Org Mobile Site
Thread: New factions?
oh yes, thats right I forgot to answer you earlier.
In cases of emergency the druids would pick a king to face the problem, however in all other cases the Vergobret (in the case of the Aedui) or other leader of the magistrate would be picked by nobility. And as for only druids possessing any knowledge, what evidence do you have of this? Particularly as it was the celtic blacksmiths who renowned as the some of the greatest in the world, whose expertise equipped the romans.
You certainly won't be seeng a Basque or Proto-Slavic faction as we know nothing about these groups during our timeframe. As for a Jewish faction, they did not appear as an independent state until well into our timeframe, and were certainly not expansionistic once they became independent.
I must also ask you to remove the first signature pic you have. This one is reserved for members of the EB Team. The others are, of course, okay.
Foot
In cases of emergency the druids would pick a king to face the problem, however in all other cases the Vergobret (in the case of the Aedui) or other leader of the magistrate would be picked by nobility. And as for only druids possessing any knowledge, what evidence do you have of this? Particularly as it was the celtic blacksmiths who renowned as the some of the greatest in the world, whose expertise equipped the romans.
You certainly won't be seeng a Basque or Proto-Slavic faction as we know nothing about these groups during our timeframe. As for a Jewish faction, they did not appear as an independent state until well into our timeframe, and were certainly not expansionistic once they became independent.
I must also ask you to remove the first signature pic you have. This one is reserved for members of the EB Team. The others are, of course, okay.
Foot
Originally Posted by Viking_Wårlord:
"I would put the inclusion of another Celtic or Germanic faction over that of Bosphorus or Massalia. "
Why the hell do we need another Celtic faction?
There's already 4 of them!
And only 1 Germanic!
We should put 2 more Germanic factions, a Basque faction,a proto-Slavic one and ,if possible; a Jewish faction!
What other two German tribes do we know enough about at EBs start date?"I would put the inclusion of another Celtic or Germanic faction over that of Bosphorus or Massalia. "
Why the hell do we need another Celtic faction?
There's already 4 of them!
And only 1 Germanic!
We should put 2 more Germanic factions, a Basque faction,a proto-Slavic one and ,if possible; a Jewish faction!
Which proto-Slavic tribe at the start date?
No independant Jewish faction existed at the start date. To include them they would need to be included as an emergant faction, which has already been ruled out a number of times on this thread, if you've read it.
I like how he keeps saying "we".
Hi, I'm kinda new here, I've had the patience to read only the firs page as everyone was arguing about a new "german" tribe, I saw someone tried to explain that there was not any germanic tribe then, cause "german" means in latin "twin" like in "twin brothers", the term used by the latins to define the 2 tribes in in Poland and East Germany today, I think the marcomanii and the teutons. so germanic people didn't even exist as an identity. Ok, now, about new factions, I don't know if anyone mentioned earlier, but I didn't see the Dacians in the first EB, instead of them where the thracians, who where not the same thing. So, if you want to be historical accurate the dacians where neighbors with the tracians in the south and in the west they had the Boii and Tauriscii, galic tribes. There where famous for their archers, for falx dacica and sica... but I think most of you know that. and Dromichaites was the dacian leader who defeated Lysimachus in cca. 280 B.C. so that would be a start.
thanks for reading and I hope I didn't repeat what someone else wrote earlier, I'll try to read the hole topic.
thanks for reading and I hope I didn't repeat what someone else wrote earlier, I'll try to read the hole topic.
We do not have any 'Thracians' in EB. We do have the Getai, one of the many Thracian/Dacian tribes. It should perhaps be noted that what we call Getia Koile (with its provincial capital of famous Sarmiszegethusa) is better known as Dacia.
So it will appear as the "Getai" wich is the greek name for the roman name "Dacia"?
AFAIK Latin for "twins" is "gemini" (like the star constellation) and not "german".
Well Iordanes in "Getica" says that german means "twin". ;)
there are not many sources on the internet, but according to University of Notre Dame's site:
germanus -a -um [having the same parents]; m. or f. as subst. [own brother , own sister]. Transf., [brotherly, sisterly; genuine, real, true]. Adv., germane, [faithfully, honestly].
germanus -a -um [having the same parents]; m. or f. as subst. [own brother , own sister]. Transf., [brotherly, sisterly; genuine, real, true]. Adv., germane, [faithfully, honestly].
Just to let you know, don't double post, there is an edit button for adding stuff on.
Unless you cant edit as a junior member, in that case, I am an idiot and disregard this entire post.
Unless you cant edit as a junior member, in that case, I am an idiot and disregard this entire post.
can't do it. probably cause I'm new here. I'll install EB1 again to remember about it, and hope to have another few ideas about the new game. If the developers are interested in details about the dacians, I'm here and now a bit about it. feel free to ask.
Originally Posted by Viking_Wårlord:
"I would put the inclusion of another Celtic or Germanic faction over that of Bosphorus or Massalia. "
Why the hell do we need another Celtic faction?
There's already 4 of them!
And only 1 Germanic!
We should put 2 more Germanic factions, a Basque faction,a proto-Slavic one and ,if possible; a Jewish faction!
There aren't 4 Celtic factions, there's 3. And Germanic factions are very difficult to research, although I would like another one. "I would put the inclusion of another Celtic or Germanic faction over that of Bosphorus or Massalia. "
Why the hell do we need another Celtic faction?
There's already 4 of them!
And only 1 Germanic!
We should put 2 more Germanic factions, a Basque faction,a proto-Slavic one and ,if possible; a Jewish faction!
Why not another Celtic faction anyway? Don't you think Galatia or the Brigantes would be fun?
Kimbern, Teutonen und Ambronen: Die Kimbern, Teutonen und Abronen waren germanische Völker, die ursprünglich in Jütland beheimatet waren. Gut 100 Jahre vor Christus begann ihre lange Reise. Immerwährende Kälte und Hunger waren der Grund, weshalb sie Jütland verließen, und nach Süden aufbrachen. Ihre Reise ging über Schlesien, Böhmen, Ungarn, Rumänien, Italien- rund 8000km legte der Treck in ca. 20 Jahren zurück. Sie lebten hauptsächlich von Fischfang und Überfällen. Wo sie auch verbeikamen hinterließen sie Angst und Schrecken.
"Es ist schlaff und dumm, sich mit Schweiss zu erarbeiten, was man sich mit Blut erkämpfen kann. Kimbern & Teutonen
Tacitus bezeichnete sie als "Tiere auf zwei Beinen". Bei Noricum (Noreia), besiegten sie 113 v. Chr. ein römisches Heer. Sie zogen dann westwärts über den Rhein nach Gallien und vernichteten, nachdem ihnen Rom die Bitte um Zuweisung von Land abgeschlagen hatte, weitere drei römische Heere (109, 107 und 105 v. Chr.) und trafen erst bei den Keltiberern auf Widerstand. Sie vereinigten sich im Gebiet der unteren Seine mit den Helvetiern und drangen auf verschiedenen Wegen in Italien ein, wo Rom ihnen das Gebiet nördlich des Po überlassen musste. Am Ziel ihrer Reise und Träume angelangt, wurden sie 102 v. Chr. von Marius bei Aquae Sextiae und Vercellae (Norditalien) vernichtet.
Well its german could someone translate it?
"Es ist schlaff und dumm, sich mit Schweiss zu erarbeiten, was man sich mit Blut erkämpfen kann. Kimbern & Teutonen
Tacitus bezeichnete sie als "Tiere auf zwei Beinen". Bei Noricum (Noreia), besiegten sie 113 v. Chr. ein römisches Heer. Sie zogen dann westwärts über den Rhein nach Gallien und vernichteten, nachdem ihnen Rom die Bitte um Zuweisung von Land abgeschlagen hatte, weitere drei römische Heere (109, 107 und 105 v. Chr.) und trafen erst bei den Keltiberern auf Widerstand. Sie vereinigten sich im Gebiet der unteren Seine mit den Helvetiern und drangen auf verschiedenen Wegen in Italien ein, wo Rom ihnen das Gebiet nördlich des Po überlassen musste. Am Ziel ihrer Reise und Träume angelangt, wurden sie 102 v. Chr. von Marius bei Aquae Sextiae und Vercellae (Norditalien) vernichtet.
Well its german could someone translate it?
Kimber, Teuton and Ambronen: The Kimber, Teuton and Abronen were Germanic peoples who originally were home in Jutland. More than 100 years before Christ began their long journey. Perpetual cold and hunger were the reason why they left Jutland, and set out to the south. Their journey was over Silesia, Bohemia, Hungary, Romania, Italy, about 8000 km, the trek in about 20 years ago. They lived mainly by fishing and robberies. Where she also verbeikamen they left behind fear and horror.
"It is limp and stupid, with sweat to develop what we can fight with blood. Kimber & Teuton
Tacitus described them as "animals on two legs." When Noricum (Noreia), they defeated 113 BC, a Roman army. They then moved westward across the Rhine after Gaul and destroyed after Rome asking them to allocate land amputated had another three Roman armies (109, 107 and 105 BC) and met only when the Keltiberern opposition. They united in the territory of the lower Seine with the Helvetii and penetrated in various ways in Italy, where Rome them the area north of the Po had to leave. At the destination of their journey and dreams arrived, they were 102 BC by Marius at Aquae Sextiae and Vercellae (northern Italy) destroyed.
Thank the Google translate!
"It is limp and stupid, with sweat to develop what we can fight with blood. Kimber & Teuton
Tacitus described them as "animals on two legs." When Noricum (Noreia), they defeated 113 BC, a Roman army. They then moved westward across the Rhine after Gaul and destroyed after Rome asking them to allocate land amputated had another three Roman armies (109, 107 and 105 BC) and met only when the Keltiberern opposition. They united in the territory of the lower Seine with the Helvetii and penetrated in various ways in Italy, where Rome them the area north of the Po had to leave. At the destination of their journey and dreams arrived, they were 102 BC by Marius at Aquae Sextiae and Vercellae (northern Italy) destroyed.
Thank the Google translate!
Originally Posted by :
Where she also verbeikamen they left behind fear and horror.
Where they went, they left horror and fear behind.Where she also verbeikamen they left behind fear and horror.
This is a thread for new factions, but if you want, we can open a new thread where we can discuss about these people... From what it says above, they where living in Denmark today, and moved southward to a kinder climate. but is much to talk, cause my opinion is that the germanic people didn't even exist back then, in ancient times, and about the early medieval germans... I don't have enough documentation to have an opinion, except perhaps the ghots, who where actualy getai or dacians, living in S-E side of Romania today. Anyway, the date they start moving is 160 years later from 272, when the game starts. It would be just a discution for our own knowledge.
ok... I haven't played EB1 for a year now and I had to reinstall it to remember. I would have to say that the troop tree is too complicated, and that dacians never had phalanx or skirmishers like you put it, with pilla (javelins). If I remember correct they had mostly light cavalry, shields and spears, great archers, good infantry, especially the so called "falxmen" who used Falx Dacica, but the normal infantry mostly used "Sica" a smaller falx. The falx had about 180 cm, and about 90-100 cm of that was the blade, curved and with small channels so that the blood can flow and the blade will remain clean. The sica had only about 60-80 cm, and was used as a normal one handed sword. it was also curved like a sicle. So, in my opinion, skirmishers would have to go, to remain plain infantry, falxmen, maybe an aditional infantry type with sica, archers, maybe 2 types, and cavalry, light, heavy (Tarabostes - they where the dacian nobles) and some horse archers, because the influence of the scythians was present at the time. I'll play it a bit tonight to look around the map and see about the cities, didn't have to much time last night.
If you cannot back-up your statements with sources and evidence they are worthless to us. I'm sorry, but how can we implement anything you say without the evidence to back it up?
Foot
Foot
Originally Posted by Foot:
If you cannot back-up your statements with sources and evidence they are worthless to us. I'm sorry, but how can we implement anything you say without the evidence to back it up?
Foot
I can give you some links but they are in romanian and you wouldn't understand much. Usually, I read these information in books, the internet is full of crap. I'll see if I can find some good sites, but I can tell you clear, there where no phalanxes in native dacian army. if there where in some points mercenary hoplites is another thing.If you cannot back-up your statements with sources and evidence they are worthless to us. I'm sorry, but how can we implement anything you say without the evidence to back it up?
Foot
Please tell me you arent considering leaving Syracuse or Pergamon out - their potential was incredible, even if not fully realised.
Illyria and Numidia would be a shame to waste too.
These are all foetal nations that could have become great had they not been snuffed out by Rome. Bottom line is that we'll never know the potential that any of them really had, were Rome never to come to power, so you should base your inclusion on two things enjoyability (we are all here to game after all) and availability of information (for factions with factual depth). That means staying tight to the mediterranean basin for the most part.
Illyria and Numidia would be a shame to waste too.
These are all foetal nations that could have become great had they not been snuffed out by Rome. Bottom line is that we'll never know the potential that any of them really had, were Rome never to come to power, so you should base your inclusion on two things enjoyability (we are all here to game after all) and availability of information (for factions with factual depth). That means staying tight to the mediterranean basin for the most part.
Originally Posted by LuciusCorneliusSulla:
Please tell me you arent considering leaving Syracuse or Pergamon out - their potential was incredible, even if not fully realised.
Illyria and Numidia would be a shame to waste too.
These are all foetal nations that could have become great had they not been snuffed out by Rome. Bottom line is that we'll never know the potential that any of them really had, were Rome never to come to power, so you should base your inclusion on two things enjoyability (we are all here to game after all) and availability of information (for factions with factual depth). That means staying tight to the mediterranean basin for the most part.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=103202 Stele 6 confirms that Pergamon will be in EB2Please tell me you arent considering leaving Syracuse or Pergamon out - their potential was incredible, even if not fully realised.
Illyria and Numidia would be a shame to waste too.
These are all foetal nations that could have become great had they not been snuffed out by Rome. Bottom line is that we'll never know the potential that any of them really had, were Rome never to come to power, so you should base your inclusion on two things enjoyability (we are all here to game after all) and availability of information (for factions with factual depth). That means staying tight to the mediterranean basin for the most part.
Originally Posted by dromychaetes:
I can give you some links but they are in romanian and you wouldn't understand much. Usually, I read these information in books, the internet is full of crap. I'll see if I can find some good sites, but I can tell you clear, there where no phalanxes in native dacian army. if there where in some points mercenary hoplites is another thing.
We are fully equipped with some romanians so links to books would be great. But please be aware that information found on the internet should certainly be taken with a pinch of salt as it rarely is able to keep up with continuing research or engage with both sides of an argument. We don't use the internet as a resource in EB, but instead rely on primary and secondary texts as well as archaelogical finds. We also don't have dacian phalanxes, but there is a thracian one from the southern tribes who were heavily influenced by the Makedonian military. I can give you some links but they are in romanian and you wouldn't understand much. Usually, I read these information in books, the internet is full of crap. I'll see if I can find some good sites, but I can tell you clear, there where no phalanxes in native dacian army. if there where in some points mercenary hoplites is another thing.
But to be quite honest our getian and thracian historians are top-notch and we feel comfortable with the portrayal of that region in EBI and it will largely be the same in EBII.
Foot
I've had the "pleasure" to chat with one on a roumanian forum, and it came to my mind to see what is going on here. if you rely on this kind of people... let me put it in a nice way... you'll get nowhere and EBII will have skirmishers and stuff like that. I don't know if there are any writings of Diodor of Sicily on the internet, I tried to find some, there is presented the first dacian king, Dromichaites, who ruled in the period you're game would start. Firstly, there was no such thing as an assembled army, there where the king's guards, but the military organization was made by every taraboste in his settlement as the dacians where mostly a defensive nation, they didn't go for other lands than their own, so there was not an army like the macedonian or the roman army. It's very much to tell so I don't know if here is the place to discuss it. But my first impresion, and I'm only interested, as a Total War fan, and a romanian, to see dacians in the game as they actually where. The capital is said to be Helis, near Argesus river, left side of Danube, so that would be the main city, the capital of the burii is also presented as other 2-3 settlements, capitals of other dacian tribes.
I was trying to help a bit, but if you think it's not needed and your researchers are helping, not like in EB1, then that's fine with me, the only thing that is important to me is to see Dacia like it was, without those funy greek names for troops and so on.
I was trying to help a bit, but if you think it's not needed and your researchers are helping, not like in EB1, then that's fine with me, the only thing that is important to me is to see Dacia like it was, without those funy greek names for troops and so on.
You probably spoke to Cronos Impera. He is not the lead historian, the very able Paullus is Faction Coordinator for the Getai, and he is also the co-Lead Historian for the EB Team (you can read up on him in Stele #7.
And what language would you like us to use? Dacian and Thracian is unknown beyond a few non-military terms. Greek is the closest we can get, unfortunately.
My only concern is that you come here as a recent member with only 9 posts to your name making all kinds of assertions but so far unwilling to back any of it up with evidence. There is no way of knowing if you are legit or just trying to yank our chain. It is helpful in any internet forum to maintain a healthy level of distrust to any person you don't know.
Furthermore, our Getai faction does not represent the Dacians (as far as I am aware). It represents the Ordes Tribe. I would suggest that you PM Paullus with your concerns in a more coherent form than is available to you here and await his reply.
Insulting members of our team is going to get you no where, btw. Each and every one of them put so much time and energy into this project that to even question them as an individual is offensive. Question the evidence, but do not insult our team members.
Foot
And what language would you like us to use? Dacian and Thracian is unknown beyond a few non-military terms. Greek is the closest we can get, unfortunately.
My only concern is that you come here as a recent member with only 9 posts to your name making all kinds of assertions but so far unwilling to back any of it up with evidence. There is no way of knowing if you are legit or just trying to yank our chain. It is helpful in any internet forum to maintain a healthy level of distrust to any person you don't know.
Furthermore, our Getai faction does not represent the Dacians (as far as I am aware). It represents the Ordes Tribe. I would suggest that you PM Paullus with your concerns in a more coherent form than is available to you here and await his reply.
Insulting members of our team is going to get you no where, btw. Each and every one of them put so much time and energy into this project that to even question them as an individual is offensive. Question the evidence, but do not insult our team members.
Foot
^congrats foot, ur 8000th post =]
I cannot so far send you books in romanian, they are at the national library, in romanian, I can only give you and the others that do this the titles and the authors. The fact that the getai and the dacians where the same thing is well known. there where however some who said that the getai where the western dacians. About the language, it doesnt look to good if the getai and the greek factions (makedonia and greek cities) use the same language. I don't have the answer for that yet, I'll think about it. and for the fact that I have 9 or 10 or 20 posts, it doesn't matter, all that matters is that the information is correct.
Originally Posted by dromychaetes:
I cannot so far send you books in romanian [...] it doesn't matter, all that matters is that the information is correct.
Are we supposed to just take you for your word until you get that information then?I cannot so far send you books in romanian [...] it doesn't matter, all that matters is that the information is correct.
Originally Posted by satalexton:
^congrats foot, ur 8000th post =]
Why isn't he a senior member yet? I have seen senior members with only around 2,000 posts.^congrats foot, ur 8000th post =]
well, what is your source of information? have you any real sources to show me that skirmishers with pilla existed back then in Dacia? or that phalanxes where present at the time?
Originally Posted by :
I cannot so far send you books in romanian, they are at the national library, in romanian, I can only give you and the others that do this the titles and the authors.
Of course you cannot send us books! We don't have an office or anything. If you write an essay, do you send the books along with it to be marked by your professor?! No. You use footnotes or endnotes. Same principle applies hereI cannot so far send you books in romanian, they are at the national library, in romanian, I can only give you and the others that do this the titles and the authors.
Originally Posted by dromychaetes:
well, what is your source of information? have you any real sources to show me that skirmishers with pilla existed back then in Dacia? or that phalanxes where present at the time?
No. You have to put forward your sources first. Not the other way round. How can we answer criticism if we do not have an argument (supported by evidence) to respond to. If we had to answer everyone's theories (correct or crack-pot) we wouldn't have time to make a mod. It is up to you to put forward an strong and supported argument for a certain representation. If you cannot be bothered to put the time in to do that then we certainly don't have the time to respond to it.well, what is your source of information? have you any real sources to show me that skirmishers with pilla existed back then in Dacia? or that phalanxes where present at the time?
Foot
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO