Countdown to Open Beta - Eleutheroi

Greetings Europa Barbarorum fans!

Yes, the preview is late. But hey, it’s here. And it’s hot. Don’t sit inside waiting for the preview, go out, frolic in the fields, chase some girls!

Okay, enough excuses. Personal reasons as well as some complications at school caused the delay. I apologize dearly for that and pledge myself to make the deadline this week.

Internally, our closed beta testers, modelers, skinners and historians are enjoying the fruit of our work culminated in the newest internal release, with a lot of new features. Be patient, the open beta is coming closer to your PC every minute there’s an EB member online!

A while ago, the EB forum at the Trivium boards went online. Finally there was a platform where our closed beta-testers could freely discuss the problems and quirks of our latest internal build. This helps efficiency and developing speed. What does that relate to you? You’re right – it means you get your beta quicker, folks!

This week, the preview is a bit different. I’m not going to tell you right now – it’s pretty obvious since you’ve already checked out the logo!

This week, the EB team is proud to present:

http://img54.echo.cx/img54/6391/logorebel1medium5uz.jpg

The Eleutheroi. You know them well. Indeed, they are your most common enemy. The many small nations and regional powers you will face in your initial expansion all belong to the Eleutheroi. But not only in your rise to power will you come across this myriad of peoples, but wherever you choose to expand, independents will stand in your way.

It is impossible to name every single tribe and people which will resist your dreams of conquest. From the great western ocean to the peaks of the Altai, you will encounter these little empires and proudly independent tribes. One thing binds this great band of enemies: their fear and revulsion of your wish to expand your borders.

But don’t expect the great collection of Eleutheroi to be pushovers. They will resist you with all their heart and spirit once you decide the time has come to incorporate them into your rising empire. You are a threat to their very existence, and they will not give up until you have completely destroyed them – or convinced them that it isn’t that bad being under your suzerainty.

It depends on your guile and willpower how much of a problem the Eleutheroi will be. Watch out! An army of marauding Scythians has assaulted your city! What will you do? Will you let them have a go at your walls, while you bypass them and take their settlements? Will you bribe them? Or will you lift the siege of your bastion? The choice is yours – just remember that while you think, they move. Indecisiveness will play you right into their hands.

But, then again, you might not be just another power struggling for a place in the sun. You might be the great leader of the greatest power on the face of the earth. Who, then, are the Eleutheroi to you? Surely they are just little rodents trying to gnaw away at your extensive borders? Perhaps – but that does not mean you should treat them as such. There are many that want to be independent – and a big pack of rodents can bring the sturdiest of trees to come crashing down.

However you choose to treat the Eleutheroi, remember one thing: for every one you strike down, there are a hundred more waiting from where that one came from. Beware!

The Eleutheroi, as you may have realized, are all those factions that didn’t make it into the mod. Here are a couple of them:

Pergamon - One of the most famous cities in the Ancient World. The site where the ancient settlements developed is situated in a fertile plain irrigated by the waters of the river Bergama Cayl (the ancient Selinus) and of the rivers Kestel and Bakır. Even though historical mention of Pergamon has not been ascertained prior to the 4th century BC, the opinion generally held is that the origins of the city are by far earlier. Various archaeological finds datable to the Stone Age testify to the antiquity of the first human settlements. The history of what then became one of the most flourishing Hellenistic cities began with the dismemberment of the immense Persian Empire, after the death of Alexander the Great. Lysimachos, who received the western part of Anatolia, chose the impervious site of Pergamon as the hiding place for a considerable treasure. Philetairos, a faithful follower, succeeded in preserving the integrity of the treasure and the possession of the city when Lysimachos died, despite attempts on the part of Antiochus I. His grandson Eumenes I proclaimed the independence of the new realm of Pergamon (3rd cent. BC), which with his successors, in particular Eumenes II, shone in the fields of economy, the arts, the sciences and culture. With the death of Attalus II, in 133 BC, the Kingdom of Pergamon, lacking natural heirs, was pacifically taken over by the Roman Senate which thus reaped the harvest of old agreements and alliances. Under the Capitoline standard the city enjoyed a great new period of development which manifested itself in the construction of splendid buildings and in the restoration of various monuments of the past. Later Marc Antonius presented Cleopatra with the city's rich library, the books of which, of incalculable value, were eventually destroyed in a fire in Egypt. The decadence of Pergamon, now known as Pergamum, followed the disintegration of the Roman empire step by step.

Belgae - The Belgae are a product of the Cubi-Biturge Confederacy collapse. In the northeast of the lands that'd be called Gaul, they formed a confederation of tribes. Most notable are tribes like the Nervii, Menapii, Remi, and Bellovacii. The Belgae were expansionistic, invading and raiding the lands around them, spreading to many different areas. They had a tendency to be absorbed by the peoples whose lands they spread to. They had a unique military affected by Britons, Gauls, and Germans, as well as their own innovations. They had a tendency to adopt good ideas, attack the Gauls, lose, and give up the good idea because it lost a few times. The Belgae were fickle that way. Most Belgae fought shirtless, some painted themselves, and they used a number of disciplined, well-trained soldiers; swordsmen, pikemen, spearmen, cavalry, and even sometimes they used axemen, as well as bowmen levies, as well as armored bowmen. The majority of their warriors would look pretty much the same, only variation would be their weapons, and occassionally chain shirts. Caesar notes their ferocity; the Nervii particularly were hardcore terrifying warriors, somewhat Spartan in their manner; music was used only to drill to, drugs were forbidden because they thought it'd make them soft, entertainment of most types was simply forbidden. They, like Gaul, were conquered by Rome, and were at a bad disadvantage when it had happened. They were allied with the Aedui for a period, and had sent many soldiers to fight with them, against both Germanic, Roman, and Arverni incursion, but this in the end simply bled Belgica dry; they had little left to fight with when Rome came, and similar to the fracturing of the Aedui tribes, the Belgic tribes had begun to infight as well, due to a loss of faith, over the loss of so many men in the wars in the Aedui lands. The Belgae would begin with Belgica Bellovaccii and Belgica Nervii.

Scythians - Iranian, former nomads, but mostly settled and substantially hellenized at EB's start. Kingdom heir to the very large and powerful Scythian kingdom of former times, but much reduced by now. They repeatedly try to expand and bring nearby Greek cities of the Black Sea coast under their control, often clashing with the neighboring Bosporan kingdom and the Sarmatians too. Around the 310's BC the Scythians were still reasonably active. They figure in enterprises of certain scale, though by no means comparable to what they had done in the distant past or even in the days of Atheas (middle 4th ct BC). Also, they tend to appear as part of alliances. They got involved in an uprising against Lysimachos and in a Bosporan dinastic war. In both cases, the sides the Scythians supported eventually lost and that may have hurt them because we don't hear much of them for a while. Some evidence, mostly archaelogical, suggests increased Sarmatian pressure, but this is not well recorded in the sources. Around the middle 2nd ct there is a sort of minor resurgence under the kings Skilouros and his son Palakos although they actually control less land. They are involved in diverse local conflicts with Greek cities and the Bosporan kingdom. This is a heavily Hellenicized kingdom with a largely settled population and some authors question the extent to which it represents continuity with the earlier Scythian kingdom. After Palakos they don't really do much else. In my opinion, the overall picture is one of decline, but putting up a fight. Reversing this trend could be the challenge for a potential Scythian player. A Scythian faction could have the provinces of Taurica and Scythia.

Some of the units you will encounter in your campaigns against the Eleutheroi:

http://img262.echo.cx/img262/4113/ju...bels2rj.th.jpg

The Jews are a proud people, bent on maintaining their independence and distinct culture. The same was true in Ioudaia when it was lorded over by Hellenic invaders. While Jews in the diaspora embraced Hellenism, the Jews who remained in their ancestral homeland were fervently encouraged by their rabbis to maintain their ancient ways and resist Hellenism. Some of the Jews therefore, found themselves called to the banner of rebellion against their overlords. Depending how stubborn they and their leaders were, their rebellions had different outcomes. In the 2nd century BC these men succeeded in throwing off Hellenic fetters under the famed Judah Maccabee.

http://img232.exs.cx/img232/4293/08yd.jpg

Dahae, coming from old Persian Daha, was a name used for every bandit and raider that drove fear into the hearts of the peoples of the Iranian plateau. These men came in assorted bands to pillage and steal whenever the opportunity presented itself, and their horses provided the mobility needed to be effective raiders. They could also be convinced by a passing general to fight alongside him, provided the pay was good and the plunder rich.

http://img104.exs.cx/img104/8753/000009po.jpg

Pezhetairoi are the bread and butter military unit of the Successor states. They are well disciplined and highly motivated pikemen that are armed and armored to the teeth. They are armored in a linen cuirass, a Phrygian cap, a bronze greave on the right leg, stout boots, good bracers, and reinforced shoulder pads made from hardened linen (due to their experience with the deadly curved swords of Thraikia). They have Illyrian style round shields attached to their bodies by leather straps that help support the weight of the shield and keep their hand free to grasp the sarissa. They are defensive infantry par excellent. They are the anvil of the two part Makedonian system of warfare, the heavy cavalry being the hammer. They should be used to anchor enemy soldiers while the thureophoroi harass the flanks and the heavy cavalry smashes into the flanks and rear.

Historically, the pezhetairoi are the classic Alexandrian phalanx. They were used to great effect against the Persians, Medes, Baktrians, Indians, Phoenicians, and many, many others. They are an effective force and have not changed much over the centuries. The Romans were able to defeat them as easily as they did for two main reasons. One, the Roman army was at a high state of readiness and tactical prowess after defeating the Karchedonioi. Two, the heavy cavalry arm of the Successor armies had degenerated to the point where they were no longer able to field significant numbers to fulfill their part of the hammer and anvil tactic of Alexandros. There were many small reasons, numbering among them the misuse of the thureophoroi, the under use of peltastai, and the lax state of warfare that the Successor states were used to. In any case, the phalanx was not as anachronistic or inflexible as widely believed; it was simply used in the wrong way. In the thirteenth century onwards, pikemen in similar formations were able to work wonders with more capable generals and a better cavalry arm. Do not under appreciate pikemen, for they are still a war winning force.

Like amongst their successors of the sixteenth century, there were also many mercenary pezhetairoi. They fought for one thing: money. Money is a cruel mistress, and therefore these men are wily and experienced, veterans of more than a few battles. But remember: they are mercenaries, never to be trusted to hold the part of the line where it will come down to it.

http://img208.echo.cx/img208/5503/rebelindogreek1cs.jpg

After the kingdom of Baktria attacked and seized its Indian possessions, it found the Hellenics who had been living there had adapted somewhat to native ways. Gone were the close phalanx formation and the long spear, replaced by a somewhat looser but more skilled melee formation. They adopted a Phrygian style helmet, light cotton Thraikian trousers, and javelins, in addition to a smaller and lighter shield. This allows them to be excellent elephant killers, as well as defeat the more lightly armored infantry of the east. They can be used as a good medium infantry, to screen the flanks and protect against elephants and cavalry while the thureophoroi deliver the fatal melee blow.

Historically, the Indo-Hellenics adapted quite well to the environment of India and prospered. Many became Buddhists, though they still remained fierce warriors, true to their Hellenic forbearers. They are an excellent medium infantry, well able to compliment other troop types and provide a versatile unit against light cavalry and elephants.

The Indo-Hellenics were a people who were proud of their heritage, and quite willing to rebel to preserve their independence from other cultures. Be sure to watch what these fowl warriors do – they might seriously disrupt your plans as Baktrian king in India!

http://img177.echo.cx/img177/8986/go...aght5lj.th.jpg

The Daernaght (Dor-nukt; Spearmen) are the most basic warriors of the Goidilic (Gaelic or Goedelic) tribes. They fight as spearmen, with a single heavy javelin to throw before attacking, or at a charging enemy, to weaken them, before engaging with their spears. The Daernaght are only semi-professional. They work and train about four months a year (as the Celtic calendar works differently), than rotate back to working as farmers, craftsmen, fishermen, etc., while their replacements go to train and fight.

Historically, the Daernaght were used well into the dark and middle ages, and the inheritors of an ancient fighting tradition. While young Goidils always played games that honed fighting skills, these semi-professionals also spent much time at work, so were not as skilled as the better trained, year-round professional Laech, but were not as unskilled as the all but untrained militias that were used as impromptu forces.

Some Daernaght found themselves without masters, in lands they did not know, and became roving bandits and rebels. But their skills are also employable by those with a good coin to throw about…

http://img177.echo.cx/img177/7633/go...aght6dn.th.jpg

The Ordmhornaght (Ord-mer-nukt) are a type of Goidilic (Gaelic or Goedelic) heavy infantry; they're rare, experienced, and very wealthy. They wield massive, two-handed hammers, imitating Dagda, 'the good god'; they smash and crush attackers, break armor, and smash cavalry mounts. These men are small in number, but they serve a strong purpose on a battle field, though they are slow to be mustered, and small in number. However, their weapons, skill, and fair quality armor, allow them to be used as strong anti-armor infantry. Their main disadvantage is impetousness; Celtic religious fanatics are not known for their restraint in most matters, combined with the essence of a Celtic warrior's lust for glory, they are extremely impetous, and are quick to break their loose formation.

Historically, the Goidils used hammers in large numbers; they were popular enough that later Irish and Scots still used them widely as the favored weapon of many field officers. The reason behind the favor given to the hammer is two-fold. It is a religious symbol. The god of the Goidils wields a massive hammer from which he forged all creation, and with which he defends his people. It is also a practical weapon. It requires minimal craftsmenship, it's sure to kill or incapacitate its target in a single blow, and it can be used to kill cavalry, light infantry, and smash the armor of heavy infantry. Such warriors large disadvantage was the lack of a shield and their over-eager nature to fight. They would be at a great disadvantage at range, where arrows could cut them down, as they lack a shield, and are slowed by the weight of their weapons, but in a melee, they would be quite fearsome.

In lands not their own, Ordmhornaght could occasionally be found without any leaders and be seen roving and terrorizing the local populace. Be sure to quickly put to heel these cruel barbarians, for they are formidable indeed!

http://img177.echo.cx/img177/8344/co...ites7ks.th.jpg

The polis of Corinth produces its own variant of the classic Hellenic hoplite. These soldiers are trained to the same level as other hoplites, but have slightly differing equipment. They still use the old argive shield and have linen greaves. They can be used as any other hoplites would be, with a remembrance of the disadvantages.

Historically, the Corinthians had a professional army of citizens that were extremely dedicated to the defense of the city. They are famous for their defensive ability, holding out against the Roman invasion for many years.

As Hellenic society evolved, some of the army of a polis would be composed of professionals. In peacetime, these tough men would be without anything to do, and would hire themselves out to others, such as the Persians, who spent much money having Hellenics defending their lands from invaders such as Alexandros.

http://img177.echo.cx/img177/4450/ca...lwyr8dh.th.jpg

The Caledonians are a fierce people on the edge of the world. Beyond Caledonia stretches a great, empty ocean, and Caledonia itself is home to a rather isolated people. They are seemingly relics of a former era of Celtic history, they do not have great deals of iron, and so do not produce many swords. They instead fight with more practical weapons, spears, javelins, and slings. Rhyfelwyr (Rh-eye-vell-wir; Warriors) are a vast number of men, of many ages and varying levels of experience. Seemingly fearless, and wild, their bodies are tattooed in esoteric spiral designs, their hair is spiked and red, and they are remarkably fearsome. They are very hardy and brave; their lifestyle demands it. Alone, a disciplined army would destroy them, but if incorporated into a more tactics minded commander of the more advanced Britons, they may prove more useful.

Historically, the Caledonians were never conquered by the Romans, despite Romans successfully defeating them in numerous engagements. The small amount of iron available to them left swords only for the most wealthy or greatest of champions. Even bronze armor was a luxury. The Caledonians did not have much cavalry, or any chariots, they only had their own fierce nature as their greatest weapon. Any chariots were likely imported from Hibernian tribes, or Britons fleeing Roman rule, and any cavalry was really just these men mounted on ponies. They were a true relic of a bygone period, still fighting without much in the way of tactics beyond ambushing and mad rushes at their enemies. These people would exist for a long time, until invading Gaels, Germans, Normans, and Norsemen would eventually conquer and assimilate them.

In the harsh conditions these men lived in, one could choose to embrace the path of war as a way of life, not as a necessity. With skill and a quite a bit of luck, these men could become far richer and more powerful than their normal life could ever have made them.

Above all, the Caledonians were a proud people. They wish to be independent from all others, and it is this spirit which kept their independence for a long time. This fierce spirit is also a nightmare for any would-be conqueror, so heed this!

http://img177.echo.cx/img177/1418/sk...bels0av.th.jpg

These light cavalrymen are from the Scythian tribes to the north of the Pontus Euxine, the Black Sea. They rely on a long spear, bow and shield (typically, the crescent shaped, leather faced, taka shield of the Scythian peoples) and are some of the most effective light horse available. There is also the long sword typical of the nomads, a Scytho-Sarmatian weapon with a ring-pommel. They are at their best when fighting in loose open formations, harassing the enemy, but ready in an instant to descend like lightning on any foe rendered vulnerable. Against unbroken infantry these light horsemen will prove of little value in a hand to hand clash and care should be taken not to waste them in such a way.

Historically, during the Persian invasion of the Pontic steppe, the Scythian cavalry swept ahead of the invaders destroying anything of use to them. They led a Royal Achaemenid army into a futile chase across the steppe until overstretched Persian supply lines and scorched-earth tactics allowed them to turn from pursued into pursuers. The mauled Persian army managed to avoid destruction and regain the safe southern bank of the Danube, but the Scythians had borne the brunt of Achaemenid might and had remained unconquered and masters of their lands. Also, even in their decline, they totally destroyed a 30,000 strong army sent by Zopyrion, one of Alexander’s generals, in 331 BC.

The Scythians have always been bent on independence. They were once lord and master over all the steppes, but now they are being displaced by their more vigorous eastern cousins, the Sauromatae. Still, the Scythians are a proud people, refusing to let anyone control them without a fight. Their great mobility made them great rebels, and it will definitely be a hard struggle for any conqueror wishing to take control of the lands of these powerful warriors.

Some monuments to remind you that not all is blood and gore:

http://img235.echo.cx/img235/6989/al...een17nn.th.jpg

http://img235.echo.cx/img235/5828/ge...een22em.th.jpg

http://img235.echo.cx/img235/5864/go...een33zq.th.jpg

Some goodies for y’all to enjoy:

http://img200.echo.cx/img200/8913/lo...l1small3dn.jpg


We hope you’ve enjoyed this week’s preview!

Please note that unless stated otherwise, ALL pictures shown in our previews are of works in progress. We continue to improve on all parts of EB, and we will continue to do so long after our initial release.

Since some areas where these news items are posted cannot handle wide images, we appreciate your restraint from quoting full-size images.

As always, if you have questions or comments, the best place to post them is here, where the EB team is most active:



https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=70

Or here:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=31

Or here:

http://207.234.213.122/forum/viewforum.php?f=13

We give special thanks to http://www.imageschack.us that provides us with a simple, foolproof, and free way to show you all these pictures each week.

Have a great day y’all!

Sincerely,

The Europa Barbarorum team

Yeah!

These are rebel units, or are they just not in the mod? I think the first...

Anyway it looks good as always :D

The Eleutheroi are the rebels. Eleutheroi is Greek for 'independents'. :]



~Wiz

alrighty ~:) I'm not that good at greek ~;p

though I guessed it right :beam: why would you make and post thouse wonderfull units while you're not putting them in the game :wiseguy:

An interesting twist. Everything looks good, but I must point out that the Indo-Hellenics, however fierce, are NOT "fowl warriors". ~;p

Ελεύθεροι:http://www.freemonks.gr ;)
http://www.freemonks.gr/pegen/h020/p...dll?cdlist.peg

That's the first thing that passed through my head when I saw the title hehe
Also,the word means "free", I can't say it has the same connotations as independant (can't remember how it's like in ancient Greek, but surely not as in the modern Greek word "ανεξάρτητος", which would be a very bad thing for our rebels here;)).

Quote:

---

Be patient, the open beta is coming closer to your PC every minute there’s an EB member online!

---

Yawn.....
yes yes, closer, always closer. Goddamnit, we wan't the bastard now!
If I had a dollar for all the times the open beta was moving "CLOSER", well. i'd hire myself a few extra modders to move it even closer even quicker.......
hmmm....i'm lost..
Peace out! :help:

nice sig quote, Rev ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Revelation

Yawn.....
yes yes, closer, always closer. Goddamnit, we wan't the bastard now!
If I had a dollar for all the times the open beta was moving "CLOSER", well. i'd hire myself a few extra modders to move it even closer even quicker.......
hmmm....i'm lost..
Peace out! :help:

---

Or you could start paying us, that would be nice ~;). Or perhaps you have some skills of your own to offer? Modding skills would be good, but you could bake us sweets to keep our energy levels up, that too would be acceptable.

Are my eyes deceiving me or is there a black chicken in the screenshot of the altars of Alexandros? ~:dizzy:

Cool!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1pain1Duck

Are my eyes deceiving me or is there a black chicken in the screenshot of the altars of Alexandros? ~:dizzy:

---

That's weird. What's up with the feathered raptor?

Ah, the independent nations..looking good! If it is so that you've managed to make them both expansionistic and able to act (and react) properly to the player's actions, the quality that is EB has been raised even further - hooray!

And those giant turkeys..better bring some good phalangitai when fighting those ~D

What the crap? :dizzy2:

huge roosters? "fowl" warriors indeed..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big_John

huge roosters? "fowl" warriors indeed..

---

Ah. thank you.

I'm going to end this rather quickly. The Britons were already argued for and against, they have been kept. The faction they represent (the Casse/Catuvellanians) came to control all of Britain south of Brigantes territory temporarily, and unsuccessfully invaded northern Gaul and Ireland. This has been talked about many times (in fact, I wanted to change the faction, and I'm the one coordinating it), but we did not, and we're not going to. Ever. So complaints should cease, cause they won't mean anything. Also, Goidils and Caledonians are not Britons, if that's what gave you the idea. Even Britons aren't 'Britons', there are three distinct cultures in Britain. Gallic 'Britons' in the south (like Casses), midlander Britons (like Manawydans, Ordovices or Catolices), and Caledonians in the far north. There will be some different units for the Casses in each region (with the fewest in Caledonia)

Duders, even your rebels are cool.

There's an error on the discription of "Chrysokeros"

"was coverted but many cultures", shouldn't it be
"was coverted by many cultures" ?

cheers

Good work EB...As always

what roosters?

EDIT: ohh, i see.
the number of inside jokes is increasing rapidly...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1pain1Duck

Are my eyes deceiving me or is there a black chicken in the screenshot of the altars of Alexandros? ~:dizzy:

---

Fowl warriors defend it!



~Wiz ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Fair enough. What about Spain? Having 4 Barbarian factions would just be overkill. There are alot better factions that could be represented. (Although in my opinion, Gauls and Germans are more than enough).

---

Having 4 successor states is overkill. Macedonia and Greek cities are more than enough. ~;)

Dude, the name is Europa Barbarorum. Just be happy we didn't ditch the hellenic ones in favour of more barbarians (Gods know I'd want it :)

What about Latin rebels such as Samnites or Campanians?

the special rebel units look brilliant its just a pity about the faction number limit, it would have been great to have had loads of tiny factions, rebels just seem to wander around or sit about for years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

Fowl warriors defend it!



~Wiz ~;)

---

Is there an echo in here? :dizzy2:

Excellent work, gentlemen. Not what I was expecting, but you never disappoint.

Now show me Britannia.

[mode=aboix]

YOUR ALL F**KING WASTER WHAT ARE TH FOWL WARIX N THE PREVEW?????1?!?!?! (REPEAT 5 TIMES) :charge: :charge: :charge: :charge: :charge: :charge: :charge: :charge: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :furious3: :duel: :duel: :duel: :duel: :duel: :charge: :charge: :charge: :charge: :charge:

[/mode]

interresting preview EB team , the ''faction'' caught me off guard though ~:)

:balloon2:

Yeah, I read the greek sounding name and thought aaah. Another successor state. But yes, excellent work, of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

The Eleutheroi are the rebels. Eleutheroi is Greek for 'independents'. :]



~Wiz

---

it means free (people)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ranika

midlander Britons (like Manawydans)

---

That's an odd name. Isn't Manawydan a mythic figure?

Yes, Manawydan in legendary sources is the god of the sea, and specifically the isle of Mann. However, in Gaelic sources, the pre-Gaelic Manx are called (when anglicized) the 'Men of Manawydan (the god)', or just 'Manawydans' for short.

This was something new; Eleutheroi.

I liked the faction name as simple as Rebels and then subfaction names like Helvetii. But this name was cool as well ~:cheers:

Very good work as always even the rebels will have nice armies .

There are more rebels in stock, ladies and gentlemen. Just relax, with time it shall come. ~;)





I like all of our factions, if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ranika

Yes, Manawydan in legendary sources is the god of the sea, and specifically the isle of Mann. However, in Gaelic sources, the pre-Gaelic Manx are called (when anglicized) the 'Men of Manawydan (the god)', or just 'Manawydans' for short.

---

'Cause Knowledge is Power. Thank you kindly, Ranika; I didn't draw the Manx conclusion.

A surprising amount of people don't, even many who you'd expect would. I guess it comes from trying to disassociate history and legends, but that often causes one to forget they always intersect at some point. In this cause, the Mannanatagh/Mannananaght (Men of Manawydan/Manawydan Men) were just the pre-Gaelic Manx, and were closer to midland Britons than they were anyone else for a period. Actually somewhat irritated me in Viking Invasion. The Manx rebels, they had all 'Welsh' names, even though the Manx, by that point, had many many Gaelic names.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Wizard

The Eleutheroi are the rebels. Eleutheroi is Greek for 'independents'. :]



~Wiz

---

YES! ~D

I am filled with happiness. :balloon2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Gee, I guess I was hoping for a fun representation of Warfare in Antiquity instead of a Barbarian-Fest. I mean, the skins are nice, but there's little difference between all these Barbarian factions, tactics-wise, aside from your starting place. ~:handball:

---

The Hellenic factions are also very much the same for my point of view ~;) .....
Lots of Pikemen and Hoplites....
The only interesting Hellenic faction for me is Bactria or maybe the Greeks..
My opinion is that that the barbarian factions are more diverse.
Did you see the Aedui and Sweboz preview?!
I think that these factions are very different!!
The Gauls have chariots,heavy swordsmen, Pikemen etc and the Germanics lots of framea equipped light troops and light swordsmen, light horse units and axemen etc..
The gauls have a very balanced army and the germanics are more guerilla oriented army.
If EB is out i will start with the Aedui faction first but germania or Iberia are my second choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Gee, I guess I was hoping for a fun representation of Warfare in Antiquity instead of a Barbarian-Fest. I mean, the skins are nice, but there's little difference between all these Barbarian factions, tactics-wise, aside from your starting place. ~:handball:

---

Eh... how do you know? Have you played EB? Or are you basing your knowledge of "barbarian" tactics on vanilla RTW and hollywood movies?
There is much more diversity among the barbarians than among the hellenics. Hell, all the Mediterranean factions fight pretty much the same way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheTank

The Hellenic factions are also very much the same for my point of view ~;) .....
Lots of Pikemen and Hoplites....
The Hellenic factions are also very much the same for my point of view .....
Lots of Pikemen and Hoplites....
The only interesting Hellenic faction for me is Bactria or maybe the Greeks..
My opinion is that that the barbarian factions are more diverse.

---

I was going to say same but you were faster.
And what comes to barbarian factions I agreed whit you. :bow:

Well, most of the Hellenic factions are successor states, and as such they succeeded the Macedonian way of fighting, centered around the phalanx. Still, they will have access to different types of units and regional units, so they will also have some diversity.

Sure the "barbarians" will be diverse, Iberians did fight a bit differently than Germans or Sarmatians.

Quote:

---

My english is poor but I bet it is much better than your finnish

---

- Olekkos varma? :wink:
Paljonko sää sitä vetoa lyöt?

Cool update but I really want to see Iberian or a Thracian faction.
Question:
Does EB also includes Proto Finnic, Baltic and Slavic rebels ?!
That will be cool.
If they exist I really like to see them :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Gee, I guess I was hoping for a fun representation of Warfare in Antiquity instead of a Barbarian-Fest. I mean, the skins are nice, but there's little difference between all these Barbarian factions, tactics-wise, aside from your starting place. ~:handball:

---

...Have you been paying attention to ANY of the past previews, seriously? any attention at all? Because if you were you would realize how idiotic that statement was.

Nonsense..........

Do you think that the clashes between the romans against the Gauls, Germanics, Iberians etc where not important and easy for the romans?!!!!
It took the Romans centuries to subject the continental Celts and they lost against the germanic tribes......
If the germanics and gauls where not important why the Romans bother to try to conquer them????
The Iberian tribes and britons where also a big pain in the romans ass...

Finally The Iberians and Gauls where vital for the successes of Hannibal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

I simply fail to see how having more Barbarians could do anything but make the game historically innacurate. The Successors, Rome, Carthage, and other "Civilized" states are the ones that should have the chance of ruling the world. The Barbarians are simply..Barbarians. While they aren't frothing at the mouth or any of that hollywood junk, they are still left behind. They should be an obstacle that civilized factions have to overcome--a role that can be filled by rebels, easily. On the other hand, the Civilized Factions are historically more dynamic in the way of trade, politics, ect. and cannot be represented so easily by Rebel factions.

My point is, having too many Barbarian factions shifts the focus too far from where the action of the era really was.

---

That stems from the common mis-conception that the "Barbarians" as the Greeks and Romans called them were a bunch of rabid morons. I'm sorry but the Celts and even Germanics were in many ways just as if not "more" cultured then the so called "civilized" peoples.

They were generally *cleaner* "yes I'm sorry the mythical big dirty hulking stinking barbarian is nothing more then just that a "MYTH" ", had more upstanding morale principles and had fully established societies and ways of doing things.

They werent just "rebels" why are we all so quick to forget the Gauls COULD have destroyed Rome if they had the chance, they werent a bunch of naked fools running around but a well oiled and effective military force!

The only reason Ceasar had as much success as he did in Gaul was due to its rapid decline, ergo. It was given to infighting, it had splintered into various factions, its military had shrunk considerably etc. etc. In essence it was but a fraction of it's former might.

Basically what your saying sounds like is that its "historically innacurate" to be able to revive a dying power or support an underdog, from that train of thought it would also be "historically innacurate" to include such factions as Pontus or Parthia.

Its generally a good idea to know what your talking about when you speak friend, otherwise you end up with your foot in your mouth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zero1

The only reason Ceasar had as much success as he did in Gaul was due to its rapid decline, ergo.

---

You discredit your own argument when you say that the *only* reason he had that much success was etc., etc.

Quote:

---

Gee, I guess I was hoping for a fun representation of Warfare in Antiquity instead of a Barbarian-Fest. I mean, the skins are nice, but there's little difference between all these Barbarian factions, tactics-wise, aside from your starting place

---

I should not respond, but I must. None of our factions were barbarians. The so called barbarians were very advanced, in many ways more so then your precious civilized states, especially militarily.
And we are about history. And so called barbarians were just as important as any Romans. We are not about holloywood, and lies about the savagery of non Latins and Greeks.
And many of your so called barbarians had great power, and may well have gotten it if some things had been different. Gauls sacked Rome, and did very well against Greeks. Parthians had a very rich and powerful empire. Perhaps you should find out about so called barbarians before discrediting them, and a bit more about your "civilized" peoples many failures.

No 'Temple in Jerusalem'? Have it give a great law & order bonus, and make Judea a very rebellious province. Make it destructable above all else.

Keeping it keeps the people from revolting, but it hinders assimilation.

This is the great thing about this mod: we've got people who really know a lot about *all* these different factions and cultures. It's not like it's a trade-off. We will have them all well represented. In fact, I personally hope everyone uses the new renderings of the factions to totally destroy the factions they hate in particular. Hate barbs? Drive them into the ground with your phalangites and heavy cav. Detest greeks? Make them run and weep before your legions. Abhor the Romans? Destroy their capital and turn it into an open field or at least a site of your grandest harem. Yipppeeee!

:wall:

Why, why, WHY does EVERYTHING have to be an argument with you people?! And don't say "because so-and-so is an idiot and knows nothing about history", because by perpetuating the argument, you are just as idiotic. I mean, I can understand the occasional venting of frustration- and Gelationus Cube's comment was somewhat uncalled-for- but by refusing to let it go, you're just perpetuating a situation that everyone else is bored to death by.

So please, for the sake of everyone else here, DROP IT.

Edit: I looked again, and it looks like this argument just ended. So let's please keep it that way.

Quote:

---

Why, why, WHY does EVERYTHING have to be an argument with you people?! And don't say "because so-and-so is an idiot and knows nothing about history", because by perpetuating the argument, you are just as idiotic. I mean, I can understand the occasional venting of frustration- and Gelationus Cube's comment was somewhat uncalled-for- but by refusing to let it go, you're just perpetuating a situation that everyone else is bored to death by.

---

IMHO, in forums two of the socially acceptable-polite rules are:

Rule#1: Unless you have something to contribute to the thread, don’t say anything.
Rule#2: Since there is no compulsory reading or replying, see Rule#1 ~:cheers:

O_Stratigos :bow:

weren't the romans referred to as barbarians by the greeks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Mercenary

weren't the romans referred to as barbarians by the greeks and cartheginians?

---

fixed ~:cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheTank

Cool update but I really want to see Iberian or a Thracian faction.
Question:
Does EB also includes Proto Finnic, Baltic and Slavic rebels ?!
That will be cool.
If they exist I really like to see them :-)

---

Proto Finnic and proto-Baltic yes, slavic no (too early), but maybe proto-slavic.
They're not skinned yet, but apart from that, they're almost ready.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Byzantine Mercenary

weren't the romans referred to as barbarians by the greeks?

---

...

greek were happy to clal anything non-greek barbarains. just like romans Called anythign non-roman barbarians. The persians called greeks/macedonians barbarians. Everybody called everybody else a barbarian...

only the Aedui and Sweboz, they didnt give a damn. (just kidding, i dont know a flying X about west-european tribes/factions/people)

what one people called another is irrelevant. we (not me, EB ~;) )should look at their own documents and make up our own mind, some parts of Livy might be usefull, but a lot of it is biased.

Didn't babarians mean foreign people/strangers at first?
I'm not sure put I think I've picked this up somewhere a time ago.

The concept of 'barbarian hordes skirting across Europe' isn't farfetched. The Celts were at one point empire builders. Gaul once had a single king (the Biturix; world king); the collapse internally led to infighting not unlike the civil wars of mediterranean kingdoms and empires. A successfully united Gaul trying to conquer huge portions of land is hardly farfetched; it would just be the Celts trying to reclaim what they percieved as theirs. The 'Briton' faction is a remnant of Gaul in Britain (southern Britain would have been included in the Biturges controlled regions, and would have been considered, by Gauls, part of Gaul). Their amibitions were likely the same (considering they commanded the entire host of Britain south of Brigantes territory when Flavius Julius invaded, they were clearly expansionists). Compare them to some of the Hellenic states. City states and the like. What did they accomplish that made them 'more' than the barbarians in this period? And the barbarians weren't all 'on the fringes' trying to hold off the advance of the civilized world. The Dacians certainly weren't just 'resisting' expansion by civilized nations. They built a kingdom, and were a genuine threat to those around them. The Germans were absolutely not just resisting invasion; it was Germans that descended on Rome out of period, and in period were an expansionistic threat to their surrounding civilizations. To the contrary of your point, the barbarians DIDN'T lose, they won. Hugely. Where is the Roman Empire? And why is most modern law of western origin based just as much on Celto-Saxon legal systems as it is Greek systems? The point is though, barbarians weren't just sidelines to the events of the mediteranean, they had their own politics (one of the main reasons to include the Britons is probably their profound connection to the mainland Gauls of the Aedui, not because of their effect on the med, even though they traded tin with Carthage and the Hellenic nations) and concerns. We don't pick civilizations based on just their interaction with Hellenes and Romans and Carthaginians, but on their interaction with eachother, and to what extent. If a faction, in this period, only interacted with the other barbarian factions, it'd still be a valid faction to consider, since they would be a real, major element in their politics; we selected the most major players in the barbarian world. The world was much larger than the sea, and we want, not just warfare, but appropriate political situations.

This whole thing is not meant as a slight, but simply the unnecessity of such an argument; we would love to include more factions. It'd be great to have every city state. However, we won't ignore major powers that the mediterranean would consider marginal because they weren't in their direct sphere of events. We had considered many powers. Pergamon (one I would personally love to see) was considered, as were a number of barbarian powers. Everything was weighed in terms of accomplishment, and importance in their region of the world. The Britons were major traders, and would've been important in the Celtic world. So were the Goidils. However, the Casses expanded more (Goidils only took the isle of Mann and set up some coastal forts in Britain in this period) and also were important outside of the Celtic world, since they controlled great deals of tin trade. They weren't ancillaries to events, they controlled some. They'll be reflected in an appropriate way too; many trade goods in Britain will ensure that trade relations with Britons would be valuable, as they actually were. It's not something we can imitate with rebels. We did explore using their space for other factions, but all of them barbarians (including, briefly, Galatians, but their contribution was very ancillary in this period; mercenaries and retainers more than anything).

You know, sometimes I think we should ask for a donation from EU, as a project that reminds people what Europe is all about. Some historian, I forget now who, said a while ago that Europe breathes with two lungs: the "Imperial" one, which includes the cultures of mediterranean, Roman Empire, and, eventually, Christianity in form that developed in this empire, and "Barbarian" one, which includes all the rest, all the multitude of the peoples, the Slavs, Germans and Celts. Both are equally important to what we are now. Just because for some reason you learn in school more about the first than about the other, doesn't mean you can dismiss the other as just a footnote to history.

what i meant in my previous post was that word barbarian was just used to describe someone different. by calling their enemy barbarians the greeks and the romans made them seem less human so the mass slaughter and the destruction of these 'barbarians' culture could be made acceptable. this has happened in many wars throughout history and creates an incorrect image of the enemy. for instance in the first world war the allies thought of the germans as barbarians and used derogatory terms like barbarian to make their slaughter more acceptable to the people at home. the germans did the same, using such words to describe the allies.
I personally think that the so called barbarian nations had just as advanced a culture as the romans and the greeks after all they had inventers and geniuses too.

:medievalcheers: :idea3: :medievalcheers:

I think every people in history called everyone else by some derogatory term or other, usually meaning "Not Us", or "Different" or "Speaking different language". If they didn't, it was implied by calling themselves "People" or "Us" or "Speaking our language"... So there's nothing wrong with that...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Mark

- Olekkos varma? :wink:
Paljonko sää sitä vetoa lyöt?

---

Et osannu kirjottaa tuotakkaan kirjakielellä, että voin lyödäkki. :tongue3:

Gelatinous Cube, looks like EB isn't for you, try RTR. It focuses to civilised factions. ~;)

So what factions you would like to see in EB Gelatinous Cube? If all barbarians were replaced by rebels as you suggested there would be about 10 faction slots free(depending on your definion of barbarian). I don't think there are enough significant "civilized" factions.

[offtopic]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kääpäkorven Konsuli

Et osannu kirjottaa tuotakkaan kirjakielellä, että voin lyödäkki.

---

~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kääpäkorven Konsuli's sig

Helvetin sosiaaliteinit

---

Sosiaaliteinit? Mitäs ne on? Sosiaalitanttojen esiasteita?
[/offtopic]
Maybe we barbarians should move this discusson to the talk your own language thread...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silvouz

[offtopic]
Sosiaaliteinit? Mitäs ne on? Sosiaalitanttojen esiasteita?
[/offtopic]
Maybe we barbarians should move this discusson to the talk your own language thread...

---

[offtopic]
- Vittu vähäx mä asun korvessa, vittu täällä ei o mitään, vittu kaikki kaveritki asuu kilometrin päässää...
Elikkä sosiaalisesti riippuvaisia teinejä ~D
Mitä ne Sosiaalitantot sitten on?
[/offtopic]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eadingas

I think every people in history called everyone else by some derogatory term or other, usually meaning "Not Us", or "Different" or "Speaking different language". If they didn't, it was implied by calling themselves "People" or "Us" or "Speaking our language"... So there's nothing wrong with that...

---

It's funny, but there seem to be more and more people 'fighting' for an adequate appreciation of barbarian/medieval culture, instead of just orgasming on the Greco-Roman one. I too got into a discussion on that on another board, recently...

Ah, if you worry we have a bias in favor of barbarians, please, don't worry. We have many very good Hellenic historians and great 'fans' of Hellenic civilizations. Everyone is being done as much justice as we can do them (given the constraints). Our concern is not 'non-conformity' so much as it is simply enlightening the conformed sense. 'Civilized' peoples WERE civilized, and we reflect that. They're being given as much care as barbarians (and in some cases, more, simply because we have the resources in terms of manpower to do them well). However, we want realistic barbarians. The CA portrayal has them all pretty much the same, and it wasn't like that at all. The tribes of Celts were more like feudal estates of the middle ages; they weren't all just indepedent tribesmen duking it out. Many paid homage to kings in other tribes, and formed large kingdoms that encompassed many tribes. However, there is a stigma that comes with using the word 'tribe', it brings to mind purely indepedent wild tribes with no central authority; to the contrary, one of the great things about this period in terms of Celts (that I wish RTW could do for us) would be the civil war of Gaul. The Aedui, who had come to power as the dominate tribe (tribes in Gaul were more like later noble houses, vying for control of the dominion). However, they poorly handled an invasion of the Belgae and Germanic incursions had overwhelmed their eastern most lands. As such, their subservient tribes grew restless and lost faith in Aedui leadership. The most powerful, the Arverni, brought several tribes under their banner in a large rebellion. Other tribes just outright flouted the rule of the Aedui. The Aedui, in the end, had only a few tribes that remained loyal, though they reincorporated many. Gaul wasn't a wild free-for-all, it was a splintered kingdom with a very complicated political situation. Imitating the war between the Aedui and their loyal tribes, and the Arverni and their dissident tribes, would be quite a bit of epic feel. The Romans largely exploited this conflict, as well as German invasions, to conquer Gaul. The Romans notably don't often fight actual Gallic armies; they don't have to. The Gauls were killing eachother and fighting the Germans, and simply spent themselves upon one another. This is only an example of political machinations of barbarian states; if you started replacing names, but kept the events, that could easily sound like the events that destroyed a number of states. However, we only imitate what we can within our constraints. Greece and Italy are going to be well fleshed out, as is the east. Our goal isn't to play favorites at all (despite some naysayers, who are more or less just whining and have no idea what we're actually doing; they see a faction they don't like has anything good, and then they get upset), but to give historical balances, disadvantages, and advantages. That isn't just in terms of units and buildings, though that is present (the Britons, for example, have little in the way of cavalry, but have good chariots, and many different soldiers based on different tribes, particularly many skirmishers and light infantry, giving them a variety to select from, as opposed to Gauls, who have a more even mix of decent cavalry, weaker chariots, good (and more) shock infantry, and some different tribal regionals, making both factions play quite differently, despite their relations). Starting position, and current relations with neighbors can heavily affect how easy or difficult a faction is to play. 'Balance' is wholely secondary to reality. If faction X starts at war with factions Y and Z, and that makes it very difficult to play faction X, we won't change it anyway, if it's historically accurate. Some factions start with only one province; advantageous in that it's easy to manage, but disadvantageous because it leaves little room for failure, and offers little in resources. The Britons start with one province; however, Britain is a rich place, and that is an advantage for the Britons, as they expand into their immediate surroundings, though the 'rebel' tribes will be hard to subdue; they had the same advantage of much local wealth, general good health, and could afford strong forces. The Germans also start with one province, but it's poor, and immediate expansion is necessary to fund a decent army. Again, nearby tribes suffered from similar problems. The idea is to make the regions realistic, and keep the AI acting in a similar method to the actual people, but allow a good human player the ability to expand, though, in some cases more than others, it will purposely be difficult to sustain a faction at first.

You guys are so keen on finnish, do me some research on proto-finnish names.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jebus

It's funny, but there seem to be more and more people 'fighting' for an adequate appreciation of barbarian/medieval culture, instead of just orgasming on the Greco-Roman one. I too got into a discussion on that on another board, recently...

---

Didn't read much of it, but I can tell you these guys are some 50 years too late in their understanding of European history. "Barbarian" laws and customs have at least equal, if not stronger, influence on our laws and customs today, to that of Rome and the classics. It is something quite obvious now, and no point debating it, really.
And let's not forget who won in the end :D :charge:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eadingas

Didn't read much of it, but I can tell you these guys are some 50 years too late in their understanding of European history. "Barbarian" laws and customs have at least equal, if not stronger, influence on our laws and customs today, to that of Rome and the classics. It is something quite obvious now, and no point debating it, really.
And let's not forget who won in the end :D :charge:

---

I dont think somebody particular won in the end. Meanning you cannot just consider all barbarian nations as an entity. You cannot do this even for Greeks. They fighted as nation (or sort of) only 3 times in history (trojan war persian wars and Alexanders march in Asia) and even in these cases there are many debatable points. The only people that maybe correspond to nation-race-state model are the romans. :hide:

Okay then, let me rephrase that:
let's not forget who LOST in the end ;D

better? :)

Quote:

---

Why, why, WHY does EVERYTHING have to be an argument with you people?! And don't say "because so-and-so is an idiot and knows nothing about history", because by perpetuating the argument, you are just as idiotic. I mean, I can understand the occasional venting of frustration- and Gelationus Cube's comment was somewhat uncalled-for- but by refusing to let it go, you're just perpetuating a situation that everyone else is bored to death by.

---

I'd prefer if you did not call me an idiot, thank you. And why do we have to adress it? Because this is what the mod is about. Sorry if you are bored, but this is about history. And we owe it to people to at least try and explain the history from which we are coming from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Fair enough. What about Spain? Having 4 Barbarian factions would just be overkill. There are alot better factions that could be represented. (Although in my opinion, Gauls and Germans are more than enough).

---

That is your oppinion, not ours. In adition, do nor forget what EB means...

Will there be an army from the Belgae that's lead by Ambiorix? He was a famous leader that once ambushed and slaughtered a whole roman legion :duel: :duel: :medievalcheers: :medievalcheers:

Ambiorix is so far out of our starting date timeframe that we can only guarantee him as a spawning general amongst the Aedui (where his is one of our many male names) and the Eleutheroi, depending on the region the general is spawned in.

P.S. Ambiorix was okay, but Julius Civilis beats him hands down ~;)



~Wiz

Was he the little guy in the comic, or the fat one? I assume your talking about that weird French comic, correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eadingas

I think every people in history called everyone else by some derogatory term or other, usually meaning "Not Us", or "Different" or "Speaking different language". If they didn't, it was implied by calling themselves "People" or "Us" or "Speaking our language"... So there's nothing wrong with that...

---

Aside from the Apache of course, who amusingly ended up taking their name from what everybody else called them... "Enemy" :grin:

Sorry if this has been asked, but i am new here, (i have been on the totalwar.com forums for some time though) will you be able to play as the Eleutheroi? Its just that i want to use those guys with the hammers!!!!!

I want this mod so much, i have been following the previews for some time, keep up the amazing work!

Well you can play as the Eleutheroi, but it's not reccomended as they aren't actually a faction. But other factions can use the Goidilic Ordmhornaght as well (basically the celtic factions and the celticish iberians).

Oh, and use this as your sig http://img200.echo.cx/img200/8913/lo...l1small3dn.jpg

not that huge one, it will annoy the moderators.