Re: Gaesatae Question
Did you read that I beat the Gaestae with Polybian Principate in guard mode?
That pretty much settles everything, especially when in history Principate made up about 2/7 of a maniple when the elite naked fanatics only made up like less than 1/10 of the Gallic army, it being the "elite" and all.
You know what that means? That means in a 3000 Gaul vs 2200 Roman battle in the game, there will be less than 300 Gaestae against about 300 principate and 300 allied troops of slightly lesser quality. On top of that, there will be 300 velite and 300 allied skirmishers. Now if, besides the AI general and his bodyguard, the rest of their army are levies, and the AI also played historically (or at least according to how so many books you stated said they just charged head on) that would mean Gaestae gets its ass kicked to the moon. With the Gaestae gone, the rest of that Gallic army is good as dead. It quite heavily outnumbered the Romans too. But then I guess it was able to do that from the low quality levies.
It seems pretty accurate to me.
So I don't know why you are arguing for the Gaestae to be nerfed and not arguing for the team to crack the game code and design a new AI for the Gauls.
Ok, so the team doesn't know how to do that, and now the AI has an army not following history and don't fight like the Gauls did in history, well the player often doesn't either. Most players are running skirmishers around the flanks to shoot rears when in history they would never get the chance, and not using the triple checkers, and having more cavalry than the Romans used, etc. So it's fair.
And really, have you gone and played a campaign yet? The campaign is supposed to be historically accurate, not custom battles. The huge morale boost of the general unit alone is enough to throw everything off.
You know, the conclusion I have reached right now is that you are a terrible tactician who don't know how to beat the Gaestae at all, and therefore you try to run to history to justify your idea that they should be nerfed. For elite units, thanks to low armor, they suck.
And as for you and all others complaining about 2 hp, I'd rather have more men than 2 hp. I'm sure we've all swarmed generals in the original RTW before and killed them, and THEY had 2 hp.
As for all the other things, the only ones worth answering to are:
1) There are qualified historians on the EB team.
2) As they have qualified historians on the team, I give them the benefit of the doubt just as I do to scientists proposing stuff like string theory, and I accept that while they could be wrong, they could also be right. While the same can be said for your sources, it certainly can't be said for you.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks