Pedites Extraordinarii more expensive than Samnite Infantry, but weaker?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MastaSpoofa

So, where polybian triarii not the men who held the line? I dont understand why, if they were the safegaurd of the legion, to hold the enemy until the legion could regroup, I dont know why they would choose to allow for more mobility. Please explain if you have the time. (I lack any knowledge but it doesn't seem logical.)

---

The hastatii and principes were the linemen. The hastatii wore down the enemy a bit in preparation for the principes, who were the men who held the line as far as I know. They only broke out the triarii when the situation was somewhat dire; they even had a saying - "To have to go to the triarii" (or something like that) - meaning the situation is bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyabedes of Aphrodisias

The hastatii and principes were the linemen. The hastatii wore down the enemy a bit in preparation for the principes, who were the men who held the line as far as I know. They only broke out the triarii when the situation was somewhat dire; they even had a saying - "To have to go to the triarii" (or something like that) - meaning the situation is bad.

---

Even so, that doesnt provide an explanation of why the romans decided to change to a mobile triarii, when the Triarii are suppose to hold the line, and even when things did get bad why would they choose to change their most heavily armored troops into somthing more mobile?

I can't answer that one, but my best guess would be to get them to the trouble spots quicker?

Perhaps the reasoning was not to add mobility. I think the mobility may have been a side-effect. The Polybian Reforms, to my knowledge, was the beginning of the empire-forming stages. They needed more available troops (hence the extension of the "who can be in the army" list) and manipular tactics were the order of the day. The hoplite phalanx of the Camillan triarii was very immobile and very expensive. Losing that lavish armor setup let up on a heavy expense, and losing the hoplite phalanx and the heavy armor allowed them to get to trouble spots faster and in better order.

That's my take. I'm open for correction by anyone who knows what they're talking about.

I asked about Triarii stats some time ago and this is what I was told:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus

About the Triarii.
The Polybian Triarii is statistically better than the Camilian Triarii. The old reason for this was that the Polybian triarii had mobility to make up for the stat loss. But now that the Camilian Triarii has the overhand animation, they are essensially equally mobile. Should not the stats be changed to about equal...?

---

Quote:

---

They're pretty much equal as it is, the only difference is that the Camillan version has a very slightly better lethality, as it should be. Thank you for drawing attention to these, though, I noticed that the Polybians have a wrong shield rating.

---

Quote:

---

The Polybian has a greater advantage fighting cavalry as well. Cheaper too.

---

Later Triarii have a nice moral boost. Quite a step up actualy, makes them far better at the job of holding a foe.

I (with some help from Peter Connolly) might be able to shed some light on the debate about the Triarii.

During the Early Republic, Camillan for game reference, the romans fought in a very defensive manner with the 1st line of Hastati screened by Leves, a second of Principis, and a third of Triarii, 'sometimes' supported by the Accensi and Rorarii. In addition there's no indication that the Triarii 'Maniples', then called Ordines, were half the size of the first two lines as in the mid-later republic. So that's a line of perhaps 900, backed by a line of 900, backed by a line of up to 2700!

That makes for a very deep third line, and implies a very defensive posture should the Hastati and Principis fail. During this period the Romans suffered many defeats which may have inspired this defensive mentality. The eventual conquest of Italy was at times a very rocky road.

This is probably the period during which 'It has come to the Triarii' was coined.

In the Mid-Republic, Polybian, the Romans had met with a measure of success in battle and seem to have become more aggressive in their use of all 3 lines in battle. The 3 line system worked, so wasn't abandoned, but the perceived need for the Triarii disappeared which may be why their level of representation lessened during this period ie- half sized centuries per maniple, and abandonment of the Accensi/Rorarii.....perhaps :beam: )

Obviously there is a fair amount of 'assumption', and a required level of faith in ancient authors (but what other sources do we have) in what I have written, but I feel mildly confident that it's a good set of asumptions.

Cheers,

Quilts

Delbrück offers an alternate interpretation of the Livy legion, different from Connolly in his analysis of the Rorarii and Accensi. He works from Livy's number: 186 men "antipilani" and "sub signis." His explanation is that the Triarii were at one time called the Pilani and that the Triarii, Rorarii and Accensi were positioned behind the standards. Those behind the standards, then, were the 60 men of the Triarii; plus the 120 Rorarii attached in units of 40 men to each of the Hastati, Principes and Triarii maniples; plus the 6 Accensi, orderlies or company clerks; for a total of 186 men.

He considers the Leves, the skirmishers, to be a part of the 40 man Rorarii unit assigned to each Hastati maniple. For the 10 Hastati maniples that would place some 200 skirmishers directly in front of the battle line. These are the men who would retreat through the gaps in the Hastati line. He also mentions that there may have been other skirmishers on the flanks; possibly the other 20 Rorarii of the Hastati maniples. He does not believe the Rorarii of the Principes and Triarii maniples were combat soldiers at all, but rather were unarmed assistants. The Accensi, he says, were totally misinterpreted by Livy. These were the 6 orderlies of the cohort. In muster formation the three 40 man Rorarii units would stand behind the 60 man Triarii maniples. Behind them would stand the 6 Accensi orderlies. This gives the number of 186 men as "sub Signis."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyabedes of Aphrodisias

I can't answer that one, but my best guess would be to get them to the trouble spots quicker?

Perhaps the reasoning was not to add mobility. I think the mobility may have been a side-effect. The Polybian Reforms, to my knowledge, was the beginning of the empire-forming stages. They needed more available troops (hence the extension of the "who can be in the army" list) and manipular tactics were the order of the day. The hoplite phalanx of the Camillan triarii was very immobile and very expensive. Losing that lavish armor setup let up on a heavy expense, .

---

Why is the Camillan Triari cheaper to recruit and maintain than the Polybian Triari then? The Camian Triari costs less than 400 to maintain, while Polybian Triari costs ~500 to maintain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intranetusa

Why is the Camillan Triari cheaper to recruit and maintain than the Polybian Triari then? The Camian Triari costs less than 400 to maintain, while Polybian Triari costs ~500 to maintain.

---

O.o That's definately a hole in my thought.

Besides, doesn't the description of the Antesigniani at least mention the muscle-cuirass was actually lighter than the lorica hamata...?

intresting...quite a lot of errors then?

Camillan Triari is cheaper to recruit, cheaper to maintain, has lighter armor, has better stats, looks cooler, etc

Polybian Triari...maybe has slightly better morale?


STRANGE!!!

Thats the price of progress.

Foot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Intranetusa

intresting...quite a lot of errors then?

Camillan Triari is cheaper to recruit, cheaper to maintain, has lighter armor, has better stats, looks cooler, etc

Polybian Triari...maybe has slightly better morale?


STRANGE!!!

---

Correction: the Polybians have the lighter armor O.o...

I actually like the Polybian triarii better as far as looks go.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyabedes of Aphrodisias

Correction: the Polybians have the lighter armor O.o...

I actually like the Polybian triarii better as far as looks go.

---

Well, I like the false-Corthian helmet of the Camillan Triaris.

But in all other aspects, Camillans Tiaris are better than Polybian Triaris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaknafien

Delbrück offers an alternate interpretation of the Livy legion, different from Connolly in his analysis of the Rorarii and Accensi. He works from Livy's number: 186 men "antipilani" and "sub signis." His explanation is that the Triarii were at one time called the Pilani

---

I've heard the term Pilani used before but for the life of me can't think where it was..... :wall: . That will teach me to not index my library! Maybe later :book:

Quote:

---

and that the Triarii, Rorarii and Accensi were positioned behind the standards. Those behind the standards, then, were the 60 men of the Triarii; plus the 120 Rorarii attached in units of 40 men to each of the Hastati, Principes and Triarii maniples; plus the 6 Accensi, orderlies or company clerks; for a total of 186 men.

---

Ok. That is interesting. Haven't heard of him. Is his work in English? or are there translated versions available?

I don't know what the actual source of the statement I'm going to quote is(but am more than willing to find out if need be, but you may already be aware of it), which states- 'Accensi by their name should be servants and were considered less reliable than the rorarii, but on the one occasion they are mentioned in battle were mistaken at a distance for triarii, so must have been armed as spearmen' (DBM Army Lists, Book 2, Wargames Research Group).

It certainly conflicts with Delbruck (damn you Livy! :dizzy2:) in that to be mistaken for a body of troops there would need to be more than 6 of them.

Quote:

---

He considers the Leves, the skirmishers, to be a part of the 40 man Rorarii unit assigned to each Hastati maniple. For the 10 Hastati maniples that would place some 200 skirmishers directly in front of the battle line. These are the men who would retreat through the gaps in the Hastati line. He also mentions that there may have been other skirmishers on the flanks; possibly the other 20 Rorarii

---

Phew, I was wondering what happened to the other 20

Quote:

---

of the Hastati maniples. He does not believe the Rorarii of the Principes and Triarii maniples were combat soldiers at all, but rather were unarmed assistants. The Accensi, he says, were totally misinterpreted by Livy. These were the 6 orderlies of the cohort. In muster formation the three 40 man Rorarii units would stand behind the 60 man Triarii maniples. Behind them would stand the 6 Accensi orderlies. This gives the number of 186 men as "sub Signis."

---

I find myself actually quit taken with the assessment made by N. Sekunda and S. Northwood in 'Early Roman Armies', Osprey Publishing. They state that Livy's version must be rejected, and that one has to assume that the Maniple system was always composed of 3 Lines plus attached light infantry (rorarii, later known as velites) from it's very beginning, and that Livy has invented a role for the Accensi, who as baggage carriers (Varro) would infact have stood behind the whole formation (remembering this was pre-marching camp days if you believe that the Romans learnt that art from Pyrrhos).

Cheers,

Quilts

Quote:

---

It certainly conflicts with Delbruck (damn you Livy! ) in that to be mistaken for a body of troops there would need to be more than 6 of them.

---

6 man for how many maniples? Even baggage carriers would have some sort of weapon - spears are good, you can even use them for your tent ;) I definitaly would hate the idea of going to the battlefield totaly unarmed.
So lets say there are 100-200 "civilists", armed with one or more (throwing) spears from the "baggage" (weapons get broken so having some more is good).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

Thats the price of progress.

Foot

---

Well, I though that romans were most eager than others to adapt to better fight their enemies. Isn't it weird to have weaker units when they are supposed to represent an enhancement in the overal roman military tactics (since we can really see a different in the tactics themselves)

So after all this talk and all this time, is there changes planned concerning Camillan/Polybian units' stats and costs ??

^ Wow Patriote, how did you manage to bring up this 3+ month old topic?

lol...

Haha well started playing EB like a month ago and realised lately, while playing, that Camillan/Polybian changes were "weird" so instead a creating a new thread and being told to look for old ones, I simply did a search for them.

Isn't it simple ? :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordCurlyton

Yes, but only in a camillan MIC. And frankly, keeping those around after the polybians hit is just plain wrong.

---

I'm playing the Averni, and I conquered the Romani in the 260s. It's now almost 250 and I've got a level 4 regional MIC building in Capua which will turn out Samnite heavy infantry in a few turns. I'm hoping it'll keep working indefinitely -- after all, Polybius never reformed the Averni military machine.

Does anybody know if I can assume that the Polybians won't happen to the Averni?

This is all AFAIK:

No Polybian reforms for you!
1) The Polybian reforms are for Romans only; and require they are alive & kicking.
2) You use a different MIC structure for recruiting your Samnites; so whatever happens to the Roman MICs doesn't affect your recruitment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LordCurlyton

Yes, but only in a camillan MIC. And frankly, keeping those around after the polybians hit is just plain wrong.

---

i left Arpi without the upgraded MIC, so i could still retrain my camillian units. :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patriote

Well, I though that romans were most eager than others to adapt to better fight their enemies. Isn't it weird to have weaker units when they are supposed to represent an enhancement in the overal roman military tactics (since we can really see a different in the tactics themselves)

So after all this talk and all this time, is there changes planned concerning Camillan/Polybian units' stats and costs ??

---

There has been some cost balancing for the Romans and a few stat tweaks since 0.8x. Keep in mind that the current public build is a beta and this includes the stats and costs. Very few units have not been changed in either stats or costs since the last public release.

Thanks for the answer!

It's just that I started paying with 0.81a, that must be why I did not see any change so far :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spoofa

So, where polybian triarii not the men who held the line? I dont understand why, if they were the safegaurd of the legion, to hold the enemy until the legion could regroup, I dont know why they would choose to allow for more mobility. Please explain if you have the time. (I lack any knowledge but it doesn't seem logical.)

---

The Triarii where the last line to loseing the battle:laugh4: while the army fought the triarii shaded under there shilds to protect them from the heat and sun and waited to be called upon...lazy old sods..

Also can someone answer this..Im seeing conflicting posts..WHen i reach the first reform do i have to distroy the highest barrecks to get all the new units? I have every homeland barracks updated fully..when it comes around will i still get the new units? and if i mess up can i still distroy them and build them back and will the new units be present? maybe i should save my game before 242bc hmmm Please help hurry:sweatdrop:

If you get the reforms and have the highest level of MIC, then the L5MIC(Camilian) will upgrade to the L5MIC(Polybian). I don't see why people even have this question. There is nothing new on the upper levels of the Camilian MICs and there are tons of buildings that should be built instead of wasting time and money on useless upper level MICs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus

If you get the reforms and have the highest level of MIC, then the L5MIC(Camilian) will upgrade to the L5MIC(Polybian). I don't see why people even have this question. There is nothing new on the upper levels of the Camilian MICs and there are tons of buildings that should be built instead of wasting time and money on useless upper level MICs.

---

Ok this is why..I was told useing money cheats if you update ahead of the script..That once you've built every single high levvel barracks all lower etc..that if you do this before the script reform comes around you will have to distory them before the reforms then build them again or you wont get the new units and will be stuck with the old ones..i dont wanna have to restart this campian over again this is why i ask.

That's how it was in v0.80, but was changed for v0.81 and beyond.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus

That's how it was in v0.80, but was changed for v0.81 and beyond.

---

Thank ya sir..