Was this really necessary...? I am disappoint.
I actually explained my analysis of that battle in detail in the Hamachi chat. Firstly, let me correct you in that WorldlyBoar's legions were mostly, if not all, out of guard mode. That's the first thing I looked for when I was reviewing the battle. It was my conclusion that due to a lack of first cohorts and a general, the Roman army was simply asking to have its morale lowered to the point where entire units would rout. It was simply a matter of time until the first routed. After that point, not only do you have a double-scare, but now you lose morale because your brothers-in-arm beside you are running for their lives.
Romans were strengthened compared to the original EDU. The most important thing is their sword, and that was improved to kill more often (its lethality for instance is improved).
Also, if suggestions are so precious, please reconsider what you think about increasing heavy cavalry mass. Remember, we wish to simulate history better by making the exploitation of heavy cavalry less possible (cannot completely exterminate it). By this we mean to allow a cavalry commander a decisive charge (or two) that really matter, after which point you should not be able to keep hitting and running as if you're running on 500 horsepower. It's a horse carrying kilo after kilo of armour, not a Lamborghini (not that I like Lambos).
Do you mean to say people may be unintentionally contributing with deception?You need to give the benefit of the doubt and consider that the player is not informed (or has not reviewed) the changes in question. And I think it's underpowerment*
![]()
Bookmarks