Burzum

Catholic threshhold over power were responsible for such things. Sources are in history itself. Look at all the burnings of books and literature that was considered "The work of the Devil" ... If I had to list sources I would be going into immense detail. I'm not interested in engaging a discussion where we exchange sources to just make up your mind on a claim to support it. You have you version of the story, whether that is truth or not, a given source doesn't mean anything as proven time and time again. Your second question I will refrain from answering if you really want my honest opinion and view on that matter. All I can say that I probably will be labeled a sterotypical supremacist.lol. Question number three, no directly, I say that there were a few great individuals in the Medieval period that clinged onto science literature and the likes, but compared to Islam in that time frame, all honesty the people in the middle east were so much more advanced and not just with scientific knowledge but were culturely advanced too. I think if one were to look at it from an Islamic point of view as aopposed to a western point of view which is biased to the west, the people of the middles east were like Romans to naked bunch of Germans with faces painted blue.

Islam got their knowwledge from all over and were the preservers of it. You in no place to tell me to revise my history...lol Both of you have a phobia to my statement about religion and it explains your low remark about it. Intolerable to Christian pilgrims yeah, but not knowledge. Two different things and deems that statement irrelevant. Crusaders fought in the middle east not for Jurusalem only like many of you mainstream folk like to believe, but the whole significance of Knight Templer and Teutonic Knights were to capture artifacts, ancient knowledge and relics. They had nothing to do with safe guarding pilgrims... lol You really have the wrong idea bud... The evolution of Islam over the decades have slowly made more and more intolerable. I think you yourself need to look into this further. About me being misinformed...lol you entilted to your opinions. But don't portray your opinion so as to make you know any better, because from what I've seen you say, the sources you have provided, and the questions you have asked, I can conlcude the same dear friend. My advice to you is before you add your 2 cents and criticise someone, read and understand them properly otherwise you make yourself look like an idiot.

Infact a lot of things came from the East. Gunpowder, etc etc. That's far east. I wasn't saying the western world were dark, but that christianity has zero tollerance for science and knowledge. Islam preserved much of ancient and Medieval knowledge and history that the west mainly burned to ash. Islam and their religion were not interested in building upon western knowledge because it wasn't Islam and Islam also impededed their progression. Only difference is who was the most tolerable.

That's exactly what I'm saying and it's a fact.

Now, I am please you sensible lot of added the Muslims into the equation. I'll just say this. Who were the people that preserved education and built libraries when Europe were running around in the Dark Ages....? T h e A r a b s .................................... Credit is due right there... You know what I mean?

I'm not just defending Rome, I'm stroking her like a kitty. Can you hear her purring? lolz All civilizations gave something, including the barbarian ones. Would Rome have been so famous without them for her to trample on? Or what of their increments of influence that shaped Roman society etc? Like you mentioned above, take Rome away ... It's like taking trees and the oceans away.. we starve of oxygen, and isn't (wasn't) Rome the oxygen of civilization in that respect? For those who otherwise bash and hate Rome and cast a shadow of misogyny on her marks that person illiterate, and is generally a byproduct through hundreds of generations of mighty Rome having the misfortune of been stomped on by her. But lest these people keep in mind that their honourable sacrifice to Rome gave us progression and hence this acknowledgement we accept this fact and therefor think of it in a positive manner and treat it as a vital narrative in our past which educates us and teaches us the value of morals and enriches our culture. This is strength and Rome represents strength, this is also wisdom and Rome represented wisdom and knowledge giving our ancestors literacy and fruit of spiritual freedom in the practices of multiple religions and didn't clutch people in a vise of phobia and allowed free expression and this also shows Rome was quite open minded to this as well. As much as the hatred of Rome is seeped in deep in various people's veins and the hatred erupts a sudden burst of anger fueled by resentment, the truth is always there to remind you of our fluctuations in the strife of progression. We can never be settled as long as we unfettered to take our ideas and carry them beyond infinity and disregarding the obstacles in the way. This is quite simply dear fellow... Human Nature. Understanding this we can understand our past and therefor make sense of it. I may have had the same dose of Rome's mighty dominance in the past because I have German ancestry... But do I throw my toys out the cot when someone praises Rome? ... No I just accept it and embrace it, and cherish Rome for her wine (this must of tasted like sweet heaven back then) and the brain development in my ancestors that they were given the chance to learn, and had the opportunity to become educated. We often have two choices in life, we get born and we can either hate or love our mother but we can't change the fact we came from her. So too we have this mark in our being, the sweet mark tattooed in our psyche and out genes through the time living under and by Rome's dominance... We can neither hate or love her we can only accept and know it was good and the good of all. How retched are we and how uncivilized are we? If we spit on the people who went through much hardships laying down the roads in which we travel, crafting the knowledge in which we utilize to construct a better world regardless of we use this knowledge whats important is to remember and pay our gratitude to those before and honour them in a glorious triumph for Rome and Rome's victorious legions which thrusted this all into being. We here today, because Rome was yesterday. We live today, because Romans died yesterday. We remember today, because Rome recorded yesterday. We can drink wine today, because... that's what Romans drank Embrace the Rome, embrace the world. Thank you

It is true that the Greeks were heavily influencial over the Romans, but they weren't totally. Rome borrowed extensivly from Gaul and the Etrscans, Iberians and the Egyptians. What we all should focus on, is to ask the question. How did Greece and the other factions influence the world? In what way? To what benefit? Did Rome do a better job? If so how?

Theres been a lot of misleading information so far but most of you, and not that's it your fault but it is just misconceptions related to the current sources within our standard yet mainstream education. However, someone mentioned the aqueducts were older than the Roman Empire, this and that... sources? References? We have credible proof the Romans built such things. Techniques and methodology can be redone today in Italy and across the States. But heres a question... How do you age a piece of stone? If that was the case, then we can better conclude the age of the pyramids lolz The cultures and civilizations prior to Rome were the fathers of our culture (e.g. Egyptians, Greeks, Persia, etc) they really were the fathers of literacy, reading, writing, because without this, you don't have a vital foundation to support much let alone a empire built to last. These prerequisites of literacy were the pillars and backbone of any civilization, one that promotes education, civilization and one that definitely promotes sophistication. Your barbaric tribes and cultures didn't have the capacity in reading and writing and just general literacy to do anything. Thus was true for the Gauls for example and countless others. It is true the Romans copied heavily from surrounding cultures and those before, but the credit goes to how they used them to enforce progress. Bottom line. The Roman military was extremely complex and sophisitcated than any other ancient army of the time hence 'ahead of it's of time, and our military today uses concept of the Romans. So the conclusion is, Rome was quite a force to be reckoned with, and they really showed the world how to be civilized.,

I do undoubtedly admit the Egyptians are one of the fathers and pioneers of technology and civilizations... but... The dominant religion in the world happens to be Catholicism... which is a matter of fact Roman... a once dominant Roman empire changed their colours as it were like a chameleon when power was dwindling and they simply didn't do it out of a last leap of desperation to retain power or anything of that likelihood, but realistically, I will conclude the Catholics were more dominant in medieval times than in their own Roman glory days of empire. They could dictate crusades and dictate war and rule in every kingdom of the Medieval era. This is not in anyway voiding the Roman civilization in defense to your statement, because once again I it anyone with Roman achievements in the face of individuals who aspire to talk down on Rome, Rome... The mighty civilization that spearheaded society with technology and arts and culture and promoted literacy throughout their empire without a strangling effect of religion and flavors most notably promoted by the Hebrews and lesser known religions which impeded progress in technological advancement rather than to support it. The fact remains the same that without Rome, mankind would be still running in skins arguing which tribesmen has bigger balls, rather than which aqueduct carries the most volume of water. Rome can be expressed like the classical little Irish girl in the village Torrots, she was walking in the garden and suddenly two leprechauns appeared... one wearing a red Roman skirt and the other a barbaric Gallic Kelt, the one wearing the Roman red skirt taught her how read and write and showed her how to channel water to her doll house. She could read and read lots of philosophy from the Roman historians and Greek philosopher her father was amazed. But the other in dirty Gallic cloth taught her how to drink and how to talk and embellish tales of the day. But after two weeks of practicing two cultures she checked, she couldn't remember what the Gallic clothed leprechaun taught and forgot everything because of excessive amounts of alcohole and lavished indulgently in bore alcohol she suffered from long tedious hangovers the following mornings. But the Roman leprechaun she could recapitulate and re-read everything she did those night while drunk on wine and remember the 'history' and gained knowledge from those events. So... what this tells you is that... Romans taught man how to record and said Hay! get your heads out of the gutter (i.e. Booze, meaningless prattling and embellishment) and showed man how to channels the waters and how to sing operas, poetry taught man how to be great artists and how to pave roads to speed economy and commerce and military movement. How to construct towns out of marble and and cultures that could be effective in the way it promoted thinking in which provoked more innovation to better accelerate progression for the benefit of all.... So really from this little lesson we can see Rome was quite something. Sure others were something, but did they actually achieve much? Like Rome did? I don't think so.

Well here we now have a thread devoted to civilizations and ... who's who? To start off, I it would be interesting to see what civilizations you think were the most influential and to what degree did each one benefited us today, which one ultimately was just ahead of it's time. Whilst I fall into the Roman rank category, and my votes and money are on Rome... There are other civilizations which deserve a closer inspection and from you the members tell us what they are? Lets hear your thoughts.

The nature of the reality is that... Rome and Greece are pretty much the best 'civilized' civilizations out there... Anything else was pretty barbaric and uncivilized. No one with a great knowledge of history and the sciences of the time will ever deny this. I think people like to defend the lesser civilized nations because they might share a common ancestry connection or generally take a liking to that civilization, which is okay, but one needs to realize that if you going to compare apples to oranges, one needs to know which of the two was more advanced and beneficial to society and man kinds evolutionary advancement through the ages. Which one effectively propelled us down a trajectory of progress as it were. I left out Persia, Egypt, China because Rome used their might to an effect that influenced cultuers at a greater level.

Thank you guys for the hard work and a lot of effort put in by all you great artists, and by that I mean programmers incorporated. Programming is an art too. Everything pretty much is a form of art. Download ready, and I will post any glitches/bugs/problems/errors or anything unusual that I will come across.

I have mention this and suggested this in one or two of my posts. This makes absolute sense. Auxilliaries are great for defending the borders and to garrison in them forts and wall towers or just support your main army in the field. But the biggest advantage would be, and this is for the Romans, is that they will be fast to train and really cheap. They would be spearmen and as spearmen they would have an attack bonus against cavalry units. There would also need to be a change where 3 auxilliary units trained is capped at 1 pop. Because on the outskirts of empire, there's a vast population, so it makes sense.

That looks very good. Interesting to see how these will look in 3D. The Etruscans have a unique distinctive sort of civilization. One that really does mimic that of the old Babylonians, that is the style of armour etc etc. Hmm.

INFANTRY Generic Name: Roman Swordsman. Specific Name: Hastatus -> Princips. Class: Swordsman. Heavy Skirmisher at Advanced and Elite ranks. Hacker Armament: Basic - Gladius. Advanced – Gladius. Elite – Gladius. Ranged Armament: Basic - None. Advanced – Pilum. Elite – Pilum. _________________________________ This looks interesting. Do you know more about this unit?

I don't know what all the excitement is about. It's just Microsoft reckons that AoE II is still been played by millions of people, and they just not making anything out of it. So what a better way than just to inject HD textures with a $20 price tag and sell that, which seriously is nothing to have a [please watch your language Burzum - Pureon] AoE II original AoE II HD... Heh... Are they that lazy they couldn't just do a remake? lolz

The Romans never had onagers in that time, but they did have mangonels. Similar to this. Except they weren't called mangonels, that was a old french name.

Right I should also mention that I've seen a lot of skirmisher units that have the same speed as cavalry units. Rather than a bug this is just a simple thing to ajust. But they need to be slower than horse units. I have noticed several other infantry units at par as well.

I'm looking forward to Alpha XIII That said, welcome to the forum Tiro LAPB!

I have seen those, but haven't really played them.

Hasta (Roman spear) Ocrea (Roman legging) Clipeus (Roman oval shield) -- Normally used by the auxila infantry in the Imperial era. Parma (Roman round shield) -- Often used by Roman cavalry Verutum (Roman standard javelin) Balteus (Roman standard shield) Cassis (Roman helmet)

In AoE II I used the elite skirmisher as my primary infantry unit, as a type of legionnaire. Sounds very stupid, but in actualy fact they exceptional in numbers. Deployed the Roman way, behind a palisade, they devastating. You need lots villagers to keep buildings and that repaired and rebuilt but in 0 A.D. we see again the creators have been clever to make your army do the building However this is AoE the same principle applys universaly, however in 0 A.D. it's much better without having stupid villagers getting killed and a place to make them on the battlefield.

LOL Those pansy units do annoy the hell out of me. Cavalry are such a diverse contingent to use for practically any circumstance with great haste. I have a habbit of preserving my cavalry in way that is opposite to the old way of throwing them in first. Throwing cavalry at your enemy is guaranteed to destroy all your cavalry units. But rather, I have adopted a more Roman stance and exploiting terrain to dig in and let the enemy come to you. A barbaric suicidal charge often leads to a total annihilation of your force. It's a disiplined army that wedges infront of a hill or forest, cliff, anything that's a corner and let's the enemy attack without flanking you. What I do is, that once the enemy engages my lines, I then throw the cavalry directly behind enemy line claming them in a lethal vise of infantry and cavalry with the enemy in the center getting cut to pieces. Or, heavy cavalry can win the day once the enemy as taken root and winning against your lines of infantry. A brutal charge of cavalry into them will often lead to their doom. But throwing cavalry in first for me is stupid mistake, and a meaningless loss of a potent tool on the battlefield. Where in the beginning the enemies infantry are ready in waiting for a charge, and they are already piked for a cavalry assault. And in the distance, your cavalry are charging forwar, gives them enough time, to dig in and show a bristling wall of pikes at them. I would keep the pansy units behind my main infantry to hurl their stuff at the enemy when they engage. Also depends, you can use them in masses to lure the enemy in a trapped situation where you can cut them with cavalry... Depends.

Now for starters I'm sure many that have played EE's expansion The Art of Conquest would know how annoying the AI is with Ptolemy in the Roman campaign. I chose in favour of Cleopatra and had to stop wave after wave after wave of Egyptian assault on her city. And when you even come into close quaters with one of Ptolemy's three bases it floods you with massives of troops and you need a good amount to lay a successful assault, but even then all your forces of the same number will be killed off like flies. How I managed to preserve my infantry was just taking a little time in organizing them into a lovely formation called the wedge formation. But what's actually unique with my tactic here is, I use cavalry as a heavy thrust in the wing of the Egyptian assault and my pilum behind locked in the gap of my wedges pluck off enemy units very effectivly. They keep throwing a shower of pilum on the Egyptians causing them to lose way more than me. The results show that this tactic for every 10 Egyptian units dead to my 1 Roman unit. Quite effective. This tactic in 0 AD is the same and I only used once to mitigate a greek assault only having 4 swordmen die to their 30.