TODO for next version (v2.6)

[Caligula Caesar]

I had a discussion with Wien1938 about Pergamon's army yesterday, and apparently they didn't use phalanxes much. Here's what was said:

Wien: Pergamon does not appear to have phalangites (pikemen). I explained this to Quinn a long time ago. Phalangites must be kept in regular training so require a great deal of organisation and resources (i.e. a powerful kingdom) to create and maintain.
Pergamon seems to have had a core of xystophoroi, javelin skirmishing cavalry and call on the citizen foot of Pergamon itself (who were not very good)
Otherwise, they were very rich and hired lots of mercenaries.
Wien: Bactria is a mix of Macedonian colonists (xystophoroi, phalangites), Persians (xystophoroi), Bactrian cavalry (light but skilled javelin horse), Saka (horse archers), mountain Indians (light spearmen and longbow archers), some Cretan settlers and some Psidians who provided a core of theurophoroi type peltasts.
I say:
And cataphracts?
Wien says:
After 151 BC in Bactria, while after Antiochos III was defeated by Rome, Pergamon took over some of the old provinces and gained access to phalangites and Seleucid cavalry and cataphracts from the military colonies.
I say:
So should we make Pergamon be able to recruit any phalangites? If so, when?
Wien says:
The answer is no. Pergamon had no access to those troops until she gained the military colonies.
I'm not sure how you'd arrange it to allow them to train them. Unless we list them at the highest military development...
(...)
I say:
What about the EB units: Eastern Axemen (not spearmen), archers and peltasts, Hyrcanian Hillmen (axe units as well), Median Cavalry, Babylonian Spearmen, Arachosian skirmisher cavalry, Bactrian cavalry, Parthian horse archers, and perhaps a few more that I don't recall from my Bactrian campaign
Wien says:
All valid as far as I recall.
I say:
Well, the East can do with a few more units. Oh yes, I forgot the Caucasian spearmen and archers. I have heard something about (Caucasian) Iberian lancers. Have you heard of them?
Wien says:
Probably based on Rhoxolani cavalry. Scale, long lances (later the kontos), bow.
Spearmen are fairly ubiquitous and archers likewise.

A point worth mentioning is that the Hellenistic way of war tended to use archers and slingers as skirmishers, much like javelin skirmishers but supporting each other.
Wien says:
The Hellenistic theorists tend to lump all such troops as Psiloi.


Based on that, I'd say Pergamon would be quite an interesting faction to make and play as.

[inquisitor]

Yeah....but in the end...we get another greek culture faction.And based on what you posted here...and nothing against quinn,but why people always belief somebody,because they claim they know much about that period.
When you(global speaking)have visited the places you talk about or did some archeological findings,then my ear will be open.But an anwser like...because quinn said so...doesn't work for me m8 srry.

And when quinn is right about pergamon,and he probaly will.Then this faction doesnt't have any interesting units...for me imho

Why do people prefer a hellenic faction above a barbarian one??
We all know that the hellenic got pawned by the romans....very easy very fast....hm....did they pawn the germans? Did they pawn the(all)britons? Did they pawn the scythians? Even the dacian gave them hell on earth....They even had to reform some or there tactics and equipment...like armor,to get a hold of them.

But dont let this turn in a little......who is beter....discussion.We all have our own tastes

I rather see an unknown african tribe faction throwning bananas at hannibal,then pergamon...thats for sure....(my humble excuse to every banana lover)
I admit that pergamon has a very nice starting position....maybe the best in the game.But the galatian also hehe

[Sir Walter]

More barbarians less Greeks.

[The Guy With No Imagination]

Well, of course, I realized we are bickering like very, very smart hens.
The solution we could all agree on is a provincial campaign with galatians/Pergamines.
I dont think Aqd would do this, but I think its a solution we could all agree on,

[inquisitor]

And what about a pergamon/galatian alliance and make that an faction.
In the end it is a game....and a combination from those 2 would kick ass.

[Sir Walter]

I think that an extensive AoR for both, and strong rebels, leaving space for Dacia would be more balanced as there aren't enough factions in northern and eastern Europe...

[Emperor Domitianus]

I still look for Romans.

[Sir Walter]

We only need one Roman faction and it's been done by Marcus Camillus & co. so well it doesn't need improving compared to most factions.

[inquisitor]

hint....-->The germans

[The Guy With No Imagination]

Well, i gues a Pergamon galation Allience would be pretty good, Gameplay wise it would rule the world, but what i am most coincerned about is historical accuracy, wich, i guess if i want that i would go to EB, but the game just dosnt have really really good graphics, what i mean by that is the gloss.(i like shiny models), not just that, but they dont have pergamon or galatia, So i gues we should make a compromise and create the Kingdom Pergamon Galatia I can see it now.



*Envisiosns great battle with Hoplites as the main battle line with Galatians guarding flanks and rear, while the hoplites stand their ground, the galatian allies encircle and flank the seleucid/makedonian troops being utterly crushed*

ahh, the possibilities

[Sir Walter]

The problem with that is that it doesn't have space for Dacia...

[The Guy With No Imagination]

Just wondering, the dacians were the Getai, and the Getai are very similar to thrace, hmm, well, now that i think about it, A solution for alll of us YYYAAAYYYY!!, here it is:The kingdom of Pergamon Galatia and instead of thrrace you put the Getai, And since the getai were Dacians, just under a different name, every one is happy, yay!

[inquisitor]

They allready are the Getai....they absorbed the most of all cultures.
But i'm glad that a Pergalatian faction isn't a to bad idea

But in the end its aqd who make the call...

[AqD]

@M.P.C.U.: romans do need a lot of improvement, but now FOE is coming.... I'll just wait for theirs

[The Guy With No Imagination]

I thought it was Emperor Domitianus who was keeping his eye out for Romans and not M.P.C.U

[Sir Walter]

I made the comment about them not needing improvement

[The Guy With No Imagination]

Ahhhh, ok


I wonder what should be the name of the Pergamo-Galatian faction,

[Sir Walter]

Dacia, not PergamoGalatia. The Dacians weren't the Getae, and the Thracians were different anyway.

[inquisitor]

Dacia, not PergamoGalatia. The Dacians weren't the Getae, and the Thracians were different anyway.

The Dacians wheren't the Getea...thats right m8,but the Getea where the dacians and the thracians at one point.
But i dont see how a dacian or thracian tribe is much different in units then the Getea.....srry
They would fight each other right away....and fighting against them isn´t to varied either.

I think the Pergamo-Galatian is a very cool idea.....
1.I and many otheres like asia minor....its central and many ways to expand
2.There starting position...IMHO is the best in the game
3.Everybody is happy....we have hellenic units and barbarian units.....after a few settlements more the eastern aor will also put a smile on our faces
4.So i really hope aqd is thinking about it....because it would also be unique to have a allied faction with gallic and hellenic units.
5.And starting to say this isn´t realistic.......i only say....even its unlikely.....it could be.....right
and in the end..its a game...and should be fun

[Sir Walter]

I know, but Asia Minor has too many factions anyway and Dacia had a bigger impact on ancient Europe as a whole in my opinion...