Roman Legion composition?

[anubis88]

Most of the time I keep a large contingent of local inexpensive troops... since I can replace casualties locally.

However, I tend to have more than the historical share of triariis. I use triariis as a second (or third) line for both form my legionaries and my locally raised units.

During the Camillian Period I tend to recruit a lot of Roariis together with a lot of Triariis. By the time I reach Polybian I tend to have a lot of experienced Camillian Triariis which I use as a third line. (During the Polybian period I keep the old Camillian Roariis as a police force in cities and road crossing.)

I also tend to recruit mercenary archers (either horse archers or cretan archers). If storming a city, I will always have a few cretan archers mercenaries at hand. Out in the open, whenever possible I will have some horse archer mercenaries.

My stack will look something like this:

For cities without stone walls: 4 mercenary archers (cretan if possible), 4 local light infantry, 4 legionaries, 6 triariis, 1 general, 1 cavalry (preferably missile cavalry)

For cities with stone walls: 4 cretan archers, 6 pedites, 8 triariis, 1 general, 1 cavalry, (preferably missile cavalry). (This is the one exception to my rule to use locally raised units. I use pedites for wall fighting whenever possible.

Out in the open (flat terrain without woods): 2 local skirmishers, 4 local light infantry, 2 legionaries, 6 triariis, 1 general, 4 horse archer mercenaries or other missile cavalry, 1 shock cavalry.

In the woods: Mostly local skirmishers and local light infantry. A few triarris or legionariis to cover any place in the line where I fear a rout could occur. Little cavalry, but always keep one general.

In the mountains: More light infantry and missile units, less trairiis and less cavalry... but always keep one general.

Wow... You really don't seem to want to play historically

[antisocialmunky]

No kidding.

[Lanceari]

Wow... You really don't seem to want to play historically

MHM. True, however...

...at first, Roman fought alongside their Latin Allies. During this period, Latin Allies may have added as much as 50% of the Consular Army. Later on, as the Romans ventured further away from Italy, Romans recruited local allies. ... though clearly they were not trusted as much and not recruited in such large numbers (as compared to the Latin Allies).

I grant you I am rather aggressive in the use of none Roman units. But using 100% Roman stacks is not very historical either.

I certainly deviate from historical patters is my heavy use of triariis... This is strictly a gaming decision. Though I would probably use more legionaries if some of my recommendations in the thread Big Shields were adopted. ...that of course is an entirely different subject.

[anubis88]

MHM. True, however...

Historically... During the Camillian Period, Roman troops fought alongside their Latin Allies. During the late Polybian Period, as the Romans ventured further away from Itally, the Romans recruited local allies.

I am rather aggressive in recruiting none Roman units. So, yes, I deviate from historical practice. But using 100% Roman stacks is not very historical either.

I was refering more to your OVERUSE of Triarii and Pedites....
a Legion should have 1 of each velites, accensi, triarri, and and a cavalry unit, + 2 units of Hastati and Principes. The rest should be allies

[Lanceari]

I was refering more to your OVERUSE of Triarii and Pedites....
a Legion should have 1 of each velites, accensi, triarri, and and a cavalry unit, + 2 units of Hastati and Principes. The rest should be allies

While playing in the campaign map, I will use accensi and velites in Italy and the vicinity of Italy. However, as I move farther away from Italy, and, my Romanii skirmishers take losses... then I recruit local skirmishers.

My expansion outside Italy runs a lot faster than the historical roman expansion. During the polybian era my troops were fighting around the Baltic Sea, the Crimea, and westernmost Africa. When the Romans ventured that far away from Rome, they relied on local skirmishers... though of course, it took them a bit more time to get there.

So, I am left with three choices: don't expand as fast, use velites and accensi in very far away posts where you have no recruiting grounds (not historical), or, recruit local skirmishers in distant regions (like the Romans did when they got that far, during the Marian and Imperial period).

[Captain Pugwash]

One thing about this thread is the variety of units within a legion from a players perspective. However there appears little support for a pedite heavy stack. Its quite another from the AI. From what I have encountered playing Audei, Getai, and currently Cathage is that the roman stacks are predominantly pedites often 50% or more of the units, with a scattering of Sammite units, and then a token presence of the traditional Roman units.

Just a thought

[anubis88]

One thing about this thread is the variety of units within a legion from a players perspective. However there appears little support for a pedite heavy stack. Its quite another from the AI. From what I have encountered playing Audei, Getai, and currently Cathage is that the roman stacks are predominantly pedites often 50% or more of the units, with a scattering of Sammite units, and then a token presence of the traditional Roman units.

Just a thought

That's true... Unfurtunatly it's impossible to tell the romans to create historical legions

[-Praetor-]

That's true... Unfurtunatly it's impossible to tell the romans to create historical legions

It will be possible in EBII.

[Epimetheus]

That's true... Unfurtunatly it's impossible to tell the romans to create historical legions

I have to wonder about this a little. I suspect that the really low recruitment and upkeep costs for Roman units may be encouraging them to spam elites. If you raised the prices some, it might change the AI recruitment dynamic to something more realistic.

[The General]

One thing about this thread is the variety of units within a legion from a players perspective. However there appears little support for a pedite heavy stack. Its quite another from the AI. From what I have encountered playing Audei, Getai, and currently Cathage is that the roman stacks are predominantly pedites often 50% or more of the units, with a scattering of Sammite units, and then a token presence of the traditional Roman units.

Just a thought

AI tends to indeed spam Pedites/Triarii, but fortunately EBII will have means to restrict the recruitment of elite units.

While playing in the campaign map, I will use accensi and velites in Italy and the vicinity of Italy. However, as I move farther away from Italy, and, my Romanii skirmishers take losses... then I recruit local skirmishers.

My expansion outside Italy runs a lot faster than the historical roman expansion. During the polybian era my troops were fighting around the Baltic Sea, the Crimea, and westernmost Africa. When the Romans ventured that far away from Rome, they relied on local skirmishers... though of course, it took them a bit more time to get there.

So, I am left with three choices: don't expand as fast, use velites and accensi in very far away posts where you have no recruiting grounds (not historical), or, recruit local skirmishers in distant regions (like the Romans did when they got that far, during the Marian and Imperial period).

It has been repeatedly pointed to you now that people are criticizing your over use of Pedites Extraordinarii and Triarii, not the use of local skirmishers. Triarii were the oldest (or wealthiest) of heavy infantry, only to be used if needed. Pedites Extraordinarii made up even a smaller proportion of the army, and certainly were not line infantry either.

[Lanceari]

...It has been repeatedly pointed to you now that people are criticizing your over use of Pedites Extraordinarii and Triarii, not the use of local skirmishers. Triarii were the oldest (or wealthiest) of heavy infantry, only to be used if needed. Pedites Extraordinarii made up even a smaller proportion of the army, and certainly were not line infantry either.

In my very first post I stated:

Most of the time I keep a large contingent of local inexpensive troops... since I can replace casualties locally. However, I tend to have more than the historical share of triariis...

I use quinqux like formations when I deploy my units, except that I use my Triariis to back up both my Roman Legionaries and my non-Roman units. That is the main reason I end up having so many triariis. Again, in my fist post I said:

I use triariis as a second (or third) line for... my legionaries and my locally raised units.

From the very start I pointed out I was using more than the historical share of trariis. And, I pointed out the reason for it. You all want to share your thoughts on my choice. Thank you.

As far as pedites... Pedites make the tinniest fraction of my total army (less than 1% of all my units in the campaign map). However, I concentrate them all on the one stack I use for assaulting cities w/ stone walls.

In my first post I explained I use different stacks for different terrains (Woods, Open Country, Cities with Stone Walls, Cities W/out Stone Walls). Do you use the same unit composition to fight in each different type of terrain?