Printable View
...possess the same stats and abilities as the elite hoplite unit (or something like that) which I get to recruit in Athens currently?
I mean, weren't the spartan hoplites considered to be the elite warrior caste of Greece?
Or is this simply an exaggeration?
To make matters worse the spartans even cost more to recruit as well as to maintain :wall:
So yeah, what's up with that?
You're thinking of a time a century or more earlier. Sparta got much weaker at the start of the game.
In my experience,I've only used Spartans in sandbox battles and as garrison troops in Sparta and Syracuse,Armored Hoplites being my main field force in distant locales. But mostly Spartans are at their best when bulked up with experience,weapon,and armor upgrades.
I don't recall for Armored Hoplites,but a Spartan unit with gold all across the board can have an attack level of something like 28,but it's near impossible to get them that high in campaign.
So basically, I'd only want to use Spartans for the sake of using Spartans?
Quite unfair...
It would be nice if their upkeep costs were reduced to make them more economically viable.
Or maybe give them the 'good stamina' or 'powerful charge' trait?
didnt we just finish a Spartan hoplite thread?:inquisitive:
btw,they kick ass in my campaign,they made me lose a battle cause i couldnt kill them in a city in 20 mins,one troop and they were not in the centra lplaza :inquisitive:
Well I'm not saying they're bad units.
On the contrary, they're as of yet the best infantry unit I can recruit alongside the elite hoplite I mentioned earlier.
But said hoplite is cheaper to recruit as well as to upkeep and, as far as I'm aware of, it's not a unit that's bound to 1 city for recruitment.
In other words, you'd think the more expensive unit is better -_-
That's a statting slip-up then. There's quite a bit of those around actually, many the side effect of numerous revisions and tweaks back-and-forth.
As it goes, the Spartans should be marginally cheaper than the regular plate-clad elite hoplites - slightly less armour coverage, no ?
Oh, what 300 does to young minds...
The Spartans were elite because of their status as full-time soldiers. When others states develop a professional military what else could you expect?
And even in the heydays the Spartans were famed; but not neccesarily any more elite than their Athenian, Korinthian, Theban etc. etc. counterparts.
After all, the Spartiatai got served by Thebes, right?
The Thebans seem to have a history of martial valor as evidenced by the Theban contingent at Thermopolyae staying as well, their Sacred Band, as well as their ability to challenge the other Greek Regional Powers.
Didn't the Theban contingent at Thermopolyae change sides or surrender at the first chance? It was the Thespians who fought to the death along side the Spartans if I recall.
Thebes capitulated, yes. They went down in history and barbarian-lovers. It was of the reasons they were so hated and the city was eventually destroyed by Alexander.
Couldn't agree more; being a good, well trained soldier in a phalanx doesn't mean you can perform awesome feats of spear&shield-fu and run 10 oponents through with 1 spear thrust...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
O, MY bad.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdragon
This is going to be a very newbie comment at this point, but...they did? I've never had the Thebans mentioned in the same paragraph as Thermopylae in any reading on it I've ever done. Any more background on this?
Well you rightfully use past tense here. Spartans were famed in Greece for their military power. During peloponesian wars there was one battle when enemies broke and run at the very sight of spartan shields. But that aura of invincibility was anihilated ad Leuctra 371 BC. Thebans shown everybody that Spartans are not invincible. This battle also costed Sparte around 1/3 of all male citizens. This resulted in self perpetuating population problems that resulted in extremely low numbers of male citizens in IIIcBC.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sponge
So in EB Spartans are still elite and very strong soliders, but they no longer have aura of invincibility and are more expensive than "normal" hoplite elite due to obvious economical law - desired product that is not available in large numbers is growing in price...
Oops,though this was for vanilla. :embarassed:
Well,from what I've read,the recruiting restrictions for Spartans aren't very different between EB and vanilla.
How could you think it´s for Vanilla, this is the EB forum after all.
Anyway, in Vanilla you can recruit Spartans in Syrakousai (or Syracuse as it´s called), which is enourmously ahistorical. It´s true that Sparte and Syrakousai was close allies and Spartan soldiers sometimes helped the Syrakousais in their struggles against the Kart-Hasdim and other Greek polises, but that´s a long way from actually having training your own Spartans in the very peculiar way young Spartans were trained, especially as Syrakousai was known for it´s low quality hoplites. It was instead famous for it´s good cavalry, that sadly didn´t make it into the game as it´s own unit, but I think the Hippeis Xystophoroi (Greek Noble Cavalry) recruitable in Syrakousai fills basically the same role.
I remember reading something not to long ago which spoke of Thermopylae and mentioned Beotian involvement. Beotia is one of the names for the geo-political area around Thebes, such as Acadia for Athens.Quote:
Originally Posted by pezhetairoi
My question kind of shifted from a historical one to one regarding gameplay.
I've already been noted that the Spartan hoplites weren't the better fighters per se, now I only want to know why their recruitment and upkeep in game should be greater if that's not the case.
My thoughts exactly, and I guess this would answer it.Quote:
That's a statting slip-up then. There's quite a bit of those around actually, many the side effect of numerous revisions and tweaks back-and-forth.
As it goes, the Spartans should be marginally cheaper than the regular plate-clad elite hoplites - slightly less armour coverage, no ?
I based my question on hearsay and wikipedia, I haven't actually seen this movie yet because rotten tomatoes gave it a bad review :laugh4:.Quote:
Oh, what 300 does to young minds...
Don't get people wrong, its a terrible movie, but it is pretty.
I think its related to EB pricing the preceived price of a unit. Since Spartans had so many population, wealth, and mercenary issues, they were a lot harder to come by. Plus you have to factor in the fact that the state trained them from childhood and other things.
The Elite hoplites on the other hand are just experienced and skilled warriors that are given very good equipment.
Might as well wait until someone who actually knows the reason why they are priced that way, but htose are my suspicions.
Not quite the same, Thebes was one city in Beotia, often the largest and most powerful, but not always the leader. When the Beotian Federation was functioning it did serve as a sort of Federal Capital but that was not the case during the Persian Wars. Thebes capitulated, some of the other cities did not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nirvanish
Attica is what you are thinking of in relation to Athensa and that's a different kettle of fish because those two usually were interchagable.
Having said that Ancient Greek politics was a mess and nothing stayed the same for long.
Weren't the spartan hoplites/warriors noblemen or at least wealthy ciiti?zens And like every other noblemen of that time they like luxeries like wine, good food and entertainment. Such things caused high expanses i think. Then the red cloak, their armour and weapons were also of finest quality available. This would cause very high recruitment costs and to repair such weapons and the other gear would need a master smith or sth like that. I am sure there was a lot more that caused the high upkeep cost of spartan soldiers, but thats what i could think of.
For me, the efficiency of units is measured in four areas:
- stats
- price (and upkeep)
- geographical availability
- MIC needed to train them
The problem with spartans, as founder of this thread wrote at the beginning, is that they are solid elite unit, but are really pricy, available in only one settlement and need level 5 MIC, and KH can train unit that is cheaper, needs lower MIC and have better stats (ok, not entirely true, Epilektoi Hoplitai have better defence and spartans have better morale by one point) in a lot of nearby areas. So there is not any point in raising them, except for role playing.
I personally think there should be some reason to have them. I do not want them to be the best unit in the world, but look at it from this perspective:
Some people wrote that as soon as other greek poleis began to have professional hoplites, the spartans lost their exclusivity. I do not think it is true. If spartans still had their strict agoge training, then, maybe with innovation of equipment and tactics, they still would be better. We should not underestimate the brutal selecting and training process they have undergoned since childhood.
And so my proposal is to add HARDY attribute to this unit, to represent it.
They still would be worse than a lot of other elite units (that have good stamina - HARDY attribute too), but they would be the best (and priciest) unit for KH.
And KH player would have reason to raise them.
I think they deserve a "legionary eagle". Having THE Spartans by your side would likely improve morale of your soldiers.
They're fine the way they are. They do their job and add flavor to the KH Roster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Woreczko
@Imperial Fist:
No. They were not 'wealthy citizens', at least not in their heyday. In their heyday, the Spartans did not even have a currency or money. Neither were they nobles in the conventional sense, unless you consider them as nobles of age and the sword. There was certainly no rank hierarchy besides Kings - Ephors - Everyone Else.
I don't know if having a bunch of helots doing their menial agricultural work for them per person meant that the Spartans were rich, they certainly didn't -own- the helots, so it's doubtful. You misunderstand the Spartan system here, I think...
Time rich, you have to have everyone else do your crap if you're going to be a 24/7 soldier/terrorizer of helots/wife sharer.
Yes, i think i do. I only assumed they were like other nation's "elites".Quote:
Originally Posted by pezhetairoi
You have money-you serve as an officer, you have the best gear, you have certain priveleges.
But actually i was never interested in spartan or other greek cultures at all. So of course i can be wrong.
Ah, but by the beginning of the EB campaign, Sparta's 'heyday' was over 100 years in the past.Quote:
Originally Posted by pezhetairoi
By 272 BC the leading Spartan citizens had become corrupted by wealth, luxury and power and most were no longer like the famous Spartans of Thermopylae.
Let's have Thebans as the 1337 units! Thebes ROCKS! LOL! ROTFL! Thebes totally pwns Sparta :2thumbsup: :2thumbsup: :whip: and Alexander totally :furious3: for razing it!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by O'ETAIPOS
Sorry, I got a bit carried away there. * goes for a lie down *