Gaul

[ReluctantSamurai]

Ok. Last word...I promise

From the official unit stat description:

Britannia and Gaul can recruit druids who can perform a constant mystical chant to raise nearby troops morale and have the adverse effect on nearby enemies.

From this thread:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...Gallic-war-cry

I have played thousands of custom battles during my years of modding RTW and seen the effect war-cry has many countless times, often from just using 1 on 1 unit battles. From what I can ascertain, it increases the fighting ability of the unit like someone else said for up to about 30 seconds. Whether it adds an attack bonus or a lethality bonus (modders will know the difference) I don't know. It definitely is effective, however, and I've seen it turn the tide of a battle over and over. It becomes most apparent if the kill-speed of combat is reduced through modding whereby you get more of a chance to see it in effect. The best way to use it is to perform the war-cry moments before a charge, then engage the enemy. I'm not sure if you have to let the unit do the full chant before attacking to get the most effect. After 30 seconds or so, you can sometimes pull the unit out of combat, perform war-cry then charge them back in again. I am almost certain it has zero effect on enemy units.

From all of that, two things are apparent (to me, at least):

Druid/Screeching Women chant is morale boosting for your own troops, the opposite for the enemy. Warcry boosts unit morale and attk value for a short period of time.

Given all that, one can safely say chanting will only affect an enemy's low morale troops like brigands or low-skill, early-game troops, and the unit cannot engage in combat or the special is dissipated. Once mid-level or higher troops start appearing on the battlefield, chanting will have little to no effect on enemy troops and its only benefit will be to your own troops. However...

....Warcry boosts both morale and attack value regardless of what the enemy has, so why would you bother with a Druid unit whose special is not as good as what your infantry already possess?

I guess their use depends whether or not you need an extra fighting unit or a support unit that can make your existing fighters perform better and last longer.

I repeat...if you enjoy the luxury of having a unit or two that cost over twice as much per man as your best infantry unit, and have to stay out of combat in order for their special to work, and whose said special is a lesser duplicate to what you already possess, then you need to crank up the difficulty.

Just my 2cents

[wooly_mammoth]

Hey, if I was forced to stop using a unit that I like because the game was too difficult and pigeon-holed me in a specific approach in order to have a chance to win, I wouldn't like it.

[Vincent Butler]

Ok. Last word...I promise

From the official unit stat description:



Britannia and Gaul can recruit druids who can perform a constant mystical chant to raise nearby troops morale and have the adverse effect on nearby enemies.

So the Warchant does affect the enemy, I know the description only says it boosts morale. With Warband, they need all the help they can get. That said, I will have to experiment on M/M. I did not know about the boost to your morale on E/E, even Cohort rout quickly on E/E with the Chant. At later levels, it is not a good idea to use Warband much anyway due to the low morale/stats. Of course the sword units still get the Warcry.

Druid/Screeching Women chant is morale boosting for your own troops

I know Screeching Women is supposed to intimidate the enemy, I am not sure if it helps your own troops or not. I would not use them anyway, regardless of my feelings about women in combat, their defense is too low. And, like Druids, I think they are unrealistic. As Scythia, I might use female units to be historically accurate, and for lack of better units for a time. Not that I am planning on being Scythia anytime soon. I want to have a successful Barbarian campaign first, the best I have done is with Britannia, and then the riots started ending my campaigns, I know, ZPG.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Hey, if I was forced to stop using a unit that I like because the game was too difficult and pigeon-holed me in a specific approach in order to have a chance to win, I wouldn't like it.

We play games for the enjoyment, yes? If using Druids makes the game more fun for you, then by all means use them. But.....






.....please try not to use comments like "I use Druids for the added swag"
If you're using Druids anytime after the first 10-15 years then: a) you have denarii to burn; or b) the battle difficulty you are playing at allows them to still be somewhat useful. Swagger has nothing to do with it

As Scythia, I might use female units to be historically accurate, and for lack of better units for a time.

The Scythian Noble Women are a bit redundant. By the time you can recruit them, you can recruit the Scythian Noble Archers which require only the advanced horse stables. The Noble Women require the Temple of Api, IIRC. This is what kills them though...Scythian Noble Archers have better stats, and lower per-man unit costs. In short, they're better and cheaper. There's no reason to ever use Scythian Noble Women as they stand; you're paying more for less (on large unit setting, Noble Archers=54 men; Noble Women=36 women)

The Head Hunting Maidens are a different story. With an attack of 10/def of 11, they are comparable to Barbarian Cavalry (or Egyptian Desert Cavalry) with the added bonus of using axes for a main weapon and so their attk is armor piercing. Great for flanking and chasing routers since they ride an unarmored horse and therefore less prone to fatigue, and are fast-moving.

and then the riots started ending my campaigns, I know, ZPG

Someday you'll learn..............

[Vincent Butler]

The Scythian Noble Women are a bit redundant. By the time you can recruit them, you can recruit the Scythian Noble Archers which require only the advanced horse stables. The Noble Women require the Temple of Api, IIRC. This is what kills them though...Scythian Noble Archers have better stats, and lower per-man unit costs. In short, they're better and cheaper. There's no reason to ever use Scythian Noble Women as they stand; you're paying more for less (on large unit setting, Noble Archers=54 men; Noble Women=36 women)

The Head Hunting Maidens are a different story. With an attack of 10/def of 11, they are comparable to Barbarian Cavalry (or Egyptian Desert Cavalry) with the added bonus of using axes for a main weapon and so their attk is armor piercing. Great for flanking and chasing routers since they ride an unarmored horse and therefore less prone to fatigue, and are fast-moving.

My brother and I noticed that about the Scythian female units with his campaign. There is no sense in training the Noble Women, but the Head-Hunting Maidens are useful. Better than Barbarian Cav, I think, and especially so because of the AP characteristic. I don't use much barbarian cav myself except as mercenaries or to have some cav in an otherwise-all-infantry army, mainly for chasing down routers.

[ReluctantSamurai]

There is no sense in training the Noble Women

There is a work-around that doesn't require any special modding tools...alter the export_descr_unit file for the Noble Women. Resize them to be the same as the Noble Archers (and the retraining cost to reflect the larger size) and now you have a unit worth using. Their range is 170, same as the men; 30 ammo, same as the men; and cost efficient 990/195 (cost/upkeep) for the Noble Women, 900/170 for the men. Downside is two turns to train Noble Women, one turn for the men.

And a correction on the Temple of Api...that is required for the Head-Hunting Maidens, not the Noble Women.

[wooly_mammoth]

I know Screeching Women is supposed to intimidate the enemy, I am not sure if it helps your own troops or not. I would not use them anyway, regardless of my feelings about women in combat, their defense is too low. And, like Druids, I think they are unrealistic.

Well, as has been pointed out already in the Germania guide, the unnerving effect of screechers stacks up with flaming arrows, dogs, nightraiders or berserkers, so a german army has the potential to break even a seasoned enemy through weight of fear and an all out death charge from axe-wielding maniacs. Maybe I'll post more on this if I write down in that thread interesting stuff from the campaign I just started, but in terms of realism, the whole german roster is complete fantasy. To my knowledge there was no such thing historically as fighting in a disciplined phalanx or even axe-fighting (let alone humongous two-handed battle axes that cleave a punny roman in half) for the tribes in that region, they relied mostly on spears and swords.

But as a fun historical fact, it seems my dacian ancestors had a light cultural impact on the roman civilization in this regard. They fought with a large, curved sickle-like blade called a falx, and this thing was genuinely capable of cleaving a limb or a head off if it connected nicely with one big swing. It appears the dacians were so effective at lobbing heads off in the first battles that the legionary helmet was redesigned so as to give better protection against such an attack.

[Ludens]

To my knowledge there was no such thing historically as fighting in a disciplined phalanx or even axe-fighting (let alone humongous two-handed battle axes that cleave a punny roman in half) for the tribes in that region, they relied mostly on spears and swords.

IIRC Caesar actually mentions the Germans fighting in a phalanx formation (though we cannot know exactly what he meant by that). That said, the Barbarian unit rosters are pretty much fantasy when it comes to the non-generic units.

But as a fun historical fact, it seems my dacian ancestors had a light cultural impact on the roman civilization in this regard. They fought with a large, curved sickle-like blade called a falx, and this thing was genuinely capable of cleaving a limb or a head off if it connected nicely with one big swing. It appears the dacians were so effective at lobbing heads off in the first battles that the legionary helmet was redesigned so as to give better protection against such an attack.

Not the helmet: legionaries added shoulder/arm guards to their shieldbearing arm, because the falx was so effective at reaching behind the shield. A legionary helmet isn't much defence against a decapitation attack. (Nor do I think decapitation was a real attack anyway: it's already difficult to accomplish to a victim who is bound and has his head on the block. Against an alert, shielded opponent is must have been pretty much impossible.)

[ReluctantSamurai]

the unnerving effect of screechers stacks up with flaming arrows, dogs, nightraiders or berserkers, so a german army has the potential to break even a seasoned enemy through weight of fear and an all out death charge from axe-wielding maniacs.

You will not need the Harpy Hags to create such an effect. Zerkers & Night Raiders + Wardogs do that just fine. However, now you really can have swagger With the distant ancestors of Michael Myers, one of the three best archer units in the game, and well armored-heavy hitting cav....you'll soon be conducting games in Rome's Coliseum.

Concerning the falx and Roman armor...I found this site a few years back. Found their discussions about weapons and armor to be more balanced than most (ie. some of the folks there don't buy into all the apparent myths)

http://www.romanarmytalk.com/17-roma...ets-armor.html

[Vincent Butler]

Well, as has been pointed out already in the Germania guide, the unnerving effect of screechers stacks up with flaming arrows, dogs, nightraiders or berserkers, so a german army has the potential to break even a seasoned enemy through weight of fear and an all out death charge from axe-wielding maniacs. Maybe I'll post more on this if I write down in that thread interesting stuff from the campaign I just started, but in terms of realism, the whole german roster is complete fantasy. To my knowledge there was no such thing historically as fighting in a disciplined phalanx or even axe-fighting (let alone humongous two-handed battle axes that cleave a punny roman in half) for the tribes in that region, they relied mostly on spears and swords.

But as a fun historical fact, it seems my dacian ancestors had a light cultural impact on the roman civilization in this regard. They fought with a large, curved sickle-like blade called a falx, and this thing was genuinely capable of cleaving a limb or a head off if it connected nicely with one big swing. It appears the dacians were so effective at lobbing heads off in the first battles that the legionary helmet was redesigned so as to give better protection against such an attack.

It seems I have read that the reinforcing bar in the helmet was added to resist a vertical Zone 1 (head) attack. But if the weapon gets caught in the shield...you have probably just lost your falx. There is a picture on this forum, I don't know where, of a reenactment of a falx cleaving a scutum. It looks like the weapon gets stuck in the shield after slicing about a quarter to a third through.
According to the writings of my Viking ancestors, the berserkers were used as the foreward of an invasion force, due to their invulnerability to fire and sword. Wikipedia quotes an account of a berserker being defeated by a large hammer. Problem in the game? Need a specific temple, same for Gothic Cav, though I believe same temple as Berserkers. But this is more suited to a Germania thread.
Now we do know from Caesar's writings the Gauls were different warriors than the Germans, holding the upper hand on them at one time, but eventually falling before them. And then the Germans fell before Caesar.

But the Germans, according to their custom, rapidly forming a phalanx, sustained the attack of our swords. There were found very many of our soldiers who leaped upon the phalanx, and with their hands tore away the shields, and wounded the enemy from above. Caesar's Commentaries On the Gallic War, Book 1, p. 30

The Gauls were quick to adopt tactics from others, but I don't recall the Gauls being said to use phalanx.

[wooly_mammoth]

Thanks for the illuminating info guys. Obviously the dacians were inferior to the romans in most, if not all, military respects. They did score one sound victory with the help of a well-executed ambush (the first battle of Tapae, iirc), but that's about it.

[Vincent Butler]

Thanks for the illuminating info guys. Obviously the dacians were inferior to the romans in most, if not all, military respects. They did score one sound victory with the help of a well-executed ambush (the first battle of Tapae, iirc), but that's about it.

Oh, Rome had problems with them, it wasn't till Trajan that they were finally subdued. And my brother and I have noticed that Dacian Warband seems to fight better than other Warband, though that is probably our imagination. Realistically, outside of Parthia, who really could stand up to Rome in the end? And Rome even burned Parthia's capital, so Parthia fell to Rome as well. Even Teutoburg, another ambush, was partially due to the Roman commander's stupidity in trusting Arminius. He was warned about him. And Rome did recover those eagles that they lost.

[ReluctantSamurai]

There is a picture on this forum, I don't know where, of a reenactment of a falx cleaving a scutum.

Here's a few:

https://www.google.com/search?q=falx...w=1680&bih=947

Problem in the game? Need a specific temple, same for Gothic Cav, though I believe same temple as Berserkers. But this is more suited to a Germania thread.

'Tis no problem at all. Playing Germania....you crave those two units. Zerkers own Cohorts (even Urbans are no match one-on-one), and Gothic Cavalry are amongst the finest outside of Macedonia and Armenia

I'm sure we'll be moving to the Germania thread after Wooly gets in a few seasons in the deep dark forests of Central Europe

[Vincent Butler]

Here's a few:

https://www.google.com/search?q=falx...w=1680&bih=947



'Tis no problem at all. Playing Germania....you crave those two units. Zerkers own Cohorts (even Urbans are no match one-on-one), and Gothic Cavalry are amongst the finest outside of Macedonia and Armenia

I'm sure we'll be moving to the Germania thread after Wooly gets in a few seasons in the deep dark forests of Cental Europe

I don't know that I have ever seen the computer train Berserkers. Germania is usually wiped out by the time I get there, unless I am Julii or Barbarian. Germany is a unique style, it would probably require some experimentation. Of course, a checkerboard would probably still work, being as flexible as it is. But no line infantry in the German roster, barring Spear Warband. The other barbarians excluding Scythia all have decent line infantry.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I don't know that I have ever seen the computer train Berserkers.

Depends on the difficulty level played

Of course, a checkerboard would probably still work, being as flexible as it is.

Spear Warband become increasingly obsolete as a campaign progresses. 9/11 just doesn't cut it against Cohorts, but 11 is still the highest you're going to see in the way of defense. Germania is all about shock troops, nasty archers, and heavy horse....

.............of which Gaul has little of

[Vincent Butler]

Depends on the difficulty level played



Spear Warband become increasingly obsolete as a campaign progresses. 9/11 just doesn't cut it against Cohorts, but 11 is still the highest you're going to see in the way of defense. Germania is all about shock troops, nasty archers, and heavy horse....

.............of which Gaul has little of

Right. If you use checkerboard, don't use Spear Warband. Gaul does have nasty archers. Don't know how effective Naked Fanatics are as shock troops, and their horse is only medium at best. Of course, it is better than Britain's cav and archers.