Actually, the Antigonids had ended up king of Macedon because they lost their heartland in Anatolia. Hellenic royal houses were mobile in the period shortly after Alexander's death.
Printable View
Actually, the Antigonids had ended up king of Macedon because they lost their heartland in Anatolia. Hellenic royal houses were mobile in the period shortly after Alexander's death.
Originally Posted by Ludens:
Actually, the Antigonids had ended up king of Macedon because they lost their heartland in Anatolia. Hellenic royal houses were mobile in the period shortly after Alexander's death.
Because they had an army and everything was fluent then. In our time period the Successor states have stabilized and completely separated. If they lose Macedonia, they lose all their resources and manpower so they can't carve another kingdom.
Why do historians say the kingdoms had stabilized? Because they didn't change their borders as radically as they did before. However, that does not mean it was impossible. I admit though, that is unlikely that the Antigonids would have recovered from the loss of Macedonia, unless they managed to squirrel away their treasury and have a spare army somewhere.
I have kingdoms...now all i have to do is wait...:embarassed:
Wow, the MTW2 engine is going to make this mod look even more awesome. I know it's a ways away, but I can't wait until we get to play it. Personally I don't really care what new factions make it in. ANY new factions will truly take this game to another level and increase the competition accross the map.
Cheers EB!
Looking great guys! I will actually buy Kingdoms when this comes out.
Not to try to quibble on minor points too much, but I'm studying Greek an Roman mythology right now, and I'm just wondering about Athena's shield. Shouldn't it have the Gorgon head on it? I know I am probably the only person to see it/care about it, but I am just wondering why it hasn't got this image on it. I know there are representations where she does not have it (Such as when she is shown springing from Zeus' head), but I would imagine the image with the Gorgon head would be far more common in this period.
Yeah, hate to quibble on stuff, but great work as always! (I feel like such an ungrateful b@$tard, but seriously! I love all of your work and I am just interested)
Geez, CA. Never happy, are you?!
Anyways, it could be that the Gorgon was reserved to the Goddess Athena alone, and not so much to the city.
The symbol of Athena was 'directly' taken from coins IIRC.
@ Hax - Yeah, I'm strange that way
@ Tellos Athenaios - Fair enough, I'm satisfied.
Great work for EB, good to see more Hellenistic factions. :2thumbsup:
Anyway, I have a question. Why is the faction called Pergamon, insteed of Attalid empire/Attalids? Both other great dynastic kingdoms to the east, the Seleucids and the Ptolomaios (sp?) are (since I presume that they haven't been changed in their names to Egypt and Syria since EB 1) named after the ruling dynasty that made them up, and not the geographical centre of the kingdoms. Or have a I missed something here?
excellent choice guys!
just read history of Pergamon and must admit it is imo going to be one of the most facinating factions. if you could find a way to somehow represent the unrest and troubles Galatians caused in Anatolia that'd also be great, adding a lot to both historical realism and gameplay.
im now looking forward to playing as Pergamon the most!
thanks to all involved:thumbsup:
Originally Posted by Gurkhal:
Great work for EB, good to see more Hellenistic factions. :2thumbsup:
Anyway, I have a question. Why is the faction called Pergamon, insteed of Attalid empire/Attalids? Both other great dynastic kingdoms to the east, the Seleucids and the Ptolomaios (sp?) are (since I presume that they haven't been changed in their names to Egypt and Syria since EB 1) named after the ruling dynasty that made them up, and not the geographical centre of the kingdoms. Or have a I missed something here?
The kingdom started as just a city and it was always called the kingdom of Pergamon. No other reason I guess
Originally Posted by :
For exactly the same reason why Makedonia was named Makedonia instead of the Argead Dynasty.
Anyway, I have a question. Why is the faction called Pergamon, insteed of Attalid empire/Attalids? Both other great dynastic kingdoms to the east, the Seleucids and the Ptolomaios (sp?) are (since I presume that they haven't been changed in their names to Egypt and Syria since EB 1) named after the ruling dynasty that made them up, and not the geographical centre of the kingdoms. Or have a I missed something here?
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou:
Didn't we remove their second weapon to be able to keep them in a phalanx formation? It's been a while since I have seen/discussed it, but that *might* be the case. Some weird restriction on the animation that the engine imposes. I may be remembering something else similar though... :grin:
In MTW2 Broken Crescent has the Varangian's able to use both a two handed Axe at first, then switching to a onehanded one and a shield once in combat, they both have seperate EDU entries and it looks like it works pretty good so maybe in EB2 you can have the feature of the hoplitai using both sword and spear without the craziness of RTW's engine.:yes:
Originally Posted by :
Which is?
For exactly the same reason why Makedonia was named Makedonia instead of the Argead Dynasty.
Geographical location ;)
Besides, at the start of EB Attalos hadn't been born.
Originally Posted by :
Except it had positions outside of Makedonia as well. ;)
Geographical location ;)
Originally Posted by Hax:
Antigonid dynasty not Argead dynasty, right? :clown: :clown:
For exactly the same reason why Makedonia was named Makedonia instead of the Argead Dynasty.
Ányway, looks GREAT (except now my Seleukid kings will NEVER be able to conquer AsiA Minor...) But LOVE the whole confusion of Hellas and Near East at the start of campaigns, so one more faction in the middle of the turmoil is just going to add to the fun :)
And I think Pergamum has good chanes of survival. Pontus moves too slowly to be an early threat, Macedon is only a threat if it has been defeated in Greece, and then its a kinda very weak threat ;). And Seleucids aren't strong enough in Sardes and Ipsos to meet the Pergamese in the early years... No no, this is gonna be great:beam:
EDIT: as for name conflict: Calling the Ptolemies Ptolemies, and not Egypt, is sort of required to state, that this is NOT an Egyptian faction BUT a Macedonian one ruling Egypt. If you called them Egyptians, everybody would be thinking Ramses II (as they are in vanilla RTW ;)). As for Seleucids - first its the same - this is not a Syrian faction but a Macedonian. And since the Seleucids at the start of the game cover MUCH MORE than Syria, calling them by any geographical name would be redundant. That some history books (usually the lighter ones, which don't want to bother their readers with foreign names) call the Seleucid empire The Syrians must have something to do with the late Seleucid kingdom, when they were reduced to Syria and Cilicia. But ON THE OTHER HAND the Antigonids are a Macedonian dynasty IN Macedon, so might as well call them Macedonia instead of Antigonids, because they ARE Macedon (the Ptolemies AREN'T Egypt in the same way, as they're a foreign ruling class). Same with Pergamum I guess ;)
Pergamon History Question:
One thing that always confused me about the history of Pergamon was how it ended. Why would a King simply leave the entire fate of his people and kingdom to the Roman Denate, hundred's of Kilometers aways? How do historians explain this?
Just curious.
I always thought it was something like, better to give it to an ally then let it be torn apart by civil war and conquered by an enemy.
Id love to see those hoplites with bump mapping or normal maps, w/e MTW2 uses. As is they look a little too clean :P Good work so far though.. I cant wait :D
[QUOTE=artaxerxes;1937286]Antigonid dynasty not Argead dynasty, right? QUOTE]
in theory, yes, but I imagine the Makedonian Antigonids used propoganda, which claimed that they were related to Alexander or something:dizzy2:
Originally Posted by Ibrahim:
I believe they did. I think they said their family was a distant relative to the family of Philippos II and shared the royal blood.
in theory, yes, but I imagine the Makedonian Antigonids used propoganda, which claimed that they were related to Alexander or something:dizzy2:
In EB1, if you are playing as Makedonia and you have someone of the "Makedonia Argeades" "ethnicity", it means that guy claims to be releated to the old royal family.
With Ptolemaioi and Seleukids, I see the need for family names as faction names, however, calling the kingdom of Pergamon "the Attalids" or the Macedonians "the Argead dynasty" or "the Argeads" would be misleading. Especially if the last FM of that family is killed, or without heirs, and some other guy from another family takes command. And, as someone said, in 272, Attalos was not even born. Calling it the Attalid kingdom then would just seem weird.
Originally Posted by Gurkhal:
As far as I'm aware, the Seleucids weren't called as Kings of Syria, but rather Kings of Asia, I think.
(since I presume that they haven't been changed in their names to Egypt and Syria since EB 1)
When will you reveal another new faction?
Plebs want to know.
When we have another faction to reveal.
What did you expect? 08/08/08?
Foot
That's a good date.
But for eb-freaks like us it's hard to wait.
Originally Posted by Jolt:
The Seleukids had a lot of titles. As far as things went with the other Diadochoi, however, the Seleukids called themselves just "King" - as in the only king.
As far as I'm aware, the Seleucids weren't called as Kings of Syria, but rather Kings of Asia, I think.