Why expand to America?
Printable View
Why expand to America?
.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steppe Merc
A late period campaign would be fine to begin with Ottomans. The Mongol invasions definitely predate them but it should be kept in mind that they were merely a small princedom, maybe one of the smallest, until the quest into the Balkans started. There's a lot of controversy about the earliest period but IMO the true Ottoman "existence" begins with the conquest of Prusa (Bursa) in 1326.
One of the most noteworthy Ottoman historians, Fuad Köprülü, firmly denies that the Kayı clan to which the house of Osman belonged migrated into Asia Minor flying before the invading Mongols. He places them (Kayı) thither much earlier, about the proposed start date of MTW2. The Ottomans weren't around after 1250's though. A good spawning date might be 1281, the death of Er-Toŋrul and the ascent of Osman...but I digress now. :dizzy2:
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justiciar
It's not so much that I want to play and that I am interested in the faction. It is also the TW community that won't get to experience all the splendours of leading Ottakar's heavy ride smashing the opposition. Or War Wagons fighting off multiple crusades.
Whom would I convince then to actually mod Bohemia?
It debases what exactly? That the Bohemia was part of the HRE? That's what I've been saying, Bohemia was part of the HRE so it doesn't need to be included beyond a rebel faction. In fact it does more to prove my point then yours of including it as a whole faction. It speaks of how the emperor was needed to legitamize the Dukes and crown it's kings. It tells of how the emperors interfered all the time in Bohemian politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLKHERO
http://www.friesian.com/germany.htm
The stem dutchies of the Eastern Frankish kingdom (as the HRE was known before the imperial title permanently settled there).
http://www.friesian.com/perifran.htm#bohemia
It is very good idea to stop arguing. These are my final wordsQuote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I checked some books and sites. In my opinion it doesn't matter how you win one battle the important thing is to gain the victory (although I think there was A' cease fire')- Serbs were stronger and won.
About the Bulgarian 'vassalage'- the Serbs tried to make one of the sons of Michael III (his first wife was Serbian) who was under Serbian influence a Bulgarian tsar but in 1331 Ivan Alexander became tsar and that put the end of the Bulgarian ' vassalage'.
I was surprised by what you said about Andronicus III.
from http://www.fhw.gr/chronos/10/en/p/pb4/pb4b.html
To confront the Serbian danger, therefore, Andronikos III, who had emerged victorious from the internecine conflict, signed a treaty of alliance with the Bulgars (1328). However, before they had had time to act against the Serbs jointly, the Bulgars were defeated by the Serbs at the battle of Velbuzd in 1330. The Byzantines seized the opportunity to take a number of fortresses along the Byzantine-Bulgarian border, as well as the ports of Mesembria and Anchialos. These did not remain long in Byzantine hands, as the Bulgars recaptured the disputed ports and, by a treaty signed in 1332, secured their former borders with the Byzantine Empire.
Well at that time the written info was not enough and that led to the difference in the opinions. Most probable A.III did not help to the bulgarians because he attacked them after that (then the version with the reinforcements- but of course Bulgarians lost many warriors).
After the battle of Velbuzd Bulgaria continued to be important but only in the eastern part of the peninsula (I am sure I said that above) and Ivan Alexander preferred not to fight against the Serbs fo r the western part. FULL STOP.
It was pleasure to have an argument with you Sarmatian.
My suggestions for new factions
Bulgarians - rebel faction (as Burgundy in MTW) in 1080
In high including(1205) Bulgaria, Walachia and Moldavia(look the map ( but the period the map depicts is later- from 1230-1241)- in 1205 under Bulgarian rule were only the three provinces)
In late(1321) - only Bulgaria ( but if possible with Tracia- new province (the lands between the Balkan mountain (or Stara planina) and Constantinople and Galipoli)
Serbia- early, high Serbia province
late province Serbia but with better infrastructure (in 1321 Serbia is not so big )
Genoa - we all know where is it
Aragon
Switzerland as in the original MTW
Burgundy
others
:2thumbsup:
I was talking about the timeframe of the game which does include early renaissance. Portgual did have a major part in the new world and its discovery. The ignorance of some people gives Spain all the credit. The French, Dutch and Portuguese had some role in the expansion to the new world. I know they mostly came in after the game, but the discovery of the new world is in it. Even if you expand three hundred years early the portuguese should be included because of the expansion to the new world. Also they played a key part in the reconquista, one of the most important campaigns of the region. Portugal fused the Muslim and Latin culture's together more than Spain did, and unique Portuguese culture like Fada music and its architecture were born out of this fusion. So Sarmation and SLKHERO I think you should do a little more research and I think these fusions should be credited just as much as Bohemia's.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLKHERO
Sarmatian the Portugeuse did have an important role in the conquest of the new world (which SLKHERO is in the game, but a few hundred years early possibly).
I didn`t say that they didn`t have influence in the conquest and exploration of the new world. I said that they didn`t have any role in the discovering of the new world. Actually, Columbus first came to Portugal seeking help to finance his expedition but he was turned down. Portugal can take credit for giving the world Magellan, for example (although he sailed under the spanish flag), but not for the discovery of the new world.Quote:
Originally Posted by GaugamelaTC
MTW II Forum will be a constructive and hence flame free forum!
Anyone who disagrees are invited to discuss this with me through Private Messages. Anyone who does not PM me understands, and therefore will post accordingly.
Een gewaarschuwd mens telt voor 2.
Losely translated: You're now informed, hence expect no mercy when you are flaming or baiting.
-Mithrandir.
I think some czech faction should be included because, even if there isn`t any other reason, of the mere fact that they make best bears in the
world :2thumbsup:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mithrandir
Furthermore :
for historical discussions, visit the Monastery.
-Mithrandir.
Thats why there is an argument to include Bohemia in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian
I still think it should be an event, and you get the choice to join the hussite rebellion or not, once you join its technically a czech faction with a unique unit.
CA can always raise the limit of factions i think.
I think that would be a fantastic way to incorporate the Bohemians, and would solve a lot of the argument and anger surrounding the issue. Though an influential part of the HRE earlier they were not the only one, but after the Hussite rebellion they became a really big deal. The question, though, would be what if someone else controls Bohemia by then? Do they rebel against whoever controls it? Do you have to control Bohemia as the HRE to switch to the Hussite faction? Some details would have to be ironed out, but I very much like the concept.Quote:
Originally Posted by faisal
Shouldn't be too difficult considering Bohemia is already included in mods for MTW1!Quote:
Originally Posted by SLKHERO
Ajax
New Unit Abilities
A legion of more than 250 new and unique units split over 21 factions, each with their own new special abilities that open up a wealth of intuitive battlefield tactics
Hopefully they will, for modders sakes...Quote:
Originally Posted by faisal
Sack it all! Let there be a minmum of fifty(50) factions. Everyone will be pleased.
Let everyone have what they wish. A fully moddable game is better than one that isn't. CA would be filthy rich if they'd just give up the control. Everyone would play this game. EVERYONE!
diBorgia
.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cesare diBorja
Wishful thinking but a shared one! :yes:
.
Personally, I think that "rebel" faction needs to be reworked.
So that every rebel province would think on its own.
Get it's own one leader (no heir) and standing army.
Be capable of doing intrusions in other provinces.
Be capable of deveploing the province (buildigns, extra units).
That way most of the minor fractions could be nicely implemented by "rebel" faction.
If real world faction hasn't expanded from its original provice, just have it as "part" of rebel faction.
If real world faction had significant expansion from it's original province, and has threatened in some way some of the known 21 factions, then it deserved to be as seperate faction.
.Quote:
Originally Posted by player1
+1 :2thumbsup: Actually I said it before, burried in a long post of mine.
.
That's a brilliant idea! A good way of adding a lot more interest to the game.
I can't see why so many are falling over the faction limit, especially if they use it in context with mods. Many mods are struggling to have a release with just 21 factions. Since M2TW will be more complex and puts an even bigger strain on modellers and textures I wouldn't care if the 21 faction limit remains.
And if the limit is increased I wonder how many are going to complain about the greatly increased waiting times during AI turns. More isn't always better.
Which nations should be included?
What does it matter?
Right now, almost a year (maybe a year, they're not obliged to keep their schedule) before the game is released, I am absolutely certain that If I want finely depicted eastern europe, with it provinces done right, with properly spelled leaders' names, I'll just have to participate in a mod for mtw2.
I am very, very skeptical about CA implementing Balkan nations, Bohemia, Lithuania and more than one Russian state. I just hope they won't make it too hard for us to add them ourselves.
I won't take any part in the discussion "Who's more important and deserves to be included more than all others (combined)".
Bulgaria was a considerable local power and fully deserves to be included, if the Balkans are to be depicted accurately. There's no medieval Balkans without Bulgaria. There's no Balkans at all without Bulgaria anyway.
Serbia was a considerable local power and fully deserves to be included, if the Balkans are to be depicted accurately. There's no medieval Balkans without Serbia. There's no Balkans at all without Serbia anyway.
Lithuania was a considerable local power and fully deserves to be included, if the Baltic region is to be depicted accurately. There's no medieval Baltic region without Lithuania. There's no Balkans at all without Lithuania anyway.
You see what I mean. This is always true, no matter if we're talking about Serbia or Bulgaria or Lithuania. Or Kievan Rus. Or Moskov'y. Or Bohemia. Or any other. To someone playing in the Baltic region Lithuania is all that important but, of course, Bulgaria isn't. And what does he/she care about Bulgaria, this state has no influence in the region he's playing in. And for someone playing in the Balkans it's the other way around.
IMO, it's the game's scope that is messed up. In the middle ages, you hardly ever have military/political actions that span more than one, two neigbouring states from yours. Go three states further and you'll find nobody knows about your "great nation" and couldn't care less about it. That's why I think The map of Medieval Europe should have been split into at least five "regions", of which the player would choose one and work his campaign there. The others would be available for diplomatical actions but you shouldn't be able to go all the way into their territory. So, imagine you had, say Central Europe with 30 factions available... sounds much better, doesn't it? It sounds much better even with 21.
Moderator note: edited to remove ad hominem arguments
Some copy paste errors here. There is Balkans without Lithuania.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anti-hero
Quote:
So if we get 9 more factions what would you like to see included (whether starting factions in 1080 and emerging factions dependent on date or game conditions)? We have ''England, France, Scotland, Holy Roman Empire, Denmark, Spain, Portugal, Milan, Venice, Papal States, Sicily, Poland, Russia, Hungary, Byzantium, The Turks, Egypt, The Moors, The Mongols, The Tumurids, The Aztecs.''
9 more factions... hmm, well there is probably several starting dates, seeing as the Mongols, the Timurids and the Aztecs are in the game. These are the factions I wish will be included (chronologically from most wanted):
Norway
Sweden
Ireland
Lithuania
Novgorod
Wales
Teutonic Knights
Jerusalem (or other crusader state, depending on starting date)
Aragon/Bohemia/Bulgaria/Serbia/Whatever other state I can't think of right now...
Try to see it from another view. More factions means more countries represented in the game, it also means more factions to choose from (hopefully they wont do the silly "lock factions" thing again, forcing us to edit textfiles) and makes the game last longer. Perhaps the biggest bonus is that we will have less of those annoying rebel provinces all over the map.Quote:
I can't see why so many are falling over the faction limit, especially if they use it in context with mods. Many mods are struggling to have a release with just 21 factions. Since M2TW will be more complex and puts an even bigger strain on modellers and textures I wouldn't care if the 21 faction limit remains.
Maybe so, but they could still add for example Norway and Sweden without doing much extra work, giving all three Scandinavian countries the same units, building culture and battle speeches. Only differ in flags and some in character names...Quote:
Personally, I fear there may be a quality-quantity trade-off here. I am all in favour of letting modders have the freedom to create many factions, but I would rather CA concentrate on making a few factions distinctive and fun to play.
Scotland is in? That's great! I missed them so much in MTW. Now to conquer the world with them :D
Aye Scotland ...I am going straight for Spain; building a villa, brew some scotch and make some haggis, set up my armchair on the beach, watch the sunset and wait for the Aztecs to come sailing over the horizon...LOL cause there are no Spanish left to go get them.
Not that I have anything against Spain...they just happen to be where I want my villa.
Heh. I was sure I had avoided it. :wall:Quote:
Originally Posted by player1
Thanks. :)
My thoughts exactly. In BI the rebels are more active but I would like to see even more with rebels attacking. It would be cool to play as the Irish rebels, Welsh rebels, etc. Or just to see the Welsh rebels making periodic border raids into England.Quote:
Personally, I think that "rebel" faction needs to be reworked.
So that every rebel province would think on its own.
Get it's own one leader (no heir) and standing army.
Be capable of doing intrusions in other provinces.
Be capable of deveploing the province (buildigns, extra units).
That way most of the minor fractions could be nicely implemented by "rebel" faction.
If real world faction hasn't expanded from its original provice, just have it as "part" of rebel faction.
If real world faction had significant expansion from it's original province, and has threatened in some way some of the known 21 factions, then it deserved to be as seperate faction.
Playing as a Vassal like a count or duke of a Kingdom would be a neat way to carry over loayalty from BI.
Lastly if CA is going to include America I would like to see the Caribs around the carribean, maybe even a seperate pirate faction. The Mayas, Aztecs, Incas with jungle battles and the Eskimo of the far north with artic battles.
Yes, the mighty eskimo army is approaching... :2thumbsup:Quote:
and the Eskimo of the far north with artic battles.
lol, I think they would be a good addition. They could give the Danes/Vikings somthing to do if they already hold iceland and greenland.Quote:
Yes, the mighty eskimo army is approaching...
Their special units could be artic dogsled chariots and the abomidable snowman. :laugh4:
You must not forget their ever famous tradition of using polar bears as horses. "Charge my brave eskimo knights!" - quote of an unknown eskimo leader, his last words before the bear threw him off his back and ate him...