Depiction of imperial reforms

[Geoffrey S]

Seeing topics on the lorica segmentata, and the fact that it is not included because it is out of EBs timeframe, makes me wonder: why are the imperial reforms included in EB? The reason I'm asking is because it represents only a small part of the timeframe depicted, right at the end, and many campaigns are over and done well before the conditions can be reached. To me it seems like it would be better to shorten the period shown in EB to an enddate before the emperors; at the least, this would open up room for a few other (regional) units elsewhere, away from the (in my opinion) overrepresented Romans.

Is this an approach the EB would ever consider, or has considered? I love the Imperial units but must wonder if the unitslots could be better used elsewhere, considering the mod goals of a more balanced representation of Europe in that time.

[Pharnakes]

I have to admit that I do agree with this point of view, there was a thread started a couple of months ago about people getting the imperials, and I think only about half a dozen people said they had. Cohors impretoria are fasinaiting units, but surely the slots could be better used.

[Foot]

Personally I'm of the same opinion. But we would have to fight tooth and claw with the Roman guys to get them to scrap it.

Foot

[Lovejoy]

Hm.. maybe you should make it easier to get the imperial reform at an earlier age? The Cohors Impretoria are REALLY cool, and I dont think I would like to see some boring archers or whatever replace them :P

Most people plays rome the most, many people only plays as rome. I've never even got the first reform myself, but I dont mind having the roman faction really indept. The roman camp is really epic, I like that.

[Intrepid Adventurer]

Thing is, in real history, Roman Army kicked the other factions around and was the only one (AFAIK) that was reformed as much as it did. Most other factions had disappeared by the time they could do a second reform (if they had even had a first one).

Having said that, I'm still in my first year of my History Major, so EB Historians: please feel free to correct me! (:

[Foot]

Thing is, in real history, Roman Army kicked the other factions around and was the only one (AFAIK) that was reformed as much as it did. Most other factions had disappeared by the time they could do a second reform (if they had even had a first one).

Having said that, I'm still in my first year of my History Major, so EB Historians: please feel free to correct me! (:

I'm not entirely sure what relevance that has here. The question is whether the imperial reforms are enough of a change from previous military practice to be worthy of using several models and several unit slots. There are many other areas of the map that are severely lacking in units, and though we are trying to fill them, we'll hit the hardcode before we are satisfied.

And Lovejoy, I would prefer to flesh out another region of the map a lot more than to have another heavy infantry unit for the Roman brigade. But then that is just my opinion. Of course we could get rid of the imperial reform for 1.0 and just have an add-on that included it for those who wanted to play the romans.

Foot

[Redmeth]

I'm not entirely sure what relevance that has here. The question is whether the imperial reforms are enough of a change from previous military practice to be worthy of using several models and several unit slots. There are many other areas of the map that are severely lacking in units, and though we are trying to fill them, we'll hit the hardcode before we are satisfied.

And Lovejoy, I would prefer to flesh out another region of the map a lot more than to have another heavy infantry unit for the Roman brigade. But then that is just my opinion. Of course we could get rid of the imperial reform for 1.0 and just have an add-on that included it for those who wanted to play the romans.

Foot

For what it's worth I absolutely agree, no matter how hard the campaign or the faction you play by 125 90% of campaigns started are either completed or abandoned. Even the second celtic reforms are a bit too far. But the edge they have on the romans are that the Augustan reforms are pushed (or is it pulled) to a very early date. EB is variety, the bad part is that great units already done would be scrapped, so to avoid that some sort of mini-mod for people wishing to play Romani would keep everyone happy (using the mod should replace some of the last reform units for the celtics maybe or for the Casse as the 120BC 2nd Celtic reform is also very rarely achieved). Too bad because the Rycalawre are my favorite units.

[Foot]

For what it's worth I absolutely agree, no matter how hard the campaign or the faction you play by 125 90% of campaigns started are either completed or abandoned. Even the second celtic reforms are a bit too far. But the edge they have on the romans are that the Augustan reforms are pushed (or is it pulled) to a very early date. EB is variety, the bad part is that great units already done would be scrapped, so to avoid that some sort of mini-mod for people wishing to play Romani would keep everyone happy (using the mod should replace some of the last reform units for the celtics maybe or for the Casse as the 120BC 2nd Celtic reform is also very rarely achieved). Too bad because the Rycalawre are my favorite units.

Eventually the celtic reforms will become dynamic like the roman reforms (hopefully - I'll bring it up with Anthony), so time will be less of an issue.

Foot

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Of course we could get rid of the imperial reform for 1.0 and just have an add-on that included it for those who wanted to play the romans.

Foot

NOOOOO!!!

[Zaknafien]

Foot, no offense brother, but I will engage you in fisticuffs

[keravnos]

While I understand the logic behind the reason to abandon reforms, I must also agree that Romani should remain EXACTLY as they are. Imperial reforms are the best way to complete what history has shown to be the "best" faction of the game. Besides, if you persevere that long, threre has to be some "silver lining" in the end of it all hasn't there?

No, Romani should stay as they are, and the only thing that should change is that they should have MORE scripting so that as many of the aspects of Romani imperium can be depicted. My ideal for them in EB, is that one should finish a Romani game, then sit up and either mutter to himself in Romani or hit the stores trying to find a book about an aspect of their life that most amazed him.

If there is one thing I dig the most about in EB is our historical depiction of the Romani.

-Besides... Post Imperial reforms Romani invasion of the Sind... You KNOW you want to... !

[Thaatu]

Personally I would like more scripting to all factions, not just Romans. I wouldn't be missing the last reform, especially if those units would be replaced with more regionals.

[Ravenic]

Personally, if the earliest Reform's date is moved up to a reasonable time (Gameplay-wise), I think the reforms should be kept.

Otherwise however, it's wasted space because literally six people have ever even seen the Imperial Reforms happen without modifying the code to make them earlier.

If the EB term is adverse to changing Imperial Reform's (I personally advocate completely dynamic reforms for all reforms, independent of an arbitraily-decided date), then scrap them and flesh out other area's.

[Geoffrey S]

While I understand the logic behind the reason to abandon reforms, I must also agree that Romani should remain EXACTLY as they are. Imperial reforms are the best way to complete what history has shown to be the "best" faction of the game. Besides, if you persevere that long, threre has to be some "silver lining" in the end of it all hasn't there?

No, Romani should stay as they are, and the only thing that should change is that they should have MORE scripting so that as many of the aspects of Romani imperium can be depicted. My ideal for them in EB, is that one should finish a Romani game, then sit up and either mutter to himself in Romani or hit the stores trying to find a book about an aspect of their life that most amazed him.

If there is one thing I dig the most about in EB is our historical depiction of the Romani.

-Besides... Post Imperial reforms Romani invasion of the Sind... You KNOW you want to... !

I can see where you're coming from, but much as I like the depiction of Rome (easily the most comprehensive of the mod) I think that in some ways the emphasis potentially detracts from other factions or areas of the map, and in particular the fact that Augustan troops are put in the mod when it's extremely rare for people actually to get that far. To me their inclusion seems a bit too much along the lines of because people think they're awesome (which they are) rather than because of how relevant they are to the overall mod goals.

That is why personally I think the enddate should be made earlier to miss out the Imperial troops, and their slots be used to flesh out some areas of the map which right now are somewhat underrepresented; certainly in EB2, where there are more factions needing a decent roster.

[The Errant]

I can see where you're coming from, but much as I like the depiction of Rome (easily the most comprehensive of the mod) I think that in some ways the emphasis potentially detracts from other factions or areas of the map, and in particular the fact that Augustan troops are put in the mod when it's extremely rare for people actually to get that far. To me their inclusion seems a bit too much along the lines of because people think they're awesome (which they are) rather than because of how relevant they are to the overall mod goals.

That is why personally I think the enddate should be made earlier to miss out the Imperial troops, and their slots be used to flesh out some areas of the map which right now are somewhat underrepresented; certainly in EB2, where there are more factions needing a decent roster.

Ehm. Does that mean M2TW has the same amount of units as RTW?
EB is already running the limits. How are you going to fit in more units for the new factions if you got to keep all the old ones in?

[Foot]

Ehm. Does that mean M2TW has the same amount of units as RTW?
EB is already running the limits. How are you going to fit in more units for the new factions if you got to keep all the old ones in?

Has the same number of units, but far more models. We've got 40 unit slots set aside for the new factions, a few of the new factions can share with other factions, but certainly we'll be cutting it fine.

Foot

[The Internet]

As anyone who knows me will tell you, i love my Romans, i always play them in my campaigns and always play them in MP, BUT i do believe that they are pretty well fleshed out right now and that the imperial reforms are so far along that maybe it would be a good idea to leave the imperial reforms and flesh out another faction that needs/deserves it more.


EB has become a mod that is more than just the Romans, they are probably the best faction to play but EB has also concentrated a lot on other factions that wouldn't get a look in on other mods and i think this is an aspect that should be expanded on with the reforms.


I know some will be gutted about the loss of the imperial reforms but as has already been said, a mini mod could be made to put them back and that not a lot of people ever get to the stage to aquire the imperial reforms so not a lot of people get the experience them.

[Imperator]

I am a Romani fan, and I for one would be deeply grieved to see my pretty legiones go. First of all, it doesn't make much sense to me to drop such pretty soldiers, which are among the most exact and perfect in terms of popularity and accuracy (thanks to the abundance of sources) in favor of some obscure MIC tribe-unit that people will take pot shots at EB for. (Ex- Do we really know they wore scarves over their left shoulder??? I want primary sources!")

The further into history we go, the more speculative the units become- with few exceptions. Therefore, we know that the units around 272-200 are bound to be the most accurate, while later on they are all 100% speculation. How can anyone know what kind of troops Carthage or Macedon would have fielded if they were around in 50 BC? If we knock off the legionaries, then by the 1st century AD, we're in TOTAL improvisation-land in terms of units. So lets keep the legionaries- the mod is about accuracy, so let's keep those units we know to be accurate (and cool) and speculate only when necessary.

[Pharnakes]

I don't think we (at least I'm not) are proprosing removing the imperials and giving the slots to reform units for other factions, just giving the slots to other factions, in some cases they're desperatley needed (Sab'yn, Pontos) prehaps being the most needful. We are not trying to interfeer with the historic acurracy of the mod, just improve the gameplay for the majority of players, who, afterall, will never reach the imperial reforms.

[Zaknafien]

there are actually a few accuracy problems in our current Roman skins, but these are being remedied as we speak.. again, top secret. :)

[keravnos]

I am a Romani fan, and I for one would be deeply grieved to see my pretty legiones go. First of all, it doesn't make much sense to me to drop such pretty soldiers, which are among the most exact and perfect in terms of popularity and accuracy (thanks to the abundance of sources) in favor of some obscure MIC tribe-unit that people will take pot shots at EB for. (Ex- Do we really know they wore scarves over their left shoulder??? I want primary sources!")

The further into history we go, the more speculative the units become- with few exceptions. Therefore, we know that the units around 272-200 are bound to be the most accurate, while later on they are all 100% speculation. How can anyone know what kind of troops Carthage or Macedon would have fielded if they were around in 50 BC? If we knock off the legionaries, then by the 1st century AD, we're in TOTAL improvisation-land in terms of units. So lets keep the legionaries- the mod is about accuracy, so let's keep those units we know to be accurate (and cool) and speculate only when necessary.

Exactly. Even by being there, the Imperial Romani (post reforms) add a whole new level of realism. Besides, I don't like to chop off historically correct units for whatever reason.

[Reverend Joe]

I personally advocate completely dynamic reforms for all reforms, independent of an arbitraily-decided date

I like this idea a lot; being a cheatin' mother scratcher, my Romani (and other empires as well) used to expand at absurd rates (I don't play anymore, as I lack the necessary computer... and game.) However, I was eternally frustrated in my efforts because my support base could not keep up. Removing date limits would make it a lot easier for lazy players such as myself to keep the game interesting.

I know, cheating and generally lazy gameplay (like playing on M/E... don't hurt me...) is not exactly in the spirit of EB, but then, some people just want to have a little fun, and satiate their bloodlust and megalomaniacal in a slightly more meaningful fashion than with custom battles, without expending a lot of effort (I blame the pot.) After all, conquering the known world in 50 years has a certain... relaxing quality.

And no, Vanilla does not suffice. No way can flaming pigs, dudes with theatre masks and knives, and old screaming naked women with wrinkly tits make up for absolutely historically perfect legionaries and beautiful, golden Hypaspists. I demand beautiful, stark realism with which to satiate my megalomania!

[Veris]

The Imperial reforms are excellent and are part of what gives the Romans such a great depth.

The only problem is the ridiculously long time needed to reach B.C 125. As has been stated, very few games reach this date, partially since it's just 147 years at the very earliest, but also because as time goes on turns become much longer. The first years of Rome might be finished in minutes, but when you have your sprawling Mediterranean Empire turns will take far longer: 5-10 minutes being great and 30-60 if there are multiple battles. It's highly impractical and thus without modding the date most people don't get to see the Imperial cohorts in action.

Thus, the units seem to be a big waste in the current state, since so few people actually don't get to see them (sure you can mod the date, but that should not be an argument to leave them in their current state of almost-never-seen). Thus, a pretty simple solution would be to accelerate the reform times. Looking at the a.i faction progression thread, most people don't go too far past B.C 200 if they even get to there, making it reasonable to have the Marians before then and the Imperials sometime afterward or something of the sort.

[Pharnakes]

I'm not the eb team, but I think this is the one possibilty that is definatley not going to happen. Afterall, if one must have the reforms, ehich I personaly don't think one should, then at least make them historicaly acurate.

[QwertyMIDX]

Not speaking for the EB team or anything, but I'm pretty sure we won't ever sacrifice to historical accuracy of the reforms for the sake of gameplay. More likely to just remove them completely.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

The reforms have already been made available early. For those of us who played v0.7x, the reforms were just something you had to wait for (107BC until the Marians).

The date requirements are there to represent things that are not as tangible. Things like technology advancement, understandings of current equiptment, enemies adapting to current equiptment, social changes, generations dying and being replaced, change in leadership, change in stability, etc.

[sgsandor]

Please please keep the imperial reforms....I love them so much!

[mAIOR]

But keeping the imperial reforms as they are seem to invalidate the statement of Lorica segmentata not being in the time frame... I mean it appeared more or less in time of the emperors (not widespread use of course) but still I find this argument incoherent with not implementing LS and then making the imperial happening so early. I do not agree they should be on the exact historical date. I much prefer the dynamic system.
But this is just something I'd like someone to explain...



Cheers...

[Imperator]

A few simple reasons why NOT to lose our precious legions:

1) Abundance of information about them means they are some of the only late-game units NOT based on speculation

2) Popularity of Romani and, specifically those nifty legionaries, mean that losing them could hurt EB's "sellability" to new fans. People just like Legionaries more than some random tribe unit only recruitable in some desolate Afghan or Bakrian province. Those legionary skins are just too cool to give up lightly.

3) The fact that few people make it past 125 BC is not a valid arguement. If EB only made units that people were likely to see, by 50 BC there would be such little unit diversity it would make vanilla look like an explosion of color and novelty. Besides, what if EB did other stuff like that? Most people play the Romani, and very few play far-off ones like Saba, Saka, etc, so should we just let them go in favor of more Roman-centric ones?*

4) There are already sooooooo many units in EB, would losing our legionaries, whose value are clear from points 1, 2, and 3, really be worth adding yet another barbarian tribe MIC, or yet another phalanx unit, or yet another random spear-unit or horse archer from the east?

5) The Romans deserve a little something for their hard work conquering the entire Mediteranean, don't they? Why include some irrelevant tribe-unit whose impact on history stretched a grand total of 5 square kilometers when you could include the legionaries who fought and dominated the known world?

I rest my case.

[Wardo]

Keep your dirty fingers away from my beautiful imperial units!