Greek Campaign - Recruitment

I'm about 20 years into my first Greek campaign and I'm having great fun fighting off those pesky "Maks" and Epirotes. However, I have a quick question regarding the recruitment of hoplitai.

I have Level 1 govt. types in places such as Sparta, Corinth and Athens and have reached the Askesis Polemike kai Skeuothekai in Sparta. The hopitai available for recruitment are Taxeis (basic/peasant); Ekdromoi (light); and Thorakitoi (armoured) but, so far, no "mid-range/standard" models (even though there are two or three mercenary options available).

My question is; is this by design? Are "standard" hoplitai only available via the rather pricey mercenary route?

On another issue, my spies tell me that I am pretty much surrounded by "rebel" cities with full stacks. So it looks like I've an expensive siege-fest to look forward to once I've dealt with Makedon and Epiros! Ah well, laughing and smiling (and watching out for them sharp pointy things).

Must be the recruitment system. You should be able to recruit Iphriactes (no idea how to spell that) hoplitons in Greece, particularly at level 1 government... or maybe they are only available at level 2 and below. Try changing your government to level 2 in a few of your core cities.

Thanks Zorba, I'll give it a go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zorba

Must be the recruitment system. You should be able to recruit Iphriactes (no idea how to spell that) hoplitons in Greece, particularly at level 1 government... or maybe they are only available at level 2 and below. Try changing your government to level 2 in a few of your core cities.

---

I've tried level 2 and level 3 governments at both Athens and Corinth; no sign of the Iphriactes and the only difference I noted was the loss of the ability to recruit Ekdromoi at Level 3. Guess it must be a "feature".

Thanks for the suggestion anyway; it looks like I'm gonna have to buy my way out of trouble with mercs - lol.

I'm playing a Greek campaign right now and I can make regular hoplites in Athens. Used the government it started with and... Level 3 barracks I believe.

i can recruit Iphikratides Hoplites in Gov I +II. in all hellenic regions.
i think you must have Barracks Lvl 2 (3?) or higher.

the Iphikratides Hoplitai are the (modern) medium phalanx fighters.
Ekdromoi Hoplitai are the light, fast ones (but not capable of phalanx)
Taxeis Hoplitai are the very light ones, capable of phalanx

in Korinth you are able to recruit Hoplites Korinthai, which are the more classic medium hoplite.

the heavy hoplites are the Hoplites Thorakitai. which recuire one Barrack level higher than Iphikratides´s.

(excuse the incorrect spellings)
so far
AADD

If Korinthian hoplites are available, use those. They have very similar stats to Iphicrathian hoplites.

Thanks for the help guys. I've reloaded EB on a fresh 1.2 instal and that seems to have sorted things! Must have been a glitch somewhere in my original instal.

Hey guys I have a question.

I am playing as the Greeks VH/VH. I have terminated Makedon, Epiros is my ally (for now), and I just finished off Pontus.

The wierd thing is that I just took Pontus capital (which is in the middle of the Near East) it has a Pontic Type I gov't that is demoshied but needs repairing. As a result I can train ALL my Hoplite and non-hoplite infantry.

My question is: Will this Type I gov't function like the Greek Type I? Or shoulc I get rid of it?

Alwasys destroy the previous governments before you build your own government buildings in a new province. It's a code limitation - we can't totally destroy the old buildings like we would like. But you need to put your own govt buildings in - not use the old ones from the other faction.

:oops: now I get why I could rebuild a Type I Romani gov't when I took the citi as the Aedui.

Got it, I will deal with it (after the hoplite is finished training though)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

If Korinthian hoplites are available, use those. They have very similar stats to Iphicrathian hoplites.

---

Yeah but they take 2 turn to make instead of one. Other than looking old-school and cool I don't see any other advantage. Is there any?:inquisitive:

They might be more proficient in sword combat, but I don't know. The only way to find out is looking in the descr_unit.txt file.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

They might be more proficient in sword combat, but I don't know. The only way to find out is looking in the descr_unit.txt file.

---

The only difference between them is that the Iphikratean Hoplite is slightly better armoured is 1 (yes, one) Mnai cheaper to construct. In other words: there is no reason to bother with the Corinthians. IIRC Khelvan announced that they won't make it to the next version of EB either.

That's a shame, I really like the way they look.

Then again, if the next EB version is going to have non-Iphikrathian hoplites as well, I suppose there's no point in having a city specific hoplite (other then Spartiates)

Btw, how is the EB team depicting hoplites in their 1.5 build? I've played a bit of RTR Platinum before I had to deinstall everything to keep myself studying for my exams, and I recall that hoplites had a phalanx like formation by default, related to the new short_pike attribute. It didn't give them a range advantage like the old RTW phalanx, but it kept them nicely close together even outside of guard mode. I think it's perfect for classical hoplites.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

Btw, how is the EB team depicting hoplites in their 1.5 build? I've played a bit of RTR Platinum before I had to deinstall everything to keep myself studying for my exams, and I recall that hoplites had a phalanx like formation by default, related to the new short_pike attribute. It didn't give them a range advantage like the old RTW phalanx, but it kept them nicely close together even outside of guard mode. I think it's perfect for classical hoplites.

---

Well, long ago we experimented with that formation and overhand animation but it keeps the inflexibility of the RTW macedonian style phalanx and that was not so in ancient times. The classical hoplite phalanx was quite a lot more articulate, manouverable and not as vulnerable from the sides as the macedonian phalanx. Additionaly, the way the spear positioning is hard-codded in RTW makes the spear placement look odd - horizontal with horizontal thrust and with the hoplite's hand at the back of the spear which is totally innacurate. Also hit-boxes are affected by the fact the horizontal manouver of the spear aims for the head only. We have a different implementation. To use the classical hoplite phalanx (a shieldwall effectivelly) in EB, you need to keep them in guard mode and alt+attack to change to spears whenever they start fighting with swords. That way you get a flexible phalanx that can make quite an effective shieldwall.

Classical phalanx:
https://img18.imageshack.us/img18/73...rmies19.th.jpg

EB tests of classical phalanx using hard-codded RTW phalanx:
https://img143.imageshack.us/img143/...lall0fi.th.jpg

Current EB implementation - both units use it but Hypaspists are in non-Guard mode and Baktrioi Agema in Guard mode:
https://img190.imageshack.us/img190/...aspista.th.jpg

I hope this sheds some light...

Class pictures :2thumbsup:

I don't remember RTRPE hoplites had the inflexibility of the Mak phalanx (or default RTW phalanx) though. If you kept guard mode off, the soldiers would proceed agressively, but still fought in a dense crowd (unlike normal RTW units, wich would get lots of space between individual soldiers when not fighting in guard mode)
As they used the short_pike, it didn't look as silly as default hoplites in RTW. Since historically hoplites used spears with counterweights on the back end, it even looks plausible. They also get to run and charge. The only downside I see with it is that hoplies as implemented in RTRPE didn't use a secondary weapon, and only fought with spears.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

Class pictures :2thumbsup:

---

Thanks. :smiley:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

I don't remember RTRPE hoplites had the inflexibility of the Mak phalanx (or default RTW phalanx) though. If you kept guard mode off, the soldiers would proceed agressively, but still fought in a dense crowd (unlike normal RTW units, wich would get lots of space between individual soldiers when not fighting in guard mode)
As they used the short_pike, it didn't look as silly as default hoplites in RTW. Since historically hoplites used spears with counterweights on the back end, it even looks plausible. They also get to run and charge. The only downside I see with it is that hoplies as implemented in RTRPE didn't use a secondary weapon, and only fought with spears.

---

Ah. Then their solution is different from the one using the RTW hard-coded phalanx. Strange that they stay in formation without Guard mode. They do need a tight formation implemented but how they keep it tiddy without Guard mode confuses me a bit.

I'm not entirely sure how they did it. In the unit file, it doesn't have the phalanx attribute in the formation line. It doesn't have the phalanx ability either, it just looks like a phalanx by default. It had an attribute "short_pike" somewhere lower, but it doesn't have the same effect as short_pike in 1.2 (well, it looks the same, but it works differently)
I assume this is what keeps them in formation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

I'm not entirely sure how they did it. In the unit file, it doesn't have the phalanx attribute in the formation line. It doesn't have the phalanx ability either, it just looks like a phalanx by default. It had an attribute "short_pike" somewhere lower, but it doesn't have the same effect as short_pike in 1.2 (well, it looks the same, but it works differently)
I assume this is what keeps them in formation.

---

Thanks. That intrigues me. I'll have to make some tests. :thumbsup:

With RTRPE, from my understanding we (by which I mean the balancing team) got around it by using the short_pike attribute. With the 1.5 and 1.6 patches, this attribute allows the unit to run as normal, while maintaining the rigid square blocks like the phalanx formation. I don't know how it would look with overhand animations (due to the rear ranks holding their spears at an angle), but IMHO our current solution works fine so far.

The biggest problem, however, is what we've dubbed the "spear push bug" or the "moshpit effect". If a unit with short_pikes has any secondary weapon, they'll drop their primary weapon and engage the enemy individually with their secondary weapons and will not maintain formation. The two formations, after they clash, would just mix together in one big mess (think of most movies of ancient and medieval battles). While it looked cool, it certainly wasn't realistic. The only way to get around it was to remove the secondary weapon altogether, thus keeping the formations intact. Which is bad news for your Hypaspistai and similar units where the spears are the secondary weapons...

Hope that helps.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheexsta

With RTRPE, from my understanding we (by which I mean the balancing team) got around it by using the short_pike attribute. With the 1.5 and 1.6 patches, this attribute allows the unit to run as normal, while maintaining the rigid square blocks like the phalanx formation. I don't know how it would look with overhand animations (due to the rear ranks holding their spears at an angle), but IMHO our current solution works fine so far.

The biggest problem, however, is what we've dubbed the "spear push bug" or the "moshpit effect". If a unit with short_pikes has any secondary weapon, they'll drop their primary weapon and engage the enemy individually with their secondary weapons and will not maintain formation. The two formations, after they clash, would just mix together in one big mess (think of most movies of ancient and medieval battles). While it looked cool, it certainly wasn't realistic. The only way to get around it was to remove the secondary weapon altogether, thus keeping the formations intact. Which is bad news for your Hypaspistai and similar units where the spears are the secondary weapons...

Hope that helps.

---

It does. Thank you very much for the information. I did not know that in 1.5 the "short_pike" atribute could be used without the phalanx atribute and allow a tight formation still. One less hard-coded impedement to us.

Although the fact of the secondary weapon without phalanx still not working is detrimental to certain of our units, exactly like you mentioned refering to the Hypaspistai. I also noticed the effect you call "spear push bug" or "moshpit effect". It is indeed annoying.

Thanks again for the information. :2thumbsup:

No problems ~:)

Also, I might add that we've tried just about every possible solution for the spear push bug that we could think of, and removing the secondary weapon was the only one that would work. Things like drastically lowering the unit mass, lowering attack, lowering the charge bonus, even changing animations...nothing worked. It's definately a shame, but ultimately it's just a small annoyance.

I do hope another solution can be found, though...

Edit: one more thing. In the earlier RTRPE betas, we encountered a bug where spearmen (with or without the short_spear attribute) were able to "push" through any formation - including phalanxes - but still maintain a cohesive line. This was the original "spear push bug" where Italian Spearmen were easily capable of punching through the front of a phalangite formation, thus screwing up the whole point of having the phalanx formation in the first place. The cause of this was the "spear" attribute, which in 1.5 gives some bonuses when defending against cavalry (but only if the spearmen are in the "ready" stance). The fix for this is to change the spear attribute into "light_spear"; it reduces the defense bonus against cavalry, but fixes the main push bug. From what I've seen, giving such units the short_pike ability (without making them a phalanx) at least partially remedies this, as the unit retains their tight square formation which is good for repulsing cavalry.

All of this information has already been made public in our forums, however it would probably be just as much effort trawling through them to get useful information as it would be to test it for yourselves ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheexsta

No problems ~:)

Also, I might add that we've tried just about every possible solution for the spear push bug that we could think of, and removing the secondary weapon was the only one that would work. Things like drastically lowering the unit mass, lowering attack, lowering the charge bonus, even changing animations...nothing worked. It's definately a shame, but ultimately it's just a small annoyance.

I do hope another solution can be found, though...

---

Lack of testing by CA so it seems...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheexsta

Edit: one more thing. In the earlier RTRPE betas, we encountered a bug where spearmen (with or without the short_spear attribute) were able to "push" through any formation - including phalanxes - but still maintain a cohesive line. This was the original "spear push bug" where Italian Spearmen were easily capable of punching through the front of a phalangite formation, thus screwing up the whole point of having the phalanx formation in the first place. The cause of this was the "spear" attribute, which in 1.5 gives some bonuses when defending against cavalry (but only if the spearmen are in the "ready" stance). The fix for this is to change the spear attribute into "light_spear"; it reduces the defense bonus against cavalry, but fixes the main push bug. From what I've seen, giving such units the short_pike ability (without making them a phalanx) at least partially remedies this, as the unit retains their tight square formation which is good for repulsing cavalry.

---

Thanks for the tip. I'll make some tests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cheexsta

All of this information has already been made public in our forums, however it would probably be just as much effort trawling through them to get useful information as it would be to test it for yourselves ~D

---

Yeah. True. :smiley:

All I gotta say is keep running them tests on the Classical Hoplites.
:2thumbsup:

Hey Aymar de Bois Mauri, I was looking more closely to the picture you provided of the: "Current EB implementation - both units use it but Hypaspists are in non-Guard mode and Baktrioi Agema in Guard mode:" And I think that the spears they are using are too short.

The reason why I say that is because the spear (or Dori) used by the "Classical Greek Hoplite" was 8' long. Also, the spear was balanced so the Hoplite could hold it 2' from the end, thus having 6' of spear projecting away from the grip. And another thing, since the spear projected about 6'-5' from the individual hoplite, in a phalanx the first 2 Ranks of Hoplites would fight (instead of only 1 rank).

IF it is possible (due to coding stuff I don't understand but you guys do) I would suggest the GREEK HOPLITES have longer spears than the ones shown on the "Current EB imprementation". And the when in GUARD MODE the 1st 2 Ranks should engage the enemy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoSpartan

Hey Aymar de Bois Mauri, I was looking more closely to the picture you provided of the: "Current EB implementation - both units use it but Hypaspists are in non-Guard mode and Baktrioi Agema in Guard mode:" And I think that the spears they are using are too short.

The reason why I say that is because the spear (or Dori) used by the "Classical Greek Hoplite" was 8' long. Also, the spear was balanced so the Hoplite could hold it 2' from the end, thus having 6' of spear projecting away from the grip. And another thing, since the spear projected about 6'-5' from the individual hoplite, in a phalanx the first 2 Ranks of Hoplites would fight (instead of only 1 rank).

IF it is possible (due to coding stuff I don't understand but you guys do) I would suggest the GREEK HOPLITES have longer spears than the ones shown on the "Current EB imprementation". And the when in GUARD MODE the 1st 2 Ranks should engage the enemy.

---

Noted. Let's see if RTW's leaves any margin for the 2nd row to engage. I wouldn't put my hopes high.