Hayasdan Reforms

[nein]

So that is why I could only use those crappy government buildings

[Floren d'Asteneuz]

The only problem is : Hayasdan has nothing to do with Achaemenids. It was only a province (like Egypt, for instance...) and the language is not even Indo-Iranian (only loans). Hayasdan had a great moment when it tried to conquer a big part of mediteranean oriental region, but maybe my knowledge fails me, but I can't see the link with ancient Persia. Parthian kings came and arsacids came to Armenia but again : not persian (arsacids are not persians) and it was a ruling, not a cultural change.

The first part of the reform in EB (the western expansion) was a great deal and very interesting and could be implemented with great historicity. The second part is a "what if" and can be extended to the whole Mesopotamia and the persian gulf but after that, it seems to me it is erroneous proposition.

[athanaric]

Well, a compromise would be to have an Armenian reform for the regions in Eastern Anatolia, the Caucasus, and the northern parts of Syria and Mesopotamia.

So that is why I could only use those crappy government buildings

Yes, and the Type III government for Hayastan is pretty terrible on top of that (-10 law, and no factional barracks beyond tier 1).

[Iaius Statius Laurentius]

Well, guess we can answer this question now. Judging from the campaign script -- or what's currently in it anyway, since it looks like a lot of the scripting is placeholder -- the reforms are roughly similar to EB1. There's a Caucasian kingdom requirement, and once that is achieved, then holding the central Persian/Babylonian/Median cities will allow Armenia to change its culture from "Eastern Tribal" to "Eastern Imperial" -- and an event fires which does.... something. It's not yet clear since that event doesn't exist yet.

Interestingly, a LOT of factions have Imperial reforms -- even those which have nothing to do with the Achaemenids. So far I can see Parthian, Saba, Saka, and Nabatu Imperial reforms. I remember one of the EB previews noting that "culture" has more to do with governing type though -- so Eastern Imperial probably represents the Persianate style of kingship rather than an Achaemenid heritage. This makes sense and tracks the other normadic ----> settled reforms. If EB went into the Roman imperial period for some reason, I am sure there would be a Diocletianic reform that changed Roman culture from "Western Mediterranean Politics" to "Eastern Imperial" for similar reasons.

But seeing as the Armenian Imperial reforms require the key Persian cities, it's probably an Achaemenid restoration dealie again. Although it might just have more of an Armenian flavor to it this time, who knows? Guess we'll have to see.