Org Mobile Site
How could such a cool looking mercenary unit like the Shipri Tukul (Babylonian Heavy Spearmen) only have 9 armor points? It saddens me that his full torso/shoulder armor has the same value as a polybian era Hastati who is only wearing a square chest plate...
His iron scale armor looks flipping awesome!
http://europabarbarorum.heimstatt.ne...y&category=any
Btw, this unit is undoubtedly my favorite mercenary infantry unit...
His iron scale armor looks flipping awesome!
http://europabarbarorum.heimstatt.ne...y&category=any
Btw, this unit is undoubtedly my favorite mercenary infantry unit...
Its armour is underpowered...this will be fixed in AtB
I suppose he lacks in the quality of the armour. IIRC the description says sth about this unit being a bit outdated at this time
Actually, it's this:
Scale armour = 6
Cheekless Helmet = 3
Under the stat system, this is what his armour would be. Compare with Thureophoroi:
Linothorax = 4
Cheeked Helmet = 4
Greaves = 2
Historically, thureophoroi very rarely had greaves anyways...another AtB fix
Scale armour = 6
Cheekless Helmet = 3
Under the stat system, this is what his armour would be. Compare with Thureophoroi:
Linothorax = 4
Cheeked Helmet = 4
Greaves = 2
Historically, thureophoroi very rarely had greaves anyways...another AtB fix
Originally Posted by gamegeek2:
Historically, thureophoroi very rarely had greaves anyways...another AtB fix
Will you use an armour-adjusted model too? Historically, thureophoroi very rarely had greaves anyways...another AtB fix
The Epeirote Thureophoroi already wear boots, so it wouldn't be to hard to simply copy that part of the skin to the other versions.
I hope to see Babylonian Heavy Spearmen used online (they're mercs for any nation).
Originally Posted by Epimetheus:
The Epeirote Thureophoroi already wear boots, so it wouldn't be to hard to simply copy that part of the skin to the other versions.
I did release a minimod that rectifyed the whole greaves thing. unless the link is down?The Epeirote Thureophoroi already wear boots, so it wouldn't be to hard to simply copy that part of the skin to the other versions.
Originally Posted by vartan:
I hope to see Babylonian Heavy Spearmen used online (they're mercs for any nation).
Aye. I think something is up with the unit's morale too. It has the characteristics of "disciplined " and "highly trained" but its morale is only 11?I hope to see Babylonian Heavy Spearmen used online (they're mercs for any nation).
Usually units with the disciplined description has a morale of around 15 or so.
Jewish spearmen has a discpline of "normal" and "trained' and it has a higher morale of 12. Scythian axemen and other units with descriptions of "normal discipline" have morales of 11.
Now, I read that discipline trait mostly deals with the closeless of the unit formation, but I still think the Shipri Tukul/Babylonian Heavy Spearmen, my favorite mercenary infantry, is getting shafted in terms of morale as well...
The point system by EB is a disaster.I have replaced it personally with a wargaming count system from here:
http://home.versatel.nl/richardevers2000/index.htm
and here:
http://www.ancientbattles.com/index_...ntBattles.html
If you like the realism in the game i advice to move from the screen to the table.
http://home.versatel.nl/richardevers2000/index.htm
and here:
http://www.ancientbattles.com/index_...ntBattles.html
If you like the realism in the game i advice to move from the screen to the table.
Originally Posted by Intranetusa:
Aye. I think something is up with the unit's morale too. It has the characteristics of "disciplined " and "highly trained" but its morale is only 11?
Usually units with the disciplined description has a morale of around 15 or so.
Jewish spearmen has a discpline of "normal" and "trained' and it has a higher morale of 12. Scythian axemen and other units with descriptions of "normal discipline" have morales of 11.
Now, I read that discipline trait mostly deals with the closeless of the unit formation, but I still think the Shipri Tukul/Babylonian Heavy Spearmen, my favorite mercenary infantry, is getting shafted in terms of morale as well...
Correction:Aye. I think something is up with the unit's morale too. It has the characteristics of "disciplined " and "highly trained" but its morale is only 11?
Usually units with the disciplined description has a morale of around 15 or so.
Jewish spearmen has a discpline of "normal" and "trained' and it has a higher morale of 12. Scythian axemen and other units with descriptions of "normal discipline" have morales of 11.
Now, I read that discipline trait mostly deals with the closeless of the unit formation, but I still think the Shipri Tukul/Babylonian Heavy Spearmen, my favorite mercenary infantry, is getting shafted in terms of morale as well...
-- the higher the discipline, the slower the unit loses its morale points (once it gets to a certain level, the unit breaks down)
-- the higher the training, the harder it is for the unit to lose its formation
Originally Posted by dejan07:
The point system by EB is a disaster.I have replaced it personally with a wargaming count system from here:
Um, er, EB's system was made by people with extensive historical knowledge. Not to mention people with a practical approach who advised them. I'd actually prefer that to systems devised by other game developers, thank you very much.The point system by EB is a disaster.I have replaced it personally with a wargaming count system from here:
Babylonians.. meh, Misthophoroi Thraikioi Peltastai all the way.
Originally Posted by dejan07:
The point system by EB is a disaster.I have replaced it personally with a wargaming count system from here:
http://home.versatel.nl/richardevers2000/index.htm
and here:
http://www.ancientbattles.com/index_...ntBattles.html
If you like the realism in the game i advice to move from the screen to the table.
The point system by EB is a disaster.I have replaced it personally with a wargaming count system from here:
http://home.versatel.nl/richardevers2000/index.htm
and here:
http://www.ancientbattles.com/index_...ntBattles.html
If you like the realism in the game i advice to move from the screen to the table.
Originally Posted by athanaric:
Um, er, EB's system was made by people with extensive historical knowledge. Not to mention people with a practical approach who advised them. I'd actually prefer that to systems devised by other game developers, thank you very much.
I'mma tweak the armor values a little by my own method - namely, the more 'epic' the armor looks and the more it covers, the more points I'll give it. And the more epic or the bigger the shield looks (and the material metal vs wood, etc) the more points it gets... Um, er, EB's system was made by people with extensive historical knowledge. Not to mention people with a practical approach who advised them. I'd actually prefer that to systems devised by other game developers, thank you very much.
IMO, the most epic looking armor for elite units: Sacred Band Phalanx, Distinguished KH Hoplites, Spartans, Camillian Triari, and those crazy triple-layered mail/scale shock troops from Seleucid and Iberia
honorable mentions go to other elite units such as the Iberian Assault infantry, Praetorian or Veterans cohort, Elite African Pikemen, Any cataphract cavalry, Sacred Band Cavalry
*btw, I heard the crazy triple mail-armored unit for Lusotanian (sp?) was disabled due to their rarity (still around for Seleucid I hope). Would it be still inaccurate for my campaign, say, to make them cost more to recruit than elephants in order to still have them around in the single player campaign?
ie. Cost 8000-12,0000 to recruit, 2000-3000 to maintain
Originally Posted by athanaric:
Um, er, EB's system was made by people with extensive historical knowledge. Not to mention people with a practical approach who advised them. I'd actually prefer that to systems devised by other game developers, thank you very much.
Doesn't mean it couldn't use a revamping! Um, er, EB's system was made by people with extensive historical knowledge. Not to mention people with a practical approach who advised them. I'd actually prefer that to systems devised by other game developers, thank you very much.
I just tell myself that if something costs ridiculously more than something, say, in the West, then perhaps it wasn't used as much and/or simply put, really costed more!! Pontian and armenian heavy infantry compared to legionnaries come to mind.^^ or siege engines.
Shipri Tukul are also one of my favorites, although i often hae the feeling that they are too expensive for their preformance. still they are an essencial part of my parthian royal army(infantry devision) useing them as line infantry is my way of getting rid of my surplus money as I don't like to use elephants (not to mention getting them from india to syria) and find that a navy of "boats" is just not ipressive enough for it's price :D still i think they really could use 1-2 extra armor points for their clothing or so.
Shipri Tukul are also one of my favorites, although i often hae the feeling that they are too expensive for their preformance. still they are an essencial part of my parthian royal army(infantry devision) useing them as line infantry is my way of getting rid of my surplus money as I don't like to use elephants (not to mention getting them from india to syria) and find that a navy of "boats" is just not ipressive enough for it's price :D still i think they really could use 1-2 extra armor points for their clothing or so.
Originally Posted by Ca Putt:
Pontian and armenian heavy infantry
No such thing! Haha, unfortunately.Pontian and armenian heavy infantry
Originally Posted by vartan:
No such thing! Haha, unfortunately.
Hayasdan have their palace guards.No such thing! Haha, unfortunately.
Originally Posted by Hannibal Khan the Great:
Hayasdan have their palace guards.
Exactly. At the palace, not in the field! LOLHayasdan have their palace guards.
sorry i meant medium/"Elite" infantry ;)
Originally Posted by vartan:
No such thing! Haha, unfortunately.
No such thing! Haha, unfortunately.
Originally Posted by Ca Putt:
sorry i meant medium/"Elite" infantry ;)
Heavy=/=elite.sorry i meant medium/"Elite" infantry ;)
The Hai armoured swordsmen may well count as heavy infantry. The problem though is their lethality (0.1), which is sub par. Other units of their "class" have 0.13 lethality.
BTW I think Shipri Tukul are just fine as they are.
the pontian version is called Elite the armenian one medium is that so hard to understand. they look rather heavy so I reffered to them as heavy infantry. both are rather similar and are a perfect example of EB unit pricing taking hitorical availibility etc into account.
Originally Posted by athanaric:
BTW I think Shipri Tukul are just fine as they are.
But they cost more than a principes, and have less morale than a hastati despite having 'trained/high_discipline' traits. And they have the same armor value as a polybian hastati despite the hastati only have a single chest square while the shipri tukul have complete torso armor...BTW I think Shipri Tukul are just fine as they are.
We Armenians get **** swords (= It's really fun, especially considering our eons old iron works.
Yes Intra, but EB is geared towards single player and even in multiplayer gives some factions strengths others don't have. They're still mercenaries or troops fighting for a foreign overlord. Of course they're going to have less morale. What you're pointing out is that Romans have super-good heavy infantry. The Babylonians spearmen are costed correctly given their region of recruitment and the gaping holes they fill in the line up of the factions that pick them.
Edit - and yeah, they look pretty cool. I wish their formation was a bit more dense though. It's really set to enhance their secondary weapon rather than their primary.
Edit - and yeah, they look pretty cool. I wish their formation was a bit more dense though. It's really set to enhance their secondary weapon rather than their primary.
Originally Posted by MisterFred:
Yes Intra, but EB is geared towards single player and even in multiplayer gives some factions strengths others don't have. They're still mercenaries or troops fighting for a foreign overlord. Of course they're going to have less morale. What you're pointing out is that Romans have super-good heavy infantry. The Babylonians spearmen are costed correctly given their region of recruitment and the gaping holes they fill in the line up of the factions that pick them.
Edit - and yeah, they look pretty cool. I wish their formation was a bit more dense though. It's really set to enhance their secondary weapon rather than their primary.
Well the comparison isn't just with Roman infantry. If you compare them with say, Greek infantry, Celtic unarmored infantry, etc - the Shipri Tukul should have more morale than a measly 11 and more armor than 9. Yes Intra, but EB is geared towards single player and even in multiplayer gives some factions strengths others don't have. They're still mercenaries or troops fighting for a foreign overlord. Of course they're going to have less morale. What you're pointing out is that Romans have super-good heavy infantry. The Babylonians spearmen are costed correctly given their region of recruitment and the gaping holes they fill in the line up of the factions that pick them.
Edit - and yeah, they look pretty cool. I wish their formation was a bit more dense though. It's really set to enhance their secondary weapon rather than their primary.
Morale mostly because he has the traits of being both "highly" disciplined and trained - and the units with those traits usually have morale in the 13s or so.
Highly Disciplined and Trained are bonuses in themselves.
Aye, they tire and lose moral slower with those traits.
=(
On another note.
Gund-î Nîzagân (Parthian Spearmen) are described as "poorly trained, levy infantry" but have the trait "highly_trained." I guess training only refers to the tightness of the formation or tiring rate, but it's funny nonetheless. :D
On another note.
Gund-î Nîzagân (Parthian Spearmen) are described as "poorly trained, levy infantry" but have the trait "highly_trained." I guess training only refers to the tightness of the formation or tiring rate, but it's funny nonetheless. :D
Originally Posted by Intranetusa:
=(
On another note.
Gund-î Nîzagân (Parthian Spearmen) are described as "poorly trained, levy infantry" but have the trait "highly_trained." I guess training only refers to the tightness of the formation or tiring rate, but it's funny nonetheless. :D
Parthian Spearmen aren't supposed to lose formation as quickly as others, hence highly trained. That's the point of that trait value (trained, highly trained, etc.)=(
On another note.
Gund-î Nîzagân (Parthian Spearmen) are described as "poorly trained, levy infantry" but have the trait "highly_trained." I guess training only refers to the tightness of the formation or tiring rate, but it's funny nonetheless. :D
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO