Results 1 to 30 of 80

Thread: EB is not Historical?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default EB is not Historical?

    EB is the best mod I have encountered. Best graphics, awesome trivia, cool voice acting, and the thing that separates EB from others: Historical Accuracy.
    However I noticed that there were some misconceptions that I found while playing the game.

    1.Greek Hoplites - The phalanx is a rectangular mass military formation, usually composed entirely of heavy infantry armed with spears, pikes, or similar weapons. The troops were disciplined to hold a line which created a nearly impenetrable forest of points to the front. EB's depiction of the phalanx at first seemed correct(after all they did a very good job with the Spartiates), but it was when they fought that I was terribly disappointed. The phalanx held a solid block of men unstoppable if fought from the front. Rome:Total War vanilla was right on this one, EB however portrayed the hoplites fighting with their spears thrust overhand as if throwing a javelin. This made them look like gay freaks. WTF!

    2.Roman Cohort - The lorica segmentata(plate mail) was used between 1st Century BC until 3rd Century AD. EB spans 272 BC until 14 AD but i wonder why they didn't put a unit that used the armor. The testudo was also removed(I wonder if this is a bug but my praetorians didn't do the famed formation when I pressed "F".

    I think those are all the misconcepcions I have found and I hope the EB staff would take notice of this and make a patch 1.3 to correct their mistakes. Anyway thanks to the EB Team for their pains while making such a great mod and for fixing my RTW(Another mod destroyed my vanilla and in installing EB I was able to play as Rome again).
    I came, I saw, I was out of popcorn.

  2. #2

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    oh my lord you don't know what you just started!!!! you just mentioned lorica segmentata as something in widespread use and contested that overhand spear thrusts were not used by hoplites, even calling them gay freaks!

    and i think you have a misconception between the phalangites and the hoplite phalanx, one is a shield wall the other is a spear wall. the overhand/underhand spear thrust has been debated ad nauseum, with overhand always coming out on top. It's in my opinion that both were used whenever the tactical situation presented the needed for either/or but overhand was more dominant.

    if you are going to even try and contest these assertions then you are going to need some sources, lots of them. i don't even think anyone from EB itself will come in here to assault you with writing and excerpts
    Last edited by fomalhaut; 04-07-2011 at 01:33.

  3. #3

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    First post. Two points, both heavily discussed on the forum, one of them recently. I don't want to jump to conclutions, and if I'm wrong, I do appologise, hoping the OP will understand that his points tends to stir reactions here, but: Is this for real?

    Edit: If I'm wrong, the OP might want to read the FAQ about the Lorica Segmentata:
    https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...Barbarorum-FAQ

    And for a discussion on the Hoplite use of spears, see here:
    https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...-Pushing-Match

    And yes, as fomalhaut says, don't mistake Hoplites for Phalangites.
    Last edited by Taedius; 04-07-2011 at 01:41.

  4. #4

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    i almost thought that as well. i was sure to read read read these discussions before i ever chimed in

  5. #5
    EB:NOM Triumvir Member gamegeek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Hanover, NH
    Posts
    3,569

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    You're very luck this was your first post here, otherwise we'd probably call you out as a troll.
    Europa Barbarorum: Novus Ordo Mundi - Mod Leader Europa Barbarorum - Team Member

    Quote Originally Posted by skullheadhq
    Run Hax! For slave master gamegeek has arrived
    "To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a desert and call it peace." -Calgacus

  6. #6
    master of the wierd people Member Ibrahim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Who cares
    Posts
    6,195

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    Quote Originally Posted by gamegeek2 View Post
    You're very luck this was your first post here, otherwise we'd probably call you out as a troll.
    why have mercy? just assume he's one, and deal with him. he's the guy who was careless enough to not read the FAQ before typing.

    ok, in all seriousness, I don't think we should treat him as a troll, but I think he could have just read the darn thing.
    I was once alive, but then a girl came and took out my ticker.

    my 4 year old modding project--nearing completion: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=219506 (if you wanna help, join me).

    tired of ridiculous trouble with walking animations? then you need my brand newmotion capture for the common man!

    "We have proven, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that if we put the belonging to, in the I don't know what, all gas lines will explode " -alBernameg

  7. #7
    Villiage Idiot Member antisocialmunky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    ゞ( ゚Д゚)ゞ
    Posts
    5,974

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    Quote Originally Posted by gamegeek2 View Post
    You're very luck this was your first post here, otherwise we'd probably call you out as a troll.
    ... its a troll account.
    Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.



    "Hi, Billy Mays Here!" 1958-2009

  8. #8

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    Whether or not the thread initiator is a so-called "troll," what I find isn't talked about (much at all) on the EB sub-forum is the simple and wide-spread xenophobia (for lack of a better term) of the greater EB forum community, the virtual lack of patience amongst the users for those not well-acquainted with EB and all things related. This phobia isn't universal but it is very real and it is very contagious (again, for lack of a better term) because it has become hegemonic in its hold over well-rooted members of this community. Some self-reflection is in order; I'm sure the Org has no need for negative trends.
    EB Online Founder | Website
    Former Projects:
    - Vartan's EB Submod Compilation Pack

    - Asia ton Barbaron (Armenian linguistics)
    - EB:NOM (Armenian linguistics/history)
    - Dominion of the Sword (Armenian linguistics/history, videographer)

  9. #9
    Member Member Havok.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Minas Gerais! \m/
    Posts
    530

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    Quote Originally Posted by fomalhaut View Post
    oh my lord you don't know what you just started!!!! you just mentioned lorica segmentata as something in widespread use and contested that overhand spear thrusts were not used by hoplites, even calling them gay freaks!

    and i think you have a misconception between the phalangites and the hoplite phalanx, one is a shield wall the other is a spear wall. the overhand/underhand spear thrust has been debated ad nauseum, with overhand always coming out on top. It's in my opinion that both were used whenever the tactical situation presented the needed for either/or but overhand was more dominant.

    if you are going to even try and contest these assertions then you are going to need some sources, lots of them. i don't even think anyone from EB itself will come in here to assault you with writing and excerpts
    Hahahahaha!
    Blatterin' trollz aheaz!
    :)
    Ser mineiro é, antes de tudo, um estado de espírito.

    El bien perdido


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwfhJy6JwPg
    A don Jose! Oriental en la vida e en la muerte tambien!

  10. #10
    CAIVS CAESAR Member Mulceber's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    548

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    1. Someone else could probably answer this one better than me, but iirc, overhand and underhand are both accurate, depending on the style of phalanx warfare. Classical greek hoplites fought overhand. The Macedonian/Hellenistic style phalanx was underhand.

    2. In every source I've seen, Lorica Segmentata was used from the first century AD to the third. Outside of EB's time frame. Re: the testudo, my copy of EB does have testudo formation, although it depends on what Roman infantry you're using. If you're using anything from before the Marian reforms. I'm pretty sure it's only Marian and Imperial infantry that can make the turtle. That's because we only have a couple of sources that describe this tactic, and they're all from no earlier than the late republic. -M
    My Balloons:

  11. #11

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    EB not historical?

    what the @%#*

  12. #12
    Klibanophoros Ton Rhomaioktono Member Duguntz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Iasi, Romania
    Posts
    766

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    Alas... another Lorica Seg. Fan... The Lorica was indeed used from the 1st century BC. But from the END of it! It's completly useless to create a whole new unit with lorica segmentata for 30 - 40 years of game. as the game ends in 14 AD. and here's a friendly advice :Do not never EVER ask about the lorica segmentata here. And stating EB isn't historical (try not to be too rough...) it's kinda (common find a word...)BOLD statement! as it EB has been desing by teams within which are many historians! (Without even mentioning us all history freaks that have not too many things betetr to to than open a new history book when we finish the preceeding one!)
    Opinions are like bacteries : we all have, but it's better to keep them for ourself... (By me!)

    generously given by Nachtmeister
    generously given by Macilrille for Sweboz combat tactics
    Generously given by Brennus




  13. #13
    Member Member Dutchhoplite's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Rotterdam
    Posts
    416

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    I love the smell of bronze in the morning!

    Campaigns completed: Vanilla Seleucid, EB 1.2. Carthaginian, RSII Pergamon

  14. #14

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    haha the only thing he forgot is asking for a release date for EBII :D

    oh and demanding latin names for things not latin ^^
    "Who fights can lose, who doesn't fight has already lost."
    - Pyrrhus of Epirus

    "Durch diese hohle Gasse muss er kommen..."
    - Leonidas of Sparta

    "People called Romanes they go the House"
    - Alaric the Visigoth

  15. #15
    Arrogant Ashigaru Moderator Ludens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    9,063
    Blog Entries
    1

    Lightbulb Re: EB is not Historical?

    Could we please stop treating anyone who brings up a controversial topic as a potential troll? This is a good way of ensuring the topic stays controversial.

    TotalWarlord's arguments have indeed been hotly debated before, but that is because many people have heard only one side of the story. So yes, it's quite possible that a new member is not aware of this, especially if he didn't check out the FAQ. Shouting "OMG, how can you not know?!" at him will not convince him you are right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mulceber View Post
    1. Someone else could probably answer this one better than me, but iirc, overhand and underhand are both accurate, depending on the style of phalanx warfare. Classical greek hoplites fought overhand. The Macedonian/Hellenistic style phalanx was underhand.

    2. In every source I've seen, Lorica Segmentata was used from the first century AD to the third. Outside of EB's time frame.
    Just a few nitpicks:

    1) It probably wasn't as absolute as this: both high and low styles are feasible with sarissa's and dory's, depending on what the situation requires. Swiss pikemen had a stance where they held their pikes at shoulder height (the phalangite shield useless in this stance, so Hellenic pikemen probably didn't use this). Underhand spear-fighting can make sense for hoplites too, say in one-on-one combat. The team went with overhand style since this is used on most Classical depictions, and seems suited to shield-wall combat.

    2) Elements of a Lorica Segmentata have been dated to 10 BC, and this probably does not represent the first use of this armour. However, the team is of the opinion that it did not become widespread until 50 AD, and even at its most popular, many legionaries would still use chainmail.
    Looking for a good read? Visit the Library!

  16. #16

    Default Re: EB is not Historical?

    It would be nice if a new Roman reform (Tiberian Reform) were introduced into EB, which would only become possible to get between 9 BC and 13 AD, and with very high eligibility requirements, which would introduce the lorica segmentata for praetorian cohorts only (since the main use of the armor during the Pax Romana would be to look nice and shiny on parade.)

    So lorica segmentata would become a reward for a successful Roman campaign.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO