Rome TW is almost totally unhistoric - evidences and answers

Thank you everybody who posted and those guys who only read. ~:) I ‘m moding game and puting new units. And I found on Net new units. My quentions (especially for you Emperor Emeu 1, because you “know” everything):

1.How to put correct icon to Amazonian Chariots (I put them to Scythia) – I have peasant icon?
2.Where to find new units? I found on www.twcenter.net something and this really working. More?
3.Where is Europa Barbarorum?
4.How to contact creators of new units. I have a lot of historic pictures and I will send them.
5.How to contact creators of Realism mode?
6.Where to find real Macedon coat of arms (she-goat)?
7.Where to find real Spartan skin (CA alternate is wrong)?
8.How to make provinces without Photoshop?
Some useful links… :help:

My new investigation of game. And I WILL PUT pictures, later (tomorrow midday, I'm wathcing Cup uefa). I finally find scanner.

1. The Names of Cities

This map is map of Alexander the Great’s way of conquering. You will see that some cities and provinces in game are wrong.

in the game = historicly

Seleuca = I don’t see city on map Seleuca – proper is Babylon
Arsakia = better is Rahagae (modern Teheran) – but the best is Ecbatana with geographic changes (famous Persian city – one of four Persian capitals with Babylon, Susa and Persepolis)
Hatra = I see Nisibis

Elymais = I see Persia

2. Illyrian Peltast

That’s how look the real Illyrian warrior with shield “so called” pelta. Pelta was light shield in pattern of number eight (Latin scutum and Serbian skuta). And those Greek Heavy peltast – real name is Thureophoroi. And Illyrian peltasts looked different from Greek Thureophoroi (in game they are same).

3.Amazonians and Scythian

Greek historians wrote a lot of about Amazonians – women warriors. A. Henry Sayce (The Hittites, The Religion Tract Society , Oxford, 1890) :”Amazonian were imagened like people of women warriors whose first native were Capadocia on cost of river Termidona. From there Amazon ians went to conquer people of Minor Asia and to establish empire… Establishing of the most cities refered to Amazonians like Mirinae, Kumae, Smirnae and Ephesus in which was glorifed great asian godess under name Ma.”
And ancient famous historian Strabon wrote (Geographie, De l’Imprimerie Imperiale, Paris, 1805) that Amazonians lived north of Caucas. Thay used sagris (labrisa or in english two -bladed axe) and pelta.
Alfred Maury (Les Getes, Journal des Savants, Avril, Mai, Juin 1869):”Greeks believed they found, in women warriors from coasts of Termidones and Sarmation land, Amazonians from their mythical and religious tradition.”
Scythi – no one knows exactly who those people were. But, something is certain – they lived in modern Ukraine and Russia and the most of historians think they are Sarmations.
I moded game - added Amazonian Chariots in Scythian Blacksmith and changed names of Head Hunting Maidens into Amazonian Cavalry (because those women look like Strabon wrote) and Scythian Noble Women into Amazonian Horse Archers.

And I put how looked Amazonian Infantry (yes, they look like hoplite).

4.Phalanx and Macedonia

The real name of Companion Cavalry is Hetairoi (Greek - Latin commpagnons). Don’t believe - just read John V.A. Fine: The Ancient Greeks, Harvard University Press, Cambridge U.S.A., 1983. From 7th century (until Philipos) the most of Macedonian army were cavalry (hetairoi) supstained from big families and nobles. And Philipos II thought out phalanx.
This is lamda (Macedon coat of arms) in game (I was wrong – I wrote alpha).
And I put picture how phalanx looked (in game Royal Pikemen). On this picture we SEE that men using pikes with two hands and in game use with one hand. How men could hold 6m long pike with one hand?
I read some of you noticed too, that hoplite fight wrong and they never fight in phalanx. Thank you!

5.ΠΤΟΛΕΜΑΙΥ and ΣΕΛΕΥΚΟΥ

Those coins were Seleucid and Ptolomeic money. So, Egypt is wrong (the Ptolomeic Empire is correct) and coat of arms is totally wrong. I see on Ptolomeic coin eagle - not Egyptian cross.

6.Galatae (or in game Naked Fanatics)

Ok, I was wrong. Those guys were lived – they were Gauls tribe. But they don’t have nothing with Dacians, Iberians and Germans.
Gaul is Roman name for Celts (Greek name).
I put picture of wounded Galatae.

7.Samnites

I put how really looked Samnite warriors and Samnite cavalry. In game they are just reskined triarii with lower stats. Somebody have to fix that!

My answers:

TonyJ – I know this is a game, but with some fixs this game can be one the best game ever made (99% only gave Half Life in the Serbian World of Computers, Rome TW 95%). Engine is total revolutionar, but campaign… Thank you God that CA make game modable!

Quillian – read TonyJ

BalkanTourist – from where origin are you?

LtMor – thank you!

Kbot – game have to be freely (it’s a game), but starting positions have to be correct and names of towns and provinces and faction’s units.

Red Harvest – I didn’t trying to discuss about everything in one post. This is only small part. Gaesatae is wrong – Galatae correct.

Kaldhore – I don’t care about Lord of the Rings and those fantastic stories. And I rarely watch Holywood movies – I watch europenian movies and series (especially German and English series and French movies).

Byzantine Prince – I fixed. You don’t understand my post about Macedonians. I wrote aristocracy was Greeks and people was mixture of Illyrian and Thracians tribes. And origin Greek language was by centuries degrade with “barbarian” languages. Everything is in Macedon Greeks, exept people. Greeks imposed culture to origins. Origin of Greeks? Next time – I have the real history of Greece… This is lamdha. Where to find Macedon coat of arms?

Mikeus Caesar – you have right about “barbatians”. Thanks for support! And you have right about MTW – this game always finish different. And in RTW always the same story – Brutii easily conquer Balkan, Scipii Sicily and Africa, Julii Gaul and Iberia, Egypt always destroy Selucid, Armenia in war with Parthia and Pontus, Britons with Germans, Thrace with Scythia, Greeks easily gone from Balkan, bla, bla, bla… Always the same story… It is boring…

Emperor Emeu 1 – the Macedon coat of arms in game is Spartan. And it is stupid to finish game in 220 BC.

Aetius – and I’m doing that.

Oaty – where to find more city mod? “Real accuracy would kill gameplay for most people” – I disagree.

Emperor Emeu 1 – Lieve, you are really challanging guy. Is there any post where are you not? Het spijt me dat jouw zich niet goed voelt ~:) . I wrote that legionares used pila – light and heavy. And they used pila to crash enemies shields – not for killing people like in the game. Praetorian Cavalry was – ok, but after 14 BC when game finish. And real name of Legionary cavalry – hartelijk dank! I put in game. But who are then Roman cavalry?

Conon394 – I still can found Lilybaeum, but I belive that town existed. So much of you said that.

We want more…

Romans
Those story with three Roman families is bad. There is simple solution from MTW. When I played with Danes in xxxx year I have to choose right family – and I choose wrong. I lost 2/3 of my provinces. Others were rebel’s provinces. Solution – start like Roman Republic and in some xxx BC come dictatorship and you elect side of dictator – like Cornelius Sula and Gaius Marius. Or First Triumvirate – Gaius Julius Caesar, Gneus Pompeus and Marcus Crassus. That will be really awesome. Those things with families are bad. Loyalty of generals – why is gone? That was right thing.
And those Auxilia troops were green in Empire. Like mercenaries in the game.

Thrace
Why is Thrace hellenic? They have nothing with Greeks. Some influence of Greeks were, but Phalanx in Thrace – impossible! Greek cavalry… And Greek names in Thrace? I cann’t believe! And what Bastarnae do in Thracian army? They were German tribe.

Pontus
Why are they eastern and have hellenic temples? I don’t understand that? :help:

Greek cavalry
If somebody thinks Greek cavalry is bad – yes, they were really bad. The worst in whole ancient world! Actually, from 7th century wars between Greek cities were clashs of hoplites. They stopped using cavalry. And they looked similar like Cataphract in game. With one big exeption – on horses weren’t saddles. Because of that they were totally inaccurate. Horsmen flew from horses even they hit the enemy. CA did jobe well (greek cavalry is weak, but looking – I don’t know).

Intersting Dacian woman’s name Branka
I noticed in game Dacian woman name Branka. Branka is modern Serbian woman name. What this name do in the game – I don’t know. Same story story like Banat (I wrote about that ).

Don't know if you noticed, but there are already some Amazonian Chariots in Hyperboria (all the way up north). They are some of the more 'special' rebel units like the Judean Zealots in Jerusalem...

Seleucia was the capital of the Seleucid Empire, and was found by mister Seleucid himself. Babylon was deserted when the new city had been built.

1) If you're going for realism, you don't want Amazonian Chariots in your mod at all. Scythian Chariots are out of period.

3) https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=42840

Your response to me is confusing - and You probably didnt get my meaning - I was trying to be subtle.

R:TW is not historically accurate to the letter - no.

Do I want to be bogged down with every conceivable accurate historic record - no.

Can you say 100% that what YOU are saying is accurate? NO

For every book or website you point me to with an opinion about the hisory of this time - I can point you to another that contradicts the first book or sight. History itself know the truth - we today in this age can only guess as to the truth based on the evidence we posess. I bet even you "school" teaches history slightly differently than schools elsewhere - why? because opinions differ with different interpretations of the evidence we find.

Even texts that date back 1000s of years can be inacurate because again its one one persons perspective of what is happeneing at the time.

My example of the American film about the enigma code can explain this.-

If in 2000 years time someone in the future finds this film and is able to view it - they will think that the Americans found the enigma machine - when in fact they didnt. Therefore if you think about it, any written texts of the greeks, romans, egyptians can also be tainted with falsehood.

With all that stacked up against you - no game is going to be totally historic - I can even bet that your version wont be.

No offence intended, but I felt you brushed aside my previos comment without it being taken seriously.

http://img1.exs.cx/img1/1241/hellen39gl.gif

A map showing the relative position of Seleucia and the big 3 diadochi states in 270 BC. DukeofSerbia I don't know what ludicrously inaccurate maps you have that show Babylon as being a major city in the hellenistic age but it was Seleucia.

I googled city of Seleucia and got 2 results,

1.An ancient city of Mesopotamia on the Tigris River south-southeast of modern Baghdad. Founded c. 300 B.C., it was an important commercial center and the chief city of the empire founded by Seleucus I.

2.Seleucia, ancient city of Mesopotamia, on the Tigris below modern Baghdad. Founded (c.312 B.C.) by Seleucus I, it soon replaced Babylon as the main center for east-west commerce through the valley. The city was the eastern capital of the Seleucids until the Parthians conquered it. The Seleucids then moved their capital across the river to Ctesiphon, and Seleucia was thus superseded. In a Parthian campaign Trajan burned the city, and in A.D. 164 it was destroyed by Romans. Another Seleucia was founded by Seleucus I in Syria as the seaport for Antioch on the Orontes.

From http://www.answers.com/topic/seleucia

As for Samnite mercs, much like Macedonian royal pikemen if you just re-name them they will be perfectly historicallt accurate. For the Macedonian royal pikemen changing their name to hypaspists makes them accurate. Calling Samnite merc Campanian or Apulian mercs makes them much more accurate. Pic as evidence

http://img36.exs.cx/img36/5897/1485face0ta.jpg

Campanian/Apulian spearman.

Integrating the amazons into the Scythian tech tree is a good idea. Some historians think that the Scythian warrior women were the basis for the greek Amazon myth.

As for Thrace and Pontus they were either hellenistic or philhellene kingdoms. Thrace much like Macedon had absorbed greek culture and ways due to proximity and trade links. Thrace was greek by culture not by ethnicity.

Thank you lars573! How to put picture like you did? I have no time to upload to servers and then put link. I want picture immediatly.

You put a pic into a post like I did using this syntax,

[IMG]webhost url where pic is up loaded too[/IMG]

This is the code I used for the Campanian/Apulian spearman image. I stuck some spaces so you could see the code. I use ImageShack as my pic webhost.

[ IMG]http://img36.exs.cx/img36/5897/1485face0ta.jpg[/IMG ]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DukeofSerbia

Thank you lars573! How to put picture like you did? I have no time to upload to servers and then put link. I want picture immediatly.

---

i'm back after a short period of no computer, thanx for your compliments.

well, about the praetorian cav after 14ac is correct, and the urban cohort did exist, but maybe not as a elite unit as CA put it. you did some very good research though

DukeofSerbia

Here two maps of Sicily with Lilbydium

http://www.unrv.com/provinces/sicilia-large.php
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb....tMapSicily.jpg


I can’t agree with you assessment of Greek cavalry.

“Greek cavalry
If somebody thinks Greek cavalry is bad – yes, they were really bad. The worst in whole ancient world! Actually, from 7th century wars between Greek cities were clashs of hoplites. They stopped using cavalry. And they looked similar like Cataphract in game. With one big exeption – on horses weren’t saddles. Because of that they were totally inaccurate. Horsmen flew from horses even they hit the enemy. CA did jobe well (greek cavalry is weak, but looking – I don’t know).”

The cavalry of Thessaly was in fact some of the best cavalry.
Thessaly furnished around half of Alexander’s cavalry for his invasion of Persia, during witch the Macedonian and Greece cavalry dominated their Persian counterparts.
The Thassalians that allied with Athens during the Lamain war consistently defeated the Macedonian cavalry (even at Crannon were the Macs had more than a 2 to 1 advantage).

Mercenary Tarentine cavalry (light cavalry) from southern Italy was highly sought after by the Various successor Kingdoms and Greek Leagues (3rd – 2nd centuries).
In general the Greeks of Sicily and Magna Grecia always deployed large cavalry forces. Thebes, during its ascendancy (4th Century), maintained and used a respectable cavalry force. Epaminondas may have used heavy infantry as his preferred decisive tool, but always in careful conjunction with his cavalry. Even Athens famous for its navy maintained a cavalry force of over 1000. While not as excellent as the Thassalians, Athenian cavalry was certainly militarily competent. Athens chose to use its cavalry sparingly, mainly for political reasons (worries about its political reliability and loyalty to the democracy).

In the 3rd and 2nd centuries the Achaean League maintained and deployed both native and mercenary cavalry (see Polybius).

Thank you lars573 again. But, is that mean I have first to upload my pictures on some free picture hosting server? :help: Is that so, which servers are the best? :help:
Conon394 - I didn't wrote Macedonia have weak cavalry. They were cavalryman until Philipos thought out phalanx. And I disagree about Greek cavalry.

greek cavalry was weak, that's just the way it is. they never used cavalry in the hoplite era, and after they didn't really learned how to train good cavalry as they were mountain people, ever saw good horses in them mountains where there is no grass to graze.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DukeofSerbia

6.Galatae (or in game Naked Fanatics)

Ok, I was wrong. Those guys were lived – they were Gauls tribe. But they don’t have nothing with Dacians, Iberians and Germans.
Gaul is Roman name for Celts (Greek name).
I put picture of wounded Galatae.


Red Harvest – I didn’t trying to discuss about everything in one post. This is only small part. Gaesatae is wrong – Galatae correct.

---

No. Galatate, or Galatians, are Gauls who migrated into the region in modern Turkey called by their name. Gaesatate (spear bearers) refers to the naked Gaulish warriors that the Romans faced at the battle of Telamon, who were likely a "mercenary" band of young landless warriors.

spear beares why the hell do they have swords in the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DukeofSerbia

Thank you lars573 again. But, is that mean I have first to upload my pictures on some free picture hosting server? :help: Is that so, which servers are the best? :help:
Conon394 - I didn't wrote Macedonia have weak cavalry. They were cavalryman until Philipos thought out phalanx. And I disagree about Greek cavalry.

---

Well as I said I use imageshack https://img1.imageshack.us/register.php?error=4 it works for me. You need to hold on to the their confimation emails unless you never delete you cookies. It works pretty good I have about 30 pics up loaded to imageshack. just register then use the confirmation email to sign in every time. And up load away, imageshack generates different code lines for you to use in forums on websites or for instant messaging services.

Here is an example of something else I have on my imageshack account you can guess what it is.

http://img1.exs.cx/img1/4137/polish2...ar2016832t.jpg

Duke
If you disagree, prove it
My point about Alexander was that he did in fact have good cavalry, good enough to always beat the Persians, etc. Half of Alexander’s cavalry was Greek.
When that half turned on Macedonia and joined the Greeks during the Lamian war, it beat the Macedonians 3 times in a row. Ergo, the Greeks cannot be said to have poor cavalry in aggregate.

Emperor Umeu 1

"greek cavalry was weak, that's just the way it is. they never used cavalry in the hoplite era, and after they didn't really learned how to train good cavalry as they were mountain people, ever saw good horses in them mountains where there is no grass to graze."

Edit: I think You’re almost completely wrong (no personal slight is/was intended, just looking to provoke a good debate).

Check the battle of Delium, the campaigns of Epaminondas. The Lamain war, the armies raised by Dionysius of Syracuse in his wars with Carthage.

The Greeks in general chose not to try and use cavalry as a decisive arm, rightfully so, without stirrups, horse shoes, with a minimal saddle and lacking the large horses of Medieval Europe cavalry simply could not challenge quality heavy infantry in the Classical World. This fact does not mean they neglected cavalry just that they did not try and use it where it was useless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spongly

No. Galatate, or Galatians, are Gauls who migrated into the region in modern Turkey called by their name. Gaesatate (spear bearers) refers to the naked Gaulish warriors that the Romans faced at the battle of Telamon, who were likely a "mercenary" band of young landless warriors.

---

Thanks. I didn't really see much point in arguing with him, even though I knew he was wrong. The Duke should try ratcheting it down a few notches. His history has some rather obvious gaps in it and he could benefit more from more focused discussions.

lars573: I'm making an educated guess for that being a Polish hussar from between late 1500s to late 1600s; or at least that's what the armour suggests.

As for Greek cavalry, well, the ancient Greeks proper were never very good with that arm. One presumes it has much to do with the nature of the gegraphy and the social developements that kept the hoplites at the fore. It didn't help any that disciplined heavy infantry with spears is pretty much pure murder against light cavalry in melee...

Anyway, the Macedonians and Thessalians lived much closer to the steppe and the lifestyle horsemen who dominated it, and duly must've had access to some way better ideas and mounts than their southern neighbors. Philip and Alexander set up a system not entirely unlike the manoralism or feudalism of the Dark and Middle Ages to support the raising and maintenance of true corps de rupture heavy cavalry; the long xyston also proved a fairly effective weapon for the unarmored light prodromoi cavalry, recruited from diverse backgrounds (I think the Light Lancers of RTW are pretty much a conversion of these guys) and primarily employed for scouting and pursuit.

The peninsular Greeks never really had anything comparable. The cavalry they had was despised by the hoplites, unarmored, fought with short double-ended spears and shields, and the horse stock wasn't anything to write home about. The double-ended spear wasn't half a bad idea, mind you, although it probably wasn't their invention - the Romans copied it, and the much longer Macedonian xyston similarly had a spare spearhead at the butt.

The Companion system pretty much died off with Alexander. The Seleucids and Ptolemids turned to other heavy cavalry systems while the Greeks and Macedonians pretty much had to do without any. Still, any cavalry is better than nothing if only for reconnaissance and pursuit (that's what the Romans, another heavy-infantry nation, initially used theirs for too). It nonetheless remains that during their campaigns into Macedonia and Greece the Romans were positively suprised to find themselves enjoying a clear cavalry superiority for a change - a factor which made outflanking the nasty but cumbersome phalanxes much easier.


As for the Amazons, well, Classical writers speak of various steppe-nomad peoples having curious customs regarding women and fighting. The one about girls not being permitted to marry before killing a foeman is almost certainly an exaggeration, or at the very least the custom would be limited to a small segment of the society (the warrior aristocracy seems a likely candidate). That aside, womens' graves from a latter period containing weapons and armour have been excavated, and although these are likely the ceremonial acoutrements of priestesses they hark back to more archaic customs which may well have seen some women actively involved in warfare.

Some Central Asian nomadic peoples are also recorded as having had units of female armoured horse-archers; there's a record of a Chinese noblewoman having received a group as a gift from an allied chieftain around something like 7th century AD.

So, it is perfectly possible and even downright likely the steppe peoples of the Antiquity had female warriors. Given the definitely patriarchal nature of both Roman and Greek cultures (the Greeks were the worse) and their categorical disdain of "barbarians" it should not come as any surprise if their authors went into serious exaggerations on the subject.

On the other hand the as-such amusing Amazon Chariots seem a bit odd, given their geographical locale. As a rule of thumb wherever true cavalry developed the war chariot soon declined, first being relegated into a pure status symbol and ceremonial schtick and eventually disappearing altogether. Anyone under close cultural and technical influence by the horse peoples of the steppe (ie. living nearby; that's as good as having to fight them off almost incessantly) adopted the much more practical and cost-efficient horseman principle ASAP, although on the other hand it seems to have taken for example the Chinese until the introduction of the first stirrups to abandon their heavy war chariots.

Ironically, the Royal Pikemen being renamed hypaspists is one of the historical inaccuracies. A hypaspist was a Greek swordsman who followed the slower-moving phalangites, dispatching any wounded enemy the pikes missed. Alexander used them with great effect.

See The Wars of the Ancient Greeks, by Victor Davis Hanson.

A hypapist could be swordsmen but they also fought as a greek style hoplite in a phalanx and they also fought as peltasts too.

And the pic from last post is a winged hussar (polish term hussaria)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by conon394

Emperor Umeu 1

"greek cavalry was weak, that's just the way it is. they never used cavalry in the hoplite era, and after they didn't really learned how to train good cavalry as they were mountain people, ever saw good horses in them mountains where there is no grass to graze."

Edit: I think You’re almost completely wrong (no personal slight is/was intended, just looking to provoke a good debate).

Check the battle of Delium, the campaigns of Epaminondas. The Lamain war, the armies raised by Dionysius of Syracuse in his wars with Carthage.

The Greeks in general chose not to try and use cavalry as a decisive arm, rightfully so, without stirrups, horse shoes, with a minimal saddle and lacking the large horses of Medieval Europe cavalry simply could not challenge quality heavy infantry in the Classical World. This fact does not mean they neglected cavalry just that they did not try and use it where it was useless.

---

yes but the fact that they almost never used cavalry in the HOPLITE ERA wich is true, means they have to catch up with a lot of info about cavalry tactics and uses and training etc.

in greece native horses were rare, because it was a mountain country so if they had horses they were small and not capable of carrying heavy armoured soldiers, so they used it for skirmish actions.

so the people were not weak, ofcourse with some training and good horses they could be a elite unit, but the native greek horses were weak. but in the lands of Macedon there was more space and a better place for horses to live and they had a rich landowning society as the romans to be rich enough to buy horses. in greece there was no space to have a large landowning aristocraty

The ancient Greeks actually had many of the same problems as the Vikings would later have in regards to cavalry; cultural emphasis on infantry and seafaring, a geography ill-suited for raising horses or for that matter serious cavalry warfare, a comparative geographical isolation from the haunts of the better war-bred strains, and social factors. Most of those also feed each other - basic low quality of force-flesh encourages emphasis on infantry, enhancing the status of the social strata that said infantry is recruited from which in turn discourages developing a stronger cavalry arm. Decent war mounts are expensive to breed and train, after all, and have little other use; moreover, if the local lifestyle doesn't by itself encourage horsemanship and riding, considerable amounts of specialized training are required for the rider too.

AFAIK the Greeks never really picked up the Macedonian cavalry doctrine, not in the least due to their geographical considerations but also because what cavalry Philip and Alexander now did raise from Greece (they seem to have preferred Macedonians and Thessalians, and the Greek settlements in Asia Minor) was promptly shipped for service abroad and didn't have much influence locally.

Thank again Lars573. I will try that!

There is also another way to get pics in your post. If you come across a website that has pics on their own seperate pages they can be wrapped in IMG tags and posted. But only if the page ends in JPG not html or anything like that. See below,
http://www.diggerhistory.info/images...s/france05.jpg

:help:

help for what