- Discuss IBFD Here -

[GERMANICUS]

Ramon
Where does one sign up?

[Jazz23]

this is a very , very great mod. THX

[sftonix]

i have reconquered constantinopolis with WRE, unfortunately damaging the fabbrica armaturae (25% of damag ), but as i try to repair this building it doesn't seem to work, so i tried also with process_cq but nothing. what should i do? i'm playing the 7.04 version. plz help me:hmmm:

[Pompeius Magnus]

I made this structure model for the late roman army. I had the feeling that a lot of users are confused according the military system of the late antique.

This version is not the last, but I think we can live with that, so far.
The text and the description for the graphic is located, of course, in the late roman army guide (see table of contents).

[Beetlecat]

PM:

Utterly awesome! Once again, incredible work.

[Pompeius Magnus]

So. The next image is finished. What you can see here is the result of 4 hours... painting.. study... painting... and so on...

enjoy
The original is located in the roman army manual thread, always the same.
With this schematic I want illustrate the players of IBFD what the status and the classification (like viri illustres) of the governors means.

[Pompeius Magnus]

and the next one...

[Coni]

Hello to everybody,
this is my first post. But I checked out the ibfd-thread a long time ago as "ghost".
Great mod. I like late roman time.
But I saw last time the thread of you Pompeius. I never saw such detailed information in any other mod-threads before.
Such a flood of informations is great for the community. I understand a lot of things much better than before.
Are you team member of ibfd-mod? I mean you are a living library.

[PSEUDO ROMANUS]

I certainly share your opinion Coni. That's our good Pompeius. he's always sharing his knowledge on the matter. Something that I really am thankful for.

[Mylae]

your scheme is simply great and clear Pompeius, like ever

[Scolot]

Good day everybody. Mod excellent! My respect to its developers. With your permission, one question. What is the conceptual line of unit creation for various factions? The question is connected, that, I think, all barbarous factions are made unhistorical: weapons and regimentals of these fractions mismatch the period presented in mod. Exception is made by Slavs. They are closest to the historical validity of that period
For example, why are saxones so well armoured, unlike the others barbarous factions. Especially, where did they get a heavy cavalry – knights – at this period?? This units appeared a little bit later – in 7th-8th centuries, not in period this mod developed for.

[Pompeius Magnus]

Hello scolot,

I think it is alittle "provocative" what you say.
Can you give me a historical source for your arguments?

Last year I visited a project in spain according the gothic time in the late antique. Parts of the exhibition were some armour of knights of the late antique. I saw this equipment with my own eyes. It looked not very barbarian! The design was a little bit more simple compared to the high-medieval time. But it was a real armour like for a "real" knight (cnitha).
By the way: even today some old spanish aristrocats are proud to have "gothic" ancestors.
I say that again and again and again:
The most important german tribes like francs and goths were modern. You find that also in the tales of the ancient writer of Ammian.
Well, the german tribes had problems to adopt roman law, because it was too "abstract" for the normal gothic farmer or citizen.
The saxons were, unlike the movie "Arthur" not the terrible slaughtering barbarians. More and more historians are thinking that the saxons were send to Britain by the romans to protect the coast (Saxon shore).

The first surviving half-timbered or framed houses are from the 12th or 13th century. But from tales we know that even in the late antique alamanii and francs build similar houses.
This situation was of course not the same for "all" germanic tribes. In the so called "free"-germany there were still some unknown areas, deep woods and so on. But even here we find in the middle and late 5th century more and more important and bigger cities.

I wouldn't say that everything is absolutely historical in IBFD or IJ. That is, by the way, not possible. But I think IBFD or IJ have a very high degree of historical accuracy.
You said: all of the barbarian factions are made unhistorical. That seems for me undifferentiated, polemical and not evidenced.

As I said: Some so called barbarians had in the time of 410AD a very high degree of civilisation.
Indeed, not like the romans.
But they adopted and learned from the romans very fast.

And in the battle of Adrianople the Goths deployed super-heavy cavalry against the romans. And this was in the 4th century. 40 years earlier than our mod IBFD!!!!

[Scolot]

Pompeius Magnus

I think it is alittle "provocative" what you say.

You are wrong. I did not have such ideas.

Can you give me a historical source for your arguments?

Of course. For example:

Knighthood as known in Europe was characterized by two elements, feudalism and service as a mounted combatant. Both arose under the reign of the Frankish emperor Charlemagne, from which the knighthood of the Middle Ages can be seen to have had its genesis.

Some portions of the armies of Germanic tribes (and super-tribes, such as the Suebi) which occupied Europe from the third century had always been mounted, and sometimes such cavalry in fact composed large majorities, such as in the armies of the Ostrogoths. However, it was the Franks who came to dominate Western and Central Europe after the fall of Rome in the West, and they generally fielded armies composed of large masses of infantry, with an infantry elite, the comitatus, which often rode to battle on horseback rather than marching on foot. Riding to battle had two key advantages: it relieved fatigue, particularly when the elite soldiers wore armour (as was increasingly the case in the centuries after the fall of Rome in the West); and it gave the soldiers more mobility to react to the raids of the enemy, particularly the invasions of Muslim armies which started occurring in the seventh century. So it was that the armies of the Frankish ruler and warlord Charles Martel, which defeated the Umayyad Arab invasions at the Battle of Tours in 732, were still largely infantry armies, the elites riding to battle but dismounting to fight in order to provide a hard core for the levy of the infantry warbands.

As the eighth century progressed into the Carolingian Age, however, the Franks were generally on the attack, and larger numbers of warriors took to their horses to ride with the Emperor in his wide-ranging campaigns of conquest. At about this time the Franks increasingly remained on horseback to fight on the battlefield as true cavalry rather than as mounted infantry, and would continue to do for centuries thereafter. Although in some nations the knight returned to foot combat in the fourteenth century, the association of the knight with mounted combat with a spear, and later a lance, remained a strong one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knight

Only at 8th century we can speak about real knights. The time before there was mounted infantry, armoured with a spear, a shield, maybe chain armour. Heavy cavalry (like gothic lancers) and knights - they are rather different concepts.

Prior to the beginning of the seventh century such regimentals like helmet, chain armor, armour, sword - is indispensable attribute of noblement of barbarous tribes. (That you 've seen in Spain, I think) Only since the seventh century we can speak about distribution (but not universal application!) a heavy armour among ordinary soldiers. And it (noblement and heavy armour distribution) concerns not only the German tribes, but also the others, including Slavs.

And in this mod Slavs are historical for 4-th century period, but German tribes (especially saxons and its knights!) are historical for the beginning of 7-th century period. And I have knowingly asked about a conceptual line of unit creation in this mod. Why such injustice concerning Slavs? Make'em for beginning 7th century too!

[Pompeius Magnus]

So your only source seems wikipedia.
Wikipedia is not a good source. Every idiot can write things in wikipedia.

And at this point the discussions with you are obsolete.

In the complete game there are no medieval knights, even in the Saxon faction there are no medieval knights.
The modern germanic "weapon development" with more modern weapons started in the early 4th centrury. Here we find in germany building (achaological sites of Xanten/Trier/Köln but also on the side of free germania (right hand of rhine)) wich were used as weapon factories for the germans.
And I gave you an example for the Gothic time in Spain. The boys had indeed modern armour and weapons in the later part of the late antique.

You don't know what you are talking about. I think you should buy a book at amazon.com or amazon.de. But stop quoting wikipedia-pages!!!

[Coni]

Really amazing.
I also don't saw any real medieval knights in IBFD.
I am not sure about the draco-standard for germanic nations at this time frame. But the IBFD units are great

"all barbarian factions are unhistorical"
@ scolotyou should check your sources first.

Dear IBFD Team:stay where you are!

[Scolot]

Pompeius Magnus

So your only source seems wikipedia.

No, you're wrong.

Wikipedia is not a good source. Every idiot can write things in wikipedia.

Maybe you could write something (what you think must be correct) valuable at wikipedia pages.

In the complete game there are no medieval knights, even in the Saxon faction there are no medieval knights

Note, a didn't mean "medieval knights". (You've told it what for ). Ok. Let's forget the term "knight". What historical sources do authentically testify to a such heavy cavalry in the environment of saxones in this period?

The modern germanic "weapon development" with more modern weapons started in the early 4th centrury. Here we find in germany building (achaological sites of Xanten/Trier/Köln but also on the side of free germania (right hand of rhine)) wich were used as weapon factories for the germans.

Can you give me the reference to to the sources confirming your words? I'll be very grateful.
While I know only what these smithies on Rhine began to function for about 3 centuries later the period you've mentioned.

You don't know what you are talking about

really? I think, you know 'bout me nothing. So you would not be such assured

think you should buy a book at amazon.com or amazon.de. But stop quoting wikipedia-pages!!!

And what literature can you recommend to me? What sources/authors can be quoted here?

And I wish to tell once again. The heavy armour among ordinary soldiers starts to extend with the beginning of 7-th century. Before this period only noblement (including noble warriors) could have heavy armour. And this noblement was the minority of barbarous tribes.

P.S. Don't be so negatively adjusted to me

[Pompeius Magnus]

Forget it.
Read Wikipedia and good is...

[Scolot]

You are very "tactful"

Yours faithfully...

[Riothamus]

Scolot you are generally correct in to say during this era of the mod the well (Germanic)armoured units were of the noble class. Chainmail, helmets and sword. I'm confident that the recent IB Mod portrays this general theme. there may be some specific unit that may need further altering. less armour, leather instead of chainmail shirts a spear instead of a sword and ect...If you can point out some specific unit that you think needs altering the IB team is not above in talking a look at your opinions.

In regards to the Saxon Cavalry the horse was treasured and its rider would have been armed like an infantry nobleman: chainmail armor and helmets armed with a sword or axe.
Some info from this site:
http://www.freewebs.com/merseybooks/...%20Cavalry.pdf

[Pompeius Magnus]

that's what I tried to explain him. The findings in spain for example are absolutely correct compared to IBFD.

no, no Rio.
he means "all" units! and all "factions"!
not only some specifics.
Perhaps we all were "blind" the last years.