Numidians !!!

hello folks

I'm a dedicated RTW player i played the original game and then Total Realism mod and now best of all "Europa Barbarorum" :2thumbsup:

i do live in Morocco to be precise in top Northern Morocco beneath the great Rif mountains , and i belong to an Ethnic group called Amazighs in other words Numidians were my ancestors :yes:

and i was excited to see this much of new Faction added in EB but :oops: no Numidians :no: as i know Numidians were a separate Kingdom aside Carthage even though Numidian cavalry served among Hannibal mighty Armies but Numidians were also fighting for the Romans and their were multiple conflicts between them and Carthaginians and the king Jugartha fought the Romans until being Defeated by Lucius Cornelius Sulla .

and iv found this on a website related to RTW

Quote:

---

Numidia

The desert people of Numidia are worthy opponents for Carthage. In history, they played an important role in the Punic roles by providing their famous light cavalry to Carthaginians, and at times, also the Romans. Numidian light cavalry is present in the game, although spear- and sword- armed light cavalry is seriously lacking in combat power compared to heavy cavalry, which the Numidians don’t have.

A curious unit available to the Numidians is the “Numidian Legionnaires” which represents Numidian attempt to copy Roman-style warfare. There is some historical basis for the use of imitation legionnaires by the Numidians. The Numidian army under Juba is described by Suetonius to have contained ten “legions” distinguished from other light infantrymen troops. The use of legion here implies infantry of rather heavy equipment. Tacitus also describes a much later Numidian (Moorish) army of Tacfarinas containing “picked men who were armed in Roman fashion” (Annals, 2.50).

---

i was stunned to know that king Juba 2 applied Roman tactics and fashion for his army that's just awesome :beam:

so the point is that can u guys by any chance re-think about the Numidians role in that Period of history

and any suggestion or comments on this post are welcome

PS: sorry for my rusty English

Hi and welcome Juba2,
I believe that the Numidians, although they did exist around this time-frame, were not powerful or united enough, I believe that they were a mix of disunited tribes till they were later united, to be included as a proper faction - R:TW has a strict limit of twenty factions, adding the Numidians would result in the sacrifice of another faction. However, fortunately, they are still there as a rebel faction and can still be battled against in a game of EB - they just cannot, unfortunately, be played as. Sorry.

From some of the concept art, it would appear the Numidians at some point will be receiving a more varied unit roster. But you'll have to wait for EB2 for a chance for them to be a playable faction.

Quote:

---

Hi and welcome Juba2,
I believe that the Numidians, although they did exist around this time-frame, were not powerful or united enough, I believe that they were a mix of disunited tribes till they were later united, to be included as a proper faction - R:TW has a strict limit of twenty factions, adding the Numidians would result in the sacrifice of another faction. However, fortunately, they are still there as a rebel faction and can still be battled against in a game of EB - they just cannot, unfortunately, be played as. Sorry.

---

First of all i want to thank you for posting a reply and if I'm not wrong the Numidians had their own Kingdom so that means they had kings and notable ones and they were forming the backbone of the Carthaginian army with their reliable great light cavalry :book:

but there is one things the Numidian kingdom was formed and lasted (202 BC - 25 BC) even tough Numidians existed since prehistoric ages and played a big role in the ancient Egyptian army :egypt: as well as both Carthaginian and Roman army's and were to have contact with Phoenician merchant sailors :yes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numidia

but i guess the game presents the factions that were already formed before year 272BC. :furious3:

Quote:

---

From some of the concept art, it would appear the Numidians at some point will be receiving a more varied unit roster. But you'll have to wait for EB2 for a chance for them to be a playable faction.

---

thx for ur replay man and yes just like u said i hope Numidians will be included in EB2 because teir worth it xD and hey im sorry but isnt EB2 is a modification to MTW 2 instead of RTW ?

well then i see what all this about but yeah too bad :wall:

and if u guys have anything to add I'm here :laugh4:

an oh yeah btw if any one can enlighten us about king Juba 2 applying of Roman tactics and fashion for his army ill be more than glad :book:

PS : my english sux i know :smash:

peace..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juba2

an oh yeah btw if any one can enlighten us about king Juba 2 applying of Roman tactics and fashion for his army ill be more than glad :book:

PS : my english sux i know :smash:

peace..

---

Imitation legionaries are mostly a myth. The concept itself comes from the fact that Roman historians (whose works are the best preserved until this day) named any close order infantry with some type of heavy body armor who threw javelins before charging as "imitation legionaries".

The tactic is far older than the Roman legions. The Carthies, Armenians and Illyrians are just a few of the peoples that developed similar tactics independently with very little or no contact with Rome or warfare in Italy.

So whenever the Romans encountered a foreign soldier wearing chainmail, scale or linothorax, that fought with a large shield, spear or sword. Did this in some type of formation and threw javelins before charging, the Roman arrogance being what it was immediatly lableled them as "imitation legionaries". As if no one else on Earth was clever enough to come up with the concept.

I don't know about the Numidian heavies. But it's just as likely they evolved on their own with little or no influence derived from Roman type of warfare.
The Carthies had a unit of Elite African Swordsmen that operated in a very similar fashion to Roman legionaries. And they evolved on their own.
The Numidian heavies are just as likely to have evolved from it as Carthage is a lot closer to Numidia than it is to Rome.

In EB there is unit of noble Swordsmen in service of the desert Kingdom of Saba. They too are armored in chain. Use large shields and swords. Plus use javelins before charging. I bet a Roman historian has them too labeled somewhere as "imitation legionaries" although their contact with Rome is very limited to the later periods in antiquity, when Rome had grown into an Empire. And those troops had been in existence for a lot longer than that.

To be fair, it's usually more along the lines of 'armed in the Roman style', which would be useful in briefly conveying the manner of fighting for a Roman audience who understand instantly what kind of armament is implied; and indeed, it does refer more to equipment than organisation, which was what really distinguished the legions. Imitation legions is something more associated with later historians who somewhat mistook the meaning of the histories in a time when Rome was coming back into focus, and something applied by CA when designing units.

For me it's a error that the Numidians are excluded from the factions, are more important at this time for the roman and mediterranean history instead of the Sabeans or Sakas, especially sakas are a very useless faction, if can a modder replace this faction with numidians is very good, the Sabeans can remain but is better if replaced with a Greek (Siracusa is better) or a Illyrian tribe factions. And the Sabeans has a very limited number of unit and is natural for a faction without a strong expansionism, and lack of historic sources, Numidians hasn't this problem I think.

AFAIK the Numidian ones were in fact the only true "imitation legionaries" - the first ones having been trained by allied Roman instructors. A sort of "royal guard" type formation of one of the more powerful Numidian kings allied with Rome (although they later had a bit of a "falling out"...), I understand.

I'm also under the impression that while the Numidians did have kings and such, there was most of the time a lot of those and they duly were neither very powerful nor influental - while the more powerful ones in turn were more often than not allied to first the Carthaginians and later the Romans who dominated the prosperous coastal regions, supplying troops in exchange of support and wealth. Not a very politically stable and coherent bunch in other words, even by the standards of tribal confederations.

Claims of kingship, after all, do not equal that being a fact. Especially among nomadic peoples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juba2

but there is one things the Numidian kingdom was formed and lasted (202 BC - 25 BC) even tough Numidians existed since prehistoric ages and played a big role in the ancient Egyptian army :egypt:

---

Numidia is kind of far away from Egypt methinks. You sure you're not confusing Numidians with the nomads of the Libyan desert here...?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Principe Alessandro

And the Sabeans has a very limited number of unit and is natural for a faction without a strong expansionism, and lack of historic sources, Numidians hasn't this problem I think.

---

I'm pretty sure "Numidian expansionism" is pretty much an oxymoron in the context you know. One gets the impression they spent most of their energy fighting over the nominal overlordship among themselves, rather than, say, trying to take over the coastal strip from whichever empire happened to occupy those. Which is really hardly surprising, as their ability to seriously dispute the onwership of coastal regions against sea-powers of the calibre of Carthage and Rome cannot have been grounds for any optimism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juba2

First of all i want to thank you for posting a reply and if I'm not wrong the Numidians had their own Kingdom so that means they had kings and notable ones and they were forming the backbone of the Carthaginian army with their reliable great light cavalry :book:

but there is one things the Numidian kingdom was formed and lasted (202 BC - 25 BC) even tough Numidians existed since prehistoric ages and played a big role in the ancient Egyptian army :egypt: as well as both Carthaginian and Roman army's and were to have contact with Phoenician merchant sailors :yes:

---

Numidia didn't just have one kingdom. They've had, at various times during EB's timeframe, three or four of them. During the period EB portrays their relevance was mainly as local ally or enemy to Carthage and later Rome. They never emerged out of the shadow of either power, and although your namesake gave the Romans some headaches following the third Punic war, the outcome was never in doubt. So, I think the team made a correct decision in replacing them with another faction: their historical impact can be reasonable well simulated through rebels, and there are other factions who were more influential in their own right.

And yes, EB2 will be for M2:TW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Principe Alessandro

For me it's a error that the Numidians are excluded from the factions, are more important at this time for the roman and mediterranean history instead of the Sabeans or Sakas, especially sakas are a very useless faction, if can a modder replace this faction with numidians is very good, the Sabeans can remain but is better if replaced with a Greek (Siracusa is better) or a Illyrian tribe factions. And the Sabeans has a very limited number of unit and is natural for a faction without a strong expansionism, and lack of historic sources, Numidians hasn't this problem I think.

---

Unlike R:TW, EB is not mediterranean-centered. Just because a faction did not seriously influence the Mediterranean theater does not mean that they were irrelevant.

Not that direct Numidian influence on the history of the Med was exactly staggering either...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Principe Alessandro

For me it's a error that the Numidians are excluded from the factions, are more important at this time for the roman and mediterranean history instead of the Sabeans or Sakas, especially sakas are a very useless faction, if can a modder replace this faction with numidians is very good, the Sabeans can remain but is better if replaced with a Greek (Siracusa is better) or a Illyrian tribe factions. And the Sabeans has a very limited number of unit and is natural for a faction without a strong expansionism, and lack of historic sources, Numidians hasn't this problem I think.

---

The Sakas took over Bactrian kingdom, so I think they are adequately relevant. If not for Sabyn, either Ptolemies or Seleucids would conquer Arabian peninsula without much opposition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

I'm pretty sure "Numidian expansionism" is pretty much an oxymoron in the context you know. One gets the impression they spent most of their energy fighting over the nominal overlordship among themselves, rather than, say, trying to take over the coastal strip from whichever empire happened to occupy those. Which is really hardly surprising, as their ability to seriously dispute the onwership of coastal regions against sea-powers of the calibre of Carthage and Rome cannot have been grounds for any optimism.

---

I don't think that Sabens has in history a mayor expansionism than Numidia, and with Numidia is possible more unit because in this case we have many historical resource, instead with Saba we have a lack of historical source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ludens

Unlike R:TW, EB is not mediterranean-centered. Just because a faction did not seriously influence the Mediterranean theater does not mean that they were irrelevant.

---

But for me numidia is more relevant in general for mediterranean-europe-east threaty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thaatu

The Sakas took over Bactrian kingdom, so I think they are adequately relevant. If not for Sabyn, either Ptolemies or Seleucids would conquer Arabian peninsula without much opposition.

---

Hmmm, but without Numidia Carthage is too strong, we lose something and gained in other hand

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Principe Alessandro

I don't think that Sabens has in history a mayor expansionism than Numidia, and with Numidia is possible more unit because in this case we have many historical resource, instead with Saba we have a lack of historical source.
(...)
But for me numidia is more relevant in general for mediterranean-europe-east threaty.

---

What Watchman and I are trying to say is that Numidia didn't manage any expansion at all. The Sabeans on the other hand were quite prominent in Arabia, and may have invaded Kush as well. You are right when you say that we know little about them, but that doesn't mean they were unimportant. EB strives to portray the entire map accurately, so factions are not included based on how much they affected the Mediteranean area. They are included based on how much the affected the area they inhabited. Sabea had little to no contact with Rome, and nor did the Saka and the Bactrians, but all three were major players in their part of the world. This never applied to the Numidians, who were always dominated by Carthage or Rome (except when the managed to occasional rebellion against them).

Quote:

---

Hmmm, but without Numidia Carthage is too strong, we lose something and gained in other hand

---

There's more ways of weakening a faction than by planting a rival in their backyard. Anyway, in my campaigns Carthage's performance was always somewhat lackluster, so I don't see why you think they are too strong.

We certainly aren't announcing what factions will be in EB2 yet, but the Numidians present some very attractive possibilities. Thanks for posting Juba2 - good to have you on the forum here. :2thumbsup: I certainly have been looking at some potential unique buildings in the region - for EB1 or EB2. Some will appear in the future at some point for sure. More work will be focused on North African regional units also for EB1 even, but our main man on this just left for Jordan for a couple of months. Some of the work will hopefully make its way to the board and preview threads before much longer though.

thank you all for your answers and posts :2thumbsup:

and yeah even tough Numidians did not expand much because of numerous reasons but they played an important role in the Area

Quote:

---

I'm also under the impression that while the Numidians did have kings and such, there was most of the time a lot of those and they duly were neither very powerful nor influential - while the more powerful ones in turn were more often than not allied to first the Carthaginians and later the Romans who dominated the prosperous coastal regions, supplying troops in exchange of support and wealth. Not a very politically stable and coherent bunch in other words, even by the standards of tribal confederations.

---

How so ? the numidian kings challenged both Carthaginian might and roman one and they had 1 major king at a time not like some tribal leaders had Numidians were not Nomadic people :idea2: they had their own culture and civilization .

have u ever heard of the Numidian Pyramid :book:

and yeah btw there might be a confusion if ur looking for the area history because there is the people Amazighs and their many names refered to their location and kingdoms for example Numidians/Berbers/Libyans/... and u people need to know that intill this instance we still use the ancient language here in north morocco we all speak it here with many accents . :yes:

Quote:

---

We certainly aren't announcing what factions will be in EB2 yet, but the Numidians present some very attractive possibilities. Thanks for posting Juba2 - good to have you on the forum here. I certainly have been looking at some potential unique buildings in the region - for EB1 or EB2. Some will appear in the future at some point for sure. More work will be focused on North African regional units also for EB1 even, but our main man on this just left for Jordan for a couple of months. Some of the work will hopefully make its way to the board and preview threads before much longer though.

---

great to hear from you man and thank you for ur welcome and yeah i wish u all best for upcoming projects :2thumbsup: it would be cool if Numidians are included :idea2:

but tell me even if EB2 is for MTW it will present the roman era history like EB1 or The Middle ages era ???

PS: my English ^^ tell me about it .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juba2

have u ever heard of the Numidian Pyramid :book:

---

Goddammit! First the Egyptians, then Babylonians, Nubians, Meso- and south-Americans, the bleeping Bosnians, and now you're telling me there's a Numidian pyramid? Pyramids are losing their credibility. When I was a kid, I was told pyramids were an Egyptian thing... Then I saw Las Vegas. At that point I also stopped believing in Santa Claus. :shame:

Edit: Oh yes, welcome Juba2! They hand out free pot here, as long as you know who to ask (try Watchman). :hippie:

Yes welcome Juba2! It's good to see another numidian fan.

Quote:

---

Goddammit! First the Egyptians, then Babylonians, Nubians, Meso- and south-Americans, the bleeping Bosnians, and now you're telling me there's a Numidian pyramid? Pyramids are losing their credibility. When I was a kid, I was told pyramids were an Egyptian thing... Then I saw Las Vegas. At that point I also stopped believing in Santa Claus.

Edit: Oh yes, welcome Juba2! They hand out free pot here, as long as you know who to ask (try Watchman).

---

Terve :beam: and yeah Numidians had their own pyramids and here is something from wikipedia :book:

Quote:

---

Ancient Berber Tombs

The tombs of the early Berbers and their ancestors indicate that the Berbers and their ancestors (the Ibero-maurussians and Capsians) believed in life after death. The prehistoric men of northwest Africa buried bodies in little holes. When they realized that bodies buried in unsecured holes were dug up by wild animals, they began to bury them in deeper ones. Later, they buried the dead in caves, tumuli, tombs in rocks, mounds, and other types of tombs.[6]

These tombs evolved from primitive structures to much more elaborate ones, such as the pyramidal tombs spread throughout Northern Africa. The honor of being buried in such a tomb appears to have been reserved for those who were most important to their communities.

These pyramid tombs have attracted the attention of some scholars, such as Mohammed Chafik who wrote a book discussing the history of several of the tombs that have survived into modern times. He tried to relate the pyramidal Berber tombs with the great Egyptian pyramids on the basis of the etymological and historical data . The bestknown Berber pyramids are the 19-meter pre-Roman Numidian pyramid of Medracen and the 30-meter ancient Mauretanian pyramid. The Mauretanian pyramid is also known as the tomb of Christian woman..

---

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...Imedghasen.jpg
The pyramid of Medracen

Quote:

---

Yes welcome Juba2! It's good to see another numidian fan.

---

Great to meet you Wolfman25 and im glad that u are Numidian Fan and yes im Numidian fan maybe cuz i have numidian blood in my veins :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juba2

How so ? the numidian kings challenged both Carthaginian might and roman one and they had 1 major king at a time not like some tribal leaders had Numidians were not Nomadic people they had their own culture and civilization .

---

"Challenged" as in "were a deterrent to expansion" and "rebelled against", if I'm not entirely mistaken. Which by itself is basic Eleutheroi stuff.

As for one major king, styling yourself one and actually being one aren't always quite the same thing - and in any case, the same argument can be put forth for quite a few realms, groups etc. that by necessity fall under the Eleutheroi.

And since when was nomadism incompatible with "culture and civilization" anyway ? Moustachioed and bowlegged steppe-dwellers make rude gestures in your aunt's general direction for such slurs !

Quote:

---

have u ever heard of the Numidian Pyramid

---

Impressive funerary buildings and other such works are not terribly unusual or meningful in the context by themselves; Europe and the Mediterranean region are full of that kind of stuff dating quite far back in some cases, the nomads of the Pontic steppe often buried their kings under huge mounds, etc.

Juba2, you keep referring to 'Numidian' and 'expansion' as if the various Numidian peoples were a unified front; in fact, the situation was entirely different. Except for very rare occasions there were a number of smaller kingdoms rather than a single kingdom. Certainly they were expansionist, but purely amongst each other. All in all, other than in opposition to local empires they had little influence on the flow of history, whereas (to cite your examples) the Saka played a major role in the east against the Indo-Greeks, and Saba was a commercial hub of major importance for trade between Egypt and India and was an expansionist power in the region in its own right.

However, I don't deny that a Numidian kingdom would be great as a new faction in EB2. But I do believe that, considering the constraints on faction slots in RTW, that the current factions had a greater impact on the history of the area depicted in EB and are more necessary to include.

hi there

yes i do understand what u saying about numidians but they did play an important role during the Era take the Numidian cavalry and how they granted Hannibal brilliant victories against the Romans and they fought the Carthaginians as well besieging their most important cities and even helped the Romans against Carthage later and yeah i hope they'll be included in EB2 :laugh4: .

I love this place, not only is it a great place to discuss the game and all it's many and great features but more often than not, it's also a fantastic place to chat about the history in the game too. Now i was just a lover of the Romans, i read books on them, watched all the rpograms possible about them but now i delve into everything in the EB time-frame, has helped me understand a lot more about the ancient world and even Rome itself. :book:



This place is like my own little playground. :laugh4:

Hi.

I agree with those who say that Saba should be replaced by Numidia. The reasons I find are:

1. Saba was a relatively small kingdom, without expansion outside the southern Arabia. They were mostly lightly cavalry, camel or infantry mercenaries under the employ of many other factions in the Middle-East and North-Africa regions. Obviously, they fought many times in both sides of a battlefield.

2. Leaving the Arabic Peninsula with only rebel regions isn't much of a problem, since historically they did not play an important role in the events during the EB Timeline. Also, I think the Seleucids and Ptolemies should be more attracted to the wealthy regions of the Mediterranean Sea than to the Arabic Desert.

3. Numidian troops were crucial to Hannibal's victories against the Romans, and in fact much of its army was composed of Iberians, Numidians and Gauls. So, they have a relevant presence in the EB timeline.

4. Later, Numidia played a very important role in the destruction of Carthage. It was the enmity and constant state of war between those two kingdoms that allowed the Romans to make an alliance with the Numidians, which helped turned the tide against the Cartaginians. After the fall of Carthage, the Numidians became the most powerful regional kingdom (although under the "protection" of the Romans).

5. The Numidians are located in a crucial region in the EB timeline and could have become a great power after the fall of Carthage, if the Romans had not had such a great military expansion. They are an excellent faction to play in a "what if..." scenario, considering that they have the necessary human and material resources to take the place of Carthage and become a very powerful faction in the Mediterranean.

6. As for the game itself, I find that the Saba units aren't as well made as the other units in EB, so I guess that it comes from the lack of sources. Someone said that they were an unfinished faction, but since the EB Team is moving to EB2, probably they won't finish the Saba faction anymore. I think it would give a lot of work to make the change from the Saba to Numidia, but I really think it would be worth it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JMRC

Hi.

I agree with those who say that Saba should be replaced by Numidia. The reasons I find are:

1. Saba was a relatively small kingdom, without expansion outside the southern Arabia. They were mostly lightly cavalry, camel or infantry mercenaries under the employ of many other factions in the Middle-East and North-Africa regions. Obviously, they fought many times in both sides of a battlefield.

2. Leaving the Arabic Peninsula with only rebel regions isn't much of a problem, since historically they did not play an important role in the events during the EB Timeline. Also, I think the Seleucids and Ptolemies should be more attracted to the wealthy regions of the Mediterranean Sea than to the Arabic Desert.

3. Numidian troops were crucial to Hannibal's victories against the Romans, and in fact much of its army was composed of Iberians, Numidians and Gauls. So, they have a relevant presence in the EB timeline.

4. Later, Numidia played a very important role in the destruction of Carthage. It was the enmity and constant state of war between those two kingdoms that allowed the Romans to make an alliance with the Numidians, which helped turned the tide against the Cartaginians. After the fall of Carthage, the Numidians became the most powerful regional kingdom (although under the "protection" of the Romans).

5. The Numidians are located in a crucial region in the EB timeline and could have become a great power after the fall of Carthage, if the Romans had not had such a great military expansion. They are an excellent faction to play in a "what if..." scenario, considering that they have the necessary human and material resources to take the place of Carthage and become a very powerful faction in the Mediterranean.

6. As for the game itself, I find that the Saba units aren't as well made as the other units in EB, so I guess that it comes from the lack of sources. Someone said that they were an unfinished faction, but since the EB Team is moving to EB2, probably they won't finish the Saba faction anymore. I think it would give a lot of work to make the change from the Saba to Numidia, but I really think it would be worth it.

---

I disagree. Numidia was not a power at the beginning of the game. They were a bunch of fractious kingdoms constantly at war with eachother. Not the best recipe for expansion.

Saba was a united kindom that at times held power in Arabia and Ethiopia. While the Sabaean unit roster remains incomplete they are the newest faction after all. They did not even exist as a faction prior to EB 0.8. It's quite natural that they remain somewhat incomplete.

The team has spent much time and effort in research and development on Saba. If they have to do the same for Numidia the faction will not see the light of day until EB 2. And since EB 2 will be made for M2TW it's likely Numidia will just be another faction, because the faction limit of M2TW is higher.

If any modder want's to go trough the trouble of changing Saba into Numidia with all the problems and coding involved. Feel free. But can you make Numidia as historically accurate as the other factions, with all the limitations and possibilities, ethnicities, settlements, troops and family members present and correctly depicted? The team however should not waste their time on excluding an existing faction like Saba they had very good reasons in including in EB in the first place.

hi and welcome

Quote:

---

Hi.

I agree with those who say that Saba should be replaced by Numidia. The reasons I find are:

1. Saba was a relatively small kingdom, without expansion outside the southern Arabia. They were mostly lightly cavalry, camel or infantry mercenaries under the employ of many other factions in the Middle-East and North-Africa regions. Obviously, they fought many times in both sides of a battlefield.

2. Leaving the Arabic Peninsula with only rebel regions isn't much of a problem, since historically they did not play an important role in the events during the EB Timeline. Also, I think the Seleucids and Ptolemies should be more attracted to the wealthy regions of the Mediterranean Sea than to the Arabic Desert.

3. Numidian troops were crucial to Hannibal's victories against the Romans, and in fact much of its army was composed of Iberians, Numidians and Gauls. So, they have a relevant presence in the EB timeline.

4. Later, Numidia played a very important role in the destruction of Carthage. It was the enmity and constant state of war between those two kingdoms that allowed the Romans to make an alliance with the Numidians, which helped turned the tide against the Cartaginians. After the fall of Carthage, the Numidians became the most powerful regional kingdom (although under the "protection" of the Romans).


5. The Numidians are located in a crucial region in the EB timeline and could have become a great power after the fall of Carthage, if the Romans had not had such a great military expansion. They are an excellent faction to play in a "what if..." scenario, considering that they have the necessary human and material resources to take the place of Carthage and become a very powerful faction in the Mediterranean.

6. As for the game itself, I find that the Saba units aren't as well made as the other units in EB, so I guess that it comes from the lack of sources. Someone said that they were an unfinished faction, but since the EB Team is moving to EB2, probably they won't finish the Saba faction anymore. I think it would give a lot of work to make the change from the Saba to Numidia, but I really think it would be worth it.

---

Well said my friend and i agree with you :yes:

Quote:

---

I disagree. Numidia was not a power at the beginning of the game. They were a bunch of fractious kingdoms constantly at war with eachother. Not the best recipe for expansion.

Saba was a united kindom that at times held power in Arabia and Ethiopia. While the Sabaean unit roster remains incomplete they are the newest faction after all. They did not even exist as a faction prior to EB 0.8. It's quite natural that they remain somewhat incomplete.

The team has spent much time and effort in research and development on Saba. If they have to do the same for Numidia the faction will not see the light of day until EB 2. And since EB 2 will be made for M2TW it's likely Numidia will just be another faction, because the faction limit of M2TW is higher.

If any modder want's to go trough the trouble of changing Saba into Numidia with all the problems and coding involved. Feel free. But can you make Numidia as historically accurate as the other factions, with all the limitations and possibilities, ethnicities, settlements, troops and family members present and correctly depicted? The team however should not waste their time on excluding an existing faction like Saba they had very good reasons in including in EB in the first place.

---

i agree with you about adding numidians to EB2.
and well if the EB team can stand adding a new faction there is no reason to exclude Saba so they can work on on it more :yes:

Cheers

I most also agree with the adding numidia in EB2 since it would be just wrong to take the saba out:thumbsdown: . I think they should be represented by the Massyili ( eastern ) since they lasted the longest. After that I don't care what faction gets added. ( Aquitani, Belgae, :2thumbsup:)

Quote:

---

I most also agree with the adding numidia in EB2 since it would be just wrong to take the saba out . I think they should be represented by the Massyili ( eastern ) since they lasted the longest. After that I don't care what faction gets added. ( Aquitani, Belgae, )

---

yeah lets hope and wait :2thumbsup:

I have an suggestion to you while do you wait for the EB2.

Check Saba's roster and vannilla's numidian one. You'll see that their fighting style is almost the same: basic infantry units are skirmishers, basic cavalry is skirmisher too, the line infantry are levy spearmans, and have african elephants.
Numidians had imitation legionairs, but as I saw in some other topic that any roman historician would call Saba's nobles and bodyguards legionair imitations...
So why dont you RP an little?
Ask someone of the team to tell you how to make Saba's Government lv 1 to be able to build in Numidia to make numidians and all Saba's troops to be able to build in Saba's factional MICs in that places.

Start an campain with Saba like this:
Your faction leader (I dont remember the name) is the son of the true numidian king that was exilated by traitors in an civil war that fragmentated the country into small states... The exilated king headed east with his family, friends and some loyal warriors. After years of walking without home he settled in the first place he could find peace: In he Arab peninsula where he joined an little tribe called Saba...
After some years, due to Saba's king death and to his own bravery, his son (your faction heir) was elected king of Saba. But he wasnt happy with it. He was ambicious and he wanted revenge. He wanted the throne of... NUMIDIA!!!


Start with Saba but make your own goals, the unification of Numidia. That should be an hard campain (I suggest you to play in lower difficult unless you're an very experienced player, and will not be the same thing as have one faction called Numidia, but should be an cool and funny campain, at least I think...

And if you are an good writer you could do an AAR of it!!! :yes:

To clarify:
Numidia 272 BC - The Massylian Numidians, later the most dominant Numidian group and the tribe of Massinissa, are ruled by either Zelalsen or a possible father of his named Niptasan. Zelalsen has one son that history notes named Gaia or Gala. Zelalsen also had royal relatives, namely Naravas, said to be of the royal family, and Meztule, a distant cousin. How much of the traditional Numidian territory the Massylians controlled exactly at this point is unclear though some scholars have suggested they were based out of Thugga, modern Dougga, and only conquered Cirta under Gala. Gala was instrumental to the rise of the Massylain Numidians conquering large amounts of territory. Wherever the Massylians began they were in firm control of Cirta and more than the province space on the EB map by the time of Gala's death.

The Massylians' main rivals were the Massaesylians most notable for their king Syphax who fought in the second Punic war. Who Syphax's father was is unknown at present. By the time of Jugurtha the Massylians were now only called Numidians as they had defeated the Massaesylians and controlled territory strecthing west to the river Molucca (Spl?) mentioned in Sallust's 'The Jugurthine War'. Though the medracen was not constructed until much later North Africa had several indigenous monuments at this time. The first was Jugurtha's table, located near the border between modern Tunisia and Algeria on the Tunisia side. The second were prehistorical burial mounds that foreshadowed the Medracen in Numidia, and the third were some Pyramid like structures in ancient Mauretania though their exact date of construction I have not found, they could be later.


Welcome aboard Juba2! ( My absolute favourite Numidian)


The Puno-Numidian, Tanit
North West African Historian for Carthage/Eleutheroi, EB