Watchman's take on units (and sundry) for EB with BI.exe

**Watchman** · 03-18-2007, 00:24

MIA for now while I work on a new version, to avoid confusion.

**Dooz** · 03-18-2007, 03:49

Very cool, thanks. Do you know if these are save-game compatible perchance?

**Watchman** · 03-18-2007, 08:04

Should be, far as I know. Or at least unit stat and description alterations have thus far always been, as were for example the slight recruitement changes to the Hai top-level barracks at Armavir when I tested that one (with add_money and process_cq in the course of a campaign; I often run that test just to see what troops a province can potentially produce so I know what kind of gov I really want there and what levels of MICs I'll be wanting to dole out the dough for down the road). Can't say I have actually *tested* the added health/healer buildings, but logic dictates they should be equally kosher.

**Dumbass** · 03-18-2007, 14:13

Cool mod. Any chance of asking MarcusAureliusAntonius if you can incorporate it ino his city mod?

**Watchman** · 03-18-2007, 21:38

Ehh... it so happens I forgot one wee little detail about my personal edition of the EDU - namely the altered projectile type I gave certain three missile units. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa; Ich bin ein Berliner Würst.

EB comes with a neat lead slinghsot model which for some reason isn't used you see, and I thought this was a waste and modded the Sphendonetai and Shuban Fradakshana to have it - these two because AFAIK they used lead shot historically, and because aside from the Balearics who specifically use bigger rocks than the norm they're the best two types of slinger (albeit the crazy range of the Celtic slingers weirds me out - maybe they're just big and strong enough guys to get that kind of mileage or something?).

Now, getting this to work required adding entries to the export_projectile.txt and export_projectile_new.txt (I modified both because I frankly had no clue which one would have been enough), a fair bit of trial and error through -show_err CTD messages, and ultimately making renamed copies of the missile model files.

I also made the Goidilic dart guys use the BI plumbata model for their projectiles. I've yet to actually test it in practice, but as I followed the same steps that worked with the lead shot it should be OK.

Anyway, unless you have the appropriate modified files you're going to get a CTD the second you start a battle involving any of the three unit types mentioned. I know this from experience.

*sigh* Time to make a revised edition I guess. Might as well fix a few things I forgot from the EDU (like warcry to the Bastarnoz) and add the modified descr_sounds_units_fire.txt I made after reading Dol Guldur's clever slinger sound fix idea.

**Watchman** · 03-18-2007, 22:05

That aside, Marcus can freely use it in his minimod as far as I'm concerned. It's not like I owned any part of the game or something, or that the modifications I've made were particularly complicated or demanding - more like tedious really. If my obsessive nitpicking over details saves someone else time and effort, so much the better.

**Kralizec** · 04-06-2007, 13:35

- the shield_wall formation has been added to a fair few units. These include all the "classical" hoplites and their ilk such as the Carthie heavy spearmen and the various versions of Hypaspistai (the Pheraspidai, who if I've understood correctly are really Hypas in different gear, also get it by this token as they'll anyway have been trained for it), a fair few militia/levy type spear units with decent-sized shields (as this sort of formation is fairly easy to use and perfect for relatively poorly trained infantry whose main job is lineholding), and quite a few "barbarian" units whose description suggested they should be able to form a very solid front to blunt enemy charges or similar such as the Belgae Milnaht and Gaisazharjoz. I've also given it to the Eastern "sparabara"-type spearmen as well as the more capable Babylonian heavies and Armenian royal guard types, as both have hoplite-type shields well suited for it and the descriptions suggested they should be able to present very solid fronts as necessary.

That's a lot of shield wall units. I assume that by "a fair few militia/levy type spear units with decent-sized shields" you mean units like the Lugoae and the Frankamannoz. I think they don't deserve the shield_wall, the fact that the EB team gave them rabble formations should indicate that they're basicly el-cheapo infantry good only for stalling and fighting off the lightest of cavalry, not locking shields and taking the brunt of an attack.

I'd approach it negatively, that is, wich units would do fine versus frontal attacks but would do significantly worse if flanked or on walls?

Yesterday I got BI working with EB but I haven't played around with the formations yet. The following I'd consider giving this ability, in descending order:

-hoplitai, and its various derivatives and copies*
-Frámáhárjoz, Háruskoz-Swáiut and Gáizáhárjoz and the Arjos (Arverni unit)
-Neitos, Rycalawre and the Solduros
-Belgae Batacorii, Milnaht, Cemmeinarn (Midland spears)
-Noricene Gaecori, Aljáz-Gae, Gaeroas, Gaelaiche, Hábuko-z Swáiut

Then there's several units wich fought in a dense formation, but for reasons mentioned and unmentioned don't qualify for the shield wall IMO. This includes most legionaries, thureophoroi and thorakitai and rabble units like the Lugoae.

*includes the triarii, the Libyan imitation-hoplites, Hypaspistai and probably the Pherispidai. I'm not sure about the Babylonian infantry and the Armenian royals.

**Watchman** · 04-06-2007, 14:25

Originally Posted by Fenring

I think they don't deserve the shield_wall, the fact that the EB team gave them rabble formations should indicate that they're basicly el-cheapo infantry good only for stalling and fighting off the lightest of cavalry, not locking shields and taking the brunt of an attack.

Locking shields and forming a dense solid mass was one of the more common ways for el cheapo infantry to serve as decent lineholders, AFAIK. A basic static, defensive shieldwall is easy enough for even poorly trained troops to do, and tended to take some effort even for elite troops to break frontally.

Rather like the pike phalanx really.

Then there's several units wich fought in a dense formation, but for reasons mentioned and unmentioned don't qualify for the shield wall IMO. This includes most legionaries, thureophoroi and thorakitai and rabble units like the Lugoae.

The normal Roman infantry order was only "dense" compared to for example most Celtic longswordmen; hoplites and phalangites for example were massed more densely, and in a straight clash AFAIK tended to have the same sort of "three to two" local numerical advantage the Romans had to the more freewheeling "barbarian" warriors. Thureophoroi and their heavier colleagues follow the same tactical philosophy (ie. relatively open order for flexibility and particularly cross-country maneuverability).

**Kralizec** · 04-06-2007, 15:04

Originally Posted by Watchman

Locking shields and forming a dense solid mass was one of the more common ways for el cheapo infantry to serve as decent lineholders, AFAIK. A basic static, defensive shieldwall is easy enough for even poorly trained troops to do, and tended to take some effort even for elite troops to break frontally.

That seems to apply more to cheap semi-proffessionals like Gaeroas and Batacorii. Not every unit that carries a spear and a large shield would be disciplined enough to mantain a cohesive shield wall.

The normal Roman infantry order was only "dense" compared to for example most Celtic longswordmen; hoplites and phalangites for example were massed more densely, and in a straight clash AFAIK tended to have the same sort of "three to two" local numerical advantage the Romans had to the more freewheeling "barbarian" warriors. Thureophoroi and their heavier colleagues follow the same tactical philosophy (ie. relatively open order for flexibility and particularly cross-country maneuverability).

Of course.

Unit choices aside, do you agree that units wich get the shield wall should get a minor decrease in their defense value?

**Enguerrand de Sarnéac** · 04-06-2007, 17:56

Originally Posted by Fenring

That seems to apply more to cheap semi-proffessionals like Gaeroas and Batacorii. Not every unit that carries a spear and a large shield would be disciplined enough to mantain a cohesive shield wall.

Perhaps even levy troops would instinctively form a 'shield wall'. Their weakness would be a decreased morale value (or whatever makes units rout easier)
A shield wall is no 'special formation' like a phalanx, rather the most simple static battle formation. Any man, levied into the army, would seek the (relative) protection of his neighbour.

Originally Posted by Fenring

Unit choices aside, do you agree that units wich get the shield wall should get a minor decrease in their defense value?

A shield wall should be an increased value only counting for the whole group. Defence value should be the defence of the soldier himself (shield, armour, skill)
Does a shield wall give a unit's defence an unworldly boost anyway?

I did not give the shield wall formation to units with long swords, such as Milnaht or Botroas. Rycalawre and Solduros do have it, since they're hightly trained warbands which only draw their swords after their formation is broken and their spears lost. Calawre, being individual heroes (for EB's sake gathered in a unit) didn't fight in such an organisation, cf their long swords.
Neither did I give it to the especially designed flexible professional spear units, such as Thureophoroi and Thorakitai (Hellenic armies don't need an ersatz phalanx on the flanks of the Makedonian ones, rather good flanking units) Legionnairies should have them, however I think they should be more flexible, so it'd be a bad idea. EB gave them nice stats anyway to justify them fighting without shield wall.

Thanks for the icon fix, Watchman, I was looking for it!

**Watchman** · 04-06-2007, 18:52

I don't think units can be given two special formations though, and the legionaires already have the testudo as their "special trick" don't they ? I know they did sometimes fight in very close order, but that was in rare special cases such as against massed Sarmatian lancers and as in that instance the front ranks also used spears that one would really rather better be simulated by using Auxilia (who might qualify for the shieldwall - IIRC I didn't give it to them, but...).

**mcantu** · 07-05-2007, 22:57

Watchman,

Just curious why you removed the bows from Getai general units...

**MindLich** · 07-17-2007, 00:48

Well, sorry Watchman. But you took so long to release the new version that I will change to Reign of Ares. But I still appreciate your work, no offence meant.
Cheers.

**Blingerman** · 07-20-2007, 11:05

Originally Posted by MindLich

Well, sorry Watchman. But you took so long to release the new version that I will change to Reign of Ares. But I still appreciate your work, no offence meant.
Cheers.

But is it not the version in first post for V2 and First cohor mod 1.3?