Printable View
Having Bakria (and Pathria(sp)) declaring independence via a script would be nice, but 20 years after the game start I'd beat that the eastern provinces of the empire could be overran anyway.
One of the advantages of playing EB is that it increases my knowedge, who are the Yuezhi?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YuezhiQuote:
Originally Posted by alatar
Normally I'm not vouching for Wikipedia as a very reliable source, however their article on the Yuezhi is surprisingly good.
Having Bakria (and Pathria(sp)) declaring independence via a script would be nice, but 20 years after the game start I'd beat that the eastern provinces of the empire could be overran anyway.
One of the advantages of playing EB is that it increases my knowedge, and so I ask who are the Yuezhi?
OK, here is my revised list:
1. Belgae: The most cool units, they seem quite powerful an surely deserve a slot the most.
2. Lugii or Boii: They are just in the right place for stopping the Sweboz.
3. Skythians: They were in the decline, but didn't Makedon also was in the decline? So that's no reason to exclude them. They would be interesting as a slightly hellenized nomad faction.
4. Bosphorion Kingdom: Good place between Skythians and Sarmatians!
5. Erainn (sp): A good counterbalance for the Casse. Isn't it all about the balance of powers?
6. Numidian tribe: To give the Carthies something like a challenge in Africa.
7. The rest would be nice for "really" rebelling factions. I don't know if this would be possible.
After all, I don't think that Kyrene, Pergamon, Syracusae or even Massalia would be a great idea. They are just far too little, and also in already overcrowded areas. The only way I could imagine them would be a "western mediterranean greek confederacy" with cities like Syracusae, Massalia and Emporion. But I guess this would be pretty ahistoric.
Evropa is already overcrowded not Africa or the east!
:furious3: :thumbsdown:Quote:
Originally Posted by K COSSACK
I dont understand! are you angry at what I posted?:dizzy2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Birka Viking
Just a joke...I dont think Europe is overcrowded:balloon2:
OK!
All Germanic invasions could be represented by hordes rather then factions.
One good thing to report is that a .mesh editor is all but finished now so the 3d models can be changed.
Great news, but how about textures (the only modding I can do passably)?
Thats already been cracked. Check out Burrek's Knights and Knaves or WhiteWolf's Byzantine reskin for some good quality texture replacers.:balloon2:Quote:
Originally Posted by alatar
I just had an inspiration. Massilia! Who could resist the combination of Hellenic and Celtic culture. And it was an independent colony who allied itself with Rome.
Huzza, we now have 3 Massilia supporters!
Another Reason I chose Massilia was because I love those Massiloi Hoplitai.
Here's my new revised list
1. Massilia:whip: :yes: :2thumbsup:
2. Pergamon:yes:
3. Syracuse:yes:
4. Cyrenaica:yes:
5. Massyli: Lasted the longest of the 2 Numidian Kingdoms and wasn't destroyed until the Vandal invasion of NA:whip:
6. Massaesyli: Started the reforms for Numidia under Syphax:whip:
7. Bastarnae:
8. Belgae:
9. Chatti: :whip: :yes: :2thumbsup:
10. Galatians: Where kinda of Like a republic
If you can't do one of these factions than this will do then I'd Request the Erain. Please?
Keeps the factions in the game though and it makes some challenging situations. On the other side, fighting the germans in 0.81a is like fighting a permanent horde.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vorian
Yes, indeed.:england: :france: :denmark:Quote:
Originally Posted by Danest
I can't help but feel that the game would benefit from having some a-historical 'factions' (Syracuse/Massilia) that are unplayable, but would allow the player to interact with them.
Under the current system there is no way to represent factions interactions with certain regions like Rome's alliance with Syracuse etc. There is no benefit for the player to leave Syracuse alone as was historical.
To make 'Syracuse' a viable mini-faction it would need an assortment of territories, like Massilia etc. Having it's territories spread out would most likely prevent it from becoming a regional power.....which is good.
I know that making factions unplayable seems against the 'spirit' of EB but perhaps the players experience can be improved by it's implemetation.
Cheers,
Quilts
If we put the time and energy into making new factions for EB2, why not go ahead and make them playable too? We're excited at the possibility of making new family trees, faction histories, descriptions of buildings, traits, etc. for all the new factions it could allow us.
That's what the Lvl 4 MIC represents, no? Here's a list to explain:Quote:
Under the current system there is no way to represent factions interactions with certain regions like Rome's alliance with Syracuse etc.
Level 1: Homeland- Field Native Troops, Pay Taxes, Culturally Identical, governed by your faction
Level 2: Province- Field Most Native Troops, Pay Taxes, Culturally Similar, governed by your faction
Level 3: Subjugated Land- Field Most Local Troops, Pay Some Taxes, Culturally Different, governed by puppet rulers or rulers subject to your government
Level 4: Allied State- Field Local Troops, No taxes, Culturally Independant, totally self-governed
Syracuse was basically a Lvl 4 province of Rome, in game terms.
But they weren't benefiting from solid Roman amicitia in 272. Shortly after our game starts, they did become loyal friends and remained so for half a century, but it's still up in the air a bit in 272.
Make it four, love those Massalian Hoplites. It would be neat to see what other troops a faction that mixes Celtic and Greek culture would have, and giving them a few straight Celtic and Greek units(and maybe those Graeco-Celt spearmen) would save a little on the need to make new units.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fondor_Yards
Dont know how much of a power they were, but how about the Galatians?
Thanks for pointing that out. The problem is that you have to conquer them to make them so. Something that didn't happen. Why can't I enter an alliance with them? Because they are the Rebel faction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Imperator
Well perhaps what's needed is to 'divy up' the rebel faction to incorporate groups acting with the same interests, and can engage in diplomacy.
I know the modders hands are tied regarding the Rebs, but with the extra faction slots we can work on this a little.
Cheers,
Quilts
I'm all for Massilia, but I must be the only one who thinks those holites kind of suck :\...Quote:
Originally Posted by Zim45
:laugh4: Well, I wouldn't say they were great on the battlefield, unless you're a prereform Celt without Aventicos(for the much ebtter Mori Gaesum) in need of some armored infantry. I like them mostly because the idea seems neat, and I like the way they look.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyabedes of Aphrodisias
They are definitely not as good as other hoplites, but then they are cheaper and are IMO one the best lighter infantry out there. In a pinch, setting them on guard mode will allow them to hold basically any part of the line long enough, unless you have completely underestimated the opposition.
I think I'm going to kick in a vote for Syracuse. Maybe they wouldn't last too well as an AI faction, but they look like a lot of fun to play which I think is what really matters.
And they're certainly not that weak in EB1. You've a city of ~10000 with a high growth rate, stone walls, a port slap in the middle of the Mediterranean trade, and Carthage will come after your 7 star general with their medium spearmen. Compare that to Pontos: a couple of thousand people, a ring of sticks, no port, no generals of note, and psycopathic Seleucids with advanced pike phalanxes who want to crush you.
{edit} Also, Syracuse is a name to conjure with. I'd heard of Hannibal's siege of Syracuse before I knew where Syracuse was, it's sort of famous for being famous. Put Syracuse in the game and people will want to play it.
{edit 2} And it's got interesting options in the hands of a good player. Defeat the Carthaginian field army. Go north, take Messina for taxbase and as a fortress against Italy. Take Lillibeo and you have no land frontier with Carthage, maybe they'll make peace. Or do you want to take Corsica and Sardinia before sending the diplomat, since they're weakly held and can build mines? If Carthage won't make peace, how about a raid to sack the capital (and pay for the mines)? Will you take Reggio, to put another bulwark in your eventual defence against Rome? Or will you leave it alone, to divide you and keep the peace? Perhaps you'd prefer to train up spies and try to make it rebel if Rome or Epiros take it. Eventually you'll take Italy, and then you'll be recruiting your pick of all sorts of units to conquer the world.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't TA talk about factions that didn't quite make it in EB? Wasn't Massilia and the Bosporus Kingdom mentioned as almost had beens? I think I recall it being mentioned that each would have started with 2 provinces each and that made them desirable Still my memory isn't that great, perhaps I'm wrong.
Lets not forget that the unit limit is still at 500, the 10 new factions would either have to use a lot of units used by other factions. Have a limited unit set. Or pluck units from already done factions to make the room.
Didn't the team say m2tw doubled the amount of skins/unit, because in M2tw they made it that each unit has two different things?
Looking at screenshots and such, I thnk there's actually 3 per unit...Quote:
Originally Posted by Fondor_Yards
max amount of textures and models has increased a lot. Not sure about the actual number. However the amount of units in the export_descr_unit.txt hasn't, I believe.
Yes, but in M2:TW is the number of models that is limiting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fondor_Yards
I thought there was unlimited amount of models but 500 unit limit still as in RTW?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
:oops: My apologies, I mixed up a couple of things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Krusader
Well, Massilia and Bosporus might be easier factions to do since they'd probably have a handful of unqiue units, but mostly be Hellenistic/Steppe or Hellenistic/Celtic. I could see Massilia have accessing to the common Western Greek units, maybe some mixed culture units, and probably more Gallic units than the other factions could recruit, maybe even the better armored, more professional units. More important is the Goverment 1/2 area. I could see Type 1s for the Greek cities in Gaul and Iberia, with Type 2s over Gaul and maybe Celtiberia. It would definately change the dynamic of Gaul and make for at the very least an interesting "what if" scenario.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdragon
Number of mesh variations is unlimited according to Caliban, you're basically limited to what you can fit on the two textures the model uses. A m2tw size texture uses up 16 times the memory of a rome sized texture though, so go overboard there and you'll have problems.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dyabedes of Aphrodisias
Well that depends on the size of your wallet...Quote:
Originally Posted by Casuir
A 8800GTX will run anything that you can throw on it...for €450 of course... :beam:
Can I ask why the MTW2 engine appears to be preferred over the RTW:BI engine? What does it offer that BI cant?
Better and more varied graphics (no more "clone" units). Slightly improved AI. Multiple unit recruitment from the same settlement per turn. Permanent forts (could be used to represent lesser cities or towns). The ability to mod unbreakable alliances. Economic warfare using merchants to control resources.Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurion Varricus
MTW2 is good. It could have been better had CA concentrated more on the improvement of the AI than just the graphics. Even so it is better than RTW-BI. Not as much as it could have, but enough to make it preferable to BI.
However if there was no room for improvement in MTW2 we wouldn't need the EB team to make it better. Thank god it's not perfect. With the team "tinkering" on it. I have no doubt EB2 will be suberb.
To get the full experience I'm afraid most of us with an older computer will seriously have to consider upgrading. And unfortunately there is no working background script to add the $$, ££ or €€ to your bankaccount. :wall:
Lets not forget the most important part:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Errant
Both the battle and campaignmap AIs are moddable...
I cant imagine what moster AI will the EB team pull out!!! :dizzy2:
I still wish that CA could come up with a Multiplayer campaign. Imagine Historically roleplaying with that. And your enemys would be humans who can adapt to different situations realistically not like the current AI( Though I have to admit M2TW has much better AI then RTW).
I think a Massalian faction would be interesting. I'm most interested in an Eastern Germany/Western Steppe faction. Anyone know of any others farther north than Scythia or Bastarnae?
You guys feel free to talk about it as much as you like. We have decided on some of the factions and will still be deciding on some of the others, but we won't answer any questions about which ones are chosen (so don't try to weasel it out of us :laugh4:) and we won't be giving any hints until you see those first new occultus sig banners coming out. :grin:
If you guys are already working on EB2 does that mean you've abandoned EB? I guess it would make sense, EB is really good as it is already.
Could you give us the number of how many factions are confirmed and how many slots are empty instead of the names?
No, the only thing that is being worked on for EB2 is faction discussion and research (mainly for new factions). All tangible 'work' is for the RTW engine, still.
There are ten new faction slots. Five are probably in. Three more are most likely in. And an additional two are sort of in.
Massagetae.
The decoupling of unit recruitment and wealth in MTW2 will allow for more accurate simulation of the nomad factions. And what could be more fun than invading lands and eating old folk?
Mini-mods.
I'd love to fight the Mauryans. Elephants, rain and disease are three radically different factors that'd add significantly to the variety of the campaign. But I can also understand why the Mauryans simply won't fit into the main EB campaign.
I'm going to be accused of bias here, but the Germans and Hibernians didn’t have significant enough political entities to warrant additional factions on their behalf in this period. Further if such were to be done, it would have to be in a generic sense, which goes against EB’s modes operandi of depicting actual politics, eg. The Aedui confederacy / Arverni Alliance as opposed to an ahistorical generic ‘Gauls’, ‘Northern Gauls’, ‘Southern Gauls’, ‘Gallic Barbarians’, or some other such nomenclature.
True, if further western barbs are to be considered, one could add the Belgae Confederacy under the Suessiones. This would include most of the Belgae and small parts of southern Briton.Quote:
Originally Posted by Imperator
The Boii (‘Strikers’) would also be a good choice with extensive land in southern Germany and northern Italy.
Even the Volcae (‘Wolves’) would add an interesting mix with lands in southern France, Asia Minor (Galati) and all over eastern Europe, though they’d not be easy to depict due to their political structure; tetrachal power sharing in triumvirates (three tribes).
The Celiberian ‘Arevaci Coalition’ would be a good addition in opposition to the Lusitani in Iberia / Spain, though some claim the name too similar to the Arverni.
The Gallic Brigantes would be good in mid-northern Briton.
Numidians would also be welcomed in Africa.
Yup, adding the Boii would certainly liven things up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Imperator
Just my2bob
I've already seen one (was wondering what that was) :beam: so it's OK for you to tell us now ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
Anyway, guys, you were saying that M2 has 1 less max. provinces and same amount for max. diff. units as RTW, but are there any signs that Kingdoms might improve on either statistic?
PS
I think you should make Kingdoms a requirement for EB2, so that you can take advantage of all available features of M2. I mean, let's face it, just about everyone who has RTW has BI, right?
------------------------------------------------------
Also, just out of curiosity, if you wanted to recreate the world in, say, 272 BC totally accurately historically (so including India, Japan, all of Africa [I assume] etc.), with all the provinces that existed and all factions with all units (that you know of, obviously) and alliances on a Total: War skeleton, how many (more) provinces, units and factions would you need?
In other words, what faction etc. caps would be sufficient to fully recreate the world in 272 BC?
Dude are you serious? Do you know how much work would go into answering that question accurately?Quote:
Originally Posted by I Am Herenow
A LOT :book:.
How about we say 2-3 times that currently in EB. Give or take. Off the top of my head. Approximately. Without doing any research. A guesstimate. I'd assume. Sort of. Maybe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Am Herenow
Well I can't speak for everyone, but I never saw the reason to get BI; magical monks, swimming armies, and fire lit battles weren't enticing enough for me to fork over my dollars. These just seemed like eye candy from CA and no real substance or addition to strategy of the game. Though if half of the stuff will work that CA is saying in press releases, I think that EB2 should be built for Kingdoms.
*shrug* I like it - Beserkers are hilarious lolQuote:
Originally Posted by Sir Edward
Also, Hordes and Horde armies was a nice touch
I would go for 100x what we currently have avaliable in EB, and that is a truly bad guestimate. Basically more than any current computer could run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caratacos
Foot
Think of the script... :evilgrin:
What, you didn't even wait till the day was out and you already start complaining?!! Why, it's not unusual for our dev computers to require a full week (!) before everything is loaded up and running... Patience my dear, patience... a good deal of it.
I have a question. Will the Aquitani possibly be represented in the near future
Well we wouldn't tell you if it was, but we might tell you if it wasn't. So it's probably better for us not to say anything. :2thumbsup: We're not giving away what the new factions will be yet guys! C'mon! :laugh4: Aitolia you guys that nabataea'll know what the factions are In di' end. (that's fun, anyone want to try more of those! :laugh4:)
So Aitolia, Nabataea and India will be in? Or will certainly not be in?Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
I certainly never said that. While you may find A Key In interpreting my comments by looking at certain words carefully, that still is no definite answer. We have picked a few already and some more are less conkrete in our minds, but it's hillyriaous to think we'd tell everyone what they are now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus
Illyria too I see... and Krete?
There may be some misleading going on here...
And the Bosporan Kingdom. Celts, Samartians, Hellenes...what's not to love?
Edit: In fact, I think it would be more fun for we non-initiates to make cases for a faction to be included, rather than try to guess whether it will be already. Certainly it'd be a change of pace for the EB staff!
Yes, Sir. I would never think the EB team could be foolish enough to reveal anything about such top secret issues. No way, Sir. :laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
Seriously though, what I squeezed in above has absolutely no correlation to what is going to be in EB2. Just some harmless fun. I'll try not do to it any meroe.
Ooh, the suspense is killing me!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meroe
That is very sly of you TA. I saw Achean.
Keep up the good work you guys, cannot wait until EB2.
RM3
dont know if you already said this but..
India would be really cool to play as:yes:
That would be a change of pace! I'd encourage any of y'all to do that sort of thing, it'll keep TA from puning faction names (I hope) and perhaps educate other forum readers and help us decide which factions to look into!Quote:
Originally Posted by Laundreu
Could we have Eleutheroi and Rebels separate in EB2, so people (like me :D) don't confuse the two?
i.e. Eleutheroi control settlements not owned by any other faction and represent minor kingdoms, tribes etc. and can have their own, normal (but perhaps small) navies. Rebels will take a city when it revolts, be non-aggressive (unlike Eleutheroi), and spawn marauding armies/pirate fleets. Eleutheroi can attack Rebels, everyone is at war with both all the time, and neither faction is listed in the Diplomacy thing.
Sound good?
That is impossible. The slave faction in RTW is unique, and we wouldn't be able to make to versions of it. There is no possibility of doing as you propose. Even if we were, it is highly unlikely we would. It would mean sacrificing a faction slot, which we would rather spend on a proper faction. I don't find it confusing it all, as regards the eleutheroi. A rebellion in EB is not led by a load of rebels, but by the independent elements within a province who wish to throw of foreign rule and rule themselves. They are as much eleutheroi as starting eleutheroi cities.Quote:
Originally Posted by I Am Herenow
Foot
I have a very modest wish:
A faction in nowadays Ireland, I like that area.
And please let them go barefoot!!
I'd be quite surprised if the Goidilic tribes weren't to make it in, so you may get your wish.
Is there a link where i can read what this EB2 will be about?
thx
1.Aitolean league (although would propably be the same as the koinon)
2.Syracuse
3.Massalia (nice exotic choise of greek-celtic units)
4.Spanish faction
5.Numidians
6.Indian faction
Massylia is in the north of Africa, they will barely have Hellenes or Keltoi units, except as mercs.
Some of the new factions are really interesting. I really like the ....... because it makes it really hard for the surrounding factions. Enemies will pour from everywhere, and it will make it a very compelling experience, and strategy/tactics will surely help.
Trust me, EB2 will be really good. :yes:
EB 2 will be EB 1 for M2:TW. That's pretty much all we know about it currently.Quote:
Originally Posted by neoiq5719
Teleklos. BASTA. Aren't you ashamed? I qin understand what you say, but people might not. Besides, this is Europa Barbarorum, not India one. At this rate of mentioning factions, we just might have aria t in our hands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
so if it will be the same , why doing it all over again? the engine is different, the map or what? why go thru this to have the same? EB is just about perfect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
I think there may be a case for giving the Eleutheroi a proper faction slot.
In RTW the AI seems to prioritize Slave faction territories as targets. This leads for instance to the Romani neglecting the Epirotes and going off conquering to the Baltic coast.
If this is still the case in M2TW, then giving the Eleutheroi a faction slot should knock this behavior on the head. It might also make the Eleutheroi more active and interesting.
Another solution might be to add the middle european Boii as a faction.
That wouldn't work as the slave faction slot is remarkably different from any other faction slot. It is outside of the diplomacy section for example. The reason that factions go for the Eleutheroi is because of the diplomacy section in descr_strat, you can change it if you want.Quote:
Originally Posted by Juvenal
Foot
Well because M2TW engine is much superior to RTW. It will let us do things that RTW didnt allow us to do.Quote:
so if it will be the same , why doing it all over again? the engine is different, the map or what? why go thru this to have the same? EB is just about perfect.
If everything goes well EB2 has a chance to be many times better then EB1.
EB1 almost completely exsoustet RTW potential. We pushed RTW as far as it was possible ( and I can bet more then CA thought it was possible ) , but its just not enough.
We think that M2TW will let us represent EB timeframe much more real then RTW. And this is what EB is about.