New factions?

Can safely say Massilia wont be a faction. Compared to many other factions they did not do much and when they did wage war against Carthage the Greek colonies in Iberia didn't bother sending help.

There should be a thread somewhere explaining this more thouroughly. Try the Search function.

Edit: Syracuse is also very iffy. There is practically no information regarding the Syracusan military from 280 BC to its fall, when it comes to composition, equipment and the likes. The Syracusan Hoplite unit we have is also in for an overhaul in EB2 as we found out that some archeological sources used for its creation, where Mamertine in origin.

That's too bad since Massilia would be in such an interesting position. However, there is a bright spot to this in the fact that it opens up space for a possible Arevaci-led Celtiberian faction. This would be very helpful in balancing the wars in Iberia.

Possible New Faction starting territories (capital in bold):

Arevaci - Numantia

Numidia - Kirtan

Mauretania - Siga, Sala

Gandhara - Taksashila, Opiana

Pergamon - Pergamon

Belgae - Bratosporios, Bagacos

Scythians - Olbia

Bosphoran Kingdom - Pantikapaion

Boii - Bononia, Eburonum, Vindobona

Some of these I'm not as sure about, namely the Boii, Belgae and Mauretanians.

Chairman

I think that both Boii, Mauretania and Balgae are adequate factions. Actually, I think they would be great additions to the game. The only things I would change in your list, is to replace the Bosphoran Kingdom with Illyria, And maybe add some other eastern faction instead of Gandhara. I think the Persians would be fun to play, however, they might be somewhat ahistorical in the EB timeframe.
thus, my new, edited list, would be:

1. Arevaci
2. Belgae
3. Boii
4. Illyria
5. Mauretania
6. Numidia
7. Pergamon
8. Persis (or other eastern faction)
9. Scythians

It will be interesting to see how many I get right.

Quote:

---

I think the Persians would be fun to play, however, they might be somewhat ahistorical in the EB timeframe.

---

They.

Were.

Gone.

Apart from some revolts around Pasargadae, the Achaemenid Persians to which you refer were nothing but a memory. Want to play Persians? Fine, just play either Hay or Pahlava, conquer Susa, Ekbatana, Persepolis and the rest of the cities and enjoy your Persian empire!

I VERY strongly support Syracuse as a faction - they should have immense fortifications (special structures to emulate the inventions of Archimedes perhaps? - just a thought), a starting army of elite units, and a huge trade income which can fund the elite army - provided their port isnt blockaded.

As for the arguments against it:

1) that it would be quickly destroyed as an AI - perhaps, but would be a nice touch for Roman and Carthagian players, and its starting defences should be such as to make sure that it doesnt just fall within the first few years

2) no great history after 270 BC. - perhaps not, but previously Syracusan kings (Dionysius, Agathocles, if I'm not mistaken) carved out large empires on Sicily and in Southern Italy. That Syracuse - had it been left alone and had the Romans and Carthagians weakened each other (both entirely possible scenarios in EB) - there's no reason why it shouldn't have done so again

3) lack of historical knowledge regarding the Syracusan army - well, as said, knowledge apparently exists of the Syracusan hoplite. Otherwise it SHOULD be possible to create a quite convincing military based on knowledge of earlier Syracusan armies compared to the evolutions in Greek military in the east - may not be the most historically accurate, but it's unlikely to be so ahistorical as to offend anybody, and given the improvement to the playing around Sicily, I think it would be worth the cost - the sight of both Pyrrhus and Syracuse running around and messing up Rome's and Carthages struggle is far superior to a mere war between Rome and Carthage ;)



My other wishes for factions would be

2) Pergamene - due to their importance of course, + the added mess it'll make in Asia Minor
3) North African faction of some kind, perhaps Numidian, so that Carthage hasn't got the place all to themselves - often gets too cozy there if they can keep peace w/ Ptollies and ward off Romans
4) faction to stop Sweboz empire, but dont know anything about it (nobody seems to do;) )
5) Galatians - again to mess up Asia Minor and be both darn irritating and darn entertaining for us Seleucid players

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

They.

Were.

Gone.

Apart from some revolts around Pasargadae, the Achaemenid Persians to which you refer were nothing but a memory. Want to play Persians? Fine, just play either Hay or Pahlava, conquer Susa, Ekbatana, Persepolis and the rest of the cities and enjoy your Persian empire!

---

I know they were. Thats why I said they would be ahistorical.
And why I added "or other eastern faction", after them in my list.

I admit I might have been somewhat "vague" on this issue, though. What I meant was some faction in this area of the map, not necessarily centered around Persepolis. However, I can not come up with a single one which was present during the EB timeframe.
(However, the region of Persis was, as far as I'm concerned, more of a vassal state during the reign of the parthians. This was not the case during the Seleucid hayday, though, so it doesent help much.)

Sooo... you want a faction it that area, only problem is that there weren´t any factions in that area? So what do you want the EB team to do, make up an entirely new faction? Bartrix? Even Vanilla didn´t make up completely new factions.
Hell, I want a faction in Balticum but I´m not going to demand that the EB team makes up a faction with some vague units in that area.

Honestly, I think the diversity of the game would improve significantly if the following faction were added. But really, make whatever factions you want; I'll still love it. :)

1. Arevaci
2. Axumite
3. Gandaran
4. Numidia
5. Pergamon
6. Persis (or other eastern faction)
7. Scythians

2 is a big no. EB team has stated there will be no African factions.

Thats really unfortunate, as Axum/ Ethiopia was really big in a lot of classical world view and myth; even back to Memnon in the Illiad. I think it would really add a LOT to the game, although their conquerable eara outside thier homeland might not be very large, outside Egypt.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brymht

Honestly, I think the diversity of the game would improve significantly if the following faction were added. But really, make whatever factions you want; I'll still love it. :)

1. Arevaci
2. Axumite
3. Gandaran
4. Numidia
5. Pergamon
6. Persis (or other eastern faction)
7. Scythians

---

1,3,4,5, are all possible.

2 is not. We are constricted to 7 cultures and would be folly giving an entire culture slot to a sub-saharan african faction just for that. In addition Axum/Nubia/Ethiopia had their glory days before and after the EB time period.

6. Persis was for most of the time an autonomous satrapy under either the Seleukids & Parthians and seemed to have stayed quiet mostly. Plus we have other more interesting eastern factions on the shortlist.

7. Scythians were a declining power at this time. We already have the Sarmatians as the European nomad faction. If the Scythians are added, it would probably only be as a significant part of the Boshporan Kingdom unit roster, should we decide upon that faction.

I for one think the Scythians would be a great faction. Declining or not they could be included and wouldn't need much work as some units are already in the game and they are pretty powerful and most useful. Numidia should have been in 1.0 so don't make that mistake twice. Also I think another far eastern faction is needed to balance the map a bit. But please before all this expand the current factions and give at least 4 new units to each. Also please don't nerf the cavalry. I know it's ancient times and some of you consider that it was weaker than in the medieval period but remember what it did for Alexander...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by General Appo

Sooo... you want a faction it that area, only problem is that there weren´t any factions in that area? So what do you want the EB team to do, make up an entirely new faction? Bartrix? Even Vanilla didn´t make up completely new factions.
Hell, I want a faction in Balticum but I´m not going to demand that the EB team makes up a faction with some vague units in that area.

---

Hah!
I'm not demanding anything! I'm just listing some factions I would find interesting, but I wouldn't want any humbug factions. Thats why I specified that I would find a faction in this region, not necessarily Persia, interesting.

That is why I find krusader's remark that they have other ideas for factins in store very interesting.
Althoug I must add: I still think that the scythians would be interesting.
However, I stress that this is NOT a demand:beam: , simply my personal opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daos

I for one think the Scythians would be a great faction. Declining or not they could be included and wouldn't need much work as some units are already in the game and they are pretty powerful and most useful. Numidia should have been in 1.0 so don't make that mistake twice. Also I think another far eastern faction is needed to balance the map a bit. But please before all this expand the current factions and give at least 4 new units to each. Also please don't nerf the cavalry. I know it's ancient times and some of you consider that it was weaker than in the medieval period but remember what it did for Alexander...

---

And what about all the other factions that are equally deserving of being included, and who, unlike the scythians, were not on their way into obscurity, but who were rising into the apex of their achievement. Give any thought to the Iberian Kingdom of the Caucasus, who, at the game's start, existed in an alliance against Hayasdan with Arche Seleukeia in a nasty pincer movement, and who, along with Hayasdan became an important power throughout our timeperiod. No? Didn't think so.

Numidia was not included because we felt that there were more important factions to be represented by our limited faction slots. Don't throw around "should" as if our decisions don't hold equal if not more merit than your own. We were once again constrained by the hardcodes, and so every decision we made was a hard one.

Finally, MTW2 does not expand the number of unit slots that we can use. With 10 new factions waiting in the wings it will likely be that some factions may even lose core faction troops, but in return the number of regionals will increase. In EBI we have left the number of units at 460, leaving 40 to share amongst the 10 new factions. As all of the factions currently chosen have pre-existing units included as regionals in EBI, this number of 40 isn't so bad.

On a minor note, our position on cavalry has not changed, and unless you can pull something more concrete than some romantic interpretation of Alexander's battles through Asia (which, if we are in anyway to be respectful to history, requires are far more indepth and complex analysis than you seem to be giving), you speak as if your words are naught but dust.

Foot

WELL...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

And what about all the other factions that are equally deserving of being included, and who, unlike the scythians, were not on their way into obscurity, but who were rising into the apex of their achievement. Give any thought to the Iberian Kingdom of the Caucasus, who, at the game's start, existed in an alliance against Hayasdan with Arche Seleukeia in a nasty pincer movement, and who, along with Hayasdan became an important power throughout our timeperiod. No? Didn't think so.


... I've never heard of that Kingdom. I've did heard of the Scythians though like most people. And I consider them to be some of the best archers in EB.

Numidia was not included because we felt that there were more important factions to be represented by our limited faction slots. Don't throw around "should" as if our decisions don't hold equal if not more merit than your own. We were once again constrained by the hardcodes, and so every decision we made was a hard one.

You do realize your mod lacks exotic factions? We don't want another phalanx faction or a HA faction. That's why so many people wanted Numidia in this mod. They are different! And I bet that there are a few black people out there playing EB that would want that Africa to be truly represented in this game.

Finally, MTW2 does not expand the number of unit slots that we can use. With 10 new factions waiting in the wings it will likely be that some factions may even lose core faction troops, but in return the number of regionals will increase. In EBI we have left the number of units at 460, leaving 40 to share amongst the 10 new factions. As all of the factions currently chosen have pre-existing units included as regionals in EBI, this number of 40 isn't so bad.

So you're gonna take out units instead of puting in much needed new ones. Hm... now that's evolution. This should be a sequel not a prequel so taking out units is a big NO imb

On a minor note, our position on cavalry has not changed, and unless you can pull something more concrete than some romantic interpretation of Alexander's battles through Asia (which, if we are in anyway to be respectful to history, requires are far more indepth and complex analysis than you seem to be giving), you speak as if your words are naught but dust.

Ooh yeah. Now don't tell me mister teacher that the Macedonian army had weak cavalry. How historically accurate is that? Why was Alexander himself riding with them? Doesn't that imply that they were the most important part of his army?


"I will show you fear in a handful of dust"

T.S. Eliot

owns

Foot

---

I suggest you take a break from our forum Mr. Daos. Foot told it as it is. You are the one who is trying to tell us (in a "you know what is best fashion") how to judge which factions are worthy of inclusions and your manner is what is most grating. Do it again like that and you are gone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou

I suggest you take a break from our forum Mr. Daos. Foot told it as it is. You are the one who is trying to tell us (in a "you know what is best fashion") how to judge which factions are worthy of inclusions and your manner is what is most grating. Do it again like that and you are gone.

---

lol

:laugh4:

You people just can't stand criticism, now can you? I was just suggesting to add some things to make the game better. I was not telling you to remove anything and I was not looking for a fight nor insulting anyone. Why are you people so nervous? What are you afraid of?

You are trying to speak for the people, which I'm pretty sure who's support you don't have.

The EB team has spent a lot of time doing research on factions, and it is fairly obvious that the Skuthioi were declining at this time.

Quote:

---

You do realize your mod lacks exotic factions? We don't want another phalanx faction or a HA faction. That's why so many people wanted Numidia in this mod. They are different! And I bet that there are a few black people out there playing EB that would want that Africa to be truly represented in this game.

---

Okay, Foot, Teleklos, can I get it straight for now?

African factions in EB: NO!. Unless you can magically give them another faction slot.

Just because there are some Finnish people that like the game doesn't mean they'll include a Finnish tribe.

Or more obviously stated: What people want (Lorica Segmentata) and what is historically accurate tends to differentiate.

Quote:

---

Ooh yeah. Now don't tell me mister teacher that the Macedonian army had weak cavalry. How historically accurate is that? Why was Alexander himself riding with them? Doesn't that imply that they were the most important part of his army?


"I will show you fear in a handful of dust"

T.S. Eliot

owns

Foot

---

Just a moment later you state:

Quote:

---

You people just can't stand criticism, now can you? I was just suggesting to add some things to make the game better. I was not telling you to remove anything and I was not looking for a fight nor insulting anyone. Why are you people so nervous? What are you afraid of?

---

Saying that you "owned" Foot is quite insulting, also telling them they can't stand criticism and taunting them is not really desired behaviour on these forums.

Quote:

---

Also please don't nerf the cavalry. I know it's ancient times and some of you consider that it was weaker than in the medieval period but remember what it did for Alexander...

---

Where have they ever stated they will "nerf" the cavalry? I, for one, can't remember this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daos

I was not telling you to remove anything and I was not looking for a fight nor insulting anyone.

---

Well...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daos

You do realize your mod lacks exotic factions? We don't want another phalanx faction or a HA faction.

So you're gonna take out units instead of puting in much needed new ones. Hm... now that's evolution. This should be a sequel not a prequel so taking out units is a big NO imb

Ooh yeah. Now don't tell me mister teacher that the Macedonian army had weak cavalry.

---

At the very least, you could moderate your tone. It could be a little less aggressive and sarcastic. Remember, nobody's actually paying the EB team - they're doing all of this for free, for us. (Well, for themselves really, but we get the benefit.)

Quote:

---

You do realize your mod lacks exotic factions? We don't want another phalanx faction or a HA faction. That's why so many people wanted Numidia in this mod. They are different! And I bet that there are a few black people out there playing EB that would want that Africa to be truly represented in this game.

---

We lack exotic factions because we strive for historical realism.

Blame history for there being so many Hellenic states at this time and 3 HA factions aint that much.

Daos, your reasons for including those factions are, to put it bluntly, laughable. They will not be included. We are not "afraid" of them, it is just inane to debate including factions because *you* say we have plenty of similar ones already, or because *you* say some ethnicities today would like to have similar ethnicity factions in the game. Get lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daos

lol

:laugh4:

You people just can't stand criticism, now can you? I was just suggesting to add some things to make the game better. I was not telling you to remove anything and I was not looking for a fight nor insulting anyone. Why are you people so nervous? What are you afraid of?

---

So a unit of good archers now defines the criteria upon which our faction list should be based (I will note that you keep using the word "should" in, as far your own impression of your meaning is concerned, the wrong way). Unfortunately we wish to define the great moments of our period; the political and economic powerhouses that emphasize the complex interplay of differing cultures (not simply the romano-hellenic one that survived in the west) during this extremely interesting period. To focus on a dying culture because their in game unit of foot archers (or horse archers, if you were referring to them) is, in your opinion, the best of their kind, is just clearly wierd.

And again you seem confused as to our motives in creating EB. It is not as a showcase of all the fantastic and exotic cultures that did exist (though mostly at the periphary of the map), but as a showcase of the great states, kingdoms, and empires that forged the world of our map throughout our time-period. To say that no-one wants another phalanx or HA faction is certainly true, but then I don't think any fan of EB would define a faction purely in terms of its unit line-up - does not Arche Seleukeia offer a different game than Ptolemaioi, does not the Saka offer far different obstacles than the Sauromatae. No, your definition of a faction lacks depth, and is thus useless to us. That is not to say that gameplay does not inform our opinion, but only when married to the equally important discipline of history. As my own motto for EB says: History does not conflict with gameplay, it inspires it. And as everyone knows, fiction can never out-do fact when it comes to true drama.

Yes, some units may disappear, but that does not mean that we are not replacing them with new units. If a unit is taken out, then it will be only so a more important unit can fill its place. I thought that was clear in my post, obviously I underestimated my audience.

Finally, I'm not entirely sure where my (and I paraphrase), "It is better to use more complicated analysis to reach a conclusion on Alexander's cavalry wing, rather than your own romantic attempt", was turned into (and again I paraphrase) "Alexander had weak cavalry". Please at least attempt to respond with some semblence of intelligence, it just raises the tone of the entire proceeding.

For a conclusion, I find your whole intrepretation of EB to be laughably twisted into your own ape-like aspirations toward history. I would ignore it and let it be, but unfortunately I find your entire manner to be offensive as well. I couldn't name one part, but ever since you started posting recently, I have been drawn to your posts with a sense of revulsion. In otherwords I find you neither interesting nor ignorable - the worst kind of bore.

Foot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

snip

Foot

---

Yeah right. If you think I'm gonna read all that you're kinda overestimating your importance. If you can't handle criticism maybe you shouldn't be talking to people. Go back into your little cage for now...

~:wave:

^
You really underestimate the importance of shutting the hell up and listening, don't you? No one here knows what you seek to achieve with your blind idiocy nor does anyone even care. You stated what you wanted to see in EBII and were shot down for good reasons. Boo Hoo. You'll get over it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by defiant3279

^
You really underestimate the importance of shutting the hell up and listening, don't you? No one here knows what you seek to achieve with your blind idiocy nor does anyone even care. You stated what you wanted to see in EBII and were shot down for good reasons. Boo Hoo. You'll get over it.

---

Aw, Teleklos, you booted him already didn't you?
Oh well. Just disregard my last post everyone.

As for Daos

:rtwno: off with his head.

Wow, so after reading that I feel like apologizing on behalf of the EB fan base, some real block heads out there you have to deal with. Also let me add Iberia or/and Bosphorean Kingdoms would be a nice hybrid combination of HA and phalanx and would liven up the scene in the black sea region.

You don't need to apologize for anything, Sir Edward. Depending on what we do decide on, I hope you'll appreciate it.

Only thing I really want to see is an Eastern Celt faction.


More of a what if; if, Nubia at this time had more heavily armored soldiers (say the upper middle and upper classes wore scale and quilted/lino thorax armor) would their probably be a faction there, or, some sort of regional unit?

Russia Almighty: the Boii seem like the perfect solution to your desire for an eastern Celtic faction and everyone's wish for something to stop the Sweboz.

Revised list based on EB Team comments:

Boii

Numidia

Mauretania

Gandhara

Belgae

Pergamon

Arevaci

Bosphoran Kingdom

There are still two more slots that I haven't figured out yet. However, Tellos' very tantalizing comment has me wondering....

Chairman