Which of course explains why if you go to China, you'll set networks of paved roads built thousands of years ago, which are still in usable condition today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
Oh wait, you won't, because they don't exist. Dumbass.
Printable View
Which of course explains why if you go to China, you'll set networks of paved roads built thousands of years ago, which are still in usable condition today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
Oh wait, you won't, because they don't exist. Dumbass.
Oh just shut up you dimwit.
:laugh4:
Oh wait, guess the Roman 'Limes' didn't really exist either... :laugh4:
...Jesus, why doesn't he just discredit the Grand Canal of China, or the Great Wall while he's at it? It's all a matter of maintenance, and it's not like all of the Appian Road can be used today, when much of its previous role has been succeeded by the quite recently built Appia Nuova. Ctesiphon was dubbed at one time the greatest city in the world by the Byzantines after it had been further cultivated by emperor Chosroës I, and today all that remains of it is an arch. Yikes, it must be impossible!
http://www.freewebz.com/brotrr/bigrigs-winner.jpg
I'm more of a utilitarian. Something is developed because there is a need for it. It is illogical to have developed advanced road building practices before there was a need for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by fjkwgv43
And if there is a need, anyone can develop them. The Romans were not inherently superior to anyone else--they just had a need which others did not. Anyone with a highly centralized government will produce large public works. Decentralized or tribal governments will not.
No one is saying that the road building techniques would be picked up overnight. The Romans took hundreds of years to develop their techniques. The United States is over 200 years old and still hasn't learned how to build a proper road.
In similar circumstances, anyone would have developed the same techniques. It's just that the Romans had those circumstances and no one else did.
I don't buy into the "Romans are demigods" crap that so many historians shovel out--it's just masturbation, poor scholarship and not supported by objective observation.
You do find ancient paved roads in Mesopotamia that were built by the Babylonians in usable condition. They date from over 3000 years before the Romans built theirs.Quote:
Originally Posted by fjkwgv43
And guess where the evidence points to the Romans getting their irrigation techniques from?
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Quotes TPC:Quote:
A successful empire needed a viable infrastructure, otherwise it would meet failure.
Ain't that the truth. Now, we all need to forward this snippet to our respective governments.
On another point, it is always good to hear from TPC b/c he is rather informative in regards to a part of the world that doesn't have much of a voice otherwise. Thank you sir.
Quotes self :Now, the EB Dev Team may come out and play with us, if we can manage to behave ourselves. I for one would love to hear if they have anything regarding Laevex's original question in the works. But I can understand that they don't want to stop their regular lives or the time that they devote to working on EB (for our enjoyment) to deal with nationalistic ... (fill in your word of choice).Quote:
However, you bring up a valid point, but one that needs to be discussed in seriousness without nationalistic fervor and with an eye towards the game and historical accuracy.
I believe most would agree. Now, can we get back to the question at hand?
Go away, please. Just leave, you're making yourself look increasingly stupid vs people who have degrees, Masters and Phd's.Quote:
Originally Posted by fjkwgv43
You can give the Barbarian culture large and huge cities in RTW after 1.3/1.5 as well, not just in BI.Quote:
That's more of an hardcoded matter though: considering you need to have a settlement plan for the hughe city and ditto palace (model + skin) and accompanying strat map GUI elements. The large city is actually a feature from BI IIRC.
:brood: Good to know.... <_<
I could see an argument for paved roads for the Lusotanna and the Getai.
I can't quote archaeological evidence. However, Iberia was a pretty well developed member of the Mediterranean world, you've got your Greek and Punic influences, a history of great native civilizations such as Tartessos, and the Celtic influences in the north (Aedui and Arverni already have roads) - in fact a lot of scholars think the Lusotanna themselves were Celtic or part Celtic.
Dacia, at least at the time of the Roman invasion, was no tribal backwater and probably had reasonably well developed infrastructure.
It would be logical enough to say these peoples possibly had the capacity.
However, to present a faction as definitely possesing paved roads is quite a claim to make without explicit evidence.
Maybe Saka Rauka should be looked into though, and given an ability to settle (and unlock an enhanced building tree), a la Pahlava.
I love it when TPC gets angry! :laugh4:
I hesitate to stick my head above the parapet in this thread, but...
I'm quite happy to accept that the real world historical Getai, Lusotann et al didn't build paved roads between 272BC and 15AD (or whenever EB ends). I would never dream of gainsaying the EB team about actual history. I fully accept that the historical Getai lacked the economy/science/engineering/infrastructure/desire to build them.
However, after I click that start button I'm not playing actual history, I'm playing alternate history. The historical Getai weren't the sort of group to build paved roads, but then the historical Getai weren't the sort of group to conquer from Massilia to the Bosphorous and from Sparta to the Baltic. The Getai in the alternate history in my game are the sort of group who do that. And it seems to me that any group with that sort of achievement level is a whole different animal than the historical Getai, and the capabilities of the historical Getai are simply not relevant to them.
I think EB (far and away the best full conversion mod I've ever seen for any game) is what RPG designers call "game-metagame incoherent". The gameplay is not consistent with the design goals. The gameplay gives the players the ability to choose their actions and make things happen, but the designers seem to want it to play out in one way, the historical way. [E.g. not only does the Hayasdan reform system harass players into going south (when Asia Minor is a softer and richer target), but the way the governments upgrade in clusters of 3 or four even tells them what order to conquer the provinces. I find myself asking "who's playing this game, me or the devs?"]
Really it would have made more sense for the EB guys to do the mod as a non-interactive flash animation and have it launch a series of custom battles, with no strategic map at all.
Just because a barbarian faction has a large empire doesn't automatically mean that it has to be technologically advanced in building paved roads and huge stone walls.
The Mongol Empire was the largest 'barbarian' empire in history, stretching from China to the Baltic, and never constructed paved roads!
Anyway, it's boring in EB if all the factions have exactly the same capabilities. The Aedui and Arveni are barbarian 'Celtic' factions that can build paved roads, the Getai are a barbarian 'Celtic' faction that can't. Variety makes the game more fun.
If you want paved roads, play the Aedui or the Arveni.
Or wait for your enemies to build paved roads, then take over their provinces.
The Getai weren't Celtic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Titus Marcellus Scato
Either that, or mod the game to suit role-playing reasons.
First of all, the hayasdan reforms is not historical in the sense that it did happen in the real world, which i am sure you know. And it does not harass the player to go south, you can very well go north and conquer the steppes, it is a plausible reform that may have happened if the Armenians conquered Persia. harassing the player is not the word i would use to describe that, it´s more of a reward for the player. harassing and rewarding are two very different things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Morte66
Not stating i know the teams views on this matter, I can only guess, but i believe that a historical 272b.c. is what they are after, after that it´s as you said, a different world, which i am very certain the team knows too. And yes, maybe getai would get paved roads if they conquered the hellas if it would have happened in the real world, but if the was a reform for getai to get paved roads, what about casse? shouldn´t they get paved roads if they conquered rome? and what about saka? And realistically, if the britons conquered the steepes, which may very well happen in the game, shouldn´t they be able to evolve their military and stop using equipment from Britain and start fielding horse archer armies and stop fielding briton armies? (which in one way is really possible, with the regional barracks.) my point is, you can´t really make reforms for every possible event in the game, it is simply impossible.
To recap: I believe the EB teams intention is not to make a mod that follows history after 272 b.c., (then it would be very boring to play macedonia or lusotann among many others who got conquered by the romans) but to make 272.b.c as close to history as possible. Making a endless set of what if reforms for every faction is strictly impossible . the hayasdan reform is a what if reform, and a very fun one to try to achieve at that, but it is not necessary to play the game as hayasdan. but you complain over that one reform and claim the team wants to control how you play the game, and then you go on and suggest more what if reforms to be in the game?:dizzy2:
Not that I want to be a overzealous Fanboy, but a little courtesy towards the team is not really to much to ask is it? (not directed directly at you morty)
on a ligther note, creepy sig you got there Ayce, you can see my IP!!
If Titus is being serious I...
(or wait let me use the words of Ranika)
Good ol' Bartix. Where are the times. O tempora, o mores.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranika
In Bartix they didn't have paved roads. Everyone travelled by transportix beamix.
ombudsman got it right. EB is not about playing history-on-rails, but there is a limit to how many reforms one can add. Apart from the unit and building limits (all but the vanilla reforms are effected by the reform marker buildings), once you start adding speculative features, you also have to determine where to stop. Should the Romans get cataphracts, should all hellenic factions get the reformed pikemen, should the Celts be able to recruit cataphracts, and so on. As it is, the team has decided not to venture far into the speculative history area. Speculative features are only included if factions did reform, or at least made a good attempt to do so.
No, he can't. At least, I don't think this particular sig collects data, it merely bounces it back to the viewer.Quote:
Originally Posted by ombudsman
Actually it only shows the viewer's IP. But I could still find out what your IP is because it's a public Internet ID. You always transmit it when connecting to something.Quote:
Originally Posted by ombudsman
Well, that answers it for me. I appreciate all the input from various viewpoints. As for myself, I'll still likely play the Lusotani next. I may wait for the Romans to advance enough to build paved roads and what not, but the Gauls will probably not be so lucky. Carthage is another story in itself. Regardless, they will all fall!!
In some ways, this will make for a better game. Once you become an accomplished EB player, you begin to look for different "role-playable" challenges. Let's face it, the AI has money and NO brains.
2 more things...
1 - I'm glad that the EB Team has already done the research and thought it through. And done so well. We get to enjoy those many hours of labor. For which I am grateful.
2 - EB Forum-goers get to discuss aspects of the game openly and I don't know about you guys, but I always learn a bit more everytime that happens. For which I am also grateful.
Very nice piece of information you got there, but not entirely correct, at least the part I quoted. As far as Herodotus states, Necho's Canals was initiated by the Egyptian Pharaoh Necho II, with the intention of allowing the large Red Sea fleet he built to operate in the Mediterrenean as well. He just gave up mid-way after over 100,000 workers had died. Darius merely completed what Necho had started. I suppose that canal is what we see in EB, linking the Red Sea.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Persian Cataphract
I think we all need to take a hard look and remember how many times otherwise advanced civilizations have missed inventions that would seem obvious in retrospect. The Aztecs and Mayas, although light-years ahead of Europe in such things as sanitation and to a lesser extent, calendars, never invented the wheel. Similarly, the Europeans took centuries to figure out how to improve their plows. I applaud the EB team for not trying to assess all the possibilities and simply giving us an idea of how it played out. My humble opinion. :yes:
What you see is the restored version by Ptolemy (I? or II? can't recall atm), that is: the original hadn't been looked after too well so a good deal of maintainance was needed to render it usable again. AFAIK that's part of the description; don't nail me on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jolt
Don't forget that, as far as this thread is concerned, the problem is that less technologically advanced countries/factions have absorbed/conquered a technologically superior country without getting any obvious technological beneficts from it. The example you give are from two civilizations who didn't know each other. If the Aztecs hadn't been conquered by the Spanish on arrival, and if there had been commerce rather than war between both countries, I have no doubt that the Aztecs would have begun making the use of the wheel shortly. While the most cited example for the game, paved roads, took much time, effort and skill, much like...lifting weights... Creating a wooden wheel was like lifting a finger, in comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Theodotos I
It sounds like you want something like Empire Earth. Pretty good game that. The Romans get spaceships and the like if they survive into the space age, which I suppose is in the same vein as the Getai developing paved roads.. roughly speaking...Quote:
Originally Posted by Morte66
It's not always that case that a less-advanced conquerer gains technological advances from conquering a more advanced region.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jolt
It happened to the Goths in Italy and Spain after they conquered Rome, but this was largely because they had already converted to Christianity, and the Christian priests had the bulk of the surviving literature of the vanished Roman Empire, and became the teachers of the barbarians.
If the barbarians had not been Christian, and simply slaughtered the Christian priests and burned every book and scroll they could get their hands on, what would they have learned then?
Where are the smilies, then?!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Moros
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
I'm speaking from a purely technical perspective here: At this point cramming another reform into EB1 would be incredibly difficult to do. The file that controls the buildings can only be described as "packed to the gills." Finding space - and getting the changes to work the way we want them to work - is the very definition of diminishing returns.
Indeed blacksnail. We have pushed that file to incredible limits but I don't think there is a whole lot more that can be done with it. I wonder what the CA guys would think if they saw the code now (not the size only, but that plus all the other crazy stuff we've wedged in there). :grin: