Watchman's take on units (and sundry) for EB with BI.exe

[Watchman]

MIA for now while I work on a new version, to avoid confusion.

[Dooz]

Very cool, thanks. Do you know if these are save-game compatible perchance?

[Watchman]

Should be, far as I know. Or at least unit stat and description alterations have thus far always been, as were for example the slight recruitement changes to the Hai top-level barracks at Armavir when I tested that one (with add_money and process_cq in the course of a campaign; I often run that test just to see what troops a province can potentially produce so I know what kind of gov I really want there and what levels of MICs I'll be wanting to dole out the dough for down the road). Can't say I have actually *tested* the added health/healer buildings, but logic dictates they should be equally kosher.

[Dumbass]

Cool mod. Any chance of asking MarcusAureliusAntonius if you can incorporate it ino his city mod?

[Watchman]

Ehh... it so happens I forgot one wee little detail about my personal edition of the EDU - namely the altered projectile type I gave certain three missile units. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa; Ich bin ein Berliner Würst.

EB comes with a neat lead slinghsot model which for some reason isn't used you see, and I thought this was a waste and modded the Sphendonetai and Shuban Fradakshana to have it - these two because AFAIK they used lead shot historically, and because aside from the Balearics who specifically use bigger rocks than the norm they're the best two types of slinger (albeit the crazy range of the Celtic slingers weirds me out - maybe they're just big and strong enough guys to get that kind of mileage or something?).

Now, getting this to work required adding entries to the export_projectile.txt and export_projectile_new.txt (I modified both because I frankly had no clue which one would have been enough), a fair bit of trial and error through -show_err CTD messages, and ultimately making renamed copies of the missile model files.

I also made the Goidilic dart guys use the BI plumbata model for their projectiles. I've yet to actually test it in practice, but as I followed the same steps that worked with the lead shot it should be OK.

Anyway, unless you have the appropriate modified files you're going to get a CTD the second you start a battle involving any of the three unit types mentioned. I know this from experience.

*sigh* Time to make a revised edition I guess. Might as well fix a few things I forgot from the EDU (like warcry to the Bastarnoz) and add the modified descr_sounds_units_fire.txt I made after reading Dol Guldur's clever slinger sound fix idea.

[Watchman]

That aside, Marcus can freely use it in his minimod as far as I'm concerned. It's not like I owned any part of the game or something, or that the modifications I've made were particularly complicated or demanding - more like tedious really. If my obsessive nitpicking over details saves someone else time and effort, so much the better.

[Watchman]

Right, version 2 is up. Bigger and better than before too.

I tested the Laecha and their fancy darts. Well, an sich it worked well enough - except they threw the damn things butt first. As what the models have in their hands when they prepare to throw look mostly like javelins, I altered the unit to just toss those instead. If nothing else the fletching of the arrows would be a bit jarring contrast when it suddenly appears.

Have fun, and if something odd comes up do tell.

[Thorlof]

Interesing mod.Very similar to my mod but a lot of difference.

[Watchman]

Right now I'm trying to run some tests to see if some of the worrisome things I've read concerning unit terrain bonuses are indeed true, and also for BI 1.6. If they are I'll probably have to make a v3...

Also, I've been wondering if the "power_charge" unit attribute in BI could be useful for something. We'll see.

[xchen08]

Hey, this looks interesting, but I have a few questions.

1) Is this save game compatible? I already use the first cohort minimod, but if any additional units beyond those were added, I suppose it would not be.

2) Are the stat changes done in a specific pattern? I generally avoid stat change minimods because they tend to be unbalancing, and the EB stat people apparently worked from a specific system that assigned points.

3) Does the addition of shield wall unbalance hoplite type troops? I've read somewhere that shieldwall adds to the defense of a unit, so if unit stats remain the same, the units now become more powerful, in the same way that the phalanx attribute makes units more powerful in melee.

Thanks for any answers

[Watchman]

I don't recall adding any units, and as mentioned before simple alterations to the EDU and EDB should be compatible.

Stat changes followed certain specific patterns in my head and what amounts to common sense for me (ie. YMMV), but I won't vouch a thing for what they might do for balance. On the other hand, the Klerouchion Agema were still a crap deal for more money than regular Pezhetairoi IIRC which was one thing I altered so...

As for shieldwall, well, it mainly seems to add a fair bit of frontal resiliency but what I've observed, and makes the unit very good at maintaining its overall integrity even under tremendous pressure. Individual soldiers have a weird tendency to wander away from it though - indeed, there was one occasion when I saw a shieldwalled hoplite unit charge an unit of early Hastati and then fan out with this tight clump of soldiers in the middle and a thin half-circle of their comrades fiercely battling the Romans several meters away... looked kinda weird. I almost suspect it somehow hampers the troops' offensive ability though, as shieldwalled troops sometimes seem to both die and cause damage rather less readily than otherwise. But, no, I haven't particularly tested it for balance or tried to make other alterations to "compensate" for it so to speak. That'd also rather go against the philosophy I assigned it with; it is, after all, supposed to be a beneficial ability or one that helps an unit fill a certain tactical niche, and a way to try to gain that elusive bit of extra edge over the opposition warriors are always looking for. In a sense it is a means to deliberately try to upset balance (that's what soldiers train such techniques and drills for after all), although of course for some poor militia whose main military merit is forming a tight clump bristling with spears and holding their ground as long as they can it is also a very welcome trick to help foil the unwelcome attentions assorted nasty proper warrior types seek to subject them to... from the front anyway.

[Dumbass]

Ok so this mod and city mod's file will overwrite eachover. Can someone tell me a way to incorporate these two mods together without them overwriting eachover?

[Watchman]

Kinda depends on what the citymod actually contains and what you'd like from each. If it's export_descr_buildings.txt though all I've done to that, as mentioned in the summary above, is add two entires of Nakhararan Aspet recruitement (so the Hai can recruit them in Armavir and some other place I've no clue about) and add "romans_scipii, saba, " to the health and healer buildings' faction ownership sections. Well, and "saba, " to the desert irrigation thingy. Should be quite elementary to copy-paste those bits manually or just edit them in yourself (although I've no idea how the citymod treats these buildings in to begin with).

Other than that the citymod seems to be nigh exclusively concerned with the EDB and, I assume, descr_strat.txt, so the main content of my alterations - unit stats - should cause no particular conflict but I haven't checked.

[Benutzername]

Just one quick question.
You mentioned that one should use Cunctator's First Cohorts mod with this one.

So here is my question:
Are you using V.1.2a of the "First Cohorts" mod?
The "only" difference is, that the improved fix is included, which actually allowed me to play my Aedui campaign without any EB related CTD for 200 turns

But since I use your mod, the rebelling cities CTD seems to be there again!
Or at least it appeals to me this way.
So my idea was, that this could be, because of your EDB undoing the changes done by the improved fix.
Would be a shame though, love what you did here
Especially shildwall.
Wouldn't wanna play without it anymore

[Watchman]

I think I used the latest one. At the moment I've a slight problem checking though, as I've managed to bugger my mobo and need to get a new one before the old wormbox deigns to even boot up again...

Valuable lesson, kids: don't try upgrading your BIOS unless you actually know what you're doing.

[Benutzername]

Thx for the answer
Hm would somehow be glad to hear, that you didn't used the newest version. Would be an easy solution to my CTD problem

Just to be sure, that these thinks aren't just happening in my current campaign i will start a new one these days and check.

Edit says: Damn typos.

[The Celtic Viking]

Just out of interest: why did you decide to give Lugoae the shield wall ability? They're only militia and their description says nothing that would imply that they used the shield wall formation.

[Watchman]

Shieldwalls were AFAIK common enough "quick and dirty" defensive techniques among militia spearmen of all qualities - and heavier troops too for that matter. It doesn't take that much complicated training to get a bunch of guys stand close together in a phalanx bristling with spears after all, and it's a good way to use numbers and formation to compensate for possible shortcomings in individual skill and war gear (both of which are fairly obvious in the case of the Lugoae).

It is hardly a coincidence that militia soldiers in military traditions highly concerned with decisively confrontational close combat were always such avid users of that kind of formation - the farmer-soldier Greek hoplites and similarly part-time Viking warbands being both cases in point. And even rather low-quality conscripted levies could usually at least form a decent approximation of a defensive shieldwall for all the good it now usually did them.

Plus, I figured the Lugoae were the more "static defensive" one of the two Celtic close-combat militia types, the other being the shortsword guys who are clearly more offensive loose-order light infantry. Or to put it this way, I always picture the Lugoae as the guys to whom it falls to "hold the breach" when a hostile warband assaults their home village and there aren't enough of the serious warriors around for the job.

[The Celtic Viking]

Ah, I see. Very well, then I have only to thank thee for sharing this. I appreciate it.

[Watchman]

You're welcome.

[Anthony]

I'll offer my take for Watchman to his defense;

That's probably how a Celtic militia would defend their home. Mind, it'd not be very organized, by a man by his nature probably realizes standing behind a makeshift 'wall' of shields knows his chance of survival are better than that of a man alone.

Now, of course, the 'wall' of a phalanx, Greek, Celtic, Germanic, or otherwise (the first being the most reasonable) would probably understand it better, and have tactics if he is a trained, regular soldier. However, even a poor, non-warrior, hastily equipped with a cheap local shield and spear, would know, "If we stand close and put our shields together, there is less of an area for the enemy to hit us, lest they hit our lowest legs or our neck and face'.

The shieldwall is not some complicated tactic; it doesn't require a lot of 'research'. It's a simple realization of a human. 'We have protection in our shields, combine it, we can resist the charge of our enemy'. It's a very basic idea of a local group of warriors.

Of course, trained warriors (Neitos, in the Celtic sense, and other Celtic 'phalanxes', in that idea, like Mori Gaesum, Rycalawre, etc.) would do this better, but, within stats, lower warriors will still die quicker, because, in a real world sense, they're not as better trained, not as well-equipped, etc.

The shieldwall is not a Germanic thing; it is not remotely unique to the dark age Germans. Danes invading Christian dark age Ireland saw it again, combined with dark age Irish cavalry, which tore them apart and convinced them to focus on Britain, and left Ireland to the Norse, who fought longer, but ultimately met the same fate.

Shieldwalls are clearly older. The Greeks, the ancient Celts (at least in the more disciplined regiments) and the Germans (likewise) knew the true value of the shieldwall. The Greek phalanx is little different than Germanic shieldwalls that fought the Romano-Celtic Britons, and sometimes Gaels (like the Dalriada), minus the cavalry support (since Saxons and many Germans didn't use ANY cavalry in battle, which is a major part of the Greek hammer and anvil, and was certainly part of a similar Celtic motion).

If you're playing Celts in this mod, use a Greek-style 'hammer and anvil' (phalanx and cavalry) if you can, supplemented by your shock infantry. It should be sufficient to break most enemies, including early Romans even in EB; it's how the Celts beat them, and Brennus sacked Rome.

The Romans and Greeks exaggerated numbers, certainly, cause we know from archaeology, not so many warriors and soldiers could've inhabited their lands and attacked. Likely, they used a tactics we can't often (not always) interpret exactly (rolling under the phalanx, like the Spaniards did later to the Swiss), and defeated the Romans and Greeks on such grounds. It wasn't hordes or swarms.

The Romans adopted Celtic standards for a reason. Celts were not disorganized hordes, but capable armies, who truly had a grasp of discipline. Even their enemies knew it. At Telamon, who's account says the Romans feared their fine order and discipline? It was a Roman.

Celts were not hordes, not barbarians, but disciplined armies of soldiers and warriors. And it is a pity not till modern days it has been examined. I don't apologize for the Celts. I am a Catholic, and Celts did sacrifice humans to their gods, which I view, as such, as monsterous. However, it is plain that these weren't savages, but simply another civilized people who did not view the world in the civility of the Greeks and Romans, but another civility. I mention to avoid accusations of being PC.

Celts were, in their religion, at times cruel, and monsterous, but they were not 'uncivilized', and complex tactics were well in their power. Shieldwalls were nothing; simple 'human' tactics, but Celts knew how to draw into opposing lines quickly by hornblows if ambushed. In such a case, it must be realized, a shieldwall was nothing to such people. They knew how to flank, how to draw tight formations, how to march, how to distract, how to use regiments and units, and whole seperate armies.

Don't underestimate how skilled Celtic war was. It inspired Greeks and Romans alike, in great amount. A Roman legionary was little more than a composite of Italic, Greek, Iberian, and Celtic war tradition; ingenious? Yes. But unique? Hardly. Simply the ones who won. Celts knew how to fight. It's why the Romans were horrified of them for so long; they weren't hordes on the border, they were skilled warriors who knew how to win, and had defeated countless enemies before.

Even the Romans knew their discipline, military strength, and respected them. Caesar's campaigns in Gaul used countless Gallic soldiers, not Romanized but fighting in their manner, to overcome Gaul. Later Roman accounts speak ill of them, but Caesar rarely says so, because he had Gallic friends, and knew who they were. My main example is; where did the modern term 'soldiers' come from? From ancient Gallic Aquitanians (and others) who called their royal guards 'Soldurii'. 'The Devoted Ones'. It is beautiful in a militaristic way, and it came from these so-called 'barbarians', who were more civilized than most modern people realize; just militaristic.

[Watchman]

Just to nitpick, but the modern term "soldier" also stems from the gold coins widely called solids (or some variation of the term) which soldiers were paid as their enrollement fee during certain periods...

Oh yeah, and the shieldwall phlanx goes back at least to ancient Mesopotamia - some of the surviving pictorial sources clearly depict infantry advancing in close order with spears projecting from between their large shields. A common argument I've seen is that such a style of fighting was particularly characteristic of settled, at least reasonably agricultural societies that out of the simple necessity of needing to defend their fields and homes had to develop a decisively confrontational style of warfare and whose populaces learned close cooperation with their peers in both the fields and the workshops of the settlements; conversely for example pastoralists could usually afford to yield ground (although not forever) and wear the foeman down with hit-and-run attacks, and the warfare of more "primitive" agricultural societies as well as those still in the earlier hunter-gatherer mode of production were nigh invariably of more "skirmishing" nature anyway - partly because they rarely had the sort of population base needed to raise the troops for and absorb the casualties of linear shock warfare.

[Anthony]

Sorry if I reply poor, I'll be honest, a touch drunk to personal problems, so probably shouldn't be doing personal things, lest my mind clear, but only want to help. However, Soldurii could have had as such an impact; the influence of words is not typically as well known as we wish it would be.

[Watchman]

Obviously - that's why I wrote "also". Some Medieval officer titles whose descendants are still in use today were also derived from comparable (Late) Roman ranks, after all.

[oudysseos]

I would dearly like to try this mod, but when I download from the link you provide the folder is empty: there are no files. I tried this yesterday and today. Confused.

[Watchman]

The link says it's "temporarily unavailable". Dunno why, it checks OK in the management program link test. Try again later - if it still hasn't started working by tomorrow I'll make another link.

[Watchman]

Well, I seem to be able to DL it now. Strange.

[Wolfshart]

Can you add an install step by step. I downloaded to my main RTW folder I have EB in and extracted to there as well. Where should I have extracted them to? The EB folder or BI or RTW data folder? On a nother note. I saw that the city mod and your mod use the first cohort mod as a base. Would it be possible for me to incororate all three? I really like the city mod and really want to try yours as well. Thanks in advance!

[Watchman]

EB mods tend to go into the relevant EB folders for fairly obvious reasons - that's where the "-mod:eb" switch tells the program to look.

My mod's mainly about the export_descr_unit.txt, the rest being just a bonus. If you want to combine this with the citymod just install the citymod as normal, and then manually replace the EDU with mine - that should do the job, since AFAIK the citymod has no alterations to that file beyond the First Cohorts ones which mine also includes.

[Wolfshart]

It isn't as odvious as you would think for someone who doesn't know one thing about modding. So all the files I should be able to extract to the EB folder over the citymod and it should work? What do you mean manualy replacing the EDU?