Fortuna Orbis Overview Thread

[Caligula Caesar]

Fortuna Orbis (meaning "Fate of the World") is a mod in development based on RTR, with the target of creating a realistic representation of the Ancient World from Iberia to western India in the time period roughly between 267 and 100 BC. RTR-FoE and VII provide a good basis for the western portion of our scope - we intend to match that in the East and add to it where possible with our own ideas.

One of those new ideas is the government system. It gives the choice between establishing a Client State (an allied but pretty much subject community), as was often done by many powers (notably the Romans), or directly subjugating the region. Establishing an client state means you are unlikely to suffer low public order there and will be able to recruit local troops fairly soon, but without earning too much economically and your factional troops will not be available. Subjugating a region directly will mean you have to dedicate considerable resources to holding the region (which won't be happy), but once that is done, you will be able to earn a lot more money, as well as recruit factional troops as well as the local ones.

However, there is another prerequisite for recruiting factional troops: Colonisation. Once a region has progressed to a certain stage of government, you can colonise it with your own citizens, who you will then be able to recruit from there as factional troops (and get several other bonuses, including increased public order). You also have to have the region fully colonised for the province to be fully integrated, which will take quite a long time. After all, it could take over 100 years in some cases, though it won't take that long in game terms.

To complement the government system, we are redesigning the traditional RTW economy to be more in line with the FoE-style one, though it will still be somewhat different. This is still a work in progress. For more details, see this thread.

Another innovation of ours is the map. Originally generated from geographical data by Antonov (the original co-founder), it has been extensively edited and improved so it will hopefully come to you without bugs. The settlements and regions on it are historically justifiable and also made for good balance gameplay-wise. Replacing the old RTW stratmap textures, we have also created new textures for the map. There is a map preview, but note that quite a few of the regions have changed, and the Mediterranean-style textures have been improved. The creditors of this map include ExRM, who have chosen to use it for their next version.

Populating the map are 21 factions (as is dictated to us by the RTW engine). These are:

-Rome
-Carthage
-Macedon
-Achaean League (Greeks)
-Pergamon
-Seleucus' Dynasty
-Ptolemy's Dynasty of Egypt
-Bactria
-Pontus
-Armenia
-Parthia
-Mauryan Empire of India
-Getai (Dacians)
-Arevaci (Celtiberians)
-Arverni Gauls
-Bellovaci (Belgae)
-Cherusci (Germans)
-Scytho-Sarmatian Steppe Tribes*
-Barbarian Minifaction**
-Greek Minifaction**
-Rebels/Independent People

*Basically many of the tribes of the northern Steppe compacted into one. I figured people wouldn't mind, since people almost never play as them (the choice between another one of them and, say, the Mauryans, wasn't hard), and they are very annoying to fight (that won't change )

**A minifaction is our response to the lack of available faction slots. It compacts several factions (such as the Greek Colonies of Massalia, Syracuse, the Bosporos, and Athens and Sparta for the Greek one) into one faction, which is not intended to be playable, but will pose a greater challenge to the player and AI alike as he tries to expand.


My policy with the units is to use RTR7/VII units and models where possible. This means I am reskinning several ones, notably the Greeks (see the Seleucid infantry mini-preview), to fit the new factions. For the Mauryan Empire, I at first used Res Gestae units before Boom S took it upon himself to change them so they are more realistic and generally pretty cool There is a Mauryan preview showing the Res Gestae units, but there is no coherent Mauryan Preview II (though many of the units are scattered throughout this thread). Boom S has also redone the old Indian Elephants, as they were not remotely accurate in some cases before. These have been previewed here.

For the units we and RTR will not be able to provide, we are looking at other possibilities. The units will of course have to pass a quality and historical accuracy test


Finally, you'll be wanting to know our progress. The map is done, with only minor edits to come, if any. Building-related issues are about 50% done (excluding balancing), but these have been put on hold, as we are focusing on adding new units atm. Most factions and areas have most of their units in place, with a few exceptions, but most of the units in place are not balanced to a single system. We have planned to release a version of FO soon after RTR-VII is released with the faction rosters we have by then (hopefully all). Other factors are completed to varying degrees.

CC

[Boom S]

now we need an image of the map with the faction starting positions.

[MathiasOfAthens]

I like your faction list but perhaps you could do one better.

-Scytho-Sarmatian Steppe Tribes*
-Barbarian Minifaction**

You could eliminate both of these factions and replace their lands by the rebels and independents. This would allow you to create two more barbarian tribes... maybe one more in Gaul, Iberia or Germania.

I would even do it for the Greek minifaction as well. The more actual factions there are makes the game more replayable. One game its this faction in Gaul rising to supremacy and another game its a german faction that manages to conquer it. Otherwise you have less factions and its really not much of a mystery who is left standing in 20 years.

Hell more smaller factions might allow more factions to be left standing after 20 years instead of huge empires...

Looking forward to your mod though I like what you did with the borders. Very nice.

[demagogos nicator]

Why would you eliminate Scytho-Sarmatians? I think they are not ment to be a minifaction. I believe that AT LEAST one steppe faction is a must for a mod with the map streching from Iberia to India

[Caligula Caesar]

I do not agree. The Steppe peoples are a must, and the only reason why they are all put into one faction is because I want them to be a threat all along the border of the Steppe. It would be an easy thing to make them be "Sarmatians" or "Alans" or "Sakas", but then either Dacia or Armenia or Bactria and Parthia would not face any threat from them.

I don't see any reason to take out the Barbarians and add one of the Barbarian tribes (the Lusitani or Illyria would be a good candidate), that would mean that Galatia, Lusitania or Illyria, Britain, eastern Germania, and several other places would be devoid of anything, which would devalue them somewhat as there would be nothing to stop them from being swallowed up by whoever comes there first. I do not want that, hence the Minifaction. The Greek one is probably less necessary but quite nice to have.

In fact, Minifactions tend to act as buffer zones which stop factions from expanding to certain areas, stopping there from just being massive factions (btw, I don't get your comment about Gaul and Germania - there are three factions in this area as well as the Barbarians, and lots of rebel regions to conquer). I can guarantee that the campaign will not be as bad as Platinum in that regard, anyway.

[The_Blacksmith]

I think you should add a Steppe faction either the Yuizhe or the Saka, i dont find the Sarmatians very interesting...

the Yuishe and the Saka invaded India, hence makes them relevant

but thats just my opinion...

[Caligula Caesar]

That why I have all of them... btw, it is actually the western Sarmatians and the eastern Sacae (Sakas) combined into one faction, with the Alans in the middle around the Caspian Sea part of the Barbarian faction. I decided at some point that a solid united frontier of Steppe Nomads is going a bit too far.

[MathiasOfAthens]

I do not agree. The Steppe peoples are a must, and the only reason why they are all put into one faction is because I want them to be a threat all along the border of the Steppe. It would be an easy thing to make them be "Sarmatians" or "Alans" or "Sakas", but then either Dacia or Armenia or Bactria and Parthia would not face any threat from them.

Agreed, perhaps the steppe faction should change to something more local like the Alans or Sakas or whatever... something small so they can expand.

I don't see any reason to take out the Barbarians and add one of the Barbarian tribes (the Lusitani or Illyria would be a good candidate), that would mean that Galatia, Lusitania or Illyria, Britain, eastern Germania, and several other places would be devoid of anything, which would devalue them somewhat as there would be nothing to stop them from being swallowed up by whoever comes there first. I do not want that, hence the Minifaction. The Greek one is probably less necessary but quite nice to have.

In fact, Minifactions tend to act as buffer zones which stop factions from expanding to certain areas, stopping there from just being massive factions (btw, I don't get your comment about Gaul and Germania - there are three factions in this area as well as the Barbarians, and lots of rebel regions to conquer). I can guarantee that the campaign will not be as bad as Platinum in that regard, anyway.

I agree with the mini faction idea its just the problem with RTW is the limited amount of factions you can have? I cant remember what the limit is? 21 or something? Anyway the problem is the larger the map the more open space and the less factions you have to cover everything. There were hundreds of German and Gallic tribes. Same with the British Isles. The major ones should be represented like the Helveti, Cisapine Gauls, Transapine, Averni etc.

Illyrians should be represented as well and they were not united so you should consider adding a tribe instead of a general Illyrian faction. I would recommend adding a Dardanian faction, the Ardiaei or the Autariatae.
Both were located in Dardania close to the sea. Near Dyrachium, roughly.

Anyway once again the problem which large maps on the RTW engine is your mod is limited to either a selection of factions all over the map or in certain areas. Obviously this time period is full of tribes and empires and there is so much potential.

This is just my opinion but I would eliminate these factions as well and reduce the size of the map to Eastern Iran/Turkmenistan.

-Bactria
-Mauryan Empire of India
-Barbarian Minifaction**
-Greek Minifaction**

You would then be able to add a Ilyrian faction, another German, Gallic and Lusitanian faction. I would deprive Britain of a separate faction because of how separate the island is and where the focus of the mod is which is on the rest of Europe, right?

If you did this would be the first to make such a unique mod with so much variety in barbarian factions. Most mods go for size and size isnt always better. I have seen too many times in too many RTW mods huge empires of Cimbrians stretching into Scandinavia and Germany, Gallic Empires in Spain and German Empires in Russia. Its not historical and its annoying. I prefer variety in barbarian factions... it creates a longer and more re-playable campaign. Each game would be different in that different factions could become dominant whereas in other mods the Cimbrians always conquered Scandinavia and Germany.

Just my 2 cents.

[Caligula Caesar]

Agreed, perhaps the steppe faction should change to something more local like the Alans or Sakas or whatever... something small so they can expand.

I have very seldom heard of anyone playing as one of the Steppe factions, unless you count Parthia, and my goal is to make them a pain in the ass, so I think my solution is best

I agree with the mini faction idea its just the problem with RTW is the limited amount of factions you can have? I cant remember what the limit is? 21 or something? Anyway the problem is the larger the map the more open space and the less factions you have to cover everything. There were hundreds of German and Gallic tribes. Same with the British Isles. The major ones should be represented like the Helveti, Cisapine Gauls, Transapine, Averni etc.

That is kinda the point of the minifaction idea. Since one cannot represent all the factions one wants to, one represents all the ones which aren't quite so important as parts of one faction which has parts spread all over the world. So there can be three factions in Gaul, two in Germania, two in Iberia, rather than just taking the Barbarians out and having three in Gaul or two in Germania or two in Iberia.

Anyway once again the problem which large maps on the RTW engine is your mod is limited to either a selection of factions all over the map or in certain areas. Obviously this time period is full of tribes and empires and there is so much potential.

This is just my opinion but I would eliminate these factions as well and reduce the size of the map to Eastern Iran/Turkmenistan.

-Bactria
-Mauryan Empire of India
-Barbarian Minifaction**
-Greek Minifaction**

You would then be able to add a Ilyrian faction, another German, Gallic and Lusitanian faction. I would deprive Britain of a separate faction because of how separate the island is and where the focus of the mod is which is on the rest of Europe, right?

That is for another mod to do. I added more to the east than nearly every other mod for a reason. Adding more area to the East provides even more potential and uniqueness, as new factions, cultures and geographical areas are encountered. It also appeals to a wider range of people - for instance, I don't think Boom S would have joined the team had I not added the Mauryan Empire (and done so in a way that he had plenty to correct )

If you did this would be the first to make such a unique mod with so much variety in barbarian factions. Most mods go for size and size isnt always better. I have seen too many times in too many RTW mods huge empires of Cimbrians stretching into Scandinavia and Germany, Gallic Empires in Spain and German Empires in Russia. Its not historical and its annoying. I prefer variety in barbarian factions... it creates a longer and more re-playable campaign. Each game would be different in that different factions could become dominant whereas in other mods the Cimbrians always conquered Scandinavia and Germany.

Actually, that is what RTR-VII does, except they have even more detail (particularly on the Greeks), as they cut it to western Asia Minor. Other mods, such as RSII, cover the area you describe, and have a fair amount of barbarian tribes. I went further east and added the Mauryans.

I do, however, intend to try my best to stop that sort of rapid over-expansion, as VII has done. The aim there is to keep factions within the area which they, historically, would have wanted to and be capable of holding. The Iberian tribes will be contained within Iberia, the Gauls within Gaul, the Greeks will not be able to go into Thrace and Dacia so easily, etc. I hope to be able to recreate VII's solution on my mod.

By the way, more factions does not necessarily mean less expansion. I recall playing a certain Barbarian Invasion-era mod in which I was calmly building my small nation as the Romano-British, and turned off the fog of war to see that the many (5 or so) German tribes had been conquered by the Alemannii, who had then gone one to conquer most of Gaul, Iberia and Italy from the Western Roman Empire. And that was in, iirc, about 20 years.

[Caligula Caesar]

I'm actually considering adding the Numidians, Nabataeans and Kushans to the Barbarian minifaction. They were, no doubt, considered barbarians by the Greeks and Romans, who considered nearly everyone to be barbarians, and I would like to have some resistance in these areas. Their architecture probably resembled that of the eastern factions more than the northern Barbarians, but I don't think that will be a problem - it is possible to make their settlements start as an eastern culture and not be upgradeable. Any thoughts?

[Boom S]

prima facie, it seems to be a good idea to me. only problem I can see is that their cultures were significantly different and the overlaps would look quite odd.

[Caligula Caesar]

Yeah, that is true. We already have that to a lesser degree because we have Alans and Lusitani in the same faction - the names might end up looking a bit strange. But I think we can live with it, if I can get it to only be the names that are wrong, which I think I might be able to do.

I was at the Saudi National Museum yesterday, and they have an interesting section on pre-Islamic kingdoms in Saudi Arabia. The Nabataeans were somewhat glorified, but they seem to have been quite sophisticated. I was also somewhat surprised to discover that there was a Kingdom of Kinda in the middle of the desert, with their capital at Qaryat al-Faw.

Actually, I'm not so surprised I hadn't heard about the Kindahs and the Ma'in, because the information one can find on them in English on the internet is extraordinarily poor.

Since they for the most part ignored the Kingdoms outside of Saudi, I couldn't find out whether my placing a settlement in Oman was right. However, I did find a quote from Strabo, saying that, "from trade, the Gerrhaeans and Sabaeans have become richest of all". I am considering operating on the southern part of Arabia to make it possible to add a Saba'a settlement and remove the one I have in Oman, which is based on very flimsy evidence.

[Boom S]

which settlement did you place in oman(called magan back then IIRC) ?

this might help.


___________________________
I might be able to help if you can tell me what exactly you are looking for.

[demagogos nicator]

I'm actually considering adding the Numidians, Nabataeans and Kushans to the Barbarian minifaction. They were, no doubt, considered barbarians by the Greeks and Romans, who considered nearly everyone to be barbarians, and I would like to have some resistance in these areas. Their architecture probably resembled that of the eastern factions more than the northern Barbarians, but I don't think that will be a problem - it is possible to make their settlements start as an eastern culture and not be upgradeable. Any thoughts?

I definately want to have Numidians in game. It brings much fun to Carthagian and even to the Roman campaign. The same goes for Nabateans and Kushans. It is shame that there is no more free space for Eastern Minifaction because names and general portraits and models could really look strange now.

[Caligula Caesar]

We could always take out Armenia - they only became major players around 100 BC with Tigranes the Great. But I don't think it would go down too well, especially when we have factions like the Belgae in (there are, obviously, no sources to prove or disprove whether there were people called "Belgae" living there in 267 BC).

Edit: The city in Oman is the current capital, Muscat, which I named Moscha, thanks to Wikipedia's (or another such site's) reliable information.

[demagogos nicator]

Interesting. I was thinking about this myself - Armenia could still stay as a part of the Eastern Minifaction as well as Saka which could be separated from sarmatian faction then.
Do not take out the Belgae please it would not be fun to have only one major faction in Gaul
Btw I even think that eastern minifaction could be more important like the greek one

[Caligula Caesar]

I have absolutely no intention of removing the Belgae, don't worry

So an eastern minifaction would have Numidia, the Meroites/Kushans, Nabataea, Gerrha, and someone in the Armenia area (Armenia or Caucasian Iberia) and maybe Bithynia. I have an objection with removing Armenia, though: I have already done a fair amount of work on their roster, and they are quite a cool faction.

The Greek minifaction has Emporion, Massalia, Syracuse, Cyrene, Athens, Sparta, Rhodes, Byzantium, Sinope and the Bosporan Kingdom. So they are also quite a useful faction to have in.

Perhaps I can make a poll and see what the public opinion is between the three.

[demagogos nicator]

So an eastern minifaction would have Numidia, the Meroites/Kushans, Nabataea, Gerrha, and someone in the Armenia area (Armenia or Caucasian Iberia) and maybe Bithynia.

Why not also some Iberians (Turdetani for example)?

I have an objection with removing Armenia, though: I have already done a fair amount of work on their roster, and they are quite a cool faction.

And what about removing Pergamon instead?

[Quinn Inuit]

We've tried to break down the minifactions by army type as much as culture. that way we can keep the AI personalities and formations aligned with the groups they represent.

For the record, we're using 3 minifactions: Greeks, barbarians, and horse-based types.

[Caligula Caesar]

I know this is a bit off-topic, but it has just occurred to me: Don't you have the Mauryans as a horse-based faction? That is indeed an interesting characterisation of them, especially as you compared their contribution of cavalry to Darius' army as that of Luxembourg were Britain and Luxembourg to team up in a war, Media being Britain (note that the population was more in the other direction!)...

I am not really that keen to change the balance of factions I have. I think I'll try to make them part of the Barbarian faction (any suggestions for a different name? Though actually, "Barbaroi" is quite appropriate, as it means people who aren't Greeks, so all the people I will put in the minfaction would fit. It's just what the general public thinks about who is barbarian or not). I think I might be able to pull it off - names and portraits will not be a problem, at least not for the starting FMs. The problem only comes in if they are conquered and rebel. Apart from that... suffice to say, the rebels are barbarians, but no one complains because no one notices. So it can be done