light spear balance (vs. swords) in 1.2

[Slaists]

For a week or so, this thread has been developing in the main forum. The main point: it seems, that the EB developers have added +4 attack to all spear units to compensate for the -4 defense the light spear units suffer when fighting infantry; and -4 attack that spear units (not light spear) suffer when fighting other infantry.

No conclusive response from the development team has been expressed yet though.

My main concerns:

1. Why was such stat compensation designed in the first place? Weren't spears supposed to 'suffer' when fighting sword units for example? With the current balance, medium swords lose in one on one fight with the lower tier spear units.

2. Could it be that this compensation (+4 attack for light spear units) is a bug?

[Zett]

With the current balance, medium swords lose in one on one fight with the lower tier spear units.

Which levy spearunits? Hoplitai Haploi should be ok this way, but Lugoae shoudn't win in my opinion.

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

[Drewski]

For a week or so, this thread has been developing in the main forum. The main point: it seems, that the EB developers have added +4 attack to all spear units to compensate for the -4 defense the light spear units suffer when fighting infantry; and -4 attack that spear units (not light spear) suffer when fighting other infantry.

No conclusive response from the development team has been expressed yet though.

My main concerns:

1. Why was such stat compensation designed in the first place? Weren't spears supposed to 'suffer' when fighting sword units for example? With the current balance, medium swords lose in one on one fight with the lower tier spear units.

2. Could it be that this compensation (+4 attack for light spear units) is a bug?

This post is quite a coincidence , as I was just about to post a mini mod :)...

It is absolutely a bug. The values were adjusted when all the Spear Units were classes as "spear", and received -4 attack vs Infantry. When all the "Spear" units were changed to "Light_Spear", nobody bothered removing the +4 bonus. Hence now, Skirmishers (with a 2nd weapon light_spear) often have a better attack than Medium and even in some cases Heavy Infantry with Axes and Swords.

Its not just the traditional Spearman either. You'll find all the Phalanx Units have attr "Long_Pike AND Light_Spear" and thus have 4 higher attack than they should. This completely unbalances all Phalanx Units, (just check the EDU yourself, you'll find Levy Phalanxes have a better attack than Elite Swordsmen ). Its like they all start out with a Silver Chevron in attack...

Anyways:-

Mini Mod To Balance All Spear and Phalanx Units

All I've done is remove the erroneous +4 attack from Spears and Pikes.

Copy over the EDU in C:.....\EB\sp game edu backup to make it work for your current Campaign NOT the EDU in EB\DATA as the game reads from the backup file.

EDU zip

[Zett]

It is absolutely a bug. The values were adjusted when all the Spear Units were classes as "spear", and received -4 attack vs Infantry. When all the "Spear" units were changed to "Light_Spear", nobody bothered removing the +4 bonus. Hence now, Skirmishers (with a 2nd weapon light_spear) often have a better attack than Medium and even in some cases Heavy Infantry with Axes and Swords.

What about Hoplites? They have no Phalanx ability, removing their bonus would make them singnificant weaker. The engine can not represent their Hoplite fightingstyle, so they should get a +4 defence instead.

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

[Slaists]

This post is quite a coincidence , as I was just about to post a mini mod :)...

It is absolutely a bug. The values were adjusted when all the Spear Units were classes as "spear", and received -4 attack vs Infantry. When all the "Spear" units were changed to "Light_Spear", nobody bothered removing the +4 bonus. Hence now, Skirmishers (with a 2nd weapon light_spear) often have a better attack than Medium and even in some cases Heavy Infantry with Axes and Swords.

Its not just the traditional Spearman either. You'll find all the Phalanx Units have attr "Long_Pike AND Light_Spear" and thus have 4 higher attack than they should. This completely unbalances all Phalanx Units, (just check the EDU yourself, you'll find Levy Phalanxes have a better attack than Elite Swordsmen ). Its like they all start out with a Silver Chevron in attack...

Anyways:-

Mini Mod To Balance All Spear and Phalanx Units

All I've done is remove the erroneous +4 attack from Spears and Pikes.

Copy over the EDU in C:.....\EB\sp game edu backup to make it work for your current Campaign NOT the EDU in EB\DATA as the game reads from the backup file.

Attachment 60

Well, my original concern is that this might somehow NOT be a bug. Maybe the EB developers were trying to compensate for the anti-cavalry bonus that the "light spear" units lose (relative to the regular spear ones)...

as to vs. 'the other infantry': the situation is not that different now as it was when +4 attack was compensating for the attack lost (in my opinion, there should not have been a compensation in the first place; the spear units were supposed to be weaker against sword units): now, +4 attack compensates for -4 lost in defense (light spears vs. other infantry)...

so, my question still remains: why were they compensating in the first place?

[Drewski]

What about Hoplites? They have no Phalanx ability, removing their bonus would make them singnificant weaker. The engine can not represent their Hoplite fightingstyle, so they should get a +4 defence instead.

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

Here's a classic Hoplite with EB1.2

;333
type             hellenistic infantry hoplitai
dictionary       hellenistic_infantry_hoplitai      ; Hoplitai
category         infantry
class            spearmen
voice_type       General_1
soldier          hellenistic_infantry_hoplitai_hellenikoi, 40, 0, 1.22
officer          ebofficer_hellenic_officer
officer          ebofficer_hellenic_standardbearer
mount_effect     elephant -1
attributes       sea_faring, hide_forest
formation        0.7, 1, 1.6, 2.4, 4, square
stat_health      1, 1
stat_pri         14, 8, no, 0, 0, melee, simple, piercing, spear, 0 ,0.13
stat_pri_attr    light_spear
stat_sec         0, 0, no, 0, 0, no, no, no, none, 0 ,0.1
stat_sec_attr    no
stat_pri_armour  11, 8, 4, leather
stat_sec_armour  0, 0, flesh
stat_heat        3
stat_ground      0, 0, -2, -3
stat_mental      12, disciplined, highly_trained
stat_charge_dist 30
stat_fire_delay  0
stat_food        60, 300
stat_cost        1, 1367, 342, 80, 498, 1367

Thats a basic 14 attack against anything and 23 Def against other "Spear", 19 Def vs Inf and 31 Def vs Cavalry, and only 1367mnai to recruit, and 342 upkeep. Compare that to any Sword or Axe, and you need an Elite to get anywhere near 14 attack, with twice the upkeep and recruitment cost. So take away the +4 attack vs everything, and you have what is a well balanced low/medium cost allround unit. Good Def, and reasonable attack.
If you are going to start giving stuff like the Hoplite a better defence, to compensate for the better attack that it shouldn't have had in the first place (and remember this defence would work against everything) , then you'd better make it probably 40-50 % more expensive too, and a higher lvl of MIC to recruit.

Well, my original concern is that this might somehow NOT be a bug. Maybe the EB developers were trying to compensate for the anti-cavalry bonus that the "light spear" units lose (relative to the regular spear ones)...

as to vs. 'the other infantry': the situation is not that different now as it was when +4 attack was compensating for the attack lost (in my opinion, there should not have been a compensation in the first place; the spear units were supposed to be weaker against sword units): now, +4 attack compensates for -4 lost in defense (light spears vs. other infantry)...

so, my question still remains: why were they compensating in the first place?

#1 light_spear: Gives default bonus of +8 to defense vs cavalry, and penalty of -4 to defense vs. infantry. Offers less pushing power than spear.
#2 spear: Gives default bonus of +8 to attack vs cavalry, and penalty of -4 to attack vs. infantry. Offers more pushing power than light_spear. Units with "spear" attribute tend to lose cohesion and break lines (due to the extreme pushing power) with undesired results, so use is advised only with cohesive formations/attributes like short_pike, shield_wall, phalanx etc.

The "Spearmen type" units were apparently all type #2 Spear originally, and +4 attack was added to said unit types. But (see last part under#2) this was found to produce undesirable results , hence they were then all Changed to type #1 Light_spear. BUT this attack was never taken away, for one of two reasons.

1) They forgot
2) They decided to leave it in for "balance"???

1) Means its a bug
2) It screws up the Infantry/Spear balance completely, so its wrong whatever.

From the above #1 Light_Spear Still gets +8 Def vs Cavalry, which is a heck of a boost. It doesn't need any phantom extra attack. The extra def means they still should slaughter Cavalry, because they can stay in battle for so much longer without taking casualties.

Why the heck Creative Arts gave +8 attack to #2Spear vs Cavalry in the first place is beyond me. Spears are not an offensive counter to Horseborne troops, they are a defensive one, i.e to keep the Cavalry off the Infantry's backs. How on earth can men on foot ever chase down men on horseback in an offensive capability? ;)

[Zett]

the spear units were supposed to be weaker against sword units

Perhaps 1 vs. 1, but a spearunit can hit a swordnuit before it's able to attack. Also in a formation, like the Hoplitephalanx, there are no 1 vs. 1 fights (or should not be). They stand behind their shields and protect each other with shield and spears. I don't think that they would be (in this formation) weaker then swordunits.

And about the stats, it's right that Hoplites seem to be much better then for example Roman soldiers. But if you use a Hoplite army against a Polybian army you will see that they are balanced. You will notice that Hoplites break much faster then for example Princeps.



Thats because they have a higher morale. And remember, Hoplites need a level 3 MIC, Principes only a level 2. You could say that their higher costs are for their higher Morale.

How Slaists already said, it's the question if this is a bug or if it's part of the balance. Would be nice if someone from the EB team could say something to this topic.

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

Edit:



The KH needs a level 4 MIC to get similare morale (Thorakitai Hoplitai) like the Polybian Principes. The stats of this troops are better then the Princeps, but Thorakitai Hoplitai are some of the 'elite' troops of the KH.

[Drewski]

Perhaps 1 vs. 1, but a spearunit can hit a swordnuit before it's able to attack. Also in a formation, like the Hoplitephalanx, there are no 1 vs. 1 fights (or should not be). They stand behind their shields and protect each other with shield and spears. I don't think that they would be (in this formation) weaker then swordunits.

And about the stats, it's right that Hoplites seem to be much better then for example Roman soldiers. But if you use a Hoplite army against a Polybian army you will see that they are balanced. You will notice that Hoplites break much faster then for example Princeps.



Thats because they have a higher morale. And remember, Hoplites need a level 3 MIC, Princeps only a level 2. You could say that their higher costs are for their higher Morale.

How Slaists already said, it's the question if this is a bug or if it's part of the balance. Would be nice if someone from the EB team could say something to this topic.

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

Nice comparison post, but you as the player can compensate. The morale difference is tiny -seasons, general traits etc. all change the morale more than this. I honestly think (and no offence to you or anyone), that people have got used to fighting easier battles with spear/phalanx heavy unit composition than they should, because they all kill MUCH faster than they should.

Rome should be more dominant in the game (in the hands of the ai) than they currently are. Most of the time, if you play another faction Rome don't really go anywhere( But I haven't yet seen any significant changes how auto-resolve calculates things, that is ai on ai battles, that would make a huge change to the campaign map).

The hoplitai was becoming extinct at the time..from the EB unit info list

The classic Greek hoplite still uses the old Argive shield, spear, short sword and linothorax. Although surpassed by the times they can still be usefull in any battle line.

They really shouldn't be a killing machine.

[Zett]

You could say that their higher costs are for their higher Morale.

Outdated. Now Princeps (Polybian) cost 1185 mnai and Principes (Camillan) cost 1046 mnai. So they are cheaper then Hoplitai with 1367 mnai (which are now more expensive).

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

[Slaists]

How Slaists already said, it's the question if this is a bug or if it's part of the balance. Would be nice if someone from the EB team could say something to this topic.

Yup, it would be really nice if any of them responded to this thread. I guess, everyone's busy playing ETW, LOL...

While I understand the points Drewsky is making I am still not convinced the current attack scheme was not set in place for some balance reasons. Maybe due to same factors that we do not know about.

For example, Drewsky argues that +4 attack was given to all spear units to compensate for the -4 attack penalty they suffer against other infantry. Well, they were meant to 'suffer' in that department so +4 attack does not seem justified just by the aforementioned penalty.

[Zett]

I fought some costume battles against the AI, no outflanking, no great strategies, nearly no battlemanagement, grassland map, medium.

Koinon Hellenon (7 Hoplitai) vs. Romani (7 Principes Polybian)

#1 Koinon Hellenon vs. Romani (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#2 Koinon Hellenon vs. Romani (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#3 Koinon Hellenon (with guardmode on) vs. Romani (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#4 Romani vs. Koinon Hellenon (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#5 Romani vs. Koinon Hellenon (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#6 Romani (with guardmode on) vs. Koinon Hellenon

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Here are the replay files, put them into your Europabarorum1.2/EB/replays folder.

Hoplitai (#1,#2,#3) without guardmode had no chance, with guardmode pyric victory.
Principes (#4, #5, #6) won all 3 battles easely even with guardmode off.

So my opinion is, that Hoplites are no match (without support) for Principes, that's ok, they are outdated how Drewski already said. But remember, Principes are availabel at MIC level 2, Hoplitai at MIC level 3. Also Principes (Polybian) are with 1185 mnai cheaper then Hoplitai.

If you make them weaker that would be a problem for KH, who have no better standard line infantery, Thorakitai are even worser as line infantery. Thorakitai Hoplitai are only slightly better (higher morale) then Thorakitai. Whats left are the Epilektoi Hoplitai (high costs) or the Koinon Hellenon Phalangitai (only available after MoT). The KH really depends on these Hoplitai (before the MoT). At the moment they are just weak against Principes, but if you take them their bonuses, they would be even weaker. That's why I say, that they should stay as they are or get something in exchange (defence bonus, lower density).

As for the Phalangitai, I agree, they are overpowered in EB (my opinion) and should get a weaker attack, their Phalanx ability makes them still a good line infantery.

I'm not against your change Drewski (the opposite, I really think that the Phalanx units should get a weaker attack too). But as a KH Player I have to say, that Holites already perform weak against swordunits (especially Romani). Of course, a human player still has no problem with that and it's historical correct, but to make Hoplites even weaker as they are now (see the battleresults again) makes no sense for me.

My

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

[Drewski]

I fought some costume battles against the AI, no outflanking, no great strategies, nearly no battlemanagement, grassland map, medium.

Koinon Hellenon (7 Hoplitai) vs. Romani (7 Principes Polybian)

#1 Koinon Hellenon vs. Romani (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#2 Koinon Hellenon vs. Romani (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#3 Koinon Hellenon (with guardmode on) vs. Romani (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#4 Romani vs. Koinon Hellenon (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#5 Romani vs. Koinon Hellenon (AI)

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

#6 Romani (with guardmode on) vs. Koinon Hellenon

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Here are the replay files, put them into your Europabarorum1.2/EB/replays folder.

Hoplitai (#1,#2,#3) without guardmode had no chance, with guardmode pyric victory.
Principes (#4, #5, #6) won all 3 battles easely even with guardmode off.

So my opinion is, that Hoplites are no match (without support) for Principes, that's ok, they are outdated how Drewski already said. But remember, Principes are availabel at MIC level 2, Hoplitai at MIC level 3. Also Principes (Polybian) are with 1185 mnai cheaper then Hoplitai.

If you make them weaker that would be a problem for KH, who have no better standard line infantery, Thorakitai are even worser as line infantery. Thorakitai Hoplitai are only slightly better (higher morale) then Thorakitai. Whats left are the Epilektoi Hoplitai (high costs) or the Koinon Hellenon Phalangitai (only available after MoT). The KH really depends on these Hoplitai (before the MoT). At the moment they are just weak against Principes, but if you take them their bonuses, they would be even weaker. That's why I say, that they should stay as they are or get something in exchange (defence bonus, lower density).

As for the Phalangitai, I agree, they are overpowered in EB (my opinion) and should get a weaker attack, their Phalanx ability makes them still a good line infantery.

I'm not against your change Drewski (the opposite, I really think that the Phalanx units should get a weaker attack too). But as a KH Player I have to say, that Holites already perform weak against swordunits (especially Romani). Of course, a human player still has no problem with that and it's historical correct, but to make Hoplites even weaker as they are now (see the battleresults again) makes no sense for me.

My

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

Great post :)

I see what you mean totally, but (and this is just my opinion ) An Army of pure swordsmen, with excellent Armor, and who throw pilae too, should utterly destroy an Army of pure Spearmen who don't. In your battles, The Hoplitai killed 41% of the Principes (as an average). That's obviously because of the +4 attack. Losing 41% of your heavy Infantry, is a pretty Pyrrhic result too ;)

I don't think that comparing Rome in its ascendency, to KH in its decline (and last days) is really fair either. Rome should wipe the floor with KH (imho). They don't need to be "balanced" and made equal. Also the Hoplites would have a massive advantage in a similar staged battle, where you matched the Princepes against Heavy Cavalry, then the Hoplitai against same Heavy Cavalry.

Rome relies on its Infantry. KH has a more diverse array of weapons at its disposal. (but yes I still prefer Rome's ;))

I maybe agree that Hoplites (with 4 attack removed) might need a slight tweak elsewhere, but think its slightly unfair to compare them against Rome. Maybe against Epiros, Mak,or Arch Seluk, is a fairer comparison.

Glad we agree on the Phalanxes though, which again imo, fall into the "what were they thinking" category, they are so unbalanced.

Btw, I'm not some Rome junky either. I like playing all the factions, and think that some should be a lot weaker than others, that's part of the challenge :) I'm still quite new to EB btw, but a very old hand at RTR and modding bits and pieces in general....

[artavazd]

All units should not be balanced. Historicaly some units were just better than others. An armored swored unit is more flexible than an armored spear unit. Historicaly that is how ROme beat KH. They were more flexible. NOw KH can make use of Thesalyian Cav. When fighting against Rome. If it becomes a little more difficult for KH to face a Roman army, than that is better because it is more historicaly accurate.

[mcantu]

All units should not be balanced. Historicaly some units were just better than others. An armored swored unit is more flexible than an armored spear unit. Historicaly that is how ROme beat KH. They were more flexible. NOw KH can make use of Thesalyian Cav. When fighting against Rome. If it becomes a little more difficult for KH to face a Roman army, than that is better because it is more historicaly accurate.

i take 'balanced' to mean proportionally adjusted; not equal to...

[mosedavid]

hi, downloaded your file.................... makes since to me (!) but i got an error....i didnt write it down but it said 'couldnt find' some bit.. i'm using RTW era's edition. I'm assuming you made an error somewhere.

... i'll write it down later if you want but was mid flow so didnt want to have to start the campaign again

[Drewski]

hi, downloaded your file.................... makes since to me (!) but i got an error....i didnt write it down but it said 'couldnt find' some bit.. i'm using RTW era's edition. I'm assuming you made an error somewhere.

... i'll write it down later if you want but was mid flow so didnt want to have to start the campaign again

I'm sorry, I don't completely understand you (if you meant the file I adjusted)...can you restate your error and the problem you are having?.

Thanks.

[Drewski]

Anyone tried the Spears/Pikes fix? And if so, what have your impressions been?

Thanks.

[Ravenfeeder]

Haven't tried it yet. Is it save game compatible? How does this affect autoresolve?

[Zett]

Haven't tried it yet. Is it save game compatible? How does this affect autoresolve?

EDU (export_descr_unit) changes are savegame compatible.

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

[Revenant]

Anyone tried the Spears/Pikes fix? And if so, what have your impressions been?

Thanks.

I did.

Currently, I am playing as KH, so I am in the middle of it:)

So far the majority of my opponents, namely Macedonia, Pontos and AS are using mainly spear units too, so no much power shift here.

At the beginning, the strong unit are peltasts, because they are sword unit. They work like "baby legionnaries". Interesting are also Iphikratean Hoplites, because they have secondary sword and they have a bit better defence than peltasts.

But the most excellent unit are of course Thorakitai hoplitai. Not only they have decent stats and affordable upkeep/price, but they have armour piercing sword as their secondary weapon. Nice versatile unit with spear/ap sword combo.

Traditional infantry types like Hopliatai and even Epilektoi Hoplitai pale before mentioned units. But I used family members units (spartiates and Epilektoi BG) a lot and they performed well.

The same is with Thorakitai and maybe Thurephoroi, but i did not try any of the latter yet.

So the conclusion is, KH has units that can stand toe to toe against sword infantry, but it differs to unmodded version of EB, whre classical hoplitai were one of the most useful units.

Thats probably because opponents are using a lot of infantry here, if they were using cavalry instead, it would be another story.

Lately I tried Thorakitai Hoplitai vs. Hypaspists in SP to test them and they butchered macedonian elites with no mercy. The same case would probably be with even such units as roman principes or maybe even legionnaries, ap sword is really killer vs. well armoured infantry.

The conclusion is I like it. The only drawback is that AI probably do not use secondary weapons, so some units will be probably too weak when used by it. True, as somebody posted here before, KH should be a weak faction anyways.

Rev

[Zett]

The same case would probably be with even such units as roman principes or maybe even legionnaries, ap sword is really killer vs. well armoured infantry.

After all the Thorakitai Hoplitai are elites and you need a level 4 MIC to recruit them. Princeps are only medium infantery (available at level 2 MIC).

The Mod as far as I know didn't change the Thorakitai Hoplitai (ecxept removing the +4 attack bonus for spear attack). So the sword attack is the same as in vanilla EB.
If you fight against other Roman elites (such as Pedites Extraordinarii) you will see, that the Thorakitai Hoplitai are still a 'weak' elite unit.

The only drawback is that AI probably do not use secondary weapons, so some units will be probably too weak when used by it.

AFAIK if a soldier gets knocked down he will switch to his secondary weapon automaticly. So the Thorakitai Hoplitai would fight with swords (not all, but some of them).


Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

[Drewski]

Well I've tried a couple of major campaigns myself. First as Casse (who are just riduculously easy to play imo--take the British Isles at your leisure, then start mopping up Celts who have kindly weakened themselves/the slave settlements). Its surprising, how many Spear units are involved in Casse/Celt battles, but I liked how upper lvl sword units actually stood out from the pack a little (as they should), instead of taking heavy losses vs some levy spearmen.

Currently playing a Getai campaign (and jeez, are they hard to get going, and even to keep going). You're 4000 mnai in debt before you even reach a settlement to take! Anyways, persevered with it, and now have around 10 provinces, and of course I've been backstabbed by all three "Greek" nations on the peninsula. I can only afford two 3/4 stacks, and they are pretty banged up, just won 3 heroic victories with one army, all on the ai's turn.

The last couple of battles, against decent ai armies, really proved a point to me, that the ai is sometimes worse than clueless. It had a decent Cavalry/phalanx/hoplite/skirmisher mix and if it had just attacked even in a straight line, I would have been pretty screwed. But no, it lost a third of its men trying these crazy premature flanking attacks, e.g. the troops walk straight forward (quite missile proof) the turn sideways within never mind archer range, but javelin range. This results in most of the "flankers" dying before even getting to the flanks. Then it tries to charge its Cavalry at troops who aren't engaged in melee, which while getting a decent kill score from the charge, then results in their quick demise. Would it have been to difficult to code in to the ai "charge then back up, then charge again", and "hold the charge until your melee guys are engaged"? Especially if you have much superior numbers. Ho hum.

(Apologies for rant)

Did quite a bit of messing around with all the Steppe factions too (in my own game). Some of those generals/horse units have frankly ridiculous armor, so I toned them all down quite a bit. Also lowered the missile attack for most horse archers (a touch)..no-one in the world will ever convince me, that guys on horses with bows, are more accurate than guys with the same bows on foot. Its pure nonesense, but EB has that in it. And we all know that Horse Archer only armies are basically illegal ;).....don't remember any Steppe faction cutting a swathe across the world either....well not until around 1500 yrs later ;)

[jhhowell]

I've been using this minimod - thanks for doing the EDU edit and posting it! Can't really tell the difference, honestly, other than seeing more sensible attack numbers on the unit cards of hoplitai, etc. Late stage Romani, 150s BCE. Long standing low intensity war against the Lusotannan in western Gaul (Lusos now hold Brittany, Normandy, and the central province south of Normandy and east of Lemorisae - apologies for the weird mix of modern and EB names, that's how my memory works...). Since the Luso armies now consist entirely of Lugoae, some sort of Celtic shortswordsmen, and the usual Celtic slingers and archers, they get stomped regardless of the spear fix. Especially since they're usually attacking a bridge.

The Fourth Macedonian War was also not obviously affected by the mod, for similar reasons (I picked up Mytilene, Byzantion, Tylis, and Serdike, leaving them with the northernmost Thracian provinces). Maybe without the mod a hoplitai plus phalangitai deuteroi would have defeated a cohors reformata on the walls before a second cohort cut through to the other side of the phalangitai. But maybe not, and there were plenty more cohorts where those came from so the city was going to fall regardless.

Just started the First Mithridatic War (really, the Pontic king happens to be Mithridates Somebody-or-other! ), as might be guessed from acquiring Mytilene and Byzantion. Gotta love the campaign "AI"... Again, no obvious effects. Facing the front of a phalanx even in guard mode still costs men quickly even with the -4 from this mod. The other Pontic spearmen I've seen have been levies - in fact I can't think of any quality non-phalanx spearmen in their roster other than hoplitai. And cohors reformata ate hoplitai for lunch even without the -4 to the latter.

Probably the only way I'll see any difference in this campaign would be in fights against the Ptolemaioi. If I play that far, which is by no means certain (starting to grow bored, and hearing Baktria calling to me... ).

Steppe factions/HA: a steppe faction did cut a swathe across the world - Parthia. And I believe they really did have ridiculous armor... I know much less about them, but I gather the Saka also kicked serious butt in this period. Do horse archers have higher ranged attacks than the archers with the same bows (Scythian foot archers vs. Scythian horse archers, say)? I don't recall for certain from my Hai campaign back in 1.0, but I thought they had the same attack (5 or 6, can't recall which).

[Drewski]

I've been using this minimod - thanks for doing the EDU edit and posting it! Can't really tell the difference, honestly, other than seeing more sensible attack numbers on the unit cards of hoplitai, etc. Late stage Romani, 150s BCE. Long standing low intensity war against the Lusotannan in western Gaul (Lusos now hold Brittany, Normandy, and the central province south of Normandy and east of Lemorisae - apologies for the weird mix of modern and EB names, that's how my memory works...). Since the Luso armies now consist entirely of Lugoae, some sort of Celtic shortswordsmen, and the usual Celtic slingers and archers, they get stomped regardless of the spear fix. Especially since they're usually attacking a bridge.

The Fourth Macedonian War was also not obviously affected by the mod, for similar reasons (I picked up Mytilene, Byzantion, Tylis, and Serdike, leaving them with the northernmost Thracian provinces). Maybe without the mod a hoplitai plus phalangitai deuteroi would have defeated a cohors reformata on the walls before a second cohort cut through to the other side of the phalangitai. But maybe not, and there were plenty more cohorts where those came from so the city was going to fall regardless.

Just started the First Mithridatic War (really, the Pontic king happens to be Mithridates Somebody-or-other! ), as might be guessed from acquiring Mytilene and Byzantion. Gotta love the campaign "AI"... Again, no obvious effects. Facing the front of a phalanx even in guard mode still costs men quickly even with the -4 from this mod. The other Pontic spearmen I've seen have been levies - in fact I can't think of any quality non-phalanx spearmen in their roster other than hoplitai. And cohors reformata ate hoplitai for lunch even without the -4 to the latter.

Probably the only way I'll see any difference in this campaign would be in fights against the Ptolemaioi. If I play that far, which is by no means certain (starting to grow bored, and hearing Baktria calling to me... ).

Steppe factions/HA: a steppe faction did cut a swathe across the world - Parthia. And I believe they really did have ridiculous armor... I know much less about them, but I gather the Saka also kicked serious butt in this period. Do horse archers have higher ranged attacks than the archers with the same bows (Scythian foot archers vs. Scythian horse archers, say)? I don't recall for certain from my Hai campaign back in 1.0, but I thought they had the same attack (5 or 6, can't recall which).

Thanks for reply....I maybe did go a bit nuts on the Steppe armor, its just that it can't be properly represented in the RTW world. FM generals already can take ridiculous amounts of damage, Samartian ones are just completely silly in any players hands. With all that armor, charging around should make the horses tire very quickly (far more than they do), and make them loose effectiveness.

I just took all HA ranged attacks down by 1, to make their equiv foot soldiers slightly better. (in my latest personal experiment ;))...

Re Parthia, ok they annihilated Rome at Carrhae, but its a bit of a myth about their dominance over Rome. From wiki:-

The Battle of Carrhae was one of the first major battles between the Romans and Parthians. This battle also created the myth—both in Rome, Parthia, and today—that Rome's legions could not combat the Parthian army. This myth was not dispelled even when the Parthian capital was sacked twice. It was this belief that led Parthia to invade Syria and Armenia several times, usually unsuccessfully.

Parthia at its greatest extent :-

Yeah Ok, not bad, But I was thinking of this Steppe Empire ;)

[A Very Super Market]

Hoo boy. Its the mongols again. Yes, they had a large empire, but if you looked closer, you see that almost half of that empire is empty steppe. The gains in the Middle East and China are more impressive, but no real testaments to the mongols. The world at that time simply did not have an answer to horse archers, akin to trying to fight a helicopter gunship with assault rifles.

The mongols also lacked any real ability to govern the lands they conquered. There were not enough of them to keep the populace happy, nor were they especially good administrators. They simply slaughtered enough people to keep the rest at a low enough level and high enough fear to prevent rebellion. After Kublai Khan died, the empire quickly broke up into pieces, and disintegrated shortly afterwards. Only the vast imperialist domains of various European powers can be called great empires.

[Revenant]

After all the Thorakitai Hoplitai are elites and you need a level 4 MIC to recruit them. Princeps are only medium infantery (available at level 2 MIC).

The Mod as far as I know didn't change the Thorakitai Hoplitai (ecxept removing the +4 attack bonus for spear attack). So the sword attack is the same as in vanilla EB.
If you fight against other Roman elites (such as Pedites Extraordinarii) you will see, that the Thorakitai Hoplitai are still a 'weak' elite unit.


Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

In my experience, the Roman infantry is a bit stronger than they "should be", if you look at their price and MIC from where they are available. I understand that its because of limitation of their recruitment zone and also because they really were tough as nails.

My mentioning of Thorakitai Hoplitai was because of concern if Koinon has some solid line unit, I know the attack of sword was not changed. And they are good, not very expensive and versatile (spear + ap sword). That they cannot be compared to such units as Pedites is obvious

It just surprised me, how they wiped floor with Hypaspists... Probably because of spear modification (-4 att for Hypaspists and they sadly have spear as primary weapon)

Rev

[Zett]

Did quite a bit of messing around with all the Steppe factions too (in my own game). Some of those generals/horse units have frankly ridiculous armor, so I toned them all down quite a bit. Also lowered the missile attack for most horse archers (a touch)..no-one in the world will ever convince me, that guys on horses with bows, are more accurate than guys with the same bows on foot. Its pure nonesense, but EB has that in it. And we all know that Horse Archer only armies are basically illegal ;).....don't remember any Steppe faction cutting a swathe across the world either....well not until around 1500 yrs later ;)

I agree, but all steppe lovers will kill you for that. You better take a fast horse and keep yourself hidden in Britain or something thats far away from the steppes.

In my experience, the Romani infantry is a bit stronger than they "should be", if you look at their price and MIC from where they are available. I understand that its because of limitation of their recruitment zone and also because they really were tough as nails.

IMO Romans are with and without Drewski mod overpowered. But in vanilla EB it was in a way that was still ok. My main concern was, that this mod would make all sword factions (like Romani and the Celts) unbalanced. But was I heard so far, was that the balance is still ok. I mean, if the Lusotannan (a spear faction) are still able to take Gaul (sword and spear) then there is no problem for me (concerning the spear/sword balance, balance in general...we need a second spainfaction to balance the beige death).

It just surprised me, how they wiped floor with Hypaspists... Probably because of spear modification (-4 att for Hypaspists and they sadly have spear as primary weapon)

That's interesting. Hypaspistai have sword as primary weapon and spear as secondary, Thorakitai Hoplitai have spear as primary and sword as secondary. And still they beat up Hypaspistai? Would be nice if someone could make some costume battle tests with Hypaspistai and Thorakitai Hoplitai.

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam

[Drewski]

Hoo boy. Its the mongols again. Yes, they had a large empire, but if you looked closer, you see that almost half of that empire is empty steppe. The gains in the Middle East and China are more impressive, but no real testaments to the mongols. The world at that time simply did not have an answer to horse archers, akin to trying to fight a helicopter gunship with assault rifles.

The mongols also lacked any real ability to govern the lands they conquered. There were not enough of them to keep the populace happy, nor were they especially good administrators. They simply slaughtered enough people to keep the rest at a low enough level and high enough fear to prevent rebellion. After Kublai Khan died, the empire quickly broke up into pieces, and disintegrated shortly afterwards. Only the vast imperialist domains of various European powers can be called great empires.

Quite true, but then Alexander's empire hardly even outlasted the man himself aswell...anyways, this isn't the place to argue about an empire that was 1 and 1/2 millenia laster than the time frame of EB ;)

Edit: Also, the amount of people in China in 1250AD outweighed the whole population of Europe, so I don't know how that's not an Empire? Damn, Im arguing again...must...stop ;)

[bobbin]

The world at that time simply did not have an answer to horse archers, akin to trying to fight a helicopter gunship with assault rifles.

Not true at all, many of the emipires destroyed by the mongols had been fighting HA armies for centuries by that point (eg the turkic invasions of the middle east, china) or had HA/heavy calvary based armies themselves (Khwarezmids).

What really made them successful was excellent tactics, disipline and above all mobility, the mongols armies could move at up to 100 miles a day, a figure probably not matched until modern times.

Sorry for contuning th argument btw.

Anyway back on topic: has anyone on the EB team ever given an answer concerning the spear stats question?

[Zett]

No conclusive response from the development team has been expressed yet though.

I'm still waiting for some respones from the team. Alternatively we could post it in the bug thread and tease bovi with our question.

Ceterum censeo Romam esse delendam