Org Mobile Site
Thread: New factions?
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus:
It would indeed be grossly unhistorical, but then again, just about every barbarian faction was split between numerous tribes. Sweboz, Gauls, Iberians, Britons were all composed of different tribes and yet in EB, due to the faction limit, most of them are represented as one tribe.
Now, if you actually had played them and paid close enough attention to ethnicities you would see that indeed; that's not the exact case.It would indeed be grossly unhistorical, but then again, just about every barbarian faction was split between numerous tribes. Sweboz, Gauls, Iberians, Britons were all composed of different tribes and yet in EB, due to the faction limit, most of them are represented as one tribe.
Originally Posted by :
Sweboz, Gauls, Iberians, Britons
What the? Sweboz, Gauls, Iberians, Britons
I'm pretty sure the factions you mean are the Sweboz, Arverni, Aedui, Lusotannan, Casse. Congratulations, you actually named one faction right. As Tellos stated, if you had actually played them (or did any kind of background research on them), you'd notice that what you are stating is not the case. They are not represented as one tribe, as the Aedui and Arverni were confederations.
I think perhaps a Caledonian or Goillic clan would be a good change of pace, give something for the Casse to contend with for power in the Isles. Aswell a new clan in Spain or Germania would be good aswell. The Mediterranean has enough contenders I believe, and so does Asia, but North West Europe gets lonely with all the elutheroi areas.
Whats the problem of regions being overpowered with factions? In my opinion there should be more factions to make more pressure. I think it would be great for the game. Whats the fun of having a faction surrounded by a bunch of rebel cities with the nearest rival faction years away from it. It would be fun to see a bunch of tribes fighting for gaul, germany, all over the place. If you want a historical accurate game, do this (if the engine permits it =P ).
This is what I think will be the most likely faction list:
Boii - EB team has shown interest with this tribe, it was quite a major one. The Boii also is located in eastern europe and cisalpine gaul; the eleutheroi hotspots.
Erain with Goidilic reforms - All those splendid units and not a faction there? Bizarre is it not. Also provides competition with the Casse on the british isles which is quite decrepit as it stands.
Numidians/Kirtan - Empty eleutheroi desert, Carthage in dire need of competition there. Also a lot of Numidian units have been created.
Gandhara - Not the Mauryan Empire, just the allied city state. The EB team has shown interest in a single Indian city state. There are also already a lot of indian units.
Belgae - Interesting Gallic-briton unit mix. Already a few Belgae units. (Purple would be the best colour to use IMO)
Celtiberians/Numantia - Competition for Lusitannan. Also a major tribe.
Helvetii - An Alp faction, quite a major tribe, already alot of alpine units
Bosphorean Greeks - Interesting position and culture.
Pergamon - well duh.
The Last faction could possibly be : Mauretanian Numidians, Another German Tribe (Don't know the major ones), Massila, Bastarnae.
Quite alot of Celts, I know.
Boii - EB team has shown interest with this tribe, it was quite a major one. The Boii also is located in eastern europe and cisalpine gaul; the eleutheroi hotspots.
Erain with Goidilic reforms - All those splendid units and not a faction there? Bizarre is it not. Also provides competition with the Casse on the british isles which is quite decrepit as it stands.
Numidians/Kirtan - Empty eleutheroi desert, Carthage in dire need of competition there. Also a lot of Numidian units have been created.
Gandhara - Not the Mauryan Empire, just the allied city state. The EB team has shown interest in a single Indian city state. There are also already a lot of indian units.
Belgae - Interesting Gallic-briton unit mix. Already a few Belgae units. (Purple would be the best colour to use IMO)
Celtiberians/Numantia - Competition for Lusitannan. Also a major tribe.
Helvetii - An Alp faction, quite a major tribe, already alot of alpine units
Bosphorean Greeks - Interesting position and culture.
Pergamon - well duh.
The Last faction could possibly be : Mauretanian Numidians, Another German Tribe (Don't know the major ones), Massila, Bastarnae.
Quite alot of Celts, I know.
Originally Posted by I Am Herenow:
This gives me an idea!
I have a suggestion as to how to get 52 playable factions. Why not have two campaigns which are identical, except with Campaign A only the first 26 factions are playable, and with Campaign B the last 26 are playable. Sort of like what RTR 7.0 wants to do, except with two campaigns instead of 20.
With Kingdoms promising multiple campaigns, you could just have:
The only thing is, I'm not sure you'd be able to squeeze in a realistic amount of units for 52 factions with the same space you had for 21 or whatever factions, but anyway, here's my suggestion if you need it.
I think it's coolThis gives me an idea!
I have a suggestion as to how to get 52 playable factions. Why not have two campaigns which are identical, except with Campaign A only the first 26 factions are playable, and with Campaign B the last 26 are playable. Sort of like what RTR 7.0 wants to do, except with two campaigns instead of 20.
With Kingdoms promising multiple campaigns, you could just have:
EB Main Campaign (A to L)
EB Main Campaign (M to Z)
in your main menu and, hey presto, 52 playable factions.EB Main Campaign (M to Z)
The only thing is, I'm not sure you'd be able to squeeze in a realistic amount of units for 52 factions with the same space you had for 21 or whatever factions, but anyway, here's my suggestion if you need it.
BTW Bosphoran kingdom's culture must be western greek, not nomad or barbarian
and new faction for britain sounds good, also 1~2 more german factions is needed
Originally Posted by Cartaphilus:
Exactly. That is what I was suggesting.
But, anyway, the celts were not able to build "strong" states as the Roman, the Carthaginian or the empires of the east. Or am I totally wrong?
Do you actually have a reason for postulating this besides your gut? Exactly. That is what I was suggesting.
But, anyway, the celts were not able to build "strong" states as the Roman, the Carthaginian or the empires of the east. Or am I totally wrong?
Originally Posted by Dumbass:
Erain with Goidilic reforms - All those splendid units and not a faction there? Bizarre is it not. Also provides competition with the Casse on the british isles which is quite decrepit as it stands.
You probably won't see most of those neat Goidilic units in EBII.Erain with Goidilic reforms - All those splendid units and not a faction there? Bizarre is it not. Also provides competition with the Casse on the british isles which is quite decrepit as it stands.
Originally Posted by lobf:
Do you actually have a reason for postulating this besides your gut?
You probably won't see most of those neat Goidilic units in EBII.
Wha! Why not? Aren't they historically accurate?Do you actually have a reason for postulating this besides your gut?
You probably won't see most of those neat Goidilic units in EBII.
Originally Posted by lobf:
Do you actually have a reason for postulating this besides your gut?
More than you, indeed.Do you actually have a reason for postulating this besides your gut?
Originally Posted by Dumbass:
Celtiberians/Numantia - Competition for Lusitannan. Also a major tribe.
Helvetii - An Alp faction, quite a major tribe, already alot of alpine units
It's a good list. However, IIRC the Helvetii where part of the Boii confederacy. The Celtiberians won't be included as a group, as they weren't a single tribe. However, we will probably see them in the form of the Arevacii (the Numantines).Celtiberians/Numantia - Competition for Lusitannan. Also a major tribe.
Helvetii - An Alp faction, quite a major tribe, already alot of alpine units
Originally Posted by Dumbass:
Wha! Why not? Aren't they historically accurate?
That's currently being argued by lobf and Elmactios, but I am not sure what the team's stance is. Recruitment for the two heaviest Goidelic units (the hammermen and the imitation dosidataskeli) has been disabled, but this does not necessarily mean they will all be scrapped in EB2.Wha! Why not? Aren't they historically accurate?
Originally Posted by Ludens:
It's a good list. However, IIRC the Helvetii where part of the Boii confederacy. The Celtiberians won't be included as a group, as they weren't a single tribe. However, we will probably see them in the form of the Arevacii (the Numantines).
Helvettii were part of the Boii? That's interesting. It seems that we will definetly see the Boii in the game then. They're going to have a really interesting unit selection: Alpine, gallic, eastern celtic, maybe even some thracian.It's a good list. However, IIRC the Helvetii where part of the Boii confederacy. The Celtiberians won't be included as a group, as they weren't a single tribe. However, we will probably see them in the form of the Arevacii (the Numantines).
Originally Posted by Dumbass:
Belgae - Interesting Gallic-briton unit mix. Already a few Belgae units. (Purple would be the best colour to use IMO)
Belgae - Interesting Gallic-briton unit mix. Already a few Belgae units. (Purple would be the best colour to use IMO)
The Belgae would rather have a mixed celtic-germanic unit list.
The Helvetii were part of the Boii confederation? I didn't know that.
-You learn something new every day!
Stupid question, perhaps: The Cisalpine Boii were evidently part of the same people as the Boii of Bohemia, however, would they have been a single entity, or were they completely separate as states?
If I'm not mistaken, the Cisalpine Boii migrated into northern Italy some 200 years before the beginning of EB, while the Bohemian Boii came to settle in... Bohemia, obviously.
But would they have maintained such a close relationship to the other Boii? I guess if the Helvetii were part of the coalision, they would have been able to keep "in touch" with the Cisalpine Boii as well.
-You learn something new every day!
Stupid question, perhaps: The Cisalpine Boii were evidently part of the same people as the Boii of Bohemia, however, would they have been a single entity, or were they completely separate as states?
If I'm not mistaken, the Cisalpine Boii migrated into northern Italy some 200 years before the beginning of EB, while the Bohemian Boii came to settle in... Bohemia, obviously.
But would they have maintained such a close relationship to the other Boii? I guess if the Helvetii were part of the coalision, they would have been able to keep "in touch" with the Cisalpine Boii as well.
Originally Posted by Cartaphilus:
More than you, indeed.
What are you talking about? I didn't even propose anything. I was just asking if you based this knowledge off of anything besides what feels right. Apparently not. More than you, indeed.
Originally Posted by Dumbass:
Wha! Why not? Aren't they historically accurate?
Likely not. But that's a whole other topic. Wha! Why not? Aren't they historically accurate?
Originally Posted by Ludens:
That's currently being argued by lobf and Elmactios, but I am not sure what the team's stance is. Recruitment for the two heaviest Goidelic units (the hammermen and the imitation dosidataskeli) has been disabled, but this does not necessarily mean they will all be scrapped in EB2.
It's not, and shouldn't be, just us. We are quite vocal about the matter, though. Anyways, the fact that they scrapped them between 1.0 and 1.1 (or maybe it was earlier) is a pretty good indicator they won't be back.That's currently being argued by lobf and Elmactios, but I am not sure what the team's stance is. Recruitment for the two heaviest Goidelic units (the hammermen and the imitation dosidataskeli) has been disabled, but this does not necessarily mean they will all be scrapped in EB2.
Originally Posted by Methuselah:
Samurai Japan... Well, we could always get rid of the Roman Republic and replace Roma with Kyoto...
...?
This tops amongst the most non-sense posts I've seen, along with Abkosee's Bartix and that Hebrew defender guy's arguments.
You guys act as if I'm kidding. Honestly, samurai Japan in EB2 is perfectly feasible. Samurai Japan... Well, we could always get rid of the Roman Republic and replace Roma with Kyoto...
...?
This tops amongst the most non-sense posts I've seen, along with Abkosee's Bartix and that Hebrew defender guy's arguments.
Uhhhh............. no it isn´t. Please remember the the 3L´s. The PL, the CL and the UL, or (as the layman says it) the province limit, the culture limit and the unit limit. T
he province limit limits the number of provinces (duh), which means that if you wanted an accurate representation of ancient Japan and the lands between ancient Japan and the current EB map edge, you´d probably have to reduce all of Europe into a single province. This be the same reason India won´t be in, representing the worlds most heavily populated area with as many provinces as say Gaul (or Grecce for that matter) just isn´t historically accurate, and historical accuracy is what the EB team strives for in all matters.
The culture limit limits the number of cultures (duh), meaning that the Japs would have to share culture with say the Celts, Greeks or Carthaginians, and now that wouldn´t be very accurate would it? This is one of the many reasons Meroe and Axum won´t be in, as they´d require a completely new culture slot.
Finally, the unit limit limits the number of units (duh), meaning that the Japs wouldn´t have more than say... 10 units, which is just grossly wrong. If you then take into consideration the huge amounts of new units that would be required just to accurately represent a small 10km wide strip of land stretching between the Saka-Rauka and Japan, we´d probably have to sacrifice not only the Roman reforms, but the Roman units all togheter.
So no, while I am no EB Team member, I can say without any doubt, that EB 2 will not in any way include Japan. Period.
If you´re really desperate for Japan buy Total War: Shogun, old but good game.
Edit: By the way, didn´t the Samurai come into existence like waaaaaaaaaaay after 500 AD?
he province limit limits the number of provinces (duh), which means that if you wanted an accurate representation of ancient Japan and the lands between ancient Japan and the current EB map edge, you´d probably have to reduce all of Europe into a single province. This be the same reason India won´t be in, representing the worlds most heavily populated area with as many provinces as say Gaul (or Grecce for that matter) just isn´t historically accurate, and historical accuracy is what the EB team strives for in all matters.
The culture limit limits the number of cultures (duh), meaning that the Japs would have to share culture with say the Celts, Greeks or Carthaginians, and now that wouldn´t be very accurate would it? This is one of the many reasons Meroe and Axum won´t be in, as they´d require a completely new culture slot.
Finally, the unit limit limits the number of units (duh), meaning that the Japs wouldn´t have more than say... 10 units, which is just grossly wrong. If you then take into consideration the huge amounts of new units that would be required just to accurately represent a small 10km wide strip of land stretching between the Saka-Rauka and Japan, we´d probably have to sacrifice not only the Roman reforms, but the Roman units all togheter.
So no, while I am no EB Team member, I can say without any doubt, that EB 2 will not in any way include Japan. Period.
If you´re really desperate for Japan buy Total War: Shogun, old but good game.
Edit: By the way, didn´t the Samurai come into existence like waaaaaaaaaaay after 500 AD?
The guy's yanking your chain. Badly I might add, but yanking don't work so well over the internet cos its all about tone of voice. Anyway, stop talking bull and get back on message: "so what "bartix" and what faction replaces armenia go then?!!"
Foot
Foot
Well, I´ve meet too many guys in my days whom I mistook for yanking my chain that I don´t take anything as yanking anymore. Maybe if he´d had 40 more posts or so.
Plus, nothing beats making absolutely non-useful posts where one simply restates what one´ve been told a million times.
Plus, nothing beats making absolutely non-useful posts where one simply restates what one´ve been told a million times.
Originally Posted by Majd il-Romani:
You guys act as if I'm kidding. Honestly, samurai Japan in EB2 is perfectly feasible.
Watch out, for he may be a Ferrous Cranus.You guys act as if I'm kidding. Honestly, samurai Japan in EB2 is perfectly feasible.
I don't know how many people feel this way, but I don't believe that EB II needs to have different European factions. I would be absolutely fine if it had no new factions. Now having some extra factions would be nice, as long as it does not come at the cost of the quality of the other factions. It would be OK to have a Helleno-Barbarian faction such as Massilia or just anther barbarian faction. However, I said such as, meaning that I don't actually want Massilia to be a faction in EB II. I am generally against the idea of one-city factions such as Massalia, Pergamon, Syracuse. I simply don't think EB team could think of enough unique units for such insignificant states.
On the other hand, I know this sounds crazy, but I am practically dying for a Far Eastern faction. I would absolutely love to see the Mauryan Empire (which is actually pretty realistic since a part of India is already represented in the EB map) or the Zhou China in EB II. It would bring the much needed freshness to EB II, which I believe lacks it. These two empires don't even have to have all of their territories represented, just as long as they are there. I know this would be stretching the map limits, but don't you think EB will be a bit stagnant if you pretty much repeat EB I. I mean, how many of you would be thrilled to see a remake of RTW come out?!? Could EB II pleeeeeaaasssseee have Far Eastern factions?
Another new faction I wouldn't mind having in EB II is an African faction such as Kush or even something Central African. That would also refresh EB, since EB I had nothing like the African civilizations (Carthage was Semitic and its military borrowed heavily from other nations while Aiguptos/Ta-Kem was no longer in the hands of the natives but simply another Successor state). Having Far Eastern or African factions would be so much better than having another generic Hellenic faction lacking any uniqueness or a minor barbarian tribe.
About the Sweboz being a single, consolidated nation. If it is truly so, as Hax and Telos Athenaois have said, that the Sweboz were united, than why have the Germanic tribes have never seemed to be able to unite against Romans? Why does Tiberius Caesar Augustus, the second emperor of the Roman Empire say that we [Romans] should let the Germans continue to follow their love of anarchy and civil strife, when asked if he will invade the Germanic lands again? - (I have found this quote in a Russian-language history book and translated it to my best). The Sweboz were just one of the many Germanic tribes and confederations. Same goes for the Casse and Lusotannan, although I do agree that Arverni as well as Aedui were pretty consolidated (since the EB team chose to represent the "Gauls" accurately, as two different factions vying for supremacy). Even when Arminius united most of the Germanic tribes, Segestes and his faction was pro-Roman and even warned Varus about the treachery. The barbarian tribes were never fully united, always having at least two factions, such as the Aedui and Arverni.
On the other hand, I know this sounds crazy, but I am practically dying for a Far Eastern faction. I would absolutely love to see the Mauryan Empire (which is actually pretty realistic since a part of India is already represented in the EB map) or the Zhou China in EB II. It would bring the much needed freshness to EB II, which I believe lacks it. These two empires don't even have to have all of their territories represented, just as long as they are there. I know this would be stretching the map limits, but don't you think EB will be a bit stagnant if you pretty much repeat EB I. I mean, how many of you would be thrilled to see a remake of RTW come out?!? Could EB II pleeeeeaaasssseee have Far Eastern factions?
Another new faction I wouldn't mind having in EB II is an African faction such as Kush or even something Central African. That would also refresh EB, since EB I had nothing like the African civilizations (Carthage was Semitic and its military borrowed heavily from other nations while Aiguptos/Ta-Kem was no longer in the hands of the natives but simply another Successor state). Having Far Eastern or African factions would be so much better than having another generic Hellenic faction lacking any uniqueness or a minor barbarian tribe.
About the Sweboz being a single, consolidated nation. If it is truly so, as Hax and Telos Athenaois have said, that the Sweboz were united, than why have the Germanic tribes have never seemed to be able to unite against Romans? Why does Tiberius Caesar Augustus, the second emperor of the Roman Empire say that we [Romans] should let the Germans continue to follow their love of anarchy and civil strife, when asked if he will invade the Germanic lands again? - (I have found this quote in a Russian-language history book and translated it to my best). The Sweboz were just one of the many Germanic tribes and confederations. Same goes for the Casse and Lusotannan, although I do agree that Arverni as well as Aedui were pretty consolidated (since the EB team chose to represent the "Gauls" accurately, as two different factions vying for supremacy). Even when Arminius united most of the Germanic tribes, Segestes and his faction was pro-Roman and even warned Varus about the treachery. The barbarian tribes were never fully united, always having at least two factions, such as the Aedui and Arverni.
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus:
the Mauryan Empire the Zhou China
Kush or even something Central African.
Did you try to read the thread? At all?the Mauryan Empire the Zhou China
Kush or even something Central African.
The Mauryan empire will be present in its FULL glory (as it ought to be) in Asia ton Barbaron.
I would like to see something unique in EBII as well, but your ideas won't make it in.
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus:
I am generally against the idea of one-city factions such as Massalia, Pergamon, Syracuse. I simply don't think EB team could think of enough unique units for such insignificant states.
Insignificant? Have you read anything at all about say Pergamon´s history? Until you do, I will not discuss this matter with you.I am generally against the idea of one-city factions such as Massalia, Pergamon, Syracuse. I simply don't think EB team could think of enough unique units for such insignificant states.
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus:
On the other hand, I know this sounds crazy, but I am practically dying for a Far Eastern faction. I would absolutely love to see the Mauryan Empire (which is actually pretty realistic since a part of India is already represented in the EB map) or the Zhou China in EB II. It would bring the much needed freshness to EB II, which I believe lacks it. These two empires don't even have to have all of their territories represented, just as long as they are there. I know this would be stretching the map limits, but don't you think EB will be a bit stagnant if you pretty much repeat EB I. I mean, how many of you would be thrilled to see a remake of RTW come out?!? Could EB II pleeeeeaaasssseee have Far Eastern factions?
Another new faction I wouldn't mind having in EB II is an African faction such as Kush or even something Central African. That would also refresh EB, since EB I had nothing like the African civilizations (Carthage was Semitic and its military borrowed heavily from other nations while Aiguptos/Ta-Kem was no longer in the hands of the natives but simply another Successor state). Having Far Eastern or African factions would be so much better than having another generic Hellenic faction lacking any uniqueness or a minor barbarian tribe.
Read anything, I mean anything on the EBII forum and you´ll se this will not ever, ever, eva in your freaking life happenOn the other hand, I know this sounds crazy, but I am practically dying for a Far Eastern faction. I would absolutely love to see the Mauryan Empire (which is actually pretty realistic since a part of India is already represented in the EB map) or the Zhou China in EB II. It would bring the much needed freshness to EB II, which I believe lacks it. These two empires don't even have to have all of their territories represented, just as long as they are there. I know this would be stretching the map limits, but don't you think EB will be a bit stagnant if you pretty much repeat EB I. I mean, how many of you would be thrilled to see a remake of RTW come out?!? Could EB II pleeeeeaaasssseee have Far Eastern factions?
Another new faction I wouldn't mind having in EB II is an African faction such as Kush or even something Central African. That would also refresh EB, since EB I had nothing like the African civilizations (Carthage was Semitic and its military borrowed heavily from other nations while Aiguptos/Ta-Kem was no longer in the hands of the natives but simply another Successor state). Having Far Eastern or African factions would be so much better than having another generic Hellenic faction lacking any uniqueness or a minor barbarian tribe.
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus:
About the Sweboz being a single, consolidated nation. If it is truly so, as Hax and Telos Athenaois have said, that the Sweboz were united, than why have the Germanic tribes have never seemed to be able to unite against Romans? Why does Tiberius Caesar Augustus, the second emperor of the Roman Empire say that we [Romans] should let the Germans continue to follow their love of anarchy and civil strife, when asked if he will invade the Germanic lands again? - (I have found this quote in a Russian-language history book and translated it to my best). The Sweboz were just one of the many Germanic tribes and confederations. Same goes for the Casse and Lusotannan, although I do agree that Arverni as well as Aedui were pretty consolidated (since the EB team chose to represent the "Gauls" accurately, as two different factions vying for supremacy). Even when Arminius united most of the Germanic tribes, Segestes and his faction was pro-Roman and even warned Varus about the treachery. The barbarian tribes were never fully united, always having at least two factions, such as the Aedui and Arverni.
You completely miss the point of pretty much everything.About the Sweboz being a single, consolidated nation. If it is truly so, as Hax and Telos Athenaois have said, that the Sweboz were united, than why have the Germanic tribes have never seemed to be able to unite against Romans? Why does Tiberius Caesar Augustus, the second emperor of the Roman Empire say that we [Romans] should let the Germans continue to follow their love of anarchy and civil strife, when asked if he will invade the Germanic lands again? - (I have found this quote in a Russian-language history book and translated it to my best). The Sweboz were just one of the many Germanic tribes and confederations. Same goes for the Casse and Lusotannan, although I do agree that Arverni as well as Aedui were pretty consolidated (since the EB team chose to represent the "Gauls" accurately, as two different factions vying for supremacy). Even when Arminius united most of the Germanic tribes, Segestes and his faction was pro-Roman and even warned Varus about the treachery. The barbarian tribes were never fully united, always having at least two factions, such as the Aedui and Arverni.
First all, I don´t see the Germans represented as a united nation, except in Vanilla. The Sweboz control only a small portion of Germania or any land inhabitated by Germanic people. To gain control of this area and unify Germania into a single nation requires huge amounts of fighting against other germans, and the fact that the Sweboz never succeded in gaining control of this area is a reather null point, as then you could just as well say that since the Seleukids didn´t survive 60 AD there´s no point having them in the game after that.
Second, woudl you rather have all the "barbarian" peoples represtend as simply rebels? The Eleutheroi of EB may be designed to be Independents rather than rebels, but they still suffer from the Vanilla rebel syndrom of uttter lack of the will to act in any way what so ever, something the Germans quite often tended to do.
Thirdly, I wouldn´t exactly trust an Roman emperor who´s only experience of Germans were on the frontline to give a clearminded view of their state of affairs. I bet the Germans said loads of bad shit about the Romans too.
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus:
On the other hand, I know this sounds crazy, but I am practically dying for a Far Eastern faction...
Another new faction I wouldn't mind having in EB II is an African faction such as Kush or even something Central African...
On the other hand, I know this sounds crazy, but I am practically dying for a Far Eastern faction...
Another new faction I wouldn't mind having in EB II is an African faction such as Kush or even something Central African...
Also, Pergamon's already in, so apparently the EB team doesn't consider them to be 'insignificant'. Also also, the Sweboz are a Germanic tribe (the Suebi), not a 'a single, consolidated nation' representing the Germans or whatever.
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus:
About the Sweboz being a single, consolidated nation. If it is truly so, as Hax and Telos Athenaois have said, that the Sweboz were united, than why have the Germanic tribes have never seemed to be able to unite against Romans?
United? What are you saying? Why do you have this crazy idea someone said it? Who said that? When did he/she say it?About the Sweboz being a single, consolidated nation. If it is truly so, as Hax and Telos Athenaois have said, that the Sweboz were united, than why have the Germanic tribes have never seemed to be able to unite against Romans?
I for sure never said the Sweboz were some sort of united thing - heck they were a confederation of tribes many of whom did by and large as they pleased, only united in the face of common interests; unless by the mere glimpse of fortune you managed to misinterpret my (and Hax's for that matter) post so grossly that I seriously doubt you were paying any form of attention at all...
Originally Posted by Aemilius Paulus:
I am generally against the idea of one-city factions such as Massalia, Pergamon, Syracuse. I simply don't think EB team could think of enough unique units for such insignificant states.
A conceivable assertion but by the extension of this logic, if the start date was circa 340 BC, Rome wouldn't be included as a faction, as it only had control over the area surrounding the city, and I'm sure everyone would have something to say about that. I am generally against the idea of one-city factions such as Massalia, Pergamon, Syracuse. I simply don't think EB team could think of enough unique units for such insignificant states.
Edit: Don't quote me on the date.
Originally Posted by Iberius Victor:
A conceivable assertion but by the extension of this logic, if the start date was circa ..... BC, Rome wouldn't be included as a faction, as it only had control over the area surrounding the city, and I'm sure everyone would have something to say about that.
Edit: Don't quote me on the date.
Rome became an empire, while Pergamon and Syracuse remained a city-state. In 272 BC Rome was no longer just another city-state. By insignificant I meant that there were larger nations than the two city-states I have already mentioned that were not represented in EB I. How unique can you make Pergamon or Syracuse anyway?A conceivable assertion but by the extension of this logic, if the start date was circa ..... BC, Rome wouldn't be included as a faction, as it only had control over the area surrounding the city, and I'm sure everyone would have something to say about that.
Edit: Don't quote me on the date.
Originally Posted by General Appo:
Uhhhh............. no it isn´t. Please remember the the 3L´s. The PL, the CL and the UL, or (as the layman says it) the province limit, the culture limit and the unit limit. T
he province limit limits the number of provinces (duh), which means that if you wanted an accurate representation of ancient Japan and the lands between ancient Japan and the current EB map edge, you´d probably have to reduce all of Europe into a single province. This be the same reason India won´t be in, representing the worlds most heavily populated area with as many provinces as say Gaul (or Grecce for that matter) just isn´t historically accurate, and historical accuracy is what the EB team strives for in all matters.
The culture limit limits the number of cultures (duh), meaning that the Japs would have to share culture with say the Celts, Greeks or Carthaginians, and now that wouldn´t be very accurate would it? This is one of the many reasons Meroe and Axum won´t be in, as they´d require a completely new culture slot.
Finally, the unit limit limits the number of units (duh), meaning that the Japs wouldn´t have more than say... 10 units, which is just grossly wrong. If you then take into consideration the huge amounts of new units that would be required just to accurately represent a small 10km wide strip of land stretching between the Saka-Rauka and Japan, we´d probably have to sacrifice not only the Roman reforms, but the Roman units all togheter.
So no, while I am no EB Team member, I can say without any doubt, that EB 2 will not in any way include Japan. Period.
If you´re really desperate for Japan buy Total War: Shogun, old but good game.
Edit: By the way, didn´t the Samurai come into existence like waaaaaaaaaaay after 500 AD?
Woooooow dude I was joking, calm down. Uhhhh............. no it isn´t. Please remember the the 3L´s. The PL, the CL and the UL, or (as the layman says it) the province limit, the culture limit and the unit limit. T
he province limit limits the number of provinces (duh), which means that if you wanted an accurate representation of ancient Japan and the lands between ancient Japan and the current EB map edge, you´d probably have to reduce all of Europe into a single province. This be the same reason India won´t be in, representing the worlds most heavily populated area with as many provinces as say Gaul (or Grecce for that matter) just isn´t historically accurate, and historical accuracy is what the EB team strives for in all matters.
The culture limit limits the number of cultures (duh), meaning that the Japs would have to share culture with say the Celts, Greeks or Carthaginians, and now that wouldn´t be very accurate would it? This is one of the many reasons Meroe and Axum won´t be in, as they´d require a completely new culture slot.
Finally, the unit limit limits the number of units (duh), meaning that the Japs wouldn´t have more than say... 10 units, which is just grossly wrong. If you then take into consideration the huge amounts of new units that would be required just to accurately represent a small 10km wide strip of land stretching between the Saka-Rauka and Japan, we´d probably have to sacrifice not only the Roman reforms, but the Roman units all togheter.
So no, while I am no EB Team member, I can say without any doubt, that EB 2 will not in any way include Japan. Period.
If you´re really desperate for Japan buy Total War: Shogun, old but good game.
Edit: By the way, didn´t the Samurai come into existence like waaaaaaaaaaay after 500 AD?
but on a more serious note here is what I think will be in EB2 (not what I want, but what I think will be in)
Already in:
Pergamon (no way!)
almost certainly going to be in:
at least 1 numidian faction, if not both
The Boii
The Basternae/some other Germanic tribe
Celtiberian tribe
might make it in:
Nabatia
Scythia
some other city-state (cyrene, syracuse)
Belgae
wishful thinking but still possible:
replacing the KH into achean and aetolian leagues
Another British/Godilic tribe
A mauryan Satrapy
Cappadocia
yeah, right:
Nubia
Ethiopia
any far eastern faction
I know the Far East, especially the Zhou, are a pretty far-fetched idea for EB II, but why couldn't the Mauryan Empire make it into EB II? Most of it is already represented in the EB map, just as Eleutheroi. Yes, I did read about Asia ton Barbaron, but it is still very hard to figure out if the mod is going to be successful or not. So many RTW mods were made or initiated and yet so few came out alive in the end.
About the Pergamon being insignificant. Why is it that so many EB fans have difficulty judging the relative importance of nations, without instantly becoming emotional as soon as their favorite faction is somehow offended. The Romani were more important than the Casse, the Seleukids were more important than the early Rome. I know that the mission of EB is not representing the most important factions but to try to represent everyone about equally. True, importance is often a matter of an opinion. However, what made Pergamon so different from the thousands of other Greek city-state colonies that it made it to EB II while others did not. Are there not enough Hellenic factions in EB already? Why not at least having something more unique, such as Massalia or Chersonesos? How was Pergamon more important than Syracuse? In my opinion, they were about equal, although Pergamon is represented in EB II and Syracuse, well I am not sure about that. What kind of unique units will Pergamon have? Pergamon Hoplites, that have the same skin (with the exception of different coloured and patterned shield)as Greek Classical Hoplites, with the exception of a different name and 1 more attack or 2 more defence skill than the regular Classical Hoplite; Akontistai with a different hat and a different skin tan?
Yes I have read Pergamon's history, General Appo. But why not have Kyrene, Halikarnassos, Zankynthos, Emporiai, Massalia, Olbia, Agathe, Alalia, Kroton, Kydonia, Byzantion, Heraklea, Odessos, Phasis, Pantikapaion, Pitoys, Kerasos, Mallos, Side, Antipolis, or Tanais? I am not criticizing the EB team for choosing Pergamon, I am simply arguing with the people who think Pergamon was so important and unique. The EB team cannot put everyone in EB II, so they have to pick and choose. I personally believe in balance and by balance, I mean not putting all of the factions in the one area, such as the Balkans and Asia Minor. There are already tons of factions there, you can barely find Eleutheroi there anymore, especially with Pergamon now being another addition.
Then you look at areas like Eastern Europe, with tens of territories occupied by so called "Rebels" between the Sweboz and Sauromatae. That area is practically crying out for a factions, as all of those Eleutheroi/"Rebels" were independent nations and kingdoms. A Slavic faction would be nice over there, one that would be a mix of "barbarian" and steppe nomad traditions. If not, as Majd il-Romani said, there could be a Boii or Bastarnae faction there. Belgae and a Godilic tribe would be nice, especially since there were already quite a bit of Godilic units in EB I and because Roma Surrectum already has the Belgae. Just as long as it's not another Hellenic faction. Why couldn't there can't we have the Kushites anyway?
EDIT: sorry for such a lengthy post, just had to get it out!
About the Pergamon being insignificant. Why is it that so many EB fans have difficulty judging the relative importance of nations, without instantly becoming emotional as soon as their favorite faction is somehow offended. The Romani were more important than the Casse, the Seleukids were more important than the early Rome. I know that the mission of EB is not representing the most important factions but to try to represent everyone about equally. True, importance is often a matter of an opinion. However, what made Pergamon so different from the thousands of other Greek city-state colonies that it made it to EB II while others did not. Are there not enough Hellenic factions in EB already? Why not at least having something more unique, such as Massalia or Chersonesos? How was Pergamon more important than Syracuse? In my opinion, they were about equal, although Pergamon is represented in EB II and Syracuse, well I am not sure about that. What kind of unique units will Pergamon have? Pergamon Hoplites, that have the same skin (with the exception of different coloured and patterned shield)as Greek Classical Hoplites, with the exception of a different name and 1 more attack or 2 more defence skill than the regular Classical Hoplite; Akontistai with a different hat and a different skin tan
? Yes I have read Pergamon's history, General Appo. But why not have Kyrene, Halikarnassos, Zankynthos, Emporiai, Massalia, Olbia, Agathe, Alalia, Kroton, Kydonia, Byzantion, Heraklea, Odessos, Phasis, Pantikapaion, Pitoys, Kerasos, Mallos, Side, Antipolis, or Tanais? I am not criticizing the EB team for choosing Pergamon, I am simply arguing with the people who think Pergamon was so important and unique. The EB team cannot put everyone in EB II, so they have to pick and choose. I personally believe in balance and by balance, I mean not putting all of the factions in the one area, such as the Balkans and Asia Minor. There are already tons of factions there, you can barely find Eleutheroi there anymore, especially with Pergamon now being another addition.
Then you look at areas like Eastern Europe, with tens of territories occupied by so called "Rebels" between the Sweboz and Sauromatae. That area is practically crying out for a factions, as all of those Eleutheroi/"Rebels" were independent nations and kingdoms. A Slavic faction would be nice over there, one that would be a mix of "barbarian" and steppe nomad traditions. If not, as Majd il-Romani said, there could be a Boii or Bastarnae faction there. Belgae and a Godilic tribe would be nice, especially since there were already quite a bit of Godilic units in EB I and because Roma Surrectum already has the Belgae. Just as long as it's not another Hellenic faction. Why couldn't there can't we have the Kushites anyway?
EDIT: sorry for such a lengthy post, just had to get it out!
i think thats' cuz that ball-less chap nicked a helluva silver and used it to become a major asia power...dun quote me on that tho...
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO