Faction List for EB2?

**Brave Brave Sir Robin** · 10-21-2009, 18:57

Originally Posted by Skullheadhq

Atropatene'd be killed in 2 turns by either the Seleukids or the hay

You could argue the same thing for Hay or Baktria. Both stuck between Seleucids and another faction. (Sauromatae and Saka respectively)

I suppose Atropatene would have less room to expand however.

Oops I forogot to mention Bosporans in my first post. Oh well, maybe scratching Atropatene wouldnt be such a bad idea.

In terms of keeping the Casse, it ensures that Britain is not a joke to take as the Sweboz or Gallic factions. Historically, you are correct, no tribe united the isle before the Romans arrived. However its addition imo is merited both to make the isle harder to take and also because British tribes did lend money and possibly troops to help their Gallic and Belgic allies during Caesars wars in Gaul.

Also, remember the game is about presenting the situation at 272 and letting everything go from there. What did or didn't happen makes no difference.

**ziegenpeter** · 10-21-2009, 19:35

Originally Posted by Brave Brave Sir Robin

In terms of keeping the Casse, it ensures that Britain is not a joke to take as the Sweboz or Gallic factions. Historically, you are correct, no tribe united the isle before the Romans arrived. However its addition imo is merited both to make the isle harder to take and also because British tribes did lend money and possibly troops to help their Gallic and Belgic allies during Caesars wars in Gaul.

Well then cut britain out? Leaves more provinces for the rest.
And

Originally Posted by Brave Brave Sir Robin

Also, remember the game is about presenting the situation at 272 and letting everything go from there. What did or didn't happen makes no difference.

is not entirely true. The importance of a faction after 272 does influence the consideration wether a faction is included or not.

**Skullheadhq** · 10-21-2009, 19:46

Originally Posted by ziegenpeter

Well then cut britain out? Leaves more provinces for the rest.
And
is not entirely true. The importance of a faction after 272 does influence the consideration wether a faction is included or not.

Well, Epeiros was largely gone after 272BC....

**bobbin** · 10-21-2009, 19:57

Eh? The Aiakid line lasted until 231bc, then the Eproite League until 167bc thats hardly "largely gone"

**-Praetor-** · 10-21-2009, 20:01

Originally Posted by ziegenpeter

Well then cut britain out?

The EB team won't cut a single province off of the British Isles. That has been already decided.

**ziegenpeter** · 10-21-2009, 20:26

Originally Posted by -Praetor-

The EB team won't cut a single province off of the British Isles. That has been already decided.

Ok I was a bit polemic there. What
What I meant is "The fact that the British Isles are on the map shouldn't be the single or a major reason for keeping casse as a faction in game because you could cut them out"
And don't get me wrong, I don't raise the plea that Casse should be kicked out.

**WarpGhost** · 10-21-2009, 20:39

I'm inclined to agree on the Casse analysis; my heart says keep them in, but my head points out that, especially with the game having the restrictions on units/factions/provinces it does, it does make a lot more sense to invest the potential savings elsewhere, where they can be more consistantly useful. Dont get me wrong, one of my favourite things about EB was that it included factions like Baktria and Epeiros; but because of both geography and AI limitations, this is one of the cases (like with Pergamon and many of the potentials on the list) I would argue the other way.

**ziegenpeter** · 10-21-2009, 20:59

The questions are: How many other potential factions we know enough about that they could be included as a facion? Did they expand/were a miltary power? And would they add variety to the game? I think the last point is also important since I'd rather let Casse and/or Saba in than having a gazillion of exchangeable hellenic factions. Finally we should consider the starting point of a potential replacement for a "peripherical" faction, because replacing Casse by another faction on the outer rims of the map would't make any sense, right?

**WarpGhost** · 10-21-2009, 21:12

Casse represent something of a particularly questionable faction because they arent just peripheral, they're peripheral and strongly seperated geographically, which takes them to a whole different level of peripheral. Saba arent quite as bad, but the empty distances involved do put them towards that level too. Even Sarmations, Saka and Sweboz have regular and notable contact with 2-3 other factions. Thats because though peripheral, their geography doesnt create significant inherent problems to their ability to impact the game. Also, dont forget that the more factions you add to the periphery, the more contact you create for those around them too.

**lobf** · 10-21-2009, 20:18

Originally Posted by Brave Brave Sir Robin

You could argue the same thing for Hay or Baktria. Both

In terms of keeping the Casse, it ensures that Britain is not a joke to take as the Sweboz or Gallic factions. Historically, you are correct, no tribe united the isle before the Romans arrived. However its addition imo is merited both to make the isle harder to take and also because British tribes did lend money and possibly troops to help their Gallic and Belgic allies during Caesars wars in Gaul.

Also, remember the game is about presenting the situation at 272 and letting everything go from there. What did or didn't happen makes no difference.

But these are gameplay considerations rather than historical ones, which the EB team constantly distinguishes as criteria for inclusion.