Faction List for EB2?

[WinsingtonIII]

There's absolutely no way we are going to have a Jewish faction in EBII.

This was announced in 2007 already.

Deal with it.

If this was in response to my post, I hope you understand that I was agreeing with you and trying to explain the reasoning behind it... I hope I wasn't misunderstood.

[resodan]

What about Meroe? I found EB I left little to do in NE Africa. Meroe was an established and important kingdom at the time of the beginning of the mod and continued to be well into the Roman period. Meroitic armies invaded Roman Egypt and Roman armies struck back into Meroe. Furthermore, Meroe was an important trade area and something of an intermediary between the Mediterranean world and the African interior. I'd suggest Aksum/Axum, too, but that empire arose too late to qualify.

The land of Kush/Meroe/Nubia was known from millenia to produce excellent archers and brave, if ill equipped, infantry and cavalry. There are certainly good units to be made. Furthermore, both Romans and Kushites fought the Blemmyes, likely the ancestors of the modern Beja and inhabitants of the arid, gold rich Red Sea hills straddling the modern borders of Egypt and Sudan. Blemmye mercenaries could be new unites, as could Noba mercenaries in the far south.

The map could therefore include a few new provinces. One for the Blemmyes, and a few in Kush/Nubia, perhaps with borders at the cataracts of the Nile.

It doesn't make sense to me to include two nomadic, Iranian factions (Saka Rauka and Sarmatians) which did not have centralized political control, yet not include a long-lasting, economically and geopolitically important centralized state that fits within the geography and time frame of the mod. There is plenty enough information out there on the Meroitic period to create a faction, and I'd be happy to contribute information or at least recommend sources to check out (like archaeologist Derek Welsby's books). I'm glad to see the the Numidians included, I just hope the Meroites will be as well!

[WinsingtonIII]

The map could therefore include a few new provinces. One for the Blemmyes, and a few in Kush/Nubia, perhaps with borders at the cataracts of the Nile.

I think one of the problems with including Meroe is at least partially that it is on the very edge of the map. M2TW has the same province limit as RTW, so I sort of doubt that the EB team is going to remove 5 or 6 provinces from other parts of the map to put them all in one place at the very bottom of the map where most factions will never reach them.

[A Very Super Market]

Not enough culture slots.

Wensington, the EB team doesn't hold gameplay over historical accuracy. If Meroe could have been better represented, a province would likely have been cut to make room for it.

[Foot]

Not enough culture slots.

Wensington, the EB team doesn't hold gameplay over historical accuracy. If Meroe could have been better represented, a province would likely have been cut to make room for it.

No, we don't go cutting provinces somewhere else because we feel like want to include a new faction. otherwise we would go for india over Meroe. Wingsington III has it right, and so do you. There are many reasons that Meroe isn't included.

Foot

[resodan]

Fair enough, I'm not a mod developer, just a player. Still, Kush was more enduring than the Sabaea (itself something of a , and under Meroe they were more centralized than numerous other already included factions. That, AND most Kushite territory

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

would in-fact

be on the map, assuming it's the same boundaries as EB I. It'd be fair to say, furthermore, that we know Kush/Nubia better archaeologically and historically than we do NE Europe at this time, which is very well represented in terms of provinces.
Don't mean to be a thorn in your guys' side, also didn't realize there were more considerations than simply being on the map and being important at the time of the scenario start. I just thought the proposition was a fairly decent one. *swallows inordinate pride* Anyway, I'll let it rest and will still play the game regardless. Actually, I'm rather looking forward to it! :)

...would there be any chance of Nubian archers as mercenaries, at least...? :p

[Skullheadhq]

I think there are some nubian units as regionals in EBI, correct me if I'm wrong, I dont usually expand that far south.

[WinsingtonIII]

...would there be any chance of Nubian archers as mercenaries, at least...? :p

EB1 contains Ethiopian Swordsmen, Ethiopian Light Spearmen, Ethiopian Archers, and Ethiopian Medium Cavalry as regionals and at least some of them are mercenaries, so I'm assuming we will see these units in EB2 as well. I realize that technically these aren't Nubian units per se (who would have been located more in modern day Sudan, not Ethiopia), but they are fairly similar to the troops that would have been fielded by the Nubians, so you will probably be able to field Ethiopian Archers and maybe just roleplay that they are Nubians. You may even be able to change their name so that in your games they are called Nubian Archers (although I don't know what the native tongue name would be).

[Foot]

EB1 contains Ethiopian Swordsmen, Ethiopian Light Spearmen, Ethiopian Archers, and Ethiopian Medium Cavalry as regionals and at least some of them are mercenaries, so I'm assuming we will see these units in EB2 as well. I realize that technically these aren't Nubian units per se (who would have been located more in modern day Sudan, not Ethiopia), but they are fairly similar to the troops that would have been fielded by the Nubians, so you will probably be able to field Ethiopian Archers and maybe just roleplay that they are Nubians. You may even be able to change their name so that in your games they are called Nubian Archers (although I don't know what the native tongue name would be).

"The word 'Libya' means Africa, and so the majority of Africans came to be known as 'Libyans' to the Greeks. The major distinction that the Greeks made was when it came to colour. They generally referred to all negroid African populations as 'Ethiopians' and all others as 'Libyans'."

The Ethiopian units cover all the negroid African units in EBI, and will do so in EBII. I believe that, even still, there are some specific Nubian units that were open as regionals and particularly for Saba. I might be wrong.

Foot

[WinsingtonIII]

Not enough culture slots.

Wensington, the EB team doesn't hold gameplay over historical accuracy. If Meroe could have been better represented, a province would likely have been cut to make room for it.

Holding history over gameplay isn't the same as throwing gameplay out the window, AVSM. I think it would be somewhat against EB's policy of accurately and equally representing as many factions on the map as possible to take multiple provinces away from these factions and place them on the very edge of the map where they only benefit one faction, whose lands extend off the map anyways, and cannot be represented accurately due to this fact.

And yes, culture slots were another consideration, as Foot said, we were both right, I'm merely clarifying that I wasn't expecting anyone to put gameplay above history, but sometimes it has to be considered in order to preserve the historical accuracy of other factions.

No worries, I understood what you said. I was repying to the continuous lobby made to incluide a Maccabean kingdom 100 yers earlier than it even existed.

Exactly, I'm in full agreement with you there. I was merely making sure I didn't get on the bad-list as one of the lobbyists...

[-Praetor-]

If this was in response to my post, I hope you understand that I was agreeing with you and trying to explain the reasoning behind it... I hope I wasn't misunderstood.

No worries, I understood what you said. I was repying to the continuous lobby made to incluide a Maccabean kingdom 100 yers earlier than it even existed.

There are like ten factions that we would prefer to incluide before the Maccabeans: the Cimbrians for instance, that ravaged through half of Europe, or the Yuezhi that flared the far east. But they are not making in because they appear too far from our starting year, even though they did shape this part of the world significantly.

The Maccabean kingdom didn't even do that.