Casse Rivals- A proposition

[Brennus]

Guys stop talking about EB Naval invasions unless you have some historical or archaeological information to add about Celtic shippping. No offence intended but this how threads go off track.

[Subotan]

I fought a 20 year war over Sicily with Carthago as Rome with EB Alex and some house rules(max high taxes unless enemy in Italy, 12 unit armies).

Quite competent at keeping armies in the field and ever over seas... as in whole 20 unit stacks + reinforcements + elephants.

Ha, nice. But then, I don't use .alex.

Guys stop talking about EB Naval invasions unless you have some historical or archaeological information to add about Celtic shippping. No offence intended but this how threads go off track.

Celtic Shipping

[Brennus]

Celtic Shipping

lol Thats gotta take some skill to operate.

[Macilrille]

Ha, nice. But then, I don't use .alex.

Celtic Shipping

Ha ha ha, yet they seem to have reached Iceland in the 7th-8th centuries in such contraptions... The Vikings found monks there when they arrived, Vestmannaeyer is named for them if I recall correctly. Of course they proceeded to cut them down or enslave them.

One must surmise that their patron saints were watching over them on those trips across the N Atlantic ;-)

[WinsingtonIII]

Guys stop talking about EB Naval invasions unless you have some historical or archaeological information to add about Celtic shippping. No offence intended but this how threads go off track.

Sorry Brennus, I never meant to hijack the thread, I was just misremembering what RTW vanilla was actually like.

In actuality, I would love to see another faction in the British Isles, but I think with the faction limit there are just too many other factions that should be given preference, unfortunately.

[Genava]

In actuality, I would love to see another faction in the British Isles, but I think with the faction limit there are just too many other factions that should be given preference, unfortunately.

Yep, I agree. I prefer a Belgian or a Boiian faction than a new brythonic faction.

Celtic Shipping

Corucos re-enacted:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[WinsingtonIII]

Yep, I agree. I prefer a Belgian or a Boiian faction than a new brythonic faction.

Definitely, and ideally both a Belgae tribe and the Boii could make it in I think. I would be surprised if we do not see at least the Boii in EB2, although I have no information on the matter so I may look very stupid when it comes out and they are not in it.

[Brennus]

Ha ha ha, yet they seem to have reached Iceland in the 7th-8th centuries in such contraptions... Atlantic ;-)

Surely a coracle wouldn't survive such a trip. A curragh would, although considering the very shallow draft of a coracle they could have simply risen above waves rather than sail through them although i think the logistics would have prevented a human from travelling that far in a coracle.

Yes I agree it does look like the Boii or continental Belgae would make a more likely addition to the faction roster (i personally see no point in the Saba... prove me wrong guys), i think we are all in agreement that there is no chance of a Goidelic faction.

[antisocialmunky]

It is fun to learn something everyday. Now I want to make one...
[/stuff]

For my two cents I think a continental faction would work better gameplay wise. Having a faction stuck on an island is somewhat of a waste from a gameplay standpoint.

[Maeran]

Curraghs and coracles are really just for pottering around and fishing. It's like saying the Romans and Greeks had nothing better than fishing boats.

Boats are rare however, so the nearest I can find you is a Bronze age boat.
http://www.dover.gov.uk/museum/bronze_age_boat.aspx

[bobbin]

(i personally see no point in the Saba... prove me wrong guys)

You better hope Moros doesn't read that

But seriously the Saba are a stronger faction choice than the Casse, we know far more about them for one thing and they were more powerful. The criticism usually put against them is that they are "too isolated" which I never understand as they are always pretty active on the map in my games (constantly fighting the Ptolemaioi and even attacking the Baktrians at Persis in a few campaigns) which is more than could be said for the Casse (who I have seen only once capture a city in the continent) .

I'm not suggesting either be dropped as I love playing them both I just think its a little unfair that people pick on the Saba so often.

Back on topic: I think a Belgae tribe such as the Suessiones or Atrebates would be the best choice for a rival to the Casse as they historically showed considerable intrest in Britain and we know about them more than other British tribes.

Curraghs and coracles are really just for pottering around and fishing

IIRC someone sailed a Currach across the atlantic so they were perfectly seaworthy, although one would imagine for longer journeys they would use bigger ships, these could still have been Currachs mind you.

[antisocialmunky]

It would probably be more accurate to say non-ideal. After all Thor Heyerdah has pretty much shown that its not that hard to sail ancient vessels not thought to be able to do ocean crossings across oceans if you have skill, a whole lot of guts, and the weather on your side.

[WinsingtonIII]

(i personally see no point in the Saba... prove me wrong guys)

I think anyone who says there is no point in the Saba should really try playing a campaign as them. It is a very fun, very unique campaign experience that is both challenging and provides great roleplaying opportunities. The same can be said for anyone who says the Casse are useless. I have found that due to their isolated starting positions and generally unique units, they both have a very interesting feel to them in campaign that cannot be replicated by any other faction, and for me that alone is reason enough to keep them (although of course historical accuracy is paramount). So, I guess my answer to you is, play a campaign as the Saba, and that will prove to you that they have a point.

I'm not trying to change the direction of this thread, I just have noticed that every time we start talking about either the Casse or the Saba, inevitably the suggestion is thrown out there that they should be dropped as factions (which the team has said they won't do anyways if I remember correctly), and I'm just putting my two cents in on that subject.

[Ibrahim]

(i personally see no point in the Saba... prove me wrong guys).

well, if was going to change your mind by myself, I'd have to resort to illegal means (like burning your house or throwing a dead horse on you bed).

besides, Saba is awesome; what is better in EB than trying to take on to world-class empires, the ptolemioi and seleukids, using a motly band of light infantry?

it has a star wars quality to it, come to think about it.

[athanaric]

@EB team, please can you make a sticky saying something like "Saba will NOT be removed" (unless you guys decide to of course)?
The request for removing Saba has become more frequent and annoying than the one for the inclusion of LS.

[Elmetiacos]

There seems to be more continuity in Central Britain/Northern England than in the South; Sutton Bank hill fort dates from around 400BC, and Almondbury was apparently burned down shortly before that, as if [warning: conjecture follows] there had been an unknown ruling group prior to that date, succeeded by new rulers centred further North, who can be identified with the Brigantes. After that things seem to have stayed fairly stable, with the proto-Brigantes extending their rule over a large part of the region until we arrive at the situation of Cartimandua vs. Venutius in Roman times. In the South, things seem to have been less stable. Most of the major centres are much younger. Aylesford and Swarling have been mentioned and opinions are always changing, but the tendency seems to be to move dates later: where once there was a conjectural "Belgic Empire" in the Southeast opinion now seems to be shifting towards the view that changes in material culture are largely due to direct Roman influence from Gaul. In EBI's version of history, Caesar's Cassi are associated (per Ó hÓgain) with the Gaulish tribes whose names ended in -casses and made a major power, but that's only one man's view in the end. What was really going on there is anyone's guess...

[Moros]

Noone start dissin' my sabaean homies okay?

[Power2the1]

Noone start dissin' my sabaean homies okay?

Word, yo. Dats straight up, dog.

[Horatius]

As long as we are throwing out ideas for a new faction why not do the obvious ones that I think are not in and add in Galatians, Massaliots, and Belgica?

[Celtic_Punk]

Look, if there were no faction limit (and more importantly, no province limit), I'm pretty sure that we'd end up with two native British factions. As it is, I'm not going to give out any hints, but there is a lot of work that has gone into Britain, and I can't wait to show it to everyone. Patience! We are working away at EB2.

You can show it all to me. I won't tell! You can trust a fellow Irishman!

[B-Wing]

Someone had a thread going a little while ago expressing a desire for EB2 to have a bigger map, and I expressed my opposite opinion that the mod would be more profited by a reduced map (mainly by not going so far south, which would consequently eliminate the Saba), and it was not well received.

Anyway, somewhat more related to the original topic, there's obviously a popular notion that there exist(ed) too many other deserving factions to include another British one. I'm no history buff of the relevant time period, so I'm not going to argue against this notion, but I will play devil's advocate and ask just what factions do deserve inclusion over, say, the Brigantes?

As it stands, to my knowledge, there are 7 factions as yet unannounced for EB2. The original 20 are definitely in, as well as Pergamon, the Bosporan Kingdom, and Massylia which have been announced. Again, I'm not as familiar with the time period as most here seem to be, so my opinions are based largely upon the desire to see gaps in the campaign map filled, but I'd say that there should definitely be an eastern Iberian faction, a Belgic faction, a northern Arabic faction, and at least one faction located somewhere west of the Getai but east of Gaul. Clearly I'm not very concerned about the far eastern portion of the map, but then I never really intend to play Bactria, Saka, or Selekuids anyway, so I'm biased. So in my mind, there's room for Brigantes.

But what about you guys? If there's no room for another British faction, then who's more important? It's easy to say there's too many other deserving factions, and list a couple, but with 7 slots to be filled, I'd really like to see a list of at least 7 factions with more historical credibility.

[WinsingtonIII]

But what about you guys? If there's no room for another British faction, then who's more important? It's easy to say there's too many other deserving factions, and list a couple, but with 7 slots to be filled, I'd really like to see a list of at least 7 factions with more historical credibility.

I mean "important" is a very relative word, but I think there are probably 7 other factions that beat out the Brigantes. Keep in mind that though historical accuracy is extremely important in EB, team members have stated that some factions will not or have not made it in due to gameplay purposes. I think Kyrene (sp?) was mentioned specifically, as the faction would never survive in the hands of the AI (sandwiched between the Ptolies and Kart-Hadast, as it were).

This is just my list, and it's very similar to one bobbin and I were discussing in the potential factions thread. It's obviously not "correct" or even necessarily a great prediction of which factions will be in EB2, but I think it works out.

So, we already know:

1. Pergamon
2. Massylians
3. Bosporan Kingdom

And, partially based on that, here's who I personally think we may see:

4. Massaesylians - With the way the EB team were referencing these guys as a major rival of the Massylians during the Massylian preview, I think they're in. Let's just say it would be very strange to put in the Massylians but leave out their major and quite powerful rival in Numidia.
5. Boii - They're historically powerful and they fit a good area gameplay wise.
6. Kartli - Historically quite important, and gameplay wise they will provide and interesting dynamic as it may be an early fight for survival in the Caucasus between the Hai and Kartli, or perhaps they could team up against the AS, which would be interesting (not sure what the historical scenario would be, I should look that up).
7. A continental Belgae tribe - Not sure who it would be, but again I believe they fill both a historical and gameplay vacuum that previously existed in the game.
8. A celtiberian tribe (Arevaci maybe?) - Some sort of Eastern Iberian faction will be in most likely, as you say.

These final two are where it gets a bit hard, bobbin gives the Scordiscii, Kappadoika, Galatia/Bythinia, Atropatene, Helvetii, and the Kambojas as options and after some research I think they all sound possible. I'm not going to hazard a definitive guess towards the last two as I think it's too much of a toss up. However, given how many of the factions on the previous list are concentrated in the West, and EB does attempt to provide a focus that balances across all areas of the map, it's quite possible that the last two could be Atropatene and the Kambojas. That would certainly spice up the East more.

Truthfully, another tribe on the British Isles would be great, but I think that once you combine the necessary historical and gameplay requirements, the factions listed make better choices than the Brigantes. Sorry for the length.

[Brennus]

Ok a must confess I do take guilty pleasure by playing the Saba in custom battles, so there you are Arabophiles. Whats the addiction with the Sweboz?

Aylesford and Swarling have been mentioned and opinions are always changing, but the tendency seems to be to move dates later: where once there was a conjectural "Belgic Empire" in the Southeast opinion now seems to be shifting towards the view that changes in material culture are largely due to direct Roman influence from Gaul. In EBI's version of history, Caesar's Cassi are associated (per Ó hÓgain) with the Gaulish tribes whose names ended in -casses and made a major power, but that's only one man's view in the end. What was really going on there is anyone's guess...

Precisely.

The key problem that has been raised (correctly) by many people here is the fact that the Belgae migrations (if they did even occur, Cunliffe claims that the Aylesford-Swarling culture is the result of trade not migration, i don't agree) cannot be dated any earlier than 130BC at the very very earliest (based on Allen's numismatic evidence). However an insular Belgic tribe could be included if it can be proven that the Casse (Catuvellauni) can be proven to be Belgic and not Marnian Gauls, as Harding suggests. We know the Casse were present in Britain by 272BC as Ó hÓgain points out, now if they were Gauls then there is no case for Belgae in Britain at this time, if however they were Belgae then it is feasible that another tribe (Possibly the Trinovantes) could be included as Belgae rivals. Once again we have the problem of a lack of evidence with no coinage in Britain till 130BC (Gallo-Belgic A stater) and no named Belgae individuals till either Diviacus c.100BC or Commios 54BC, and certainly no Belgic pottery till c.60BC.

If the Casse are Belgic then there are grounds for a proto-Atrebates or other such tribe, if they are Gallic then once again we are stuck with the first Belgae arriving in the 1st Century BC. It all depends on your interpretation of Caesar's commentary on Britain and whether the continental Casse (the Catalauni) were Belgae or Gauls from the Marne region.

Sorry if that bored everyone, im gonna go an build a mini curragh and test it in the bath.

[oudysseos]

There seems to be more continuity in Central Britain/Northern England than in the South; Sutton Bank hill fort dates from around 400BC, and Almondbury was apparently burned down shortly before that, as if [warning: conjecture follows] there had been an unknown ruling group prior to that date, succeeded by new rulers centred further North, who can be identified with the Brigantes. After that things seem to have stayed fairly stable, with the proto-Brigantes extending their rule over a large part of the region until we arrive at the situation of Cartimandua vs. Venutius in Roman times. In the South, things seem to have been less stable. Most of the major centres are much younger. Aylesford and Swarling have been mentioned and opinions are always changing, but the tendency seems to be to move dates later: where once there was a conjectural "Belgic Empire" in the Southeast opinion now seems to be shifting towards the view that changes in material culture are largely due to direct Roman influence from Gaul. In EBI's version of history, Caesar's Cassi are associated (per Ó hÓgain) with the Gaulish tribes whose names ended in -casses and made a major power, but that's only one man's view in the end. What was really going on there is anyone's guess...

Not quite: the major centres that the Romans found were much younger- Camolodunum, Sorviodunum, etc. There are plenty of 3rd century BCE and earlier sites in the South; Maiden Castle, Uffington Castle, Old Oswestry, The Wrekin, the Bigbury-on-Stour hillfort close to Durovernon- and many many smaller sites, mostly unexcavated. Some of these are late Hallstatt-era foundations that seem to have been continued into the Middle Iron Age, and some might have been late 4th/early 3r4d century sites. There seems to be a general pattern (with regional variations) of the smaller hillforts falling out of use in favour a few, bigger sites, until the 1st century BCE (give or take 50 years) when a whole crop of new sites spring up and the older hillforts close down. It is hard not to associate these late pre-Roman sites with some kind of Belgic migration, but there are pefectly plausible alternative scenarios.

Ó hÓgain might believe that the Cassi were in Britain and known by that name as early as 272 BCE, but he can't prove it, for as Brennus points out the earliest numismatic evidence is much later. Given that all but one or two of the tribes reported by Caesar had disappeared by the time of Claudius, it is possible that tribal identities were more changeable than is often assumed- and in fact, we have to consider the possibility that tribal names themselves, as an idea, were not universal in the 3rd BCE: the large number of smaller sites certainly is suggestive of smaller political and ethnic identities, similar to our notions of clans or families. The very notion of a tribe might only have been forming in the 3rd century.

[athanaric]

but I will play devil's advocate and ask just what factions do deserve inclusion over, say, the Brigantes?

I'm all for the inclusion of the Brigantes. The problem is, can you (or the EB team) accumulate enough material evidence for this faction?

Ok a must confess I do take guilty pleasure by playing the Saba in custom battles, so there you are Arabophiles. Whats the addiction with the Sweboz?

The Swêboz units look extremely good even for EB standards. Not to mention their great reliability in melee engagements.
Apart from that, they're the only "Germanic" faction in the game, thereby representing a culture that played a major role in Europe from the EB timeframe onwards.

Both Swêboz and Saba are "underdog" factions that are outclassed by their neighbours, either in technology or in terms of armour and manpower.

[ziegenpeter]

Well, the sweboz are a bit cheated into the game right? The team claims, that there must be enough evidences for a faction's activity around 272bc, but afaik we don't get much information about germanic tribes until the 2nd bc and most only from the 1st bc... Or am I wrong?

EDIT: But you are right, sweboz are the developing country of the antiquity, even more than saba. The latter had at least this great dam. Something a germanic wouldn't even dream about.

[seienchin]

Ó hÓgain might believe that the Cassi were in Britain and known by that name as early as 272 BCE, but he can't prove it, for as Brennus points out the earliest numismatic evidence is much later. Given that all but one or two of the tribes reported by Caesar had disappeared by the time of Claudius, it is possible that tribal identities were more changeable than is often assumed- and in fact, we have to consider the possibility that tribal names themselves, as an idea, were not universal in the 3rd BCE: the large number of smaller sites certainly is suggestive of smaller political and ethnic identities, similar to our notions of clans or families. The very notion of a tribe might only have been forming in the 3rd century.

That is the point. 272bc is a maybe not the best starting year for historical accurate mod, because we have little to no knowlede about the barbarian tribes. Having the sweboz, casse and the aedui and averni in their current form is far stretched and the sauromatae as an united kingdom seems unlikely too.
So I think judging the relevance of the barbaric factions by historical facts is quite difficult and a belgian-britain faction would imo be great for balancing the game.

[oudysseos]

You can show it all to me. I won't tell! You can trust a fellow Irishman!

Aren't you from Cork? Hardly inspires trust in a Dublin man.


Seienchin, it's true that many of the "Barbarian" factions would have more written sources were the game to start later, but the later we start, the more entrenched Roman supremacy would already be- and many of the Hellenistic factions would fade out. It's all about balance, and 272 BCE is one of the latest dates that we can posit a plausible alternate history. The death of Pyrrhus ended any chance of a Hellenistic Kingdom expanding into the Western Medd.

[oudysseos]

Check this out.

[moonburn]

and before the brigantes there´s still alot to be discussed around sicily and massilia since we can now subdivide regions to express that there might a leading city but she wasn´t totally in control of the region wich ofc gives the western greeks a fair chance to show up and fight their regional power batles

also the chatti haven´t been rulled out yet and i still believe that a belgic faction if represented will authomatically clash with the casse (i sure hope so or else the aedui are going in for some serious troubles being caught beteween the arverni and the belgiums wich ofc can be aplyed for the arverni if they are caught beteween the chatti and the aedui or if an alpine faction shows up )

putting in the brigantes imho is giving 2 much importance to a part of the map that won´t bring much into the game