How major are some “major” factions

[4th Regiment]

On the numerous post we discus here should CA include some “minor” factions like Lithuania, Serbia, Bohemia, etc How absurd this is I will show on comparison of Serbia and England.

Size-Serbia and England were about the same size on the start of the game era and both kept growing during the time again in about same size. However Serbia like most of the southern Europe was much more populated and developed.

Direct interactions with other nations/wars/overall importance in euro history- England had direct interactions/wars with one major nation France. Serbia with Byzantium, Hungary, Venice, Cumans, Mongols, Turks. England had direct interactions/wars with two “minor” factions Ireland and Scotland. All “minor” faction Serbia interacted with, were much more important than Ireland or Scotland-Bulgaria, Walachia. Bosnia, Naples, Latin Kingdoms, Ragusa Republic. Not to mention importance of the Serbian territory during the spiritual struggle between Rome and Constantinople (Serbia was wavering most of the time between those two major centers)
Point is that England become superpower after Middle Ages.

And I do not know why CA thinks that English will play only England, French only France etc. When I was playing MTW XL, I have tried many different factions and most important thing for me was game play and challenge. Unlike Bohemia, Lithuania, Serbia who were ”in the middle of the fire” England was mostly isolated and basically only one front to take care of. So not only historical accuracy but the game fun sometimes is not on the side of “major” factions.

[Zenith Darksea]

Point is that England become superpower after Middle Ages.

Sorry, I'm afraid that I'll have to correct you there. At its height in the Middle Ages (when it controlled half of France) England was considerably bigger than Serbia. Richard 'Coeur de Lion' of England led the Third Crusade to the Holy Land and was the only crusader to defeat Sultan Saladin. English troops occupied Scotland and Ireland for a time, and fought some of the bloodiest wars in Europe.

I agree that Serbia should be a faction. So should Bulgaria. But claiming that it was more important than England is a moot point. I think probably more people will play as England and Scotland. And besides, I'm sure that mods such as Medieval Total Realism, Mediaeval Auctoriso and my own Leipsana Romaika will satisfy your wishes to include Serbia.

[Thracian]

With all my respect, 4th Reggiment, but there is absolutely no connection between Scotland and Bulgaria.
Personally, I think both Serbia and Bulgaria should be in the game. They were the prime adversaries of Byzantium, at least in the Balkans and managed to deal some heav blows to it, such as Acheloi in 917AD which were as disastrous as Manzikert. Besides, the Balkans were a very importaint location- the course of history would change if the Turks were repelled by the christians. Or imagine if they had conquered Constantinople as early as 718AD...
But still, I agree with Zenith that most people will play as England.

[Sidus Preclarum]

Point is that England become superpower after Middle Ages.

considering the Byzantines didn't even exist after the middle ages, they should not be there in MTW either? Point is, Political powers rise and fall. And England _ or more accurately, the lands over which the King of England had juridiction_ did rise through those ages, and ultimately was more influencial on Eureopean history, and ergo on world history, than Serbia.
Now, of course, in a perfect world (ie if M2TW was developped by paradox :p) , I agree Serbia should definetely be in ...

[4th Regiment]

Sorry, I'm afraid that I'll have to correct you there. At its height in the Middle Ages (when it controlled half of France) England was considerably bigger than Serbia. Richard 'Coeur de Lion' of England led the Third Crusade to the Holy Land and was the only crusader to defeat Sultan Saladin. English troops occupied Scotland and Ireland for a time, and fought some of the bloodiest wars in Europe. .

My intention was not to say Serbia was greater than England or some nation bigger than another but good exaple that some factions characterized like “minor” were major as well as some “major” factions during medieval period
PS.During it’s height Serbia controlled what is modern day Serbia and Montenegro, eastern Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, Macedonia, 80% of Greece and having Bulgaria and Ragusa as vassals. Which as big as England in it's hight. And those numerous wars England fought were wars against France, Scotland and Ireland. Serbia fought countless wars against Byzantines, Hungary, Venice, Turks, Bulgaria, Bosnia, Ragusa, one war against Cumans and invasion of Mongols.

[GVP]

I agree that Serbia should be in the game aswell as some other, as you said, "minor" factions. Sadly most of the major factions are from the western part of Europe (sales and all).
I hope that changes.

[Boudicca]

What we need is an "overall" approach to such a game. Whoever says that it is impossible to really show the historical setting in such a game as MTW2? I really think that the faction limit is something that should be reconsidered. I do well remember Europa Universalis II with its great liberties in choice of faction. Why should such a thing not be implemented into future TW Games. Of course, the variety of units might be a bit lacking, but I'd really prefer a historically correct campaing map. It would also help in having to lead a war for "medium supremacy" in a certain region right at the beginning of the game, rather than conquering the world at instant.

I am unhappy with the current concept, and I fear that it will put disadvantage to all wishing for eastern European factions.

[Ahiga]

I agree. CA already has homogenous factions (The seleucids in RTW had -no- unique units of its own. All were shared with another faction), so I don't see the issue. If they add more factions, it would just be work on the map. They could make a generic 'serbian/balkan' unit list. A generic 'german' unit list, and so on.

[Shaun]

(The seleucids in RTW had -no- unique units of its own. All were shared with another faction

yes they did, Silver sheild pikemen.
But i agree, CA just basically made greek units the same for every greek faction. Thats fine if they do that to Western Europe, as their armies were very similar. But, however, i fear that they will do it to the Orthodox factions as well( of which there are only 2) and maybe even the muslims.

[mike007]

IMO, i only want to play factions im interested in & im afrid to say Serbia doesnt make the cut. Sctoland, swizerland, Paptal states, irland, they all sounds great to me and im glad CA is including them in the game (playable or not, mods will fix that!)

Maybe im biast against eastern factions, but ol-matey towel head just doesnt interest me.

thats just MO though

[dukestubel]

I'll first state that I'm not in favor of limiting the number of factions to as small a number as there have always been in Total War games, and second that I also find it historically distressing that the Eastern European Nations are always woefully under represented. The real issue I see is that Serbia (or any other nation) could be in the game except for the inclusion of any other faction. For instance Scotland, nowhere near as big a player in history as Serbia, but is probably a good inclusion for gameplay sake. It's inclusion will remedy England's traditional position of not having to worry about its flanks, this will definitely improve gameplay. Or how about making just one Spanish nation, arguably ahistorical, but as the Almohads almost always overwhelmed a divided Spain in the original game, unifying Spain will give them more staying power thus diversifying the way the game plays out. I will admit I don't see how two different Italy's will add much to MTW2, I would prefer Serbia or Bulgaria to be included. That would diversify the eastern portion of the map and give control of the Balkans to a more historically meaningful nation.

[4th Regiment]

Boudicca, I perfectly agree with you about EU2. Some times ago, before MTW2 was announced I have posted that if CA really wish superb game it could be by merging EU2 engine of diplomacy, technology tree, strategic development of state etc with improved tactical battles of TW. Also something from Crusader Kings (younger brother of EU2) like personalities and recruiting system (more suitable than EU2 because it is only medieval based). EU2 engine is already there for several years and it works perfectly with ALL world factions and giving super realist diplomacy, recruiting technology etc with far smaller usage of PC recourses. It will not be problem for CA programmers to use similar engine of EU2 (like many games, for example tons of WWII tactical simulations clons) and to concentrate on tactical battles. But nothing from that…they will continue with those turn based building buildings…which is childish aproach...but I guess children and younger teens are biggest market…and EU2 is not game for the kinds (at least not for average kinds)

PS.Mike007, you should see list of unique units of Serbia, in the sticky tread above where Boudicca classified all posts about nations which should be included in the game. Far away from ol-matey towel head

[killmore]

Maybe im biast against eastern factions, but ol-matey towel head just doesnt interest me.

thats just MO though

Geez...
1) Serbia is in Europe even more so than the Bizantines.
2) They never wore towels.
3) No I am not Serbian (or from that area)

[mike007]

Geez...
1) Serbia is in Europe even more so than the Bizantines.
2) They never wore towels.
3) No I am not Serbian (or from that area)

alright, keep your shirt on sport. You know what i mean yeah?

[Tostig]

Maybe they base their choices on more than one criteria - Uniqueness of playing them (Not just unit variation mind you, starting position could be important), historical significance and cultural surviving cultural ties (Commercially speaking making a game about English military history might be a better strategy than one about, say, Cornish ones.)?

[bggeneral2]

There are two ways for CA. If they want this game to be not only pleasure, but to teach gamers in history and to be usefull for students-gamer, then they should change totaly there fraction policy.
Other way is to think more comercialy and to calculate sales - separated by east and west Europe. In his case there marketing will push them to change there fraction policy IN THE SAME DIRECTION !!! Surprise! But marketing investigation for this game are NOT GOOD FOR WESTERN FRACTIONS NUMBER DOMINATION IN THIS GAME!!!! (Internal information). So boys, do not wory. They will change policy. Not because they want to be historicaly acurate, but for money.

[Tritio]

No, no... CA is not attempting to portray the Medieval countries to such a degree of accuracy. If they can exclude a country such as Serbia, then they seem to be going for a skimpish, non-historio, non-realistic coverage of that time. It just isn't within their scope. We'll have to mod the game once again to change that.

Now, of course, in a perfect world (ie if M2TW was developped by paradox :p)

Oh yessssss... and Cheers to EUIII!