Reasonning for a TW historical mod and for re-enactment is slightly different, I realised it when after having finished my RTW BI mod Arthurian: TW I begun late roman re-enactment. When some approximations or interpretations are not a problem in a mod, it can be big issues in re-enactment.
At least Ranika and Anthony, historians for EB celtic factions have been also of an awesome help for my own mod!
And that was this way that I met Robert online too :wink:
Quote:And that was this way that I met Robert online too :wink:
Indeed!
cry:
Btw, is there any news about the publication of that enigmatic manuscript where you got all the Welsh unit names etc. from?
Ah, this one... there is also the MS mentionning a brittonic king named 'Arghair' allied to various irish kingdoms.
No news about both! Problem is that Ranika is no longer online, and his cousin Anthony wasn't aware about those MS - although he does have too a very deep knowledge of ancient gaelic civilisation and history!
Quote:Reasonning for a TW historical mod and for re-enactment is slightly different, I realised it when after having finished my RTW BI mod Arthurian: TW I begun late roman re-enactment. When some approximations or interpretations are not a problem in a mod, it can be big issues in re-enactment.
True, true. A game like EB has to model whole empires and economies, whereas reenactment/living history are best at portraying small groups and single events. A game can't just say "we don't know" for some things, either.
That doesn't mean we can't gripe when we disagree with the designers' interpretation of something, though :^)
I'll download EB sometime in the next two weeks and let you know what I think.
I agree entirely, and feel free to gripe away (though do bear in mind that dozens of people have spent hundreds or even thousands of hours apiece working on it over the last several years), I just hope you enjoy playing too.
I will go ahead and say, for example, that in many cases we've gone with the upper end of armor levels on troop types, which many of us feel a bit uncomfortable about at times, but we're eagerly anticipating showing off some of our work on EB2 for M2TW, where we'll be able to show different armaments in the same unit. So, for example, we'll be able to show thureophoroi with several different helmet types, several different breastplates or tunics, and with or without greaves. I'm really excited about that!
Anyway, I hope you give it a shot, and I hope you enjoy it. We'll soon be delivering a 1.1 patch, which will include a few new units (beautiful ones, too...wow), several other new features, bug fixes for a few tiny things, some stat corrections to make battles better, and...I hope...a new terrain set up so that battles look better.
Quote: [
That doesn't mean we can't gripe when we disagree with the designers' interpretation of something, though :^)
I'll download EB sometime in the next two weeks and let you know what I think.
Me too! I hope we can design our seige works too :wink: :lol:
So what about bridges? Does it make sense to do that? RTW is really goofy about getting around the rivers. I know the Romans weren't greatly hindered by rivers, and the other advanced cultures had means to build them. Might require a special upgrade at the blacksmith or something, but it at least would add a different twist.
Just a thought. I'll hush now.
Ok, I've downloaded this mod into a folder with a squeeky clean version of RTW 1.5. And it just plays as RTW 1.5.......What would the problem be?
Sean wrote:-
Quote:I've only got a general knowledge of Spanish warfare, and I didn't want to leap in with "Hah! They're wrong on this!" when I wasn't sure.
Well, I will rush in where angels fear to tread!
hock: .... and state absolutely that there was no such thing as Iberian cataphract cavalry in the West at the time of Hannibal, or indeed until late Roman times.
For that matter,virtually no mail whatsoever turns up in the artistic or archaeological record in Spain until the first century BC.( ask our resident expert on early Iberian warfare, Professor Fernando Quesada here on RAT )
Komanos wrote:-
Quote:I guess the point kind of is, when crafting individually unique unit rosters for 21 factions and more than a dozen rebel "factions," we've often been forced to rely on sources that are either few in number or even slightly outside our time period. There are many types of troops in the ancient world that we want to see represented, and if we only represented those that were particularly well-attested, we'd have a pretty limited unit roster, especially outside of Greece and Italy.
......if that's the way it was, then that's the way it was....some ancient armies
did, for instance have only
one or two troop types...and that's no excuse to "use your imagination" when facts are few and thin on the ground....but here they are not. There were no cataphracts in the West until well after 100AD. And if you are more interested in 'playability' than the limits of 'historicity', then produce a fantasy game 'based on' broadly historical terms.......that is more honest than claiming 'historicity' whilst acknowledging "(we)...freely admit we are often..... on shaky ground with some units."
Instead of having unhistorical up-armoured units, realise that armour's protective abilities are often over-exaggerated and change your rule accordingly.For most of the ancient period troops were graded by the type of shield they carried - body-armour was not so important. Therefore make armoured heavy Infantry ( big shields) only marginally more effective than un-armoured Heavy Infantry (big shields).... and thereby get the basis of your rules right! Then you won't need to un-historically 'up-armour' units to make them competitive!
(Shades of the WRG and their Super Heavy Cavalry in one of their editions...when some clever chap realised that by dismounting them, they went from almost invulnerable to totally invulnerable!! :roll: )
In terms of warfare/battles, armour/no armour is only a marginal factor !!!!
Quote:Sean wrote:-
Quote:I've only got a general knowledge of Spanish warfare, and I didn't want to leap in with "Hah! They're wrong on this!" when I wasn't sure.
Komanos wrote:-
Quote:I guess the point kind of is, when crafting individually unique unit rosters for 21 factions and more than a dozen rebel "factions," we've often been forced to rely on sources that are either few in number or even slightly outside our time period. There are many types of troops in the ancient world that we want to see represented, and if we only represented those that were particularly well-attested, we'd have a pretty limited unit roster, especially outside of Greece and Italy.
......if that's the way it was, then that's the way it was....some ancient armies did, for instance have only one or two troop types...and that's no excuse to "use your imagination" when facts are few and thin on the ground....but here they are not. There were no cataphracts in the West until well after 100AD. And if you are more interested in 'playability' than the limits of 'historicity', then produce a fantasy game 'based on' broadly historical terms.......that is more honest than claiming 'historicity' whilst acknowledging "(we)...freely admit we are often..... on shaky ground with some units."
Instead of having unhistorical up-armoured units, realise that armour's protective abilities are often over-exaggerated and change your rule accordingly.For most of the ancient period troops were graded by the type of shield they carried - body-armour was not so important. Therefore make armoured heavy Infantry ( big shields) only marginally more effective than un-armoured Heavy Infantry (big shields).... and thereby get the basis of your rules right! Then you won't need to un-historically 'up-armour' units to make them competitive!
(Shades of the WRG and their Super Heavy Cavalry in one of their editions...when some clever chap realised that by dismounting them, they went from almost invulnerable to totally invulnerable!! :roll: )
In terms of warfare/battles, armour/no armour is only a marginal factor !!!!
I agree with most of your post but disagree on details.
Europa Barbarorum is a game. The designers can't afford to say “we don't know thisâ€
Yes, after all, it is only a game!! One which I would like to get running on my PC!!!! :o o
So, can anyone give me pointers as to what I am doing wrong? :?
The EB installer should have created a shortcut on your desktop and in the start menu. The only way to launch the mod.
you can still play unmoded Rome 1.5 while EB is installed if you use the ordinary shortcut.
OK thanks, I will look for it! I was expecting one on the desktop, probbaly lost it in the clutter! :roll:
Nope, it just doesn't want to work, and when I tried from the control panel, it jsut erased the icon.... :roll: will try one more time!