EB Online EDU v2.1 - RELEASE!

[vartan]

Should be a 1 line fix.

You have amazing predictive powers.

[Lazy O]

Samnitici Milites are not in Romes roster.

[Kival]

Samnitici Milites are not in Romes roster.

That's exactly what we are speaking about?

[Lazy O]

I did not see what you guys were speaking about, Vega just asked the same thing yesterday :D

[antisocialmunky]

We're talking about this:
https://www.europabarbarorum.com/fac...ani_units.html

Which is actually reporting units from the release before the final EB release so while outdated, it still gives you a good idea what a roster SHOULD look like.

[Vega]

This is not maybe good thread to reply but is this possible, why in kolonion hellenon Epilektoi Hoplitai (Hellenic Distinguished Hoplites) have ATK 16 DEF 29 and Spartiatai Hoplitai (Spartan Hoplites) have ATK 16 DEF 28 and they are more expensive than Epilektoi I think that historicaly Spartan Hoplites are best greek unit ever trained :DD

[Ludens]

I think that historicaly Spartan Hoplites are best greek unit ever trained

Well, in the land of the blind...

Until after the Peloponnesian war, the Spartans were the only-city state with a full-time army. With the exception of some elite forces (the Theban Sacred Band is the best known, but there were others) all other hoplites were part-time warriors. The reason the Spartans could do this is because their citizens did not have to farm or attend to business. They had helots to do that for them.

However, because of constant warfare and increasingly sophisticated government, other Greek city states began to acquire experienced, full-time warriors as well. And from that point onwards, the Spartans suddenly look a lot less invisible. After the defeats at Leuctra and Mantinea, the Messenian helots were freed, and the Spartans could no longer their full-time army or their agoge.

Also, they were never quite invisible to start with: the battle of the champions shows that 300 picked Argives were quite a match for an equal number of picked Spartans. In other words: the cream of the Spartan hoplite-force wasn't any stronger than that of other powerful city states: Sparta's superiority lay in their rank-and-file, not the top-end. Off course, by the time EB starts, Sparta is still a powerful city-state with a proud culture, but they no longer had the monopoly on (or even a large number of) full-time hoplite-soldiers.

In EB, the Spartan hoplite simply represent the regional equivalent of the Epilektoi: a city's brightest and best, equipped with the finest arms and armour that money can buy. The only difference is their culture (morale bonus) and the fact that Spartans were an old-fashioned Pylos helmet. Hence the -1 armour.

I agree there is, at the moment, no point in preferring Spartans over ordinary Epilektoi; but the reasoning for not making them supermen is sound.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

In EB, the Spartan hoplite simply represent the regional equivalent of the Epilektoi: a city's brightest and best, equipped with the finest arms and armour that money can buy. The only difference is their culture (morale bonus) and the fact that Spartans were an old-fashioned Pylos helmet. Hence the -1 armour.

I agree there is, at the moment, no point in preferring Spartans over ordinary Epilektoi; but the reasoning for not making them supermen is sound.

Spartans also possess better stamina than Epilektoi. But yes Vega, make these posts in the edu threads.

[Vega]

I didnt tell you to make superemns of them but spartans must be stronger than that elite army, why should they be more expenisve than them when they are weaker... its look that spartans is uselles in this game...

[gamegeek2]

I hope people noticed that I fixed the mistakes that I said there were...unless i didnt fix kluddargos...

Commentaries on the specific changes? I should be able to answer them within a few days to a week.

Spartans stamina advantage makes them very very good...heavy armor plus very good stamina is hard to come by.

[Kival]

AP twohanders were statistically very overpowered. The change was necessary if we were to implement the elite size increase. Rhomphaiaphoroi regularly rack up over 200 kills on large size still, and Kluddargos use a statistically identical weapon (in the new EDU).

I´d like to hear some commentary on other major changes, particularly on cavalry secondaries and elite size increases.

I'd propose not to increase the size of the two-handed-swordsmen but give them ap. Their unit description fairly directly state their weapons as AP-weapons. Whereas the two-handed-swordsmen have their use without AP, Drapanai and co are useless now and can't see any reason why their weapon which are meant to be ap-weapons should not be ap-weapons.

[antisocialmunky]

Yeah, they should finally be big enough of a unit to do something now lol.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I hope people noticed that I fixed the mistakes that I said there were...unless i didnt fix kluddargos...

Commentaries on the specific changes? I should be able to answer them within a few days to a week.

Spartans stamina advantage makes them very very good...heavy armor plus very good stamina is hard to come by.

I'm backing up the Drapanai being useless now. They need ap back.

[vartan]

I hope people noticed that I fixed the mistakes that I said there were...unless i didnt fix kluddargos...

Look into it when you come back from the trip. You told me I should let people know not to use the Lugii and the Kluddargos.

EDIT: I understand recent concerns. In fact, I think it was a compromise between would you like your unit smaller but with AP and higher stats or larger with slightly lowered stats (if at all) and possibly an AP removal. Not for all units, of course. This was something for elites and falxes and some others I think. For instance, notice that there is no longer a limit on the Bastarnae Falxmen. This is why. That AP trait does make a big difference though, and it could prove quite unfortunate not to have it on some units.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Look into it when you come back from the trip. You told me I should let people know not to use the Lugii and the Kluddargos.

EDIT: I understand recent concerns. In fact, I think it was a compromise between would you like your unit smaller but with AP and higher stats or larger with slightly lowered stats (if at all) and possibly an AP removal. Not for all units, of course. This was something for elites and falxes and some others I think. For instance, notice that there is no longer a limit on the Bastarnae Falxmen. This is why. That AP trait does make a big difference though, and it could prove quite unfortunate not to have it on some units.

Well the main concern with Drapanai and Bastarnae is that they are not elites and yet still lost the ap attribute. Their unit size was not increased to compensate a la Thracian Elites, and while I believe the attack was modified some bit, it still doesn't seem to matter much against armored opponents. The armor piercing attack was much more important to these units than the extra 2 or 3 attack they received.

I understand the concern that the Bastarnae in particular were considered OP, being readily available as mercs to some factions, but increasing cost would go a long ways towards fixing that rather than changing the unit itself. These two units in particular were always somewhat risky plays as they died in droves to any sort of missile attack. However, their tangible upside was clear. If an opponent spent all their missiles or did not think to use them on these units, then they would play a very important role on the battlefield. As it is now, they play a much, much smaller role while still having the obvious weakness.

[vartan]

I have to agree with that viewpoint, because making it so that neglecting the enemy's falxmen can prove fatal to your cause is probably one of the more exciting possibilities there ever was with regard to falxmen in the first place. Non-AP falxmen sound simply like better swordsmen to me.

[antisocialmunky]

It would be nice if rhomphs got their AP back. Getai is now quiet dull. They weren't broken or imba except for the fact that they could take a charge to the face and live.

The change was kinda a weird one that not a whole lot of people really wanted as far as I know.

[vartan]

Two questions for both gamegeek2 upon arrival as well as everyone else now:

1. What do you think about SPQR bringing more than 1 First Cohort to the field? Is that problematic?
2. Should SPQR not be able to hire mercenary phalangites? Does their mixing with Roman cohorts become problematic?

Thanks.

[Lazy O]

1.No

2.Its kinda wierd that Imperial and Marian troops fight alongside them, ahistorical IMO, but not problematic.

[Kival]

I would agree. The "problem" wiht imperial troops is just that they cost nothing compared to their heavy armour but one has to accept that I think. It's also ahistorical to use no cav at all with them etc. but it should not be forbidden.

[Lazy O]

They do not have enough armor to make up for their pitiful attack.

[-Stormrage-]

, Come get your 3 in 1 package now, it comes fullly equiped with roman cohorts , gallic soldiers AND PHALANXES. :D

[Kival]

They do not have enough armor to make up for their pitiful attack.

11 attack with 0,15 lethality from 100 (!) men is not that bad. They have AP-Javelins etc. Surely they are not good for fast killing but they are nearly unbreakable for such low costs.

[-Stormrage-]

why dont normal skirmishers have AP or atleast more attack?

[Kival]

We have spoken about that before stormrage...

[-Stormrage-]

we did but i didnt get a satisfying answer, they are still worthless

[antisocialmunky]

They do not have enough armor to make up for their pitiful attack.

Its alright now that stamina and lethality are all tweaked up.

[Lazy O]

Why in bloody hell do Roman archers have 10 armor?? Arent they supposed to be carbon copies of the Syrians?

[Kival]

Why in bloody hell do Roman archers have 10 morale?? Arent they supposed to be carbon copies of the Syrians?

They have very different stats so I don't think they are supposed to be copies of Syrian Archers (what is a carbon copy?).

[-Stormrage-]

Why in bloody hell do Roman archers have 10 armor?? Arent they supposed to be carbon copies of the Syrians?

I agree 100% , romans imperial archers are way overpowered, i dont know about you but rome was famous for having a superior infantry force, giving them superior archers as well is overdoing it. The imperial roman archers dont even have a sheeild and they can last ina fight with the best sheilded EB Archers, they are tanks. I brought 8 slingers each with one chevron as saba, i made 4 slingers shoot at 1 imperial archer the other 4 shot at another, they got 3 kills (1 volley) WOW, i'm sure no one will think there is anyhting wrong with that, no thats completly natural right.Imperials were historically armoured tanks that got 3 kills when 240 stones were getting hurled at them at (insert LARGE number here)/mph