TW one of the major things that I remember noticing was a big increase in naval invasions.

Of course, the extremely high price of ships in EB2 will undoubtedly reduce the frequency of naval invasions from vanilla.

from a gameplay exclusive point of view, i alway prefer if new factions slots are used to fill in the power vacuums and as dumper zones for uncotrolled expansion (like that of Roma and Ptolemais). so IF there is to be a second faction on the isles (which are pretty small to beggin with) i'd like to see it as distant as possible from Casse, like in Ireland or Scotland. but i'd like much more to see a second Iberian faction, a new central europen faction like the Boii, the Belgae....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WinsingtonIII

But other than those two major invasions, which may have been scripted considering they happened every time (not sure on that), I simply don't recall seeing it happen very often. Maybe it's just that I've played vanilla M2TW more recently than vanilla RTW, but when I first got M2TW one of the major things that I remember noticing was a big increase in naval invasions.

Of course, the extremely high price of ships in EB2 will undoubtedly reduce the frequency of naval invasions from vanilla.

---

Sorry, but RTW Vanilla has lots of Naval invasions, also with the Greeks, carthago and even the spains.
Anyway Is there any evidence of the casse in 272bc? Just asking because I never read anything credible in that way.:book:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brennus

I suggested the Atrebates not to prevent the Casse from expanding but to do the very opposite, to prompt them to expand. I have noticed in my non-Casse games that the neutrality that exists between the Casse and Eleutheroi at the start of the game oftens prevents the AI Casse from expanding.

---

Since most players complain that the Casse can too easily gain control of the islands, I am not sure whether that's a good idea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seienchin

Anyway Is there any evidence of the casse in 272bc? Just asking because I never read anything credible in that way.:book:

---

As Odysseus writes, the history of the British Isles only starts when Caesar arrives there. Before that we have to go with the archaeological record.

I was but stating obvious examples. As Seinchein says there are many more. You are right, however, the price is likely the limiting factor.

I seem to recall someone mentioning that him lowering the price of ships increased the frequency of naval invasions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ludens

As Odysseus writes, the history of the British Isles only starts when Caesar arrives there. Before that we have to go with the archaeological record.

---

Which is tremendous. There is an extraordinary amount of data: the problem is synthesizing it into something meaningful.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seienchin

Sorry, but RTW Vanilla has lots of Naval invasions, also with the Greeks, carthago and even the spains.

---

I guess I just haven't played vanilla in years then, because I don't remember this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WinsingtonIII

I guess I just haven't played vanilla in years then, because I don't remember this.

---

Lately I have considered going back to it for just one campaign to see how fast I can beat everyone. After EB I suspect very fast ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seienchin

Sorry, but RTW Vanilla has lots of Naval invasions, also with the Greeks, carthago and even the spains.

---

In all my playing of EB, I have only ever seen one AI Naval invasion, and I practically set that up for the Carthaginians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by seienchin

Anyway Is there any evidence of the casse in 272bc? Just asking because I never read anything credible in that way.:book:

---

I remember a thread about a year or two ago where some guy claimed that the majority of stuff in the Casse leader's Biography trait was rubbish :shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oudysseos

Look, if there were no faction limit (and more importantly, no province limit), I'm pretty sure that we'd end up with two native British factions. As it is, I'm not going to give out any hints, but there is a lot of work that has gone into Britain, and I can't wait to show it to everyone. Patience! We are working away at EB2.

---

Ooooooh I'm as giddy as a schoolgirl:dizzy2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

I remember a thread about a year or two ago where some guy claimed that the majority of stuff in the Casse leader's Biography trait was rubbish :shrug:

---

A lot of the Casse and British stuff in general was based on sources that the EB team no longer has access to, so with no way to check these things we are likely to see some big changes in the way the British isles and their inhabitants are portrayed.

I think this was the reason some of the Irish units were taken out in the recent versions of EB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

A lot of the Casse and British stuff in general was based on sources that the EB team no longer has access to,

---

Not quite- we have at least as much if not much much more source material than the team did back in '04/'05 when the Casse was first concepted. What is changing, perhaps, is the approach. There are a lot of blanks to fill in for an EB faction- family trees (there are no identifiable British individuals before the 50s BCE), names of settlements and regions (no records from the 3rd century BCE) and all kinds of stuff that we can only speculate on. To fill some of these blanks for the Casse, EB1 looked to material like Gildas, Nennius and the Welsh Annals. Modern scholarship does not view these sources as accurate history, but they were taught as fact for maybe 1,000 years, so there is a lot of inertia behind them. The thing is, whatever scenario we come up with has to be speculative to some degree, and the best we can aim for is for our speculation to be as plausible as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbin

We are likely to see some big changes in the way the British isles and their inhabitants are portrayed.

---

Maybe...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Subotan

In all my playing of EB, I have only ever seen one AI Naval invasion, and I practically set that up for the Carthaginians.

---

I fought a 20 year war over Sicily with Carthago as Rome with EB Alex and some house rules(max high taxes unless enemy in Italy, 12 unit armies).

Quite competent at keeping armies in the field and ever over seas... as in whole 20 unit stacks + reinforcements + elephants. :skull: