New factions?

[Charge]

Really hope that you aren't going to do any mistakes with them.

BTW, heres my unfinished faction list:
German fact. - Ubii, Teutons, Goths, Suevi;
Gaullic fact. - Aedui, Arverni, Belgae, Ligures;
Spain - Lusitans, Iberi, Celtiberi;
Africa - Carthage, Numidia, Egypt;
Italia - 2 Roman factions (like optimates and democrats, to allow civil war);
Greece - Macedonia, Epirus, Greek_cities (????);
East- Seleucids, Pontus, Armenia, Parthia, Pergumum, Bactria;
Others- Dacia, Scythia, Sarmatia, Britons, Illyria.
UNFINISHED
Date 272 b.c.

[Zaknafien]

We will not include a second Roman faction at the expense of another full playable faction. Its just not something we will do in EB unless the hard-coded limits were raised drastically. I understand the appeal of a Roman civil war, but its just not fair to other factions.

[Charge]

This was just my faction list, which I plans to include in my mod (which is suddenly again is EB unofficial modding project ). I would like you to look at my barbarian factions.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Huh?!

-You don't seem to have heard of the 30 faction limit.
-Why do you post your own daughter mod info in a thread aimed at speculating about the mother mod? Why not create a thread of your own? Save's me the
-And for that matter why work on such things if you don't know what part of your work will be covered by EB already before you start on it? Even more important: you don't know what your platform (EB mod) is going to be like as far as the technical matters go. So you don't have a basis to work on - and won't have for quite some time because we haven't given any such things away yet.

Conclusion: it's a lil' early for creating your own minimod on top of a mod that's not out yet...

As far as your faction list goes:
-I very much enjoy the EB style of naming things like their respective owners would've done back then; and you happen to chose that awful Latinized version pack of the orginials. But that's matter of taste.
-As far as your new factions go: you've plunged into some of the most difficult to research; and you have shifted the emphasis very strongly to Western Europe. This means that many of your factions might just end up decimating each other instead of giving the Eleutheroi a different colour from dirt white.
-I don't know much about them; so can't comment on them any further, really.

[Charge]

-I don't know much about them; so can't comment on them any further, really.

But I'll reply anyway ...

-You don't seem to have heard of the 30 faction limit.

Oops... removed can be Sarmatia.

-Why do you post your own daughter mod info in a thread aimed at speculating about the mother mod? Why not create a thread of your own? Save's me the

To help you - don't you see? Why post mine thread if main mod only in developing..

-And for that matter why work on such things if you don't know what part of your work will be covered by EB already before you start on it? Even more important: you don't know what your platform (EB mod) is going to be like as far as the technical matters go. So you don't have a basis to work on - and won't have for quite some time because we haven't given any such things away yet.

I'm sure you're going to mod M2TW, don't you? Basis and all necessary will be when you did your job. My work now is research, that's what I'm doing right now.

-I very much enjoy the EB style of naming things like their respective owners would've done back then; and you happen to chose that awful Latinized version pack of the orginials. But that's matter of taste.

Yes, I will use Latin. names. As I said my mod going to be more friendly to average gamer. (Also I don't know how new factions will be named in your style)

-As far as your new factions go: you've plunged into some of the most difficult to research; and you have shifted the emphasis very strongly to Western Europe. This means that many of your factions might just end up decimating each other instead of giving the Eleutheroi a different colour from dirt white.

Hm, maybe I should give you map_regions(not made yet) to evidently show appointment of all new factions? Most important factions are :
Illyria (to prevent expand Epirus, Romans, Macedonia on a north; and Dacians to the west);
Ligures ( to allow romans fight cisalpine gaul, but don't hurt main gauls);
...................rest factions was added to simulate regional power, or culture centre (if we have slots).
For example germans :
West-germans (main tribes - Suevi (Germinones, don't know exactly name), Teutons (Ingevones), Ubii (Istevones, more cultural);
East-germans : Goths;
I skipped Scandinavian germans.
As of moving emphasis to the west - east contains less factions but they are huge, west contains more factions which aren't so powerful. From what I've learn this was in real life...

[Bellum]

I have to agree with the new African faction idea. So much empty space! And, if I'm not mistaken, even Rome in all of it's glory had problems holding North Africa west of Egypt.

[Wolfman]

Which is why if Meroe is not being implemented that there should be the two numidian factions. From what I read they were a thorn in both rome and carthages backsides

[Charge]

No, this backsides was in almost every country. If we have unlimited faction list, then even each tribe separately, but we haven't...

[Zaknafien]

The problem with Meroe is that their unit selection would be very poor, and they would be quickly dominated by the Ptolemies. Not a very good choice for game balance.

[azzbaz]

In my eyes these are the new factions you should have

1.Heruskoz= Made Rome think twice about conquering Germania. Were very good at ambushing. They were led by formidibale warlords called Drighten.
Were rivals of the Hattoz just like the Aedui and Arverni
Settlements= Askalingaz(Minden), Ermanarazul?(Irminseoul)CAP

2.Hattoz= Said to have infantry to match the Romans in terms of discipline.
The Batavi tribe (subtribe of Chatti) had amphibious cavalry and the Chatti were learned in trenching. They differed to other Germans because of there manner of fighting and traditions. They didnt involve themselves in petty squabbles but made fullscale campaigns.
Settlements=[Mattium](Kassel)CAP, [Arctaunum](?)

3.Belgae= I think they will be in it. They were said to be the least developed but the bravest of the Celts. The Nervii had a Spartan-like culture so it would be cool to use some of their units.
Settlements=Bagacos CAP, Bratosporios

4.Iberians= A culture unique to Celt-iberian, Celtic, Greek etc. Had there own language. Might be hard representing a united force though, but keep in mind. Best reprentation would probably be a post-Tartessian people (Turdetani) leading them, not a warlike people but probably the most civilized. With the Conii in the alliance
Would be substancialy wealthy due to their silver mines. And for gods sake give the Carthaginians less land in Iberia. A lot of the land you gave them at 272BC they didnt own, they had influence over it, but they didnt own it until Hannibal
Settlements=Carpia(succesor to Tartessos)CAP, Conistorgis

5.Odrysae Thraikians= Were driven into the Bosporus in 273BC by the Celts. Made a comeback and took Thrace bak in 214BC under the king Pleuratus. Would have some unique units. Daco/Getic,Hellenic/Illyrian influenced culture.
NOTE: were different to the Getae brood
Settlements(to start with)= town on the black sea, Olbia? something accurate.
would be expected to to take Tylis and Uskudama(traditional odrysae capital) from the Celts

6.Numidians= The Massyli really. They were allied to Carthage and help them against Rome. Then in the Second Punic War allied to Rome. Massinissa was a Massyli king and owned all Numidia at one time (148BC). Eventually the Romans tried to conquer them under Jugurtha. Though outnumbered the Numidians gave the Romans hell until they captured him.
Settlements=Cirta CAP, Theveste, Siga

7.Illyrians= under the old Pleuratus(of illyria) succeded by Agron 250BC. They ruled over a united Illyria with the capital at Skodra under the master tribe the Ardiaei. They were a thorn in the sides of the Epirotes, Macedonians, Romans etc until they were conquered in 168BC
Settlements= Skodra CAP, Epidamnos

8..Boii/Baio-warioz [warriors]= Celto/Germanic influenced culture centered around the Danube in Boio-haemum[Bohemia]. Some moved from here and settled Cisalpine Gaul and Pannonia. They fought the Sweboz subtribe the Markomannoz and the Dacians under Burebistus. They were known to be particularly savage and always fighting. When Hannibal defeated L.Postumius Albinus hids Boii allies turned his skull into a drinking cup. In the 2nd Century BC they turned back the Teutons and Cimbri.
Settlements=Boiodurum (gate/fort of the Boii, modern Passau) CAP, Eburonum?


9.Galatae= Not one of my favourites, but they did alter history in Anatolia, at one point owning much of central and east Anatolia. They would start under the kings Leotarios and Leonnorios. And would be made up of the Tectosages, the Trocmii, and the Tolistobogii. They were much feared mercenaries in the east often swaying the tides of battles. a unique government too.
Settlements=Ancyra CAP, Pessinus, Tavium

10.Etruscans= Originally an expansionast league under 12 cities. But because of Celtic and Roman wars it declined. In 272BC they are a waning power with only one city and an outpost in North Etruria. They had a rich culture, language and military. The last Etruscan city was taken in 265BC. The culture was Italic/Hellenic. Due to gameplay reasons I see why you may not include it but I still think they would be a good addition to the game.
Settlements= Velzna [Volsinii] CAP, Tular [Tuder]

or

10.Erain= something to represent the unique Gaels and challenge the Casse
I dont know much about them.
Settlements= Emain Macha?

In order to accomodate for these factions changes should should be made to original factions
Sweboz factions should be given another settlement (Leufana, modern day Luneburg)
and the Casse too should receive another settlement. In fact all factions should have at least 2 settlements so they dont get steamrolled by factions close to them.
(and please try and increase the settlement limit I know youre doin your best just keep goin at it.)

Cheers plz feed back
........pant

[Son of Perun]

The problem with Meroe is that their unit selection would be very poor, and they would be quickly dominated by the Ptolemies. Not a very good choice for game balance.

More poor then Saba? I think there are enough east arican units to make a faction: Ethiopian spearmen, Aithiopikon Agema, Elephantes... And I can imagine also Nubian archers, skirmishers and light cavalery. Later after the conquest of Egypt they could get Egyptian and Hellenic units or they could expand to Arabia and get some Arabian regionals.

In almost every game I've played the Ptolemies crushed the Seleucids and started endless wars with Bactria or Carthage. I think the game needs a faction that would weaken Ptolemies.

[Charge]

I think the game needs a faction that would weaken Ptolemies.

... or immediately get crushed by them...

[Son of Perun]

... or immediately get crushed by them...

Not if led by wise and brave general (like me ).

[Krusader]

More poor then Saba? I think there are enough east arican units to make a faction: Ethiopian spearmen, Aithiopikon Agema, Elephantes... And I can imagine also Nubian archers, skirmishers and light cavalery. Later after the conquest of Egypt they could get Egyptian and Hellenic units or they could expand to Arabia and get some Arabian regionals.

In almost every game I've played the Ptolemies crushed the Seleucids and started endless wars with Bactria or Carthage. I think the game needs a faction that would weaken Ptolemies.

Nubians didn't use elephants until much later and that was after they saw Ptolemaic use of them. And you're listing Ethiopians who are not Nubians and in fact seems to have disliked Nubians intensely and vice versa. Aithiopikon Agema btw should be axed for the next release as the sources used to create the unit came under fire in a scholarly journal (yes EB can make mistakes) and units like that were apparently only around during the final days of the Ptolemaic kingdom.

You can imagine? You obviously don't care about historical accuracy. This is just I want a 'black faction' over again. You expect us to include Meroe and just invent units?

As I told another guy who desperately wanted a Scandinavian faction in, is that if you collect information, sources, evidences etc. be they textual or, archaeological that shows why Meroe ought to get a spot then we will gladly hear it.

[abou]

More poor then Saba? I think there are enough east arican units to make a faction: Ethiopian spearmen, Aithiopikon Agema, Elephantes... And I can imagine also Nubian archers, skirmishers and light cavalery. Later after the conquest of Egypt they could get Egyptian and Hellenic units or they could expand to Arabia and get some Arabian regionals.

In almost every game I've played the Ptolemies crushed the Seleucids and started endless wars with Bactria or Carthage. I think the game needs a faction that would weaken Ptolemies.

Yeah... that isn't going to cut it. To add to what Krusader said, you're strongly delving into unfair conjecture by just listing off units you would think they should have rather than what they did - including the thought that they could somehow recruit Hellenics.

Like I mentioned - this region is well below the military horizon. There is no way they would be able to do much to worry the Ptolemaioi. I doubt they had the logistical know-how to even create a field army, let alone march it north, and then somehow actually defeat a Ptolemaic army. They wouldn't have the tactics or the fighting styles capable of doing that. They would just simply be skewered by the phalanx.

If the Ptolemaioi need to be weakened, feel free to mod a higher rebel spawn rate for the region or something instead.

[Son of Perun]

Aithiopikon Agema btw should be axed for the next release as the sources used to create the unit came under fire in a scholarly journal (yes EB can make mistakes) and units like that were apparently only around during the final days of the Ptolemaic kingdom.

That's a pity, I really liked those guys.

You can imagine? You obviously don't care about historical accuracy. This is just I want a 'black faction' over again. You expect us to include Meroe and just invent units?

Actually I care about historical accuracy, but I have read in some previous thread that "where there are no historical evidences, there comes logic". How did Nubians beat Romans if they used only spears and arrows?

But I see that without any historical sources it is impossible to persuade you, so I .

[Foot]

Actually I care about historical accuracy, but I have read in some previous thread that "where there are no historical evidences, there comes logic". How did Nubians beat Romans if they used only spears and arrows?

Yeah, logic is important to move from evidence to something that can be used ingame, but this is for individual things, not for the creation of an entire faction's unit roster.

Foot

[Watchman]

How did Nubians beat Romans if they used only spears and arrows?

By being bloody hard to reach and not worth the effort ? It's not like Pharaonic Egypt had had a particularly easy time campaigning there either, simply because of terrain and distance, IIRC. And the locals were quite clever enough to not obligingly come out of the hills to get trampled flat.

[Bellum]

I imagine it's awfully hot in that part of Africa.

[azzbaz]

I was wondering what the developers thought of my faction list? Give me some comments or feedback on it.

[Krusader]

In my eyes these are the new factions you should have

1.Heruskoz= Made Rome think twice about conquering Germania. Were very good at ambushing. They were led by formidibale warlords called Drighten.
Were rivals of the Hattoz just like the Aedui and Arverni
Settlements= Askalingaz(Minden), Ermanarazul?(Irminseoul)CAP

Possible candidate.

2.Hattoz= Said to have infantry to match the Romans in terms of discipline.
The Batavi tribe (subtribe of Chatti) had amphibious cavalry and the Chatti were learned in trenching. They differed to other Germans because of there manner of fighting and traditions. They didnt involve themselves in petty squabbles but made fullscale campaigns.
Settlements=[Mattium](Kassel)CAP, [Arctaunum](?)

As I understood the Hattoz or Chatti were first mentioned around 120-150 BC (cant remember specific date) in textual sources and also by what our historians said there havent been any archaeological findings dating the Hattoz to the Hessen area (where Kassel is I recall).

3.Belgae= I think they will be in it. They were said to be the least developed but the bravest of the Celts. The Nervii had a Spartan-like culture so it would be cool to use some of their units.
Settlements=Bagacos CAP, Bratosporios

They were powerful at 272 BC but began to decline shorty thereafter, however they are still being considered.

4.Iberians= A culture unique to Celt-iberian, Celtic, Greek etc. Had there own language. Might be hard representing a united force though, but keep in mind. Best reprentation would probably be a post-Tartessian people (Turdetani) leading them, not a warlike people but probably the most civilized. With the Conii in the alliance
Would be substancialy wealthy due to their silver mines. And for gods sake give the Carthaginians less land in Iberia. A lot of the land you gave them at 272BC they didnt own, they had influence over it, but they didnt own it until Hannibal
Settlements=Carpia(succesor to Tartessos)CAP, Conistorgis

Actually there are many other Iberian tribes that are also possible, although if an Iberian tribe is included it will most probably be a Celtiberian one.

5.Odrysae Thraikians= Were driven into the Bosporus in 273BC by the Celts. Made a comeback and took Thrace bak in 214BC under the king Pleuratus. Would have some unique units. Daco/Getic,Hellenic/Illyrian influenced culture.
NOTE: were different to the Getae brood
Settlements(to start with)= town on the black sea, Olbia? something accurate.
would be expected to to take Tylis and Uskudama(traditional odrysae capital) from the Celts

The Thracians will probably not be included due to many factions surrounding them. Also, by my recollection there weren't large enough kingdoms post-272 that were capable of launching outright invasions of other non-Thracian kingdoms. But main reason is it would be very hard, plus we cant give them Odrysai region due to Tylis being a Celtic city at game start.

6.Numidians= The Massyli really. They were allied to Carthage and help them against Rome. Then in the Second Punic War allied to Rome. Massinissa was a Massyli king and owned all Numidia at one time (148BC). Eventually the Romans tried to conquer them under Jugurtha. Though outnumbered the Numidians gave the Romans hell until they captured him.
Settlements=Cirta CAP, Theveste, Siga

Will probably make it in...but we are debating if Massylia or Masaesylia is the good Numidian choice.

7.Illyrians= under the old Pleuratus(of illyria) succeded by Agron 250BC. They ruled over a united Illyria with the capital at Skodra under the master tribe the Ardiaei. They were a thorn in the sides of the Epirotes, Macedonians, Romans etc until they were conquered in 168BC
Settlements= Skodra CAP, Epidamnos

Possible candidate. Not discussed much but they were a thorn in their neighbours' side, more so than the Thracians it seems.

8..Boii/Baio-warioz [warriors]= Celto/Germanic influenced culture centered around the Danube in Boio-haemum[Bohemia]. Some moved from here and settled Cisalpine Gaul and Pannonia. They fought the Sweboz subtribe the Markomannoz and the Dacians under Burebistus. They were known to be particularly savage and always fighting. When Hannibal defeated L.Postumius Albinus hids Boii allies turned his skull into a drinking cup. In the 2nd Century BC they turned back the Teutons and Cimbri.
Settlements=Boiodurum (gate/fort of the Boii, modern Passau) CAP, Eburonum?

Also a hotly debated candidate. Would be the Central European Boii, not those in northern Italy.

9.Galatae= Not one of my favourites, but they did alter history in Anatolia, at one point owning much of central and east Anatolia. They would start under the kings Leotarios and Leonnorios. And would be made up of the Tectosages, the Trocmii, and the Tolistobogii. They were much feared mercenaries in the east often swaying the tides of battles. a unique government too.
Settlements=Ancyra CAP, Pessinus, Tavium

Asia Minor is packed, but Galatians are being discussed. At this point of time though they'd be in a faction together with Bithynia.

10.Etruscans= Originally an expansionast league under 12 cities. But because of Celtic and Roman wars it declined. In 272BC they are a waning power with only one city and an outpost in North Etruria. They had a rich culture, language and military. The last Etruscan city was taken in 265BC. The culture was Italic/Hellenic. Due to gameplay reasons I see why you may not include it but I still think they would be a good addition to the game.
Settlements= Velzna [Volsinii] CAP, Tular [Tuder]

Really don't think the Etruscans is a viable faction at this time due to them being conquered only 7 years later.

or

10.Erain= something to represent the unique Gaels and challenge the Casse
I dont know much about them.
Settlements= Emain Macha?

These guys are a possible candidate too.


Some you forgot though:

Pergamon
Bithynia
Syracuse
Bastarnae
Bosphoran Greeks
Massagetae
Brigantes/Brigantines
Aquitanii
Mauretanians
Nabataea
Caucasian Iberia
Lugians

----------------

We'd want to tell you our faction choices...but alas we need preview material.
When there are no previews or such in a mod forum people believe it's dead.

[Son of Perun]

Just guessing which new factions will be in EB2:
1.Bosphoran Kingdom
2.Belgii
3.Heruskoz
4.Boii
5.Syracuse
6.Caucasian Iberia
7.Massylia or Masaesylia
8.Errain
9.Pergamon
10.Galatians

Tell me if I was close .

[azzbaz]

Thanks Krusader for giving me some feedback. I have some questions about the responses you gave. You said that you may include a Celt-Iberian faction in EB 2? From the literature i've read the Lusotannon were either a Celt-iberian tribe or heavily influenced by the Celt-Iberians. It may not be wise to include a Celt-Iberian tribe when you can include a culture and people completely different like the native Iberians? Your probably thinking of the Celtiberians centered at Numantia or Okilis with the master tribe the Arevaci arent you. Give us some feedback

[azzbaz]

The Reasons I Dont want and/or think these factions should be in it are.

Pergamon: This one was actually borderline in my mind. It was a rump state left after Lysimachus' Hellenistic Thracian kingdom broke up, I recall. They would be like most of the other successor kingdoms though I feel. Also they would start the game with just one settlement, It might just look too good to the Arche Seleukids, Greeks, Makedonians, Ptolemaioi and Pontos. Too much against it in my eyes. Unless you dont have the Galatae, Leave it on the cutting floor.

Bithynia: I'd have my Thracian kingdom I guess, but probably has the same sorta problems as Pergamon

Syracuse: Look forget about it. It's been said before, but the idea of a Syracuse faction annoys me so much. The Carthaginians and the Romans would just obliterate them. Then you've got expansion problems etc. I'd also imagine it would be difficult making a unique unit rooster for a faction that probably fought identically to the Greeks.

Bastarnae: This would be really tricky since you probably dont have much in regards to information on these people and what you do have is very unreliable since a lot of it is still questionable or obscure. It'd be hard finding out where they lived at 272BC let alone making a faction out of them

Bosphoran Greeks: This one is also borderline on my mind. I actually really wouldn't mind them in the game. They would be a good mix of Hellenic/Scythian/Eastern culture I'd guess. There's also plenty of information on them too. Puttem in instead of the Etruscans

Massagetae: Correct me if I'm wrong but the Massagetae were the same as the Alans who were the same as the Aorsi who were part of the loose Sauromatae confederation. Probably not a good idea including just one of the Sauromatae tribes when you could include any of them; Roxolani, Iazyges etc

Brigantes/Brigantines: Would be good, but they would either be destroyed or destroy the Casse early in the game.

Aquitanii: No, I dont think so. They were very similar to the Aedui and Arverni. I think a third player in Gaul wouldn't be wise. I can just imagine playing as the Aedui and fighting clone wars with the Arverni, Aquitanii and Casse. Not fun and not worth it.

Mauretanians: If you're thinking of having a Numidian faction, stick a knife in it. They didn't much of an impact on history in africa or history as whole.

Nabataea: Might be good owning Petra and Aelana but I cant help but feel they would quickly be dispatched by the Ptolemaoi and Seleukids

Caucasian Iberia: little room for expansion with more major kingdoms like Armenia and Pontos nearby. and little impact on history.

Lugians: A Celto-Germanic people I think. The Boii would be a better choice though. More information on Boii than the mysterious 'forest peoples' the Lugii

Pick the Hattoz instead

[Elminster12]

I very much doubt they have very many "shoo-in" candidates with the number of factions they have already. Honestly, some of the factions already in are probably of debatable importance and impact. We can't expect the EB team to conjure up something as important as Roma or Kart-Hadast at this point...well, unless they finally include Bartix, that is. Fricking travesty that they aren't in EB1

I myself am not too concerned with difficulty as much as I am with flavor. I like experiencing the new and exciting. I very much do play EB in part to LEARN...
So...

Bithynia
Bastarnae
Bosphoran Greeks
Brigantes/Brigantines
Nabataea
Lugians
Heruskoz
Belgae
Celtibrians
Numidians
Boii
Galatae
These are most interesting to me. Of course, I'm not worried because I trust that everything will be as full of historical flavor as the originals.

[Zaknafien]

Actually most of the new factions have already been decided on ;)

[Anthony]

Aquitanii: No, I dont think so. They were very similar to the Aedui and Arverni. I think a third player in Gaul wouldn't be wise. I can just imagine playing as the Aedui and fighting clone wars with the Arverni, Aquitanii and Casse. Not fun and not worth it.

Not much to say, but this is inaccurate. The Aquitanians have material evidence of being more akin to Celtiberians and northern Iberians in some regions, with Gauls in the north; they spoke a different language than the Gauls and left a good bit of different material culture. They'd not be super unique, but they'd hardly be the same as the Aedui and Arverni.

[azzbaz]

Well there's something I didn't know. Thank you for picking me up on that. I thought that because they lived in Gaul they would've shared many of the same attributes the Arverni and Aedui did. I knew they would've been Iberian influenced, but do you really think that they are really that unique and/or important to be considered as a faction?

[Strategos Alexandros]

I would like the following factions in Eb if possible or plausible:
Galatia
Syracuse
Massyli
Belgae
Erain/Brigantes
Bosphorans
Celtiberians

[Son of Perun]

Actually most of the new factions have already been decided on ;)

How many?