EB Historians Hear Me Out

Lorica segmentata->Adrian Goldsworthy said that from new archaeologic digs in Kalkriese (supposed site of Teutoburg wald) was found there. Then he goes on to say that Romans wore them, and included a drawing.

Masks-> for Signifers, hes says also found in Kalkriese (supposed site of Teutoburg wald) that signifers wore them (but he does know, before it was thought just for ceremony or parades).

Is Adrian Goldsworthy, author of "The Complete Roman Army" and other books on this subject, wrong? or is he right because of new finds in Kalkriese?

EDIT:spelling, and I put helmets as if signifer did not use 'em...I MUST BE RETARDED

EDIT2: No I dont want segentata units in EB. I just thought the basic thoughts of everyone here was "it didnt exist" in this time period.

Battle of Teutoburg Forest, 9 AD. 'Nuff said really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

Battle of Teutoburg Forest, 9 AD. 'Nuff said really.

---

I expected much more from you.

:inquisitive: What did you expect, then ? It's hardly breaking news the first segmentatas start turning up around that period. But they were yet anything but even remotely common at that time, not that they ever became particularly normative later either whatever the official goal might have been.

So how's any of it relevant to EB whose timeline caps out around that time if not slightly earlier ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Watchman

:inquisitive: What did you expect, then ? It's hardly breaking news the first segmentatas start turning up around that period. But they were yet anything but even remotely common at that time, not that they ever became particularly normative later either whatever the official goal might have been.

So how's any of it relevant to EB whose timeline caps out around that time if not slightly earlier ?

---

Armies started using segmented in 9 AD. EB ends in, what 14 AD?

So those five years merit another Roman reform, and another batch of Roman units?

from what i understand you want EB to add a unit which is wearing LS from 9-14 AD?
what a waste of a unit slot....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyar Son

Armies started using segmented in 9 AD. EB ends in, what 14 AD?

---

15 AD. I understand what you are saying, but this has been brought up before. In fact, IIRC there is even a segmentata find that predates Teutoberger Wald. The point is that it wasn't used in large numbers until about half a century later, and even at at it's height it was never used by the majority of the legions. It seems rather pointles to add another legionary unit that is wearing armour that would not become common until half a century, especially since the Romans are not exactly short on units and the mod is running out of model space.

Apart from that, I'd like to meet some guys that have actually REACHED 14 AD with their campaign.

Well, that pretty much fills up the quota for LS threads for February. Please come again in March. Or should this be counted as March's LS thread, seeing as it's the last day of February? o.O

I fear the plural I detect in your writings, Pezhetairoi.

Regardless: a LS-unit is quite obviously a waste of space so I think I can take a bit of liberty and say it will not be included as a unit. There are some much more significant and needed units waiting to find their way into EB...

I think it should be Pez's job to handle all LS threads. Pez, you could even keep a standardized answer and post it whenever the new LS thread starts. :idea2:
This would save the EB team TONS of time - which they can spend making EB 1.1. :study:
Something EVERYONE will be happy with!:beam: :beam:
As a reward, whomever hands out green balloons should do so ... here Pez. Here is one from me... :balloon2:
*sees downcast Pez* It's ok, Pez, c'mon, let's go to the tavern. I'll get you a drink. . . .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pezhetairoi

seeing as it's the last day of February? o.O

---

isnt this year a leap year?so it would be in 2 days.....

No I dont want segentata units in EB. I just thought the basic thoughts of everyone here was "it didnt exist" in this time period.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hooahguy

isnt this year a leap year?so it would be in 2 days.....

---

You forgot that for over half of the world the 29th had already begun when you wrote it, though. There's life beyond East Coast, you know. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyar Son

No I dont want segentata units in EB. I just thought the basic thoughts of everyone here was "it didnt exist" in this time period.

---

Quoth the FAQ:

Quote:

---

II Historic
---
Q: Where is the Lorica Segmentata?
A: Lorica Segmentata wasn't used until several years in AD. This places Lorica Segmentata out of the EB time frame and to include it would be ahistorical.

---

I don't see any denial of existence, merely the observation that it is out of the timeframe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios

There's life beyond East Coast, you know. ~;)

---

WHAT?! impossible! theres no such thing!
surely you must be joking!:whip:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Boyar Son

Lorica segmentata->Adrian Goldsworthy said that from new archaeologic digs in Kalkriese (supposed site of Teutoburg wald) was found there. Then he goes on to say that Romans wore them, and included a drawing.

-----

Is Adrian Goldsworthy, author of "The Complete Roman Army" and other books on this subject, wrong? or is he right because of new finds in Kalkriese?

---

Just to be a picky technique-conscious historian, I find Goldsworthy's work to be very rough, technically speaking, and he jumps to conclusions in his work without necessarily providing solid evidence--as if it were supposed to be as self-evident to everyone as it seems to be for him.

Not that he's absolutely wrong from this observation; but he has a history of jumping to conclusions.

Dhampir,
I thought Goldsworthy's work is a great 200 level course on all things Roman Army-esque. Although the EB team would - in my view - be graduate level (or expert even). *doffs hat to the EB team* Alot of the players here are probably coming in at the high school level and get most of their info from their high school history courses or the History channel. Nothing wrong with that. We ALL start thereabouts.
And through this game, some of our interests are piqued and we dig deeper. That in itself, may be the EB team's greatest contribution.
Having said that. . .
Boyar Son,
I too find Goldsworthy's work to be somewhat quick to make a conclusion. Sometimes, I have to re-read the last paragraph to make sure I didn't miss something. I think - in person - he is undoubtably an expert. As Goldsworthy expresses it is often hard to know for sure when it comes to things from the Ancient World. Lack of evidence son on so forth... .

I'm very pleased to hear those opinions of Goldsworthy's books. While I have enjoyed them very much and learned a lot from them there have been quite a few occasions where I have thought I must have missed something and a couple more read throughs have left me still perplexed at how he came to certain conclusions. It's nice to know I'm not alone.

Boyar Son:
1. Lorica Segmentata did exist, but only for certain for the final few years of an EB campaign and even then only in a small minority of cases - even after that it isn't fully attested as being the mainstay of the Roman armies.
2. If it were to be included it'd be unrepresentative, whatever the period. Possibly on artillery users.
3. 9 AD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhampir

Just to be a picky technique-conscious historian, I find Goldsworthy's work to be very rough, technically speaking, and he jumps to conclusions in his work without necessarily providing solid evidence--as if it were supposed to be as self-evident to everyone as it seems to be for him.

Not that he's absolutely wrong from this observation; but he has a history of jumping to conclusions.

---

Comes from basing himself largely on literature, and not being particularly up-to-date on the archeological side of things. So, he's quite decent on events (nothing new, but presented smartly), but less so on the nuts and bolts.

Maybe this should go to the EB 2 tread, but how about that: In EB 2 (if possible of course) for the Imperial legioneries both LH and LS can be used as skins, since the M2TW engine allows a couple of skins per unit. And then we would have no monthly tread on LS.

Quote:

---

Maybe this should go to the EB 2 tread, but how about that: In EB 2 (if possible of course) for the Imperial legioneries both LH and LS can be used as skins, since the M2TW engine allows a couple of skins per unit. And then we would have no monthly tread on LS.

---

Two things:

1) Have you ever *reached* higher than 9 AD in your campaign?

2) The Imperial reforms happen in what, 150 BC? To have some units in there with Lorica Segmentata more than 150 years before they started using it? Nah.

There's the Augustan ones too, tho. But IIRC, the problem is that we're not talking about 'rare' or 'uncommon'; we're talking about 'exceedingly rare to the point of being of so little significance as to hardly make it worth a thechnical footnote for history buffs, and the most thechnically inclined ones only' ... that is to say: beyond being do-able to include with Augustan legionaries without giving an awfully distorted view of the figures.

(If you have 4 trunks that'll mean 1 in 4 will wear it. If you make 100 trunks; it will still be every 1 in 100. Which is way beyond what the archeological record suggests, AFAIK. And such a number of skins is simply beyond do-able, if at all thechnically possible with the M2TW engine.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hax

Two things:

1) Have you ever *reached* higher than 9 AD in your campaign?

2) The Imperial reforms happen in what, 150 BC? To have some units in there with Lorica Segmentata more than 150 years before they started using it? Nah.

---

Excuse me Hax but if am not mistaken the historical place of the imperial reforms is about the 20s BC. Since they can happen about 150 BC I thought the LS could also be placed there. I don't demand LS. I can easily live and enjoy the game without it. But I proposed the upper as a way to shut the LS lovers up. I have total trust in the EB team's judgement, especially since I pointed out that I am not very adept at modding or history.

Historically, the Marians also happened in 107 BC. The trigger in EB is 190 BC, and I believe the Imperial happen some 50 years after that. Even if you reach them in 100 BC (which is quite far in the campaign), you would be more than 100 years BEFORE the first use (!) of the Lorica Segmentata.

I hate LS...

From a purely aesthetic point of view, I prefer the serious utilitarian look of chain-mail to the Hollywood cliché over-polished LS. Even on an inexperienced soldier, chain-mail adds a menacing quality for some reason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matinius Brutus

Excuse me Hax but if am not mistaken the historical place of the imperial reforms is about the 20s BC. Since they can happen about 150 BC I thought the LS could also be placed there. I don't demand LS. I can easily live and enjoy the game without it. But I proposed the upper as a way to shut the LS lovers up. I have total trust in the EB team's judgement, especially since I pointed out that I am not very adept at modding or history.

---

I just posted why it isn't a very practical idea. Unless I am very mistaken in which case I welcome anyone with some knowledge on the matter at hand (statistics of LS finds in the time-frame of EB)... :wink:

In short the issue is not on the conceptual side; but on the practical side of the story -- it can't be done properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dhampir

From a purely aesthetic point of view, I prefer the serious utilitarian look of chain-mail to the Hollywood cliché over-polished LS. Even on an inexperienced soldier, chain-mail adds a menacing quality for some reason.

---

Seconded. LS just makes me think "The Wizard of Oz".