Total War: Rome II - Battle of the Nile

**Arjos** · 06-14-2013, 05:22

Originally Posted by Barkhorn1x

- This basically confirms capture points are the baggage train and will be in for all battles as - I quote loosely; "If they loose their baggage they'll lose the battle because they won't be able to supply their army. Huh? The army may be hungry after the battle but I'm pretty sure they will be OK for a few hours!

Close your eyes and think that it's all during the Diadochoi wars, soon as the baggages are taken, the Makedonian vets simply said: "That's it, I'm out!" :P

It would've been so cool if the army, who lost the supply train, started to suffer casualties in the campaign map and had to fight for it or go foraging. Fingers crossed for mods or an update down the line...

**Hooahguy** · 06-14-2013, 05:24

Originally Posted by Arjos

Close your eyes and think that it's all during the Diadochoi wars, soon as the baggages are taken, the Makedonian vets simply said: "That's it, I'm out!" :P

Thats valid, maybe because they know that their supplies are gone then they fight with less morale?

**Arjos** · 06-14-2013, 05:27

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Thats valid, maybe because they know that their supplies are gone then they fight with less morale?

In the particular case I mentioned, their families and all their possessions were with the baggages. So they would've literally lost everything they owned...
But armies cut off from supplies, either pillaged, fought their way out, ate roots, resorted to cannibalism: whatever they could think to survive and then succeeded or died...

Those Makedones, were already in a civil war and just didn't see the point, since the other commander was more than pleased to enlist them ^^

**Hooahguy** · 06-14-2013, 05:30

Well if thats the case then I would be surprised if they didnt get demoralized.

**Barkhorn1x** · 06-14-2013, 14:00

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Thats valid, maybe because they know that their supplies are gone then they fight with less morale?

The Macedonians had their baggage train looted at Gaugemela and they went on to win the battle.

Of course then they had the - much larger/richer - Persian baggage train in their possession.

**Rhyfelwyr** · 06-14-2013, 14:39

Units gained experience during battles as far back as RTW - they glowed and sparkled for a few seconds after it happened. I don't have a major problem with that.

But the baggage train thing is ridiculous, it's painfully arcady. As if the men would just lay down and die as soon as their camp was looted, lol. There's plenty of solutions for them to survive - most obviously going on to win the battle and taking the enemies supplies. And even if they lost, they could always loot the local area.

**B-Wing** · 06-14-2013, 15:08

Thinking more about the baggage train as a capture point, I'm guessing there will be a timer associated with it, similar to capturing city squares. Otherwise it would be Game Over as soon as an enemy unit marched over to one. Still, I think losing your baggage train during battle should simply cause a moral penalty to all your units rather than directly costing you the battle. That way there would still be a strong incentive to protect/recover the baggage camp.

The only good thing I see about the baggage train camp dynamic is that, as Hooahguy pointed out already, it will force players to take a different approach to defense than in previous TW games. Whenever I was on defense before, I would just position my men on the most favorable terrain possible. With the baggage train camp being automatically positioned on the battle map, it will force the defender to position his troops with protecting it in mind.

Do we know if baggage camps are only applicable to defenders? That is, will attacking armies also have baggage trains?

**Barkhorn1x** · 06-14-2013, 15:59

Originally Posted by B-Wing

Whenever I was on defense before, I would just position my men on the most favorable terrain possible. With the baggage train camp being automatically positioned on the battle map, it will force the defender to position his troops with protecting it in mind.

...and what? Any general remotely competent wouldn't position his baggage train on - or behind - the most favorable terrain possible?
IMO, it's a gimmic that we never had before and don't need now.

Who the EFF does CA think it's audience is anway? Why are they pushing this crap?

**B-Wing** · 06-14-2013, 16:23

I was specifically referring to situations where I would use the borders of the battle map (the red lines) to cover my flanks. Or situations where I would place my entire army on an extremely steep slope with unreachable terrain behind me. With the baggage train camp being a capture point, I can't abuse the limitations of the game to gain an upper hand to the same degree as before. That's what I was referring to.

I'm not in favor of the baggage train being captured. Just looking on the bright side.

**Arjos** · 06-14-2013, 17:04

Originally Posted by Barkhorn1x

Who the EFF does CA think it's audience is anway? Why are they pushing this crap?

Yappy kids WILL get money from stressed out 21st century mothers: fact :P

**Hooahguy** · 06-14-2013, 18:28

Originally Posted by Barkhorn1x

...and what? Any general remotely competent wouldn't position his baggage train on - or behind - the most favorable terrain possible?
IMO, it's a gimmic that we never had before and don't need now.

Well, depending on the type of battle, like an ambush, it might not be on the most favorable terrain. But I agree, You should be able to place the baggage train.

I feel like the baggage train could be really well implemented. First off it would give you something to look after like in real life they had to. I think its status at the end of the battle should determine the rate of recovered injured. For instance, if you have 1,000 injured in a battle, preventing the enemy from destroying the baggage train means that 900 of them make a full recovery, but if you lose the baggage train then only 400 recover from their wounds.