Frequently Asked Questions

Q: I see people bashing CA for not creating an historically accurate game - does EB agree with them?
A: Absolutely not. EB would not exist if it were not for the wonderful game of Rome: Total War. Creative Assembly has done a fine job in creating it. Some EB team members have been disappointed by some aspects of the game, especially the moddability (not nearly so as advertised), but we all respect CA for the work they have done. We do not participate in CA bashing. However, having said that, we do respond when they insult their fans in their FAQ...

Q: Does your mod place history over gameplay?
A: We find it very sad that people even ask this question. We try to educate people to understand that there need be no compromise between gameplay and history. One problem is that CA reinforces this misconception - consider this quote:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Shogun

We think aiming for complete historical accuracy would also have been utterly boring for everyone except the dozen or so people who want a painstakingly accurately depicted Vexillationes Equites Sagitarii Seniores and a complete list of tribal factions and nations, all behaving like they were stuck on historical tramlines, with no choices for the player. Instead we create a start point that is a close approximation of an historical situation and then allow the player to alter history by their actions, thus probably creating a counter-factual outcome.

---

As you can see, not only does CA hold contempt for those of us who enjoy history (which is a shame, given that the game was advertised as historical), but they don't understand that history can create wonderful gameplay, and that describing units, factions, and other game entities historically does not require gameplay to follow a historical path.

We at EB find that given just a little in-depth research, what was once generic (or fantasy) hordes becomes a wealth of historical diversity in units, buildings, and factions. Historical events had causes - instead of trying to recreate historical events, we put in place triggers that act on historical causes. So history can be re-written, and yet the cool bits of history are not lost. CA takes a dim view of its customer base, feeling that they would rather set fire to pigs, or play a faction 1000 years out of date, than to enjoy the incredible diversity found in an accurate portrayal of the militaries of the time. Our mod will be a testament to the fact that history and gameplay go hand in hand, and its popularity perhaps an indication to CA that it errs in treating its customers as though they were all brainless zombies who look no deeper than pretty graphics and head-tossing fantasy men.

We set the table (properly). You write the history. What could be more fun?

Q: When will your mod be released?
A: An open beta will be released as soon as we have fixed certain issues with our core systems. After that, the full release is uncertain. However, we are relatively close.

Q: Is your mod all about barbarians?
A: No, our mod seeks to recreate, as accurately as possible, the classical world as depicted within R:TW at the time of campaign start. This includes all factions, and we have modders working on every area. Personally, I like Rome the best.

Q: Are you portraying the barbarians as "better" than the Greeks or Romans?
A: We try to be as accurate as possible with what we do for all factions. This means looking at all available sources, not just the Roman ones. Roman historians typically portrayed the barbarians they hated as being much less sophisticated than they actually were. This does not mean the barbarians were "better" than the Greeks and Romans, but the barbarians, and the Celts in particular, had much to offer in the advancement of the classical world. A myriad of different peoples helped shape the area, not only the Greeks and Romans.

Q: Do you know more history than anyone else?
A: No, the members of EB are not more knowledgeable than anyone else. We do have professional archaeologists and professional historians among our ranks, but that does not give us a monopoly on history by any stretch of the imagination. We simply take the time to do research well beyond taking for granted the various assumptions often made about the different people of the classical age. We search primary sources, and are very thorough. However, we are always willing to reexamine our work if someone presents us with information that contradicts what we believe to be true.

Q: I've never heard of unit/faction/name X. I can't find it online. Where did you find it?
A: Most of our sources are primary archaeological and textual evidence. We have people reading and examining this evidence in period languages. We consider secondary evidence as well. However, many of our sources are found in places that only academics will be able to access, and a few have not even been published yet. Our goal is to be as accurate as possible, not to please those who want to be able to find what we describe on Google.

Q: Do you have an axe to grind against (Rome, Greece, insert faction here)?
A: We believe that our mod can be an educational tool, teaching people about the rich and varied cultures that existed throughout our small slice of history. We do not attempt to artificially portray factions in a light other than an academically sterile one. That is, as objectively as possible.

Q: Is the work on Rome and Greece an afterthought?
A: Absolutely not. Rome and Greece are receiving just as much attention as all of our factions. Greece and the Successor states even moreso, due to the predominance of Greek scholars in our membership. We have representation for all the factions.

Q: Then why do you call yourselves "Europa Barbarorum?"
A: The project was born over a year ago, when the thought was that the team could provide as much historical information as possible to help CA portray the barbarian factions as more than just a bunch of drooling, naked neanderthals. When it seemed clear that CA wasn't accepting outside help, the team became determined to turn this research into a mod. The purpose of the mod expanded to include accuracy for all factions, but the name has become part of our identity. It may not be completely descriptive any longer, but the team has always been known as Europa Barbarorum. It is like a given name, it is a part of who we are, not what we are.

In addition, the term "barbarian" originally meant foreigner. Everyone is a "barbarian" to someone.

Q: What do you see as the principle scope and focus for EB from an organizational standpoint?
A: This is somewhat difficult to answer. As an organization, EB is dedicated to providing an entertaining, historically accurate gaming experience. Inside of EB are numerous divisions; one for each faction, for the economic system, for the naval system, for siege warfare, for music, for voices, for the map, and so on. We divide the work among our members as best as possible, to try and ensure coverage over every aspect of RTW. I suppose the most concise answer would be: Our primary focus is to research every aspect of RTW to determine if we can improve it in terms of historical accuracy, realism, and gameplay, and to implement what we have found into a complete package for your gaming pleasure.

Q: How many mods are going to be integrated into EB, like are you going to use the expanded campaign maps, will you be incorporating unti modification mods like higher attacks for certain units?
A: The short answer is - none. We incorporate things we have learned from other mods, such as TTO's Cherry Vanilla Pack, and Myrddraal's Four Seasons script, and how RTR removed the Senate, but we are incorporating no mods whole into our own. All of our work has been done in-house

Q: What do you think is the difference between EB and RTR?
A: The best answer is that we try to avoid comparison with other mods. We respect the work of all modders and try to foster an environment of cooperation, not competition.

Q: What are your plans on making the game more realistic, but not making gameplay less fun or annoying?
A: This is hard to answer without specifics. Generally, we accept certain abstractions and conventions that RTW uses to generate an environment of continuing rewards, while improving upon these systems to make them both more realistic and more fun.

Q: What are you doing with (insert favorite unit name)? Will it look different/be more powerful?
A: We have completely tossed out every single vanilla unit from the game. We are creating 500 new units from scratch, and 255 new models. Only a few vanilla units remain as placeholders for EB units not yet created. The game will be completely different.

Q: Why don't you release (favorite unit)/(favorite skin)/(piece of EB)?
A: Europa Barbarorum is a complete conversion. This means that we are not a team of modders making individual pieces, whether that be music, a map, skins, models, or any other bit that goes into our completed whole. One of our principles is to release work that has enough content to justify the term 'complete conversion,' along with being bug free. One of the reasons we will not be releasing a single skin or group of skins separate from the mod is because doing so would be direct violation of our founding principles. In other words, these pieces are part of a whole, and we intend to release the whole, not incomplete pieces.

Q: How are you planning on changing the relationship between the senate and the roman factions?
A: We have removed the Senate from the game; We will not be releasing more information at this time.

Q: Is there a way to implement senate missions/rewards/reprisals without an active SPQR faction?
A: We have added interesting gameplay elements, such as Roman Triumphs, but these are outside of the existing (limited) system.

Q: If a way is found to fundamentally change the workings of the senate, including adding new "senates", is there any thought to adding 'senates' to other factions (carthage comes to mind)?
A: There is no way to fundamentally change the Senate, so we have removed it.

Q: Will the aliens who built the pyramids make an appearance?
A: Find me primary sources detailing their existence and appearance, and they most certainly will.

Q: How are political relationships between factions that changed over the game timeframe being handled?
A: The best answer I can give you is that we're doing the best we can on an individual faction basis, within system limitations. We try to look at the causes of some events and check for those causes to exist in the game. So as the Seleucids developed Cataphracts after being exposed to them, in the game they will gain access only after being exposed to them, not at a certain date.

Q: Can protectorates be in-place at the start of a game?
A: As far as we know, no.

Q: Considering the breadth of the mod, is EB going to produce a detailed (more akin to a manual than a readme) supporting text document?
A: EB is in the process of creating a detailed manual.

Q: Are 0-turn buildtimes for certain units being considered?
A: The idea has been discussed and rejected.

Q: Have any animals been harmed in the development of EB?
A: We have wiped out an entire race of elephants (yubtseB) and dogs fear our name. We burned all the pigs, as well.

Q: Is the gallic faction being split up into several tribes like it was historically?
A: We will handle tribal divisions as best as possible. In general, the factions represent the most important tribes of the area. CA has already broken the Thracian tribes in two, for us. Gaul represents the Aedui for us. When we have the ability to add factions, the Arverni will be added. No matter how many faction slots we could add, we would never add more than these two Gallic factions, to represent that they held control over almost all of the major Celtic tribes in the area during this time period.

Q: Will there be new factions in the areas south and east of he original campaign map?
A: Yes, absolutely. However, our ability to do this is limited by the number of available factions. Currently, we can't add more.

Q: Will you be changing the campaign victory conditions?
A: Each faction will have faction-specific victory conditions.

Q: Will you be adding area X to the map?
A: We have no plans to expand the map even further, given that the map we are working on has 199 provinces, the limit.

Q: Why did you add so many provinces to area X, which was of lesser importance?
A: Our goal is to release a completely bug-free mod. Increasing the range between settlements over the limit of 50 tiles introduces bugs within the game mechanics, especially with respect to trade calculation and breaking the AI. As our principle is to not introduce fudges that circumvent some area of the mechanics, to avoid problems elsewhere, we will not be combining provinces (making some in "unimportant" areas larger) to avoid these issues. We feel that our map gives the best representation of the ancient world as possible within RTW limitations, and the best gameplay.

Q: I think you should have more provinces in densely populated areas, why didn't you do this?
A: See above. We had no choice but to depict Arabia accurately, for instance, or it would do bad things to the game mechanics. We can't make the population centers even more dense without breaking things. In addition, clustering provinces together makes for very slow, boring gameplay. We did not want to play Siege: Total War.

Q: Is the start date still 270 BC?
A: We are currently testing under a start date of 272 BC. We are not sure what our start date will end up being.

Q: Has your expanded map caused slowdowns like with mod X?
A: Testing has shown no loss of performance in any way, though our new campaign map models may cause a small slowdown for lower-end computers.

Q: Will you make the battle maps larger?
A: If we can figure out how to do this, certainly. At this time, it seems impossible.

Q: Will I be able to play mod X with EB installed?
A: EB is a complete conversion, and will not be compatible with other mods.

Q: Why does faction X have province Y? Why doesn't faction X have province Z?
A: Factions will be given starting positions that are true to history, given what that faction actually represents (certain tribes, groups of tribes, a kingdom, and so on), and the political realities of our start date.

Q: Will you be expanding the Roman armies compared to vanilla?
A: Yes. We have not yet released how, though.

Q: Will certain rebels, in places like Numidia, Illyria, India etc. be much stronger than others to represent the left out factions?
A: Well, certain areas will be more difficult to take than others. This is not to represent factions that did not make it into the game, but to represent the diversity of people and warfare found in the "rebel" areas.

Q: Will you guys be manipulating the AI to try and make them do certain things in the campaign?
A: Neither the campaign nor battle AI routines are open to us. We are making changes we feel will support the AI, both in the campaign and on the battlefield, but the lack of decent AI is a problem CA did not give us the tools to fix.

Q: Have you changed the distribution of wealth any?
A: Yes - provinces, resources, and trade have all had their values tweaked, and costs are much higher than they were. The open beta may see imbalances in this respect, as we have not been able to balance the economy the way we want to, and will not be able to until our core systems are in place. This is part of what we want your help for, to balance the economy, and other aspects of EB.

Q: I read way back that you guys were going to use original langauge speaking and spelling in the mod, will you guys still do that?
A: We are using transliteration from original languages throughout the mod, and we still plan to have original voices in the mod. Only the Latin is complete, but we have made progress on the Greek, Punic, and various Celtic languages, among others.

Q: Are you doing something to affect the problem of unrest caused by distance from the captial with your expanded map?
A: Various new ways to combat unrest will be available, though we find that unrest due to distance from the capital is not completely ahistorical.

Q: Will you be moving to/supporting BI?
A: If we determine, after its release, that there are enough benefits to modding to do so, yes.

Q: Will I be able to mod EB, such as inserting my own skins?
A: Yes, though it will be much more difficult. EB will be using up to the province, faction, unit, model, building, and every other conceivable limit. In addition, each EB model is brand new and not based on vanilla. So you cannot use your existing skins on EB models, they will have to be changed.

How long will it take?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ignoramus

How long will it take?

---

As long as it takes I feel. Given the sheer scale of work that is going into this it cannot be rushed.

Maybe the other guys could shed light on an exact timeframe...

just wondering, is this thread updated regularly?
or are you still at 15% of your skin total?

Hello

I am interested in how EB is going to handle the non-Roman nations on the Italian peninsula (e.g. Samnites, Campanians, Marsii). I have seen the skins for the Samnite warrior (done by Prometheus I believe?) but all the central and southern provinces on the map seem to be owned by a Roman 'faction', so will these other nations be portrayed as rebels within these provinces?

Congratulations on the project, i admire the work you are all putting in.

:bow:

I'll be handling those peoples (and prometheus will be making the units). You might see more than a few Italian regionals. :bow:

Outstanding, thanks for the reply. I have always thought that the Social Wars was one of the closest times Rome came to going under and am glad that such fascinating people's will be in EB.

History getting a bit rusty now, but 270BC is too late for the Etruscans to make an appearance?

Well, I know for a fact that there was a peace treaty between the Etruscan cities and the Roman Republic in 282 BC and shortly after all their cities fell under direct control of Rome. So 10 years later they should still be counted among Rome´s Italian Allies and expected to fight in their army much like the Campanians, the Umbrians or the Samnites. :book:

Interesting. Before I started reading up on this period I had pictured the Punic Wars as huge Roman 'Empire' struggling with and eventually squashing plucky little Carthage (just a city state after all).

It is only when you start reading that you realise that Carthage had half of Sicily and part of Iberian peninsula, in addition to much of the coast and hinterland of North Africa and dominance of the western mediterranean sea, whilst Rome didn't even control all of Italy, with the Gauls in the north and recently subjugated 'italians & greeks' in the south.

Pretty amazing those Romans, the way they manage to wipe Carthage of the map despite the apparant starting position advantage for Carthage.

The only real advantage the carthaginians had at the onset of the war was their navy. It´s my opinion that Carthage lost the war(s) mostly because it lost its naval supremacy to the Romans after they invented the corvus. The inability to supply and reinforce its armies fighting overseas was fatal, as was the inability to perform large landings on enemy land(Hannibal had to fight its way up Iberia, Gaul and the Alps, to fight Rome on its own ground. Scipio just crossed into Africa, bypassing important Carthaginian armies.)

BTW: Carthage NEVER had direct control of the interior of Iberia, or of North Africa for that matter. They were not able (or perhaps were not willing) to take large territories, prefering to stay on the coast in fortified trade posts (which eventualy became towns). You can find an accurate analogy in Portuguese Expansion in the 1500's.

Also, imagine the coast of North Africa (Morocco, Lybia, Tunisia, etc...) as Greece. Let me explain. Sidon and Tyre had colonised the western Mediterranium (Carthage being one of such colonies) and in time these colonies became somewhat independent (like the colonies of the Greek). Utica for example was a city that rivaled with Carthage itself.

Once Tyre fell, Carthage took control of most of these colonies and destroyed most of their walls, so they couldn´t rebel. Only Utica was allowed to keep its walls and had a equal status Carthage had a significant empire, yes, but only in paper. They had very limited manpower, almost no army and disloyal subjects.

Oh, Carthaginian citizens had an aversion to war, their levies were generaly of poor quality, while the Romans...well...you know the rest... ~;)

You make good points. It will be fascinating trying to reverse history and win as carthage, keep control of the sea and win the war. My personal hope for the RTW expansion is 3D naval battles, playing an amphibious invasion of southern italy from Carthage.

well i can dream.

Even in Vanilla RTW I found that keeping naval superiority of the Western Mediterranean is essential to keep your Empire. Caralis and Lilybaeum are particularly dificult to hold on to when you cant prevent the enemy from landing on your coasts.

Even if naval battles aren't 3D, it would be better than nothing. It wouldn't bother me a bit if naval battles looked like a game of Space Invaders in black and white, the AI is retarded and I want control of my ships!

EDIT:

By the way, I've been soaking up information on EB for the last several hours, my eyes are starting to hurt now but I'm so excited! This mod looks absolutely gorgeous!

Will certain factions be so easy that they wil be almost be unplayable?
And one more question, will EB be harder to mod then vanilla rtw (due to advanced stuff that was added such as zor, etc.)?




Great work by the way ~:thumb:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mongoose

Will certain factions be so easy that they wil be almost be unplayable?
And one more question, will EB be harder to mod then vanilla rtw (due to advanced stuff that was added such as zor, etc.)?
Great work by the way ~:thumb:

---

Certain factions will be very difficult, but none will be so hard that as AI we see them (in playtesting) defeated within a few turns or a decade or so. This isn't an official policy as far as I know, but who wants to put a lot of work into a faction and then have them disappear before anyone has a chance to fight them.

Will some be easier? Yeah; easier than others. But I suspect playing even the Ptolemies and Carthage as very hard might be something of a challenge. Maybe not for some folks though. About the difficulty to mod...I'm not sure. It may depend on what aspects you want to change. I suspect if we've changed it then as long as you know what you're doing that it can be modded further, but my code experience is limited to certain aspects like families, names, buildings, and 2D graphics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mongoose

And one more question, will EB be harder to mod then vanilla rtw (due to advanced stuff that was added such as zor, etc.)?

---

EB will be extremely difficult to mod. For units, all our models are custom made, so you can't just add new skins (or take our skins for vanilla units). We'll also be at the model limit, so you won't be able to add your own models. We'll also probably be at the unit limit, which means you can't add new units.

For the campaign itself, we'll be at the building limit, the province limit, we'll have made major changes to the economy, to resources, to unit recruitment, we'll have added governments and other new things...Also, we'll be utilizing background scripts that change many things. Our trait and ancillary system will be new and very different.

In short, modding EB will be like modding an entirely different game. Except while with vanilla there was still some room to play with, we're planning on reaching the limits with everything we do.

Thanks for the quick reply.


Are there any plans for adding the four turns per year script? Or would that conflict with EB?


"Will some be easier? Yeah; easier than others. But I suspect playing even the Ptolemies and Carthage as very hard might be something of a challenge. Maybe not for some folks though. About the difficulty to mod...I'm not sure. It may depend on what aspects you want to change. I suspect if we've changed it then as long as you know what you're doing that it can be modded further, but my code experience is limited to certain aspects like families, names, buildings, and 2D graphics."

That's good. IMHO over powered factions (for realism reasons) often balance out a llittle because they end up fighting each other so much.

What are you going to do with the elephants in EB?

In vanilla I simply love them! :charge:

Like, how many elephant units will be avaible, and what about their stats and look?

Uh. The music? What about the music?


EB Rocks. ~:cheers:

Later

Updated.

What is this "occultus" ?

It's a secret.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khelvan

It's a secret.

---

Is that the next preview? :idea:

You guys so fell for that one...

Its quite obviously a joke made to make everyone think theres something secret and mysterious. Although it is rather low i cant say i wouldnt do the same thing in their position and have some fun with my power.

In all honesty, he won't even tell us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steppe Merc

In all honesty, he won't even tell us.

---

???

Steppe Merc could have the answer if he looked inside our hidden forum, but you know he's not the sharpest tool in the shed being a hippie and all. :hippy:
;)

Quote:

---

As you can see, not only does CA hold contempt for those of us who enjoy history (which is a shame, given that the game was advertised as historical), but they don't understand that history can create wonderful gameplay, and that describing units, factions, and other game entities historically does not require gameplay to follow a historical path.

---

HA! Nicely put, I agree 100%. I recall reading that when it was first posted on the BI FAQ thread over at the official RTW forum. It made me furious.

History is not pinned with gameplay. They are independent.

I would much rather feel like a general of that age than some two bit hack tossing flaming pigs into the fray.

edited double post.