EB-Twitter updates Discussion

[athanaric]

Pure fiction. Even if armed with that they would not have time to train them to act like phalangites.

If resources weren't so limited, it'd be cool to have an optional "what if" mode, where you can unlock units such as this one upon meeting specific requirements...

[QuintusSertorius]

For anyone who thinks we've gone quiet, we've been busy with playtesting. We've managed to get Rebels to recruit, though they appear to prefer doing so in the north-west corner of the map. Hoping to encourage them to recruit elsewhere with some more changes.

Taksashila has a new independence script, for example, which mimics that of Hayastan/Baktria in the tribute-giving side of things. Those scripts are now all fixed, so that you don't get hit with an indemnity, then regular tribute in the same winter. Taksashila doesn't have a "forgiveness" event to return to satrapal status, though, once you break with the Mauryan Empire, you're done.

I've also done another efficiency cull of monitors, so hopefully between-turn processing should be a little faster, especially after the T1 closure of all the player-only scripts.

[Lusitanio]

If resources weren't so limited, it'd be cool to have an optional "what if" mode, where you can unlock units such as this one upon meeting specific requirements...

I think anyone with the skills could create a Carthaginian unit fighting in that style and making it unlockable with a reform or battle against Phalangite type armies. But the thing is, Carthage already can recruit phalangite mercenaries so you can have that type of unit in your armies, not as good as an elite but it sure does the job

[Jurand of Cracow]

For anyone who thinks we've gone quiet, we've been busy with playtesting.

I keep my fingers crossed. Together with the TATW guys, you're the best modding team, imho.

It looks like the heavily revamped version. Is it still going to be 2.35, or you'll call it 2.4 ?

[Genghis Skahn]

Is it still going to be 2.35, or you'll call it 2.4 ?

Still 2.35

[QuintusSertorius]

Indeed, while we've made some significant changes in particular areas, one of the stated goals for 2.4 is to finish implementing all the factions (and put in major overhauls of some existing ones). Those are much bigger changes than anything we're doing for 2.35.

[NapoleonMaster]

tbqh, I expect an Illyrian faction and a Scythian or an eastern faction.


EDIT : What is this "Saka Reunification" event?

[QuintusSertorius]

EDIT : What is this "Saka Reunification" event?

It's a script that runs for the Sakan player tracking their conquest of the provinces held by other Sakan tribes. They get acknowledgements and small rewards to help them along; though once they finish, there's a big revolt by the losers who rode away with their herds.

[Tureuki]

My knowlodge of the period is kinda weak so forgive my ignorance but were any kind of Proto-Turkic speakers present in the range of campaign map, or entered the scene sometime after the start date? I know that there is a strong connection between Sakas and Early Turkic peoples that is present in every field from language to genetics, but not sure about the details of its origins.

[Genava]

My knowlodge of the period is kinda weak so forgive my ignorance but were any kind of Proto-Turkic speakers present in the range of campaign map, or entered the scene sometime after the start date? I know that there is a strong connection between Sakas and Early Turkic peoples that is present in every field from language to genetics, but not sure about the details of its origins.

From what I known, the Saka are definitely Indo-Iranian, they appears too early in the historical and archeological records. The Yuezhi and the Wusun are more problematic and could be related to Proto-Turkic or Proto-Hunnic cultures.

The study of the origin of each nomadic tribe is just a pain. There is a huge cultural connection from the Western Scythia to the Eastern Altai and Sayan Mountains. Nomad can change easily of culture and of language and they adopt easily other populations. I personally think that genetic is really useless to explain nomadic cultures and origins.

[Tureuki]

I think Yuezhi were most certainly not Turkic, but Wusun issue seems a bit complicated, there seems to be a connection between Wusun and the Ashina Clan/Turkic Khaganate. They were either Turkic with strong connections to neighbouring Indo-Iranians, or were initially Indo-Iranians who were gradually Turkicized by either a wave of conquerors, or peacefully through incorportating Turkic speaking tribes among their ranks.

Indeed it's a dead end if one decides to follow genetics path. Genetic mixing has probably started when Proto-Turks-Mongols-Tungusics-Uralics were still simple hunter gatherers scattered between the Ural Mountains and the Bering Strait. They weren't same and the first mixing started between themselves.

[Genava]

I think Yuezhi were most certainly not Turkic, but Wusun issue seems a bit complicated, there seems to be a connection between Wusun and the Ashina Clan/Turkic Khaganate. They were either Turkic with strong connections to neighbouring Indo-Iranians, or were initially Indo-Iranians who were gradually Turkicized by either a wave of conquerors, or peacefully through incorportating Turkic speaking tribes among their ranks.

Yes, there are loanwords in Turkic languages that are similar to the ones found in Tocharian language, which could suggest a close-relation during their development.

[Genghis Skahn]

My knowlodge of the period is kinda weak so forgive my ignorance but were any kind of Proto-Turkic speakers present in the range of campaign map, or entered the scene sometime after the start date? I know that there is a strong connection between Sakas and Early Turkic peoples that is present in every field from language to genetics, but not sure about the details of its origins.

Like Genava says, the Saka were probably Iranian instead of Turkic(they are often described by xeofox, one of our historians who works as an archaeologist studying them, and other peoples like the Wusun, as Scythians). Though Turkic loanwords probably aren't out of the question.

The Yuezhi and the Wusun are more problematic and could be related to Proto-Turkic or Proto-Hunnic cultures.

Wusun is a good question, but at the very least the Yuezhi probably weren't Hunnic. Cranial and DNA(AFAIK) analysis suggests they were Europids, as opposed to the supposedly Mongoloid Huns/Dzonyuu/Xiongnu whose later presence in Yuezhi territory suggests that the Yuezhi had been driven out(as the sources describe). The Yuezhi again seem to share a bit with the Saka such that certain Yuezhi/Tocharian units have been dubbed "pointy hat saka"(might be mixing up another unit, but I think that's right) by the team, or the fact that they both mummify their dead and etc. Not sure about the Turkic element, it's an interesting question IMO.

I'm not sure if there are any Proto-Turkic speakers in the mod, or if any enter it later. There are Hunnic invasions(and units) planned, but the question of how Turkic they would be is unknown to me. I've forwarded your question to our internal forums, since it's a pretty good one.

[Genava]

Wusun is a good question, but at the very least the Yuezhi probably weren't Hunnic. Cranial and DNA(AFAIK) analysis suggests they were Europids, as opposed to the supposedly Mongoloid Huns/Dzonyuu/Xiongnu whose later presence in Yuezhi territory suggests that the Yuezhi had been driven out(as the sources describe). The Yuezhi again seem to share a bit with the Saka such that certain Yuezhi/Tocharian units have been dubbed "pointy hat saka"(might be mixing up another unit, but I think that's right) by the team, or the fact that they both mummify their dead and etc. Not sure about the Turkic element, it's an interesting question IMO.

Thank you Genghis Skahn. The Yuezhi are more probably culturally indo-iranian/tocharian but it is a bit more complicated for two reasons. There are not a single tribe but a confederation of 4 or 5 entity and there was another nomadic culture previously in the territory of the Yuezhi and the Yuezhi are genetically different of the Tocharians. Either they comes from a different group of indo-european nomads or they are an indigenous culture that was changed by the newcomers.
https://www.researchgate.net/publica...y_and_genetics

[Tureuki]

Even the smaller entities are usually a federation in a smaller scale. They didn't minded accepting new tribes among their ranks, or forming new federations with tribes they previously had no connection with. There were regional Turkmen federations in Anatolia, in which some of the tribes were Kurdish or at least Kurdish originated. Look at the listed tribes in Kazakh federation, Kangly, Kypchak, Merkit, Naiman, Kereit. Names from vastly different eras and regions.

[Genghis Skahn]

@Tureuki on the subject of the Proto-Turkic or early Turkic peoples, this response is from Arjos, one of our Steppe FCs:

Regarding proto-Turkic, to sum it up: the movement of the Dzonyu caused much resettlement in the east. At the start of the game Turkic speakers would've been outside of the map (southern Siberia, roughly between the Ob River or the Yenisei River, getting closer to Lake Baikal). These people would already have interacted with Turan tribes and with the Dzonyu expansion eventually moved closer to the Altai Mountains and there lived under even greater Iranian influence. It is even possible that the Wusun (ancient name being Asana, themselves one of the easternmost Iranian tribes) actually exercised authority over the first Turkic speakers and with the civil war and collapse of the Dzonyu, caused also by the Han, the subsequent power vacuum was filled by Turkic tribes, who however based their administration and organisation on Iranian, Kushan and Hunnic models. In fact it is even possible that the early leaders were Iranian nobles (Ashina clan being very similar to Asana), but with a larger Turkic majority in the populace. Some Saka also didn't take part in the migration southwards, so yes definitely a part of the first Turkic communities originated from such Saka. Together with Turan clans and others the early Turks emerged...

[Tureuki]

Thanks for the answer. What does he thinks about the origins of the Xiongnu though? From what I understood he basically says Proto-Turks were not a part of Xiongnu, they were beyond their territory and were later subjugated by the Xiongnu. I myself looked up to but found no solid answers that can be agreed on with confidence.

My own non-academic view is, the original structure was Proto-Turkic, but Proto-Mongols were a main component in the federation. I'm leaning to this because during this period and afterwards, Turkic speakers started to dominate the entire area. If the ruling elite was Mongolic, together with the Mongolic subjects very close to their starting point, would very likely halt the expansion of Turkic language. Much like how the rise of Mongolians almost made Turkic speakers in modern day Mongolia and Altai range extinct. Eastern steppes turned predominantly Mongolic(Shrinked after several impacts on Mongolic populations, such as Dzungar genocide). Eurasian Huns, who in my opinion were most likely a splinter group, also support my thinking, as they spoke a Turkic language.

[Genava]

Generally in the literature, the Xiongnu (or Dzonyu) are viewed as hunnic or proto-hunnic. The connection between hunnic, mongolian and turkic is difficult, they are clearly related but their splitting dates are unknown. The Xianbei are either turkic or mongolian, or even both if the splitting occured later. But the Mongolian is the prefered hypothesis for the Xianbei. One of their vassal tribe, the Tuoba is thought to be turkic but it is still debated. The other candidates for turkic language are the Dingling and the Tiele.

Genghis Skahn, another thing about the Yuezhi and Tocharian debate is that the Tocharian is thought to be Centum Indo-European language and the Bactrian language spoke by the Yuezhi during their migration in the Iranian region is a Satem Indo-European language. Generally to explain this, people used the idea of a confederacy with a mixing of the cultures, notably the Lesser Yuezhi, or used the idea of language adoption with the migration. And there is a misleading naming from previous historians, Strabo used the word Tokharoi to describe Indo-Iranians nomads (probably Saka or Yuezhi) and when the Tarim manuscripts were found they applied this name on them. But it is wrong since there are two different languages in the region, the Bactrian and the so-called Tocharian. But the Bactrian could be the Tokharoi described by Strabo.

[QuintusSertorius]

New unit on the feeds and more to come.

[OJ33DA]

Is it just me, or do half of the new Iltirtkesk look like Jesus?