 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
CyberChrist
|
|
Denmark
Jan 1970
time: 05:13
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by cpoulos on 02-06-2001 05:35 AM
Cyber,three out of the four sources you list say no elephants survived the Alps crossing.
|
They most certainly do not! They say only a few survived, just like I have been saying. I have included the sections where they in fact does support that not ALL (most sure, but not ALL) elephants perished.
SSNP Library
He did not begin to cross until early fall, which meant that he encountered winterlike conditions in the Alpine region. His force suffered greatly from the elements and the hostility of local tribesmen. He lost most of his elephants, and by the time he reached northern Italy, his army was reduced to about 26,000 men, 6,000 of whom were Cavalry. However, the number was quickly raised to about 40,000 by the addition of Gauls.
Boise State University
He arrived in Italy with only 26,000 men and about two dozen elephants. So, while it is true that Hannibal brought his elephants across the Alps, he did so only at great loss. Most died either at the Rhone or in the Alps.
The History Net
Although his crossing of the Alps with the elephants is widely remembered, Hannibal made surprisingly little use of them. In fact, most of the 34 elephants he started with died during the mountain passage or during the severe winter that followed.
The Illustrated History of the Roman Empire
Having famously crossed the Alps with his elephants, Hannibal descended into Italy and wrought havoc against the Roman forces.
Major battles took place at Trebia and at Lake Trasimene, in both of which Hannibal remained victorious.
A lot is made of the psychological impact his elephants had on terrified Roman troops.
But by the battle of Cannae all Hannibal's elephants had died.
Polybius might very well say that no elephants were present at the Battle of Cannae - but I ALREADY pointed that out in my previous post, AND that battle took place 2 YEARS after Hannbial crossed the Alps and entered Italy!
And you yourself admit to the elephants being present at the Battle at Trebia which took place BEFORE Cannae, how can you then claim that whatever Plybius wrote about elephants at Cannea has ANY kind of bearing on whether any survived crossing the Alps?
Was HE present at the crossing or at Trebia as well? I thought not.
So that reference is totally useless for supporting any notion that no elephants survived the Alps
And before you start claiming that the elephants used at Trebia River was the reinforcements from Africa then these reinforcements only came AFTER he had won the battle at Cannae.
Please brush up on your reading-the-entire-message-skills both in regard to reference-links and posts in forums before you go on a you are so wrong finger-pointing crusade again, thank you!
EDIT: hmm, got a little worked up over this - sorry about that 
[This message has been edited by CyberChrist (edited February 06, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberChrist
|
|
Denmark
Jan 1970
time: 05:13
|
|
oops, disregard this one
[This message has been edited by CyberChrist (edited February 06, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberChrist
|
|
Denmark
Jan 1970
time: 05:13
|
|
I use MPG.
I suspect all other nation references would cause the same error if that nation had been destroyed prior to applying the new events.txt file.
In case of CityCapture ANYBODY should work just fine as long as it is kept a JUSTONCE event.
You might find other nation specific events impossible to fix this way though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Civfan
|
|
Toronto, Canada
Sep 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
A small question Bebro, the Arsenal is the cleanest source of power but it produces pollution in Rome even if you remove all the workers from the land. Was this intended to be like this?
The first punic war saw much more use of ships, maybe more ships for the Carthagians through events would solve this.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
RobRoy
|
|
Nice job, BeBro! Congrats.
Haven't noticed any major new issues. I'll try to send an e:mail with a few more little nits, for your consideration.
FWIW, I tried killing off the Greeks via Cheat Menu, but I couldn't recreate the problem with EVENTSR2 that has been reported. I am also using the MGE, but I understand there is a slight difference between the U.S. and European version of MGE. I'm almost at that point in my regular game, so I'll see if I can kill off the Greeks in it and whether I can replicate the error. It makes sense that the program would reject an events file that refers to a deceased civ; but perhaps, in certain versions or under certain circumstances, the name of the destroyed civ is somehow retained.
In retrospect, I'm really glad you bent over backwards to make the Macedonians and Cartheginians playable. It was certainly worth the wait.
EDIT: By the way, I thought the German text for the Tower of Babel WAS a joke - and a fairly entertaining one, at that.
[This message has been edited by RobRoy (edited February 06, 2001).]
|
|
| |
|
|
|
SixArmedMan
|
|
Toronto, Canada.
Jan 1970
time: 00:13
|
|
How can you blatantly ignore four references which state that the elephants survived? Did you even bother to check the bibliography or any footnotes on any of these links? It'd be narrowminded to ignore any references from a website, simply because its origins stem from "the internet". In any case, you DID misread the links he provided... Isn't it possible you're wrong in this case? That you might've misread your sources as well?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Chris 62
|
 |
But I'm feeling MUCH better now
Jan 2001
time: 00:13
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SixArmedMan on 02-06-2001 11:29 AM
How can you blatantly ignore four references which state that the elephants survived? Did you even bother to check the bibliography or any footnotes on any of these links? It'd be narrowminded to ignore any references from a website, simply because its origins stem from "the internet". In any case, you DID misread the links he provided... Isn't it possible you're wrong in this case? That you might've misread your sources as well?
|
If you go back further in the thread, you will see that I didn't blatenly ignore his references. This started as a point that should an Elephant be used in this scenario as a battle unit in northern Italy. I agree that it would indeed be narrow minded to ignore information from any source. I lost my temper with him and probaly should not have. What I was trying to convey was that the historians who were there state bluntly on the issue of Elephants that they were not there. It is certinly possibe that some of these creatures did survive the crossing. The real point I was trying to get accross(and none to successfully I now see) was to not accept at face value quicky history lessons over the net. I understand that men like Livy and Polybius can be long winded and boreing to the modern reader. And your right, I should have been more clear in my opinions, but it drives me to distraction that people jump to a site and say "your wrong". Did he think BeBro didn't research this point? Did he think I pulled it out of thin air? He as much as said so. Also, these Elephants did not have the impact that Indian Elephants had on Alexander's army, as the Indian was nearly twice the size of the small north african elephant. Right or wrong, this is what I think about this subject. His statement that I point out a web site for him to check really p*ssed me off, as this is the whole thing in miniature. Read Livy's history of the Second Punic War, go to a library and get it, because your not going to finish it in one sitting, was what I was trying to convey. I hope this clears the air on my intentions. I don't know it all. Not even close. He should look in the mirror and say the same thing.
------------------
All knowledge begins with the phrase: I don't know.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Djugashvili
|
|
by day, Cher impersonator by night
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
great scenario young man! i wasted 7 hours sitting on my ass last saturday playing as the romans... im wondering which path the romans historically took, ya know to gauge how im doing... did they conquer southern or norhtern italy first? did they set out to conquer the south of what is now france (niceae, massilia) or greece and albania first? what were their priorities? im not real familiar with this era so answering these questions might help me rate my performace while playing... spose it doesnt really matter as long as the romans rule the world in the end tho.. oh well id like to know dammit!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberChrist
|
|
Denmark
Jan 1970
time: 05:13
|
|
Small correction appear to be needed in the Roman events file 3 (may be needed on the other events files as well).
The randomly generated Macedonian Hypaspists and Hetaroi at loc 85,81 seems to be placed wrong. Sardes is located at 86,82. This means the Macedonians will keep getting units just outside Sardes even when Sardes is conquered.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
 |
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:13
|
|
Djugashvili, at the time the scenario starts the Romans fought mainly in against the Etrucans (from the north) and several Italic tribes in middle Italy. 327BC started the war(s) against the Samnites. At its end in 290BC the Romans ruled Italy from the Arno (sp?) river (on the scn map not included, nearly at the same "height" as the northern top of Sardinia) to the Campanian territory in the South.
280BC started the war against Pyrrhos in Southern Italy, some years later all Greek cities there were in Roman hands
264BC the first Punic ar against Carthage broke out, fights were mainly on Sicily, which became the first regular Roman province at the end of the war in 241BC.
Northern Italy (the Po valley) was conquered later (if I recall correctly, Mediolanum 222BC? - perhaps we should ask Prometeus  )
Greece came under Roman influence after the Roman victory against Macedonia 168BC (finally with the destruction of Corinth in 146BC), Southern France was under Roman rule since Caesarīs first campaigns (58BC)against Germans and Gauls, but some cities there had some kind of autonomy even later, e.g. Massilia, which was allied with Rome during the Punic wars, but later conquered by Caesar 49BC (?), who didnīt accept the neutrality of the city in the civil war .
For the scenario I recommend that you take middle Italy, then the North, and then the South (because in the scn the Southern cities are harder to capture)
------------------
Civ2000
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro or anybody else who's played this scenario, I have a question.
How difficult is the AI? Will the AI actually launch noteworthy attacks that can capture your cities? Like in Nemo scenarios where he heavily uses the moveunit command and you can actually lose vast amounts of land. In almost every scenario you never have to worry about losing cities because the AI is so stupid. I'm just wondering if this scenario is geared like Nemo's to make the AI a worthy foe.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Djugashvili
|
|
by day, Cher impersonator by night
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
well hey then Im doin pretty good! i think im in the 180s or so and i have much of central europe from the barbs, conquered greece, and am now campaigning in iberia and sitting outside Pella... funny, mediolanum is one of the first couple cities i took... what i dont like about this scenario is the fact that the AI builds so many damn cities and turkey has like NO infrastructure... this isnt really major, it just bothers me... is there a way to turn off settlers for the AI players? i mean i know theres a way, but would u do it? would it royally screw things up or what?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Djugashvili
|
|
by day, Cher impersonator by night
Dec 1999
time: 05:13
|
|
(playing on proconsul btw)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CyberChrist
|
|
Denmark
Jan 1970
time: 05:13
|
|
I have found another incorrect (I assume) random unit creation.
Barbarian Cimbri and Teutons are being created at location 52,54 a hill just next to Opitergium (loc 50,54).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
BeBro
|
|
of the Krauts
Mar 2000
time: 06:13
|
|
MagyarCrusader, the AI abilities depend from what civ you play. If you play as Romans, AI Macedonians are heavily supported via events, but there forces are sent in the East, to conquer Persia. In most of the games, they conquer more than a half of Persia, but sometimes the game develops completely different.
If you play as Macedonians or as Carthaginians the Romans are supported via events, and, especially at the time of the Punic wars, a Carthaginian player should loose several cities (as well one who plays Macadonians).
Also a Roman player can loose some cities (as in Ceteramīs or SunTzu first games), if he didnīt check the events out before playing, but I wouldnīt this compare with the AI onslaught in Red Front, since the historical situations are completely different and so it was not intendet that the Romans are overrun by enemy forces
Djugashvili, disabling settlers generally for the AI would perhaps make the scenario too easy, I think
CyberChrist, this is no real error. During the tests I thought the same as you, and want to move their creation points into Opitergium, but then I did not, because it seems not too unrealistic that Barb plunderers appear directly in front of a Roman city
------------------
Civ2000
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Prometeus
|
 |
of Old Europe - "In America we don't trust"
Jun 2000
time: 06:13
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by BeBro on 02-06-2001 06:24 PM
Djugashvili, at the time the scenario starts the Romans fought mainly in against the Etrucans (from the north) and several Italic tribes in middle Italy. 327BC started the war(s) against the Samnites. At its end in 290BC the Romans ruled Italy from the Arno (sp?) river (on the scn map not included, nearly at the same "height" as the northern top of Sardinia) to the Campanian territory in the South.
280BC started the war against Pyrrhos in Southern Italy, some years later all Greek cities there were in Roman hands
264BC the first Punic ar against Carthage broke out, fights were mainly on Sicily, which became the first regular Roman province at the end of the war in 241BC.
Northern Italy (the Po valley) was conquered later (if I recall correctly, Mediolanum 222BC? - perhaps we should ask Prometeus )
Greece came under Roman influence after the Roman victory against Macedonia 168BC (finally with the destruction of Corinth in 146BC), Southern France was under Roman rule since Caesarīs first campaigns (58BC)against Germans and Gauls, but some cities there had some kind of autonomy even later, e.g. Massilia, which was allied with Rome during the Punic wars, but later conquered by Caesar 49BC (?), who didnīt accept the neutrality of the city in the civil war .
For the scenario I recommend that you take middle Italy, then the North, and then the South (because in the scn the Southern cities are harder to capture)
|
I couldn't say it better, BeBro, i'm impressed... Mediolanum was conquered in 222, but Insubrians lost all of their indipendence only after their last revolt that finished in 80 BC ( and no one of them received roman citizen status until Caesar ).
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:13.
Apolyton Time is 00:13. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-02-2001 14:21
|