A few thoughts on the expansion capabilities of the northern european factions

Reading the latest preview on the Pritanoi there are some thoughts and questions I'd like to share with you.

One thing that vexes me in EBI is that when I play with factions like the Casse or the Sweboz, unless I restrain myself for role playing reasons, I can start pumping out units and I can create a huge northern european empire. In real history though those factions were not states with a central government but rather tribal coalitions which were unlikely to expand like the Romans or the Successor Kingdoms did. They certainly raided their neighbours and sometimes the whole tribe would migrate carving a new home for themselves in conquered lands but the in game possibility of say unifying G.Britain and then conquering provinces in northern Gaul ruled by the ''British Crown'' is quite far fetched, not because it did not happen in real history but because it could not happen with the social organisation of those people. Even in later times when the Germans brought the Western Roman Empire to its knees (and almost did the same to the Eastern part) they didn't do so as an expeditionary force of a unified German state but as more or less independent tribes who created independent kingdoms in the former roman lands.

My point is how this political structure could be represented in the TW engine? I noticed two details in the Pritanoi preview: The fact that the Touta (the commoners) soldiers will not be available all year round and that the faction will experience "a fundamental transformation in their identity and way of life". The first one could be a way to make it impossible for the human player to go rampaging around the map without a dedicated professional military (and the more centralised government required for its existence). Especially since he can not field elite-only armies any more due to their limited recruitment. Maybe you will utilise the mechanic from an early preview concerning the Klerouchoi Phalangitai (high upkeep cost when outside settlements and zero cost when garrisoning settlements) for the Touta units too? Also could this "transformation" point to a social and political reform towards a more organised state?

It could be argued that I am too mediterranean biased and I would like to see the political institutions of the Romans, Greeks or Eastern cultures applied to the northern Europeans. But there may be examples in the Celtic world too. I admit that my knowledge on how centralised the Gallic states were, is at least poor, but the greater urbanisation of these areas gives me a clue. And if the Gauls could organise themselves this way they could export these ideas to the more traditional Pritanoi. At least from what I read in the preview the British society was being heavily influenced by the Continent.

Finally, and sorry for the long post, I am sure the team has already thought about this issue and they are definitely more knowledgeable than me, both on history and the game mechanics so I guess they'll find solutions. Nor am I expecting you to reveal info that are not to be revealed yet. Anyway, if the accursed hard coded limits plague us again, we can always revert to the good old-fashioned, voluntary, "I'm simulating a Chatti invasion with a stack raised only in the Chatti Gawjam" stuff. :yes:

The situation is different in M2TW in that we can affect the recruitment of units in several important ways.

1. Quantity. The number of units available to recruit can be limited by more than how much money it takes to hire them. In the case of the Pritanoi, you will never have more than a couple of the Nobles units at one time.
2. Seasonal. Through script, it is possible both to restrict recruiting to one season (i.e., you can only hire units in winter for the spring) and also to limit the lifespan of certain units (i.e., you can have all levy type units disband at the end of the campaigning season). Work is ongoing on this so I won't say more, but "pumping out units" just isn't going to happen, at least not right away. There are a lot of other things that will happen along these lines, but you'll have to wait.

I was expecting something like that, I just didn't know if it was possible. The seasonal recruitment especially will totally revamp gameplay. This project methinks resembles more and more a historical simulation than a game. You bet I will wait Oudysseos.

Just to be clear: the seasonal recruitment is something that is being developed, but if for any reason it doesn't work as planned, we would explore other avenues.

Quote:

---

(...) i.e., you can have all levy type units disband at the end of the campaigning season)

---

Wait, does that mean that it is possible to disband units by scripts? It could be an interesting way to simulate "miltia-type" units, e.g. low-exp warbands that would be spawned at emergency.

Quantity limitations will be great for all factions. No more pure-elite armies.

Seasonal recruitment? Wow, that's quite a concept. I hope that "campaigning season" means all season except for winter.

Well, it would depend. Remember the summer-hating steppe?

In case of the Pritanoi I'd say the touta units probably won't be available during harvest :juggle2:

Regarding reforms, this is something I have wondered about before. In EB there government reforms for the Hayasdan faction: the first represents a greater centralisation of power in an initially fragmented mountain kingdom, the second was about transforming the faction into a new Persian empire if you control certain regions. I asked long ago whether similar reforms were planned for other factions, for example for transforming the tribal confederations of the "barbarian" factions into centralised kingdoms. The answer was that no more reforms would be implemented unitl EBII.

Therefore, I'll ask again: are there any political reforms of the same type we have already seen for Hayasdan currently planned to be implemented in EBII?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kongeslask

Therefore, I'll ask again: are there any political reforms of the same type we have already seen for Hayasdan currently planned to be implemented in EBII?

---

Naturally.

Foot

:yes: After all you can't go fighting around the world (south park anyone?) without taking care of your internal affairs... I guess we'll have a lot of parameters to consider before we hit the end turn button. And that's exactly how we like it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

Naturally.

Foot

---

It would be interesting to hear more details of what you have in mind. In reference to the OP, will it be possible to change your Pritanoi, Sweboz or whatnot into a kind of polity that could plausibly expand into a far-reaching empire?

On a more historical note, is such political changes at all plausible for the time period? Could the tribal factions have turned into more permanent states with greater military and technological sophistication in the time period, assuming good leadership and an otherwise favourable situation?

Quote:

---

On a more historical note, is such political changes at all plausible for the time period? Could the tribal factions have turned into more permanent states with greater military and technological sophistication in the time period, assuming good leadership and an otherwise favourable situation?

---

No.

However, the game is an abstraction and despite no central organisation, the germans (represented by the Sweboz) was a people/culture and did threaten the Gauls and Romans, eventually overrunning the WRI. Still without being one centralised state. The first Germanic Empire if you wish to speak of such would probably have been what the Franks built on and with the ruins of the WRI in Gaul.

EBII cannot mirror RL exactly, so we have to make do with an abstraction within the limitations of the engine and indeed current computers ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kongeslask

It would be interesting to hear more details of what you have in mind.

---

It certainly would, but you'll have to wait. Previews are the proper place to preview things.

Foot

If I may elaborate on Foot's brief post. The reasons that we do not share everything with the community in general are:

1. We want to present a finished product for you, you do not buy a car or house one part at at time either if you know what I mean. It would spoil the joy of the end product and it would loose its appeal.
2. If we shared everything with the community in general, everything would be discussed by the community in general, it would muddy things and take time, for; as you know, opinions are like ars... well you know- everybody has one. So again, we will present you a finished product that you can like or dislike. However, if you wish to contribute there is a thread in the stickies where you can apply for the Team to help us out.

I am sorry, but we cannot and will not reveal more. I hope you understand and is not too upset by that policy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kongeslask

It would be interesting to hear more details of what you have in mind. In reference to the OP, will it be possible to change your Pritanoi, Sweboz or whatnot into a kind of polity that could plausibly expand into a far-reaching empire?

On a more historical note, is such political changes at all plausible for the time period? Could the tribal factions have turned into more permanent states with greater military and technological sophistication in the time period, assuming good leadership and an otherwise favourable situation?

---

This is a serious question: the tribal factions that were referenced in fact did not turn into Imperial-ready states within the time period of EB and indeed for much longer afterwards. I'm not in favour of historical determinism, yet it seems clear that the kind of centralised, literate, urban society that is most likely to produce a world conqueror is not something that be plausibly posited for many of our "barbarian" factions.

So, what to do? We want to make these factions as historically accurate as possible, which, it seems, may include making them pretty much incapable of replicating the Roman Empire. But then, what to do with them? What constitutes victory for the Pritanoi, when in real life, 300 years after the start of the game, no native British tribe had succeeded in unifying the Isles or indeed even a significant portion of them?


We do have plans for all of this, of course, but the fundamental issue will always remain. The Roman, Macedonians, Carthaginians, and Parthians can believably make a stab at a large empire: for the other factions this is harder to envisage.