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

[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.

[Wardo]

Keep your dirty fingers away from my beautiful imperial units!

[gran_guitarra]

Bub, if you want to go with total historical accuracy for the Romans you have a ****load of work to do.

1) Remove the Polybian Reforms. They were a gradual process taking well over 30 years during which all of Italy was given Roman citizenship and the equipment of the Legions was standardized. For historical accuracy make it several reforms (one for each unit change and one for the added citizens).

2) Remove Antestignai (Light Infantry) from the Marian Period. Legionnaires were never Light infantry, only auxiliaries functioned as such. During the early Augustan Period several Legions had cohorts which were trained to function as light infantry, to counter-raid germanic and parthian territories. For historical accuracy remove them.

3) Add First Cohorts, which were basically Cohors Evocata with double the size of regular cohorts.

4) Give Triarii the phalanx formation.

5) Either downgrade Velites to 42 (same as hastati, Principes, Triarii) or raise those to 50, since their numbers were even in Legions.

6) In the Marian Period, make it so auxiliaries are the same as Cohos Reformata, as historically they were trained and equipped to the same standards, leave the spear auxiliaries as well, since they existed.

So, if you are going to use historical accuracy as the argument to remove the Augustan Reforms I can use it to say do all that stuff, even though it serves no real purpose and adds nothing to the game.

Just leave the Imperial Reforms, since they remove nothing from the game.

Oh, as an aside, the elite Light Legionnaires were an Augustan (not Marian) trend, as in the Marian Period only Auxiliaries functioned as such. If you could add one for the Augustan Period I would really like it (make the Marian one an Auxiliary), and add an Auxiliary which is a Legionnaire with slightly lesser stats. (say one more than spear auxiliary in each?)

[Geoffrey S]

I must echo the views contained in Foot's posts, which is a much better attempt at representing the same view as mine. I like the idea of a pros/cons list.

1) Remove the Polybian Reforms. They were a gradual process taking well over 30 years during which all of Italy was given Roman citizenship and the equipment of the Legions was standardized. For historical accuracy make it several reforms (one for each unit change and one for the added citizens).

2) Remove Antestignai (Light Infantry) from the Marian Period. Legionnaires were never Light infantry, only auxiliaries functioned as such. During the early Augustan Period several Legions had cohorts which were trained to function as light infantry, to counter-raid germanic and parthian territories. For historical accuracy remove them.

3) Add First Cohorts, which were basically Cohors Evocata with double the size of regular cohorts.

4) Give Triarii the phalanx formation.

5) Either downgrade Velites to 42 (same as hastati, Principes, Triarii) or raise those to 50, since their numbers were even in Legions.

6) In the Marian Period, make it so auxiliaries are the same as Cohos Reformata, as historically they were trained and equipped to the same standards, leave the spear auxiliaries as well, since they existed.

I don't know about 1, 2, 4, and 6, but points 3 and 4 have been adressed before: First Cohorts are available at least in Cunctator's mini-mod and in future EB versions, and the phalanx formation as applied in RTW is simply not correct for hoplite styled units. Further discussion on these matters I'd rather see in its own topic, since it is not particularly relevant to this subject.

So, if you are going to use historical accuracy as the argument to remove the Augustan Reforms I can use it to say do all that stuff, even though it serves no real purpose and adds nothing to the game.

Just leave the Imperial Reforms, since they remove nothing from the game.

I'm sorry, but where are people using historical accuracy as an argument to remove the Augustan Reforms? No-one denies they are as historically accurate as possible. What is being debated is whether the resources they use are disproportionate or not, and if the changes were significant enough in history and in the context of the mod to warrant a seperate reform over the Marian units. In my opinion they do remove something from the mod, namely the fullest oppurtunity to more accurately represent the period the mod focuses on.

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

I don't see the point in this argument. If the Imperial Reforms were actually removed, I could see many members of the team quitting and the mod being torn apart.

Though to be honest, some factions are quite shortchanged. Armenia has what, 6 units?

[Foot]

I don't see the point in this argument. If the Imperial Reforms were actually removed, I could see many members of the team quitting and the mod being torn apart.

Though to be honest, some factions are quite shortchanged. Armenia has what, 6 units?

Because 1/4 of their faction's reform periods are lost. If it was decided that it was for the good of the mod's representation of the period then I don't think anyone could complain - they might disagree, of course. We do discuss these kinds of things and we do vote on them.

Using Armenian names, Hayasdan has 8 factional units in total + 1 Georgian unit. All of these share models, and many of them are recruitable by other factions. The Romans are necessarily far more wasteful and share far less, yet they still feel the need for, in my opinion, superfluous reform that doesn't really add much, comes very late (both in game and in history), is hardly ever seen by the player (and don't attack those players who finish before the imperial reforms, they have every right to stop the romani game when they get bored of it!).

I have already suggested a mini-mod approach, which seems perfectly reasonable. The main game would focus its attention from things happening very late in the game and improve things happening much earlier for other factions and for other regions. A mini-mod could be installed for players who wanted to play the romani to their conclusion as a state ruling the world and ruled by an emperor.

Foot

[Geoffrey S]

I don't see the point in this argument. If the Imperial Reforms were actually removed, I could see many members of the team quitting and the mod being torn apart.

There's no need to be quite so dramatic. Personally I'm genuinely interested in the reasons behind the inclusion of this reform over adding more units to less well-represented factions. At the very least clarifying posts might enlighten people such as myself about why what the reforms represent are so important. I can understand the inclusion if the Roman campaign was the flagship campaign of the mod, which is the way it looks right now: Rome is easily the most fully developed faction in the campaign. But if it is to the detriment of other factions doesn't that fly against the stated goals of EB?

Foot's suggestion of some kind of Roman mod sounds appealing, which would allow those interested in a complete Roman campaign with the Imperial reforms as grand conclusion to have their fill, and would allow other factions to be fleshed out that little bit more. Perhaps even as a seperate install option akin to the Gaesatae patch? Although that comes close to RTRs 'counter faction' feature using batch files, which I think EB said they wouldn't want to use.

[Redmeth]

Why not pursue a mini-mod approach, for the player who wants to play the Romani there should be a .bat file that replaces the relevant files and puts the Romans with Imperial reforms in place removing some units from the other end of the world, some regionals, some units that wouldn't imbalance the game too much.
The units and script for the Imperial reform are in place and it's not like the AI ever gets the Imperial reforms.
That way everyone stays happy
What do you think?.
I don't want to sound pathetic, but please don't let this argument lead to members leaving or something it would truly be a shame.