Casse Rivals- A proposition

**ziegenpeter** · 02-11-2010, 18:56

Originally Posted by Genava

Each one at home and that will be much better.

Dunno, as a historical interested person, you should know that foreigners can contribute a lot to their hosting culture. Imho great cultures developed alway there, where two cultures met...
@Mods: Could you please delete Horatius' sig? I find it quite offending ("Britain not Londonistan"), and or also because its way to political for such a forum.

**Genava** · 02-11-2010, 20:26

Dunno, as a historical interested person, you should know that foreigners can contribute a lot to their hosting culture. Imho great cultures developed alway there, where two cultures met...

I answer you by PM. I don't want spam this thread.

**Ludens** · 02-11-2010, 21:42

Originally Posted by Genava

I answer you by PM. I don't want spam this thread.

Current politics do not belong in this forum.
Take those to PM, or to the backroom.

Political signatures are something of a grey area in the .Org rules. I'll check with the other moderators. If you feel a signature is offensive, don't hesitate to contact me.

**MataNiall** · 02-11-2010, 21:58

Hey first post on this forum lol so i thought i'd add my penny worth to it. Aside from the obvious Caledonian or Pict answer to it could you not add a Faction if you were going to add a faction into the Isles area add it in Ireland. Since there is a good bit of information on the tribes and people of Ireland from that time and much earlier. I for one can see my Family line goes all the way back to 1800 BC lol. Also it'd be better than sticking a tribe next to the Casse and then both of them battering each other till one dies. Where as if a faction is put into Ireland it keeps them away from each and will hopefully make them expand Casse over Southern Britain and Ireland Northern Britain. This is just my penny's worth though i'm not wanting my Head bitten off lol

**Brennus** · 02-11-2010, 22:18

NOBODY BITE HIS HEAD OFF! We don't want a repeat of what happened to Richard III earlier this week.

Hello MataNiall and welcome to the Guild. Although an Irish (or Goidelic tribe as they are more commonly reffered to in the forum) faction is a sensible idea it is unfortunatly not feasible. Personally I would love to see a tribe in Ireland but sadly the archaeological record does not support a faction of this type. The Irish Iron Age is very poorly know, for reasons that we cannot yet be sure about, there is very little information availiable about the material culture of Ireland during this period. Skinning and designing units would be based too much on theory and conjecture rather than fact. Although we do have literary accounts like the Ulster Cycle these accounts were mostly written about 1000 years after the starting period of EB.

Another point to remember is this, Ireland's location. Now I doubt you would find anyone in this forum who would support another British faction as much as me (prove me wrong guys) but the fact that most of the action in EB is focused on continental Europe and the Near East means that Ireland and Britian do not present good locations to place a faction that would add to the gameplay.

One final point to make is this, mnai would not be applicable to Ireland during this period (although in truth it isn't really to the Casse until c. 100BC) no coinage is present in circulation in Ireland until the Vikings (hoards of Roman coin do exist but it is unlikely they were ever used as tender) in Ireland during the late Iron age there is only one curreny, cattle.

Sorry. And once again welcome.

**Horatius** · 02-12-2010, 02:33

Originally Posted by ziegenpeter

Dunno, as a historical interested person, you should know that foreigners can contribute a lot to their hosting culture. Imho great cultures developed alway there, where two cultures met...
@Mods: Could you please delete Horatius' sig? I find it quite offending ("Britain not Londonistan"), and or also because its way to political for such a forum.

Sorry that your offended, but I work with honest immigrants every day, and know for a fact that muslims, christians, hindus and people of all other religions who desperately want a better life, have no problems with any type of group including Jews, and who are ready and eager to accept British values are rejected by immigration and sent home everyday simply because the quota is full.

I'm sorry if you believe that we should be keeping the scum I very often have to work with who believe the 9-11 terrorists are heroes, my personal opinion is those people are horrible and should be deported for lying on their immigration applications in order to free up quota space for those who belong here.

We have literally sent political dissidents who were eager to move here, couldn't prove things, i.e. that the fate of other dissidents would happen to them if they were sent back to their country of birth, simply because quotas are full. Don't get me wrong I am 100% in favor of immigration, Englishmen and Women are all descendants of immigrants, I just think we should be favoring people who love us over people who hate us.

**Horatius** · 02-12-2010, 03:08

Originally Posted by oudysseos

Look, in real-world terms, many of these suggestions are perfectly reasonable: but Total War is not a model of the real world. It is an engine whose primary function is to generate battles, and whose only goal is to conquer territory. Many real, historically important entities (like Massalia) simply do not fit well into that paradigm, and it is very difficult to make economic or cultural dominance significant in the game. So yes, Massalia was part of the process that brought Rome and Carthage into conflict- but how do we realistically introduce something like that into the game? How can there be a faction that starts with one territory and always stays that way? Would anyone really play that faction for more than a few turns?

I'm afraid we're up against the limit of the engine, here: it was not intended or designed for these things. You might as well complain that your Dodge mini-van can't win a Grand Prix. It's just not what it's for.

EDIT: Completely OT, but Horatius, with all due respect, I'm a little tired of the kind of sentiments you expressed in your sig. I certainly am not in favour of bombing soft targets for political purposes- but that standard has to apply to everyone, not just Hezbollah or Al Qaeda. Why is it wrong for the 7/7 or 9/11 bombers to attack civilians (and it is wrong), but not wrong for Israel, the United States and Great Britain to do exactly the same kind of thing but on a much larger and more terrible scale? Do you even know how many totally innocent Iraqi and Afghani civilians have been killed by us? Is it impossible to conceive that the peoples from whom Hamas, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda draw their ranks might just have some legitimate grievances, and that Great Britain and the US just might bear some responsibility? A moral standard that you don't apply to yourself (and that has to include the nation to which you belong) is worthless and hypocritical rubbish.

First off a matter of chronology proves you are very innacurate. I will try to avoid beign offensive, even though you oppened by calling me a hypocrite.

NOBODY in the ranks of Al Queda or Hezbollah joined because of legitimate greivance. They started at a time when British and American Forces had JUST stopped a genocide attempted by Serbian Christians against Bosnian Muslims. Those poor Serbs we bombed into submission have not responded by strapping on bomb vests or holding a plane hostage. Do you ever stop to wonder if it is a horrible situation that Muslims from the Middle East often get indoctrinated into Terrorist garbage in Britain? There are plenty of BBC interviews with a lot of families who state clearly the indoctrination did not happen at home, which means it happened elsewere. It really is not a coincidence that 9-11 happened before the Afghan War, I didn't support the Iraq War, but it really has nothing to do with Al Queeda, Saddam Hussein was an enemy of Al Queeda infact and the terrorists are very happy he is gone. I am to, but for different reasons (Anfal Genocide). Britain has also handled the Iraq War very humanely and the men and women on the ground have performed exceptionally well. I would be careful before trying to compare men and women who selflessly volunteered for a hard life so you could devote yourself to study, to fanatical men working to destroy everyone and bring a new Dark Age.

As I just stated also every single Al Queda supporter we allow into Britain means someone who does not support a new Dark Age does not get in.

http://www.womenforwomen.org/global-...tan-update.php
She is the type of person immigration can’t allow in because of full quotas.
What I am suggesting is common sense, not rascism, and I would have already removed the sig if I wasn't already called a rascist, and not only that even if everything you said is true, it isn't hypocrisy or rascism to want to prefer people who don't support enemies of your country as immigrants.

My politics are simple, on the Middle East withdraw from Iraq once we repair the damage we made, give what help we could in Afghanistan, Middle East Wise Israel should withdraw from what it calls territories and abolish it's settlements and negotiate which parts of Jerusalem goes to who, and the terrorists and their supporters have no place in Great Britain. But I guess in the modern world that is defined as rascism.

**Megas Methuselah** · 02-12-2010, 04:15

Blah blah blah you can't deny immigrants when your own breed took over my entire continent. I'll keep calling you a hypocrite until your people swim on back to Europe.

**Brennus** · 02-12-2010, 09:21

Islamic fundamentalist terrorist acts are small fry (notable exception being September 11) compared to Northern Ireland's recent (very disgraceful) past