Has EB changed your line-up?

[2ltben]

Only that now I keep my slingers and skirmishers behind my frontline now. When I'm playing Rome I still use the historic Hastati-Principes-Triarii, with my cavalry evenly divided among the flanks(if odd, favor the right) and after the animations pack patch the crouching Triarii would be fracking awesome. I'd just rather now have the gaps in the lines when retreating my skirmishers, and I mostly use slingers anyway, and they have the god of all missle ranges. They don't need to be kept up front. For seiges, though, Hastati go in first to clear the gate, then get out of the way as the Triarii move down the streets to the town center. Then I bring up Hastati and missles behind them, and leave my Principes for rearguard(I've had cavalry come down the streets from behind me countless times, and Principes can usually hold their own while the others advance. If they fall, I send in the Rorarii while I swap the Hastati and Veles. God, my Rorarii always get the sh*t jobs)

I noticed that I'm not attacking as much anymore. I set my legion to guard mode and bring myself into range that the enemy will attack me in. It works with the Romans, but not so much with the other factions. I've had Casse infantry charge the enemy when changing positions down the line and they tend to make gaps in the line when they try to encircle the enemy.

I'm reading De Re Militari by Vegetius, so hopefully once I get some Legionary Cohorts I'll be ready for the necessary tactical reforms.

[econ21]

Not much. RTR got me to change my line-up to try to follow a historical Roman army. It never really occurred to me to do that in vanilla RTW. In EB, I am also encouraged to play in a characterful (historical) way. I find the Roman units in EB have roughly similar capabilities as in RTR with only relatively minor nuances.

Heavy cavalry in general is more robust in EB than RTR, so I am more inclined to make a cavalry charges a integral part of my battle plan. Contrary to what I argued here initially, I'm finding the 2HP general's units are definitely overpowered - in EB, they tend to spearhead my assaults - so for historical reasons, I will be happy when Qwerty nerfs them.

The early Roman infantry less superior in EB than RTR. RTR principes in particular can slaughter almost any infantry. Perhaps as a consequence, I am finding (elite) mercenaries can have a bigger role in my army in EB than RTR. The EB early triarii are monsters, however. So I tend to give them the job of cracking the toughest nut in the enemy army (e.g. German bodyguard units etc). The RTR triarii are more like the late EB ones - very good spears - but not quite so invincible when used right (maybe this is just the effect of the phalanx formation).

Perhaps the main functional difference I am finding between my RTR and EB Roman armies is that the javelins and pila seem weaker in EB. In both mods, it is good to try to get a flank or rear shot to avoid the shield - but in EB it seems almost compulsory whereas in RTR, they can still do a lot of damage frontally. Hence, I am more inclined in EB to put the velites on the flanks, instead of in front of my hastati. The RTR usage feels more historical to me, but what do I know?

I do find I am lacking the Italian allies and some other auxiliaries that make up half my RTR stacks, although I think I've read that EB will introduce more of these later. The hasta equipped EB early principes may sometimes take on the anti-cav role I give to my RTR Italian spearmen. I don't know how I'll cope after the Polybian reforms.

I'm having a hard time finding a place for the Rorarii in my armies. They are the one early Roman unit unique to EB. Sticking them as a reserve and giving them first dibbs on garrison duties is the best I can manage.

[PseRamesses]

Only that now I keep my slingers and skirmishers behind my frontline now. When I'm playing Rome I still use the historic Hastati-Principes-Triarii, with my cavalry evenly divided among the flanks(if odd, favor the right) and after the animations pack patch the crouching Triarii would be fracking awesome.

Why do you favour your right side? I seem to get better impact on the left side since the shield is on the right side, from my point of view that is.

Heavy cavalry in general is more robust in EB than RTR, so I am more inclined to make a cavalry charges a integral part of my battle plan. Contrary to what I argued here initially, I'm finding the 2HP general's units are definitely overpowered - in EB, they tend to spearhead my assaults - so for historical reasons, I will be happy when Qwerty nerfs them.

Agree. In the beginning cav was essential but RTR moved the back farther from the combat line until I only carried 2 units for chasing routers. With EB I use the almost like they should be used. However, I still argue that their speed is absurd. Who ever outran or kept pace with a mounted horse? Why can´t they run at a realistic speed? It´s a bit annoying IMO.

[2ltben]

Why do you favour your right side? I seem to get better impact on the left side since the shield is on the right side, from my point of view that is.

A cavalry flank can usually peel off four or five units that are about to hit your line. If they won't run off at all and get far away enough from the main army to attack(I always lead them out a fair distance to prevent reinforcements from the main battle line), it'll leave their left flank or rear exposed to a charge from the reserves. I also keep them on the right because of the historical favoring of the right flank, with cohorts being ordered from right to left and so on.

In the brief stint I had with Makedon, I found that phalangates and Thessalonian cavalry to be the nectar of the gods. The phalanx line takes care of the enemy's line while the cavalry attacks the Peltastai and Theurophorai(pesky little buggers, can break up a phalanx pretty well at that)