3.4 EDU - SUGGESTIONS

[NacroxNicke]

Against sweboz if something of you routes, and another division sees that unit routing, then you are basically fucked because the fear effect is so enormous that it will make chain rout instantly if the player can manage to charge just when the other unit routed

Well, that's what barbarians are for :D

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I'd argue thats Casse instead of Sweboz. Sweboz grind you down and eventually eat you away in melee because they refuse to rout. Sorta like the same concept as Koinon Hellenon but without any armor which is strange but true.

[vartan]

Watch the language. This isn't a chat room.

[-Stormrage-]

Watch the language. This isn't a chat room.

agreed. and even if it were a chatroom... That word is related to a mental picture, and i dont like having that picture pop into my head. Its like an ambush, innocent piece of writing and then poof.

[antisocialmunky]

Don't make me throw a shoe at you.

[The Celtic Viking]

Having inferior stamina and a higher cost while otherwise being identical with Bataroas makes the Golberi Curoas a completely useless unit. IMO you should make them slightly superior to but also slightly more expensive than regular Bataroas.

Or at least make them identical to Bataroas to give a less clone-army option for the Gauls.

[Lazy O]

Do they not wear mail?

[gamegeek2]

Where did that idea originate, that they wear mail? Was it when unarmoured barbs received a +1 armor bonus and people didn't understand why Golberi Curoas had 6 armour?

[Lazy O]

Wierd; the black stuff looked like mail to me :D

[The Celtic Viking]

They do seem to have cheek guards though, which Bataroas seem not to have. Is that why they had +1 armour compared to them?

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Nah, they have nifty capes. Definitely +1 armor for those.

[The Celtic Viking]

Drat, I knew it was one or the other. That would explain why Dracula always wears one, too.

[Kival]

Give Kopis AP back! I was severely shocked when I heard they lost AP...

[Arjos]

Controversial suggestion: costing and statting equipment based instead of tiers...

Should give more accurate compositions: for example no iron clad gallic armies or overpriced light troops...

[Kival]

Controversial suggestion: costing and statting equipment based instead of tiers...

You mean stronger based on equipment instead of tiers. To stat and cost only based on equipment would be silly and it's also already based on equipment it's just that tier has a stronger influence. Anyway that cannot be a Suggestion for 3.4, that would be a 4.0 or something similar.

[The Celtic Viking]

Controversial suggestion: costing and statting equipment based instead of tiers...

Should give more accurate compositions: for example no iron clad gallic armies or overpriced light troops...

No iron-clad Gallic armies = two new Sweboz.

[Arjos]

For example: what makes Arjos cheaper than Solduros?
Or Gaisatoi so pricy? Same thing for unarmoured archers...

Right now it's partially based on equipment and a lot more on stats...

You mean stronger based on equipment instead of tiers.

Yes to statting, for example defense skills related to how heavy a unit is; plus the historical recorded fighting skills...
But for pricing imo, it should be about food, stipends, resources, materials and manufacturing...

No iron-clad Gallic armies = two new Sweboz.

Considering how Swebozez armies in MP atm are: BGs and merc BGs, plus Lugiones; no not really...

only based on equipment would be silly

Never meant that way and you know it! :P

[The Celtic Viking]

Okay, let me restate it then: no iron-clad Gallic armies = two new Saba lacking elephants. Better?

My point is if you take away their armour you take away their playability.

[Arjos]

My point is if you take away their armour you take away their playability.

Every faction would reflect the same policy and it would be accurate to have more unarmoured units in overall on the field...
All I'm saying is: those all heavy infantry armies are too gamey, this for any faction even Karthadast...
Exception would be late republican and imperial Roma, which imo shouldn't have 90-100 men or 60 cavalrymen in the first place...
These could be limited to 10 legionary units for example (keeping the current men per unit) or reducing the n° of soldiers...
For example steppe factions would end up with yes lots of unarmoured HAs (they can already), but at the same time less heavy infantry and cavalry...

[Vlixes]

Well, if there is a way to take away spear as secondary weapon for Xosenthosez Xazdadoi and Dreugulozez Brunjadoi I will be very happy. Spear in melee is not even close to the effect of the longsword. I mean, these (but also another heavy units like Briton late champions) tend to use the secondary weapon when you order to use the primary. You can click attack to get back the longswords, but that you can forget and makes your micro more problematic, and for no good reason.

[Lazy O]

If we go by armored suggestion like 5 units of every faction would have armor ( armor, not necessarily metal ) , and roman legionaries would cost upwards of 2500 if we take all that training and armor into account . Aside from that, it would completely *******k the game balance and everyone would spam gaesate . Essentially, Saba will be balanced once again, because everyone else will be just like them .

[Arjos]

it would completely *******k the game ... Saba will be balanced once again, because everyone else will be just like them .

Instead we go for the gamey hollywood style armies?

everyone would spam gaesate.

They have high quality helmets, longswords, gold torques, bracelets, thureos and are mercs, so they wouldn't be cheap...
I'd still restat them with higher defense and attack skills, little less armour maybe or cut the additional HP...

But frankly 2.7k for 60 men seems a lot... For example during the Telamon campaign there should have been 30.000 of them, some must have been mounted and other poorer or younger, but still atm in MP you can't get any way near a fraction of it...
One could see the "real" Gaisatoi in the Uirodusios and the Gaesatae being "champions", but still what's making them cost so much? All the Galatikoi hired by the Ptolemaioi asked as much money as all the rest... Chiefs would get a larger share, but that's like 40 individuals out of thousands... Iirc Polybios speaks of wages/hire instead of mercenaries, so it was more of a payment to the leaders (in order to make them join the war) and then they would deal with the distribution of the loot among their men...

[Lazy O]

The real word is boring , we do not like it .


/Discussion

[capomafioso]

Well, if there is a way to take away spear as secondary weapon for Xosenthosez Xazdadoi and Dreugulozez Brunjadoi I will be very happy. Spear in melee is not even close to the effect of the longsword. I mean, these (but also another heavy units like Briton late champions) tend to use the secondary weapon when you order to use the primary. You can click attack to get back the longswords, but that you can forget and makes your micro more problematic, and for no good reason.

agreed, can we also sort this out for galations aswell, i dont know why theyd want to use spears instead of their nice shiny longswords


also kival i was also quite shocked that kopis didnt have ap anymore, but after playing with the edu for a while now i agree with it quite happily, AP kopis was taken out for a reason, i dont know what it was....but it seems to be good so we should stick with it

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

I disagree with removing the spear from some units. Galatian spears, Arjos and the Germanic Bg's plus nobles are all crazily effective for their price, spear or no spear. If any units needed the removal of the spear, it would be Solduros and Hypaspists. The reasons are these. Those two units are very expensive as 80 man elites and while they have immense staying power, they don't have the best killing power. Galatian Spears and Arjos are already the two finest infantry units one can use at around 2000 mnai. Just look at any Arvernian, AS or Pontic armies and you will usually find 4 of these. Units that are already used so heavily clearly need no editing.

Also, take a look at the formation of Galatians and Arjos. They should be using spears as they are packed so tightly together. I'd imagine the longsword would be for when the formation is cracked.

Also @ Arjos - Sweboz can bring a max of 6 armored infantry, 2 of those being undermanned bodyguards and their elites being 70 men. If they bring all that, its likely they can't afford their elite cavalry and need to go light or no cavalry instead. 2/3 of a Sweboz army (more like 3/4 in terms of numbers of men) will have an armor rating of 6 or lower no matter how many armored infantry you take. They don't play like Gauls at all as you have to be VERY careful around horse archers and most foot archers.

[Arjos]

Also @ Arjos - Sweboz can bring a max of 6 armored infantry, 2 of those being undermanned bodyguards and their elites being 70 men.

Make that 8, since the BGs cost less than 2.5k, plus 4 armoured cav: Marxolitho Wolxiskod and Xosenthōzez Marxoreidondijoi...
Again the tier system allows lots of weird things, it needs to be tweaked imo...

Re "losing spears": that's absurd as Rob pointed out the spear and the shield-wall were the main weapons, swords were most of all a status symbol and used in extremis for those elite units...

[gamegeek2]

How can the sweboz bring 4 armored cavalry? Tier system strictly limits them to two.

BTW I am raising some numbers for Germanic units in the next update, such as Zemjones and Chatti Clubmen; I'm also cutting javelin attacks to 9 (for those with 10) and raising the numbers of ammo for some units (sucj as Korodrougos)

[Vlixes]

Make that 8, since the BGs cost less than 2.5k, plus 4 armoured cav: Marxolitho Wolxiskod and Xosenthōzez Marxoreidondijoi...
Again the tier system allows lots of weird things, it needs to be tweaked imo...

Re "losing spears": that's absurd as Rob pointed out the spear and the shield-wall were the main weapons, swords were most of all a status symbol and used in extremis for those elite units...

If that's true, then is incoherent with so many units using longswords in the game. Just take a look at the Sweboz roster. Nonsense. IF that's true, again, then all those units must get rid of the longsword. If that's not true, which seems to be the case, then allow them to use their letal longswords as the more cheap and less trained inf. It's quite absurd that the best infantry of an army must battle with such a non-shock non-line-inf weapon. This units used to battle in the center, and they use spears for that? Frankly, nonsense. I've tesed their effect with the longsword (unsubstantial clicking everytime they got spears) and is absolutely different. They have much more killing power and can stand vs well armoured inf units with longswords (and not neccesarily with the same armo number as them, also lower than theirs). I don't see any reason for not taking out the handicaping spears. Finally, this will be not a problem if those units were not bugged. So, what was the initial intention with them? Clearly, to use their longswords as much as they like. The game is just bugged.

[Vlixes]

How can the sweboz bring 4 armored cavalry? Tier system strictly limits them to two.

BTW I am raising some numbers for Germanic units in the next update, such as Zemjones and Chatti Clubmen; I'm also cutting javelin attacks to 9 (for those with 10) and raising the numbers of ammo for some units (sucj as Korodrougos)

That's nice. But why are you cutting jav attack? That implies all units with an increase of armour? Or all units no matter if they have an increase of armour?

[gamegeek2]

I just looked at the Sweboz' javelin range and their javelin attack and thought they didn't line up well.