What are the main things you want to see fixed from EB1 in EB2???

[Foot]

No client rulers then?

I was referring to the government resources (Homeland, Subjugation, Allied) not the government buildings.

Foot

[fomalhaut]

will their be mechanics to represent degrees of assimilation rather than just the generic 'unrest' feature? i know that MTWII has religion and such.

also, how will the '-ization' process work? I hate when i take a city like Carthage, for instance, but it is at its highest level of Administration building so that even long after the culture/government would be romanized, it would still have mostly semitic buildings? I really like hellenizing europe, and for RTW the Strategy Map representation changes at the next level of government building, which usually coincides with the end of huge culture penalties

[Foot]

will their be mechanics to represent degrees of assimilation rather than just the generic 'unrest' feature? i know that MTWII has religion and such.

also, how will the '-ization' process work? I hate when i take a city like Carthage, for instance, but it is at its highest level of Administration building so that even long after the culture/government would be romanized, it would still have mostly semitic buildings? I really like hellenizing europe, and for RTW the Strategy Map representation changes at the next level of government building, which usually coincides with the end of huge culture penalties

Those are two very different things how a settlement looks is not associated with any game mechanics that we can introduce and modify as for colonization, you should probably check out the roman previews-

Foot

[geala]

I'm rather pleased with EB 1, my only wish would be better (historically more accurate, I mean) Greek units. I think that will happen.

[vartan]

historically more accurate

What does this mean anymore? History has room for more than one interpretation. That is why when 20 students turn in papers for a single prompt, and none of them answers the same way as any other, none of them fails for the simple fact that they did not achieve a single correct answer. EB has provided us with an interpretation of history that--and it is important to remember this--has not been constant, and has changed over time. I don't take it for granted because when entering in factional unit lists for EB Online I see name changes over and over again for units. Flexibility is a great trait in history.

[Ca Putt]

anything in particular you would like to suggest?

[Olaf The Great]

I suppose another thing I'd wish for is a more complete barbarian roster, an perhaps a "reformed pastoralism" government for the other nomads and possibly the barbarians.

[geala]

@ Ca Putt: I don't want to start a discussion about units here, therefore I don't mentioned examples.

What does this mean anymore? History has room for more than one interpretation. That is why when 20 students turn in papers for a single prompt, and none of them answers the same way as any other, none of them fails for the simple fact that they did not achieve a single correct answer. EB has provided us with an interpretation of history that--and it is important to remember this--has not been constant, and has changed over time. I don't take it for granted because when entering in factional unit lists for EB Online I see name changes over and over again for units. Flexibility is a great trait in history.

Surely, I concur with what you said. We have sometimes so few informations that a good deal of speculation is mandatory, esp. for a game and its restrictions. I only had some problems in mind that are possibly caused by the early introduction of some of the Greek/Hellenistic units. E.G. to have peltasts with thoureoi shields and thoureophoroi is such a problem. EB2 should get rid of the peltasts and install thoureophoroi with javelins instead. And a thoureophoros should not have much armour, with armour it should be a thorakites. Or the padded armour of the Cretan archers. The only pictures of Hellenistic time Cretan archers show them without armour, and if armour is given to them because of gameplay reasons (which are important reasons) it should perhaps be one that is more common for the Greeks and at least shown in some ancient illustrations. Or the rather strange Akarnanian attack unit. Or the appearance of the chitones and the Roman caligae of many Greek units.

Small things like this. The possibility of M2:TW units to show more than one appearance will solve many problems and I think the team is aware of the problems. We had such discussions before, no need to warm it up.

[athanaric]

Or the padded armour of the Cretan archers.

I'd rather see a source for the extreme missile range they have in EB I.

Or the rather strange Akarnanian attack unit.

Which unit are you referring to? Akarnania doesn't have a regional special unit in EB I as far as I'm aware of. Perhaps you mean Agrianian?

[TheLastDays]

The MTW2 environment and its engine are much more stable than RTW 1.5; at least CTD's after battles won't be that usual anymore but also bugs coming from other RTW specific issues won't appear anymore.

Now that is something I am really looking forward too

I was referring to the government resources (Homeland, Subjugation, Allied) not the government buildings.

SO there will still be different government types and also those representing client kingdoms, right? 'Cause I was a bit shocked by that last post that said there won't be allied provinces