You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Empire: Total War (Archived-See Empire: Total War Heaven)

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.46 replies
Total War Heaven » Forums » Empire: Total War (Archived-See Empire: Total War Heaven) » New faction feature: Great Britain
Bottom
Topic Subject:New faction feature: Great Britain
« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
Hussarknight
Seraph Emeritus
posted 19 November 2008 09:43 EDT (US)         
That's right, a new faction feature has been published on the official Empire: Total War site. It gives us some more information on Great Britain. It's strength lies at sea, not only in naval power but also in trade and colonies.

Read the full feature here on the official ETW site.

          Hussarknight
AuthorReplies:
Gallowglass
Legionary
posted 26 November 2008 12:43 EDT (US)     26 / 46       
Ventory, you remind me of me with my Gaels and correcting people when they forget (or never knew) that it was a Scot who made the United Kingdom, and that British isn't necessarily English.

But I didn't use block capitals.

------m------m------
(o o)
(~)

Monkey beats bunny. Please put Monkey in your signature to prevent the rise of bunny.
m0n|<3yz r 2 pwn n00b

[This message has been edited by Gallowglass (edited 11-26-2008 @ 12:45 PM).]

Bulba Khan
Legionary
(id: stormer)
posted 26 November 2008 13:03 EDT (US)     27 / 46       
If the AI is clever, then wouldn't they use squares against your cav

I feel the same way I did after playing Stronghold 2 for about 15 minutes, like it was my birthday and all my friends had wheeled a giant birthday cake into the room, and I was filled with hopes dreams and desires when suddenly out of the cake pops out not a beautiful buxom maid, but a cranky old hobo that just shanks me then takes $60 dollars out of my pocket and walks away saying "deal, with it".
sskrypteia
Legionary
posted 27 November 2008 02:10 EDT (US)     28 / 46       
Going on what gallowglass said, the British in reality would only refer to the Gaels of the British isles. So the welsh, and possibly scots (not sure) dont think the irish however (which come to think of it would mean the scots arent either... confused now). They were named after Britannia.

The english are Anglo-saxons which racially are quite different. And England is named after the Angles .. angleland which evolved into England. So British is a pretty innaccurate name if you think about it..... I'm just putting myself into deeper thought as i continue so it ends here...

Síleann do chara agus do namhaid nach bhfaighidh tú bás choíche. - Both your friend and your enemy think that you will never die.
Waffentraeger
Legionary
(id: Daelon)
posted 27 November 2008 02:31 EDT (US)     29 / 46       
Stormer, if the AI is smart, it will use all abilities to it's own advantage... I don't think that devs would put abilities into games and program the AI to not use it.
Kor
Busschof Happertesch
(id: Derfel Cadarn)
posted 28 November 2008 08:53 EDT (US)     30 / 46       
The english are Anglo-saxons which racially are quite different. And England is named after the Angles .. angleland which evolved into England. So British is a pretty innaccurate name if you think about it..... I'm just putting myself into deeper thought as i continue so it ends here...
That is the traditional vision but dna research has generally shown this to be inaccurate - without going into too great depth here there was no real replacement of one people by another. Quite probably only the ruling elites changed, exactly as happened in India, England during the Norman invasions, France during the Frankish invasions, etc.
Going on what gallowglass said, the British in reality would only refer to the Gaels of the British isles. So the welsh, and possibly scots (not sure) dont think the irish however (which come to think of it would mean the scots arent either... confused now). They were named after Britannia.
Incorrect. The term referred not to the Gaels of the British Isles (the Welsh are not Gaels), the term referred to the inhabitants of the British isles. With that in mind using the term British is not incorrect.

Interestingly, the article reveals Britain will start with William III as king of England and Scotland. As he was simultaneously stadholder in the Dutch Republic I wonder how the devs will deal with that. An alliance from the get-go? Will William III even appear on the map?

Kor | The Age of Chivalry is upon us!
Wellent ich gugk, so hindert mich / köstlicher ziere sinder,
Der ich e pflag, da für ich sich / Neur kelber, gaiss, böck, rinder,
Und knospot leut, swarz, hässeleich, / Vast rüssig gen dem winder;
Die geben müt als sackwein vich. / Vor angst slach ich mein kinder
Offt hin hinder.

[This message has been edited by Kor (edited 11-28-2008 @ 09:13 AM).]

Andalus
Legionary
posted 28 November 2008 10:35 EDT (US)     31 / 46       
A good point. Since command is shifting away from the royal family and nobility, it is not given that the ruler will be an active character. After all, many kings of these times never set foot on a battlefield. In fact, most generals didn't get too close to the actual fighting themselves.

That hadn't occurred to me about William III, it will be interesting to see how it is done.
Gallowglass
Legionary
posted 28 November 2008 10:50 EDT (US)     32 / 46       

Believe me, Ssk, you don't want to think about it. You end up going in circles. It's all inaccurate, there's no answer. British isn't incorrect, though, as it's a combination of races and cultures. It's just often misused.

And I hadn't though about the Prince of Orange, either. Perhaps CA will take another swipe at historical accuracy, like they've done with their claims of a defeat in Ireland destroying a Jacobite restoration (actually two swipes at historical accuracy in one, there). Perhaps the British and the Dutch will become allies or vassals.
William wasn't king for too long after 1700. Maybe it just plain won't matter.

------m------m------
(o o)
(~)

Monkey beats bunny. Please put Monkey in your signature to prevent the rise of bunny.
m0n|<3yz r 2 pwn n00b
Kor
Busschof Happertesch
(id: Derfel Cadarn)
posted 28 November 2008 11:33 EDT (US)     33 / 46       
A good point. Since command is shifting away from the royal family and nobility, it is not given that the ruler will be an active character. After all, many kings of these times never set foot on a battlefield. In fact, most generals didn't get too close to the actual fighting themselves.
Yes, but the interesting thing about William is that he actually commanded in person on occasion, like at the Boyne in 1690. Louis XIV and XV didn't command in person but they were present at many of their victories. George II commanded in person at Dettingen and his son Cumberland did also, on numerous occasions (usually unsuccessfully). And then, of course, there's Frederick the Great. So I think it's unlikely they'll completely block monarchs from commanding - it would lose the game Frederick the Great and he's one of the most interesting and well-known generals from the eighteenth century.

Kor | The Age of Chivalry is upon us!
Wellent ich gugk, so hindert mich / köstlicher ziere sinder,
Der ich e pflag, da für ich sich / Neur kelber, gaiss, böck, rinder,
Und knospot leut, swarz, hässeleich, / Vast rüssig gen dem winder;
Die geben müt als sackwein vich. / Vor angst slach ich mein kinder
Offt hin hinder.
sskrypteia
Legionary
posted 29 November 2008 04:53 EDT (US)     34 / 46       
"That is the traditional vision but dna research has generally shown this to be inaccurate - without going into too great depth here there was no real replacement of one people by another. Quite probably only the ruling elites changed, exactly as happened in India, England during the Norman invasions, France during the Frankish invasions, etc."

I've done some reading up to updates myself, and I found this "People with Germanic origins came to Britain well before and after the early Anglo-Saxon period, and this long period of immigration can explain a relatively strong Germanic genetic signal today. About 60% of the current British population still has some native Briton DNA, arguing against the idea that Saxon invaders ethnically purged the country. The textual and archaeological evidence collected (by previous studies) is also controversial," said Pattison."

I think you'll find Kor, when the Angles and the saxons begun their little conquest of england, the others i.e the celts (I choose to correct my "gaels") were referred to as Britons.

"Then all the councillors, together with that proud tyrant Gurthrigern [Vortigern], the British king, were so blinded, that, as a protection to their country, they sealed its doom by inviting in among them (like wolves into the sheep-fold), the fierce and impious Saxons, a race hateful both to God and men" Quoted from Gildas' De Excidio.

Referring to the Britons and the saxons as two different people. The original inhabitants of Britain are believed to have intergrated into society, or pushed into Wales, fled to Ireland or scotland.

However in light of the fact that all this happened like 1400 years ago and I suppose considering the Island is called Britain we may as well call them British.

Síleann do chara agus do namhaid nach bhfaighidh tú bás choíche. - Both your friend and your enemy think that you will never die.
Kor
Busschof Happertesch
(id: Derfel Cadarn)
posted 29 November 2008 05:10 EDT (US)     35 / 46       
Krypteia, your use of "s as opposed to quote tags is a little confusing. Nevertheless, the reference to Pattison more or less supports my argument.

I think, however, that you are using the term Briton with hindsight. You view the population of the British Isles as a genetically identical group prior to the invasion by the Anglo-Saxons. It is true that the term Briton in 500 AD did not apply to Anglo-Saxons, but it did apply to all the original inhabitants of the isles, who were not necessarily Celtic. The inhabitants prior to the Celtic invasions are all included in the term, regardless of race, except if you use the term Brythonic, but in that case you are also excluding the Gaels. It is certainly a complicated matter, but it is only logical to reassess the meaning of words over time, and as 'Briton' is a name based on the British Isles and was used to refer to the inhabitants of the Isles, it is only logical that the English are Britons too. Especially as, as I said and Patterson supports, a majority of the population of England are not Anglo-Saxons but closely related to pre-Anglo-Saxon inhabitants. In other words, the distinctions propagated by modern day national borders do not necessarily translate to medieval politics and certainly not to genetic differences or race, as everything's mixed: there were no clear cut lines or distinct borders.

But this is really off-topic and if you want to carry on the debate it would be best to take it to the History forum.

Kor | The Age of Chivalry is upon us!
Wellent ich gugk, so hindert mich / köstlicher ziere sinder,
Der ich e pflag, da für ich sich / Neur kelber, gaiss, böck, rinder,
Und knospot leut, swarz, hässeleich, / Vast rüssig gen dem winder;
Die geben müt als sackwein vich. / Vor angst slach ich mein kinder
Offt hin hinder.
Gallowglass
Legionary
posted 29 November 2008 06:40 EDT (US)     36 / 46       

Is anyone else amazed I'm not involved in this? I am.

I agree with Kor, though, because 1) we'd end up going around in circles and 2) a thread which sort of covers this already exists in the history forum.

------m------m------
(o o)
(~)

Monkey beats bunny. Please put Monkey in your signature to prevent the rise of bunny.
m0n|<3yz r 2 pwn n00b
Andalus
Legionary
posted 29 November 2008 07:25 EDT (US)     37 / 46       
So I think it's unlikely they'll completely block monarchs from commanding - it would lose the game Frederick the Great and he's one of the most interesting and well-known generals from the eighteenth century.
Maybe there will be a sort of command threshold? So they will not exist in game, unless/until they reach a certain trait level or something, when they will appear as a general also. That way, the less warlike kings will be that way, and the general-kings will be as they are. There would be advantages to both.
Pertti Susilainen
OD Loaf-ward
(id: Sukkit)
posted 29 November 2008 07:41 EDT (US)     38 / 46       
And England is named after the Angles .. angleland which evolved into England.
Englaland/Englalond.

Hu seo þrag gewat, genap under nihthelm, swa heo no wære
"As for the comment made by eithyddyswcitwr, could you please post back with better grammar that we can all understand, thankyou."
Winner of Sul's Most Obvious Comment Award
Tsunami StudiosWildfire Games
The Frankish Throne (4.6)
sskrypteia
Legionary
posted 29 November 2008 07:43 EDT (US)     39 / 46       
Fair enough. I shant continue the debate here then. I wonder when the next update is coming, hopefully next week. Monday maybe

Síleann do chara agus do namhaid nach bhfaighidh tú bás choíche. - Both your friend and your enemy think that you will never die.
Ventory
Legionary
posted 29 November 2008 11:48 EDT (US)     40 / 46       
4 enemies at once, and it won every war...
Gallowglass
Legionary
posted 29 November 2008 12:49 EDT (US)     41 / 46       
This isn't the place to talk about Russia, Ventory...if you were. Granted, it's not the place to talk about you-know-what, either, but that's over...

------m------m------
(o o)
(~)

Monkey beats bunny. Please put Monkey in your signature to prevent the rise of bunny.
m0n|<3yz r 2 pwn n00b

[This message has been edited by Gallowglass (edited 11-29-2008 @ 12:50 PM).]

Woolagaroo
Legionary
posted 29 November 2008 19:33 EDT (US)     42 / 46       
I hope he wasn't, that's not at all true about Russia, especially in this time period. Russia usually has a hard enough time fighting one enemy. Now Prussia on the other hand...

And I think this thread might have veered hopelessly off-topic.

Deutschland erwartet, dass jeder Mann seine Pflicht tun wird.
Россия ожидает, что каждый исполнит свой долг.

[This message has been edited by Woolagaroo (edited 11-29-2008 @ 07:34 PM).]

SwampRat
M2TW Ladder Leader
posted 30 November 2008 08:42 EDT (US)     43 / 46       
Gallowglass mentioned the Jacobites - is the game starting before the '45 or is it afterwards to avoid bits like that?

I have quite a few worries about the game rather than expecting it to be good. Still, I hope it'll be fun even when dashing my hopes in most other areas. I'm guessing it'll be shying away from 'complex' towards arcadey, which would be a shame.
Gallowglass
Legionary
posted 30 November 2008 09:23 EDT (US)     44 / 46       
It's starting in 1700 - so it would have three risings worth mentioning to deal with. It would. But CA, going by their faction description, seem to have counted the 1689 Rising as ending all Jacobite hopes, and probably to explain why no British troops at the start of the game are deplted they've said that the war was fought entirely in Ireland.
Basically, they couldn't be arsed to make the required new faction
When Crann Tara's done, I'll likely be doing a mod on that.

------m------m------
(o o)
(~)

Monkey beats bunny. Please put Monkey in your signature to prevent the rise of bunny.
m0n|<3yz r 2 pwn n00b

[This message has been edited by Gallowglass (edited 11-30-2008 @ 09:24 AM).]

Kor
Busschof Happertesch
(id: Derfel Cadarn)
posted 30 November 2008 10:12 EDT (US)     45 / 46       
This picture shows part of the UK's government summary. Apparently the Dutch Republic and the UK definitely start off separately, but they will be allies and trade partners. Oh, and the game might end in 1799, looking at the prestige win condition.

Kor | The Age of Chivalry is upon us!
Wellent ich gugk, so hindert mich / köstlicher ziere sinder,
Der ich e pflag, da für ich sich / Neur kelber, gaiss, böck, rinder,
Und knospot leut, swarz, hässeleich, / Vast rüssig gen dem winder;
Die geben müt als sackwein vich. / Vor angst slach ich mein kinder
Offt hin hinder.
Woolagaroo
Legionary
posted 30 November 2008 12:16 EDT (US)     46 / 46       
That's hardly enough time to get into the French Revolution and the whole can of worms that unleashed. Oh well, I think it's a good guess some of that will be present in an expansion.
It also raises the question as to whether the Holy Roman Empire will be present in some way in the game, as it was still a political entity during the time period.

Deutschland erwartet, dass jeder Mann seine Pflicht tun wird.
Россия ожидает, что каждый исполнит свой долг.

[This message has been edited by Woolagaroo (edited 11-30-2008 @ 12:17 PM).]

« Previous Page  1 2  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Total War Heaven | HeavenGames