There definitely shouldn't be an Epirus faction, its territory would be controlled by Alexander since he inherited that throne as well thanks to his mom.
There definitely shouldn't be an Epirus faction, its territory would be controlled by Alexander since he inherited that throne as well thanks to his mom.
Noobtastic indeed, EB hasn't been a beta since 0.8, and people calling it a beta was the reason this one was named 1.0, it seems that didn't work though...Originally Posted by noobtastic
Aside from that, EB is still in its beta stage. Don't look for a mod being made for it for some time. They have to finish EB first!
Support Asia ton Barbaron, the Eastern Mod for EB, on The Guild and TWC.
Former barman at theEB Tavern.![]()
My balloons:![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Silly me, I didn't even notice.
![]()
Support Asia ton Barbaron, the Eastern Mod for EB, on The Guild and TWC.
Former barman at theEB Tavern.![]()
My balloons:![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
I know that pahlavans were much moer cavalry based then persians.Limited to kinsmen sounds good to me.
Oh, sorry I didn't read the date. I had assumed the campaign begins on the death of Phillip. Still though, it would be pretty cool if there was some way that Macedon could automatically take over Epirus's territory when Arybbas diesOriginally Posted by konny
About the elephants,I think you should limit them to native mic in the Sindh province,because persians recruited their elephants from there IIRC.
Yes, local MIC would be a good idea. There are other locals that I hadn't though about, too: "Greek Mercaneries" should be recruitable in locals MICs in the western Satrapies. But what were they? I think in Alexander's army this term refers to Iphikratians, but is it true for the Persian army well?
That is not possible, ASFAIK. I don't think that it would be accurate either because the Epirotes had their own king in Alexander I (a different Alexander than the Great), who started the war in Italy in the 330s. But it should be allied.Originally Posted by Diamondj
Expand the map to India, make the extra unwanted terroritory unpassable and make the region part of the Sahara region. Now you've taken care of areas that we don't really care about. As far as re-allocating provinces, make cuts in several regions. From the Isles, take;Erain, Corieltauvae, Cambriae, Cornovae and from NW Africa take Phasania and Gaetulia. Mod the Africa part of the map to put a sahara province border between a fully expanded Carthage and Alexander/Ptolemy. I have personally never seen the AI take Auwjogotanoz, the small island off the coast of of the Scandanavian peninsula, so for all intents and purposes I'd say scrap it. You now have 7 provinces for india, and if it's argued more is needed, the only overallocation of provinces I feel is in Gaul/Germany, so you might want to take one or two from there.
A few more proposals. This should definitely be based on BI, and incorporate the loyalty ratings. Give Rome a counter faction, and make the late game interesting. The emerging factions will allow Baktria to form properly, as well as Pahlava, and any other appropriately emerging faction. It would also allow hording, which would be applied not only to those typical factions you expect, but even to give some depth to perhaps a political party that was driven from it's home. Perhaps use religion as a crude form of culture, with Greek, Roman and Other since these two particular cultures were the ones who dominated regions and slowly converted other cultures to their own ideals. Obviously a persian won't be happy about a barbarian, but neither culture tried to really change the other. Do cities have loyalty in BI? If not, I'd suggest client rulers, with some decent rates of movement for players and keep the current client ruler set up for AI. With client rulers for all, with family members representing generals only, you could give more depth to ruling a city compared to being a battle commander. If when Alexander dies, if his empire is formed, it will collapse into the appropriate factions. If he dies before his time, then depending on how much if anything was conquered, have the 3 generals emerge as contenders in Greece itself. I'd suggest play time be from the death of Alexanders father to either the current end game date, or, slightly before the historical time for the Imperial reforms, and cut them out in favor of giving more units to these new factions if the unit limit from the removed factions doensn't supply enough units to the new factions.
[edit - wrong button] Reasons for not including the KH, it was a alliance of city states, better represented by rebels I think. Other italian factions, nobody else on the peninsula from what I know had a taste for conquest quite like Rome. I noticed Illyria suggested, they only came together for a short while, and were interested in piracy not conquest so much, and thus perhaps give a large naval port to the rebels there with the ability to produce some strong ships. Or a lot of them, whatever. Casse are gone, what role did they really play? Did they ever invade the mainland? Did they even dominate the region? Not really. Arvernii: I believe the Aedui at this time were a stronger faction no? Either way, while it's regrettable to cut them, I again feel their better represented by rebels who oppose a individual tribe. Perhaps if we want a change of tribe there remove the Aedui for another Gaulic tribe that may seem more appropriate. Saka was my last faction that I feel ultimately should be sacrificed, in order to give romans late gameplay value, a counter faction and representing the civil wars. If the Saka were truly a hard competer, they would have been in the core collection of factions EB has had since .7x I feel.
Faction List:
[greek]
1)Makedonia
2)Ptolemy
3)Seleukia
4)Lysimachus
5)Epirus
6)Baktria
7)Eleutheroi
[Roman]
8)Rome
9)Counterfaction
[barbarian]
10)Aedui
11)Getai
12)Lusotannia
13)Sweboz
[steppe]
14)Sarmatian
[Eastern]
15)Pontos
16)Armenia
17)Persia
18)Pahlava
[Forgot their culture]
19)Karthage
20)Saba
[Indian]
21)Maurya
Cut factions:
Casse
KH
Saka
Arvernii
Last edited by Gazius; 11-10-2007 at 20:06.
Isn't this faction list strange?In 360 bc there were no Ptolemies or Seleucids (together with persians?Thats strange),and no Lysimachus.Why make Alexanders empire crumble?EB is about changing history,not replaying it.I can only see a way to include them if one of these are shadow faction of Maks,or if they are emergent.Saka should changed to massagetae, almost kicked some mak ass.
Last edited by Malik of Sindh; 11-10-2007 at 20:22.
Yes, provided there are some people that will join in. I can't make it all singlehanded. I had made some conceptual maps with homelands and expansion zones for possible new factions that I will upload tomorrow.
I didn't plan to make a new map. I wanted to use the EB map and the EB units to represent the periode. The idea is a "Prelude to EB" with using as much of the original game as possible. Of course, if someone is willing and able to make a new map that fits better, please step foreward. The same is for new units: there is something like the Immortals missing for the Persians. Another unit would be an Etruscian Hoplite in EB style.Expand the map to India, make the extra unwanted terroritory unpassable and make the region part of the Sahara region.
I had thought on the BI as well for the possiblity to create a Makedon rebell faction for the East (certainly not all 4 of them). Hording would be fine, too. For example for a Celtic horde that comes down the Danube.This should definitely be based on BI, and incorporate the loyalty ratings. Give Rome a counter faction, and make the late game interesting.
Roman counterfaction? The game ends around the time EB starts, there is no need for the possibility of a Roman civil war.
That would be four emerging factions for the Makedons. A little much, especially because the chance to get at least one into the game is very small: The AI won't conquer Persia and a human player won't have so much problems with unrest.Faction List:
1)Makedonia
2)Ptolemy
3)Seleukia
4)Lysimachus
5)Epirus
6)Baktria
A counterfaction for the Romans is not needed. They start with Latium only and are not intended to take much more than Italy. After thinking it over, I would suppose to cut the Samnite as well and replace them with rebells. When Syracusae and a Italo-Celt faction is in, Italy is allready quite full.8)Rome
9)Counterfaction
Pontos and Persia at the same time?15)Pontos
16)Armenia
17)Persia
18)Pahlava
Yes, an Indian faction could be an idea - on the other, were these Indian provinces of any importance for the other factions, others than provinces that a lot of people tried to counquer in vain? Their main "zone of action" would be somewhere outside the map.21)Maurya
Saka could be a candidate to cut because Parthia should start further north as a nomad faction. I hadn't the Arverni on my list too. They should be replaced by an Italian tribe, for example the Boii in Bononia or the Insurbes in Mediolanum; leaving Gaul to a single-town faction, for example the Bituriges.Casse
KH
Saka
Arvernii
Cutting KH would be no-go for me. They were very important for the time of Philipp.
Playing Casse in 360 BC is for sure not different than playing them in 270; but on the other hand it is one of the favorite factions of many players and I don't see a reason to kick them out (that AI doesn't know what to do with them isn't an argument. If it was one, we must cut nearly all factions out.)
Bookmarks