Printable View
The cost of upkeep for hastati and principles are almost the same, but the principes have far better equipment and better stats.
IMO, I'd think that if you have a full set of chain mail armor, great equipment, and have seen battle before, you'd require much more money for upkeep than a fresh green unit of moderately armed hastati...?
Someone enlighten me...
Nope, Roman levies that buy their own kit, not professional soldiers = crappy pay = low upkeep.
I can see why the upkeep for equipment in both cases would be nill, but I had always assumed (without any basis, it is true) that principes would be genraly better locked after than hastatai, with more privilages, less grunt work, ect. And better pay.
Is this not correct, then?
In addition, shouldn't the upkeep of the levies reflect the economic penalty of having landowners away from their farms and businesses? (as apposed to specializing farming and fighting, rather than having the same people do both)
But you could argue that having specialsed fighters is damaging the ecobomy, becuase if they weren't profesionals, they would be farming, doing some other taxable job.
So I have never really bought that theory, though it is included extensivley in eb.
Given that the later professional legions were basically recruited from the severely poor who understandably tended to prefer steady meals, roof over head and a salary to starving in the gutter...
Anyway, AFAIK the upkeep in EB is by and large a fairly straight 1/4 of the recruitement cost... but of course the calculation of the latter may have gotten glitched at some point.
After the First Punic War, many of the soldiers who had been away fighting for so long missed the harvest. Their crops were rotting, and they had little option but to move to the city and sell their farms to big landowners. This led to a trend of urbanization, which increased the number of urban poor (the class Marius would later call on to enlist).Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharnakes
Roman amateurism became even more apparent when Hannibal marched through Italy unchecked for years on end. So it clearly hurt the eternal city not just economically, but militarily.
But to address your original post. Rome was populated enough as it was, and had plenty of slaves to do the farming. Slaves are far cheaper than farm-hands, because after all you only need to feed them and give them a place to sleep (if you want an idea of how to use your slaves most efficiently, read Cato's On Farming--it's appallingly immoral, but economically appealing to the unscrupulous). In addition, it is not as if slaves were in short supply, particularly after 146 BC (when Rome showed her newfound brutality by sacking Carthage and Corinth).
But I digress. The main reason I thought it would be better to increase the upkeep and decrease the cost of the levy, and/or decrease the upkeep and increase the cost is because it would better differentiate the militia and professional armies (plus the difference makes for fun gameplay).
Just my opinion. I intend to follow this plan for my future Romani campaign.
^ uhh, guys, I'm talking about pre-Marian Hastatis and Principes (the land owners), not post-Marian cohorts. lol
I'm asking why principes costs the same as hastatis to maintain while they have so much better equipment while they are also suppose to be the "veterans" who have seen some combat - as opposed to hastatis who are much poorer to have the same equipment and are usually fresh green troops.
EB has some system of balance that the team is happy with. I agree though, for gameplay purposes, you really have no reason to recruit hastati.
Maybe it could be an addition to your already great Cohort/Phalanx/elephants minimod...lolQuote:
Originally Posted by TWFanatic
With something that small, you might as well just edit it yourself. You could slightly increase cost of principes and slightly decrease cost of hastati.
True, so the gold standard is 1/4 the recruitment cost = upkeep?
Far as I know, anyway. (And if you want to see a case of those having gotten spectacularly buggered in the process, look no further than the Komatai Epilektoi... :sweatdrop: )
TWFanatic when you look at the units descriptions you will find the following:
Levies: are broke down individuals who cannot afford thier own equipment. So they throw a few rocks/arrows/javelings and run like hell when the enemy gets close.
--But u also have other levies who are either issued or get themselves a spear and a shield.
Regular troops like pre-marian legions, Phalangitai Deuteroi, Hoplitai, and a few more.
-Are land/property owners THEREFORE they can afford their own equipment (and vote in the case of western greeks).
Levies tend to be people who worked (or not worked) low paying jobs just get by.
By levies I simply meant troops who are "levied" i.e. the militia army.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoSpartan
Tell me something I don't know.Quote:
Regular troops like pre-marian legions, Phalangitai Deuteroi, Hoplitai, and a few more.
-Are land/property owners THEREFORE they can afford their own equipment (and vote in the case of western greeks).
Not going to contribute to the landowners argument.
But I will say that for me it makes sense to have Hastati, given that they cost the same as Principes and that, during battles, it's always a good idea to have your crappier troops take the brunt of the fighting first, that way they tire out the enemy units. When that happens, I generally replace the Hastati with the Principes during any lull in the fighting and thus, when the enemy charges again, I've got fresh, well-armoured troops with good morale (and a full stack of pila) against tired enemy troops who have by this time normally wasted all their ammunition (at least when playing against AI). That tends to win the battle for me. If even that doesn't work, I bring out the Triarii and deliver the coup-de-grace. It's historical AND effective!
For me, the fact that they cost the same as Hastati is a bonus, not a problem.
You, sir, are evidently an optimist who looks on it as a good thing that principes are as cheap as hastatai.
The rest of us seem to be pessimists who think it is a bad thing that hastatai are as expensive as principes:sweatdrop:
My opinion? short of the abolishment of all roman units except accensi (don't kill me bovi:oops: ), I think things are fine as they are.
Why would I? You didn't turn your back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharnakes
Well, no, because if they cost the same and the principes is the better unit, the logical thing to do is to produce all principes and never produce hastatis.Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Alco
Precisely. For the sake of better gameplay, there should be an incentive for a player to recruit hastati. Worried about historical accuracy? Well, making the upkeep of both units the same is just begging for people to use principes instead of hastati, which is entirely inaccurate.
Why should there be an incentive?
How ridgidly you stick to historical accuracy is entirely up to the player.
By that logic, EB has no reason to be historically accurate. It's up to the player to make it so if he wishes it to be so.Quote:
How ridgidly you stick to historical accuracy is entirely up to the player.
Why? Oh, perhaps just for the sake of historical accuracy.Quote:
Why should there be an incentive?
No, EB provides a framework, within which the player can be historicaly acurate if he chooses. RTW won't let you be accurate, no matter how hard you try, the units, traits, ballancing, ect is just too far away.
No, it seems that historicaly the principes and hastatai got paid the same by the state.Quote:
Originally Posted by TWFanatic
Arguably also logic. The Principes are wealthier men, meaning they're the owners of larger estates or whatever; and duly one would imagine the negative economical effect of them being away from their "day job" to be that much more severe than that of the (relatively speaking) poorer Hastati-class militiamen.
But as I've mentioned already, it may simply - or even most likely - be a minor oversight in statting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharnakes
You still have to factor in the cost of upkeep for equipment, among many other external costs.
If historically, principes and hastatis were equal in total cost to maintain and train, then pre-Marian Rome would've equipped all her soldiers in principes fashion.
Other factors besides wages certainly increased the upkeep rate for principes.
No, the men payed for their equpiment, and presumably also the equipments upkeep. So the STATE sees no increase in costs.
The only reason the romans didn't recruit pure principes was the lack of sufficently rich men to afford the equipment, which eventualy lead to the marian system of recruitment. As the differing social classes can't be represented in eb...
Should hopefuly be solved for EB2, when you can have differing regeneration rates.
That would be basic compensation for their financial losses from being away from their main livelihood for an extended period, and of course funds for such running costs as food and whatever. I recall having been told one time the Greek city-states had comparable arrengements for their citizen-soldiers. However, the unit upkeep cost is an abstract number and must also account for the overall losses imposed by productive citizens being away from conducting their main business...Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharnakes
I say, Medieval II and EBII will sove this :)
Cheers...
Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pharnakes
Look - playing Rome isn't hard. You could recruit all Hastati or all Principe and it really wouldn't change that much. I can understand why people would want a reason to recruit one or the other but it really comes down to issues outside of cost in game terms - something that M2TW can abstractly deal with.
To be honest, I believe there is an argument for merging the Hastati and Principe units as they were effectively equipped in a similar manner and performed basically the same roles on the battlefield - an indistinguishable role as far as RTW/EB gameplay goes. Hence the temptation to simply train Principes over Hastati.
The main difference between the two appears to be the younger, less well equipped, less experienced men were deployed in the first line, and the better equipped and experienced men were deployed in the second.
With one unit for both lines [Call it Legionary Infantry or something], that can be simulated by simply putting the raw units in the front line, any units with experience chevrons and armour/weapon upgrades in the second. Frees up a unit slot too. Actually would free up more than that given the Camillian and Polybian units.
Anyway, just something that always bothered me about those particular units.