The Klingon Empire.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
Printable View
The Klingon Empire.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
Unguessed occultus sig, who has it?Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
That occultus sig is so occultus, that unfortunatly your probably the only one who could've guessed it ( like the Bosporus)Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
Is the Occultus sig Bobbin's sig?
No thats just one of the member sigs, the occultus one I'm talking about is this one currently sported by Moros.
https://img513.imageshack.us/img513/...secret6gi7.jpg
That was really just a fluke and I was way way off the mark concerning the one above.Quote:
Originally Posted by anubis88
I always supected a second Arabian faction. So that makes sense when you consider Moros is the specialist on that. I have no idea which Arabian tribe would be powerful enough to warrant inclusion in EB II though.
Maybe the Minaeans? But that would probably put them to close to the Sabaeans.
And if they include the Nabataeans, the team probably has to revise the Arabian provinces. Because I believe the capital of the Nabatean kingdom was Petra, and I don't know if Bostra was part of their kingdom at the games start. Not that I am an expert of some sorts. Moros could probably give us the answer.Quote:
MINAEANS
The Minaean kingdom (Maʿīn) lasted from the 4th to the 2nd century bc and was predominantly a trading organization that, for the period, monopolized the trade routes. References to Maʿīn occur earlier in Sabaean texts, where they seem to be loosely associated with the ʿĀmir people to the north of the Minaean capital of Qarnaw (now Maʿīn), which is at the eastern end of the Wadi al-Jawf and on the western border of the Ṣayhad sands. The Minaeans had a second town surrounded by impressive and still extant walls at Yathill, a short distance south of Qarnaw; and they had trading establishments at Dedān and in the Qatabānian and Hadramite capitals. The overwhelming majority of Minaean inscriptions come from Qarnaw, Yathill, and Dedān, and there is virtually no evidence of territorial possessions apart from the immediate vicinities of these three centres, which have more the aspect of typical “caravan cities.” A thin scattering of Minaean inscriptions has been found in places just outside Arabia, such as Egypt and the island of Delos, all manifestly resulting from far-flung trading activities; and texts from Qarnaw refer to a number of important points on the caravan routes, such as Yathrib (Medina) and Gaza, and also to interruption of trade by one of the several phases of warfare between Egypt and the Seleucids of Syria. An explicit mention of caravans is perhaps found in the expression mʿn mṣrn, interpreted by the scholar Mahmud Ali Ghul as “the Minaean caravaneers.”
Minaean social structure differed from that of the other three, predominantly agricultural peoples. The latter were federations of communities (often termed by modern scholars “tribes,” though they were not genealogically based) grouped under a leading community, with the nation as a whole designated by the name of the hegemonial community, followed by the phrase “and the [associated] communities.” The Minaeans, however, were subdivided into groups of varying size and importance, some quite small, with none exercising a dominating role over the others. Among the other three peoples the office of “elder” (kabīr) was normally filled by the head of one of the associated communities in a national federation. Among the Minaeans, however, the kabīr was a biennially appointed magistrate controlling one of the trading settlements or, in some cases, invested with authority in all of them. Legislative functions were exercised by the king acting together with a council and representatives of all the Minaean social classes. Minaean inscriptions make no mention of wars undertaken by the king or the state; this suggests that Maʿīn may have enjoyed covenants of safe-conduct with their neighbours along the trade routes.
Your article says they didn't conduct war... That kinda rules them out for a Total War game, doesn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Horatius Flaccus
I think that pretty much explains their chances of factionhood.Quote:
The overwhelming majority of Minaean inscriptions come from Qarnaw, Yathill, and Dedān, and there is virtually no evidence of territorial possessions apart from the immediate vicinities of these three centres, which have more the aspect of typical “caravan cities.”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
Very true. :shame:Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
A year or two ago, Teleklos wrote that there would be two new Punic - culture factions. One is going to be the Massylians. My guess is that the second would be another Numidian faction, but that means little. I also predicted that Epiros would not be in EB1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
Nonetheless, I agree with you. In the Massylian preview the Masaesylians are consistently mentioned as the other strong tribe of Numidia and as major rivals of the Massylians. I get the feeling that it would be difficult to accurately portray the Massylians as a faction without the Massaesylians being a faction as well. Sort of like the Aedui/Arverni situation, where to have one you need the other, otherwise it's a very inaccurate representation of the situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
I on the other hand believe we might get another Arabian faction ( the culture spot is the same right?), probably Nabatea, or a smaller kingdom somwehere around there... There was one post from Moros (master of mischief, i know) on twitter, where he wrote rise swordsmen of the north, and when asked further questions replied in a way that it may have something to do with a new northern arabian faction...Quote:
Originally Posted by WinsingtonIII
The Occultus looks like a bit of a Celtic symbol or Germanic. Though might as well be some Slavic symbol as far as I know.
The thing is, I remember hearing that we simply don't know enough about the early Nabataean military to be able to include them as a faction, and I don't believe Palmyra was powerful enough at EB's start date to warrant inclusion. Plus, I really don't think Massylia can be effectively represented without Massaeylia. He could have been referring to a regional Northern Arabian unit that represents a faction that didn't make it...Quote:
Originally Posted by anubis88
Arabia was home to a number of different people nomad and settled who differed in quite a lot of ways, including thier military. That's why in EBII there'll be much more regional units in Arabia, representing the different ways people fought, clothed, looked,... Basically there'll be some northern units representing the Nabataean, Lihyans, Qedar, ... Others tha represent the more Urban north Arabians such as the Gazans, Dedanites, Bostrans,... There'll be units representing the very much persian influenced east coasters, the camel nomads living in the ma'in deserts, there'll be units representing Sabaeans and Qatabanites,...
For the north we indeed have little material. As our main source are simple graffiti. We can see a few basic unit in there but we have no remains or clear/detailled depictions of equipment. So we'll have to use what we know or would logically be around.
The ma'in as a faction would not really work. Thier highdays are over, they weren't that centralized and all, rather more a loose federation which primary interest was trade and little military tradition.
its a bull! :clown:
(Im referring to Moros' sig).
so it will be a faction that reveres giant bulls! :clown:
oh, yeah, that's very helpful..:clown:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
or is it a camel?! :clown:
[Bangs head on desk] why won't you tell me?
There is something temptingly sanskrit about the curvy bit above the first "c" in occultis. Or is that just the headbanging talking?Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
Love that member banner too.
that just the animal's thigh. I suspect that its either a bull or camel atm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclops
As far as I know the Slavs aren't identified until well into AD years. So no, we won't get a Slavonic faction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phalanx300
Saba shares the Semitic (not Punic, sorry) culture group with Carthage. I guess this would have applied to most coastal Arabs, but Moros could correct me on this. BTW, I doubt the people of Numidia were in any way Semitic, but their ruling class would have absorbed a great deal of the Carthaginian culture in the same way as the Roman Empire would later influence the aristocracy of neighbouring tribes.Quote:
Originally Posted by anubis88
Wasn't there a Slavic unit in EB though? Description said something about them living in marshes and being cannibals.
Is probably more likely to me a Celtic faction, or partly Celtic. Like Celtiberians or Belgae perhaps.
Perhaps EB goes for RTW style, meaning the sig is a bull and it are Celtiberians. :clown:
Yes, the Voinu. Their name tag is that of Slavic light spearmen. The description amends that into being the proto-Slavs, and then mentions it's only speculation. I also don't get the impression we know much of these people, despite their impressive archaeological record. The Scyths seem to me to have a better chance at inclusion.
Weren't the Scythians ruled out?
They were in decline (but so was Epeiros by then).
The Sarmatians were thought more appropriate for the faction slot, since they were stronger.
But now that there are more faction slots...
I'm still guessing a Eastern Arabian faction (around Gerrha or Homna) for Moros' sig though.
Hardly, Epeiros was in control of large parts of Macedonia and Thessaly at the start date and was a major power in greece for many years afterwards.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
What I meant to write was that the Scyths, as unlikely candidate, still have a better chance of inclusion. Sorry for being unclear. I am not sure if they have been ruled out officially, but between the Sarmatians and the Bosporeans it seems unlikely.Quote:
Originally Posted by anubis88
The symbol parts in the occultus signature don't look like a steppe one, in my opinion. Maybe you know more than we do? :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
Yeah, I really doubt that we'll see the Scythians. After the Scythian king Ateas died and was defeated in battle by Phillip II of Macedon in 339 BC, the Scythian empire pretty much crumbled apart. They pretty much got kicked out of the Balkans and the Sarmatians gradually began overwhelming them in the East. By 272 BC I don't think they were very unified and don't really make a good faction choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
Yeah, but the Scyths would be total game breakers, what with their AP lightsabers and force lightning.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
That makes a lot of sense, considering that the Sauros have their Death Star bodyguards:skull:Quote:
Originally Posted by Badass Buddha
Doesn't the occultus simbol look like that ancient indus valley civilization's stamp of an ox?
Unlikely, unless they found a way to get another culture slot and add like 50 provinces...
Maybe a reference to Spain. So Celtiberians :clown:.
LOLQuote:
Yeah, but the Scyths would be total game breakers, what with their AP lightsabers and force lightning.
Scythian fanboys should keep in mind that the Bosphoran Kingdom, though thoroughly Greek, was heavily influenced by Scythian art and military styles.
The Indus civilization, as the name implies, would primarily have been located in the Indus valley, which is on our map, with a slight expansion towards modern Malwa and, possibly, central asia, so they would not need too many new provinces to be included.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
What they would need, however, would be a very big, working time machine...
in 272bc the kingdom of akosha already rulled over most of india except the tamil regions (wich i´m not sure if it included sri lanka or not)
Still waiting for them, you know :sweatdrop:
Keep the good work, guys.
Its gonna be the Arevaci, my druid told me so.
What's the status of Pergamon? Confirmed or ruled out?
Well I am banking strongly on either the Arevaci, the Marcomanni or the Suessiones, if one of those doesn't make the final cast I will eat my torque.
Confirmed and previewed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brennus
I think the first mention of the Marcomanni was during the very late republic, perhaps even empire.... So i would definetly rule them outQuote:
Originally Posted by Brennus
Occultus Faction are picts
Nah, I remember someone ( I think oudysseos) saying that there will be no other factions on Britain. Somewhere in the Pritanoi preview I think.Quote:
Originally Posted by echolot
Picts in 270 BC...? nah...Quote:
Originally Posted by echolot
I hope that was a joke that didn't quite come out right.Quote:
Originally Posted by echolot
Yes I agree it does look like a Pictish carving, most likely a Pictish bull, but....
Could the occultus be a bear, perhaps signifying a germanic tribe? AFAIK the bear was a warrior symbol for them.
That's a good thought, there have been several finds of bear skins from Iron Age Germany where it's thought they were worn as ceremonial robes. The animal was skinned but the claws and paws were retained to allow the skin to be worn, its from the claws that archaeologists know they were being worn.
The front of the symbol certainly has dog like qualities but that "hump" (or it could even be a wing) in the middle and the strange tail don't quite fit with it being a bear. However, it could be a composite of two animals, the other end looks slightly like an elk or a moose (in my opinion).
Moros' occultus sig seems to bear a - at least to me - puzzling stylistic affinity to...
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
...this decorated 'Thraco-scythian' cheek-guard, dating to the 4th Century BC (Oguz Kurgan, Cherson).
A complete speculative hypothesis, I know ... but possibly a hint towards the Bastarnae ;)
Let's hope :yes: .Quote:
Originally Posted by Lvcretivs
There is certainly space in that part of the map. Would be an interesting faction, combining Celtic, Germanic and Steppe Iranian qualities. How many slots are left to confirm?
Six.
So that does mean there are going to be 10 extra factions?
Slots might not equal factions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brennus
bobbin are you suggesting that slots might be used for AI factions instead, perhaps with the Cimbri and Teutones emerging and using the crusades feature to amass a very large force at some point in the game if the right conditions are met? Or is that a load of Casse pony poo I am talking?Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
What could slots be used for then?
Cimbri and Teutones won't emerge. Don't even go there :)... There was a long debate about this over at TWC
Thanks for the warning :)Quote:
Originally Posted by anubis88
Maybe 1 of those slots its the rebel faction?
If not then im pretty much clueless.
No, the rebel faction is already included. The team has hinted that it might reserve one of the faction slots for scripting purposes. However, all factions will be playable.Quote:
Originally Posted by J.R.M
Well, I think Bobbin's commen pretty much confirms that there are going to be another 6 new factions. What he did afterwards was just damage control. :yes:
Then again, the team likes to be as vague as possible.
We do?
Oh I must remember that ;-)
:dizzy2:
How about the Maurya Empire :jester:
On a serious note wasn't there mention that the next faction(s) would be Celtic or Celtic influenced? This would fit with the Arevaci and the Bastarnae (if they are actually being considered). As for the rest of the slots.....
Something to keep in mind is that while faction slots exist, if there are not enough FC's to bring have a faction brought to life, then we may very well leave unused slots open.
Well If we use the logic... who can be these new mistycal factions and what people they present? I IMO the are:
1. Bithynia (Asia Minor -thrakians and greeks, rival to Pont),
2. Caucasian Iberia ( Georgian tribes-kartvelebi, right name is Kartli - enemy#1 for Hayastan)
3. Caucasian Albania ( dagestan-lezgin tribes and some HUNNU tribes, as a Alban-Arran tribes union)
4. Hispanian state - celtberians
5. A German tribe
6. Palmirena (Palmirena, in Syria, before Zenobia)
7. A celtic tribe
8. Spartacus slaves revolt - emerging faction
We not having emerging factions, it wastes a faction slot as you can't play as them.Quote:
Originally Posted by zurab
1. Nah, ruled out I think officially by the team. Besides, you've got Pergamon there. And you'd have to take the Bythinians together with the Galatians to form a meaningful enemy.Quote:
Originally Posted by zurab
2 and 3. One of them could work. Perhaps the Kartali. Although I doubt their expansionism.
4. "State" is a bit of an anachronism, but I think a tribe in Spain (probably Celt-Iberian) will be in.
5. Historical sources are a bit sketchy at best here. Perhaps the Bastarnae would do.
6. Palmyra lacks sources for this time and expansionism. Perhaps Moros will come up with a better candidate near the Arabian Peninsular.
7. Another pure Celtic tribe is out I think (Pritanoi, Aedui, Arverni, Boii), but Celt-Iberians (Arevaci?) are possible, so are Illyro-Celtics (Scordisci), Germano-Celtics (a Belgae tribe),...
8. A joke is always the best way to close.
So Spartacus will be a starting Italian faction in EB II?Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbin
I can't wait the gladiator units, yeaaahh. :kid:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
That would be great but I doubt it as Spartacus revolted in 73 BC if I remember rightQuote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
Somehow I begin to doubt you meant it as a joke... You weren't serious, were you?Quote:
Originally Posted by zurab
Unless you can prove that the situation in Rome in 272 BC automatically leads to a slave called Spartacus leading a revolt in 73 BC they will never be in...
Well actually I meant it as en emerging faction from the begining, then I found out that no emerging factions will be in. In my opinion an emerging Spartacus faction (using Mongol slot) would be great but since devs decided not to use any emerging factions...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
Even if they did use emerging factions there would be no reason whatsoever to include "Spartacus". Unless you make a mod which has historical expansion, all the historical characters at the right time and so on. But that would be history on rails with no choices to be made by the player.Quote:
Originally Posted by zurab
Right now the only things "emerging" are things that are plausible under certain parameters (like the Marian reforms). It would be absolutely absurd to have some dude appearing in Italy in 73 BC, who always is called Spartacus for some reason or the other, whether or not the Italian peninsular is still under Roman control.
Or do you have prove that in 272 BC it was already certain that 200 years later, this would happen; whatever would happen in those 200 ears.
What I would like to see, and I doubt that is possible with the engine, is that the chance of the spawning of rebels increases when you build lots of latifundae or the like.
I think that law penalties already increase rebel spawn, so the latifundiae could be given those penalties.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
Don't they just lower public order?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hannibal Khan the Great
If so then it increases the chance your city revolts. But I believe spawing rebel armies are probably better to represent an army of runaway slaves than a whole city that revolts (that's more of a civil revolt).
IIRC the law penalties also increase brigands, e.t.c. in the countryside.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
The Bastarnae might be a fun idea, considering their strategic location for the game and the mix of cultures usually ascribed to them (as a tribe in writings of authors) and that location (archeologically) and their involvement with Philip of Macedon's war, however I believe their only realistic use in the game would be as an emerging faction à la Mongols, which has been ruled out...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mediolanicus
I hope and am quite confident they won't appear as a faction
actually they're a more reasonable selection than you may think.
What if the Roman player chose to abandon Gladiatorial Games and the related structures and features of society at the start of the campaign? A Spartacus faction wouldn't make a lot of sense then, would it?Quote:
Originally Posted by zurab
Really?^^ Sounds like a conformation of a new faction to me. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by paullus
Still where do you get any credible informations on them?
Ah the excellent but difficult to find monograph: 'A comprehenisve overview of theoretical history and social structures of the East germans and their historical accurate representations in game mechanics' by Prof. Sharon Aedi.
Complete lifesaver that was.