Results 1 to 30 of 639

Thread: Faction List for EB2?

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Come to daddy Member Geoffrey S's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Shell Beach
    Posts
    4,028

    Default Re: AW: Re: Faction List for EB2?

    Quote Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus
    I'm not saying that the Sweboz are included on the basis of Caesar's writing.
    Then I suggest you rephrase your reasoning, because the section quoted was not that clear.

    I can see where some of the confusion comes from. Tellos Athenaios implied that because their mention occurs around 104 bc they would have to be an emerging faction; clearly their history goes back further than that, so that wouldn't be a valid reason. I think MarcusAureliusAntoninus put it more clearly: what's being argued against by both is including people such as the Cimbri and Teutones on the basis of a moment many years after 272 in which a major action brings them into the attention of Greek/Roman authors, which is what was being implied by SouthernTrendKill and in reaction to whom both were writing. The EB team is not stating that the Cimbri and Teutones didn't have a history before their encounters with the Romans, but are arguing against their inclusion on the basis of achievements of the 2nd century bc.

    Like the other factions in a situation such as that of the Sweboz at the time, such as mainly the other 'barbarian' factions, new factions need archeological remains to form the basis of evidence for the faction in 272 bc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Centurio Nixalsverdrus
    So you can have all kinds of reason for not including the Cimbri or Teutones or Ambrones or whatever tribe of Skandza, and I concur with your reasons. But don't say they would be an emerging faction and therefore excluded. The Greeks and Romans are not the measure for all things you know.
    The last highlighted line is like preaching to the converted. That's the whole basis of EB in a nutshell. It also shows that the reasons the EB team has for not including such factions as the Cimbri and Teutones (which has not actually even been explicitely stated will be the case) you concur with in the first highlighted line aren't fully understood. They aren't saying they would be an emerging faction and therefore excluded: they are saying that the reasons given for their inclusion by for instance SouthernTrendKill aren't enough to warrant inclusion, because those reasons imply they would have to be emerging factions because the first time those peoples had an relevance is midway through the campaign game. That's where the idea that the Cimbri and Teutones would have to be an emerging faction came from, not from EB team members.

    I must note that the EB team has not gone further than showing why the reasons given here by fans aren't enough to warrant including certain discussed factions. That does not mean they aren't candidates, since that does not mean stronger evidence in favour doesn't exist or isn't being discussed in the EB development area.
    Last edited by Geoffrey S; 08-12-2007 at 11:27.
    "The facts of history cannot be purely objective, since they become facts of history only in virtue of the significance attached to them by the historian." E.H. Carr

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