Eurasia Barbarorum

[Megas Methuselah]

I'm talking about maybe 3-5 years down the line?
Maybe EB 3.0??

I think 3-5 years is still within the timeframe of EB 2.0.

[chairman]

SPQR_Arcani: there are a few irritating issues with what you suggest; irritating not because of you, but because it's impossible and we all feel the pain. Firstly, there are the hardcoded limits: from my own propositions to the team and their responses, I have figured that adding China and the area in between would require around 100 new province slots, 15 new faction slots and maybe up to 200 new unit slots, which unfortunately don't exist. The second is that if the team did have these new limits at their disposal, they would first use them for enhancing the area already occupied by EB and EBII before moving on to new regions. Thirdly, the EB team has a focus in the ancient and classical Mediterranean, not in other time periods or regions. In order to make the new areas as accurate as the existing area, the team would need to add up to 20 or 30% more members whose focus is on East Asia. That is a huge increase that would dilute the current make-up of the team and forcing a major re-focus of the team's time and energy.

However, I understand what you mean. We would all love to be able to command Roman and Chinese armies in battle and settle once and for all who were the better conquerors (though I don't doubt that you would soon have “Crossbowmen Overpowered” or “Chinese Cavalry Underpowered *&(*&#”!!111!!!” threads pop up very quickly). Maybe if E:TW adds more province, faction and unit slots (we know they have added faction slots but we're not sure if all can be playable) and if the EB Team mass recruits historians, modelers and concept guys who know about East Asia ... maybe then. Do keep in mind though, that before China, the EB team has unfinished business with India first.

Chairman

[spqr_arcani]

from my own propositions to the team and their responses, I have figured that adding China and the area in between would require around 100 new province slots, 15 new faction slots and maybe up to 200 new unit slots, which unfortunately don't exist.

It's cool you guys actually looked into this and considered its feasibility.
As I mentioned in my original post, there are a bunch of limitations and
this East Asia thing is a distraction from EB's current focus/vision. But
then again, didn't EB start out trying to rectify the historical accuracy of
barbarian units in Vanilla RTW? (or something like that?)

Seriously, I was thinking the same ballpark for the number of faction slots
(if you include the minor warring kingdoms). I was surprised at the
sheer number of additional units, though. But it was a pleasant surprise.

Anyway, it's a fantasy of mine for now. Definitely first things first.
In the future when there are better TW engines with less hardcoded limitations, and faster machines, this shouldn't be a stretch of imagination.
For now, I'll take whatever updates come from the EB team. That includes
India if it's in the works!

[Chaotix]

arcani, you might also want to check out Asia ton Barbaron, a mod for EB being made (not done yet) by Malik of Sindh and Admetos, among many others. It doesn't unfortunately have China, but the map stretches from Macedonia to India.

[Ludens]

I'd love to see a mod accurately depicting China in this era, but I don't think this would be compatible with EB. I think that, with 2 exceptions, that was no military contact between EB's world and China during the mod's time-frame, and for good reason. The geographical barriers between the two worlds are formidable to anyone who is not a steppe nomad. You can't get an army over the Himalayas with classical logistics, and going over the steppe would be courting disaster. As such, a realism mod like EB could never feature a campaign in which China and Rome (or Bactria, or Parthia, or whatever) would get to duke it out which each other.

[Megas Methuselah]

Thanks for the info, Ludens. Judging from your statement, wouldn't going by ship then be more plausible? Just curious.

[Ludens]

I don't know much of seafaring in the Indian and Pacific oceans during the Classical age, however if they were using Classical Mediterranean naval technology I think the expedition would be doomed beforehand. First of all there is logistics again: Greek and Roman ships carried many rowers because their sailing techniques weren't as sophisticated as they would become during the age of exploration. As a result, they needed to dedicate much storage space to supplies if they wanted to sail (row) for long periods with resupplying. Unfortunately, in our hypothetical invasion they would have had to use this storage space for soldiers, horses, siege equipment, etc. Of course, there would be specific supply ships, but the crews of these ships would have to be fed as well. Also, the more ships you use, the bigger the harbour and storage facilities needed to assemble the invasion. Logistical problems grow exponentially as distance increases. Basically, the army would have to rely on foraging and trade while under way, which is not very efficient nor conductive to a quick voyage or likely to improve relations with the locals.

Secondly, the ships themselves weren't that seaworthy. Triremes and similar designs are good enough for the Mediterranean, but if they can survive the euphemistically named Pacific Ocean, I have my doubts.

However, presuming they somehow manage to overcome both logistical problems and the weather, upon arrival they would have been completely cut off from their homeland. They would have only a vague idea of the area where they are going, and it's political situation, and would be unable to communicate with the homeland. Chances of reinforcements are slim to none, and given the supply problems I doubt they could have returned home even if they wanted to.