Guys, remember the discussion we had on spamming?
Printable View
Guys, remember the discussion we had on spamming?
It is good and should be practiced and encouraged at every opportunity?
Yeah, I'm done now. But it all started with Sarcasm, so don't look go lynching me just yet.
Now, seeing as Pergamum is a new faction, I think it would be appropriate were it to be included in this thread. Now please, someone tell me the details centered around the "city-state" factions. It sounds so exciting. Whenever it enters my thought, my blood warms and my bladder gets impatient. :beam:
This actually has some interesting implications for what new factions might be in there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Methuselah
The factions will evidently be divided into four different categories, one of them being city-states.
If you think about it, there aren't many factions currently there, that bight be categorizred as such. The only ones I can come up with straight away are Pergamon and the KH (though this is actually more of a leauge of city states that a city-state in itself). Carthage and Rome could possibly be considered city-states, but that seems unlikely.
Unless the former two are the only factions in this category, which also seems unlikely, given that the other socio-political types then will have an average of roughly 9 factions each, this certainly narrows the alternatives down considerably. Some possible city-state factions have also been officialy rejected by the team, such as Kyrene and a division of the KH. This has made me draw the following conclusions:
Some possabilities might be:
1. Syracuse: Has been much debated in the past, and was active during the period. Unfortunately, not too much is known about their military, and their position would be quite difficult to hold, right between the growing empires of Carthage and Rome.
2. Massalia: Seems very unlikely, given that team members have said it probably won't be in. Does fit the criteria for a city-state quite nicely, though.
3. Gandhara: Was Taxila a city-state? I think I read that somewhere, but as I can't remember the source, I somewhat doubt its credability. Anyone care to enlighten me?:beam:
4. Tylis: The Thracian kingdom of the Odrysiai was centered around the city of Tylis. Was definately active during the period, however did never expand far from its original boundries.
5. Bosphoran kingdom (maybe): Centered around Pantikapaion, however uncertain wether they can actually be called a city-state. Is a quite possible candidate for a faction, though.
In the case the KH is a city-state faction, other alternatives are:
6. Aetolian leauge: Active during the period, did temporarily controll large parts of Greece. It was involved in both wars and alliances with Macedonia as well as Rome and the AS.
7. Aechaean Leauge: Also active, and important in greek internal politics of the period. Would require a new province in the Peloponesse, however, and seems overall less likely that the Aetolians.
Anyway, the prospect of different factions having different socio-political configurations has intrigued me quite a lot since their mention in the Gaza-announcement, and hopefully, we will know their true nature before long.
Wow... I'm alread pissing myself in anticipation! :crowngrin:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithridates VI Eupator
We're all in the urinal, but some of us are looking at the stars...Quote:
Originally Posted by Methuselah
I´m sorry to destroy your theory, but as it says in the preview of the Gaza Campaign that you will be introduced to this culture, I would say they actually consider either Ptolemaioi or Arche Seleukeia as city state factions... (Cause I don´t think neither KH nor Pergamon have much to do with Gaza)
How could they possible consider the Arche Seleukeia a city-state faction? `Cause you know, it wasn´t.
After wondering what the EB map would look like, with ten new factions on it I am starting to think I wont be able to have my fun "isolated from the rest of the world until the time is right" campaigns.
Well, I don't think that Ptolemaioi or AS will be city-state factions. Having the two largest empires in the western world posing as city-states makes absolutely no sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuningaz
Also, I haven't gotten any confirmation from the team on this, but I would guess that the factions in the tutorial will not be factions from the real campaign. Especially when one considers that when the EB-campaign starts, Antigonos, apparantly the main adversary in the tutorial, has been dead for 30 years.
Hm you got your point there. I guess we´ll see when EBII is out:yes:
It's much too early to discuss who will be a city-state faction, as we don't know yet what the other 3 socio-politic types will be and how "city-state" will be defined.
I would normally think that city-state means something like Syracuse, a state based on a single polis. But it could also mean a state which is based on the foundation of cities and military colonies, which would count in the AS, the Ptolies and perhaps Rome. In the preview it says that "city-state factions spread their influence and culture into a province through the use of military or trade colonies", so I guess this points to the latter interpretation.
Still, I dare bet my copy of EB... no, I never bet that...umm... well, something very dear to me, that the Arche Seleukeia will never be represented as an city-state in EB. That would just be so ridiculous.
If Athenai was its own faction, sure, city-state. And you know, they spread their power through use of military and trade colonies. But the AS as a city-state... and yeah, I know your second interpretation differs a lot from the classical city-state type, but why then call it city-state?
I don't know. Seriously, it's just an idea. It depends a lot on what the other socio-politic types might be. I'm quite excited about that stuff. I guess another type could be "tribal confederacy", but I have no idea what the other types might be. "City-state" could mean a lot, depending on how the other types are defined.Quote:
Originally Posted by General Appo
I'd bet anything members of the EB team are simply laughing at our presumptions right now... :shame:
I know they want to avoid emergent factions, but bringing back the Yeuzhi would be cool. Make 'em emergent, it'd be fun.
And why not have one or two factions emerge later in the game? It would spice things up a bit.
Personally, I would love to see a Roman clone faction that emerges a few dozen years after the Marian reforms that would simulate a civil war that came with the huge power shift in Rome itself. I'm a Roman civil war fan! (call it a battle between populares and optimates, or the Boni as they are often called.....) But that idea might be too complicated. So yeah.
Why not? I mean, it's been stated before, but I suppose it can't hurt to say it again. A lot of work goes into factions - a lot. We're not going to put so much work into a faction that can't be played, which is what emergent factions are: unplayable.
You guys need to get over it.
I'm sorry, but the Roman Republic (which covers most of our timeperiod was really rather stable, compare that to the Seleucids or Ptolemaioi and you can imagine why the romans would be one of the last factions to be considered for a shadow faction.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cbvani
Foot
Yes, I agree on a historical basis. But I can dream.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
You are wrong. It is possible to have playable emerging factions. It won't happen, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by abou
What about unplayable emerging factions?Quote:
Originally Posted by BozosLiveHere
dull
Foot
Here's my thoughts on possible new factions
1.Numdia
2.Georgia (very probable in my opinion)
3.Boii (central european ones as a nice rival for the sweboz)
4.Belgae
5.Bosphorian Kingdom
6.Pergamon (duh.)
7.Kappadokia (or galatians but probably not both as anatolia is pretty crowded as it is)
8.Atropatene (wouldn't it be nice to see a three way war them the Hay and Georgia for control of the Caucasus)
9.Celtiberians (just to make expanding into iberia even more annoying)
10.Gandhara (just to make expanding into india even more annoying)
Another i thought would be worth a mention is the Massagetae.
Sorry if some of these have been shot down already i haven't had the time to read all 31 pages of this thread:)
I'd LOVE Thrakia. I mean, they deserve a place in the game. Oh, and maybe Illirian pirates? Oh and can u have some sort of emergent faction, since there's mongols and timurids in m2tw. and what about maybe an extra campaign? the extra campaign could just start later with diff boundaries You know like some factions get swallowed up, the reforms are already there for some factions, and some expand, and some shrink.
Literally on this very page we explain that we are not going to have emergent factions, please read the thread before posting or read the FAQ so we don't have to repeat ourselves.
We are not having another campaign startdate, there won't be a late era in EB. This is because the extra work would mean that EBII would not be released until way into the second half of this century.
As for your other suggestions, Illyrian Pirates is not really a plausible faction.
Foot
Well what about the slavs? Like russians, armenians, georgians, lithuanians, belarus, ukraine, and others? might be able to pile them up, and i THINK they existed in that time. oh and if anyone asks, im russian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
AFAIK Slavs are a later ethnicity, similar to Franks, Goths etc. etc. in that their origins are more or less already defined but the ethnicity as we know it didn't come into play until roughly 500 years later?
Armenians and Georgians are not slavs at all. They are from the Caucasus mountains and Anatolia, from an ancient people who had lived there for centuries. The Baltic tribes at this time (which I imagine the slavic culture was descended from) leave very little in the archaelogical record which suggests that they were in any way unified to a level that would allow us to represent them as a political unit.
Foot
then how do you suppose they all speak the russian group of languages and use the cyrillic alphabet? plus, if records of my people (Belorussians) are correct, Minsk existed for over 2500 years! The Kievan Rus didn't come till the vikings, but there were slavs at that time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
Well how do you suppose that many areas in which there used to be spoken predominantly Celtic languages people came to speak some derivative of Latin? Years of cultural assimilation do tend to have a bit of an effect, mind you.