Several Questions.

[Fluvius Camillus]

Greetings, fellow EB'ers!

I have several EB related questions...

1. Great Routes

I think you all know them, the three major routes in EB, the silk route, the amber route and the Persian Royal Road.

I get the idea that some of these route "buildings" are missing. The loading screen of the Amber route says it goes past Buridava, the Getic capital, but it is not there, there is only a river port.

The Persian Royal Road is said to go from the Aegean Sardis all the way to the Persian Capital, Persepolis, then again, in Persepolis is no Persian Royal road "building" there if I am correct.

Same goes for the silk road to the end trade hub which the map says is Seleukiea, AFAIK none there either.

2. Victory Conditions

I my recent Pontic campaign I got a massive empire. But I have not the reached the Victory conditions yet. I thougth the Pontic royal family claimed to be descendant of the Persians and they tried to revive the Persians but also enjoy hellenic culture. The Pontic Victory conditions are from Seleukiea to Gawjam Bastarnoz and Vindobona, the last two being faraway inland Barbaric settlements. Why do the victory conditions suggest the Pontic kings want to claim these territories, as Persian successors I would rather think they would want more territories east, especially the Persian old capital. As Pontic king I expected to have the great dream of owning the Pontus Euxinus, the Hellenistic States and the old Persian provinces, not some faraway inland towns. Also after Pella the region become outlying regions, while eastwards the old Persian/Seleucid territories are Subjugation (type II) regions. It would make more sense the Pontic interests lay there. The Empire I have created now looks more like the Pontic "dream" IMHO (maybe plus the final Pontus Euxine settlements).

Enclosed picture of my current empire and VC.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

3. Ptolemaic - Roman Alliance

Curious to learn more, I read the EB biography of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the Ptolemaic ruler of the start of EB (if I am correct). It stated that after the defeat of Pyrrhos the Ptolemaioi allied themselves with Rome, an alliance which held for a long time, through the Punic Wars. The final battle of Pyrrhos in Italy was Beneventum, in 275BC. Why is the only ally of Rome Carthage (treaty) then? As EB starts in 272BC.

Picture showing the concerning biography (its said in the second part of the description):

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

4. House of Yervand/Orontid Dynasty - Artaxiad Dynasty

I am not too much aware of Armenian/Hayasdan History, but also when searching Wikipedia (I know its not the most reliable source, but when taking it with a pinch of salt...) and Google (mostly only gave EB home site links or pictures of Hayasdan Cataphracts) I questioned myself this.

The EB icon is like this:

This symbol is from the Orontid Dynasty (EB Hayasdan royal family of Yervanduni).

According to Wikipedia the Orontid dynasty (the house of Yervanduni, the royal family in EB) was not in power later in the time, when the Artaxiad dynasty grows in power under Artaxias I. They rule from 189BC over Armenia. The Artaxiads had this standard (again according to wikipedia).

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

This is the faction symbol of the Artaxiads (ruling from 189BC until the overthrow by the Romans, Lucullus at Tigranocerta), not the Orontids, from the starting EB time period. Is the symbol still correct then? (I am sorry if I missed a bit of text in EB which explains this question)

That was all.

Feedback much appreciated, thanks in advance!

EB is an awesome mod, team, keep up the good work!

~Fluvius

[Fluvius Camillus]

Extra Questions

5. Ptolemaioi and Seleukid States

a. What exactly were the Ptolemaic and Seleucid lands, Seleucids were an empire and Ptolemaic's too right? Wikipedia() calls their both native names Arche Seleukeia and Arche Ptolemaioi. But that Ptolemaic article's title is Ptolemaic Kingdom. Is this a difficult to explain state or a wikipedia typo?

b. At the start of the Seleucid campaign (272BC) the Seleucid capital is Antiocheia, but wikipedia (sorry) states the Seleucid capital was Seleukeia (at the Tigris) until it was moved to Antiocheia in 240BC.

c. And why is the Seleucid Empire so much referred to as Syria (or the inhabitants Syrians), it was much, much larger than Syria during the rule of Antiochos III Megas and before the Parthian invasion.

That was really all!

~Fluvius

[Marcus Ulpius]

Extra Questions

5. Ptolemaioi and Seleukid States

c. And why is the Seleucid Empire so much referred to as Syria (or the inhabitants Syrians), it was much, much larger than Syria during the rule of Antiochos III Megas and before the Parthian invasion.

That was really all!

~Fluvius

It depends at what point of its history the kingdom was referred as Syria. Eventually the Seleucids ended up only with Syria. But even before that their core regions were Mesopotamia and Syria. Their rule in Asia Minor and Iran was never strong and consistent. Culturally they were closer to the more Hellenized population of Syria than to more "Eastern" population of Mesopotamia.

I'm by no means an expert, so I can be wrong, so any corrections are welcome :)

[Mulceber]

It depends at what point of its history the kingdom was referred as Syria. Eventually the Seleucids ended up only with Syria. But even before that their core regions were Mesopotamia and Syria. Their rule in Asia Minor and Iran was never strong and consistent. Culturally they were closer to the more Hellenized population of Syria than to more "Eastern" population of Mesopotamia.

I'm by no means an expert, so I can be wrong, so any corrections are welcome :)

Also, this is just conjecture, but since they didn't have consistant power in Turkey, that means that the only area in which they consistantly had access to the Mediterranean was in Syria/the Levant. Roman and Greek sources are where much of our information on this comes from, so if the only area where the Seleukids touched the mediterranean was the Levant, that's what they would be known for to Greco-Roman writers - as Syrians. So they could be known as such strictly because that's what the Romans and Greeks knew them for. I'm not saying the Greeks and Romans wouldn't know anything about the east (that's definitely not true), but the Levant would likely be the area of the Seleukid Empire that they were most familiar with, and thus how they identify the Seleukids, even though they controlled far more than that. Again, this is just conjecture and I could well be wrong. -M

[Fluvius Camillus]

Alright thank you for the feedback.

I was thinking about that too, but I remember the Seleucid Empire being referred to as Syria at the time of Antiochos III Megas before Magnesia..

Any shots at the other questions?

~Fluvius

[anubis88]

I've also read that Seleucia was the capital before 240 BC. I believe that the reason for this placement of the capital is for the AI to focus ont the west and the mediteranean more than on the east ( as in RL)

The seleucids were called syrians probably becouse their powerbase was in Syria, and that never changed throught history.

I also never heard that the romans actually concluded an alliance with the ptolemaioi. All i've ever read about was that the Ptolemys sent emisserys. I don't believe they concluded the alliance since the Ptolemaic kingdom helped carthage during the punic wars (at least one of them with money)

For the Arche thing. I asked that a long long time ago. IIRC the Arche in this context means something like the Mighty kingdom of Seleucia


hope anything helps

[everyone]

I think the victory conditions picture is outdated, in fact those of a few factions are outdated. such as Hayasdan. to view the real victory conditions, you should click on the '?' button on the top right of the scroll, then the advisor would appear and list the settlements you have to hold; and highlight those that you have yet to capture.

[Aemilius Paulus]

About the Syrian thing, in Russia, all sources refer to the Seleucid Empire as the Syrian Empire or the Syrians. What about Netherlands? What is it called there?

And yes, because the heartlands of Seleucia were in Syria, and because by the alter times, they have lost much of their holdings except Syria, the Seleukids are called Syrians, even when they were not. Most people in US never say "USSR" or "Soviet Union", but simply call that specific entity "Russia", despite the fact that Russia was simply the main "republic" of USSR, but of course, it was not the only. The area of USSR before the breakup was 22,402,200 km² (not counting the satellite states) and Russia's area is 17,075,400 km², much of which is wilderness.