Faction speculation thread

[Anubis88]

How about Baltoslavic faction? Like Venedi-Aesti confederation or something?

The sources for such a faction in the first century BC would be minimal at best... It would be really hard to portray such a faction imho

[dromychaetes]

You think wrong.

The parent faction of Akyra was indeed Arverni though (= it rebels to Arverni). But if that was not the case, Ankyra would have had Western Greek culture (base culture of the rebels).

Please explain what do I think wrong...
You basically said the same thing as me, except for the addition that the area where the celts settled after they were defeated belonged mainly to western Greek culture (Ionian?).

Regarding strictly the game, it would probably be to crowded to create the Tylis kingdom and maybe would be better to have a Galatian kingdom separate and independent from the other celts as was, between Pontus and the Greek factions. This would also mean new troop tree and loads of work.

[Dargaron]

Please explain what do I think wrong...
You basically said the same thing as me, except for the addition that the area where the celts settled after they were defeated belonged mainly to western Greek culture (Ionian?).

Essentially, you said, "Well in EBI Ankyra was a Arverni settlement I think". Mediolanicus replied that this was wrong, since Ankyra belongs to the rebels. However, the parent faction of Ankyra, the faction it rebels to if/when it does rebel, is the Arverni, which gives it a default culture of "Barbarian".

The "slave" faction has the Western Greek culture, which means that if Ankyra had "slave" as it's parent faction, all the buildings there would be of the Western Greek culture.

[Mediolanicus]

Please explain what do I think wrong...
You basically said the same thing as me, except for the addition that the area where the celts settled after they were defeated belonged mainly to western Greek culture (Ionian?).

Regarding strictly the game, it would probably be to crowded to create the Tylis kingdom and maybe would be better to have a Galatian kingdom separate and independent from the other celts as was, between Pontus and the Greek factions. This would also mean new troop tree and loads of work.

In EB I Galatia only has something to do with the Arverni through the game engine. Galatia does not belong to the Arverni, no more than Gava Saka belongs to the Arverni.

[dromychaetes]

OK-OK, I'm not familiar with the game engine at all so thanks for clarifying that.

[fd7s]

libya or a indian kingdom?

[InfantryToddler]

I quite sure an Indina faction is out of consideration (other EBII folks might give you more infos why not - help me out here?!) ...and for Libya or actually more Numidia: this is a link to one of the previews http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=265205 . If Cyrene will be in I don´t know.

[PolishHussar]

1. Numidia

2. Syracuse

3. Thrace

4. Indian faction?

[Nerva]

1. Numidia

Already in... http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=265205

2. Syracuse

Certainly a faction with a lot of fans but... with little military information at the start date and also it would have a really difficult expansion

3. Thrace

Not a unified entity but the getai are thracians...

4. Indian faction?

Unlikely do to culture slots limit and unrealistic expansion towards west...

Greetings
Nerva

[InfantryToddler]

[Nerva] - Certainly a faction with a lot of fans but... with little military information at the start date and also it would have a really difficult expansion

I can only confirm Nerva there. Syracuse seems ruled out (as what I´ve read in the forum here). Altough it will get it´s specific flavour (AOR units, province description etc.) I guess.

[Nerva] - Not a unified entity but the getai are thracians...

Greetings Nerva! Are you working at DAC for TATW? If positive, then THX! No need to comment here (don´t want to start kidnapping threads here, as I´m actually doing at the moment !) Another THX anyway!
Back on topic - About Getai: nothing to do with this post in particular, but I hope this doesn´t evolve into another Dacia/Romania thread (I like Romania as every other geographical region on our plantet btw !), but let Romania keep it´s ground firm and steady without moving all to much into this thread?! OK?

[White Hand]

Add the Dardani or Taulanti tribe .

[Mediolanicus]

Add the Dardani or Taulanti tribe .

Yes, boss! Right away, boss!

[fd7s]

a nubian or arabian faction - somwhere more southh?

[Mediolanicus]

Nubian is out of the question because of the culture limit.

Another Arabian faction could be possible, but there aren't that many that were strong and expansive enough.

[Anubis88]

Nubian is out of the question because of the culture limit.

Another Arabian faction could be possible, but there aren't that many that were strong and expansive enough.

Neither was Saba and they are in already from EB.
My guess is that Arabia will get another faction, and that would be Nabatea, even tough we don't know much about them in the pre-Roman contact era

[White Hand]

Yes, boss! Right away, boss!

Good dude i'm your boss

[vpapako]

The Achaean and Aetolian League make much more sense as candidate factions than KH. They played a major part in politics and war in Greece during the game's timeframe. The KH was actually just a temporary alliance between the Athenians and the Spartans to fight Macedon in the Chremonidian war, which they lost. These two were weak, far from any prospect of imperialism, because the very concept of a city-state had become obsolete at the time. A city state could under no circumstances rival the hellenistic kingdoms of the time, that's why leagues of cities were formed in the first place. The Achaean and Aetolian leagues along with Macedon dominated Greece in the Hellenistic period. Neither Athens nor Sparta played any significant role during this period. IN FACT Sparta was "conquered" (forced to join at swordpoint) by the Achaean league.

Massilia wasn't just another city state that was captured. It was a powerful Western European Greek empire. Most of the Greek cities in western Mediterranean like Emporion were Massilian Colonies. And they were quite a few. Massilia with it's navy played a MAJOR part in the Punic wars as an ally of Rome and was finally subdued by the Romans after Julius Caesar's death. I think it was during the war between Octavian and Marc Antony. It certainly was not just another city-state that gets captured by Gauls, as it hapens in EB1.

The argument "too many Greek factions" is used quite often. I respectfully disagree. I believe a faction like a Greek league of cities (not the KH) or Massilia would be a better choise, in terms of historical importance, than another Scythian or Arabian faction. I agree with a belgic or another celtiberian faction though. As for Syracuse and Rhodes, Massilia was way more important than any of them, and than Athens and Sparta as well.

If the game's timeframe was the classic period Athens and Sparta would be the logical choices. In the hellinistic period though, they played no bigger part than to wait for a greater faction to Capture them, which is what happened by the way. (Athens was finally captured by Sulla)

[B_Ray]

Interesting viewpoint. For me, having a faction composed of Greek cities in the western Mediterranean would be very cool, though I'm pretty confident based on comments from the team that there will be no such thing. I think the closest possibility at this point in development is Syracuse. I don't recall any team members giving the final word on Syracuse's status, though I personally think it highly unlikely as a playable faction.

I don't think we'll see the Achaean League because it didn't properly exist at the game's start date (correct me if I'm mistaken). The Aetolian League, though perhaps less significant historically, is more realistic given the start date. Acknowledging your points about the relative insignificance of the Chremonidean alliance, it's still clear that the Koinon Hellenon are going to remain a faction in EB2. So I think it has to be asked, what would cramming another faction into the Greek heartland accomplish or contribute to the game? Could either a playable Achaean or Aetolian League offer anything to the experience that isn't already provided by the Koinon Hellenon and Epirus? I can't see how they would.

[frontier-auxilia]

1.Slingers from anywhere will be deadly as hell
2.Sakae, Parthian,Bactrian and Sarmatian bodyguard will be monstrous murder machine that make seasoned spartans and legionnaires wet their skirts. Just like they should in real life
3.A nubian faction will be interesting.

[paulus]

That's right B Ray, the Koinon Achaion did not exist yet in 272, not in an official sense. The Koinon Aitolion definitely did exist, and definitely was organized and expansive. But we're not going to replace the Chremonidean Athenians and Spartans with those piratical Aitolians! We've certainly considered adding the Aitolians as a faction. We could do them up a nice unit roster, it would work fairly well. Except that they wouldn't even touch a rebel region. They would be entirely sandwiched between other factions. So we're doing something slightly different instead, only I can't tell you yet what we're doing...