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

Judea - Total war

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.253 replies
Total War Heaven » Forums » Judea - Total war » Judea - Total war starting and looking for members!
Bottom
Topic Subject:Judea - Total war starting and looking for members!
« Previous Page  1 2 3 4 5  Next Page »
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 05 June 2008 01:04 EDT (US)         
JUDEA TOTAL WAR IS A 100% OPEN MODIFICATION on the singular condition that credit is given where credit is due. ALL PROPERTY OF THE MOD IS RELEASED FOR GENERAL PUBLIC USE, DISTRIBUTION, AND/OR FURTHER ALTERATION.

ALL MATERIALS LENT OR DONATED TO JUDEA TOTAL WAR REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF THE RESPECTIVE CREATORS UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED.

AS SUCH THE CREATORS TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY for the ultimate nature or effects of any materials. By knowing receipt of materials you consent to the above. HAPPY MODDING!




(hitties, hebrews, philistines, assyrians, kessites, babylonians, egyptians)


Alright, so i've been kicking this idea around in my head for some time, but I think i'm going to go for it now, if i can drum up support, and you all are the first to hear!

The game will use BI and start probably around 1250 BC and go (for whoever wants to) until probably around 950 BC, beginning with the bronze age collapse and ending with the time of Judges as well as the beginning of Assyrian domination.

The map will reach from the west of egypt to the iran, from the Dardanelles to central arabia.

factions (so far) :


Egypt, Ethiopia/Abyssinia

Assyrians, Babylonians

Hittites, Neo-Hitties
Philistines

Amalekites, Edomites? Midianites? Moabites?

Hebrews

GOD/senate - because there wouldn't be Hebrews without commandments. For you non-abrahamics, consider this faction as representing the religious influence, if not true divinity. Non-playable.
Sea people - Non-playable

rebels.



functions/features - what is different?

new map - which i gotta make

no navy, but wait! - this is important. God and the Sea People will have islands that cannot be reached by the player from which they will come. God will have a single city that is immensely wealthy that will trade with the hebrews - turning away from god as the hebrews will mean a huge loss of income (plagues and famine) as well as unrest. enter forced diplomacy script.

desert "towns" - non-towns that will have buildings that cannot be built, used for gathering troops in the desert. they can be built into towns later, but they will be more abstract towns than anything else, representing the "big fish" in the region rather than a true settlement.


wo do we have?

Me! I can do unit lists using existing models and brandy-new skins (see photos), and i can put a map together, and recruitment etc, but i can't do crazy stuff.

who do we need?

coders who know what they are doing! I can do everything myself if i set my mind to it, but by that point everyone will be playing Empires.

historians! i only have the bible and wikipedia and so many hours in a day to go through jstor etc.

anyone with experience putting a mod together! i'll be basically raping my home version of the game until i meet someone capable of doing non-destructive modding.

other artists! not that i can't do skins myself but more hands never hurt.

anyone interested?


all WIPs - also, legs and arms to be replaced with original skins, particularly on chariots which will sport bare arms with bracers.
http://xs128.xs.to/xs128/08234/01289.jpg
hittite swordsmen - middle infantry unit. face is strange because i'm going for 100% original which takes some practice.
http://xs128.xs.to/xs128/08234/02838.jpg
more of the hittite swordsmen.
http://xs128.xs.to/xs128/08234/04371.jpg
hittite chariots - gotta fix that darn egyptian skin, also needs to face and hat in addition to arms and legs.
http://xs128.xs.to/xs128/08234/03413.jpg
philistine skirmishers - need new shield in addition to arms and legs. also upper chest not drawn.

[This message has been edited by SrJamesTyrrel (edited 09-06-2008 @ 00:59 AM).]

AuthorReplies:
PrivateClark
Legionary
posted 22 July 2008 14:49 EDT (US)     151 / 253       
Apophis150
Legionary
posted 25 July 2008 02:14 EDT (US)     152 / 253       
SrJamesTyrrel would you please contact me about me working as a historical consultant for the project


storfarm@hotmail.com

[This message has been edited by Apophis150 (edited 08-22-2008 @ 07:07 PM).]

Gaius Colinius
Seraph Emeritus
posted 25 July 2008 20:12 EDT (US)     153 / 253       
Jeeze. Ye guys have been busy. I'm working on something that might be a big help to ye. Can't say anything right now. Top secret and all that but ye'll find out in due course.

-Love Gaius
TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid

Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog.
Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw
Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce

SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 29 July 2008 09:55 EDT (US)     154 / 253       
damn it all.

well, i'm back from italy and can get right to work.

at least, that would be the case, except that my computer is completely fried. system restore was unsuccessful. the typical solution would be to purchase a new computer, but that simply is not a possibility at the moment. I will let you guys know if things look up for me financially, but until then, you'll have to consider me (bitterly) removed from the project (and, for the most part, this community, although i will have friends with computers who might let me borrow sometimes).
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 08 August 2008 22:28 EDT (US)     155 / 253       
Relatively good news?

I finally got my computer to the guys again yesterday, got home to a message saying that the harddrive was salvaged onto a portable but that i'll need to wait till monday to pick it up because they have no weekend hours.

This means that, while I won't have the computer, i might be able to move my things from the portable onto my good ol' flatmate's here, and email to someone for proper posting.

Anyone up for the challenge? It's texture files and a couple .cas files. Assyrians mostly, and a few hebrew/caananite dealies.

[This message has been edited by SrJamesTyrrel (edited 08-08-2008 @ 10:29 PM).]

SubRosa
Legionary
posted 09 August 2008 21:31 EDT (US)     156 / 253       
Exactly what are you looking for someone to do? Just post pictures you send them? Could you not do that from your flatmate's computer?
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 10 August 2008 01:09 EDT (US)     157 / 253       
how can i take pictures without the programs? :P

I mean, that's just if people want them. I was not the only one posting in this thread, but perhaps i was mistaken in thinking that there would be interest in the files.

[This message has been edited by SrJamesTyrrel (edited 08-10-2008 @ 01:11 AM).]

SubRosa
Legionary
posted 10 August 2008 01:55 EDT (US)     158 / 253       
Anacharsis
Legionary
posted 18 August 2008 05:56 EDT (US)     159 / 253       
Very interesting mod. I was wondering why nobody was interested in this part of history. The mod seems very good, and a bit advanced to give opiniones, but there's go someones anyways (please consider them as that, only opinions...there is few truths in history.)

1) Are you aiming for a purely mithical mod or a historical mod with mythical elements? The Bible is not a factual historical source. For a modern historian it has exactly the same historical value as the Illiad. With this, i'm not meaning that is pure fantasy, but it was written much later than the facts and some of them are exageratted. The might of Israel for example, and specially of their inmediate adversaries.....but malekites?, Edomites? Moabites? these all seems too small to me to make factions wwith them. Perhaps a generic -Arameans- should sound better. Some others like the Midianites and Khanites(Canaanites) are widely known by contemporary sources from true empires (Egypt, Mitanni, Hitites) and can make factions

2) I missing the exact date of the fall of the Hittite empire, but i'm positive about it has not done it into the Iron Age. While they were among the first to manufacture iron weapons as special items, their military was never changed into an Iron Age one, they were destroyed well before that. Although they fell to the attacks of the sea peoples, the final blow was delivered by the Kashkas (a mountain people close with their capital city, possibly related with the late cimmerians) and the Phrygians, a group of Sea Peoples that settled in the old center of the Hittite empire, coming not from the Egean but from land, possibly Thrace. Neo-Hittite kingdoms appeared all in the western part of Anatolia as direct heirs to this empire, but separated between them

3) The word Maryannu is not related with the Sea People's invasion. It is referred to the social group of the Chariot specialists, a kind of Chariot Nobility, and it first appears in sources related to Mitanni from about the 18th Century BC. Mitannians were the first to use high speed Chariots with axis-equipped wheels. With the supremacy and the subsequent spreading of this kind of combat, the culture and social characteristics related to the Chariot and this social group responsible of driving them into Battle also spreaded along with the chariots themselves. But it is Mitannian in origin, and some will say also proto-indoeuropean (Iranian). However, Chariot, name and social culture spreaded fast, and by the middle of the 17th Century it reached Egypt, with the establishement of the short-lived Hiksos dinasties that partially won because the Egyptians lacked Chariots.

4) More tomorrow when i gonna be sober

[This message has been edited by Anacharsis (edited 08-18-2008 @ 06:36 AM).]

Nikich
Legionary
posted 20 August 2008 18:46 EDT (US)     160 / 253       
okay anarchis... some people here dont agree with ur athiest statements... (that is enough of that) -SubRosa

[This message has been edited by SubRosa (edited 08-20-2008 @ 08:56 PM).]

SubRosa
Legionary
posted 20 August 2008 20:42 EDT (US)     161 / 253       
Nikich, this is an Unofficial Warning. HeavenGames does not tolerate verbal abuse or trolling. I refer you to the Code of Conduct which clearly states that:
You may not bait/troll users. Bait / Trolling is defined as posting with a clear intent to provoke anger, incendiary posts, and behavior that results in other users violating the CoC.
I appreciate that you may be a Christian, and that you may not like the idea of one of your religious texts being declared to be a-historical. But if you want to debate something then argue your points and provide the archaeological evidence to back them up. Never attack the person. Making threats against someone who says things you do not like will get you nowhere but ban-land, and fast.

I also remind you that this is a game forum, not a Theological one, and this topic is specifically about a mod, not your religious beliefs. If you are really enthusiastic about arguing the historical value of the Bible, then take it to the History forum. I am sure they will love you there.
Apophis150
Legionary
posted 22 August 2008 19:04 EDT (US)     162 / 253       
I dont think you guys(the atheists) realize that this Mod is a Judeo-Christian mod....it plans on having a God faction. Anyway how can you say the Bible is a work of fiction or anything along those lines....because some atheist 90years ago said its not true. Its been considered true since the day it was writen
Gaius Colinius
Seraph Emeritus
posted 22 August 2008 19:34 EDT (US)     163 / 253       
I also remind you that this is a game forum, not a Theological one, and this topic is specifically about a mod, not your religious beliefs. If you are really enthusiastic about arguing the historical value of the Bible, then take it to the History forum. I am sure they will love you there.
This is a mod forum. If you want to discuss the bible & religion, we have a general community forum for all discussion not related to Total War games.
We also have a history forum in which you can discuss all history related to the periods in which the Total War games are set. That's all history from pre-history up to an including Napoleon.

-Love Gaius
TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid

Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog.
Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw
Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce

Danilh
Legionary
posted 22 August 2008 19:36 EDT (US)     164 / 253       
Its been considered true since the day it was writen
Not by Muslims,Hindus,Confucianists,Bahi'a believers(sp?), Spiritists , (generic) Paganists, and all sorts of other religions.

Please respect religious neutrality in this forum. If you want (another) religious discussion, you should please go to the off-topic forums.

SrTyrell himself said that if you aren't a believer you should consider the God faction as religious influence.

Dang! Gaius beat me.

[This message has been edited by Danilh (edited 08-22-2008 @ 07:37 PM).]

Anacharsis
Legionary
posted 23 August 2008 01:44 EDT (US)     165 / 253       
Will iīm really not interested in such type of dicussions.

Thank you Subrosa for delete it before i readed it.

Just i going to add some points.

*Iīm not an atheist. My religion is not your business. I did not read anywere something like "this is a Christian mod; if you are not a Christian, please do not post here"

*I do not feel threatened by Internet menaces. Not even a little. I did not readed your school bully threats anyways. Also i feel VERY LITTLE concerned by ANY other types of menaces by the way.

*I never said that Bible is fictional. Just said "the same level of historical value as books like the Illiad". Bible was first written during the Babylonian captivity, ending in 587 bc, a full seven centuries after the facts. Older existent Bible are the Dead Sea Manuscripsts...rigth? 2200 yeras old, 200 BC, about 387 years after the liberation. Hebrews has no writting before that. Never heard a Bible expert to said otherwise. If existed before that it was oral tradition. Then it has the same level of connection with the actual events as the Illiad. If you are convinced that otherīs tales are lies but yours are true, its fine by me. But do not expect any kind of minimal intellectual respect or consideration for that ideas from me. I just couldnīt.

*-"Mythical" is not equal to "false". Is just a different mode of see things. Evidently archaelogy did not support the idea of a Midianite Army of 120.000 "men at arms", in the same way that it did not support a 300 or so ships that assaulted Troy. Thatīs why i asked which criteria you were going to take. I did not state "that criteria is bullshit". In fact i liked the God Faction to simulate the mode in what the Hebrews dwelled. It only gives wellfare, what is good. If it were to annihilate enemies i will have another opinion of this mod and probably never written here. FOR EXMPLE: In the Bible, the Moabites are a dangerous enemy. In Hetean and Egyptian sources they are unremarkable. Thatīs why i asked about criteria


BACK IN THE MOD

Why Kssites separated from Babylonia? They have taken power in Babylon in 1595 BC. The dinasty keep its ties with its tribal structure. This style of government (a Dinasty that rules over a city state AND a separate, pastoralist tribe) was very common in the 2nd Milennia BC; another example is the City of MAri and the Khanean (Canaanite) Tribe. Kassites lost power in Babilonia after 1100 BC, due to a Elamite invasion, and we never heared again from the tribe and the dinasty. Thatīs why i think that the should be the same faction.

[This message has been edited by Anacharsis (edited 08-23-2008 @ 05:30 AM).]

SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 23 August 2008 08:39 EDT (US)     166 / 253       
Of course, i no longer call the shots (unless i get a computer up and going..) but :

i hadn't thought we were going to have the kessites AND the babylonians, it was either-or in my mind. personally i lean towards the kessites being a faction with very loose control over a very major city, of which the former as you said will possibly be wiped out by elamites, with the periods of independence marked simply by rebels, perhaps uniquely strong rebels.

I've always discussed Maryannu as a chariot corps, or at least the young warrior nobility - as in all tabletop games, though their historicity may be argued - was another use suggested where i missed it?

the hittite empire dissolves in the generations following 1200 bc, which in Rome terms could be dozens of turns, more than deserving a place in the game.

as for the tribes, it's the realm of the historians. i'm not overly attached to any but the main players (egypt, hebrews, assyrians).
Gaius Colinius
Seraph Emeritus
posted 23 August 2008 20:54 EDT (US)     167 / 253       
SrJamesTyrrel
Did you by any chance get an email from me or did it get lost with your hard drive?

-Love Gaius
TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid

Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog.
Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw
Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce

Nikich
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 02:05 EDT (US)     168 / 253       
ok maybe i got a little too heated up... but it wasn't all my fault! anarchis, i would like u too also stay off the religious topics and focus on the mod... we are using the bible and wikipedia as our historical refrences. please dont say anything offending... as for me, i am doing this only because i want to stay on the team, and i can't believe the words that are coming out of my mouth; anarchis i am sorry
Danilh
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 08:56 EDT (US)     169 / 253       
but it wasn't all my fault!
In my view, Anacharsis presented a question and an argument that offended you and you attacked him instead of declaring that you're offended by such statements and politely asking for him not to talk about that.

You should see Venomrider at Stronghold Heaven, he is a fundamentalist Christian and there were many religious debates there, and even so he didn't ever troll.

Back on the mod;

There is an unused unit in RTW, the Judean Zealot. You can use them for basic spearmen and rename them of course.
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 09:57 EDT (US)     170 / 253       
Dalinh - good memory! those guys do show up in the campaigns, but rarely.

I think they may just be the same as desert infantry though, when I get a computer i'll take a look-see.

Gaius - I don't remember anything from you, but my email is rather full of spam these days - do you know when you sent it?



Not to dive into the fray but it should be remembered that the perspective of the writers make things very different. The large empires felt that the smaller people were insignificant, but the smaller people certainly felt differently. Egypt was more than content to assume that Canaan was just a fools' land with untrackable bickering - the hebrews kept track. This is not to say that they were not crazy exaggerators, but it's also unwise to throw out historicity simply because it is in conflict with other sources (archeology of course lies less seldom).

Sources like Herodotus and Thomas More were alive for the times they wrote about and are no more (or less) accurate than anyone else with a strong bias could hope to be. If the fact that the official biblical writers came 600 years later* shows that they are inherently wrong by one's logic, this only means that our suggestions, 2000 years later, are all completely unfounded and should never be considered, regardless of what "side" we take.

On a more washy note, faith is about believing in the face of conflict. The strongest conflicts come from sources you trust, like science, OR the writers of the bible. We have NO way of knowing what is and isn't true (yet), and there's no point in saying that the ancient writers were infallible (they are human) or that scientists have a complete knowledge base (they are looking at fragments). Those who believe what they will ought to continue to do so and not worry about what others think, as it is irrelevant to the personal pursuit of "truth."


* (and hey? the four evangelists were certainly not that late! they were written all of them before 100 AD. you can't date a compilation by its creation date, you have to look at the sources!)

[This message has been edited by SrJamesTyrrel (edited 08-24-2008 @ 10:13 AM).]

Andalus
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 10:40 EDT (US)     171 / 253       
I was going to add a point on the religion debate, but that's best left alone.

Judean Zealots are indeed just Desert Infantry in different colours, but if you look at the model for Arab Cavalry and Bedouins, there is a nice scimitar that might be useful.

I believe sometime ago you asked me about Mycenaean equipage. The End of the Bronze Age by Robert Drews has this to say:
The Mycenaean infantrymen depicted on the Warrior Vase and Warrior Stele wear corslets. In place of metal strips, these corslets seem to have copper or bronze scales. And like their Philistine and Egyptian contemporaries, the Mycenaean warriors wear leather skirts that reach to midthigh But it is not just at Mycenae, and not only at the transition from IIB to IIIC that the infantryman's corslet appears in post-Catastrophe Greece. Figured IIIC sherds from several other sites show footsoldiers (Although some riding in chariots) wearing hedgehog helmets, waist-length corslets, and leather skirts

...metal greaves may in Mycenaean Greece have been worn now and then by chariot crewmen who for some reason preferred plate armour to scale armour. But it is unlikely that infantrymen before ca. 1200 wore metal greaves.
Which is where we come in.


Something else I have been meaning to ask you about is the Temple.

Firstly, how will the Temple of Jerusalem be represented? It wasn't built until the time of Solomon, as this mod draws to a close. But that doesn't really matter, we can put it in earlier. I thought that we could have a Temple to Yahweh, which goes up to Awesome Temple in all cities, except for Jerusalem, where the 5th tier 'Temple of Jerusalem' can be built. This is easily done using hidden resources.

Another option would be to have the same temple available everywhere, but in Jerusalem an add-on could be built - 'The Holy of Holies' (Requires min building_level temple_of_one_god_awesome_temple) which could maybe be already present (Like Meduseld or Gardens of Ithilien in FATW), or something that can be built, perhaps only after Iron Proliferation.

Secondly, we already agreed about Custodians, but will they be available from all temples, just the Jerusalem Temple, or a regular barracks? Alternatively, they could be trained from the major religious settlements, eg. Jerusalem, Bethel, Gilgal.

I thought perhaps they could be recruitable globally from temples, but in Jerusalem they recieve an experience bonus. There are two ways this could be achieved. The first is to have the Temple of Jerusalem train Custodians with, say, a +3 experience bonus.
Alternatively, put in two hidden resources - Jerusalem and NotJerusalem. You put in two lines of recruitment for Custodians, one for each hidden resource. The Jerusalem line can give an experience bonus where the other does not, so it doesn't all come in a big lump with the top level temple.

Is there anything you need to know about the Egyptians?

Speaking of which, I have just done some office ancillaries for them in my game. I could let you use them if you so wish.

[This message has been edited by Andalus (edited 08-24-2008 @ 11:08 AM).]

SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 11:22 EDT (US)     172 / 253       
All those methods sound almost perfect (they each, of course, have some drawbacks, as always).

I think the custodians could either require a hidden resource and be trainable from a good barracks or simply be available only at massive jewish temples.
Perhaps alternatively we could have an eagle unit from jerusalem?

Is there a way that a temple could give a good morale bonus only to jewish troops?
Andalus
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 11:36 EDT (US)     173 / 253       
Yes. After the moralebonus bit, put:

requires factions { britons, }

or whoever the Hebrews are replacing
Perhaps alternatively we could have an eagle unit from jerusalem?
That is a good idea. You'd need to change the eagle that goes on the top of the banner to something else though. Maybe a Star of David?

On the Mycenaeans, by the way, they sound a little like Bastarnae without the weird helmet, and Greek weapons. And I forget, how are the Mycenaeans featuring in the mod?
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 11:43 EDT (US)     174 / 253       
I imagined them as parthians campaign-wise - a good faction played with an impossibly small fraction of their empire available and quick to dissolve (hopefully around 1200)

I forget what bastarnae look like. As for the mycenaeans, they have their well-clad men with the cascading armor, and their light infantry with the corslets as described. I hand't put much thought into them yet.
Bulba Khan
Legionary
(id: stormer)
posted 24 August 2008 12:26 EDT (US)     175 / 253       
here is a picture of bastarne:-

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".
Hussarknight
Seraph Emeritus
posted 24 August 2008 13:48 EDT (US)     176 / 253       
I thought perhaps they could be recruitable globally from temples, but in Jerusalem they recieve an experience bonus. There are two ways this could be achieved. The first is to have the Temple of Jerusalem train Custodians with, say, a +3 experience bonus.
Alternatively, put in two hidden resources - Jerusalem and NotJerusalem. You put in two lines of recruitment for Custodians, one for each hidden resource. The Jerusalem line can give an experience bonus where the other does not, so it doesn't all come in a big lump with the top level temple.
You could do without the NotJerusalem hidden resource (saves work) by using this recruitment code for the Custodians:

recruit "custodians" 0 requires factions { faction, } and not hidden_resource jerusalem
recruit "custodians" 3 requires factions { faction, } and hidden_resource jerusalem

          Hussarknight
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 15:31 EDT (US)     177 / 253       
hussar - a good solution if it works, adding not jerusalem everywhere was going to be a bit of a bitch :P
Andalus
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 16:45 EDT (US)     178 / 253       
It's actually quite simple. You use Replace to change 'slaves' to 'slaves, notjerusalem' and then change it for Jerusalem.

I wasn't aware that worked with resources, Hussar, but thanks.
impspy
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 17:01 EDT (US)     179 / 253       
aren't Zealots the same as desert infantry?
No, Judean Zealots have better morale and higher stats then desert infantry.

"He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword..." Matt 26,52b
"Viva Christo Rey!" Miguel Pro, and numerous other Catholics who were martyred for their faith in Spain and Mexico in the early 20th century.
Winner of the 2008 TWH Seraph elections.
Unchallenged master of EAW Heaven
Ah, but for a return to Christendom, darn Reformation.
SubRosa
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 17:14 EDT (US)     180 / 253       
Yes, they are quite impressive in their stats. Not fellows you want to go up against. They just use the same model and skin as Desert Infantry is all.
Anacharsis
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 23:06 EDT (US)     181 / 253       
The word "Maryannu" was traditionally known from the Hittie, Egyptian and Syrian sources as commonly used after 1650 AC, but seems to appear associated with pre-imperial Mitanni (in fact, their Syrian subjects, because MIttanian language was not written as far as i kwon) since some 100 years before that. Its meaning is very similar to the medieval europe "knigth" or "gentlemen" (in spanish is the same word, "Caballero), and could be used in an equally wide functions. Its relation to "youth" is probably most related with function than with age, as "acting nobility" or "warrior-proven nobility", youth, force, impetus.

The only "ethnical" content of the word is that is tough related to the came to the Middle East of an Iranian Warrior Ruling class, as for m"ARYA"nnu. First Iranian writen words effectively appears much before these groups could be identified, related with war, horses, chariots, and military values. It can be a cultural development and not an invasion. They virtually dissapear (excep MAryannu) until the apparition of the "Persians" among the Elamites.


The Medo-Persians appears since the early iron age as members of the Elamite tribal confederation. The Root "iron" and "aryan" are the same in fact. THese groups are the only ones with true cavalry before 1000 AC. Evidences of horse archery (already with brides) seems to have appeared in the early North Iranian /Kurgan cultures as early as 1400 AC, but i donīt know if they were real horse archers or just mounted hunters. Assyrian Cavalry appears between 950 AC and 900 AC. (OSprey Military date is 911 AC), traditionally noted as the "first Cavalry" (today we know earlier developments).

If you really need it, i can investigate the word "Maryannu" more deeply and seriously, but i cannot add nothing more without further research. Only that it seems to came from east

[This message has been edited by Anacharsis (edited 08-24-2008 @ 11:08 PM).]

SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 24 August 2008 23:19 EDT (US)     182 / 253       
...not to be rude, but what i'm missing is why we're researching it in the first place.

did somebody talk about Maryannu in a context that was out-of-keeping with the standard? so far as I know, you're the first to even USE the word in relation to this mod..?

as far as cavalry, i think i may have suggested but horse archer units would be a reform unit in the eastern provinces, and a standard brigand unit further north. there is also evidence to suggest that light horse supported/supplanted assyrian chariot runners later in this time-frame.

This has got me thinking about balancing, as Rome has it's share of poor ideas, or good ideas poorly implemented...I think we should set down some "ground rules" which will guide our decisions in making army lists.

My suggestions are then:

Light infantry is fast and mobile, allowing it to close with ranged infantry, but ranged infantry has a noted advantage over slower heavy infantry, which of course holds it's own against light infantry for obvious reasons:
light infantry beats ranged infantry beats heavy infantry beats light infantry.

In terms of weapons, we have the thrust and the slash. Thrust gets tighter unit formations, therefor better attack in a close grinding melee (where the few can act as many, provided they are not flanked). Slash gets increased overall power. Within thrust we have spear and sword, with spear being the mod's only proper chariot counter infantry. Within slash we have sickle sword and proper ax, of which the latter i think should get the AP ability.

slings have AP ability and long range, making them great against unshielded soldiers. archers have shorter range but higher attack in general, meaning that they are better used against unarmored troops (such as slingers):
archers = slingers in even combat
slingers beat archers against heavy infantry
archers beat slingers against light infantry

Javelins and other hand projectiles as always are a light-infantry counter, or the opposite of standard missiles. They also had the ability to stick into and drag down wicker shields with more success, and although the game has no "SP" attribute that I know of, we might find a way for them to become more effective in this manner.

It's not terribly different from Rome, but i want to see that each gets its place in the game, particularly with the loss of abundant horses. I'm running a few "mental tests" of these rules...haven't had troubles yet, but people should try their own and see how long it takes to tell me i goofed!

[This message has been edited by SrJamesTyrrel (edited 08-25-2008 @ 00:12 AM).]

Anacharsis
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 01:52 EDT (US)     183 / 253       
OOOOPs sorry :P i donīt know why LOL

Yes i readed it in early pages

Iron Age heavy (spear) infantry should be impressive good against Chariots. The fall in the use of these weapons was a characteristic of the age change. Cavalry also should do well against them.

I donīt know why javelineers has a anti-chariot bonuses, but Iron Age oner may be even more impressive about that

[This message has been edited by Anacharsis (edited 08-25-2008 @ 02:00 AM).]

SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 02:34 EDT (US)     184 / 253       
Actually i found the reference to it as an ethnicity on page four, so that was my bad.

javelins get counted as spears i think, but perhaps they also get greater benefits against these types. as to why i do not know; if we write our own units they don't need to have the same benefits (it seems sorta...arbitrary/illogical to me) but everything is open and yes, they would get better as the reforms come through.

as for cavalry being good chariot interceptors, i think we need some clear historical grounds for that. armies were centered on the chariot for a long time, so if cavalry (at this point only barely developing) had significant bonuses it might feel strange. faster yes, and cheaper, and without scythes on the chariot FAR less vulnerable, but further bonus seems pushing it.

on the topic of chariots, has anyone seen what happens when we reduce significantly the height value (not x or y radius, just height i think) of a chariot mount? to say, 0.25? it needs very little still be hit and I would LOVE to know whether, with what I believe will be a reduced collision cube, whether the crew may take hits from missiles. Many a mod could benefit from this if it turns out true. If i remember i will test on my father's computer when i visit him tomorrow.

does anyone know how we might represent rough terrain? i've mentioned before that it would be ideal that chariots and close-order infantry have a hard time moving through it, to give the hebrews like, a prayer. RTW did not include real slope mechanics, making hills a near-impossibility. The only thing i can think of is if there were a way to create a ground type that included many tiny obstacles like rocks and shrubs similar to the foreground of http://lh4.ggpht.com/_IqkGgsLMsHY/R5eJdDU0ZTI/AAAAAAAABvg/fVpeeT0I1gk/IMG_9460.JPG that are too small to bother light infantry but just large enough to annoy dense infantry and just close enough to make chariots struggle.

Also, if anyone has any ideas on how to make terrain happen so that there are real cliffs and hills and mountain passes etc, do chime in at any time .
Ischenous
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 06:46 EDT (US)     185 / 253       
I remember fighting a battle and there were lots of rocks around which ruined phallanx formations and similar. I was in Seleucid land in the east.

Calling all new people. USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION before asking a question. Thank you.
Alert the APOCOLYPSE is coming!!!!!!!

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOM(Itcame)
"TWH Guild Award (Best Duo/Trio) -Ischenous/IJ"- Tryhard. Why he chose that nomination, I don't know...

[This message has been edited by Ischenous (edited 08-25-2008 @ 07:32 AM).]

Andalus
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 08:12 EDT (US)     186 / 253       
I recall being in Babylonia, west of the river, in the middle of the desert, and fought a battle that sort of had cliffs/mountain passes in. Basically it is rocks that start low and finish high. Possibly it is done by putting a rock on a slope. I have also seen this in Africa. I will see if I can find some screenshots.
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 09:47 EDT (US)     187 / 253       
isch - i know what sort of ground you mean, but that's more middle-sized nicely spread objects, that could fit say 10 men abreast. Although they would mess with phalangites large formation because of the size of the obstacle....well i'm at a loss for words so i sketched :



left is what they have, left is what would be ideal (ignoring in both cases the lol hexagon pattern).

Left : although the main form of the phalanx is broken up, the stones are wide enough apart that the men in the front can still bring some decent power to bear (max spears in the front line is 45, they come with about 70% of that). In addition, the attack value per man exposed to danger is 1.1 compared to the typical 1.3, which is not the kind of trouble you'd expect.
The chariots you can see all have relatively unhindered paths that will slow them down, but not terribly.

Right : although the main form of the phalanx appears intact, the men are struggling to bring their weapons to bear. The number of presented spears in a dismal 45% of their main strength, while the attack value per man exposed is a mere 0.8. This is the sort of disadvantage that will be necessary to keep canaan safe.
The chariots also are all of them hindered by the terrain and will move very slowly in any direction.

we can also do this with modifiers in EDU perhaps with heavy units and chariots getting penalties in terrain, but i'd rather see the terrain give the penalties, not some "unseen force."

note : although we won't have real phalanxes in this game, the short spear phalanx and shield wall patterns may well see use. the need to evade chariots is the main reason for this terrain discussion.
Ischenous
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 09:59 EDT (US)     188 / 253       
The only thing I can think of right now then is possibly design the battleground the way you want with the editor and attach it to certain places. Unfortunatly it wouldn't be randomly generated, so I hope we don't have to do that.

Calling all new people. USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION before asking a question. Thank you.
Alert the APOCOLYPSE is coming!!!!!!!

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOM(Itcame)
"TWH Guild Award (Best Duo/Trio) -Ischenous/IJ"- Tryhard. Why he chose that nomination, I don't know...
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 10:05 EDT (US)     189 / 253       
but many mods change woodlands, there must be a way to change rocks?

If so, wouldn't it just be a matter of scaling down the stone .cas and asking the game for more rocks per square unit?
Anacharsis
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 10:06 EDT (US)     190 / 253       
Well, besides the fact that cavalry displaced Chariotry virtually everywhere (except in China until 500 BC, India and the British Isles), the only "historical" source are the chinese traditions of the kingdom of Tchao, from 410 BC approx, that tells about the superiority of cavalry in combat.

The scythed version effectivity is widely discussed (if you play wargames you probably noticed that it is represented either as a raather useless suicidal wheeling shit or an ancient age battle tank) and the celtic chariots that fought Caesaar seems very effective (but i readed that they have a much more advanced wheel axis and other improvements when compared with Bronce Age middle-eastern chariots, that also are some 1000 years later) but that falls outside the range of the mod

I think that the javelins have the bonus because of the Runner (chariot-suppport infantry) used mostly javelins, but agains that do not seems logical..perhaps its easy to kill tied horses with a javelin?. In my opinion spear heavy infantry should be de definitive anti-chariot weapon.

Rough terrain will be great. I have seen in some complete unit description a type of terrain (like Sand, Snow, Wood) called "scrub"...what is it? it is only usable on cities?
Andalus
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 10:20 EDT (US)     191 / 253       
Concerning chariots, it is a point for consideration that Egyptian Chariots were of a different style to those of, say, the Assyrians. The design was modified so that they were lighter, had no back, for easy access/exit. They also had less spokes as part of the weight-loss scheme. All this made them more bumpy, though they hadid use primitive shock-absorbers. (Eg matting on the chariot floor). This means that they are faster and more flexible, but not as stable as the Assyrian style, which carried more 'weight', if a chariot can be said to have weight in battle. I just wanted to know if this would be represented?

The reason javelins have an advantage againts chariots is partly due to their manner of fighting. They have a more 'flexible' loose formation, not a close packed spear formation, and carry little in the way of armour or equipment. This makes it easy for them to avoid the horse and scythes. A well-placed javelin can bring down the driver, and you can be much surer of that than with a bow or a long spear. Unless they charge straight on to your spearpoints, fighting chariots involves breaking formation and moving in quickly on the vehicle. Light infantry can do this better. A quick javelin in the horses' necks, then close on the crew with daggers.
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 10:37 EDT (US)     192 / 253       
should probably have narrowed the scope of my statement : I think we'd need good evidence to support the idea that cavalry BEFORE 900BC had a significant advantage IN MELEE over the highly sophisticated iron-age chariots.

There's no doubt that over the centuries the development of cavalry will supplant chariotry, but even at the very end of our timeframe the cavalry we see should be very primitive, without armored riders or proper tack aside from perhaps a blanket. There's nothing I've seen to suggest that this "proto-cavalry" filled anything but a cheap assisting role to the chariot charge.

One thing I could see happening is that the horse archers in the north could fill the battlefield role of the egyptian chariots in the south - a lighter unit used to make surgical attacks on enemy chariots - but much more available as they are not noblemen. Particularly in the hands of brigands, these units should present what they did in history - a threat to northern countryside well beyond what was expected of their wealth or number.

andalus - i think i suggested earlier that the egyptians would be invariably lighter (less charge, more speed) and that unique to them would be a light chariot unit that would employ several bowmen to act as the aforementioned interceptors. Northern chariots would be mostly spear-laden chargers. We should be able to do this by decreasing the mass value of the Egyptian chariot (to decrease tossing force) and changing the horse skeleton to a lighter one (to increase speed).
Boetje
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 15:27 EDT (US)     193 / 253       
about the rocky terrain:

it sometimes gets buggy with big things like elephants and chariots. they get stuck. you wouldn't want that with a mod where chariots play such an important role...

Yep, it's true, having no sig is boring. But so is this one. Which makes my point... relatively pointless.
Can a point be a point when it is pointless?
SubRosa
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 16:51 EDT (US)     194 / 253       
Like this from my Amazonia AAR:

This Chariot was stuck between the two rocks. It was quite funny to watch it trying to get between them.
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 19:00 EDT (US)     195 / 253       
sub - lol at that picture.


as far as "mooring," i wouldn't call that a bug in our case, if we let the player know that it will happen, and i don't think that smaller objects will present that sort of thing as often as one might think (especailly since this looks more like a case of two chariots pushing for the same hole, which always causes issues). Once we find where to edit the situation, it's just a matter of troubleshooting.

alternatively, if the rocks are quite close together, the chariots will be blocked entirely from entering the area, which would cause HELL for pathfinding.

If it is unmanageable, perhaps a ground modifier is best.



on a last note, i think i've finally settled that the information in EDU just is not correct - men and mounts are ALWAYS together. No changing of any value can make the men be hit individually. So sad. I don't know why they would say that such a system is in play...but it's not :O.

Anyways, we'll just need missiles to get a generic bonus against chariots then.
Gaius Colinius
Seraph Emeritus
posted 25 August 2008 19:03 EDT (US)     196 / 253       
Gaius - I don't remember anything from you, but my email is rather full of spam these days - do you know when you sent it?
7th August but I'll re-send.

-Love Gaius
TWH Seraph, TWH Grand Zinquisitor & Crazy Gaius the Banstick Kid

Got news regarding Total War games that should be publicised? Then email m2twnews@heavengames.com. My blog.
Nelson was the typical Englishman: hot-headed, impetuous, unreliable, passionate, emotional & boisterous. Wellington was the typical Irishman: cold, reserved, calculating, unsentimental & ruthless" - George Bernard Shaw
Vote for McCain...he's not dead just yet! - HP Lovesauce

Danilh
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 19:17 EDT (US)     197 / 253       
Will this be more like RTR and EB or more like Vanilla?

If it's gonna be RTR style, it's going to take more time, but the final result will be much more impressive. If it's like Vanilla, than it'll be easier because you can arbitrare ly assign roles like "Heavy" , "Light" and "missile" units for every faction.
Andalus
Legionary
posted 25 August 2008 19:18 EDT (US)     198 / 253       
I distinctly remember archers on British Light Charots being killed seperately and coming off the chariot, but the driver and the chariot itself were fine.
Ischenous
Legionary
posted 26 August 2008 04:04 EDT (US)     199 / 253       
If they suffer casualties sometimethe men will be spread out between the chariots/elephantes and so some have less than they should. Sure it wasen't that Andalus?

Calling all new people. USE THE SEARCH FUNCTION before asking a question. Thank you.
Alert the APOCOLYPSE is coming!!!!!!!

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOM(Itcame)
"TWH Guild Award (Best Duo/Trio) -Ischenous/IJ"- Tryhard. Why he chose that nomination, I don't know...
Andalus
Legionary
posted 26 August 2008 04:44 EDT (US)     200 / 253       
No, they started with 36, and went down to 35. The man was lying there all on his own.
« Previous Page  1 2 3 4 5  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Total War Heaven | HeavenGames