[EB] Thoughts on balancing Rome in a historical way

[antisocialmunky]

They can only be as good as their equipment (with other factors being influential as well, though not nearly as much).

EDIT: To make an analogy. In photography we say that your photo is only going to be as good as your lens. Equipment matters. Balancing means a lack of favoritism and an insistence on the consistency of stat values for each piece of equipment.

If so, get rid of tree bonus and barb bonus.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

If so, get rid of tree bonus and barb bonus.

The barb bonuses are there for a reason: to make them competitive in both campaign and MP. Sweboz are still very tricky to play as, though I did have a match with them last night against LazyO which went pretty well, though his army was experimental and honestly not a comp I would ever take for MP. The one problem we run into when statting lightly armored units is that speed differences between heavy and light infantry aren't drastic enough, nor are the stamina differences. The difference for infantry between very good stamina and no stamina boost is about 20 seconds worth of fighting. That's 20 seconds for which the lighter unit has an advantage which is made up for by the fact that they have already been slaughtered up to that point when the heavies get tired. Since all this is hardcoded, I feel as if a minor bonus is the least we can do.

[antisocialmunky]

No, Vartan just said that you should just stat the equipment and ignore the man. I'm just saying that the person and skill must be considered as well.

Rome seems quite reasonable at 1800 legions. You just need proper support units. I managed to make a working army with cavalry with 8 legions, 4 spear auxillaries, and 4 numidian archers.

You can go ahead and make imperials better if you reduce support infantry unit costs to somewhere closer to 1400. Make all the Rome guys happy.

[vartan]

No, Vartan just said that you should just stat the equipment and ignore the man. I'm just saying that the person and skill must be considered as well.

You're misrepresenting what I said, probably because you misunderstood it. That's fine, just don't post your misrepresentations. Just because you should stat based on equipment does not mean you should not stat based on other factors. Where is it written you must stat based solely on one factor? If we statted based on equipment alone you'd have a really imbalanced game.

[antisocialmunky]

What do you mean, Gaesaetae are already imba.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

What do you mean, Gaesaetae are already imba.

Not really, they are great targets for the new skirmish cavalry. Pointy sticks are effective against them.

[antisocialmunky]

Not really, they are great targets for the new skirmish cavalry. Pointy sticks are effective against them.

If we statted based on equipment alone you'd have a really imbalanced game.

:-P enis joke.

[gamegeek2]

No, Vartan just said that you should just stat the equipment and ignore the man. I'm just saying that the person and skill must be considered as well.

Rome seems quite reasonable at 1800 legions. You just need proper support units. I managed to make a working army with cavalry with 8 legions, 4 spear auxillaries, and 4 numidian archers.

You can go ahead and make imperials better if you reduce support infantry unit costs to somewhere closer to 1400. Make all the Rome guys happy.

Vega is quite happy with my current plan to reduce the cost of the spear auxiliaries to 1644, as he has actually used barbarian auxiliaries (particularly the Appea Gaedotos) at my request.

[Vega]

Hey gg2 yea i will be pleased with reducing cohorts valdvm cost, but when robin told me that archers have more defensve skill than cohorts.... that was very big lol moment for me why cohorts def is only 7 ?

[vartan]

Hey gg2 yea i will be pleased with reducing cohorts valdvm cost, but when robin told me that archers have more defensve skill than cohorts.... that was very big lol moment for me why cohorts def is only 7 ?

Because they are heavily armored and can withstand two armies if in guard mode? lol...

[antisocialmunky]

High armor and shield values which aren't reduced by fatigue are great for exhausted battles :p

I hope the solution keeps the aux units similar strength per man since aux heavy infantry were often counted equivalent of cohorts. Similar career soldiers but they weren't Romans.

[vartan]

High armor and shield values which aren't reduced by fatigue are great for exhausted battles :p

Yeah, I know. That's why Rome wins with guard. I've tested Romans in the past. When they win in non-guard, it's cause they're offensive. When they win in guard, it's cause they're fighting ability is still 100% due to no fatigue. It's usually a win-win for them (and especially any stamina, armored infantry).

I hope the solution keeps the aux units similar strength per man since aux heavy infantry were often counted equivalent of cohorts. Similar career soldiers but they weren't Romans.

Yes, but were they armored the same way? Were they armed the same way, too?

[antisocialmunky]

Yes, but were they armored the same way? Were they armed the same way, too?

Most of your LS finds come from Auxilary headquarters and Limes and not the headquarters of the legions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auxilia....80.9314_AD.29

[-Stormrage-]

Fighting isn't about winning, it's about depriving your enemy of all options except to lose.

Interesting

Dont mind me people, just trying to get the Post count up.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Because they are heavily armored and can withstand two armies if in guard mode? lol...

This shouldn't affect anything. Some of us (believe it or not) like to use legions outside of guard mode as offensive units. (I know, blasphemy Vega) Just because people like to spam legions and stick them in guard mode doesn't mean that we should lower their defense skill to the same or less than levy skirmishers. They were highly trained after all.

[vartan]

Most of your LS finds come from Auxilary headquarters and Limes and not the headquarters of the legions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auxilia....80.9314_AD.29

Didn't answer the question.

[antisocialmunky]

Didn't answer the question.

They were of similar quality as the Roman legions themselves, similar equipment, organized similarly but in smaller groups, similar length of service requirements (25 years). The main distinction is that they were not all Roman citizens and instead gained citizenship after their 25 years. Their role was to provide specialized combat services to the Roman heavy infantry and cavalry. After all, pretty much the 2nd best archer in the game is an auxilia unit and the current depiction of the heavy infantry cohorts stat them to be basically Romans except no missiles and spears instead.

The auxilia arms of the Roman Army came to play an important role over the course of the 1st Century, and by the beginning of the 2nd Century they had, in many senses, surpassed even the legions in usefulness. Nonetheless, in the 1st Century AD the reputation of the auxilia was marred by several bloody auxiliary revolts. From the years 6 – 9 AD Illyrian and Dalmatian auxiliaries in modern Yugoslavia sided with only partially conquered, anti-Roman tribal factions, and started a bitterly fought guerilla war that seriously depleted Roman manpower. Only a few months after the Illyrian Revolt was put down, in September of 9 a former native auxiliary commander, the Cheruscan German Arminius, lead three Roman legions and some auxiliary units into a trap in the Teutoberg Forest of Germany. The Romans were slaughtered and panic ensued throughout the Empire, even in Rome herself, at the magnitude of the crisis. The Roman frontier was consolidated and restored along the Rhine by Germanicus half a decade later. In 68, the last year of the reign of Emperor Nero, Batavian auxiliary commander Julius Civilis started a revolt amongst a number of Germanic peoples and this movement was put down only with great bloodshed and human tragedy. There were also a number of isolated instances of rebellion – the tragic adventure of the Usipi at the end of the 1st Century being a famous example.

Many of the auxiliary rebellions occurred because the troops’ local sympathies were stronger than their Roman sympathies. Julius Civilis, a proud citizen of the Batavi people, started his rebellion to avenge the honor of fellow countrymen who felt they had been slighted by the Emperor. Likewise, the Illyrian rebels of the beginning of the Century were stationed amongst their ancestral lands, with their families and villages close at hand, and finally decided that the liberation of that which they loved was more important than their oath to the Empire. In light of this, starting in the late 1st Century we find that Roman emperors and generals consciously attempted to post auxiliary regiments far away from their native lands; thus, we find Britons in Dacia, Syrians in Britain, and Spaniards in Egypt. Though many of these troops ended up marrying local girls and probably learning their languages, their local sympathies would have never come close to the loyalty they felt to the Army and their comrades.

The auxiliary regiments fought gallantly in all the great wars of the 1st and 2nd Centuries AD. Spanish, Celtic, and German auxiliaries participated in the Roman invasion of Britain (43 – 51 AD) and afterwards formed the most active part of Britain’s garrison. The much-vaunted cohorts of Batavian infantry proved more than a match for even the boldest of woad-painted Britons in the invasion. A number of auxiliary units, particularly cavalry, served with distinction in the civil war that erupted with the death of Nero (68 – 69 AD) as well as during the contemporary First Jewish War (68 – 73 AD). Auxiliary infantry of German origin formed the vanguard of Julius Agricola’s army during his invasion of Caledonia in the 80’s, occupying a role that had always previously been filled by legions.

http://www.historum.com/war-military...n-auxilia.html

They weren't simply cheap bodies but support units expected to be the best soldiers to provide the best possible services.

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Good points ASM. Auxilia were a professional force. I think their morale was increased as well from last edu. That being said, they aren't much better than, say, Samnite spears or Appea Gaedatos and yet they cost a lot more.

[antisocialmunky]

There are some weird anomalies. Eastern Auxilia (clearly Greek?) have a Kopis and a smaller shield while the Western one has a bigger shield. The Kopis has no AP and both cost nearly the same. Are the 400 AP pila between the Legion and the Auxilia worth ~100 mnai?

[vartan]

There are some weird anomalies. Eastern Auxilia (clearly Greek?) have a Kopis and a smaller shield while the Western one has a bigger shield. The Kopis has no AP and both cost nearly the same. Are the 400 AP pila between the Legion and the Auxilia worth ~100 mnai?

You make good points. How do you know it's a Kopis? It's supposed to be a gladius if I'm not mistaken... I know the Auxilia Archers have a gladius. The western auxilia are simply much like the eastern just without a secondary weapon. I believe their shield looks the same size... It's strange. Other than statting them according to what they're armed and armored with, I supposed the other things we could change to improve them are their spacing/density (I don't know much about this aspect), their morale (is it on part with legions? should it be? should it be lower, or even higher?), and their defensive skill (same as last parenthetical question).

[TheShakAttack]

They were of similar quality as the Roman legions themselves, similar equipment, organized similarly but in smaller groups, similar length of service requirements (25 years). The main distinction is that they were not all Roman citizens and instead gained citizenship after their 25 years. Their role was to provide specialized combat services to the Roman heavy infantry and cavalry. After all, pretty much the 2nd best archer in the game is an auxilia unit and the current depiction of the heavy infantry cohorts stat them to be basically Romans except no missiles and spears instead.


http://www.historum.com/war-military...n-auxilia.html

They weren't simply cheap bodies but support units expected to be the best soldiers to provide the best possible services.

I do not disagree, but look at this and you will understand why they were much cheaper than the legionary cohorts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auxilia....28caligati.29

To summarise: (sorry for terrible formatting)

Stipendium (gross salary) 225 188
(food and equip deduction the same for both)
Plus:
Donativa (bonuses)(average: 75 denarii every 3 years) 25 none proven
Praemia (discharge bonus: 3,000 denarii) 120 none proven

I did not say that they were any weaker, in fact, they were just as good as legions. The Batavi were apparently considered the best troops, even better than the legionaries. However, i just proposed that because it would be ahistorical to represent that both cost the same. My proposal for nerfing was to counteract the buffing of legions.

[vartan]

I did not say that they were any weaker, in fact, they were just as good as legions. The Batavi were apparently considered the best troops, even better than the legionaries. However, i just proposed that because it would be ahistorical to represent that both cost the same. My proposal for nerfing was to counteract the buffing of legions.

I'm losing track of all the posts, haha. So if we nerf them and their cost to counteract buffed legions, this is to allow Romans to get 20 units using factional troops alone? or was there a more critical reason?

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

You make good points. How do you know it's a Kopis? It's supposed to be a gladius if I'm not mistaken... I know the Auxilia Archers have a gladius. The western auxilia are simply much like the eastern just without a secondary weapon. I believe their shield looks the same size... It's strange. Other than statting them according to what they're armed and armored with, I supposed the other things we could change to improve them are their spacing/density (I don't know much about this aspect), their morale (is it on part with legions? should it be? should it be lower, or even higher?), and their defensive skill (same as last parenthetical question).

It's clearly a kopis. Use them in a custom battle and you will see.

[vartan]

It's clearly a kopis. Use them in a custom battle and you will see.

I see. It doesn't even have AP in the original. GAMEGEEEEEEEKKKK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol =)

[gamegeek2]

I see. It doesn't even have AP in the original. GAMEGEEEEEEEKKKK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! lol =)

Did I not explain that I don't have my computer until Monday, and even then I must re-install everything? smh... :)

[antisocialmunky]

GG, I'm going to propose a shieldwall default formation mechanic when you have time.

[Lazy O]

For your sake, I suggest you dont, its all too easy to ignore it :D

[TheShakAttack]

I'm losing track of all the posts, haha. So if we nerf them and their cost to counteract buffed legions, this is to allow Romans to get 20 units using factional troops alone? or was there a more critical reason?

I'm losing track of all the posts myself. With regards to your specific point, yes, it will hopefully allow them to do that. Remember, the merc count has to be increased upto 10 since the current 2 inf aux types do not reflect the sheer variety of Aux had. Therefore, these "mercs" effectively count as aux.

[vartan]

Did I not explain that I don't have my computer until Monday, and even then I must re-install everything? smh... :)

I forgot to tell them!

I'm losing track of all the posts myself. With regards to your specific point, yes, it will hopefully allow them to do that. Remember, the merc count has to be increased upto 10 since the current 2 inf aux types do not reflect the sheer variety of Aux had. Therefore, these "mercs" effectively count as aux.

Yeah. I think Rome or perhaps only post-Marian Rome needs a high merc count.

[antisocialmunky]

For your sake, I suggest you dont, its all too easy to ignore it :D

Just start barbs in shield wall like greeks in phalanx and then increase their mass a little.