Because 3 and particuarly 4 cannot build the factional mics to the correct level to recruit the troops that we would want them to.Originally Posted by Wolfshart
Foot
Because 3 and particuarly 4 cannot build the factional mics to the correct level to recruit the troops that we would want them to.Originally Posted by Wolfshart
Foot
EBII Mod Leader
Hayasdan Faction Co-ordinator
Ok gotcha. Like I said for me it wouldn't be an issue as I only ever recruit from Roma or Capua and play historically only following correct dates but I could see how it could hinder the blitz players out there.Originally Posted by Foot
So I guess it comes down to game play over history.
Last edited by Wolfshart; 04-11-2007 at 21:00.
Slainte!!![]()
We are not pandering to the blitz players with this, the Romans sure recruited latin and italic troops from other cities than Roma and Capua. The only way we can represent this with the recruitment system we have is if those cities have gov1s or gov2sOriginally Posted by Wolfshart
Foot
EBII Mod Leader
Hayasdan Faction Co-ordinator
Ok so it comes down to a conflict with scripting, unit slots, building slots and game play then? If so I guess that very little could be done and the most would be to reduce them to gov 2. Ohh well.Originally Posted by Foot
![]()
Last edited by Wolfshart; 04-11-2007 at 22:45.
Slainte!!![]()
It's not about history over gameplay, it's about using the Engine to represent history the best way we can. The Romani are a special case and they are already given an unreasonable amount of attention compared to every other faction.Originally Posted by Wolfshart
To be honest I find your insistance that we preference gameplay over history to be slightly offensive given our stated aims.
Our Roman troops also represent the Soccii, it's really that simple.
Recruiting from even Capua is probably a-historical if you just want "pure" Roman troops, only recruiting from Roma and Capua is a-historical if you follow the conventions EB uses.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
I don't think Wolfshart suggested any such thing (gameplay over history), so don't get your knickers in a knot! It is clear to me that he has accepted the explanation, but still exhibits some disappointment.....which is fair enough.Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
Like myself it would appear that Wolfshart is a new member to these forums so may not be 'intimately knowledgable' about decisions that have been made for unavoidable reasons. However, what seems obvious to you may not be obvious to others.
The first time a booted up EB it seemed obvious to me that Roman troops must represent the Soccii/Latins as well. But just to clarify I asked the question in a PM to a member. The answer I got didn't answer the question. It left me more clueless than what I had been to start with. Now I know for certain, so thank you.
So please be patient with those who are 'not in the know' or haven't been around long enough to witness certain evolutions. They may actually have some ideas that get around some perceived obstacles, if they haven't walked away mumbling 'what a pack of beligerent !@#$%^&*'.....
Cheers,
Quilts
Please don't lecture me. I realise that not everyone is entirely clued up on everything. However, it gets frustrating when you have to make the same point in every post in the same thread.
We work very hard, we are almost all academics or students working within a field related to our roles in EB. We know about the reality of ancient Rome and her relationship to the other Italian states at the start of the game.
Sometimes it feels like people role up, look over the mod, find something they don't think fits and assume we don't know what we're talking about. While I don't think that is really the case here it does become rather wearing in general.
"If it wears trousers generally I don't pay attention."
[IMG]https://img197.imageshack.us/img197/4917/logoromans23pd.jpg[/IMG]
Bookmarks