You mean the several other times you made a thread about them?

It was not that important in this period but they should be present. Minor faction. Maybe playable?

But without CA statement about this topic there is not much to debate.

​

NemoTheElf101#1472 wrote:

You mean the several other times you made a thread about them?

You know .. you're right!

Strange thing that .. just when one starts a conversation ... it suddenly comes to an abrupt end.

No one knows why .. one of life's great mysteries I guess. :)

​

Loreguy#1056 wrote:

It was not that important in this period but they should be present. 

But without CA statement about this topic there is not much to debate.

You jest. So there's this game set in specific period of history, it's called PHAROAH: Total War

The Pharoah of the period, son of Rameses the Great (arguably one of Egypt's greatest rulers along with Thutmose III) made a monument, a monument to celebrate his alleged victories .. including over ISRAEL. 

Did he  / any Pharoah, Hittite king, etc from the period mention victory much less engagement with Lullubi, Igihalkid, Sutu, Shubru, Ithaca, Bоeotians, Thrace, Ithaca, Malidiya, Baharia, etc?

No, yet these factions have been included as playable factions and Israel omitted.

Further with the expansion of the game into later dates it's worth considering scholars like Eric Cline have stated Egypt had withdrawn from Canaan by 1140 BCE and the vacuum was filled by  ... you guess it ... ISRAEL.

At the heart / cross-roads of the Bronze Age world we have recorded historic factions that are omitted. 

Canaan .. where a signifcant amount of action happened, was fundamentally important.

​Hebrew Kingdom's importance during the era of Ramesses III lies in its strategic position but they were not a major power. Minor faction is fine.

​

Psycho_V#4329 wrote:

​

NemoTheElf101#1472 wrote:

You mean the several other times you made a thread about them?

You know .. you're right!

Strange thing that .. just when one starts a conversation ... it suddenly comes to an abrupt end.

No one knows why .. one of life's great mysteries I guess. :)

​

Loreguy#1056 wrote:

It was not that important in this period but they should be present. 

But without CA statement about this topic there is not much to debate.

You jest. So there's this game set in specific period of history, it's called PHAROAH: Total War

The Pharoah of the period, son of Rameses the Great (arguably one of Egypt's greatest rulers along with Thutmose III) made a monument, a monument to celebrate his alleged victories .. including over ISRAEL. 

Did he  / any Pharoah, Hittite king, etc from the period mention victory much less engagement with Lullubi, Igihalkid, Sutu, Shubru, Ithaca, Bоeotians, Thrace, Ithaca, Malidiya, Baharia, etc?

No, yet these factions have been included as playable factions and Israel omitted.

Further with the expansion of the game into later dates it's worth considering scholars like Eric Cline have stated Egypt had withdrawn from Canaan by 1140 BCE and the vacuum was filled by  ... you guess it ... ISRAEL.

 

At the heart / cross-roads of the Bronze Age world we have recorded historic factions that are omitted. 

Canaan .. where a signifcant amount of action happened, was fundamentally important.

The game's been out for a couple years now, with no mention of their inclusion or even presence in the map, roster, or events. That's the main reason why they're not really discussed, that and there isn't much of a demand to have them in the game.

Like it's just that simple. Stick in the Canaanites with a monotheistic religious system and maybe the Amazons' homeland mechanic and that's really all it could amount towards. It be fun but it's not really what people want.

​

Darios#5306 wrote:

I personally would love to see the Habiru in the game. However, the fact that CA hasn't mentioned them at all seems rather telling.

Ultimately, they're either going to completely avoid the subject (I personally think that's dumb but they did completely omit the rise of Islam in Total War Attila - the Al Andalus faction in AoC was a lame cop out) or they're being saved for a DLC down the line. 

At least take comfort from the thought that CA reads this forum and I am certain that they are very aware that there are some fans who are interested in seeing the Habiru.

Cheers Darios.

We do have little bands of Habiru (rebels) in game.

However .. two points. First, the term is a generic term for a social group (of which the Hebrews of Israel constituted a major part from the mid 13th C BCE in Canaan / Amarna period). Second, the use of the term had almost ceased by the game's period. The last recorded instance was by Rameses IV in 1140 BCE in reference to slaves quarring in Wadi-Hammamat. It is more than a coincidence the mention of Habiru slaves / rebels is replaced by the term Israel from the late 13th century with Israel becoming the dominate force in the region from 1140 BCE, according to scholars like Cline. 

With regard to Attila, I believe the game's end date was 450 CE (please correct me if I'm wrong). If that be the case, the rise of Islam would be regrettably (as I too would love to play the period) out of scope (Prophet (ﷺ) born in 570 CE). MTW and MTWII both imho, did a reasonable job of depicting the various Islamic factions, politics and religion, albeit a little light on the culture.. especially the golden age of Al Andalus under the Umayyads. But key point here, CA didn't omitted them, label them something like 'infidel' or 'muslims'. They were afforded their contemporary name and the repect warranted.

​

Psycho_V#4329 wrote:

​

Darios#5306 wrote:

I personally would love to see the Habiru in the game. However, the fact that CA hasn't mentioned them at all seems rather telling.

Ultimately, they're either going to completely avoid the subject (I personally think that's dumb but they did completely omit the rise of Islam in Total War Attila - the Al Andalus faction in AoC was a lame cop out) or they're being saved for a DLC down the line. 

At least take comfort from the thought that CA reads this forum and I am certain that they are very aware that there are some fans who are interested in seeing the Habiru.

Cheers Darios.

We do have little bands of Habiru (rebels) in game.

However .. two points. First, the term is a generic term for a social group (of which the Hebrews of Israel constituted a major part from the mid 13th C BCE in Canaan / Amarna period). Second, the use of the term had almost ceased by the game's period. The last recorded instance was by Rameses IV in 1140 BCE in reference to slaves quarring in Wadi-Hammamat. It is more than a coincidence the mention of Habiru slaves / rebels is replaced by the term Israel from the late 13th century with Israel becoming the dominate force in the region from 1140 BCE, according to scholars like Cline. 

With regard to Attila, I believe the game's end date was 450 CE (please correct me if I'm wrong). If that be the case, the rise of Islam would be regrettably (as I too would love to play the period) out of scope (Prophet (ﷺ) born in 570 CE). MTW and MTWII both imho, did a reasonable job of depicting the various Islamic factions, politics and religion, albeit a little light on the culture.. especially the golden age of Al Andalus under the Umayyads. But key point here, CA didn't omitted them, label them something like 'infidel' or 'muslims'. They were afforded their contemporary name and the repect warranted.

I'm not referring to the Grand Campaign, but the fact that Attila ultimately did not release a campaign DLC taking place during the reign of Heraclius. It was one of those things that quite a few folks were really clamoring for. Al Andalus in the AoC campaign was CA trying to avoid touching the Roman/Sassanid wars with the Rashidun Caliphate. My guess was that the subject touched a bit too closely to modern day religious conflict and the proverbial clash of civilizations.

The devs might be ignoring Israel in Pharaoh for similar reasons. However, I would also argue that I would prefer to see Israel depicted as a DLC faction with serious research and unique mechanics put into it rather than just another random Canaanite minor faction coming with the next update. We'll see what happens!

​

Darios#5306 wrote:

I'm not referring to the Grand Campaign, but the fact that Attila ultimately did not release a campaign DLC taking place during the reign of Heraclius. It was one of those things that quite a few folks were really clamoring for. Al Andalus in the AoC campaign was CA trying to avoid touching the Roman/Sassanid wars with the Rashidun Caliphate. My guess was that the subject touched a bit too closely to modern day religious conflict and the proverbial clash of civilizations.

The devs might be ignoring Israel in Pharaoh for similar reasons. However, I would also argue that I would prefer to see Israel depicted as a DLC faction with serious research and unique mechanics put into it rather than just another random Canaanite minor faction coming with the next update. We'll see what happens!

True, I hate political revisionism with a passion.

You're not the only one to suggest a full DLC for Israel.

It may well be the best option, both for gameplay, financially and politically for CA.

​

Psycho_V#4329 wrote:

​

True, I hate political revisionism with a passion.

And yet you ask for the inclusion of a faction that didn't exist during the Bronze Age Collapse but rose as a result of it.

​

We’ll that’s it then

‘Dynasties’ is the final addition to the title

I don’t even know where to begin 🤦🏾‍♂️

I appreciate that at least CA told us that this will be the final addition to the title, so we won't have to spend the rest of the year speculating on future content.

​

Darios#5306 wrote:

I appreciate that at least CA told us that this will be the final addition to the title, so we won't have to spend the rest of the year speculating on future content.

For sure. The endless posts about Mythos/Israel/Elam/Siberian Hunter-Gatherers were getting annoying. 

Take it easy folks.