Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35

Thread: Near Eastern faction research thread

  1. #1
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Near Eastern faction research thread

    To get things more organized we should collect research into threads to be more easily accessible I will edit this with my own personal research, please be sure to note which culture your research is for.

    Research should be functional and aim at improving the game mechanics, appearances of faction units and faction rosters.

    Canaan (Kena'anim)
    Faction name to be decided.
    Starting position: Sur (replaces Tyros) & Urusalim (replaces Jerusalem)

    I would suggest two Canaanite factions in the locations above, perhaps some of the Anatolian factions that would be encompassed in the territory we wish to give the Hittites could be moved and renamed, or one of the Nubians which would be encompassed in a greater Nubian or Lower-Egyptian faction.

    While Antioch (which should be renamed Alalakh) is in the possession of Mitanni in our current plans I would suggest the region have a Canaanite and Hittite cultural presence this could be done through AOR recruitment or perhaps since Ugarit flourished until 1200 BC give it to an Ugaritic Canaanite faction as a Client of Mitanni.

    The Canaanite roster is now being tweaked by myself to represent the Mitanni influence on Canaanite architecture and military during 1400-ish BC.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Our mod starts just after the Middle-Canaanite period which means the roster should feature some advanced elements of Near Eastern warfare to reflect the improvement in overall life and economy in Canaan.

    Very slight changes have been made to the overall structure of the roster now to reflect classes more so than an organized military structure.

    Light > Land-Workers, Nomads and Peasants
    Medium > Volunteers and Trained soldiers
    Heavy> Land owners, Nobles and Princes


    The reason for this is because people who were working on the Nobles land or Nomads like the Shasu people would not have enough money to afford expensive military equipment thus in most cases they would be light infantry in some cases even armed with their own farm tools.

    The cityfolk would represent what we could fathom as a sort of "Middle-Class" working in markets these people have enough money to afford better armor than their rural counterparts.
    It is also not far-fetched to assume these cities had some trained levies to defend them or guards who would most likely be equipped by the rich noblemen they serve under.

    It is however important to note that it is believed this "Middle-Class" died out at a later time following the Mitanni influence therefor the merchants and such would belong to the upper-class and the people below them would have mostly rural lives.

    For this reason the Medium roster will be reflecting troops serving under Princes and Kings used to protect their land and cities from the invading armies of Egypt, Mitanni, the Hittites and their rival Canaanite princes.

    Nobles and rich men of course would have the best equipment, swords, bronze and lamellar hide armor, helmets and even chariots.

    Reconstructed Near-Eastern Bronze armor

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    We will want the army composition to be mostly light infantry reflecting a sort of muster system were Princes gathered able men from their land and tribe to bolster their own men.

    Non-Canaanite troops will be added to the Canaanite roster most notably the use of Shasu skirmishers from the Sinai and perhaps some Canaanite units named after other Canaanite city states to reflect some form of tribal alliances.

    Shasu Bedouin battling Pharaoh Seti I
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    Typical Canaanite infantry would be armed with Javelins, Swords and Axes armored in cloth typically with no helmets, Syrians (chariot archers) are sometimes characterized by a banded leather helmet which could be made by re-texturing one of the Saka caps.

    Lighter infantry may be armed in nothing more than a patterned kilt with clubs, axes (occasionally swords) and picks.
    Light infantry units may also be made up of outcasts called "Apiru" who were hired into a Princes service to bolster his force.

    Not all Apiru were poorly armed, there are records of them using Chariots and even being a sufficient enough force to capture a town. (The Military History of Ancient Israel #23)

    Nobles rode Chariots into battle arming themselves in the metal and hide armors of nearby empires, they would sometimes command well armed infantry battalions in large battles however.

    Spears were also used expertly by professional Canaanite soldiers (and hired by the Egyptian army at one point during a war with the Hittites) they were known to form a 10 rank deep Phalanx.

    It is also apparent that the Egyptians used hired Mycenaean warriors at the battle of Megiddo. There are reliefs showing the reliance on mercenaries from the Aegean region (and later Sea-Peoples) in the midst of battle either alongside or against the Egyptians in some cases I believe a wealthy Prince in need of professional warriors would probably get his hands on some.
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 


    At Megiddo, Pharaoh dominated the Canaanite chariotry with heavy Mycenaean infantrymen armed in Bronze plate armor. Perhaps due to the nature of their armor or their pure experience alone they would attempt to take on (most successfully) the Canaanite and Mitanni chariots without fear.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



    That's all I have for tonight I will update tomorrow with more research.

    Sources:
    The Military History of Ancient Israel
    Armies and Enemies of Ancient Assyria & Egypt
    Thutmose III: The Military Biography of Egypt's Greatest Warrior King
    Canaan Under Seige
    Biblical People & Ethnicity
    The Great Armies of Antiquity

    Also worth a look is Warfare in the Ancient Near East to 1600 BC

    NEW Resources (2/6/14)
    Good for depictions, questionable history as it is from a game manual.
    Ancient Armies
    Last edited by Brivime; June 02, 2014 at 07:42 AM.

  2. #2
    PunitorMaximus's Avatar TWTEAW Mod Leader
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Austria (that one in europe)
    Posts
    2,881

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    good idea, i sticked the thread
    would you please collect all the relevant and reliable research in the first post of this thread?

  3. #3

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Found some info on a somewhat brief but informative article

    The Battle of Megiddo and Kadesh are similar in regards to the Hittite and Canaanite forces. In Megiddo, the Canaanites preferred drawing the enemy into their home turf of their choice. They would choose a topographical location with a fortification to conceal a large portion of their chariotry as a surprise attack. The Canaanites used infantry as an auxiliary force after a crushing blow by their chariots. So it would seem that the Canaanite roster should reflect their heavy use of noblemen's chariots in battle. It's recorded that after the battle of Meggido, 924 Canaanite chariots were captured. Now, it is said that there were 10,000 Canaanites at Megiddo, and with almost 1,000 chariots, this would equate to a chariot for every 10 men! The focus of chariotry also reflected in biblical texts, with the Israelites' great fear of the chariots and the constant emphasis of the Canaanite's chariotry, and the ineffectivity of the Canaanite forces without chariots. The Battle of Mount Tabor (around 14th century bc) is a perfect example. The Canaanite army advanced with its chariots, and found themselves caught in a mire of mud from a recent downpour. This rendered the chariots useless and the Israelites attacked and destroyed the Canaanite army.

    Source: Yeiven, S., Canaanite and Hittite Strategy in the Second Half of the Second Millennium B. C., Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 101-107.

  4. #4
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Thanks for the strategies.

    What I need right now is illustrations and reliefs to base my units off if anyone has a few of these (the more diverse the better) it would really help move the roster improvements along.

  5. #5
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Does anyone have ideas for the names of our two Canaanite factions?

    We have one in Sur (Tyros) and one in Urusalim (Jerusalem) and if Punitor agree we will have the city state Ugarit in control of Alalakh (Antioch) as a client of Mitanni.

    Edit:
    It doesn't have to be Ugarit per-se but since the city flourished within our timeline it would be cool to include an Ugaritic faction perhaps even as a slightly different culture to the Canaanites (while not being completely different) and Ugarit would be the closest thing I can make off the top of my head to Alalakh.

    Or we can just give it to Mitanni but I wouldn't want to give Mitanni all of Syria to be honest I would rather have a client-state system dividing Canaan and Syria between Mitanni and Egypt (with Sur being independent).
    Last edited by Brivime; March 24, 2014 at 11:01 AM.

  6. #6
    Dontfearme22's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Not Earth
    Posts
    1,729

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Brivime View Post
    Does anyone have ideas for the names of our two Canaanite factions?

    We have one in Sur (Tyros) and one in Urusalim (Jerusalem) and if Punitor agree we will have the city state Ugarit in control of Alalakh (Antioch) as a client of Mitanni.
    I think we just name them after the cities, but remember they would be ruled by Egypt and would have little direct control over their territories. Actually winning a game as a Canaanite state should be very difficult.

  7. #7
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Dontfearme22 View Post
    I think we just name them after the cities, but remember they would be ruled by Egypt and would have little direct control over their territories. Actually winning a game as a Canaanite state should be very difficult.
    Agreed, which is why I suggested the client-state system for Mitanni and Egypt's rule over Canaan and parts of Syria.
    It would represent Caananite states fighting for independence over Egypt which would suit the mod nicely.

  8. #8
    Dontfearme22's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Not Earth
    Posts
    1,729

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Brivime View Post
    Agreed, which is why I suggested the client-state system for Mitanni and Egypt's rule over Canaan and parts of Syria.
    It would represent Caananite states fighting for independence over Egypt which would suit the mod nicely.
    Perfect, once I get more into campaign stuff ill set that up. Quick point, when you edit or add in faction names could you edit my complete faction name list rather than make a new one?
    also, could you look over the list of starting provinces i put on the main thread a few days ago and check for any errors? its really important cause im sending them off to someone who will make starting position maps for the factions.

  9. #9
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Sure I'll look over it, is it on the front page? I can only check for the Near East factions mind you.

    Perhaps you could paste it here.

  10. #10
    Dontfearme22's Avatar Campidoctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Not Earth
    Posts
    1,729

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Brivime View Post
    Sure I'll look over it, is it on the front page? I can only check for the Near East factions mind you.

    Perhaps you could paste it here.
    I made a few starting positions, tell me if they are good so far:
    Faction starting positions(major factions):
    Hengiasva(Fire-Horses), although the non-english name is the factions name:
    Chorasmia and Transoxania
    Sindhu:
    the regions of Alexandria Arachosia and Oraea
    Kamboja:
    the region of Kapisene and the province of Baktria
    Elam:
    the region of Harmozia and the province of Persia
    Babylon:
    the regions of Seleucia and Charax
    Assyria:
    the region of Hatra
    Mitanni:
    the regions of Edessa and Antioch
    Egypt:
    the regions of Tyros, Petra, Jerusalem, Ptolemais Theron and the province of Aegyptus
    Minoans:
    the regions of Hierapytna and Rhodos
    Myceneae
    the region of Sparta
    The Hittite empire
    the provinces of Cicilia, Galatia et Cappadocia and the region of Pessinus
    Wilusia(Troy)
    the regions of Ephesus,Pergamon and Nicomedia

    we still need a few western european factions and maybe a sea people faction or whatnot

  11. #11
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Dontfearme22 View Post
    I made a few starting positions, tell me if they are good so far:
    Faction starting positions(major factions):
    Hengiasva(Fire-Horses), although the non-english name is the factions name:
    Chorasmia and Transoxania
    Sindhu:
    the regions of Alexandria Arachosia and Oraea
    Kamboja:
    the region of Kapisene and the province of Baktria
    Elam:
    the region of Harmozia and the province of Persia
    Babylon:
    the regions of Seleucia and Charax
    Assyria:
    the region of Hatra
    Mitanni:
    the regions of Edessa and Antioch
    Egypt:
    the regions of Tyros, Petra, Jerusalem, Ptolemais Theron and the province of Aegyptus
    Minoans:
    the regions of Hierapytna and Rhodos
    Myceneae
    the region of Sparta
    The Hittite empire
    the provinces of Cicilia, Galatia et Cappadocia and the region of Pessinus
    Wilusia(Troy)
    the regions of Ephesus,Pergamon and Nicomedia

    we still need a few western european factions and maybe a sea people faction or whatnot
    I don't see any problems except for Egypt, Tyros and Jerusalem are going to be Canaanite client-state factions of Egypt and Petra I'm not sure what we're doing with that but I believe it might be going to Midian.

    Is everyone in agreement for making Alalakh (antioch) a Phoenician client-state of Mitanni if so then that should be corrected.

  12. #12
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Here are some city name conversions I've been able to find:
    Petra - Sela
    Antioch - Alalakh
    Tyros - Sur
    Jerusalem - Urusalim
    Tarsus - Adanya
    Palmyra - Tadmor
    Edessa - Harran
    Ancrya - Hattusha
    Edessa - Karkemish
    Hatra - Harran
    Seleucia - Babillu
    Charax - Lagash
    Susa - Susa
    Yathrib - Latribu
    Adummatu - Adummatu
    Mascat - Hili
    Gerrahea/Hagar - Tarut
    Eudaemon - Aden
    Hegra - Dedan

    If no one has any ideas for what could be changed I'll add these to dontfearme's pack.
    Last edited by Brivime; March 24, 2014 at 01:35 PM.

  13. #13
    |Sith|Galvanized Iron's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    I live in Kansas
    Posts
    4,710

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Brivime View Post
    Does anyone have ideas for the names of our two Canaanite factions?

    We have one in Sur (Tyros) and one in Urusalim (Jerusalem) and if Punitor agree we will have the city state Ugarit in control of Alalakh (Antioch) as a client of Mitanni.

    Edit:
    It doesn't have to be Ugarit per-se but since the city flourished within our timeline it would be cool to include an Ugaritic faction perhaps even as a slightly different culture to the Canaanites (while not being completely different) and Ugarit would be the closest thing I can make off the top of my head to Alalakh.

    Or we can just give it to Mitanni but I wouldn't want to give Mitanni all of Syria to be honest I would rather have a client-state system dividing Canaan and Syria between Mitanni and Egypt (with Sur being independent).
    Well the strongest and most feared (and most hated by the Israelites) of the Canaanites were undoubtedly the Amalekites, though the ones in control of Jerusalem itself were the Jebusites. However since they were all allied it is probably wisest to just call them the Canaanites, the various tribes can probably be represented on the politics screen?
    Also responsible for the Roma Surrectum II Multiplayer mode
    Rest In Peace Colonel Muammar Gaddafi
    Forward to Victory Great Leader Assad!


  14. #14

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by |Sith|Galvanized Iron View Post
    Well the strongest and most feared (and most hated by the Israelites) of the Canaanites were undoubtedly the Amalekites, though the ones in control of Jerusalem itself were the Jebusites. However since they were all allied it is probably wisest to just call them the Canaanites, the various tribes can probably be represented on the politics screen?
    I would agree that Amalek was a fearsome marauding force that frequently terrorized the Levant, but I don't think they were strong enough to actually conquer other nations. They functioned more as raiders rather than a conquering force.

  15. #15
    PunitorMaximus's Avatar TWTEAW Mod Leader
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Austria (that one in europe)
    Posts
    2,881

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Is everyone in agreement for making Alalakh (antioch) a Phoenician client-state of Mitanni if so then that should be corrected.
    yup!

  16. #16
    |Sith|Galvanized Iron's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    I live in Kansas
    Posts
    4,710

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by trinhbot View Post
    I would agree that Amalek was a fearsome marauding force that frequently terrorized the Levant, but I don't think they were strong enough to actually conquer other nations. They functioned more as raiders rather than a conquering force.
    Yeah I would probably favor a united Canaanite faction rather, but if one were to be singled out it would probably be the Amalekites. I imagine them in as real bad guys in black armor hehe.
    Also responsible for the Roma Surrectum II Multiplayer mode
    Rest In Peace Colonel Muammar Gaddafi
    Forward to Victory Great Leader Assad!


  17. #17
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by |Sith|Galvanized Iron View Post
    Yeah I would probably favor a united Canaanite faction rather, but if one were to be singled out it would probably be the Amalekites. I imagine them in as real bad guys in black armor hehe.
    A united Canaanite faction would be unrealistic as the Canaanites were city-states who fought with each other.
    I hope however whoever is doing the political notes will use the Same-Blood feature to allow for a Canaanite player to unite with other Canaanite AI factions.

  18. #18
    |Sith|Galvanized Iron's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    I live in Kansas
    Posts
    4,710

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Brivime View Post
    A united Canaanite faction would be unrealistic as the Canaanites were city-states who fought with each other.
    I hope however whoever is doing the political notes will use the Same-Blood feature to allow for a Canaanite player to unite with other Canaanite AI factions.
    Well how are you going to unite them without editing the campaign map and the cities?
    Also responsible for the Roma Surrectum II Multiplayer mode
    Rest In Peace Colonel Muammar Gaddafi
    Forward to Victory Great Leader Assad!


  19. #19
    Brivime's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    740

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    Quote Originally Posted by |Sith|Galvanized Iron View Post
    Well how are you going to unite them without editing the campaign map and the cities?
    With the Same-Blood feature you can set multiple factions to be the same race or tribe for example Athens and Macedon can unite into a Hellenic League.

    So in the diplomacy screen there is an option to "Join Coalition" if you're in diplomacy with a faction that has Same-Blood relations with you and it gives you their land and armies and makes you one faction.

  20. #20
    PunitorMaximus's Avatar TWTEAW Mod Leader
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Austria (that one in europe)
    Posts
    2,881

    Default Re: Near Eastern faction research thread

    i never managed that cuz all the other hellenic factions hated me. somehow. suckers.
    but this sounds quite cool. we should definitely use that feature for all groups with similar culture.
    like the aegaeans, arabs, various nubian/kush factions...and ofcourse especially european tribes.

    WHOA! we could make lebanese canaanites and sea people one blood...cuz in real life canaanite + sea people = phoenicians.
    this would give us the opportunity to depict big migration and integration processes.
    a few examples:
    *helladic/agaeans factions + dorians = hellenic people
    *aryans + hamarpas = vedics (or whatever the correct term is)
    *kituwatna (southeastern anatolian citystate; vassal of hattu) + hattu = new hittite empire (actually existed)
    *arzawa + assuwa + wilusa = western anatolian coalition
    and many others
    Last edited by PunitorMaximus; March 25, 2014 at 04:16 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •