Do the technological backward factions like Iceni, Arveni, Suebi and Sparta get various reforms to become modernized?

[Gogunbanzui]

For example: a chinese state callled "Qin" back in warring states period start out as a puny, backward and undeveloped while it's neighbours are rapidly progressing. After a series of disastrous defeats in battles, the Kingdom of Qin decided to institute civil, economic and military reforms to get itself modernized(especially conscription, standardized uniforms and standardized weapons) with the help of a foreign talent named "Wei Yang". As years go by, the kingdom of Qin bacame one of the strongest, and finally united the Chinese states under it's bannner.

So do the Iceni, Arveni, Suebi and Sparta get various reforms to compete with the more advanced Carthage and Romans? If no, then it will be very difficult.

[Captain W. Handberg]

I hope Barbarian factions won't. Light and chaotic warfare is their speciality. The most advanced thing they should get would be chainmail armored troops with shields fighting in a Saxon-style shieldwall, like Germanic tribes did in the 4th century onwards.

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

It should be a choice of "modernization" like in FotS. You can become more civilized but you get public order penalties if you do, and even then, you can't exactly go toe to toe with Carthage.

[♠ Thomas Cochrane ♠]

It should be a choice of "modernization" like in FotS. You can become more civilized but you get public order penalties if you do, and even then, you can't exactly go toe to toe with Carthage.

Desperate not to say Rome? Cus Carthage was a really bad example. Rome would have been a much better choice to make your point. Based on Carthage's fighting style, I'd say they were the PERFECT example of a "barbarian" faction which was very forward thinking in terms of military, social and political ingenuity, which - like you say - allowed THEM to go toe-to-toe with ROME. Their core infantry were still more or less as badly organised as a barbarian army, but they utilised just about every other fighting style (unit types for instance) in order to overcome their limitations. Where you were perhaps wrong in your answer of picking Carthage, is that on the other hand, Rome did more or less the opposite, picking one style of combat (heavy infantry) and doing it better than any group of people up to that point of history (and their level of advancement of fighting style was not overtaken until Napoleon). Even Sparta's famous military society had nothing on Rome, as the Sparta we know was only a tiny, core part of their much larger levy and slave army.

[Border Patrol]

Desperate not to say Rome? Cus Carthage was a really bad example. Rome would have been a much better choice to make your point. Based on Carthage's fighting style, I'd say they were the PERFECT example of a "barbarian" faction which was very forward thinking in terms of military, social and political ingenuity, which - like you say - allowed THEM to go toe-to-toe with ROME. Their core infantry were still more or less as badly organised as a barbarian army, but they utilised just about every other fighting style (unit types for instance) in order to overcome their limitations. Where you were perhaps wrong in your answer of picking Carthage, is that on the other hand, Rome did more or less the opposite, picking one style of combat (heavy infantry) and doing it better than any group of people up to that point of history (and their level of advancement of fighting style was not overtaken until Napoleon). Even Sparta's famous military society had nothing on Rome, as the Sparta we know was only a tiny, core part of their much larger levy and slave army.

What in the hell am I reading? Rome is the ultimate example of 'barbarian faction turned military reform'. The story of the Western Mediterranean was one of Phoenicians and Greeks until a small barbarian tribe absorbed the Samnites and got a treaty laid down with Carthage- placing Rome in her sphere of influence. Carthage a barbarian faction? What a stupid post.

[CDR Hurricane]

Carthage a barbarian faction? What a stupid post.

While we, as Total War players, do not generally consider the Carthaginians as barbarians, the Romans would have. For that matter, the word is originally Greek, and can refer to anyone who doesn't speak Greek, so you could even call the Romans a barbarian faction.

However, Top Hat Zebra is correct, at the start date, Carthage would have been more of a superpower than Rome, and more difficult to fight against.

[Hans Friedman]

They do. 'Barbarian factions' can 'steal' technology that will allow them to make triemes and other modern roman stuff.

[chadwicknight]

They do. 'Barbarian factions' can 'steal' technology that will allow them to make triemes and other modern roman stuff.

Source dude. Source.

[Hans Friedman]

Source dude. Source.

Looked for the source, can't find it right now. But I'm pretty sure I read that for example, if my Suebi captures a Roman Port city, I will then be able to build Roman style ships from that city.

[♠ Thomas Cochrane ♠]

Source dude. Source.

Looked for the source, can't find it right now. But I'm pretty sure I read that for example, if my Suebi captures a Roman Port city, I will then be able to build Roman style ships from that city.

It's true that they can "steal" tech, but let's hope it's a more complicated process than just capturing towns. I'd hope for something like the necessity of an educational building present, or a general with the trait "likes foreigners" or "ingenious" or "interested in mechanics" or something. Then you would be given a Dilemma option screen offering you the tech, at the penalty of "culture" in that region, or something.

[EmpireTotalwar]

Its confirmed by a gaming magazine, its right. Already a thread up for this

[omzdog]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_coinage

Technology back then wasn't really something on a blueprint you could take back to the home village.
More techniques of survival that were spread. The leap to modernize an entire nation is a bit different.

[blace]

The so called barbarian factions like the averni and iceni were not less techonologically advanced than rome and greece they just were more polically fragmented and thus didn't have enough money to afford mass ammounts of thier best tech. if you get big and powerful enough you should be able to be just as advanced and strong using their own tech as any roman, greek faction. they were not backwards. Their best troops are the equal if not superior to any roman or greek soldiers. Thats how it was in Europa barbarorum which was made by history experts so thats how it should be in rome 2

[SirFork]

The so called barbarian factions like the averni and iceni were not less techonologically advanced than rome and greece they just were more polically fragmented and thus didn't have enough money to afford mass ammounts of thier best tech. if you get big and powerful enough you should be able to be just as advanced and strong using their own tech as any roman, greek faction. they were not backwards. Their best troops are the equal if not superior to any roman or greek soldiers. Thats how it was in Europa barbarorum which was made by history experts so thats how it should be in rome 2

Yes in fact i recall splendid Germans mosaics, beautiful Iceni's coliseums, breathtaking barbarian paintings and sculpture.

[fenianmenace]

Yes in fact i recall splendid Germans mosaics, beautiful Iceni's coliseums, breathtaking barbarian paintings and sculpture.

Stop insulting your own intelligence. Mediterrean factions were far more advanced due also to the presence of rich raw materials sites (for example).

Being more advanced in architecture does not equate to being more advanced in everything. The Celts in particular are generally admitted by historians to have been pretty decently superior to the Romans when it came to metallurgy. A few examples: the helms (called galea) that generally come to mind when thinking of Roman legionaries were actually adapted from Gallic forms. The archeological record strongly suggests the Romans did not use chainmail until it was introduced to them though contact with the Gauls. Gallic chieftains minted gold coins up to Caesar's conquest whereas the Romans did not start minting them in large numbers until after this conquest. I could continue, but I feel I've made my point.
As a previous poster noted it was the so called barbarians political disunity that allowed Rome to conquer them not any inherent inferiority.

[SirFork]

Being more advanced in architecture does not equate to being more advanced in everything. The Celts in particular are generally admitted by historians to have been pretty decently superior to the Romans when it came to metallurgy. A few examples: the helms (called galea) that generally come to mind when thinking of Roman legionaries were actually adapted from Gallic forms. The archeological record strongly suggests the Romans did not use chainmail until it was introduced to them though contact with the Gauls. Gallic chieftains minted gold coins up to Caesar's conquest whereas the Romans did not start minting them in large numbers until after this conquest. I could continue, but I feel I've made my point.
As a previous poster noted it was the so called barbarians political disunity that allowed Rome to conquer them not any inherent inferiority.

You should read my post more carefully 'cause i've said nothing about the Gauls, in fact i do not consider them "barbarians" at all.

[fenianmenace]

You should read my post more carefully 'cause i've said nothing about the Gauls, in fact i do not consider them "barbarians" at all.

You're right I was looking at the title of my thread and assumed you were lumping them in with the other two, my mistake.
However, with that being said, the Britons themselves were quite skilled in metallurgy, especially gold-crafting. If you've ever seen pictures of the treasure hordes of pre-roman Britain, the fact that they were in fact more than the painted savages the Romans portrayed them as become quite evident.

[Huberto]

The word isn't modernized. The word is hellenized.

[omzdog]

The word isn't modernized. The word is hellenized.

Ya, just as the reforms weren't modernizing they were Westernizing in Japan.
I mean the Imperial court and government seats were modeled exactly after Prussia.

[blace]

while it would be nice to steal certain Mediterranean techs i dont think that you should need to to become strong. The northmen were as much of a civilization as anyone else. the cities in Gaul prove this