Recruiting elites in EB2.

[tls5669]

Hope you guys can take some constructive criticism and dont take this the wrong way, thats not my intention.

I was so disheartened reading stele 2.

I really hope you've reconsidered the recruitment rules for elites.

I mean come on man, it takes 1 turn, which is one season, to build a big ass stone fort, but 1 year or more to train a soldier to be a non reform elite?

Looks like EB2 is gonna be great, but unfortunately i'll probably pass. Hope you guys still support EB1 after EB2 comes out. In that version I can run around with 5-6 armies of elites if I can afford them, not have to wait 20 years just to get one army of elites.

[Watchman]

...you *do* realise you're not supposed to have armies of elites running around to begin with, right ?

[Foot]

Hope you guys can take some constructive criticism and dont take this the wrong way, thats not my intention.

I was so disheartened reading stele 3.

I really hope you've reconsidered the recruitment rules for elites.

I mean come on man, it takes 1 turn, which is one season, to build a big ass stone fort, but 1 year or more to train a soldier to be a non reform elite?

In EBI it was instantaneous to build a temporary wooden fort (you didn't have to wait a turn for it to be built). Given that roman armies would build such forts at the end of every march, that makes sense.

In EBII you won't be able to build forts as forts will be used to represent permanent settlements.

In Stele #2 we don't mention, at any point, that it will take one year to build an elite. However they will have lower replenishment rates as they are being recruited from a smaller section of society.


Looks like EB2 is gonna be great, but unfortunately i'll probably pass. Hope you guys still support EB1 after EB2 comes out. In that version I can run around with 5-6 armies of elites if I can afford them, not have to wait 20 years just to get one army of elites.

It sounds like you are playing the wrong game anyway, and you are looking for a different experience than the one which eb offers.

Foot

[tls5669]

Say Carthage has a population of 25,000 people, 1 person in Carthage could be an elite soldier and in turn train 10 people, in turn they train 100, so on and so on. Pretty soon you have a substantial population of Sacred Band Infantry. They train when Carthage isnt at war. So if theres 1000 SB's in Carthage and say I recruit 80 of them I have to wait 2-3 seasons to recruit more?

"Wait Hannibal, you recruited 80 of our brothers, but you have to wait till next year before you can recruit any more of us. We're going over to Hasdrubal's house to play cards, come back in three seasons."



It sounds like you are playing the wrong game anyway, and you are looking for a different experience than the one which eb offers.

Whats the difference in Rome running around in 217BC with about 20 Legions? So I have five or six armies of elites, if I can afford them, why not?

[Bucefalo]

tls5669, I honestly i don´t like what you posted here. You can always mod your own version of EB to suit your tastes, but you are sort of "menacing" to stop playing EB just because you don´t like a feature? What´s the point?

That´s seems childish on your part, but anyway, if you want so badly to have full armies of elites, just edit the export_descr_building to suit your tastes. Stop trying to convince the team to make the mod suit your playstyle (and less saying: "i won´t play unless you make the game as i want it")

Hell, once it is in your computer, just change whatever you want so you can enjoy more your time playing the game, after all is you who is going to play the game on your computer.

I apologise if i am being rude, but i don´t see any point in complaining about this.

[Atilius]

Whats the difference in Rome running around in 217BC with about 20 Legions? So I have five or six armies of elites, if I can afford them, why not?Because Rome was able to raise an army of that size in the late 3rd century BC, but it was beyond the capacity of any ancient people, kingdom, or empire to raise an army consisting entirely of elites.

[Tellos Athenaios]

EB 1 was if anything too easy on attaining elites. The cost of elite units in your military is much higher than that of levies. Not just in terms of the sheer amounts of money it takes to keep them in the field; also in terms of `power'.

First of all, these men represent and/or wield substantial power and influence within the politics of their faction. Simply put: shifting the burden of military responisbility too much to those who are able to claim something in exchange afterwards is a hughe risk. Calling upon the aid of a warlord means owing the man a favour. Giving an overly ambitious noble the command of an army means risking an ursurpation of your own power.

Secondly calling upon influential but loyal members of the nobility means that you lose much of your influence-by-proxy where they come from. That is if you have someone exceedingly loyal to you in charge of a distant Satrapy with a people that is otherwise not inclined to obey your rule... Calling upon that man to join your army with his own forces leaves your Satrapy exposed to revolt. Furthermore if he is an able governor you have to make do with lesser men to occupy administrative roles. That may earn you a lot of issues too.

[tls5669]

Because Rome was able to raise an army of that size in the late 3rd century BC, but it was beyond the capacity of any ancient people, kingdom, or empire to raise an army consisting entirely of elites.


I never said once that my entire army was elites, I have about 13 or so armies only five are elite, and not even the whole army is, Carthage doesnt have access to an elite archer unit, peltast unit, I dont know if the SB calvary is an elite, I dont have them in my armies, I couldnt afford them at the time, so Ive just stuck with what I have, the Liby-Phoenician Cavalry (Im not a very good calvary commander anyway).

My "elite" armies usually consist of 6 units of either Elite Liby-Phoenician Infantry or Sacred Band Infantry as the front lines. One of them had a couple Elite African Infantry units. Thats it, it isnt like im playing AS, every freaking unit they have is elite. Believe me I know, AS just declared war on me the other night (I ran Egypt out of Africa). Im scared of them a little, theve got some nasty units.

[tls5669]

tls5669, I honestly i don´t like what you posted here. You can always mod your own version of EB to suit your tastes, but you are sort of "menacing" to stop playing EB just because you don´t like a feature? What´s the point?

That´s seems childish on your part, but anyway, if you want so badly to have full armies of elites, just edit the export_descr_building to suit your tastes. Stop trying to convince the team to make the mod suit your playstyle (and less saying: "i won´t play unless you make the game as i want it")

Hell, once it is in your computer, just change whatever you want so you can enjoy more your time playing the game, after all is you who is going to play the game on your computer.

I apologise if i am being rude, but i don´t see any point in complaining about this.


Thats why its called constructive criticism. I guess some people are more thin skinned than others.

[Foot]

Matey, your criticism isn't constructive in the slightest. Constructive criticism is impossible at this point anyway, as you seem to pulling numbers out of thin air and generally have a poor understanding of the mechanics themselves. Lastly you appear to be rather loose with your use of the word "elites" and present a rather poor understanding of the armies of the ancient world.

Anyway, from how it sounds, I think you may be playing the wrong game entirely. EB is for those who wish to play a game that does its best to simulate the ancient world. Our recruitment will do that to best of our historical understanding and (as will be necessary) our interpretation. If you would prefer to play a different style of warfare then I would suggest a different style of play.

However threatening to not play EBII because you have intepretated a very rough sketch of how we visualise recruitment in EBII is not constructive and, to be honest, not really criticism.

Foot

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

In my opinion the recruitment of elites should be far more restrictive. Not only the recruitment slots should take far too long to fill - My suggestion is 9 turns, that's how long it takes to recruit "Feudal" elites in RR/RC, but there should be also a recruitment restriction after a certain number is reached, which means no further units shall be recruitable before you lose or disband some of your elites in battle.

Currently, I think that Hellenistic factions such as the AS are overpowered precisely because of that, and not just their big size. After a certain stage in the game, no game mechanics prevents the uncontrollable use of uber units by both the player and the AI, and the AS et all, posessing perhaps the best top tier in the game, become an unrealistic nightmare.

[DaciaJC]

In my opinion the recruitment of elites should be far more restrictive. Not only the recruitment slots should take far too long to fill - My suggestion is 9 turns, that's how long it takes to recruit "Feudal" elites in RR/RC, but there should be also a recruitment restriction after a certain number is reached, which means no further units shall be recruitable before you lose or disband some of your elites in battle.


These restrictions would apply to the AI as well, I assume? It certainly would be nice not to have to deal with continuous waves of Elite African Pikeman...

[Jolt]

Yeah, like Foot said, the fact is that the game is molded for historical accuracy. And it is historical innacurate to have an army of the elite class (For example the Iberian elite) which supposedly would be too few to reach an army size. Armies always relied on lower quality soldiers to fill the bridge of numbers, which could not be reached with an elite (The very name answers the question. They are the elite. They are the chosen few.) leadership of tribes. Even if we take off the social and/or financial status needed for an individual to belong to an elite unit, the elite units usually underwent through intense training moreso than ordinary soldiers, and many of those elite soldiers already came from backgrounds of famillies adapted to fighting, so they were familiar with the whole concept and practice since children. However, trying to mold a Punic artisan in his 30's who never knew other trade than his own, into a Sacred Band (As per your arithmetic calculation 10 train 100, which 1000 which train 10000 with train the entire male population of Carthage into Sacred Band infantry,) is simply realisticly impossible, as most people in Carthage would fail to adapt to the standards which made the Sacred Band an elite unit. The degree of elan and discipline maintained by such units are elite (Meaning, they are not normal). Thus once again, you cannot shape a village idiot into a Sacred Band terminator, no matter how many mnai you throw at him.

In such a case, we'd have modern armies solely composed of Commandos and Special Brigade units.

The concept is unfortunatly for you, too unrealistic and out of touch with reality to be implemented by EB II.

[Megas Methuselah]

Oh, give the kid a break. If he isn't a fan of history, then he doesn't have to play EB2. Let him go enjoy the Sims or Roller Coaster Tycoon or something. He obviously has only a limited understanding of the historical correctness represented in Europa Barbarorum.

[A Very Super Market]

Now, he's playing as Carthage, so it doesn't work. However, if you bring his strategy into Bartix, I'm sure that it all makes sense.

[J.R.M]

Well, every unit in Bartix is Elite, so any strategy works perfectly with them.
Back to topic. I guess that an army with lots of elites plus the stupid AI (CA fault) its just the cheapiest way of fighting, seriously. But oh well i think everyone can play how he want.

Can´t wait for EBII..

[tls5669]

Yeah, like Foot said, the fact is that the game is molded for historical accuracy. And it is historical innacurate to have an army of the elite class (For example the Iberian elite) which supposedly would be too few to reach an army size. Armies always relied on lower quality soldiers to fill the bridge of numbers, which could not be reached with an elite (The very name answers the question. They are the elite. They are the chosen few.) leadership of tribes. Even if we take off the social and/or financial status needed for an individual to belong to an elite unit, the elite units usually underwent through intense training moreso than ordinary soldiers, and many of those elite soldiers already came from backgrounds of famillies adapted to fighting, so they were familiar with the whole concept and practice since children. However, trying to mold a Punic artisan in his 30's who never knew other trade than his own, into a Sacred Band (As per your arithmetic calculation 10 train 100, which 1000 which train 10000 with train the entire male population of Carthage into Sacred Band infantry,) is simply realisticly impossible, as most people in Carthage would fail to adapt to the standards which made the Sacred Band an elite unit. The degree of elan and discipline maintained by such units are elite (Meaning, they are not normal). Thus once again, you cannot shape a village idiot into a Sacred Band terminator, no matter how many mnai you throw at him.

In such a case, we'd have modern armies solely composed of Commandos and Special Brigade units.

The concept is unfortunatly for you, too unrealistic and out of touch with reality to be implemented by EB II.

In ancient warfare an elite was 20% soldier, 80% equipment. And whos to say they didnt promote among their ranks? If a Liby-Phoenician Heavy Infantry soldier shows bravery and skill in battle, he could have been given better equipment and promoted.

[A Very Super Market]

Equipment was not provided by the state (Apart from legionaires, not elites anyways) so you might as well replace that with wealth, instead of just equipment, as well as a multitude of factors.

Furthermore, you argument doesn't apply to your theory. The mere fact that Liby-Phoenican infantry are fighting in a unit outside of the Sacred Band makes them ineligible as Carthaginian militia don't turn into Libyans.

[A Terribly Harmful Name]

Indeed, that's a generalization. Elites could or could not be afforded their equipment by the state, and equipment is of no use without the due competence to use it.

[ziegenpeter]

Ancient "Froms G's to Gents" is cool but not historical because there was a bit of a class conceit going on back then

[abou]

In ancient warfare an elite was 20% soldier, 80% equipment.Care to tell me where you found that statement?

[tls5669]

Its all about equipment. So maybe its 25%/75%, I was stating that it was the equipment more than the soldier that mattered the most on ancient battlefields. Let me ask you this, if you put a Thorakitai Agematos Basilikou, in hoplite equipment, is he still an elite?


What is the definition of an elite? Someone that fights with elan and grace? A veteran of many battles that fights better than most? A highly disciplined soldier with a lot of morale?.......That could apply to any solder on the battlefield.

If a peltasti fights with elan and grace, in a disciplined matter, does that qualify him as an elite? No it doesnt, but "Armor him up" and he would be in an elite class, or just right below that.

So my discription earlier was wrong, it would be more like this.....A Liby-Phoenician Heavy Infantry soldier that proves himself in battle and fights better than most, "armored up" would basically be a Elite Liby-Phoenician Infantryman.

Take the Liby-Phoenician Heavy infantry soldier.......Though the earlier units used Greek armor, these men wear mail armor copied from Roman lorica hamata. They were armored in a mail shirt, Thracian helmets, and bronze greaves. They have the traditional large round shields and long overhand spears of the classical hoplites of the Greek mainland. They are a quality phalanx, able to stand up to both Romans and their Greek counterparts. These Liby-Phoenicians have been re-armed with mail shirts, allowing them to take a role as a heavy phalanx infantry. Additionally, their training has improved due to Greek advisors and better Phoenician commanders, so they are well able to double as sword-armed close combat infantry as well.


Armor him up, give him a better close combat weapon and you have this.......... Though they are armed with the traditional hoplite shield and spear like other Carthaginian troops, these elite warriors are armored with a metal cuirass, and a Libyan axe as their secondary weapon for close combat. They are very versatile and can be also found deployed as seaborne land soldiers in the Carthaginian navy. Their heavy armor and weapons allow them to battle the hardiest opponents. They should be deployed where the fighting will be at its absolute thickest, as they are able to charge in for a kill once the enemy has exhausted himself upon the unforgiving points of their spears and axes. The definition of the Elite Liby-Phoenician Infantryman.

So what is the difference?.......THE EQUIPMENT.



Now lets take KH for example. The Hellenic Distinguished Hoplites.......They are armored in the finest bronze armor, with shields made from only the best and stoutest wood. These shields are faced with fine leather or bronze, and in the skilled hands of your greatest soldiers, they can stop all but the most determined blows. The spears of these fine soldiers are made from the best cornel wood and iron. All of them are battle tested veterans.

Basically a battle tested Hoplite with better EQUIPMENT.


Now a Spartan Hoplite on the other hand that would be a "true" elite, and come to think about it I was wrong about the SB infantry, they would be "true" elites also.

The Spartan hoplite.
Their boys were taken from the parents as soon as they were able to walk and trained to be soldiers. They were often beaten and generally mistreated by their teachers until they reached an age where they could fight back. They engaged in heavy physical activity from an early age, exercising and practicing to fight almost as a religion. They were encouraged to steal and be crafty to survive, but were often beaten if caught. There are even some accounts of required sodomy between the young boys and sometimes even wife sharing, with the belief that a military unit should even love together! In this harsh environment, tough and fanatical soldiers are produced. When the Spartans were finally defeated and subjugated by the Romans, one of the more conservative Roman nobles is said to have wept and lamented the passing of a warrior culture without equal

The SB infantry.
They are trained from birth to be great warriors and they are able to afford high quality armor and weapons. They fight as a traditional Phalanx organized in the Spartan style. They are a nearly impervious wall from the front and are extremely hard to flank due to the fact that they are as proficient with their swords as with their spears. Even the heaviest cavalry is no match for the Sacred Band as long as they’re presenting their spears in the direction of their attacker. Only a flanking maneuver by heavy cavalry or heavy infantry has a chance of breaking them in a melee. They are proficient with their swords as well.

They were born to be soldiers, their whole life is about being a soldier and living for war.

So to me at least anyway, Spartan Hoplite = SB Infantry. "True" elites of the EB world.

[Meneldil]

The amount of cluelessness displayed by the original poster is kind of scary.

The fact that he conveniently forgot about all the class, ethnic and wealth issues that plagued the ancient world and then pull out number out of his bottom to complain because he cannot make unrealistic full elite armies is amazing.

According to your own concept, there should be no non-elite units. I mean, it's easy to ask 1 guy to train 10 other dudes, who each train 10 other dudes. And anyway, training is useless, it's all about guns and stuff.

[Jolt]

So you're basically agreeing with my previous statement?

My definition of Elite (As per wikipedia, which is actually a correct statement) is that:


The Elite is a relatively small dominant group within a large society, having a privileged status percieved as being envied by others of a lower line of order.

In ancient times, only individuals from a military background could be incorporated into the elites, besides having to have the social status and wealth needed to afford the equipment and be integrated into such units. Since only a very few number of individuals in all societies could band together into such units, that is why they were so scarce in history. And since they were so scarce in history, EB will make their appearance scarce as well.

[Mediolanicus]

If a peltasti fights with elan and grace, in a disciplined matter, does that qualify him as an elite? No it doesnt, but "Armor him up" and he would be in an elite class, or just right below that.


And who is going to "armor him up"?

He himself is going to have to do that. And before he can do that, he must be able to afford to do so.
To be able to afford this, he must be of a certain rich social class which has loads of money and the time to train with the bought equipment; some kind of elite of the society.

Now, as you hopefully know, not everyone swims in the money and has all the time of the world on their hands; not now and not in ancient times. Thus elites were rare, and it is EB's goal to represent this fact in the game.

[The General]

The OP seems to confuse heavy infantry/cavalry with elite; thus, here's one definition of the word "elite" (especially during EB's timeframe, 2. & 3. would've been the most accurate definitions):

e⋅lite
  [i-leet, ey-leet]

–noun
1. (often used with a plural verb) the choice or best of anything considered collectively, as of a group or class of persons.
2. (used with a plural verb) persons of the highest class: Only the elite were there.
3. a group of persons exercising the major share of authority or influence within a larger group: the power elite of a major political party.
4. a type, approximately 10-point in printing-type size, widely used in typewriters and having 12 characters to the inch. Compare pica 1 .
–adjective
5. representing the most choice or select; best: an elite group of authors.
Also, é⋅lite.

Origin:
1350–1400; ME elit a person elected to office < MF e(s)lit ptp. of e(s)lire to choose

[tls5669]

And who is going to "armor him up"?

He himself is going to have to do that. And before he can do that, he must be able to afford to do so.
To be able to afford this, he must be of a certain rich social class which has loads of money and the time to train with the bought equipment; some kind of elite of the society.

Now, as you hopefully know, not everyone swims in the money and has all the time of the world on their hands; not now and not in ancient times. Thus elites were rare, and it is EB's goal to represent this fact in the game.

HHHHMMMMM I seem to recall their being a lot of rich empires back then, I guess Rome was the only empire to armor their troops. So show up for battle but bring you own stuff, um ok. A professional army was not unheard of then, not all empires were composed of rabble, several empires could pay wages and for equipment. If you can afford armor for a regular unit, then you can for your elites. So I guess every time an elite is recruited from the normal rank and file, he had to keep his old gear? I think not, the government/empire issued it too him. No one would join the ranks of the elites if they had crappy gear.

If it was that way, then very few would come to fight, no one could afford armor. The leaders must have been oozing charisma to get poor people owning nothing to come and fight for them.



Lots of soldiers took armor from the vanquished.


First off let me say I dont want to run around with all elites, if the recruitable number was limited I have no prob with it, but if I can afford 5 stacks of elites right now then I should be able to recruit them. Not recruit one stack, wait 3 seasons, recruit another, etc, etc. Sometimes it takes elites to beat the Romans. That way the Romans will overrun or weaken you to the extent of where you cant fight back. But if there is 300 elites available I should be able to recruit them.




According to your own concept, there should be no non-elite units. I mean, it's easy to ask 1 guy to train 10 other dudes, who each train 10 other dudes. And anyway, training is useless, it's all about guns and stuff.

LOL ok. In ancient warfare yes, it was more so that way. But you cant apply that to todays armies, where its probably 80% soldier 20% equipment, armies of today are pretty much uniform worldwide.

[Azathoth]

:wall:

[Krusader]

Lesson to learn:

You want to discuss something with EB, you bring sources, not what you think they did or wish they did or pull stuff out of thin air.

And oh, to be clear, something EB members have said a few times up through the years:

We design the game for ourselves. Or that is the design philosophy. We make a game we want to play. We do listen to our fans though and if there are ideas that bear merit, we see if we can incorporate them. This also means, that if someone doesnt want to play our mod because of that and that feature or mechanic...we just dont ******* care.
If someone comes with criticism to our mod, we ignore them if they pull things out of thin air and have a demanding attitude, but we try to listen and respond when some comes with constructive criticism.

[Cyclops]

This is classic, right up there with the Bartix thread. Maybe this fella is a pro?

He opens by asking the mods to reconsider something they haven't even done.


...I mean come on man, it takes 1 turn, which is one season, to build a big ass stone fort, but 1 year or more to train a soldier to be a non reform elite? ....

The stuff about "1 man trains 10 so I can have endless elites" is in the same non-sequitur vein (you know what I mean) but no-one snaps. This line being squashed he throws another grenade:


.. I dont know if the SB calvary is an elite....

WTF? But no-one seems to notice, so he throws another...


...an elite was 20% soldier, 80% equipment....

Is he recruiting cybermen? However in the face of reasonable explanation he counters with


...But you cant apply that to todays armies, where its probably 80% soldier 20% equipment, armies of today are pretty much uniform worldwide.

Honestly that is sheer provocation. This fellow throws in furphy after furphy, I feel he is actually fishing for a rude reaction. Still there is genuine humour in some of the stuff, so I rate him 7/10.

I daresay it is less humourous for the mods answering silly posts that make completely unfoundded assertions about their work. I rate the responses 10/10 for patience.

The few times I have made humble unsolicited suggestions they have been dealt with very fairly, and the one idea I had (about granaries) that was a bit silly and not well though through was dealt with tersely rather than rudely which was better than I could expect really.

[Cultured Drizzt fan]

LOL ok. In ancient warfare yes, it was more so that way. But you cant apply that to today’s armies, where its probably 80% soldier 20% equipment, armies of today are pretty much uniform worldwide.

:inquisitive: what? If anything today's armies are MORE reliant on equipment then ever before. There is a reason that a country like the USA can trash the army of a third world country, and it aint always training. Having bigger, better guns lends a HUGE advantage to that army, and is the reason most smaller forces uses guerrilla warfare, and fear tactics now a days. (of course I am not an expert on any of this, so don't quote me.... And don't think I am saying that training does not make a difference, it does... but well you know what I mean)


but on your other point I have to also disagree. Empires could have a professional force, but that was always a much smaller number to the levies it called upon for the basis of their armies. And they were expected to be able to bring the basics of their gear, if not everything. There is a huge difference between paying for a helmet, buckler and Sarissa. And paying for scale mail, a decent sword, a shield and who knows what else. Plus there is the fact that elites are going to want much higher wages, they probably wont be able to have day jobs so they need to be permanently provided for..... It made having huge reserves of elite units completely impractical. In the abstract way the EB engine works this is best showed by exactly what they plan on doing.....

And they would join the ranks of the army, because even if they had crappy gear they had the chance to get quite a bit of loot if the campaign was successful. And if they didn't get levied then well, The state would not look to kindly on them.

[The General]

HHHHMMMMM I seem to recall their being a lot of rich empires back then, I guess Rome was the only empire to armor their troops.
From 107BC onwards. Until that, the Roman troops paid for their own equipment, just as was the norm in those days - most realms of those days weren't organized states as we think of countries these days, but hierarchical systems of greater and lesser lords and the commonfolk.


So show up for battle but bring you own stuff, um ok.
Yes, that was the norm - using the Roman republic as an example, the requirement to bring certain armament with you on the campaigns was maintained by legislature


A professional army was not unheard of then, not all empires were composed of rabble, several empires could pay wages and for equipment.
A professional army was pretty unheard of, the prevalent system was the citizen militia/tribal warrior system, strenghtened by a warrior/noble class providing a well-armed/armoured/trained elite to the ruler. Sometimes rulers did maintain a mercenary-like, standing units, but these formed but a nucleus, and not the whole army.

Post-roman-empire standing armies started appearing in Western Europe in the 15th/16th Centuries as new systems started replacing the feudal armies of knights, men-at-arms and peasants, largely as an effort by rulers to strenghten the authority of the ruler/state over that of nobility/landowners.


If you can afford armor for a regular unit, then you can for your elites.
As said, most often rulers did not pay for the armament of their troops, and when they did, it was not for the massed citizen/farmer-militias recruited to bolster the ranks.


So I guess every time an elite is recruited from the normal rank and file, he had to keep his old gear? I think not, the government/empire issued it too him. No one would join the ranks of the elites if they had crappy gear.
Eh, what? We are still discussing militaries of the Antiquity, aren't we? A peasant would have had a really, really hard time trying to move up from his peasant-unit to the elite units of the nobility... Not only he most likely could not have afforded the equipment, he was of the wrong class (and that DID matter in the yesteryears!) - and I've my doubts as to whether there was even a possibility of climbing-the-ladder in the ancient armies... At least beyond your own unit.


If it was that way, then very few would come to fight, no one could afford armor. The leaders must have been oozing charisma to get poor people owning nothing to come and fight for them.
Ugh, wut?

The kings must've had an oozing charisma to get poorp people owning nothing to pay taxes. You do know rulers/states can force people? Also, sometimes people would want to join the armies, for example, if there was considerable loot to be gathered from the vanquished foe, or because they wanted to defend their homes and families from an invader...


Lots of soldiers took armor from the vanquished.

Gear does not equal status. The two do correlate (massed militias tended to have worse armament than rich nobles...duh), but a farmer clad in the best available armour of his day is still a farmer.


First off let me say I dont want to run around with all elites, if the recruitable number was limited I have no prob with it, but if I can afford 5 stacks of elites right now then I should be able to recruit them. Not recruit one stack, wait 3 seasons, recruit another, etc, etc. Sometimes it takes elites to beat the Romans. That way the Romans will overrun or weaken you to the extent of where you cant fight back. But if there is 300 elites available I should be able to recruit them.
... The system will be the same for everyone. No one is going to be spamming elitestacks if/when the system is implemented.


LOL ok. In ancient warfare yes, it was more so that way. But you cant apply that to todays armies, where its probably 80% soldier 20% equipment, armies of today are pretty much uniform worldwide.
I trust you haven't served in the military, hmh?

In modern warfare, most casualties are inflicted through indirect fire, artillery, bombers, missiles and suchlike, unless the other side is resorts to guerrilla warfare (say, because the opposing force is superior in numbers and/or equipment, as has been case in the US-versus-X conflicts) and hides in mountaneous or otherwise difficult terrain (Afghanistan?), or, worse still, within civilian residential areas (Iraq?).

And this does not include satellites and the information they provide, better optics, superior firepower, et cetera.

Of course, training does matter, but having served a year in the military, I can say within six months you can have effective infantry capable of cooperating with mechanised forces (I was a gunner in an infantry fighting vehicle) - hell, you could cut a month or two from that by more intensive training.

Bleh, a rather long rant, and probably filled with zounds of factual errors. Do correct them, people, please.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Post-roman-empire standing armies started appearing in Western Europe in the 15th/16th Centuries as new systems started replacing the feudal armies of knights, men-at-arms and peasants, largely as an effort by rulers to strenghten the authority of the ruler/state over that of nobility/landowners.

And that was mainly to quell the large numbers of disbanded mercenary bands (100 years war) who resorted to robbery, pillaging and ravaging the country side for a living. Only in the 17th century become such armies something much more than the military equivalent of a fire fighting corps; and even then it should be remembered that large portions of the various standing armies were still simply a bunch of enlisted mercenaries.

[Watchman]

True regular "national" armies as we have today didn't really start turning up before around... late 1600s, IIRC mah books. I recall reading the Brandenburgians (later better known as Prussians) were around the first to get the idea rolling for real. (We may also note that on the end of the Thirty Years' War several field armies - as per the norm of the day, mercenaries - went rogue and had to be destroyed by their former paymasters and/or the owners of the unlucky locales they were currently in; "now that it's peace, what are *we* going to do?")

[Constantius III]

True regular "national" armies as we have today didn't really start turning up before around... late 1600s, IIRC mah books. I recall reading the Brandenburgians (later better known as Prussians) were around the first to get the idea rolling for real. (We may also note that on the end of the Thirty Years' War several field armies - as per the norm of the day, mercenaries - went rogue and had to be destroyed by their former paymasters and/or the owners of the unlucky locales they were currently in; "now that it's peace, what are *we* going to do?")
Louisian state commission army probably fits in there too, and maybe the Swedish indelning system? Both were about roughly the same time as Friedrich Wilhelm...but yeah, second half of the 17th century.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I am posting here because I agree with Cyclops that the guy sounds like a troll, a good one too. Also, if this is the next bartix I want to be in here so I can look back when this is linked in the distant future.

@future ACIN: Quick look behind you! Just kidding.

Also I want the EB team to reconsider the decision to have all Seleucid troops be on elephants, because now I can't afford being the Seleucid and I can't have full stacks of elite calvary anymore which is unrealistic because in the Seleucid empire there was a lot of land so 1 out of every 2.2 people had a horse out of necessity.

[Foot]

And what a lovely discussion this was. However, as it appears that we are heading down the road of needless insults, I think I'll just close this baby down.

Foot