Printable View
Hi , Am at about 244bc awaiting poly refms and have got 2/3 of sicily and first
two provinces in southern gaul (as Romani.) Can anyone tell me what the best
missile units are for the romans? Have done quite well with the standard slingers so far but greek and celtic archers have now become available as aux
troops? Do I change now or wait for reforms?
Regards ,
Figulus.
What units are best is largely dependant on your own playing style. Slingers are really powerful throughout the game though.
Archers are fairly worthless compared to slingers now for me. They cost less and do more, but they do get bloody boring after awhile :boxedin:. I wish that there were an assortment of elite AP longbowmen.
Thanks Bovi , just wondered wether slingers flat trajectory would become a
problem at some stage but I guess it hasn't yet!
Regards,
Fugulus
They will hit your own men if they are in the rear but it is only a few here and there. As long as they stand back a bit there isnt much of an issue.
I typically place my slingers on the far flanks of my army at a 45 degree angle to my infantry, facing inwards, which gives them good flanking fire. Just remember to cover them with cavalry.
For Roman missile units, I usually use the Celtic slingers in the north. They do real well.
Celtic slingers are the best (statwise) you'll find.
Interesting,I have always used archers,flaming attacks always take down an enemy morale before they reach your lines,and if tou can get them to fire into combat,enemy units tend to break quicker?
There is some debate as to whether slingers are a wee bit too kickbutt, personally I'd use 2 slinger units max to keep the battles a bit more fair for the limited AI, and go with a unit of archers or two for the flame arrows which tend to frighten masses of barbarians :)
I try and and give all of my armies on unit of slingers when they are at my empires borders. especially when it is a small army. they are very handy for taking out heavy cavalry which is preferred when vastly outnumbered.
Cretan archers are probably the best archers in the game. They don't have AP like slingers do, but have a base attack of 6. Against enemies with low armour but large shields, Cretans will do better then Celtic slingers.
Celtic slingers have a longer range though (200 instead of 160, most other slingers are 180 IIRC) and twice as much ammo (40 instead of 20)
Finally Cretans have more armour and fare better in melee.
These two are probably the best (that you can easily get your hands on, anyway)
I like the Cretans especially for some reason. They're pretty cheap compared to other mercenaries, too.
I usually only use slingers for city defense since I hate losing guys to friendly fire and no fire ammo ability (I rely on the towers for that).
I'd say slingers are way too kickbutt. And if you're playing as a faction with access to Shuban Fradakshana, get them. Iaosatae may be the best stats wise if you're western, but if you're eastern, Shuban are the best numbers-wise.
Any historical evidence that slingers played such a decisive role as they tend to do in many battles?
They probably shouldn't be quite as amazing as they are. One of the biggest problems is that because lethality doesn't work on missile units its very hard to balance them within the EB stats system, especially once they start building up experience. Hopefully when we rework the system in order to use a large scale (closer to the maximum allowed by the RTW engine) we can make missile weapons work a bit better and blunt some of the problems of experience within in the EB system.
Have a look at this post.Quote:
Originally Posted by kalkwerk
I also have some questions for the vets such as:
1) i have only played one campaign,well i´m still on it and u have to meet certain requirements to advance into the so called next era for the Romans.
At least the year 172BC,
Have more than 6 Latifundia built in Italy,
Hold at least 45 settlements,
Fight more than 250 battles, and
Have a character that is:
Sharp/Charismatic/Vigorous
Popularis
Consul or Ex-Consul
Has Influence > 2
Has Command > 2
OR just conquer 90 settlements.
Do u have to get all of them or just one (not the 90 settlement one)?
Which brings me to my next question, if u play other faction, do u get to see the roman legions? cos it´s a fact from all TW games that the AI doesnt upgrade its cities so do u get to see them?
Another is , How do u get a guy to be appointed consul or exconsul? is that one of the traits u´ll get at a certain age or what?
And my last question is, does anybody make it to EMPERATOR?
thx
All of the objectives must be reached.Quote:
Originally Posted by neoiq5719
It is hard for the AI to meet the Marian objectives, especially when they lose Italy. Though, it is not impossible. If they have 45 settlements (and haven't lost Italy) in 172BC, then all they need is the right type of guy. But the Marian Reform was a responce to not being able to field previous types of armies. The AI never really seems to build an empire large enough or advanced enough to need to reform.
Consul, like other Roman political offices, is appointed to those in the Senate with proper requirements. To get Consul, you must have been in the Senate for a while and held other offices. Pay attension to the faction annoncements every spring and there will be a guy or two given the office of Consul (depending on whether you have enough family members and whether the previous holder of the office kept his possition or not).
The trait "Imperator" or the possition of Emporer? Personally, I have gotten both.
But for the consul thing, u have to take your guy to Rome to get it or is a trait given to your general for achieving a specific number of battles??Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus
Couldn't you make the dynamic reforms only for the player or make them less complicated for the AI.
If more reforms are going to be dynamic, I hope all of them are, then perhaps the ones for the AI should only depend on date and maybe provinces held (but less provinces than what would be needed for the human-controlled faction)
Good point Redmeth. I think we should go with that in future.
Senate offices are just awarded to those worthy, no matter where they are. More Influence helps.Quote:
Originally Posted by neoiq5719