Printable View
It has been stated a billion of times, including in this very thread, that there won't be a Kush or Meroe faction.
The reasons were IIRC :
- they haven't conquered anyone
- there unit roster would be quite poor
- people want this faction in just for the sake of having a black-people-only faction
Neither have the Sabaeans, Koinon Hellenon, Lusotanians...Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
Why? There are lot of east african units in EB. Their unit roster wouldn't be poorer then Sabaean.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
No, they want it because of its unique culture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
Sorry, but all these arguments seem pointless. Can anyone state better reasons why this faction shouldn't be in EB2?
How about that their main enemies, as wel as their historically prefered route of expansion, lay of the campaign map? They never seemed to have bothered the Ptolemies (and later the Romans) that much, despite defeating one or two invasion attempts. Nor did they do much against the Greek colonies on the Red Sea, apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Perun
Incidentally, some people think that Saba may have invaded and ruled Kush sometime around the EB time-frame. There is no direct evidence, but then no Greek or Roman historian ever wrote about this place. Apparently, it was not considered influential by them.
BTW, leave the accusations of pro- or anti-black bias, please. It is not important for the discussion and will only lead to fighting.
It just seems to me like a Nubian faction would have no choice exept to move north against the Ptolemies and get crushed. Unless they had a fleet to invade Arabia, but would they have had such a fleet historically? I am not as well versed in history as most of you.
You seem to know something about Meroe. What were their main enemies you are talking about?Quote:
Originally Posted by Labrat
You're right that they haven't really bothered the Ptolemies or Romans or attacked the Greek colonies. It was mostly because of trade which was an important source of income for Meroe. Without the Greeks and their colonies, there would be no trade.
Saba also haven't bothered the Ptolemies or the Seleucids. Historically Saba in the EB time-frame was in decline. The Greeks took over the trade with India and Saba was gradually getting poorer. Meroe, on the other hand, was on the rise.
Afaik EB is not trying to recreate history. Playing for Meroe you would be able to choose another way to expand. The Ptolemies are fully engaged in wars with the Seleucids, so they would not be able to focus on the outlying southern border (as Saba-players can confirm).
I haven't heard about the Sabaean invasion to Kush. Even if such thing happened, it was probably short-lasting and unimportant event because the Meroitic kingdom lasted until the 3rd century AD when it was destroyed by the Aksumites.
I'm pretty sure they are, or as closely as practical. Many of the factions never achieved EB victory conditions in real life, yet the victory conditions themselves have historical relevance.Quote:
Afaik EB is not trying to recreate history. Playing for Meroe you would be able to choose another way to expand. The Ptolemies are fully engaged in wars with the Seleucids, so they would not be able to focus on the outlying southern border (as Saba-players can confirm).
When Alexander the Great infiltrated further down the nile towards Kush he was confronted by the great army of The Kandake Of Medewi/Meroe seeing such a brilliant military formation he concluded it would be best to withdraw his forces.
DO NOT TELL ME THAT THESE PEOPLE NEVER THREATENED ANYONE.
When you have people like the Saba and Lusitani in the game and then your prepared to have Syracuse and Pergamon for the next game why the hell couldn't you have the Medewi kingdom?
Enough is Enough
The aim of this game is to achieve historical accuracy (or get as close to it as possible), agreed. This is why we play it (well this is why I play it anyway).
You want the finishing product to be as accurate as possible, agreed.
Yet, on the same page you would be quite content with having the Kingdom of Medewi represented as rebels, with one city and an army of a few hundred Ethiopian tribesmen on account of it being a more pacifist empire than agressor?
In my mind anyway this is not giving justice to these people.
I don't care it has been raised a billion times, this just means that there are a billion other people out there that want a historically accurate game like me.
If you are STILL ignorant to fact that these people deserve to be represented in this game, I suggest you find another mod.
I'll crusade for the Medewi Kingdom
This is going to be Europa Barbarorum II, so I suggest we keep things focused on Europe or at least Northern Africa. Although I would rather see Meroe be a faction than Saba, whose rise to imperial status was twice as unlikely. Make them rebelling/shadow factions at best.
Make the Numidians a faction and give Carthage something to fear early in the game as opposed to them quickly becoming an economic superpower.
I am going to start talking in bold to appear more in with the crowd here. They have been rejected because of a very simple hardcode problem: cultures. We barely have enough culture slots to cover our existing factions. Culture decides what portraits a faction uses, so unless you want your Meroe Kings looking a bit on the white side (and we certainly don't), then you can forget about any faction from that area of the map. End of.
Foot
Unlike KH and Lusotanians, Meroe wasn't a force to be reckoned with. No one ever bothered about them. Try to guess why it was never conquered for long ? Surely not because it was an extraordinary military force...Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Perun
Even the Romans didn't care about that piece of land.
What about, you know, factional units ? I'm sure officials from EB explained repeatedly that they haven't got a clue about what specific unit a Meroan kingdom would get. You would likely end up with "Meroan Archers", "Meroan Spearmen" and "Meroan Axemen" and a whole lot of regional unit to make up for the lack of faction-specific units.Quote:
Why? There are lot of east african units in EB. Their unit roster wouldn't be poorer then Sabaean.
Furthermore, I'm also wondering why
Quite frankly, I don't buy that. There sure might be a few people here and there that have some knowledge about Meroe. But most people pushing for it are like "omg a black faction 1!!!1!11!! <3".Quote:
No, they want it because of its unique culture.
Nabatea would IMO make a much better faction near Egypt.
Plenty of historical accuracy there. Please, enjoy ap stick throwing boyar sons of Novgorod evil empire.Quote:
Originally Posted by azzbaz
Not even in MTW II Kingdoms? I thought with more faction slots there are also more cuture slots. But I don't know anything about it. If you are planning to add the Numidians, Meroe could share the same culture with them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
You really think that no one bothered about them because they were poor and undeveloped? Here are some facts about Meroe that can hopefully change your mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Meneldil
Meroe's location at the convergence of a network of caravan roads with trade routes along the White and Blue Niles makes it East Africa's most important center of trade. The Nubians of the Meroitic Period manufacture richly decorated textiles, graceful decorated ceramic vessels, objects of bronze and iron, exceptionally fine gold and cloisonné jewelry, and other luxury items.
That's also the reason why the Romans send there an expedition - to secure the gold mines in upper Nubia. So you can't say they were totally unimportant. They surely weren't an extraordinary military power, but they were an important player in that region. Expansion into Egypt was not even possible for them, the Nubians in fact made many attempts to conquer the Nile valley: some of them in 8-7th century BC, when they succesfully conquered the whole Egypt and ruled as pharaohs, and one even in the 1st century against the Romans. Of course they were defeated by Rome, but they became only a vassal kingdom and not a roman province.
But then again - what makes Saba so better then Meroe? No one has answered this question. As I have already written - the Sabaeans weren't more powerful then Meroe in this time period.
Meroe would be a good faction for EB2. At least it was historically important enough to be included.
Nil points for history. Numidians were not black africans, so would not have the same portraits meroe. And 7 culture slots, just as in RTW 1.5, is the max allowed in MTW2. And as EB1 already uses 7 culture slots, we can't add another one for Meroe period, not even if they shared with another faction. Hence no meroe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Perun
Foot
Quote:
Originally Posted by azzbaz
Meroe was the capital of the Kushite Kingdom or the Meroitic Kingdom. Do you actually read what's in the encyclopedia?Quote:
Heres some evidence from an encyclopedia.
"...Meroë was the southern capital of the Kushite Kingdom or Napata / Meroitic Kingdom that spanned the period c.800 BC - c. AD 350"
It is a kingdom with relevance to the game and I believe is important enough to be in it
Saba was a very rich kingdom. Koinon Hellenon was probably the "kingdom" with the most battles in the period of the game. Lusotanna was a big enemy of Kart-Hadast. Point.Quote:
Neither have the Sabaeans, Koinon Hellenon, Lusotanians...
We are talking about historical accuracy in EB, not how big or varied the roster is.Quote:
Why? There are lot of east african units in EB. Their unit roster wouldn't be poorer then Sabaean.
Give me 5 examples of unique culture to the Kush/Meroe Kingdom.Quote:
No, they want it because of its unique culture.
Read some books and then talk. I recommend searching for Arabia Felix (forgot the author; google it and you'll find it) which will surely give you serious arguments why Saba was chosen in EB.Quote:
But then again - what makes Saba so better then Meroe? No one has answered this question. As I have already written - the Sabaeans weren't more powerful then Meroe in this time period.
I want the Massaeyl Mauretania faction! And the Boii and Goidilic (Erain) factions.
Thanks for the information Foot. :wall:
There was no such thing as KH in history so what are you talking about? If you mean those anxious city states with their petty alliances, KH was the "kingdom" with the most LOST battles in the period of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
Lusotanians were great warriors - but only in their own mountains. You could say the same about Meroe - they both lived in outlying regions with rough terrain and without much importance. Btw if Lusotanna was such a big enemy of Kart-Hadast, why are they allied at the beggining of the game?
Maybe Saba was rich but it never really tried to became an empire. They were only merchants and farmers.
Thanks for recommending me that book - I was searching for something about pre-Islamic Arabia.
Yes, I am talking about those. I did not specify lost battles, I specified just battles, so be careful when you contradict as you may contradict the wrong point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Perun
Then how come Baktria and Pahlava were allies of the Seleukid Empire and after some time both of them got their independence?Quote:
Lusotanians were great warriors - but only in their own mountains. You could say the same about Meroe - they both lived in outlying regions with rough terrain and without much importance. Btw if Lusotanna was such a big enemy of Kart-Hadast, why are they allied at the beggining of the game?
And the difference with Meroe is...?Quote:
Maybe Saba was rich but it never really tried to became an empire. They were only merchants and farmers.
My pleasure.Quote:
Thanks for recommending me that book - I was searching for something about pre-Islamic Arabia.
Look Ezymedieval, after the Kushite Capital, Napata was taken by Psamtik of Egypt in 591BC the successors of this kingdom moved the capital further down the nile to Meroe so in changing it to the Meroitic Kingdom. The people were called Kushites though so I apologise for the sarcastic reply.
Look, this argument can keep bouncing back and forth, but you are still left with very good reasons they should be in it and reasons that they shouldn't as with many factions already in the game. As for 'culture slots', I'm sure that the modders can represent them with one of the culture slots along with the Numidians.
Bold writing represent
...Or have the Numidians with the same one (culture slot) as the Carthaginians.
Carthaginians are of Middle East (Phoinikiai) descent. It's totally different from having the Numidians being represented in the same culture as the Carthaginians.
Finally! Of course there is no difference. That means if Saba is good enough to be in EB, Meroe is good enough too.Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
The Numidians were influenced by carthagian cuture, so its not that unrealistic.Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
What's being argues against is the 'too'. Both played a relatively small part on events on the campaign map and there is less information. But the area needs to be represented, so in my opinion it's one or the other, but not both; since the engine is more capable of representing Saba since they don't need a seperate culture for black portraits it's a far more logical choice.
Well in my opinion it's not one or another. The region is large enough for both Saba and Meroe.
an easier solution to this is just use the kingdom of aksum. it had conquered both the meroe and the saba. it would be even better to have the 3 factions in there to make that part of the map more interesting.
Sure, if you've got suggestions as to which culture should make way for a new one with only Meroë (or Axum) so they can actually have black character portraits...?Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Perun
I really think the region is best represented by strong rebels. Perhaps a similar script to the Boii one in 1.0, spawning a defensive army should a faction invade?
https://img443.imageshack.us/img443/...ibilitykd9.jpg
I've been doing some thinking about what I think the EB2 map should look like. I've contracted the southern part of the map by taking out desert wastelands that no one in their right mind would want to conquer. This would free up for settlement slots for Europe.
Also, I think northern steppe settlements should be removed and replace the Saka with an emerging faction that would pose a mid-game threat to Parthia and Bactria, who in turn will put pressure on the Seleucids. Modeled from the Mongols and Timurids in M2TW, these nomads could also pose a threat to Sauromatae.
Saba should be removed as a faction, although I would keep their units to be hired as mercenaries. I think their faction slot would be best used for either:
Pergamon - (Greek) counter to Ptolemy/Seleudids, potential ally with Pontos
Thrace - could potentially be a rebelling faction, mushc like the civil conflict in English in the Britain campaign.
Belgae - further represent the divisions within Gaul
Numidia - counter to Carthaginian expansion. Could be a rebelling faction as well mid-game
Illyrians - like Thrace and Belgae, these people were not united by 272BC (I don't think) So they could be a rebelling faction, that is, they will unite if they no longer enjoy living under Greek/Roman/Getae rule.
This replacement would not require African or Arabian cultures to be included.
I think these changes would create longer and more challenging campaigns.Aslo, with the quicker turns in M2TW it wont take 10 hours of playing to get to 200BC!!
To be honest, I really can't see any of that happening.
I was thinking that steppe, arabian, and (southern) African settlements would be better used in Europe, such as including more towns in Magna Grachea, Greece and Anatolia.
I've read that the team plan on enlarging the map for EBII. While this would be great for condensed areas like Greece (more battles instead of seiges) it would cause problems for other areas.
Enlarging the map while keeping the steppes will make it impossible to travel from on city to another without rationing.
Furthermore, this would correct the problems of Parthia and Bactria's 272 starting position.
I'm sure that EB team won't remove any faction that is present in 1.0.