Printable View
A bit harsh, it was based on what I read in the game, i don't have the time to check every last piece of information so i assumed the EB team, who spent a lot of time and effort making the mod, were more informed than me in this matter and included it for a good reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by lobf
Anyway just my final 2cents, it has been a intersting discussion:2thumbsup:.
Sometimes, I get tired of conquering the world and all...maybe play as a weak but famous faction struggling for its bare existence among surrounding super powers is interesting too, at least for a change.
To be honest, I always want to play as a single Greek city states, such as Athens, Sparta, Corinth, etc.
For example I wish we could get Corinth as a faction starting as Macedonian protectorate...don't know if EB have some plan of province campaign.
I am very much looking forward to a Boii faction which I believe will serve as the axle of Europe, well situated in central Europe with obvious objectives towards the Helvetii and northern Italy they will be a great disabling faction forcing every nation around them to expand more appropriately (or over dead Boii bodies) while more realistically opening up the Celtic lay lines to the eastern Celtic world Tylis and Galatia.
Id love to see a Galatian faction but I can't think of a way to tie their politics to their relatives in Tolosa without flat out incorporating Tolosa into the Galatian faction which would obviously be unhistorical. Either way I suspect that without such a function, the Galatians wouldn't be considered "worldly" enough to be implemented. In a recent game as the Aedui I was one province away from smashing the Arverni and completing my last game objective when suddenly the Arverni acquired Galatia and two full stack armies. Which while hilarious and better then nothing would still be disappointing in EB2. Perhaps this presumably scripted event could occur for the Galatians if a non-Celtic faction captures Tolosa. (If no one has any idea what I’m talking about I can go into more detail about the Volcae Tectosages of Tolosa and their correspondence with the Volcae Tectosages in Galatia)
Other factions id like to see but almost certainly won’t be put in the game
Cimbri
Brigantes
Scordisci
Belloavaci
Veneti
Aravaci
I know next to nothing of the civilizations outside the Celtic nations.
Sacha, you just might be pleasantly surprised! (Is he lying? Only Foot knows! Bwahahaha).
Look, Lobf, I think that you miss the point sometimes. We will certainly provide as comprehensive a historical justification for the British faction* as we can when we are ready to do so, but it is not the case that the original framers of the Casse were mistaken or remiss or crazy: an interpretive direction was taken, one that was well grounded in the historical and archaeological record, and now with the expanded opportunities of the new engine, a slightly different direction is likely to be the result, just as well grounded in exactly the same historical and archaeological record. Try to get this, Lobf: both versions are equally "right" or "wrong" - in fact, that kind of characterization (right, wrong, true, false) is in itself inappropriate: we are interpreting, as best we can, the physical remains of an illiterate culture to fit the limits of the game engine that we have chosen. There are often many equally legitimate ways to interpret the evidence that we have, but ultimately we have to make some choices.
What I am trying to say is that with a faction like the Casse, the best that anyone can ever do is say, "This is how it could have been". Sometimes there are several ways that it could have been and we can only pick one of them. What we can't ever do is say, "This is how it really was", 'cos nobody knows that, even for many of the better documented Greek and Roman factions.
*Not giving anything away here: 'Casse', as I have said, is a very valid choice as a name for this faction, but it is no secret that there are some other possibilities. This is one of those 'multiple ways it could have been' scenarios: we can only give the faction one name even though there are several choices.
what do you think about Nanda Empire in India? :idea2:
Well EB 2 features only the north-western part of India so no Indian factions I guess...Quote:
Originally Posted by Visarion
Kind of hard since the Nanda empire had been gone for almost 50 years by EB's start date.Quote:
Originally Posted by Visarion
If there was a Indian faction it would be the Maurya Empire and that would require the map to be extended much further east, given the limited number of provinces available it isn't likely to happen.
I hope some more Black Sea factions make it in, like maybe Thrace, Colchis (ancient Georgian kingdom) and the Bosporan kingdom. Altough any coastal faction would be nice. :yes:
btw heres a picture of the world in 300 bc, might give you guys a picture of what possible factions might be in.
http://www.worldhistorymaps.info/ima...-Hem_300bc.jpg
I get the feeling that the Bosporan kingdom might be in. Don't read into that too much, I have absolutely zero access to information about this, I just have a weird hunch about them being in, more so than about any other possible factions.Quote:
Originally Posted by hekk
Maybe it's just my wishful thinking, as I think they would be really fun. Interesting starting position, interesting mix of Greek hoplitai and Skythian troops. I think they would be quite fun.
what about a Finno-Ugric faction? :D
Well, Colhhis was a Roman protectorate/province then. Another Georgian Kingdom -Kartli (Caucasian Iberia) would be a good choice for a new faction. It was independent, rival to Armenia and ally to Selevkids.Quote:
Originally Posted by hekk
Bosporan Kingdom as a new faction would be fantastic too!
Colchis was a roman protectorate in 300 or 272 bc?
If I was somebody else I'd probably just ask "Source?" but even with all my respect and kindness I doubt it.
Was not. It was a land of many princes without any common king. It had recently been attacked by Hayasdan, and was currently under the protection of the Iberian king.Quote:
Originally Posted by zurab
Foot
Well, I'd like to know why the Arctic Marine Mammal Hunters aren't a faction. That's just unacceptable.Quote:
Originally Posted by hekk
Not gonna happen I'm afraid. There just isn't all that much information available about the early Finno-Ugric culture or population, and even less so about supposed early Finnish tribes/tribal kingdoms (like Kvenland).Quote:
Originally Posted by Visarion
However, I'd hope there'd be one unit to represent the Finno-Ugrics, in EBI there's four Baltic units but no Finno-Ugrians, tsch! It'd be hilarious to have some spear/axe-woodsman unit "Otsonpojat" or something. :laugh4:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
Right you are, my mistake. Colkhis became province of Rome later.
Did not notice that we talk about 300 bc
I wonder about the Batavians, they were a power in the region and according to the Romans one hell of a warrior. And seeing that they came form the Chatti that isn't that weird. I've heard in this program that when they went to war Batavians would dye their hair red and the Chatti customs of having to kill someone to become a man also still applied for them. They were known to cross rivers in full equipment with their entire force often suprising the enemy and winning the battle. There's also a helmet design which they used which is now used by the Germanic Bodyguard in EB1.
They destroyed a couple of Rome's legions and if it wasn't for a Batavian traitor they might not have been forced to surrender.
Would be great as a faction, small but powerfull, perhaps not good enough to be a faction but definately deserving for an unit like the Chatti, Cherusci, Nervii who all were not your ordinary Germanic soldiers but fought or were armed somewhat different.
Well, although I'm a huge fan of germanic culture, I doubt that there will be more than one germanic faction in EB. All we know about them is from a time much later than 272bc. So the swebozez are already a tiny little bit speculative and it would be hard to make a new germanic faction without simply cloning the Sweboz.
Well Adui and Arverni springs to mind as well as basicly all Hellenic factions, similarity doesn't decide the faction. I'm pretty sure that we will see another faction in the area, perhaps an Belgic faction or the Lugii perhaps, I hope for another Germanic faction but we'll have to see for now.Quote:
Originally Posted by ziegenpeter
the arevaci will most certainly make it to the rooster considering their importance in the iberian peninsula and will make for a more accurate political geo strategical reality of this time period :book:
In that case, could you skip the Jewish kingdom in the overall campaign map,Quote:
Originally Posted by Al-Masri
but make a provincial campaign (a special map) in which the player can play as the Jewish kingdom?
XGM couldn't add all the factions on their overall campaign map, but they wanted the players to be able to play some extra factions, so in addition to the overall campaign map, they have 5 provincial campaign maps (Galatians, Pergamum, Chersonesus, Syracuse, Epirus). These provincial campaign maps are actually as big as the overall map, but the player can only play as one faction, the faction for which the provincial campaign was made for.
So, EB could skip over the ancient Israel faction for the overall campaign map (they could be included in Seleukia, or they could be a rebel province to be contested between the Arche Seleukid and the Ptolemaioi).
However, EB could have a provincial campaign, which is a specially designed campaign map (as big as the overall campaign), where the player can play as a special faction. So for ancient Israel, the start date could be in the year of 166BC, in the middle of the Makabim Revolt.
Few modification would be necessary to the map, except perhaps canceling a few towns from the periphery (like Britain, or the steppes), and adding a few towns in the Levant area (Jerusalem, Samaria, Hebron, Ashkelon, Gaza).
The player would start with perhaps a stack.
And something like 3 or 4 stacks of Seleucids are marching down the coast, in the first turn.
It's just really wonderful to be able to build shrines to Yahweh.
Researching the appearance of the Israelite units of that era shouldn't be very hard at all, there must be entire books available, easily found by asking the Jewish community.
And for every faction that doesn't make the overall campaign, the EB team could make a provincial campaign where the only playable faction is that special faction, like how XGM did it. A peripheral faction (most likely Britain, or Bactria) can be taken away in each of these cases, so that the extra faction can have a slot.
Also, for a faction like the Galatians, maybe the map can be changed, to extend from the Alps to the Levant. That way more towns can be included.
In fact, these provincial campaigns could be released as continual patches (expansions), to keep up the interest in EB.
A bad idea, I rather play world maps with the total limit of factions, if anything it will set people off since EB1 is managing just fine with the word map.
That's why there is a semantic difference between "being cloned" and "being similar".Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
I think 30 awesome factions will be enough to keep me interested. But fan mini-mod ahoy.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePianist
Well if we look at the Cherusci and the Chatti their society and warriors were also different. Similar as comparing Spartan and Syracusian Hoplites in EB.Quote:
Originally Posted by ziegenpeter
We have enough work to do as it is, without creating new factions, new units and new campaigns. We hope that the glorious depth and breadth of EBII will be enough to sate most people who play.Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePianist
Foot
There are tens of factions more worthy to be included than the Maccabean state.
Well but Cherusci and Chatti are already in the Sweboz unit roster and cutting them would leve a hole in the already small roster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
Plus, we have no records about different germanic tribes in 272bc but even for later times, I wouldn't know how to tell them apart by anything else but their name and location. If you have literature about this subject, I'd be greatful if you posted it.
I don't think it makes sense to give a faction slot to the Maccabean Kingdom. As has been stated on the EB1 forums many a time, it doesn't make sense from a gameplay or historical perspective. In terms of gameplay, they would almost certainly be crushed by the AS or Ptolies within the first 10 years, meaning that unless the player is playing them (or the AS or Ptolies), you're never going to even see them. Historically, a Maccabean Kingdom would be content with controlling the Jewish homelands, and would certainly not have any interest in building a huge empire, which is what would happen if they were controlled by the player. They are best represented by strong rebels and an especially rebellious population (which will be much better represented in EB2 due to the "people" buildings and the inclusion of more religious aspects).