Can barbarian factions recruit artillery ships from unconverted ports?

[Alwyn]

According to the TWC Wiki page on Cultural Groups:

Barbarian Cultural Group factions are the only factions who are able to gain special naval units from captured ports of other Cultural Groups, and only if those ports are not converted to your culture.

Recently, I saw a player say that this isn't possible anymore. To test this, I started the Grand Campaign as the Arverni and invaded northern Italy. Rome had built a Military Wharf in Ariminum. This type of port would allow Rome to recruit artillery ships - but does it allow the Arverni to recruit them, if they capture the city and don't convert the port to Arverni culture? When I captured the city, this is what I saw:



This simply means that the Arverni can recruit artillery ships from one Roman city, if the city has the right kind of port and if the player doesn't convert the port to their culture. It doesn't mean that every barbarian faction can recruit them in any unconverted port captured from any nation which can recruit artillery ships.

There are several factors which might affect this. Maybe some barbarian factions can recruit artillery ships from these ports but not others (the player who reported that they couldn't do this was playing as a different faction)? Possibly this is affected by mods (I was using unmodified Rome II)? Perhaps a barbarian faction can only recruit these ships if they capture Roman ports, but not if they capture Hellenic ones?

I wonder if any other players would be willing to try this experiment - play as any barbarian faction, capture a city with a port (from a faction which can recruit artillery ships, and the port needs to be one which that faction could use to recruit artillery ships), don't convert the port (you can convert the government and other buildings in the city, just not the port itself) and see whether you can recruit them. If anyone does, I'd be interested to see the result.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

No one need to make a testing campaign.

The celtic ballista ship can only be recruited in roman millitary ports. Also the Britons, Daco-Thracians, Iberians, Germans and Steppe can only recruit from a conquered roman military port.

Quick search with help from PFM/RPFM in database.

[Alwyn]

Thanks!

[Welsh Dragon]

No one need to make a testing campaign.

The celtic ballista ship can only be recruited in roman millitary ports. Also the Britons, Daco-Thracians, Iberians, Germans and Steppe can only recruit from a conquered roman military port.

Quick search with help from PFM/RPFM in database.

Thanks for the information Carmen. Looks like mine was either out of date or incomplete when writing the Wiki page. Sorry.

Would you be willing to please put together a list of what "civilised" ships barbarians can get from what ports, so I can include that on the Wiki to clarify all this? It would be very helpful, as this is one of Rome 2's less well known and understood mechanics.

I'm now wondering if the non-barbarian culture port required is tied to the Cultural Group of the "civilised" ship you're trying to recruit. e.g. Britons, Gauls and Getae artillery ships are all "Roman Light Artillery Quinquereme" or "Roman Artillery Quinquereme," and in my Iceni campaign I just took a Carthaginian (Cultural Group - Hellenic) Tier IV Military Port and can now recruit "Greek Missile Penteres - Briton Slingers."

Thanks.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Its tied to the culture of the ship:

Celtic, Briton, Germanic, Iberian, Daco-Thracian Culture Group:

Roman Light Artillery Quinquereme --> Roman Military Port 2-4
Roman Artillery Quinquereme --> Roman Military Port 2-4

Steppe Culture Group:

only Roman Light Artillery Quinquereme --> Roman Military Port 2-4

Celtic Culture Groups:
Persian Assault Teteres - Spear Warriors --> eastern military port 2-4

Briton Culture:
Persian Assault Teteres - Spear Band --> eastern military port 2-4

Germanic Culture:
Persian Assault Teteres - Spear Brothers --> eastern military port 2-4

Iberian Culture:
Persian Assault Teteres - Scutarii --> eastern military port 2-4

Thracian Culture:
Persian Assault Teteres - Thracian Warriors --> eastern military port 2-4

Dacian Culture:
Persian Assault Teteres - Heavy Spears --> eastern military port 2-4

Steppe Culture:
Persian Assault Teteres - Steppe Spearmen --> eastern military port 2-4

Celtic Culture Groups:
Greek Missile Penteres - Celtic Slingers --> greek military port 2-4

Briton Culture:
Greek Missile Penteres - Briton Slingers --> greek military port 2-4

Germanic Culture:
Greek Missile Penteres - Longbow Hunters --> greek military port 2-4

Iberian Culture:
Greek Missile Penteres - Iberian Slingers --> greek military port 2-4

Daco-Thracian Cultures:
Greek Missile Penteres - Dacian Bowmen --> greek military port 2-4

Steppe Culture:
Greek Missile Penteres - Steppe Archers --> greek military port 2-4

[Welsh Dragon]

Thank you again Carmen. That will be a big help for updating the wiki. Much appreciated.

All the Best,

Welsh Dragon.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

You are welcome.

[Abdülmecid I]

Persian Assault Teteres - Spear Warriors --> eastern military port 2-4

The names of the ships raise also an interesting question about methodology, in what concerns the composition of encyclopedia articles. Creative Assembly has really butchered their spelling, which poses the dilemma of whether we should prefer the correct spelling or CA's flawed product. For example, the proper spelling is tetreres (from greek τετρήρης) and not teteres. Fun fact: in the missing r, we can detect the common Indo-European root between the Latin and Greek languages (quadro ~ tettera). Paradoxically enough, in the unit description, CA actually uses the correct spelling:

There is a good deal of debate as to how large ancient warships worked; the principles are understood, but the details are not always so clear. A Roman 'quadreme' or Greek 'tetreres' would seem to have four rows of oars if the name is translated literally. However, it is unclear how four sets of oars each with one rower apiece could be used without them getting in a terrible tangle even with a magnificently trained crew, or how the top set of rowers would be able to handle the extremely long oars pitched at a steep angle and still produce any power. The chances are that the term 'oar' had become synonymous with 'rower' and that the lowest bank had more than one man per oar. The other option was to go back to a double row of oars, with two men apiece. Two banks of oars would also have made for a cheaper construction task for each ship. Either way, the result was a ship that could rival the lighter trireme in speed, yet had more deck space for a large fighting contingent or artillery pieces.

Of course, balance is restored by misspelling the Latin version of the poor ship (quadreme instead of the appropriate quadrireme). In my opinion, when it comes to unit descriptions, the encyclopedic should always prefer the grammatically correct version, but things get a bit more complicated, in regards to article titles. Perhaps a compromise could be achieved, by opting for the "official" albeit wrong version and then mention the right spelling in a footnote, marked by an asterisk.

[Morticia Iunia Bruti]

Its simply a spelling mistake in the unit derscription as for "Assault Tetreres - Thureos Spears" CA used the correct spelling...

https://www.honga.net/totalwar/rome2...e_Thureos_Four

But only in the english version:

In the german translation it was written correctly:


"Persische Angriffs-Tetrere - Speerkrieger"