arevaci syracuse and meroe
Printable View
arevaci syracuse and meroe
Hi
first i really love your work with europa barborum..
well i saw the factions list for this mod,and i have to say that the lusitanians were the ancestors of the portuguese and not spanish as you refer on you faction list..
if you could just take a look http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lusitanians there.
and yes im portuguese,im not insulting anyone,i also didnt like how the total war franchise treat the portuguese in medieval,and in empire mainly because in that time period (empire) Portugal was a superpower and it wasnt playable in that game ,i dont understan why but there you go..
so i only registered to say that..also viriathus the leader of the lusitanians was born in Viseu a portuguese city not in spain therefore the lusitanians werent spanish..
i say this as a fan of your work and a student of history !
i hope the mooders see this post ,and thank you!
Hello polatucus, welcome to the .Org and to EB ~:wave: .
I am not sure where it says that the Lusitanians are the ancestors of the Spanish rather than Portuguese. The team knows that most Lusitanian territory is in what is now Portugal; although they had a few bits of Spain as well.
Hello Polatucus,
Thank you for your support! Like Ludens I am unaware of where the Lusitanians are stated to be the ancestors of Spain. I reviewed our history section and found only a mention that in addition to their location in what is now modern Portugal, they also controlled parts of modern Spain. However, if any mention is made to them being 'Spanish' I can assure you it is only a reference to the peninsula, not to the modern country. For the most part EB prefers to spend its time in the past, so to speak, and to avoid modern politics. We are more concerned with how ancient peoples regarded any individual tribe or nation than with how modern peoples regard them, as the ancient perspective is what we have to deal with in the text, descriptions and more. The ancient Lusitanians were viewed by outsiders as one of the Iberian Peninsula's tribes, and therefore as Iberians. By other tribes they were viewed as original Iberians, having not become mixed with invading Celtic populations or settling Greeks and Phoenicians.
A similar situation arises with the faction of Taksashila and its existence in what is now modern Pakistan, while its ethnicity is considered to be Indian, not a reference to the modern state. In making the game we have to be aware of how other ancient populations viewed the Taksashilans, how strongly they were connected with other Indian populations, and how much they differed from them by integration with immigrant Persian, Hellenic, and Steppe populations. For more details on how Taksashila fit into ancient Indian society and cultural awareness please see our preview of them.
Tanit
Iron Age Belgians=Modern Belgians, nice and simple.
Kush in 272BC map;
http://uppix.net/f/e/5/ae39d5102873e...a5250f5a0t.jpg
I think it is so appropriate both keeping busy the Ptolemy and an one of the most empty area in map. Also non-Greek Egyptian faction would be nice.
IMO other factions should be Atropatene and Thracia.
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Brennus
Kush/Meroe won't be a faction due to the culture limit of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by CanOmer
No native Egyptian faction as there weren't any by our start date.
Neither was there a Thracia, and the kingdom that commonly gets called that was destroyed by the Galatians just before our start date.
Where did you find this :DQuote:
Originally Posted by CanOmer
Here:Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Blacksmith
http://geacron.com/home-en/?sid=GeaCron757021
I am sorry to say it but you are wrong in most of your statements.Quote:
Originally Posted by polatucos
First of all, if you seriously are studing History, wikipedia is not a recommendable source.
Then as the mod team members already pointed out the Lusitanians also populated several areas of the nowadays Spain (Zamora, Salamanca, Extremadura and even more if as some authors say we can link them with the Vettoni), in fact some sources say that Viriathus could be born in Estrella Mounts (nowadays Zamora, Spain) but really nobody knows where he was actually born, it is all a matter of speculation.
You are mixing nationalism with History, since only the romantic authors of the XIX century and the modern nationalists tried to link the portuguese enthity to the Lusitanians as their proud and independent ancestors; when in fact we could ironically say it would be a wrong stuff, since even in that optic we could say more properly that medieval Portugal -basis of the modern state- was found by gallaecian ancestor tribes (Gallaechians populated north of Durius river where is settled Oporto and Braga, main cities of the first Portuguese entities) and as furthermore independent part of the Kingdom of Galicia and León (being simple: Port of Galaecia = Portucale, Callaeci = Portugal). But anyway this is a modern problem and has nothing to do with history. Lusitanians -whoever they were- actually have few to say to the nowadays portuguese or spanish national States.
Anyway, from your point of view, I don't understand your rage since Lussotanan -that you see as your ancestors- are fully represented in your game as the only faction in Iberia, in a way really good since two of the team members were portuguese, so you could be proud enough and more (and what it is more I never saw in the game that "confusion" you quoted).
When in my honest opinion that I stated in a previous post long time ago and that it was closed, I think they shouldn't be in the mod because of several reasons I pointed out there that I won't explain again, I know it sounds rough but I tried to explain it there. Well, in my theory I think ancient Iberia would be better represented in this mod with two factions, regarded to the indoeuropean and the iberian (pre-indouropean) cultures in the peninsula as the two different Worlds they actually were: in the indoeuropean side I would select a celtiberian one (because of their higher development, panoply, resistence against romans, urbanism, client settlements system, cultural influece and reference for all the indoeuropean Iberia, etc), for example the Arevacii, or better I would vote for a more historically accurate confederacy of Celtiberians (as a previous example of the Khoinon Hellenon in the mod); and finally a Iberian one, here I don't have enough knowledge to say what one, but I would say first Turdetani (recovering inheritances of Tartessos, really high urbanism, warfare and chief states) or the Illergetai-Edetani (quite good oponent for romans and good fortresses, warfare).
Still, you see EB modders and members, as I say there is a nationalism wing in some decissions and here with this Polatucos guy, you have a vivid example of how some people usually know their story, and how some of your members could influence your team to take a wrong decission, in my honest opinion. Decission that after all I respect as player -more in the best mod of Total War of all time-; and even I would ironize: as a galician guy myself that prefer play with Lusitanian close to the gallaechian than the imperialist celtiberians of perfidous Castille-Spain and the Iberians from african ancestors allied with colonizers... just kidding. No, seriously, as historian, I don't agree with the current situation, I am not nationalist as the real nationalist said of me in that thread -pointing out their own faults-, I just tried there to show some historical accuracy and according to the mod mechanism.
PD.
Sorry if I somebody could see this words as somehow disturbing, I don't pretend it, but at this time I thought necessary to enlight some historical and mod facts regarding to this post and that thread, still probably I wrote too much.
It's a long time since I don't read the forum nor play this fantastic mod and I am glad to see the EB2 project is still in works and with good future.
Thanks EB team and keep it high.
The EB team used a list of criteria to decide which factions to include in EB1. I don't know if these criteria have been changed for EB2, but even if they still are the same, the current faction list isn't the only possible outcome. For example, you could argue that the Sarmatians and the Lusotanians never stood a chance, and should be replaced by Syracuse and the Bosporean Kingdom. It depends on which criteria are considered more important, and a number of practical considerations such how information is available and whether there's someone to do the work.
So it isn't helpful to claim that a disagreement over faction choice must be the result of nationalism. The team may have used other criteria than you have, may have had insufficient information, or it may just have been a practical decision. More importantly, such claims make constructive discussion difficult, since they force it away from the decision to include a faction, and onto the person who made that decision.
So please drop the accusations of nationalism. You are free to argue your case, you are free to think the EB team was wrong, as long as you attack the argument rather than the team members or other posters.
I already did it in that thread and I was the first being called nationalist or other things.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
But be sure I won't intend to continue that "ancient" discussion, nor try to defend again my claims about the matter nor any other in this forum. They were enough defended there or tried to, even with the wrong things that were said (me too).
I know, at least in the past, by following the mod team critheria -and as it is understood because of the work and problems intended- the current factions won't be removed. So I claimed there for a celtiberian new faction plus the lusitanian one.
But what it is more, and to show you that I am being just enthusiast for History and accuracy, It is hard to me to say it but I would say today that I would prefer a Turdetani faction or other one reflecting the Iberian-preindoeuropean World of the ancient Peninsula, than a Celtiberian one if that means to have a Lusitanian one too (as this latter is known and not under question). Then we would have both ancient worlds represented -not properly since we would have an Ist Iron Age tribe without urbanism, panoply, etc.. as Indoeuropean representant and with a IInd panoply celtiberian Iron Age one, just a matter of nouns and nuclear settlements after all- but still nearby accurate than having two indoeuropeans and any iberian-mediterranean one in the other side. It is my honest opinion, still after defend the celtiberian faction. Some people that is supporting the Arevacii faction would find this strange, but this is the last I have to say.
Grettings.
PD. Edit:
But well after reading the thread, speaking as a simple player I still agree with the majority that just add a supossed new faction for Iberia depicted with the Arevaci along/plus with the current Lusotanna, it would be the easier, and most confortable situation to balance Iberia gameplay, and probably the happier for all of us.
Just an opinion, the real hardworkers -the EB team- have to balance all the matters, resources and then take decissions, and this is not probably really easy most of times. Because of that, I am sorry if I have been disrespectful sometimes. After all we all fully enjoy your works.
4 Factions to go...
Mmmmhm ...
I would say that Media Atropatene is a contender...
Along with Iberia...
The other two factions I wouldn't know... Im not too educated :P
Then start here! History of the ancient world is very interesting and multi-sided.Quote:
Originally Posted by eddy_purpus
XSamatan
uhhhmmm - I wasn't online that much in the recent weeks, but did somebody noticed the new (as far as I know) occultus-Signature of konny in this thread?!? https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...Mid-Game-Blues -I for myself see some grey wolf-skin or something...
give us good guesses!
I'm pretty sure that's the one from the bosphoran kingdom.
Looks more like a bat....or maybe a bunny rabbit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hotseat_User
Did the Bosphoran Kingdom get previewed already?Quote:
Originally Posted by rickinator9
No, they just mentioned it in one of the other previews
I have suspected this faction for some time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kull
http://www.wolfire.com/lugaru
no comment....Quote:
Originally Posted by Blxz
You don't like indie games? I must admit I have never played this one because it is decidedly weird looking but someone linked it to me only 3 days ago so it's fresh on the mind.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrahim
:laugh4:Quote:
Originally Posted by Blxz
actually, I'm into indie games. I was just left speechless by the fact that anyone would propose a rabbit-based faction :clown:
(in short, my last comment was a joke).
That's an anachonism, the Lugaru kingdom was subdued by the Bartix in 290 Bc.
who in turn were subdued by the Tarbosaurus katanks :clown:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ca Putt
That was 150 BC, way after starting date!
btw: Indie games FTW!
May I interrupt you with some wild guesses? :rolleyes::laugh4:
Hopefully:
- one of the various celtiberian tribes already mentioned
- a second arabian faction
- Kimbri
- an ethiopian faction (as far as my knowledge goes there where quite a few links to certain culture groups that are already in the mod ... :creep: )
Probably:
- Belgae
- Arevaci
- Helvetii, Rhaetii or something similar
- Atropatene
I don't think Kush will be in, due to culture limits IIRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowwalker
I go through dense moments occasionally. Totally missed your meaning that time. =)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrahim