[EB MP]3.0 Thread - Testing and Updates

[gamegeek2]

Right, here I shall outline some propositions.

Vartan and I have agreed that from now on units that cost between 1850 and 2500 mnai will be limited to 4 of a single unit. This is in response to a few things:

a. The possibility of a spam of Cretan Archers, particularly by the Koinon Hellenon, or (less importantly) Dacian Elite Archers by the Getai.
b. The "arms race" of phalanxes in which players are obligated to bring only Pezhetairoi as Hellenistic factions or lose to the other player's phalanx. We feel that this will help mitigate this and free up some cash in the Hellenistic fight, and we don't want to make exceptions to our rules.
c. The low cost of some key heavy units such as Indo-Hellenic Heavy Hoplites and Thorakitai. Spams of these haven't popped up by I don't want to take chances.

Next, something a bit more hard-hitting

Division of Sauromatae into Two Army Types: "Bosporan" and "Sarmatian"

Currently, the Sauromatae are forced to have limits on the number of key Greek troops they can bring, while they are allowed an expanded number of non-factionals to fill their infantry needs. I feel that this division would allow for more factions to be represented in EB Online, and remove the need for restrictions such as this. A player would need to announce which army type he brings.

The "Sarmatian" Army
-Not allowed to bring Bosporan factional troops (except Scythian units) - this includes Bosporan Archers!
-Rest of roster is fully available.
-Maximum of 6 non-factionals allowed.

The "Bosporan" Army
-Different list of factional troops.
-Not allowed to bring Sarmatian factional troops (except Scythian units and some exceptions to be added)

I would add a host of troops to the Sarmatian roster to enable the "Bosporan" army including:

-Thraikioi Peltastai
-Thraikioi Hippeis
-Thraikioi Prodromoi
-Hoplitai Haploi
-Peltastai
-Thureophoroi
-Pontikoi Thorakitai (maybe) - to represent the later Bosporan legionary imitations
-Thorakitai (maybe)
-Epilektoi Hoplitai (maybe)
-Hippeis
-Lonchophoroi Hippeis
-Hippeis Xystophoroi (maybe)

This would be made possible via editing of descr_model_battle

The steppe factions are well overdue for an overhaul in their 3.0 stats; I will redo all of their stats in this regard at the same time as I stat the Saka.

--- Saka Proposal ---

I fully support a division of Saka into "Steppe Saka" and "Indo Saka" but I'm not sure how I'd work this out.

[Lazy O]

Give back cantabrian circle. The ones who have been affected the most by its removal are the noble horse archers. They still die to arrow fire and cant avoid it anymore. Thus losing their dual role and being extremely limited during the archer war because you cannot afford to waste such expensive units.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Give back cantabrian circle. The ones who have been affected the most by its removal are the noble horse archers. They still die to arrow fire and cant avoid it anymore. Thus losing their dual role and being extremely limited during the archer war because you cannot afford to waste such expensive units.

Well you have to take foot archers as steppe factions now to absorb arrows. Nothing too difficult to figure out about that. Use the noble horse archers after your enemy has expended the majority or all of his missiles. They can harass from the back while posing a constant threat of a charge to the rear.

[TheShakAttack]

Hey

2 very interesting posts to respond to. Unfortunately I do not have the time to do them both justice right now, and they both deserve well formulated replies given the issues that have been brought up.

I will respond to gg2 for now since I think it will take less time.

The Sauro split should be interesting; seems like a “creative” way to work in a Bosphoran Faction ;)

In fact, if anything, Sauro becomes the Bosphoran Kingdrom rather than being Sauro :P

It’s quite clear that the path envisioned for Sauro and Saka are remarkably different than they have been previously. Though the plans have not been fleshed out, it appears that to choose Sauro (sarmatian army) or Saka (early era), means bringing incredibly large numbers of HA, some heavies and almost non-existent infantry. Now, this is not terribly far from how the historic armies would have been (though of course, HA units would be much larger, and have more ammo), but, in terms of gameplay, I think it would be too restrictive unless these cav get some kind of serious bump. It would be quite easy to bring a lot of heavy spears, some slingers and heavy archers, and 1-2 heavy cav to counter this type of an army.

I’ll wait to hear more about this split. I would be particularly interested in seeing the proposed unit lists of the 2 eras/armies for the 2 factions. Maybe after seeing the lists, things might not seem so gloomy.

Robin, I will defo get to your post since it deserves such due to how informative and cogent it is.

On the note of Saka, might I suggest that something similar to the previous steppe declaration be implemented? I was speaking to Robin yday, and he said his main concern is that he wouldn’t know what kind of army he was up against, an infantry based or cav based one. Perhaps we could implement something whereby any more than 7-10 infantry units would need to be declared as infantry based (rather than limiting which units can be taken)? I hope I am not misunderstanding him when he said that this was a proposal worth considering when he said “stfu you idiot”.

[-Stormrage-]

I fully support a division of Saka into "Steppe Saka" and "Indo Saka" but I'm not sure how I'd work this out.

Game over Shak , you have no chance.

I know from Experience, maybe he will give you a .1 here a .2 their but thats it.

[Lazy O]

Tell me, what reason do you have to justify this? All other factions underwent a change, if we are going to do this, why not limit gauls into 3 eras? Why not the carthaginians as before rome or after rome? Why not limit catas for Seleucids unless they are facing the Parthians? Hey, what are the sweboz even doing here without any metal, how did they even get 36000 mnai in the first place, lets impose 10000 denarii limit on them just to make sure the game is historical. Have you ever heard of Sarmatians fielding Falxmen and Germans and Baltics? I most certainly have not.

[antisocialmunky]

You know what the weakness of saka was before? Your infantry line had crap morale and heavy hoplites were stupidly fragile compared to regular ones and prone to massive chain routs.

Since there is no missile limit anymore, I don't think its a problem. I don't really want to see an eras division. I don't really mind seeing a Thorakitai HA army. I can take one already as KH.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

You know what the weakness of saka was before? Your infantry line had crap morale and heavy hoplites were stupidly fragile compared to regular ones and prone to massive chain routs.

Since there is no missile limit anymore, I don't think its a problem. I don't really want to see an eras division. I don't really mind seeing a Thorakitai HA army. I can take one already as KH.

The only problem with this is that most Saka infantry units are in line to receive excellent morale on par with standard hoplites. The Indohellenikoi have excellent morale already and I would figure the Saka Heavy Hoplites will as well since they possessed it in 2.1. Going against the Sauros, you can drive their HA away with an archer slinger combo and then target the mostly unarmored infantry line to inflict severe casualties but there is no such hope against the heavy infantry of the Saka. Saka does, for the record, possess a cataphract unit as well as a cataphract archer so they can be nearly as flexible as Pahlava in this sense as well. Maybe the heaviest of Saka cavalry should be in smaller numbers? I'm not sure what proportion of steppe armies were based on heavy cavalry rather than light HA.

[Lazy O]

@Robin; I think we discussed this before, idk, Saka Heavy hoplites had 11 morale. Same as the indo hellenic hoplites. I say steppe armies, before settling in, would be probably 90% horse archer 10% cata. Now, that would be pretty cheap too, problem is getting those few units of catas to do some serious damage, which im sure almost everyone here can avoid.

And gamegeek2, you still have not given a reason for dividing the Sakae into eras, on the sweboz part, I say they should not even be included in the factions list, same goes for the saba.

[TheShakAttack]

I think the point Lazy was making (about unit eras, not C. circle), whilst more symbolic/ranting than literal, makes sense. Dividing saka into 2 eras does not make much sense, especially since the EBO roster is very happy to incorporate "later era" units with older ones in other factions. In fact, I think if you really want to dig into Lazy's argument, it is very tenable. BUT I think to delve into that would mean that we get dangerously and fruitlessly sidetracked, arguing for the sake of arguing.

Plus, are there any historical sources which indicate that Saka did not have ANY HA (the light types) when they settled (what is proposed to be the "later era")? Certainly I would agree they might have been in a lower proportion (not 60-90% light HA anymore).

I would like to repeat the following to ellicit a response from Robin and GG2 who seem to have the most concerns re: saka. Robin, am I correct is saying the following from my earlier post?:

"...[Robin] said his main concern is that he wouldn’t know what kind of army he was up against [if his opponent was saka], an infantry based or cav based one. Perhaps we could implement something whereby any more than 7-10 infantry units would need to be declared as infantry based (rather than limiting which [combination of] units can be taken)? I hope I am not misunderstanding him when he said that this was a proposal worth considering when he said “stfu you idiot”."

I'd also love to hear GG2s concerns about saka.

[gamegeek2]

One by one:

Why not limit catas for Seleucids unless they are facing the Parthians?

Under current rules, the Seleucids can only take two cataphracts anyways.

Why not the carthaginians as before rome or after rome?

272 BC onward can be called "after Rome" as the Punic Wars start a decade into our timeframe.

Have you ever heard of Sarmatians fielding Falxmen and Germans and Baltics? I most certainly have not.

Contemporary historians didn't distinguish a Baltic speaker from a Germanic one. The fact remains that in the immediate area west of the Sarmatian core territory, river-traversing East Baltic tribes made their homes, and they fought mainly as spear-armed infantry, with some archers and cavalry among them. Germanics would be more elusive, which is why I intend to reduce the Sarmatian options in that regard, but please note that many of the "Germanic" units are also used as placeholders for other troop types. For example, undoubtedly the East Balts had a core of experienced veterans such as the Dugundiz, but EB has no such East Baltic unit; hence the Dugundiz serve as a placeholder.

Hey, what are the sweboz even doing here without any metal, how did they even get 36000 mnai in the first place, lets impose 10000 denarii limit on them just to make sure the game is historical.

Now you're just being silly. Certainly the Sweboz had limited access to metal, but towards the later part of our time-frame (on which we focus for the Sweboz, the Gauls, etc.) a large industry of bog-iron smelting developed in the region, and access to iron greatly improved. Tacitus writes of fire-hardened wood later, but keep in mind that his account was second-hand at best, and perhaps limited by Roman stereotypes.

Give back cantabrian circle. The ones who have been affected the most by its removal are the noble horse archers. They still die to arrow fire and cant avoid it anymore. Thus losing their dual role and being extremely limited during the archer war because you cannot afford to waste such expensive units.

Absolutely not, when the result of giving it back would be to make foot archers once again useless at shooting circling horse archers. I can re-power the HA by giving their arrows full strength at their entire range; I may grant HA greater numbers, and I have already given them a slight accuracy pump. But the fact is, foot archers were the best counter to horse archers historically, and I want to make sure that's true in EBO as well. And I remember us testing horse archer armies at full power and you complaining about how it was a total slaughter...