Realistic Troop Numbers Mod

Some time ago, I produced a version of this for RTR, but since I only play EB now, I thought I would move it across.

The idea is to have the troop numbers in battles be more accurately scaled to history, and also to improve the battle engine to make battles more historical as well.

Introduction

We all know that an army of 2 or 3 thousand soldiers can't possibly be the total field army for Rome or Seleucia or any other major nation of the time.

Therefore, the 'apparent' troop numbers must 'represent' a much larger body of troops in some way. While I understand this logic, it is applied very inconsistently, and the underlying simulation that CA have built, does in fact represent exactly the number of men shown, and no more.

The fact that we actually play battles involving hundreds or a few thousand soldiers on each side, contributes hugely to the inaccuracies of the combat model.

There is one simple way to fix this. CA could allow MUCH larger units to exist, say thousands per unit. I truly believe that this is the best and right solution, and that some peoples computers would actually handle it ok, if not now, then in the near future certainly.

Unfortunately, this route is not open to us as modders, and we must find another way.

I believe the solution involves a number of steps. Each of these steps has pitfalls and drawbacks, as well as its strengths. I therefore propose to develop a mod in three parts, with anybody interested able to download each part or the complete mod.

The steps are:

1. Adopt a consistent 'figure' scale; and
2. Adopt a consistent 'ground' scale to the figure scale.
3. Change the availabilities of certain troops to be more historically accurate (limited in number, etc)

Step 1. Adopting a consistent figure scale - Realistic Troop Numbers Mod

This is simply assuming that each 'figure' / 'model' in the game 'actually represents' a larger number of men, and scaling all unit sizes based on their historical numbers.

I have produced a few variants of this and have come around to a preferred number for the figure scale, which is 1 Model = 6 Men when playing at Huge scale.

The reasons that I like 6, rather than 8 or 10, 12 or 20 or some other number, are:

- 6 is roughly the right number to be able to represent the smallest effective tactical units (of around 150 men) to the largest (of 1,500 men).

So, based on our 1:6 figure scale, some polybian roman unit sizes should be:

Velites (for a legion) = 200 figures (representing 1200)
Hastati 200
Principe 200
Triarii 100

A full consular legion of 2 Roman and 2 allied legions can be contained in a single stack.

Note: I assume that 'Huge' unit size is selected to make this mod work. If you selected 'Large' instead, you are effectively making the figure scale double to 12:1.

Post Marian Cohort 80 Figures
First Cohort 132 Figures

Further note: How do we think of these 'ten men' being arranged? Well I don't think it is too important to worry about this. If you do, I think of them as being 2 deep and 3 men wide.

Therefore, the roman first line of 5 ranks (i know there are those who think it was 6) would be 3 figures deep. An 8 rank hoplite phalanx 4 figures, and a classic 16 man deep pike phalanx would be 8 ranks deep.

A Macedonian Pike Battalion was 1440-1500 men strong (and Alex had 6 of them in India) so 6 units of 240 figures (the numbers must be divisible by 4, since the number to be entered into the troops file is actually the normal size, which is then multiplied by 4 with huge unit size selected).

Alexander had 1000 archers, 500 of which were Cretans. Clearly two units of 80 figures each. And 1000 Agrianian Javelinmen, 160 figures.

A companion cavalry wedge on the other hand, was typically between 2 and 3 hundred men, so can be represented by 48 figures. Units cannot be less than 24 figures in RTW.

And this is right isn't it? That a companion cavalry unit should have 1/6 to a 1/5 of the men that a pike phalanx had, because in reality that's what they had?

I believe that by scaling each of the units in this way, based on their historical numbers (where documented), that we actually approach a more realistic and historical portrayal of the troops themselves.

Of course, the costs of the units also need to be adjusted in parallel to this scaling of numbers. This is straightforward and mechanical. After the scaling, there may be further argument to alter the costs for other reasons. I have not changed costs for other reasons as yet, simply allowing that EB has got it right to date.

By providing a scale to the units, it also allows large barbarian units to truly be 'large' in comparison to for example the Roman units which we have very firm documentation for. If we want a 'large warband' to contain 1500 men, and there is historical evidence for this, then they indeed can have the largest unit of 240 figures, which dwarfs some of the roman units size wise.

This also leads to a further modification that can be made to the campaign, to enable larger barracks in larger cities to produce larger units. Surely this is the realistic impact of having a more concentrated population and larger training facilities. We could easily introduce new units that use the same models and troop types, but simply have size variants.

For example, a small gallic village produces a small warband (500 men?), a medium town produces a medium warband (1000 men?) and a large town can produce a large warband (1500 men?).

This might even apply to some of the 'regular' armies, and hoplite morae, etc

Thus we can give each nation all of their troop types at the start of the game (as is realistic) but allow them to progress to build bigger armies later in the game. As comrade Stalin taught us, quantity has a quality all its own.

To summarise the first mod idea, we need to research the actual number of troops in each unit, and then scale it appropriately.

The factors that must be changed in descr.units.txt are: Number of men (or engines or animals), number of ranks default, costs.

I have done this for EB81a and attached the file here:

export_descr_unit.txt:
http://files.filefront.com//;7305644;;/

The changes I have made in this version of the file include:

Making Camillan units 900 strong
Making Polybian units 1200 strong, 600 for Triarii
Making roman light artillery 5 engines strong, representing the 30 engines that normally accompanied a legion
Making Marian units 480 man cohorts and 800 for 1st cohorts (actually, there are no 1st cohorts in EB at the moment, so anyway)
Making most greek hoplites 800 strong morae, and Spartans 384 men strong.
Reducing the size of most slingers and archers to around 300-500 men.
Reducing the size of hellenic cavalry units like Hetario to around 300 men (48 figures)
Changes to Roman cavalry to fit history
Parthians have been changed to a 1000 man unit as they historically used. Lookout for the cataphracts!
I haven't done much with the tribal and african factions, because I dont have the history and evidence to do it. If somebody else does, great, we can update it.

I don't have any kind of monopoly on the right answers for unit sizes. If there is scholarship that indicates different unit sizes than i have made, I can change the numbers.



Step 2. Adopting a consistent ground scale - Epic battles mod

This mod is going to be a lot more impactful and problematic. Some people don't like to play like this, but I love it.

If we really want to say that 'those 240 men are really representing 1440 men' then we also need to adopt a consistent ground scale.

This means thinking about that figure actually representing 6 men in the same area. Those 6 men must be really small, in fact less than 1/2 the size of the current model. If we are now talking about 6 men who are actually much smaller than the model, then the rate at which they walk, range at which they fire, etc, must also be scaled. In fact it needs to be scaled to the same degree, i.e. the square root of 6, about 2.4.

In order to make this work then, all we need to do superficially, is to change the movement rates to 1/2.4 the vanilla level. I have done this and it works a treat.

There are a number of other issues that need addressing though:

- Ranges of all missiles must be reduced to 1/2.4 of current (but not less than 20, which causes a CTD). City walls cannot be adjusted, making them much longer range than they are now, in comparison to the troops. I don't see any problems with this.

- Charge distance needs to be divided by 2.4 as well. This works well without problems.

- Hit Points may need to be adjusted? Because we are now talking about a figure actually representing 6 men, in at least 2 ranks, really only a half of that figure can 'strike at the enemy' at any one time. So effectively the casualty rate needs to be halved from what we see in the current battle model. To simulate this, i am experimenting with doubling all HP to 2 for normal men. Indeed this slows down the casualty rate substantially (as you would expect for an epic battle that we are now playing).

I have made all these adjustments and played through the battles, and in my opinion, they play much more realistically, and at a much more reasonable 'pace' for a large battle spread over a large linear area. Sending cavalry from one wing to another takes most of the battle, because effectively the battlefield is now 6 times bigger in area than it was previously.

Troops are very slow to maneuvre and change formation. The simple act of moving makes this slow. Therefore, once you have established your formation, it is difficult to maneuvre in the face of the enemy. You cant just change the number of ranks in your phalanx on a whim.

It is very possible to lose one wing, hold the centre, win the other wing, using this scale. Battles become much more linear, and maneuvring along the battlefield left to right becomes a long term prospect.

There is one problem, and it is nasty. There is an existing bug which means the AI will happily march its army towards you (defending) up hill and down dale, to the point of exhaustion and beyond, without ever stopping to recover. In this new battle system, where the distances are 2.4x what they used to be, this results in the AI always being exhausted by the time it arrives at your lines.

I have considered making all troops 'hardy' or 'very hardy' to overcome this problem, but it doesn't work. I find no way to make the AI conserve its freshness. I have also tried playing with the weather model to produce less fatigue, but I can't do anything which slows it down. It means that fatigue ends up giving the player an 'easy win' on a lot of battles.

The alternative is to turn fatigue off. That is now how I play. To balance it, the morale of troops needs to be taken down, since they would normally be losing morale due to fatigue.

So the plan is for Part 2 to:

- Change Battle Map Movement Modifiers text file to slow things down
- Turn Fatigue off in preferences
- Change EDU with Morale changes, Range and Charge distances.



Step 3 - Changing Troop Availability

I believe there is a case to reduce troop availability in certain areas, and this would produce more realistic armies. At the moment, it is possible in EB to hire entire armies of mercenaries in certain locations, as well as filling armies with niche troops like slingers and cretan archers. This was never historically desirable nor feasible.

My plans would involve changing which units are allowed at certain MICs, as mercenaries, different mercenary recharge rates, and even changing costs and stats of the units.

I am not sure how much work is involved in changing all these things, especially in the context of EBs quite complicated recruitment model, so I don't know when I am going to get around to doing part 3.

Summary

I believe that this mod significantly improves the historical realism of EB, as well as providing a more realistic 'large battle' feel to the combats. The first mod (consistent figure scale) seems to me to be something that most people will be interested in. The second mod will interest some and be annoying to others (hence, different mods).



Be interested in people's comments and suggestions.

Hope to post something for Epic Battles (Step 2) for people to try out, sometime soon.

UPDATE: Posted below a version of the Epic Battles Mod. Also note that you need the Elephant model bug fix installed to make either of the mods work (I think!).

Sounds grand. I like the idea of slower battles, as I'm a slow player; I need time to do things. I am ashamed to say that I usually have my finger on the pause button...

But eh, javelins are already thrown at a fairly short distance; wouldn't sixthing that distance look kind of strange?

But anyway, if you do it, I'll play it.

Southern Hunter,

Sounds very interesting. I think it has alot of potential :2thumbsup:

About no.s in phalanx units. When at full strength, I think their numbers were based on 16 (1 file) being quadrupled ie- 16 smallest, 64, 256, 1024, 4096 largest being deemed a 'phalanx'.

Did you consider a 9 per figure scale so each guy could represent a neat 3x3 arrangement? That way the space occupied by each figure could be consistent with 'known' spacings etc

Not too sure about the 'evolving' recruitment bit. Wouldn't that require tripling the no. of units in the game which I think is already getting close to bursting point.

However, I personally would be very interested in a mod where all factions can recruit their troops from the outset rather than just the levy options which most factions only have access to at the beginning.

Anyway, some great ideas in my opinion. As you say, due to the skirmish level scale of the actual game we probably should try and get away from the 'but that's what my guys.....on the little computer screen are doing' concept, and adopt a more 'wholeistic' (Spelling?????) approach to the combat we 'see'.....just like miniatures wargamers have been 'forced' to do since it's inception.

Look forward to seeing what you come up with.

Cheers,

Quilts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dyabedes of Aphrodisias

Sounds grand. I like the idea of slower battles, as I'm a slow player; I need time to do things. I am ashamed to say that I usually have my finger on the pause button...

But eh, javelins are already thrown at a fairly short distance; wouldn't sixthing that distance look kind of strange?

---

If you like it slow, you will love it :-)

We won't be 'sixthing' them, but 'square root of sixthing' them. That is roughly half the speed and range that you are used to in EB (which is already reduced a little from Vanilla). So javelins will fire from what looks like 20 yards (but represents 40 in our new scale). Ranges less than 20 are not permitted and cause a CTD.

Hunter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quilts

About no.s in phalanx units. When at full strength, I think their numbers were based on 16 (1 file) being quadrupled ie- 16 smallest, 64, 256, 1024, 4096 largest being deemed a 'phalanx'.

Did you consider a 9 per figure scale so each guy could represent a neat 3x3 arrangement? That way the space occupied by each figure could be consistent with 'known' spacings etc

Not too sure about the 'evolving' recruitment bit. Wouldn't that require tripling the no. of units in the game which I think is already getting close to bursting point.

However, I personally would be very interested in a mod where all factions can recruit their troops from the outset rather than just the levy options which most factions only have access to at the beginning.

---

Yes about phalanxes. At the moment, I have left them all at 1440, which is the Alexandrian Macedonian size. It is true that the evidence points to the successors using a binary doubling of 256, 512, 1024 etc. We could change them all to 1024, but we can't do 2048..not enough figures.

I did consider 9. I also considered 10 (nice and neat and easy to multiply), 12, 20 and other numbers. It turned out that 6 worked out well to get the balance of units right, especially for Romans and Greeks. Also, the scaling is nice, not too slow. If the number gets too big, the engine tends to not support it, for example, the minimum range is absolute at 20. You make a good point about spacings though. I COULD in theory, go through the spacing for each unit and change it to represent the fact that we have 3 guys wide by 2 deep. Basically, increase the width of everything by 50%. That would make it even more linear than it is now, but I am not sure if it will look good or wierd.

The tripling of units need only apply to some things. For example, if we take the basic 'spear warband' of the celts or similar, the more common troops in other words, I think they could be doubled, tripled (small, medium, large) or even more variations in size if desired. There is a problem that they will NOT be able to be mixed when they suffer casualties. The game will say 'warband small' can't be mixed with 'warband medium', which is a bit sad.

I don't want to take all semblance of 'progress' out of the game, but having to build for generations before getting the 'good troops' isn't really right. The reforms is another matter entirely...I think they are quite well represented...although it isn't true that things 'progressed' in the way that the game shows, and that later legionaries were just 'better' than republican (polybian) legions.

I am not sure how close we are to the unit limit. I thought we were at the model limit but there was still room for units? Dunno.

Cheers,

Hunter

Quote:

---

Step 3 - Changing Troop Availability

I believe there is a case to reduce troop availability in certain areas, and this would produce more realistic armies. At the moment, it is possible in EB to hire entire armies of mercenaries in certain locations, as well as filling armies with niche troops like slingers and cretan archers. This was never historically desirable nor feasible.

My plans would involve changing which units are allowed at certain MICs, as mercenaries, different mercenary recharge rates, and even changing costs and stats of the units.

I am not sure how much work is involved in changing all these things, especially in the context of EBs quite complicated recruitment model, so I don't know when I am going to get around to doing part 3.

---

The only thing you can mod is mercenary availebility, if you take a short look at edb.txt you will notice that it would be not good to make any changes to it (10 MB didn't come from nowhere)

BTW EB has made it's own efforts to keep the number sof eliteunits small in comparison to the normal soldiers (availebility/cost/upkeep).

Quote:

---

I am not sure how close we are to the unit limit. I thought we were at the model limit but there was still room for units? Dunno.

---

we are close to both limits and may reach them with the next release...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bonny

BTW EB has made it's own efforts to keep the number sof eliteunits small in comparison to the normal soldiers (availebility/cost/upkeep).

we are close to both limits and may reach them with the next release...

---

EB has made decisions on balance reasons presumably, whereas I am arguing for historicity.

Thanks for the update on limits.

Cheers

I would love for a mod like this to be created. :sweatdrop:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Southern Hunter

EB has made decisions on balance reasons presumably, whereas I am arguing for historicity.

Thanks for the update on limits.

Cheers

---

You should know us well enough by now to know that the main driver for our decisions is historical accuracy, not balance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lovejoy

I would love for a mod like this to be created. :sweatdrop:

---

I'm testing it out now. Loving my epic battles :beam:

You may consider increasing Roman units - the "base" legions were quite often expanded, sometimes over 5000 men

I copy/pasted the new "export_descr_unit.txt" text file, but the game crashes once I start a campaign. Am I missing something?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MButcher

I copy/pasted the new "export_descr_unit.txt" text file, but the game crashes once I start a campaign. Am I missing something?

---

Well, that's bad :-(

What kind of error do you get?

It is possible that I didn't have a clean 81a, which would mean me doing it all again I guess :wall:

OTOH, maybe you don't?

Hunter

Is anybody else having a problem with it? or not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by O'ETAIPOS

You may consider increasing Roman units - the "base" legions were quite often expanded, sometimes over 5000 men

---

Yes, we could do that for Romans. Add in a 'Emergency Strength Legion' or something like that, at 1440 Hastati, 1440 Principes, 1440 Velites, 720 Triarii which makes it just over the 5,000 men mark. It would have high maintenance costs, encouraging the player to disband it once he has defended Rome with it.

Got to be careful about the AI using it badly.

Can't do much more above 5,000 with our 240 man limit.

Hunter

10 Cohorts in a Legion
3 Maniples in a Cohort
2 Centuries in a Maniple
80 men in a Century

4800 men in a standard legion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus

10 Cohorts in a Legion
3 Maniples in a Cohort
2 Centuries in a Maniple
80 men in a Century

4800 men in a standard legion

---

I'm aware of the structure of a post-Marian legion. In fact, it differs from your post only in that the first cohort has 5 Maniples, thus making a full strength of 9 x 480 + 1 x 800 = 5,120. This doesn't include the 120 light cavalry and 30 light artillery pieces.

The previous post I THINK we were talking about polybian era legions, which is when many of the legions were 'oversized' to fight particular threats.

They were 'typically' of 1200 Velites, Hastati and Princepes, plus 600 Triarii, or 4200 all up. Again cavalry ala of 300 and artillery notwithstanding. But they did go to 6000 or more in a single legion, presumably by expanding the size of each line (more of everything in other words).

Hunter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Southern Hunter

I'm aware of the structure of a post-Marian legion. In fact, it differs from your post only in that the first cohort has 5 Maniples, thus making a full strength of 9 x 480 + 1 x 800 = 5,120. This doesn't include the 120 light cavalry and 30 light artillery pieces.

The previous post I THINK we were talking about polybian era legions, which is when many of the legions were 'oversized' to fight particular threats.

They were 'typically' of 1200 Velites, Hastati and Princepes, plus 600 Triarii, or 4200 all up. Again cavalry ala of 300 and artillery notwithstanding. But they did go to 6000 or more in a single legion, presumably by expanding the size of each line (more of everything in other words).

Hunter

---

I don't think the enlarged 1st Cohort existed before the Empire.

About the bigger legions. I have been 'fiddling' with many ideas about how to represent this, and without buggering the Ai I don't think it can be done. My final conclusion was that you could take along an extra 'stack' of units that follows the big stack, and avoids battle, to replace loses. That in some way gives a feel of a bigger army (by being able to eplace loses etc) even if the actual battles are fought with the normal sized units.

On others things. How have you found the battle Ai handing your new formations? With a unit of romans having a frontage of.....60 something?, and phalanxes having a frontage of 40, it's significantly narrower.

The reason I ask is that I'm convinced that work has to be done to 'standardise' the frontage of units (with the player 'promising' not to alter them :whip: ). I reckon it will really help the battlefield AI as unit centres will target unit centres without having to angle in etc.....

Anyway, I'm rambling. But can you let me know what your thoughts about what impact your changes are having on the AI please?

Thanks in advance.

Cheers,

Quilts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quilts

I don't think the enlarged 1st Cohort existed before the Empire.

---

Yes, fair point. Probably right at the end or out of our time period completely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Quilts

On others things. How have you found the battle Ai handing your new formations? With a unit of romans having a frontage of.....60 something?, and phalanxes having a frontage of 40, it's significantly narrower.

The reason I ask is that I'm convinced that work has to be done to 'standardise' the frontage of units (with the player 'promising' not to alter them :whip: ). I reckon it will really help the battlefield AI as unit centres will target unit centres without having to angle in etc.....

Anyway, I'm rambling. But can you let me know what your thoughts about what impact your changes are having on the AI please?

---

It is hard to say from the limited testing I have done to date. My impression is that the AI has an easier time of it, essentially since fatigue is off, and that was a simple way of a guaranteeing that the AI mucked itself up. I am trying to get the morale levels right, having just reduced them to compensate for no fatigue.

My current feeling is that the lower morale levels give 'historical' results, sort of, but that slightly higher levels give 'hard' battles, since the routers generally reform and come back, and casualties for the winners are higher. If we can have battles causing more casualties for the winner, I think that will improve the campaign overall (and slow it down in some ways).

The AI still plows straight into the middle of a long line, and makes its units go all over the place. It doesnt handle the 'long line' concept particularly well. I found myself trying to hold the line, and then at some point in some battles just deciding to dogfight and play its game, running units everywhere to hit flanks and so on.

I havent fought many battles against barbarian types or Horse archers. I remember them as particularly painful and interesting last time I tried this in RTR.

What I'll do is post the files for Epic Battles Mod soon, and let other people do some testing as well.

Cheers,

Hunter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Southern Hunter

Well, that's bad :-(

What kind of error do you get?

It is possible that I didn't have a clean 81a, which would mean me doing it all again I guess :wall:

OTOH, maybe you don't?

Hunter

Is anybody else having a problem with it? or not?

---

Unfortunately there's no error report, only a crash to desktop whenever I start a game.

As far as I know I do have 81a, but I'll download and install the new version again to see if that's the problem.

:mad: As an avid table top wargamer this sounds awesome and I think I will give it a shot. :duel:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Southern Hunter

The previous post I THINK we were talking about polybian era legions, which is when many of the legions were 'oversized' to fight particular threats.
They were 'typically' of 1200 Velites, Hastati and Princepes, plus 600 Triarii, or 4200 all up. Again cavalry ala of 300 and artillery notwithstanding. But they did go to 6000 or more in a single legion, presumably by expanding the size of each line (more of everything in other words).
Hunter

---

They would have a similar amount ofSocii making a legion about 9000 strong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Teutobod II

They would have a similar amount ofSocii making a legion about 9000 strong

---

Yes, well terminology issue. I prefer to think of it as a Roman Legion and an Allied Legion of similar strength. In EB, I make this with other Italiotes.

Hunter

OK, I have made a version of the 'Epic Battles Mod' for EB. It changes the scale to 1:6 for battles; so a unit of 200 figures at Huge scale is 1200 men (say a Hastati unit for a whole legion).

I have done nothing to the troop costs (yet!) but alter them in line with the change in troop numbers.

I would appreciate any feedback on where I have got the troop numbers wrong. I did get a little concerned that I didnt understand all the roman cavalry types and when you get them, given I have never played through an EB campaign as Roman and not sure of the terminology.

I personally find that the battles rock! There is much more danger of them going wrong for the player, particularly if you dont have a good general. The action on a wing with cavalry will take them far and wide, and miles away from the infantry battle line, which moves at a snails pace. Good morale enemy infantry can really hook in and be hard to beat. Holding a solid line is critical and can be tough when the AI comes in hard.

As Roman, I try and play historically, and backup my Hastati with Principes when they get depleted or their line is busted.

Appreciate any feedback.

To install:

First: Install the Elephant Fix found here:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=81988

(I did this before I started work on my mod, so it is embedded in my file, but you need to install the models)

Second:

Here is the troop movement modifiers (backup and replace the existing one in your EB/DATA folder. It is exactly half the current EB speeds.

DESCR_BATTLE_MAP_MOVEMENTS.TXT:
http://files.filefront.com//;7338600;;/

Third:

Here is the unit file (backup and replace the existing one in EB/DATA folder). I have made a number of changes:

Halved Charge Distances
Halved Fire Ranges
Lowered Morale by 4 across the board (to compensate for no fatigue)
Lowered Morale by 2 for Mercenaries
Lowered Morale by 1 or 2 for light missile troops
---
As for the other EDU for Realistic Troop Numbers:
Made all troops at 1:6 scale
Altered ranks to reflect 2 ranks per figure

export_descr_unit.txt:
http://files.filefront.com//;7338674;;/

Fourth and Finally:

Edit your Preferences file (in EB/Preferences/preferences.txt) and make Fatigue FALSE not TRUE.

All set to try the Epic Battles mod, just start a new campaign from scratch. The most changes are to Rome, Greece, Maks and other Hellenistic types, Pahlava, etc. Small changes to others, but not as noticeable.

As above, very much welcome feedback on mistakes, extra changes to make, etc.

Particularly interested in whether you are having big interesting 'epic' battles to decide a campaign, which is really the idea.

Cheers,

Hunter

If anyone is playing through with this, I would be interested in getting feedback.

I am playing a VH/M campaign as Makedonia. So far there have been a couple of large very nice battles, including many losses for me when I win, and a couple where my army has been destroyed by the AI.

I am becoming quite rich though, Maks have some awesome mines available to them!

Hunter

Would it be possible for someone post a screenshot of this mod in action? I'm interested to see how battles look with the larger troop numbers.

which version of EB you used as a base? v0.8 or v0.81?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by O'ETAIPOS

which version of EB you used as a base? v0.8 or v0.81?

---

0.81a with the Elephant Model fix

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Artificer

Would it be possible for someone post a screenshot of this mod in action? I'm interested to see how battles look with the larger troop numbers.

---

We can't get any more than 240 men in a unit. The impact of the mod is to adopt a scale that gives 'effectively' a larger number of men, moving over a larger area of ground, etc.

Read the first post carefully and you will see what I mean.

In any case, screenshots are a good idea, and I will post some this weekend, to give you the idea.

Cheers,

Hunter

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Southern Hunter

If anyone is playing through with this, I would be interested in getting feedback.

---

Not yet but I will have a go in the next couple of weeks.....I hope. Too much work at the moment unfotunately.

Quilts

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Southern Hunter

We can't get any more than 240 men in a unit. The impact of the mod is to adopt a scale that gives 'effectively' a larger number of men, moving over a larger area of ground, etc.

Read the first post carefully and you will see what I mean.

In any case, screenshots are a good idea, and I will post some this weekend, to give you the idea.

Cheers,

Hunter

---

Ah, I see. Oh well. I'd still like to see screenshots though, so thanks in advance for whatever pictures you'd like to post. :2thumbsup:

Been playing some more with the mod and with my 'challenge' mod, designed to make the game much harder. Working ok, but just lost a campaign badly, so need to play some more.

Interested if anyone else has some feedback.

Cheers.

Could you post a screenshot?