Printable View
In fairness Zenith, we expect some people to be iffy with some of the choices, however we are hopeful that when the time comes and a release is made, that we will create a modification that shows we were right to include them, afterall alot of our motives for adding particular factions are hidden in our private forums and we can understand confusion when seeing them added without the reasons behind it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenith Darksea
yes ditch volga-bulgaria and maybe ireland but norway, noooooooooooooooooooooo! im not a huge fan of serbia but its better then seville and especially norway! a pleasant surprise would be burgundy,portugal, or bulgaria(though it didnt exist).Quote:
Ideally I'd ditch Ireland and Volga-Bulgaria, and then have Sevilla, Norway and Serbia, but that apparently isn't up for discussion, which is a shame, because Ireland in particular seems to be quite a waste of a faction slot (especially when compared to Serbia and Norway, both of which actually did something, and both of which had fairly cohesive government).
We want to do something different. We're tired of the negelect of certain factions. Norway and Ireland help to make England not become a power house, and have incredibly unique units themselves.
EDIT: Zenith, while you may think that Ireland is a waste of a faction, they were persistently a thorn in the side of England, and a large amount of troops always had to be sent to put them down again. While the Normans initially conquered most of it, in a mere generation they "became" Irish and brought new techniques to Ireland. Now, Shoot Conn a PM if you want the univeristy-thesis-esque epic post on why they are included.
Here's fingers crossed for Anjou:sweatdrop:
I would vote for The Emirate of Sevilla over Norway due its postion on the map, Norway occupies a small corner of Map, and only really affects Denmark and less extent scotland
Sevilla occupies a very stragticly imporant postion and will have a large impact on the moors, spain and Aragon.
Wouldn't the best solution is have all three factions, whatever the thrid one is, and depending on which factions you play which factions is in the game, something similar to whats happening with rtr 7.0?
wtd there no bartix facshun!??!?! u shud ad them cos theys were supur empire one time!!!!
:furious3:
i completely agree. seville would be fun because it would be whipped by the spainish in a second. they norwegians would be destroyed by the danes who have a modern army.Quote:
I would vote for The Emirate of Sevilla over Norway due its postion on the map, Norway occupies a small corner of Map, and only really affects Denmark and less extent scotland
Agreed. Norway didn't really have the same impact on medieval history as Seville had. If there's any Northern faction to be added it's Sweden, although it didn't exist at all in in 1073:clown: Anyway, can't say that I disagree on Norway as an alternative and I won't go into the usual "Add faction X becasue I like them". Looking forward to Faction #3.Quote:
Originally Posted by A living god
Well, Seville did nothing except they were annexed by Almoravids soon... :book:Quote:
Originally Posted by Innocentius
That made me laugh. Really. Great to see people bringing that back up.:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Justiciar
Sevilla would stop Spain, Aragon and the Moors from conquering what therwise be rebel provineces in the south of spain too quickly. If MA is anything like EB it will take along time to defeat even a small faction like Sevilla.
I think factions should be included if they actually survived for a good part of the timeframe of the mod, if Seville only lasted 50 years as was described I don't think they deserve to be put in, it shows that they were quite weak really.
A factions should be included if it was important at the start date.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
How does lasting for only 50 years make it weak? Given that is was surronded enemies, the chirstian kingdom in the north, the moors in the south to have lasted 50 years it must have been farily strong
Well its all really relative. Just because they were in a bad position directly in front of a budding expansionist empire doesnt mean that they were weak. I mean there isnt alot you can do when youre up against an empire thats many times your size. Its the food chain really. Even though Sevilla was a big fish, it had the misfortune of being directly in the way of one of the biggest fish. Theres no doubt that at game start the Almoravids are one of the strongest factions on the map (easily in the top 5, probably in the top 3) and it would still be a few decades before they hit their peak (Although the Almoravids for all their power only lasted about 1 century (nominally 4 generations of kings but really only 3)). In all frankness, Sevilla easily had more stability in its empire and rulers than the Almoravids ever had and had it not been for its unfortunate location at the crossroads of great expansionist empires it would have lasted a considerable length of time. In my opinion, had the Almoravids stayed in north africa, its easy to see an iberian penninsula divided between the four great powers of Castile, Aragon, Portugal, and Sevilla.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
But really thats all just conjecture. The fact is Sevilla only lasted about 50 years. Its your decision to decide whether or not in this particular case the potential is more important than the fact of history. I mean if you look at France at this one instant in history than it really probably wouldnt deserve a faction slot but history says that it turned into a great and powerful nation so its in. On the other hand if you look at the Abbasids, a once incredibly powerful empire but at this instant in history possessing only a small fraction of its former power. History says the Abbasids would simply continue to decline into nonexistence but at this moment in history it still had enough of its former power that its very much within reason to believe it could undergo a major resurrgence and dominate the region once more under the right circumstances.
I personally tend to see history as more of a string of coincidences than the result of any sort of premeditated strategy on the parts of various people but thats just my opinion.
Im not trying to support Sevilla or discredit it. Im just trying to present how tricky gauging a faction's worth can be. Norway is in the exact same boat. History says that Norway never really amounted to anything. ALthough you can say that Norway's fate is more sealed than Sevilla's although even that is arguable. Sevilla clearly had the more fertile socio-economic foundation to really grow and expand into a great powerful empire similar to the Caliphate of Cordoba before it btu as i said before its position placed it in the path of forces larger than itself. Its like a tree sapling that has the potential to turn into a large and solid tree that could stand for centuries but a particularly harsh winter in the first year of its life puts a quick end to it. Norway on the other hand doesnt really have the population or resources at its ready disposal for expansion (unlike Sevilla) but we see that had one or two key battles fallen in Norway's favor (and we all know how large of a role freak chance plays in war) Norway could have established a sprawling empire encompassing Scandanavia and the Birtish Isles and possibly more. You could say that a flip of a coin relegated Norway to a minor and generally forgotten role in history.
At this stage of the game though, none of the factions we're presenting really have much any sound and undeniable historical basis for being included and really what we're looking at is which one exhibited the greatest potential as well as which one contributes more to interesting and dynamic gameplay. Although even when considering this its a very tough decision. I already discussed each candidate's theoretical potential had the die fallen more in their favor so lets take a look at gameplay.
Both factions fill an area of the map that is notoriously full of rebel provinces and therefore they add credibility to those areas and make them more than just quick grabs to dramaticly and unrealisticly increase the power of those factions lucky enough to be neighboring them. Or even worse the regions could turn into complete dead zones where no faction has any real reason incentive to even conquer (obviously this second fear applies more to Norway than Sevilla because as is shown historicaly the southern iberian will no doubt be a heated battleground). Considering this you may say that at least the area of sevilla will be conquered relatively quickly and the region become useful whereas if there was no faction in scandanavia the region could potentially remain neglected and dead the entire game. Having Norway would give vitality to an otherwise dead region while sevilla couldnt even claim to the same (at least not to such a great extent). On the other hand placing a faction like Norway in the middle of a dead region at the edge of the map could be considered a complete waste from a gameplay perspective because Norway would really only interact with a very few other factions, most notably denmark. Its single province in the British Isles almost isnt even worth recognition being so far removed from Norway's power base in scandanavia and being only a single province that once removed by any one of the powers in the area would effectively end and Norwegian presence in the area (as happened historicaly). Sevilla at least has several very unique and differing factions around it that it can interact with freely creating interesting dynamics that could change drasticly from one game to the next. It shared its religion with the Almoravids but it shared a closer culture and world view with the christians allowing it to go either way with its allegiances depending on the circumstances. You can see that this is what actually happened historicaly as Sevilla allied itself with one or the other depending on which power better served its interests at any given moment.
I mean thats just a quick overview of the give and take that makes this decision so difficult and i didnt even touch all the new dynamics and considerations that the third faction brings into the debate. This post grew longer than i had expected it to be but i hope it gives you a glimpse of how much thought and energy went into these faction decisions behind the scenes in our developer forums and we still couldnt even reach a decision on the final faction. If you think this is an easy decision then quite frankly you arent making a very good decision.
I can now understand how hard it is to pick the last faction.
I was quite impressed by Seville as one of the candidates, and felt sure that they would be a good choice. But then Norway came up and I felt the same. Honestly, I find it very difficult to choose.
However, I think I will vote for Norway for a couple of reasons:
1.) I would like northern Europe(Britain, France, Germany, Scandinavia) to be as detailed as possible. No offence to the Eastern European kingdoms, but I feel that having the same old roster of England, Scotland, France, Holy Roman Empire, and Denmark just doesn't do justice to the north of Europe. I would prefer if Aquintaine or Tolouse were represented, but I can well understand that they weren't that important militarily, and with only 31 faction slots they don't deserve a separate faction.
2.) Without Norway, it makes things too easy for the Holy Roman Empire. Having only Denmark in Scandinavia allows the Holy Roman Empire to quickly strike at Jutland and thus effectively defeat the Danes, whereas Norway would help stabilise Scandinvia and prevent any blitzkriegs.
what about burgundy? though it wasnt powerful at the beggining of the game unlike norway it would grow to become a power that would stop imperial expansion into france and vice versa. it would help to fill the emptiness of western europe.Quote:
Without Norway, it makes things too easy for the Holy Roman Empire. Having only Denmark in Scandinavia allows the Holy Roman Empire to quickly strike at Jutland and thus effectively defeat the Danes, whereas Norway would help stabilise Scandinvia and prevent any blitzkriegs.
I think the christian factions in the north and the moors in the south of seville were strong.
Since this is a thread where the non-modders can voice their opinion, here's mine.
If we are going to honour a state/nation/faction with a faction slot I think it should have some kind of obvious importance, if historically it has only lasted a few generations, then I think the slot should be given to a nation that has at least passed the test of time. And there are many who did and are not included or even considered for the vote.
Of course putting another iberian faction in will make gameplay more interesting..in the iberian peninsula, but the same can be said of putting in any other faction anywhere. This game is based on history and I'm sure most of the choices were influenced by how important a power was, to be included as a faction.
A 50-year existence isn't an accomplishment, better represent Seville as a very hard to conquer rebel province (with a barber's guild:beam: ).
The 'what if' argument could also apply to any other state as well that was destroyed by someone else.
This being said, this is not my mod so the decision is not mine, but this is the voting thread so I think I can put in my two cents.
I'm quite curious as to the identity of the last faction.
MA was founded by myself on the premise that while we would create an experience that would teach people about history, it would also be good from a gamers perspective. Ireland was included, for example, to help recreate Willaim's struggles with the other British peoples and hold England up for a while, as France is rather weak at the time and I do believe were excommunicated at that point, so are in a very poor position that a unoccupied Englsih faction could easily exploit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beavis
Factions are chosen not only on historical interest, but how they contribute to the gameplay experience, you could add all 31 of the most important, but it then be dull to play as its too easy in area's to dominate, and too hard in others.
Your opinions are all valid, as long as they are put in the same format as above, spam and abuse won't be listened to and won't survive very long. Factions are ALWAYS a big point of discussion at this stage, after all if your discussing it, it's only because you care enough to do so right?
Rest assured, even if some choices displease you, the team is imo talented enough to eliviate these fears once you get the final product.
Yes, to put it simply, MA is not here to reenact history as it happened. We are working on literally alternative history, I call it "what if"-history. Based on facts but allowing freedom to the player. True historical fiction.
You theory fall in water because Ishbiliya was one of the three strongest Taifas. Anothers were Batalyaws and Sarakusta. All three were Andalusian Taifas plus Majorca which was Slavic. Those were major Taifas.Quote:
Originally Posted by shifty157
and what about Bulgaria??!?!
Hello
Bulgaria deserve to be there more than the half of the factions that will be included.I think you are inteligen and know the facts anyway here I will post some information that will convince you about bulgars/
The Bulgars arrived in the Balkans in the 7th century....
this says many.
also the first europian country that preserve its name you know is Bulgaria
More will tell you the maps from the period of the Second Bulgarian Kingdom
http://www.anamnesis.info/resources/1183_1241.gif
1183 - 1241
http://www.anamnesis.info/resources/1261.gif
1261
http://www.anamnesis.info/resources/1335.gif
1335
http://www.anamnesis.info/resources/1335_1451.gif
14th C just before Ottomans
From 1183 to 1396 a main power in the balcans
it is good that you decied to include Volga Bulgars
Thanks
I'm surprised that I attracted such a response from the devs.
Your product will definitely be more interesting than the vanilla game.
This is my only way to contribute to your mod's development and of course sway the voters.
I think the root of the game is historical importance, secondly gameplay.
For example from a gameplay perspective Denmark and say a faction like Pomerania (which was independant for much of the period ) would have a similar impact on gameplay to the neighbour factions, but Pomerania would never be considered over Denmark because of the latter's greater historical achievement, the same could be said of the Estonians instead of Novgorod, even Wales instead of England.
This said please hurry up with the last faction so we can vote.
we all agree on that!Quote:
This said please hurry up with the last faction so we can vote.
Bulgar, as has been stated before, the factions have been decided upon and they will NOT be changing, it took three months to get to the point we are at now, so we are not going to change our descisions. There are loads of factions that "deserve" a spot, but we are not gifted with unlimited spots OR unlimited staff to supply this. Bulgaria may be important to you, but everybody has their favourites and that sometimes clouds judgement, there were factions I wanted to see BUT after fair arguments meant they didn't make it, just how it goes I am afraid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulgar
yes yes
why dont include USA God Bless Bush,,,
answer me what has done Sevila to change world history somehow??
anyway your problem do what you want .
Sevilla carved out a niche for itself leaving large cultural impacts (flamenco, anyone?)
A a Norwegian, it's fun to see the good work you have done on the presentation, and also that many would like Norway as the 31. faction.
At the moment, however, I'm leaning towards Seville. This is due to their position on the Iberian peninsula, which, at least in MTW, tended to be a very powerfull area. It needs to be a difficult area to conquer, and the addition of Seville seems to accomplish that. Will the Norwegian presence in the Western Isles have the same effect in Brittania? I think not, certainly not to the same extent.
But I will wait for the third option to make my mind up. Perhaps my patriotism will win, after all.
good point.Quote:
Will the Norwegian presence in the Western Isles have the same effect in Brittania? I think not, certainly not to the same extent.
whens the next faction being released cause i thought i saw that it would be released by the end of the week.
The Norwegians did exert influence in the Isles, and made a few attempts at Ireland - as well as retaining a dynastic claim to the Kingship of England.
I'm torn between these two, I must say.
Just as a question of general interest.. wasn't Aragon in a personal union with Navarre at this time? And wasn't Catalonia independant under the Counts of Barcelona? Or was that later? :dizzy2: