Comments on a Future Koinon Hellenon Faction

Hello all.

Yes, it's time for another annoying thread about the KH. I have to say that I very much like their presentation in EB 1.0, though I have to make a couple of entirely constructive comments concerning the nature of the faction and the government system. Naturally I have no idea what the government system will be like in the M2TW version, but here are some general ideas. I make these comments here since I realise that EB 1.0 is already far beyond this stage of planning. Do forgive the length and rambling nature of this post.

Now the model of the KH is a league of cities with Sparta as its hegemon, based on the Chremonidean alliance. Yet in EB 1.0 the homeland government type was not based on the model of a league, but on Sparta itself exporting its Agoge, with other league members represented by the expansion governments.

My suggestion is that it would be more appropriate to either keep the same general type of government system focused on Sparta but make the faction just Sparta (I know this sounds silly, but I'll deal with it at greater length shortly), or to keep the faction as the whole League but to make the government system more appropriate to a League, rather than just to Sparta.


So, what might a faction based around Sparta be like?

First off, it wouldn't mean cutting off Athens and Rhodes and leaving Sparta with just one starting province. The homeland resource would still be based around some kind of Laconicising Spartan government - on this point, I feel that if you do institute a Spartan Agoge then you ought to be able to train Spartan hoplites, though I don't think that the Spartans would necessarily export their Agoge (perhaps in alternative history they might though). Historically, when Sparta subdued another city the system seems to have been enslavement (as in the case of Messenia, though they do not seem to have considered extending this, and besides the helots had already been freed by 272), the imposition of a sympathetic oligarchy or a harmosteia. However, she could install oligarchies in any city, Dorian or not, and we can hardly have a harmosty in Sparta itself. It would seem then that an oligarchy would be a good type III government, and a harmosty a good type II.

In fact, in the case of Sparta being the faction, I would say that a good type I would perhaps be a Basilike Synoikia Spartiatike ('royal Spartan synoecism'). That way you emphasise the fact that Spartan is expanding into a Dorian homeland and consolidating it (and it represents Sparta itself too), but without introducing its own Agoge in an unrealistic way.

So, to summarise, the government types could be as follows:

Type I : Basilike Synoikia Spartiatike (Royal Spartan Synoecism)
Type II : Harmosteia Spartiatike (Spartan Harmosty)
Type III : Oligarchia Hypekoa (Subject Oligarchy)
Type IV : Polis Symmache Autonome (Allied Autonomous City)

But Athens and Rhodes shouldn't be left out of the picture - the player would start with these as well. This system would leave Athens and Rhodes starting with Type IV governments rather than Type II (though with the option to become harmosties/oligarchies) - perhaps this effect would not be preferable in terms of unit recruitment however.


But what if the faction were to be based entirely around the notion of the League?

The logical result of this should surely be that Sparta, while Hegemon, should not be the main factor in determining the League's 'homeland'. The homeland would become any city that would be a major player in the league potentially, while the subjugation (Type II) provinces would be those cities that were Hellenic but not important or central enough to have figured largely in the league's anti-Macedonian/Epirote strategy. This obviously changes the focus a lot - all of a sudden Athens, Rhodes and Sparta are all homeland provinces. So what kind of government might this focus produce? I would suggest:

Type I : Koinonia Hellenike (Hellenic Communion)
Type II : Klerouchia Panhellenike (Panhellenic Cleruchism)
Type III : Tyrannos Enchorios (Local Tyrant)
Type IV : Polis Symmache Autonome (Allied Autonomous City)

I have always seen (and I don't think I am alone in this) the role of the KH as realising the dream of Panhellenists such as Isocrates - though of course I do think that, if possible, the Greek cities in M2TW should fall out from time to time and maybe try to secede from the league. As such, instituting a Type I government would represent the act of integrating the government of a city into a larger league structure, while Type II would involve the league sending out settlers much in the manner of those who went to Thurii to conquered Hellenic cities that aren't important enough or relevant to the league's primary focus of uniting Hellas against Macedonia and Epirus.

One objection that I have heard to this is that there would be too many homeland provinces under this system - I disagree. Based on the campaign map of EB 1.0, I can think that only the following provinces would be homelands - Athenai, Sparte, Rhodos, Korinthos, Syrakousai, Taras, Thermon and Demetrias, a total of 8 cities (I don't include cities such as Chalkis or Mytilene that could be seen as being under a more important city's area of influence, such as Athens'). For comparison in EB 1.0 Epirus has about 7 homeland provinces, I think.


Conclusion

The Hellenic city states are always going to be difficult to represent as a faction. They would almost be best as rebel cities, but they really have to be shown in a playable form (and I wouldn't forgive you if you made them rebels!). As such, I think that you have to choose what your focus is to be. Is it one city and its allies (as in the case of the first option) or on the league as a whole (as in the second)? Personally I would be quite happy with either. Maybe the government system will be totally different in EB II; however, I think that the point of focus still stands.

I hope that, even if you disagree, you found this a worthwhile discussion point.

I'm half-drunk and been sitting up all night exchanging pics of girls with Sarcasm so not in the mood to read entire post.

But you do bring up some valid points, which hopefully other EB members will read up on. KH is probably one faction we will see if we can improve a lot with the new M2TW engine's limits. Especially Loyalty.

As usually happened in Greek history, when a league or alliance managed to grow strong enough, some of its member states might not see the benefit of being in that league/alliance as their freedom was secured or they felt the alliance/league or a succesful general could be a threat to their own liberties. Pausanias of Sparta is one example (think it was him). This is something we'd want to represent. The more succesful you are with the KH the more fearful some of your members might be.

One idea I've personally thought about is having a gov type for Greek cities granting them member status and another gov type for non-Greek cities.

Yeah! What he said.





*tkaes another painkiller*

Ey...why do you got a soldier on your sig image, and I just got a lousy mismatch of colors? Well, mismatch of colors is preferred over that "150 BC Eromenos Calendar July Model". Jeez, look at that pose. Says "You'd wish your girl slave was as hot as me".

Anywho another idea is to actually make certain units available after 250 BC like the Thureophoroi, Lonchophoroi, Thorakitai & KH Phalangitai...and I think one unit more, but can't remember. And yeah see if we can have some difference recruitment systems for Seleukids & Ptolemaioi at least. One "katoikiai" recruitment with lower taxes & happiness (lots of lands given to military settlers, said settlers not happy to be obliged to march to war when their King says so. Ungrateful bastards) and one "polis" system with higher taxes & higher happiness (they pay taxes off their lands and such, and being granted polis status they are happy campers). Klerouchoi Phalangitai & Prodromoi would be only available from katoikiai system, while Lonchophoroi from both.

And yeah we will see if we can redo the entire MIC system too. Like making grant of lands requisite for some units like the Klerouchoi ones for Diadochoi & a few Roman ones. And making agricultural levels having an impact on cavalry availability ("Magic sir. That is how we feed horses here in the deserts of Arabia"). Also we might be able to do some nice stuff with resources, like controlling a resource allows you to build/train this and that in your provinces (like in Civ. You control 1 Copper source, you can train Axemen in all your cities). In EB...that's elephants!! Maybe even making it so that Epeiros can recruit elephants if they have some alliance with Seleukids or Ptolemaioi (then they get forest elephants!!). Another option is haoma, or Steppe weed. As long as you control that, your nomadic units have long hair and shoot flowers...wait that ain't funny (although in Simpsons it is).

And we're still debating the last two faction slots. Only 3 people were injured during the last debate, so we are making progress.

Now, off to try to concept a damn Seleukid unit so we can get it drawn and on a sig image.

Hey, I wrote a Stele now...

And yeah you can remove the half-
Gotta love cheap Danish beer.

Hey, there's always that one picture of a Seleukid phalangites from the Seleukid/Ptolemaic battle scene.

Of course he's about to get stabbed by an angry Galatian so that might not be the one you want to go with. :beam:

This is the first time I ever got a drunken response from EB - and remember we're discussing the Koinon Hellenon, not the Arche Seleukeia!

oops (edit)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zenith Darksea

This is the first time I ever got a drunken response from EB - and remember we're discussing the Koinon Hellenon, not the Arche Seleukeia!

---

I'll go track down our KH guys. ~:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Krusader

Ey...why do you got a soldier on your sig image, and I just got a lousy mismatch of colors? Well, mismatch of colors is preferred over that "150 BC Eromenos Calendar July Model". Jeez, look at that pose. Says "You'd wish your girl slave was as hot as me".

---

I can get a tan. I win.





*painkillers f-in rock*

Sounds nice.
I think I prefer the second option, it shole be a legue of city-states in my opinion rather then just one. We could also just keep the Agoge as a unique building in Sparta that would increse law and allow creation of Spartan hoplites.

Drunken-EB team members = a somewhat vague, but very entertaining, response. :laugh4:

Mmmmm, beer.

Anyways, I think your post was well thought out and made several valid points. :yes:

We'll have to wait and see what they can do with M2:TW.

Bootsiuv

Since the KH is the most quasi-fantasy-what-if faction, would you guys be willing to create a set of reforms modelling the transition from a loose confederation of states allying against an agressor to a more unified state dominated a single power? It would be cool to play out history as it might have unfolded if someone managed to unit the Greek peoples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

Since the KH is the most quasi-fantasy-what-if faction, would you guys be willing to create a set of reforms modelling the transition from a loose confederation of states allying against an agressor to a more unified state dominated a single power? It would be cool to play out history as it might have unfolded if someone managed to unit the Greek peoples.

---

Love the idea

Just out of intrests is there any Spartan Agoge like system you can use for Athens and Rhodos?

i really like antisocialmunkys idea