Owned by uber levy slingers?

[Intranetusa]

I had a half stack ~1000 Polybian era soldiers composed of double chevron veteran hastatis + celtic spearmen, vs ~1400 "levy slingers" + several celtic slinger + celtic spearmen.

Now normally, I would have no trouble dealing with slingers and their uber AP ability due to their low attack (usually 1-2). However, these slingers were veterans, and had accumulated 4-5 chevrons. So I was facing slingers with 6-7 attack + AP...

Long story short, I got pwned when their slingers wrecked by guys by firing/running away, etc


Since most of the slingers of the era was better than archers, maybe the slingers could merely have a higher attack value than most archers, without the AP trait? :/

[TWFanatic]

This has been addressed countless times. EB has lowered the attack in 1.0 of most slingers, but the ap is there to stay. Thankfully the AI doesn't spam them, but yes they are arguably overpowered.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
You know, there's something called light cavalry... :charge:
.

[pezhetairoi]

Yer. They break easily if you concentrate three or four light cav on a clump of slingers at a go from multiple directions. Or just charge frontally, then force your way through to cut them in half. Also works. No army should be without cavalry, precisely because of this reason.

[Intranetusa]

Yer. They break easily if you concentrate three or four light cav on a clump of slingers at a go from multiple directions. Or just charge frontally, then force your way through to cut them in half. Also works. No army should be without cavalry, precisely because of this reason.

Well, I'm trying to role-play as Roman, so I'm basically going pure infantry with minimal cavalry besides general and occasionally maybe 1 or 2 equites.

[pezhetairoi]

...but that's enough! I never dispose of more than 4 cavalry units per fullstack legion, and sometimes less. It's already enough. The Romans never went pure infantry, they always had a decent number of cavalry. It was only in quality that they were lacking. So if you really want to roleplay, bring cavalry anyway, 3-4 units of them, just make sure they aren't equites but local equivalents like Liguriae or Campanici... With two cavalry units and coupla light infantry units like rorarii in support you could already wipe out all those fellas. Use the cavalry to get behind the slingers or pin them down, then charge in with your infantry. Since the enemy is mostly slingers, you could actually devote most of your infantry to hunting down the iaosatae. Just use the equites to charge and halt a slinger unit long enough for infantry to catch up and take over, then move on to another unit. At the same time, with a bunch of cavalry barrelling around in the enemy's rear areas, the iaosatae wouldn't even be able to fire! Even if you can't catch the slingers with infantry or cavalry, devote enough to chasing them and not allowing them to stand still and they won't even be able to get a bullet at you. Your main mistake was to allow them the leisure to fire at you. Even chasing them ineffectually to the ends of the map is superior to letting them stand still.

[Intranetusa]

.......

See, but the problem is the slingers never fully retreat. When they fall back, they fall back into the thick lines of their spearmen, making any cavalry attack ill advised.

[Geoffrey S]

Well, I'm trying to role-play as Roman, so I'm basically going pure infantry with minimal cavalry besides general and occasionally maybe 1 or 2 equites.
In which case, you're going to lose. Roleplaying doesn't mean being completely inflexible.

[pezhetairoi]

@intranetusa

Sure they fall back into their spearmen, but then immediately behind comes my infantry who then proceed to smash into the spearmen without hurling pila. Since it takes skirmishers devilishly long to filter through their own MLR, almost all the time I catch them mid-filter, and they either attempt to disengage to the rear losing quite a big chunk of men only to be unable to fire since theirs and mine are now all tangled up in combat all down the line, or they end up being drawn into the fight as melee infantry, which they are ill suited for, chevron or no chevron. After which is a textbook application of ambush/outflanking with whatever cavalry you have. Slingers in the front of the MLR are no big problem. It's those on the flanks (which rarely happens, for some reason, they are always behind the MLR which means the same thing w.r.t. friendly fire) that cause more trouble, and even those rarely last long under my alae-and-cavalry combined ops. Amazing how well Samnitici Milites/Pedites can take out slingers, even one unit against three, especially the enemy is also being distracted by cavalry milling on their flanks.

For those who don't know, by the way, MLR is Main Line of Resistance. I wonder who coined that term.

[NeoSpartan]

Guys.... the OP said it

"However, these slingers were veterans, and had accumulated 4-5 chevrons. So I was facing slingers with 6-7 attack + AP"

Remember they also get morale boost with that extra expireince so they WILL NOT rout easely.

Its no suprise he go his Romani manhandeled by the Gauls.

Tip: Don't F* With Anything North Of the Alps :whip:

[antisocialmunky]

Slingers are one the best unit classes in the game. Atleast they weren't as insanely OP as the last version though.

[Danest]

Play like the Romans, lose like the Romans. They did poorly against fast-moving missile troops, so you can probably expect the same. Though, I think you're role-playing foolish Romans like Crassus -- Great Roman leaders could adapt, and do something that no other Roman had done before. Role play a Caesar rather than a Crassus, take some cavalry (even disband them when you're done if you want), and smash those slingers. ;)

[Danest]

As far as excellent troop-types, I think the persian archer-spearmen are excellent as well, against all but the most heavily armored/shielded of infantry.

[TWFanatic]

.
You know, there's something called light cavalry... :charge:
.
I use light cavalry to hold them and heavy cavalry to sweep them away.

Personally, I don't find them a problem when the AI uses them, I find them supply overpowered for me. They are incredibly lethal for me, and experience is gained fast. Plus, the AI is too stupid too counter them.

[Intranetusa]

Play like the Romans, lose like the Romans. They did poorly against fast-moving missile troops, so you can probably expect the same. Though, I think you're role-playing foolish Romans like Crassus -- Great Roman leaders could adapt, and do something that no other Roman had done before. Role play a Caesar rather than a Crassus, take some cavalry (even disband them when you're done if you want), and smash those slingers. ;)

As soon as I hit the Marian reforms, I plan to send a full stack of post Marian legionaries + auxillaries, unsupported, deep into Seleucid/Parthian territory.

Recreating Carrahe by getting my full stack legionaries slaughtered by cataphracts & horse archers sounds fun. :)

[geala]

Better recreate the defence of Syria against the Parthian invasion afterwards where the Parthians were ripped to pieces by the Romans. They were far from invincible.

Slingers, archers and skirmisher are too strong in some aspect. I accept the ap feature of the slingers (although it is historically wrong), but not the close combat performance against cavalry. The problem is mainly the too high moral. When I once again had to watch a bunch of slingers killing many of my Hetairoi in close combat I decided to put things a bit more in accordance to history. Loose order troops were extremely vulnerable to cavalry and such should it be in EB. I therefore lowered the moral of all troops with missiles and javelins. Now it's a bit better

[Pharnakes]

In what way were slings not ap in history?

[Charge]

Stone can pierce armour?

[Tellos Athenaios]

The damage a lead bullet does is considerable. Basically the ancient equivalent of a shot gun - which is what the sling was used for.

[Pharnakes]

The whole point is that it doesn't pierce armour, but that is where it's strength lies. If an arrow fails to penentrate (as it likely will if you wear good armour) then only minor brusing will be done, at the very most. This is due to the arrows low momentum.

However, a lead bullet has very high momentum, so even if you wear a full curiass, you will still get broken ribs because the shock of the bullet hitting you will just be transmited through the armour, sure the curiass is better than nothing, and will help difuse the force, but you're still going to weak up sore in the morning (if you ever do). Simiarly, whereas an arrow will just bounce off a helmet, the helmet will transmit sufficent energy from the stone to know you out, or even give you sever concusion.

Thus, although sling bullets aren't actualy ap in themselves, the damage they deal, is.

[Intranetusa]

+ 3 atk, -1 AP :dizzy2:

[Pharnakes]

What?

AP is absolute, its there or it isn't sadly there are "gradings" of ap, otherwise slingers and the like would be easy to ballance, but....

[Charge]

I think he meant no ap, as in fact it doesn't pierce armour, and without armour damage is around arrow...

[Watchman]

The effect - focused blunt trauma - is basically around the same you get out of a mace (and to a somewhat lesser degree axe). Against an unarmoured target the effect is roughly similar to a musket ball by what I know of it (the Romans apparently had a specific tool for extracing sling bullets from bodies...), but in any case it doesn't as such have much in the way of an advantage over an arrow or javelin there.

If you amped the slingers' attack value that much to compensate for removing the AP attribute you'd just end with the buggers scything down lightly armoured targets like so much bowling pins, and basically turning them into super-archers.

After due deliberation the People's Revolutionary Committee rejects the idea and adjourns for some vodka. :balloon2:

[Danest]

By giving slings AP, we allow for them to be "felt" through armor, which they might be, while arrows that failed to penetrate probably wouldn't be painfully felt. Merely increasing sling's attack rating and removing the AP wouldn't cause this to happen. As it stands, persian bows are better against bare skin, while slings bullet blows are sometimes more likely to be felt through armor... this is done by giving the bows the high attack value, and the slings the low attack and AP ability. Nothing other than the use of the AP trait will allow bows to hurt more against bare skin, and the slings to hurt more against armor.

[Mykingdomforanos]

IRL I guess sling damage would depend on wether the receiver was wearing flexible armour like chainmail, or rigid armour like a muscle cuirass/ late-Roman plate cuirass.
The rigid armour would be completely impervious to any damage if it wasnt pierced or severely dented (ie by a big whacking thing not by a little stone), whereas someone wearing mail could still get blunt trauma injuries by a sling bullet or heavy melee weapon (but not by an arrow)

I would think a pointed object like an arrow would be more likely to "pierce" armour but not do as much damage to a wearer of non-rigid armour as a sling bullet.

[antisocialmunky]

Slingers don't hurt armour mroe, armour just protects less against it.

[Intranetusa]

If you amped the slingers' attack value that much to compensate for removing the AP attribute you'd just end with the buggers scything down lightly armoured targets like so much bowling pins, and basically turning them into super-archers.

After due deliberation the People's Revolutionary Committee rejects the idea and adjourns for some vodka. :balloon2:

The main problem with slingers is if they either upgrade weapons or gain chevrons/veteran they become uber.

I would run in fear if I had to fight levy slingers with 3 golden chevrons
(1 + 9 attack + AP = 10 attack+ AP ability)...let along any "good" slinger unit that becomes a veteran force. I think even the Roman testudo would be raped by something like that...

Oh well, I guess having slingers with AP is the lesser of two evils... :/

[pezhetairoi]

Well, all's well and good, but I still say if I had majestic7's army with one or two more cav units, I could beat those buggers. Sure I'd take a helluva loss in the approach, but since he still has cav, I could probably beat them slingers.

Not that I'm not admitting 6-7 + AP is heck painful, I've had a couple turned on me before, and of course, I've seen what my own 5-chevron slingers do to others. But they are beatable, as long as you don't fight them one-on-one. My uber gold-chevron slingers have been utterly swept away before by a flanking move made with 2 Ridoharjoz and 5 Frankamannoz.

Of course, that would all depend on just HOW many celtic spearmen were there with the slingers. Majestic7, comments?

And I agree that AP should stay for slingers for the rationale provided. Besides, they are a mighty good force multiplier for the side that uses them well and good, in other words, the player. :)

[roman]

Counter fire? Get your own uber slingers, most north italian cities can recruit them lvl 2 or 3 of local MIC if i recall. I am sure Romans used slingers in their push north. Or if you like hire merc. ones and use them when needed. During battle offer up a sacrificial unit or two, if you win the battle there is a good chance that many casualties will recover. I just finished a KH campaign on VH/H and all my armies had 3 or 4 units of slingers for countermeasure purposes. Now in my Armenian campaign i try to have slingers when i can (Scythian Archers are just too damn good of an alternative atm). Speaking of frustration dealing with range units... try going up against Saurmatae (sp?) Armenian northern neighbors when they field nothing but elite archers and lancers.

Roman.

[Mykingdomforanos]

The main problem with slingers is if they either upgrade weapons or gain chevrons/veteran they become uber.

Slingers cant upgrade weapons afaik as there is no upgrade missile weapon unlike in vanilla, at least not anywhere in Europe Ive seen but I am new to EB

Your point about gaining chevrons is bang-on as celtic and Eastern slingers do 2 damage freshly recruited , when they get 2 measly bronze chevrons they are already twice as effective with 4 damage.

My slingers (50% of my Casse army) average 2 silver already and pretty much win sieges by themselves and clean up anyone in open field with less than say 10 armour.
It will change if I head East I guess as I will be against armoured cavalry.

I guess all units with low starting stats (especially attack more than defence) have more to gain by experience than some elite that already has 20 attack.

ie base slingers vs base some phalanx ( 2 damage vs 20 damage = 10% effectiveness)
and
slinger with 6 exp vs some phalanx with 6 exp (8 damage vs 26 damage = 31% effectiveness)

[pezhetairoi]

tsktsk, half your army? That's mean. :) Though the temptation is there. I had to set a no-slingers house rule to prevent my Romans from steamrollering every settlement with a wooden wall. o.o

[Mykingdomforanos]

Yep I cant help powergaming in pretty much anything that features any sort of stats :book:
I figure it all boils down to maths and its a game so try and win, I can roleplay enough with my enjoyment of history to fill in the blanks lol
Though I guess a dominant army made up with fully half of slingers would be somewhat unlikely and I do enjoy realism (hence EB rather than Vanilla) but hell its a game so cant be perfect I guess.

[pezhetairoi]

Well, I'm just glad your army wasn't -all- slingers. :)

[Menander of India]

I like to have a second stack in front of my main one when campaigning... Most troops are light infantry (with light cavalry in some cases, depends on the faction you see...) and act like a screening force - mopping up, raiding etc (even though IMO it's ,mainly, something of personal vice I think LOL) ... When I can afford two stacks of course...:laugh4:

[Conqueror]

If all you want is a counter vs slingers, then you should not go for slingers yourself. Get some (good) archers instead; they tend to have higher attack values. In a missle-vs-missle fight, AP is almost a non-issue, simply because missile units don't have much in the way of armor (there are some exceptions to this rule). Of corse, getting your hands on quality archers can be a problem if you're playing as Romani in the Western Mediterranean...

[blank]

If all you want is a counter vs slingers, then you should not go for slingers yourself. Get some (good) archers instead; they tend to have higher attack values. In a missle-vs-missle fight, AP is almost a non-issue, simply because missile units don't have much in the way of armor (there are some exceptions to this rule). Of corse, getting your hands on quality archers can be a problem if you're playing as Romani in the Western Mediterranean...

slingers have better range than [western] archers, so this is not really a good idea

[Danest]

Slingers are pretty nasty, but it really does seem that real life commanders often really did favor them for their ability to harass even armored troops. And on another note, I wish it was impossible to shoot at soldiers on the other side of a wall. I mean, the shooters can't even see the targets! Ah well, all hard coded I'm sure. I wonder if the height of the wooden walls could be extended (invisibly/transparently) to a height such that missiles couldn't shoot over them... no more super-accurate blind fire.

[Intranetusa]

Regarding archers, I have a question - should I use plain arrows or fire arrows when fighting heavily armored enemies and light enemies?


It seems to me that plain arrows have more damage but less lethality, whereas fire arrows have less damage and more lethality. So I basically use fire arrows against heavily armored cavalry units and plain arrows against enemy light infantry.
Am I wrong?

[Pharnakes]

I dunno, I do know that all mislie units have 1 lethality by hardcoding. It has always seemed to me that normal arows have less attack but more accuracy, and flaming arrows the other way round. Personaly I never use flaming arrows, except to frighten elephants, as I don't belive they were ever really used on the battle field, only in sieges.

[Mykingdomforanos]

I would think a flaming arrow would only be much use for setting things on fire (or scaring poor elephants) and would probably burn someone a bit at worst if it hit them rather than setting them on fire. So maybe 1 point more of damage IMO. They would be less accurate as well , especially if they had a rag wrapped around them rather than say dipped in pitch.
Only point of foot archers I can see is vs troops with less than like 3 armour and they would need to be super long range (180+), on balance Id go with slingers with maybe 1 unit of good archers to use flaming arrows.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Don't forget that archers require less space to deploy, so you can safely add another unit of archers or two without risking being exposed to cavalry. Thiis a particularly valuable asset when you need to cope with repeating AI assaults on your empire or when you are short of money.

[Danest]

Use the flaming arrows on a unit who's morale has started to break, and it will often break the rest of the way.

[Mykingdomforanos]

Don't forget that archers require less space to deploy, so you can safely add another unit of archers or two without risking being exposed to cavalry. Thiis a particularly valuable asset when you need to cope with repeating AI assaults on your empire or when you are short of money.

Regarding the space to deploy, I just overlap my slingers and have found I can get up to about 3 overlapping units without them shooting each other in the head
Even 4 or 5 overlapping units and I only get a few friendly fire casualties

Different question: Are archers safer than slingers when shooting from behind your own line or is there not much difference in terms of friendly fire?
I read the slingers have a flatter trajectory but havent seen what happens in that instance

I like to keep my missile troops as close behind the main line as poss (greater range) but if I pul them back will I still shoot my own line in the back just as badly?

[pezhetairoi]

I have. Slingers and archers are equally harmless behind your lines, as long as the enemy you're shooting is far away. If he comes within javelin range of your main line, that is too close for your slingers and they will eventually shoot your main line in the back. Archers are marginally less dangerous in this instance. Of course, slingers can't shoot over walls as efficiently as archers, but they have a lot more ammo, and AP to boot.

[bovi]

Slingers will probably be better represented in EB2, where experience does not give added missile attack.

[Mykingdomforanos]

It doesnt? Experience would make them more accurate and also perhaps able to sling harder/longer range though. It takes great skill to sling with force and accuracy.
Does the game engine allow for selected units to gain experience slower?

[bovi]

I think not. I'm not sure, but I think you can change how experience affects stats globally. The default is, I believe, +1att/+1def per three experience, awarded at levels 1, 4 and 7.

Slingers as they are now in EB1 are sort of correctly lethal when first recruited, but become gatling guns with a few chevrons.

[Thaatu]

Slingers as they are now in EB1 are sort of correctly lethal when first recruited, but become gatling guns with a few chevrons.
I've questioned this a few times in my mind, so I just ran a test battle with two celtic slingers vs. one Bataroas unit. Slinger1 had no experience while Slinger2 had experience 9. They both fired at the same time until their shots were depleted. Slinger1 killed 81 and Slinger2 killed 112. Surprisingly little difference considering it was attack 2 vs. attack 11. Similiar things seem to indicate that experience doesn't have that much of an impact on ranged units. It does have some impact, but not much. I'll still disband my ranged units if they gain too much exp.

[bovi]

I think you'll find that it's an entirely different matter if you test against a unit with decent armour.

[pezhetairoi]

Also, which unit was on the left and which on the right? That might make a difference too.

[Thaatu]

My my, so sceptical all of a sudden.


Two Iosatae (one exp 9), on top of each other, against a Seleucid Hypaspist. Both got one kill... Okay, that was pretty sad. Let's try something else.

...against a KH Thorakitai. The 0 exp. slinger got 6 kills, the 9 exp. slinger got 9.

...against Iberian Scutarii. Slinger1 got 21 kills, Slinger2 got 25 kills. They shot about half of their ammunition before the Iberians got pissed and began the pursuit. I stopped there.

Also I had two Syrian archers going one on one, the AI unit being exp 9. It was even until I got about 1/3 casualties, after which the enemy got a slight advantage and the slippery slope beat me.


I still don't think experience is that big of a deal with missiles...

[Mykingdomforanos]

Can you not just raise the armour of everything but give melee weapons and maybe archers more damage/lethality to balance the slingers more?
I guess that rebalancing the stats of pretty much everything would be a major nightmare though.

Slingers arent gamebreakers IMO, they just seem somewhat overpowered with exp, I can live with it ;) The testing above seems pretty fair compared to what any other unit would gain with experience.

Slingers not gaining missile weapon exp is a pretty major nerf, damn I will have to learn how to manouvre melee troops better.

From a realism standpoint, I can well imagine that a unit of unmolested slingers repeatedly pelting high velocity stones at lightly armoured infantry or unarmoured horses would whittle them down somewhat, I read somewhere that a sling was a daily tool for the likes of shepherds to defend against wolves and the bullet arrived with serious range and velocity, ie David vs Goliath though that was close range I guess.

[Kολοσσός]

I have annihilated an opposing army with slingers alone but I had an elevation advantage. My mounted general was well forward, ahead of my formation and at the base of the mountain. AI, given the choice of climbing up hill to meet my main force or focusing on the general may choose option two. So they followed my general around the field of battle exposing flanks to missile fire. I made sure my general kept his distance, his job was that of bait. I think the enemy suffered something like 700 casualties due to slings alone. On the other hand, if heavily armored infantry closes in from 12 o'clock on level ground the stone throwers may as well pelt them with ping-pong balls. That's why they should be in the skirmish mode because that will make them adjust the formation constantly. If the enemy goes for the center the center slingers will retreat but the flank slingers will stand their ground hitting the enemy from the flanks.

[Olaf The Great]

Think of it this way...

1-The AI sucks in RTW, you will win most battles, a couple of losses should be a good thing.
2-If they have 4/5 chevrons, wouldn't it make sense that they are uber?
3-As what other say, lead bullets going at 50 mph *do* hurt, even through armor, and depending on size and speed might even kill a man or knock him off his horse(IE RTS cavalry death)

[bovi]

[tests]

I still don't think experience is that big of a deal with missiles...
Those results seem to fly in the face of my earlier experience (and reasoning!) that a attack of strength 11 AP with 100% lethality should be extremely much more efficient than a strength 2 AP with the same lethality. I have no explanation, and ran a few tests of my own.


Two iosatae of respectively 0 exp, 9 exp against a mori gaesum front on a significant downward slope, 15 vs 21 casualties (inconclusive).
0 exp, 9 exp+gold weapons on relatively flat, open terrain against a pantodapoi phalangitai front, 4 vs 22 casualties (supports the theory of extreme increase in effectiveness, but only with weapon upgrades).
0 exp, 9 exp on a slight upward slope against a pantodapoi phalangitai front, 4 vs 5 casualties (casts doubt on the theory).
0 exp, 0 exp+gold weapons on flat, open terrain against a pantodapoi phalangitai front, 7 vs 31 casualties.


I have to conclude that you are right. Seems the stats lie, the weapon upgrades are a lot more important than experience, as a 3 bonus on the weapon is more important than a 9 bonus on experience. The experienced guys always rack up more kills than their inexperienced friends, but only slightly more and nowhere near the difference that there should be.

[Mykingdomforanos]

Hmm I had assumed a weapon upgrade was just +1 to damage same as 1 point of experience is +1 to damage, thats strange

Where can you find missile weapon upgrades in EB anyway? I cant see any in the tech trees that someone published, only found the basic blacksmith with +1 to armour/light weapons/heavy weapons

[Thaatu]

So even the attack value seems to be more complicated then would imagine. Or bugged. Confusing... Judging by these tests, since the max exp level gives something like below 50% more kills compared to level 0, I think it's nothing to worry about. Although more tests should probably be done before concluding this as the final truth...


Oh, but if anyone sees Rebel slingers that have golden weapon upgrades, better pack cruise missiles with you.

[pezhetairoi]

I was thinking more of them bomblet-releasing bombs. Cruise missiles are a little too...specific.

Scary to see the results, though. No wonder the enemy garrisons aren't dying that much faster under my First Army silver chevroned slingers as they are to my Third Army bronze chevroned ones.

[Callicles]

Regarding the flaming arrow discussion, I only use them when defending. The reason being that I don't know where the archers would have gotten the fire from. They didn't have lighters in their pockets.

So, regardless of whether it is historically accurate, I imagine the same sort of thing that is at the beginning of the movie Gladiator. A small trench is dug just in front of the archer line. Some sort of oil is poured in and then lit on fire. The Archers dip the end of their arrows in before loosing the next volley.

Again, I don't know if it is accurate - in fact may very well not be - but I think it is more accurate than archers running around the battlefield with torches in their pockets.