Here are a few ideas of mine :
1) Paionian cavalry : a must
2) The "blue" celtiberians guys
3) Indian chariots
4) Aetolian cavalry
What do yout think ?
Printable View
Here are a few ideas of mine :
1) Paionian cavalry : a must
2) The "blue" celtiberians guys
3) Indian chariots
4) Aetolian cavalry
What do yout think ?
I thought you were banned...
Ahh, those blue celtiberian guys. I know exactly what you mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by shub niggurath
The what now?
is the team looking for suggestions on new units? i thought they were running out of unit spots, or mabey that was provinces...
What?Quote:
Originally Posted by shub niggurath
The blueman-group got a time-machine and started breeding?
Anyway, I know I might be jumping to conclusions here, but if there will be a Numidian faction, I read about some elite cavalry employed by Jugurtha called "regii equites", (by the romans, apparantly).
This force was drawn from Jugurtha's Gaetulian allies, and is said to have been one of the most loyal forces of the army, as they, in contrast to most Numidians, did not desert after a defeat.
Such a unit could, for example, be avalible to the Numidians in their southernh provinces, given that they have gone through some sort of reforms, and have a moral bonus, representing their loyalty to the king.
However, all pure speculation.
We didn't start this thread, and we certainly aren't looking for new unit suggestions. If someone comes a long with a well written piece about a unit that we did not know about or did not think was viable we'll listen, discuss and make our decisions. But otherwise this is just like the new factions thread, people letting their imaginations run while they wait for EBII.
Foot
Indeed!
I have no delusions that the EB team would listen to my (from time to time) insane ramblings. However, it is hard to resist the urge to post...
foot, if someone gives a good suggestion, will you tell us if you have included that unit? I really want you to add the thracian infantry with rompahia and shield. not the falxmen or bastarnae or pelatists, just infantry. with bronze armour and phyrigan helmet with face mask. I really miss that in eb 1. The closest that is to it is the Thrakioi Peltastai. I can make a simple picture in paint to show you what i mean. and it is historacly correct.
https://img404.imageshack.us/img404/...lolololgi1.jpg
This isn't some guessing game, we are not going to reward people with previews of units we aren't ready to reveal yet.
As for the unit you mention above, is this what you are looking for:
https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/u..._rhomphaia.gif
They are in EBI you know.
Foot
..and that's when they woke up and noticed it was just a dream...
1. i just wasnt sure of if you had added it allready, so it would be stupid to talking about units that would be added IF you added a thracian faction or a new merchendary. and i understand it is not in eb 1 becouse getai did not use that kind of troops, but ordysay did and they are only elutheroi and no playable.
2. the thraikioi rhomphaiaporoi is heavy infantry with a very long two handed sword and no javelins. What i mean are something more like the thracian pelatist that is in the game, but more heavy, if you know what i mean. i have read much about thracians lately. i will try to find a good picture, maybe from one of the osprey books.
1. Are the ordysay (sp?) you talk about the Ordes? Cos thats who the Getic faction represent. Regardless we still have units representing a people in an area even if they don't appear as a playable faction.
2. I cannot speak on behalf of the historians working in this area, but if you can find information on this unit I'm sure they will be interested to take a look. You'll need something better than osprey however.
Foot
This thread is so funny.
What is actually funny is Ludawg's insisting on old R:TW Vanilla units to be included in EB!
Ludwag: the Thrakioi Peltastai are the unit you are talking about. The only difference is that the EB version has some light armor. I'm guessing that you didn't notice that the Thrakian peltasts actually do use the rhomphaia (i hate infinitely long, unpronouncable greek words for barbarian things), phrygian and attic helmets like you want (some of the peltast models might get the attic in EB2) and the thureos (that's the shield you like).
From your drawing, I assume that you have the Osprey Men-at-Arms book "MAA 360 The Thracians 700 BC - AD 46". However, as Foot alluded to, EB uses more than just Osprey books to design units (though some units bear freakishly close resemblence to some pictures from Osprey). So while the Thrakioi Peltastai don't look exactly like the soldiers from MAA 360, they represent the true warrior type from Thracian history.
Hope that helped explain some things.
Chairman
what kind of units are you talking about? You are talking about the ls-armour? I cant se that thracian infantry is an old vanilla unit. You mean they guys with green hair?Quote:
Originally Posted by Matinius Brutus
foot, how do you want the historcal information to be presented? Do i need to send you a lot of sources, or do i have to collect some information and give a description? And how do i even know if this kind of unit fits in the gameballance out from the historical evidence? you are the the one how decides that.
Collect information and write a description but also give your sources. We'll read it and then we can decide. But we cannot promise anything. So no you don't know if it will fit in the game, but if you want to do some research than you are more than welcome to. But in the end it is up to the historians for that area who will decide.
Foot
I think he is refering to the Odrysians.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
Ludwag: The Thraikioi Peltastai is basically the same, as Chairman stated, with romphaia and all, and as the M2TW engine allows for variance in unit skins, I don't think there will be any problem.
Actually, I believe the Thraikioi Peltastai wield falxes.
I thought falxes were the heavier, two-handed variant... Or maybe It's the other way around.:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
It's the other way around. Rhomphaioi are the big evil two-handed thing. The falx is shorter, and could be wielded with one hand (not for long, but still).
I stand corrected!:beam:
Actually Mithridates is right. Taken from the EB site description for Thraikioi Peltastai: They are expert javelinmen, able to pepper their targets with javelins before charging in with their fearsome rhomphaias.
Then it's probably that the EB website is wrong, in this case.
https://www.europabarbarorum.com/i/u..._rhomphaia.gif
See these longswords, those are rhomphaias.
http://www.gk.ro/sarmizegetusa/ranis...es/falx_02.jpg
If we look at this falx, you notice that it is way shorter in comparison. If you then look at the way the Thraikioi Peltastai wield their weapons, you can see that they are wielding it with one hand. A rhomphaia is longer (and thus heavier), and required two hands. A falx was shorter and could be wielded with one hand.
My new suggestions :
Phrygian heavy cavalary
Bythinian light cavalry
Pisidian slingers
Cilician infantry
Cilician cavalry
Pamphylian light infantry
Machimoi Epilektoi
Nubian Kleruchoi
Libyan Wildmen
Libyan Chariotry
Cyprus Light Phalanx
Ptolemaic Felt Cataphract
Gedrosian Light Infantry
Characene Slinger
Parthian Camel Cataphract
Elamite Camelry
Babylonian Light Phalanx
Caspian Javelinists
Blue Celtiberians
I stand corrected. :smash:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
Edit: and what are blue Celtiberians?
/me dies from the inside.Quote:
Parthian Camel Cataphract
I think that he means Gaesatae with woad from Celtiberia.
I'd prefer:
Dragons
Ogres
....Unicorns.
Herodian of Antioch, book IV, chapter XIV, line 3:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
"Macrinus thus received the office of emperor not so much because of the soldiers' affection and loyalty as from necessity and the urgency of the impending crisis.
While these events were taking place, Artabanus was marching toward the Romans with a huge army, including a strong cavalry contingent and a powerful unit of archers and those mail-clad soldiers who hurl spears from camels."
What sources are you basing this distinction on? I've never heard the falx described or depicted as anything other than a two-handed weapon (unless you want to argue that large sicae were called falxes). The difference between the romphaia and the falx, it seems, was entirely in the shape of the blade (straighter versus strongly curved) and in the primary people who used it (Thracians versus Dacians).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
And from Herodian IV.14.3 - Nisibis, AD 217:Quote:
Herodian of Antioch, book IV, chapter XIV, line 3:
"Macrinus thus received the office of emperor not so much because of the soldiers' affection and loyalty as from necessity and the urgency of the impending crisis.
While these events were taking place, Artabanus was marching toward the Romans with a huge army, including a strong cavalry contingent and a powerful unit of archers and those mail-clad soldiers who hurl spears from camels."
"Meanwhile Artabanus was upon them with his vast and powerful army
composed of many cavalry and an enormous number of archers and
kataphrakts who fought on camels, jabbing with long spears (possible
corrupt text, but the camels and the long spears are secure).
15.2-3:
"The barbarians caused heavy casualties with their rain of arrows and
with the long spears of the kataphraktoi on horses and camels, as the
wounded the Romans with downward thrusts. But the Romans had easily
the better of those who came to close-quarters fighting. And when the
size of the cavalry andthe numbers of the camels began to cause them
troublem they pretended to retreat and then threw down caltrops and
other iron devices with sharp spikes sticking out of them. They were
fatal to the cavalry and the camel-riders as they lay hidden in the
sand, not seen by them. The horses and the camels trod on them and
(this applied particularly to the camels with their tender pads) fell
onto their knees and were lamed, throwing the riders off their backs.
As long as the eastern barbarians are riding on horses or camels they
fight bravely; if they dismount or are thrown they are easily taken
prisoner because they do not resist in close-quarters fighting. And
further, they are hindered from running away (if this were necessary)
by the loose fodls of their clothes hanging around their legs."
Needless to say, both of these mentions postdate the EB timeframe by several centuries.
I am sure you are just joking, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by shub niggurath
So what is the difference between Herodian 4.14.3 and Herodian 4.14.3 ?Quote:
Originally Posted by MeinPanzer
that's from 217AD (the events, not the Author). I believe EB wants info from 272BC-14ADQuote:
Originally Posted by Tollheit
Oops, didn't see that. I keep my citations all together and I just copied the two together.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tollheit
True, but still, I don't think the idea to have Parthian camel cataphracts is stupid enough to make someone "die from the inside".Quote:
Originally Posted by Ibrahim
Oh, if you only knew...Quote:
True, but still, I don't think the idea to have Parthian camel cataphracts is stupid enough to make someone "die from the inside".
It´s not as much dying per say as a sploding from the inside.
And no, I will not tell you what a sploding is. You should know, noob.
It's what happens to me when someone misspells "per se"?
Yeah, sorry. I know it´s really spelled persay. :yes:
Guys, let's stop the arguing now, kay?
We were not arguing, move along.
I am just one of a nit-picky nature.
one of a nit-picky nature on a forum frequented by many for whom English is not a first or even second language? learn some forbearance.
i think we'll not be including cataphract camelry. some of the other suggestions are probably more viable. what about pergamon? what new units shall we give them? galatian kataphraktoi?
I'm curious, what do you make of the Galatian cataphracts in Appian's account of the Seleucid order of battle at Magnesia? I've always taken them to just be heavily-armed (mail-armoured) Galatian cavalry (basically the current Galatian Heavy Cavalry), but I wonder if perhaps you have another interpretation?Quote:
Originally Posted by paullus
Possible Galatian heavy cavalry that adapted eastern horse barding?
The Galatian Heavy Cavalry is what I went with in my version of Magnesia.Quote:
Originally Posted by MeinPanzer
The cataphract is unfortunately... broad. I wonder what TPC would say.
I don't think Paullus was being very serious; seeing his remark about camelry...Quote:
Originally Posted by MeinPanzer
Regardless of whether he was serious or not, I'm just curious what his take on the Galatikoi kataphraktoi of Appian's account is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
He's going to be away for a couple of days, so it might take a while to respond.
Foot
Lemme guess. Another one who got trampled by the FOOT!!!!
Sorry, I´ll try to stop saying that.
Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the term cataphract simply mean "armoured"? I am under the impression that in history it was used for heavy cavalry as well as the completely-armoured cavalry we now associate with cataphracts. Historically, camels weren't used in close combat, and Herodian's text also suggests they skirmished rather than performed charges, so it wouldn't make sense to weigh them down with armour. Most likely their riders wore armour, but not the camels. The same goes for the Galatian cataphracts.
Incidentally, there are little unit slots left and EB2 will include 10 new factions that need unique units as well, so I'll doubt we'll see many new units in EB2 that are not related to those factions. Just posting suggestions is not enough, you'll have to make a good case when, where and why they should be implemented.
AFAIK, Cataphract as in kataphraktos means 'fully covered', whereby 'covered' impicitly requires substitution, e.g. "nees kataphraktoi" (fully decked ships). This is in case of armour, obviously, part of debate: for instance if anyone said "hippeis kataphraktoi" (litt.: fully armoured horsemen) should that suggest the horse was covered also?
Actually, not needing to use the merc trick to recycle models freed a lot of unit slots. I don't know if even most members realize this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
Do you mean to say that the total limit in EBII could be higher than 500? Because if you do, this is news to not only me but also just about every member of these boards that I know of. However, I have heard that the higher model limit will allow EBII to different looking soldiers for each unit as well as maybe more officers per unit. There was another cool trick for the new model limit that I can't remember but it was much less ambitious than what I think you are suggesting.
Chairman
No, he's saying that in EBI we had to waste unit slots on using the merc trick to give certain units to certain factions. This saves about 12 units (if I remember correctly - or something like that number). Spendios, our unit hoarder, has recently freed up a further 7, I think.
Foot
Good man Spendios. Have a manly pat on the back.
The man knows his EDU.
Foot
Yeah, in EB1 for instance; we have one slot 'wasted' on having both a rebel (slave) Ioudaioi Taxeis *and* and a rebel (slave) Peltastai Indohellenikoi.Quote:
Originally Posted by BozosLiveHere
EBII :
Name: Numidian reformed infantry (wip)
Factions: Numidia (and Massaesyli if included) with reforms; as local unit at high MIC level for at least Romani and Qarthadast, maybe some hellenistic nations as well
Equipment: rounded scutum, short gladius-like sword hung from baldric, simple helmet of greek or roman types, short spear, maybe javelin, linothorax of leather or chainmail with leather or cloth pteruges, short tunic and trousers, sandals
AoR: Kirtan, Siga, Ippone, Utica, Kart-Hadast, and Adrumento; possibly Lixus and Sala as well
History: based on the Syphax's infantry trained by Scipio's centurion in the Second Punic war
Sources: Osprey MAA 121 Armies of the Carthaginian Wars 265-146 BC by Terence Wise, pg.14, and Osprey MAA 243 Rome's Enemies (5): The Desert Frontier by David Nicolle, plate A1.
........
I know that this is not enough to completely convince the team to add this unit, though I guess that you may already be considering this unit. Either way, I hope this helps you make a decision. I apologize that my only sources are Osprey, but those are the ones I have on hand, and the 2nd source includes a picture of a Numidian prince with heavy Greek, Carthaginian or Roman influence on armor and weapons that I thought fit the general concept.
Chairman
What is wrong with Osprey books - now that it has been mentioned a few times in this thread - I´ve always thought they were of good enough quality but please enlighten me if I´m mistaken ? Or did you mean you wanted more sources than only Osprey ?
The problem with Osprey books is often one of transparency- most of the time, the books are too short to include extensive citations, and so sometimes some reconstructions or claims, which are often objectionable, cannot be fully investigated. Nicolle's Desert Frontiers title is a prime example of this; his Herodian soldier reconstruction is as fanciful as any vanilla RTW unit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skandinav
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheGlobalizer
I personally like the ideas of Trolls singing black metal songs fighting Dragons, empaling Ogres and rapping Unicorns at the Ragnarök.
......lol o_O
Ok I have an idea for a unit.
Name: Dio Brando. (chaotic evil)
Battle cry: MUDA DA (useless, as in the foe's attak)
spical attak: ZA WARUDO (The World, an assistant Dio can summon to attak the foe.)
Main attak: Time Stop ( by saying "TOKI YO TOMARE" time stops, and by saying "SOSHITE TOKI GA UGOKI DESU" time moves again.)
Final attak: WRYYYYYYYYYYYY (Dio throw a steamroller on the foe while standing on it, then hit the foe while still on the steamroller shouting "MUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDAMUDA" untill the foe is dead, then Dio finally burst into laughter and screems "WRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!"
Oh, and he can also throw knifes.
Here is the reference in its entirety:Quote:
Originally Posted by chairman
All that tells us is that they were organized "almost" like Romans and that they had at least one success in battle; it tells us nothing about equipment. Livy mentions later that Massanissa brought 6,000 foot to Zama, but it's not clear if these guys were among them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Titus Livius
Also, Osprey are limited by their format. Their goal is to give a quick overview of the subject in a limited number of pages, so there is little space for details or to discuss the uncertainties and contradictions that plague classical military history. In addition, popular history can lag quite a bit behind the real thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skandinav
Of course it was only quality as opposed to format or function that I questioned, never should a comparison be made on different terms.
But thank you for some clarification on what was meant ( I have a few Osprey books on my shelves and couldn´t agree more ) as I clearly mistook the resentment, or caution rather, as founded in something less central than the obvious.
Hey MP,
Sorry, I was away for a few days, and having returned, forgot all about this thread. I've generally assumed that Appian made a mistake calling them Galatians. Don't they overlap with the generic "kataphraktoi" in Livy? The contingents of Galatians would have been stationed right next to them in the battle line, so perhaps Appian messed up. I know its usually translated "mail clad" and my interpretation is that its either 1) an error, and should just read "kataphraktoi" or 2) a reference to Galatian cav wearing heavy armor: breastplates, chain mail, and the like. I prefer 1), but I'm not gonna call someone a fool who thinks that we should give greater credence to Appian's wording.
well...wiki is worse than osprey...sure it gives a better overwiev but since nearly any1 can go and edit it's not too trustworthy...and leviathan..I really hope that wasn't supposed to be serious... and I continue to wonder when the next suggestion for ''blue cetiberian'' will come :laugh4: still confusing me thought
That Livy states that Statorius "taught them in formation" and "to follow standards and keep their ranks" seems to imply that it was not merely light infantry, but some sort of heavier troops. The fact that the Crathaginians were beaten in a battle "in formal array on level ground" also seems to point to this conclusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Atilius
That they fortified camps etc. also implies that the force was romanized in its tactics and orgainzation.
But to what extent they carried roman-ish equipment can not be derived from the text though. They might as well have carried a spear and aspis, instead of gladius and scutum, however, I would guess that they wore some kind of armour, of a better type that the hardened-leather that, for instance, the mauri wore. Helmets also seem quite likely.
The bottom line being; some form of armoured melee line-infantry (though quite posibly carrying javelins), arranged in, at least to some extent, coherent formations.
I was trying to tally the number of free unit slots so far, in the quote above Foot has given 12 and 7 making 19 new unit slots for 10 new factions so far.Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
I just going through the EDU and searched for the highest number listed for the unit slots and got to 548. I was confused by this because I thought the max # of unit slots was 500. For some reason I also recall reading somewhere that stated EB uses 460 slots which would make the count 40+12+7=59 new units slots for ten new factions or just under 6 specific units a faction.
Could someone clarify what the max is for the EDU?
500. It has always been 500, and always will be. Do not believe those putrid liars who would tell you otherwise. They lie.
Foot
Ok, please don't flame me for this, but,when you guys have released EB2, if there is 1 unit slot left free (i doubt it but still) you guys should put a totally over-the-top unit like Unicorn Cataphracts or Flaming Elephants
*runs away*
There won't be any extra unit slots left.
Foot
How about Bartix Elephant driven ninja chariot riders? I read that in polybius they were employed by Antiochus at Magnesia, for the paltrysum of 10000000 mnaiQuote:
Originally Posted by Majd il-Romani
Now that we have some serious unit proposals, how about you guys type in some spam?
Why are units numbered up to 548 then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Foot
Okay:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcasm
An Essay upon Unicorns and their history by General Appo
Chapter 1: Proof of Unicorns existance and history
How about unicorns? I seriously think Unicorns are underrepresentated in modern games, even in ones dealing particulary with supposedly mythological creatures. For example, the computer game Age of Empire: Age of Mythology included many supposedly mythological creatures but left out the unicorns. Some might argue that this is because unicorns had not yet appeared in mainstream mythology, however, many Greek historians wrote of their existence, particulary in the Indus Valley, where images of what might be a unicorn has also appeared on early seals.
By medieval time the unicorn had grown more and more accepted into European mythology, possibly becasue of biblical and ancient sources frequently mentioning it, even though contacts with the Indus Valley where this wonderful creature lived was scarce. Marco Polo himself wrote of what might have been an unicorn, even though some people have claimed he was describing an rhinoceros. Even the great Leonardo Da Vince wrote of the unicorn, and far distant nations such as Denmark used unicorn symbols such as it´s trademark horn.
Now, during ETW timeperiod (1700AD-1800AD) European contact with the Indus Valleys was constantly increasing, as trade posts were set up in India and the nearby area. Surely wealthy Europeans interested in the stories of unicorns would have organised parties to search for these wonderful beasts, and though some claim that this did never occur and that unicorns do not exist, newly found evidence exists that proves the contrary. Just look at this painting (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...PalFarnese.jpg) from 1602, it clearly indicates Europeans had encountered unicorns already at that early age, perhaps brought home from India by such explorers as Vasco Da Gama.
In fact there is some indication that the great Timur the Lame had several unicorns in his entourage. In 1398 Timur invaded India, and he sacked many towns and cities, including the great city of Delhi. During this campaign his army allegedly encountered a small herd of unicorns shortly after crossing the Indus River, and Timur naturally intrigued by these creatures brought several of them with him for the rest of his campaigns. when Timur died the unicorns passed to his third son Miran Sha, who was however killed shortly after at the battle of Sardrud in 1408 by the Kara Koyunlu, a Turkic tribal confederation that ruled much of Armenia and Iraq during this period. Their great general Qara Yusuf was after the battle presented with the unicorns, and he to keept them with him during many campaigns. When Qara Yusuf died the small herd passed to his son Qara Iskander.
However Iskander did not relish the unicorns as much as their previous owners had, and so keept poor watch over them. And so during the Ak Koyunlu invasion around 1420 the unicorns were captured by the Ak Koyunlu, and even though they were ultimately defeated they brought the small herd back to their homeland. The herd long stayed with the Ak Koyunlu and passed on from ruler to ruler, but in 1464 they were hard pressed by the Ottoman Empire, and so requested aid from it´s greatest enemy, the Serene Republic of Venice. In an attempt to gain their good faith the present ruler Uzun Hassan gifted two young unicorns to the Doge of Venice.
As anyone know unicorns seldom mate but live for many hundreds of years, and take a long time to age. This was indeed a wonderful gift, which inly increased the Ak Koyunlu´s outrage when Venice´s aid never materialised. Anyway, the uncorns stayed in Venice for some time, were they were the target of much wonder and affection both from the citizens of Venice and the foreign dignitaries privilieged enough to be allowed to see them. In 1509 though, Venice was crushingly defeated at the battle of Agnadello, by an alliance led by Pope Julius II. Julius had seen the unicorns several years ago in Venice and so demanded them as part of his treaty with Venice. With no choice, Venice ceaded the two still not fully grown unicorns to Julius, who keept them at his court in Rome, where they passed on to several Popes. It was during the reign of Pope Clement VIII that the above posted painting was made, clearly demonstrating the existence of a not fully grown unicorn at Rome at that time. I will explain more tommorow about the nature of unicorns and the conspiracy to keep unicorns a purely mythological creature, but now I must have my beauty-sleep.
Chapter 2: The Nature and later history of Unicorns
Firstly, I do not unerstand why anyone would joke about such a serious matter as unicorns, I strongly believe that unicorns to exist, and I intend to attempt to convince you of it as well. Secondly, why doesn´t that picture prove anything? When someone finds a cavepainting or mosaic from ancient Rome or Greece it is considered important historical material that strongly indicates the existence of whatever the painting or mosaic depicts, why would it not be the same with later work of arts? It´s all part of the conspiracy I intend to reveal, possibly in a later post.
Now, to the nature of unicorns. A unicorns is as far as looks go simply a horse with a horn potruding from it´s forehead, though unicorns do tend to be extraordinarily beautiful creatures, displaying a natural grace and elegance unknown to horses. Unicorns seldom mate, and when they do it takes an extremely long time for the one baby to grow into a mature unicorns, often as long as 300 years. In return, unicorns have a very long lifespan, able to live for as long as 2000 years, and in extreme cases even longer. Though a unicorns can be slain by a human or animal, it is exccedingly rare, both as unicorns have an incredibly ability to quickly heal any wounds inflicted upon them, and because any creature who approaches a unicorn with the intent to hurt it will be overwhelmed by the unicorns beauty, and will be unable to harm such a beautiful creature.
The unicorn is a naturally docile creature, but when its infants are in danger it will drive off the assaulter by attempting to impale the assaulter on its sharp horn. Because of the unicorns impressive speed and agility, it almost always succeed in this task, instantly killing the assaulter. Unicorns are vegetarian creatures, eating only grass and leaves, refusing to even touch a dead animal. Unicorns are also quite intelligent creatures, often succeeding in avoiding traps and galantly passing any test or hinder in its way, though sometimes it makes use of its incredible reaction speed and jumping ability.
The unicorns have lived in the Indus Valley for many millenias, as has already been menioned. There the climate and nature was appropiate to all their needs, and they thrived there, creating several seperate herds of unicorns, each consisting of about 20 unicorns. At most there appears to have been 30 to 40 of these herds in existence, so about 700 unicorns at their peak.
The native inhabitants of the Indus Valley where aware of the unicorns existence, though they did not often show themselves to the inhabitants, being naturally catious. When the inhabitants spoke to outsiders of these creatures they were often thought of as liers, and even when they were believed the creature appeared more as a mystic creature from ancient legends then an actual living animal. During the Mauryan Empire and the rule of the Indo-Greeks, the unicorns went into hiding, and were seldom spotted by any humans except a few natives which had gained their trust. During this time they were pressed to find food without exposing themselves to human eyes, and so fewer and fewer new unicorns were born. The number of unicorns begun to slowly decline, until by around 1000 AD it was down to around 300 specimens. During this longperiod not much is known about the unicorns, but they appear to have retreated to the most seclusive areas of the Indus Valley, where they lived their long lifes in peace. As I have already mentioned, a herd of unicorns was taken by the army of Timur the Lame during his invasion of India in 1398, though it is unclear how the unicorns were captured.
After Timur´s departure the unicorns were pressed even harder, as the population became ever greater, and no new unicorns (expect the ones taken by Timur´s army) had been borned for over a millenia. The very last unicorns in the Indus Valley is supposed to have perished sometime during the early 19th century. The unicorns take by Timur the Lame however persisted in Rome, but there conditions were about to change dramatically.
During the reign of Pope Pius VI (1775-99) a member of the Freemasons society allegedly stole the two unicorns and brought them to a Freemason lodge in Bretagne, likely to study the nature of these incredible creatures, something the Popes would never allow them to do. Pius does not seem to have cared much for the theft, but his succesor Leo XII certainly did. During his reign an extensive search for the unicorns was begun, and many Freemasons were hunted down and persecuted, but the unicorns were not found, for under great pressure from the Pope´s lackeys the unicorns had been taken to America, and the thriving city of Philadelphia. What exactly happened next I will hopefully explain in an later post, but now I´m afraid I must... do something else. Till next time.
Chapter 3: The late history of the Unicorns
Anyway, I´m tired so I´ll just give a short account of what happened after the unicorns had been taken to Philadelphia. the Freemasons were curious as to nature of the unicorns long life-span, and so did some experiments. However the unicorns were stolen by Darwin´s lackeys who tried to drown them in the Hudson River but fled when one of them was shoot by an rabbit that accidentally triggered an abondonded rifle left there by American Vice President William A. Wheeler, 19th Vice President of the United States of America, District Attorney for Franklin County, Attendant to the University of Vermont and reknown for his honesty, for reasons better left untold of, at least in this post.
Anyway, the unicorns fleed to Mexico by train where they took up living around the Sad Hill Cemetery living of rotten oranges left there by various friars. After many decades they were found by the CIA who are now making horrible evil terribly experiments on them to determine the truth of their origins.
General Appo. 27th May, 2008.
Maybe because some numbers are not used ? ~:handball:Quote:
Originally Posted by a completely inoffensive name
Can someone give me an accurate number of how many unit slots are actually used?Quote:
Originally Posted by Spendios
O(1).