Unit discrepencies

[Iskandr]

I'm mainly talking about stats vs. appearance here. Unfortunately I'm at work so I don't have the numbers, or for that matter the spelling. Anyways, here's what I remember as the most egrarious offenders from my Romani and Seleukid campaigns:

Syrian archers vs toxotai cretae - the Cretans have a much higher armor value (7? +1 for shield) compared to 2+0, despite the fact that the cretans are shown as wearing linothorax+ helm+ small shield. The Syrians, however, appear to be wearing some sort of scale armor (presumably bronze), bronze helm, and also appear to have a small shield strapped to their back. Unfortunately, neither unit's description includes any mention of armor. The Syrians are also more expensive, despite not really being better in any way, and being recruited troops vice mercs (I personally think all the 'professional' merc troops, like pezhatoroi, hippeis, etc. should cost way more).

Galllatian Kullodon vs (Southern Gallic Mercenariy spearmen that actually use swords) - The kullodon are both cheaper, and have better stats. I can see if they were recruited from different areas, but they are both readily available in Asia minor.

Roman scutum are (at least pre-marian) all rated as shield value '3' - there are several units units carrying theuros that have a value of '4' as well as, in general, a seeming lack of consistancy between shield size and value. I understand the deal with phalangites, but there are other units that don't seem to have a reason for the discrepancy. This seems to be really prevalent amongst units with the theuros, with the value ranging from 2 to 4 for units holding, apparently, similar shields. I understand that there is some artistic license involved, but it is still somewhat disconcerting.

Judean Spearmen vs. Peltasts/theorophori - not really sure there is problem per se, except the Judeans are cheaper, come in larger units, and have better stats than the (in theory) professional hellenic light infantry.

Machimoi phalangitai - amusingly, the description notes how these troops are more expensive to maintain (for political, not physical, reasons) yet they are actually cheaper than even the pantopadoi phalangites. Luckily, the AI Ptolemies spam kluerechoi agema instead, so this isn't of great concern.

Anyway, sometime over the weekend, I'll try to post some more, with actual numbers.

Salvate,
Iskandr

[Iskandr]

hmm, double post, not sure how that happened

[BigTex]

I think the syrians are wearing leather scale. Not certain though.

I'd Like to add a question about the phalangites and classical hoplites. The basic phalangite has a shield factor of 5, but the classical hoplites/spartiates only have a shield factor of 2. Is that a balance factor? Or was the phalangites shield actually better then the argive?

[Iskandr]

I believe the high "shield" value for phalangites respresents the protection afforded by the mass of pikes, as well as their shield itself. Also, I noted that the Makedonia version of Syrian Archers has a silverish scale look, so I'd assumed they were metallic.

Iskandr

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Something I was wondering about alone the same lines: The gallic light mercenary cavalry have a charge bonus of 1. Shouldn't any cavalry have a decent charge bonus? Esspecially since these guys have spears?

[QwertyMIDX]

What you're seeing there is the charge bonus for their javelins (which is actually 0, but is displayed in game as 1). The charge value of the secondary weapon isn't shown in the unit scroll. You'll see the same problem with lots of units.