I would like to add my contribution to this post which I find very interesting except maybe for the anti/pro roman boys (although I am myself a roman fanboy) but I just want EB to be as close as possible to reality.
First of all, I always hate when people say that spear was as good as sword in battles. Spear is not worse or better than sword, it was meant to have a different battlefield role. Although I can't quote which page exactly, anyone who read The Prince of Machiavelli might remember this text.
In Machiavelli times, German pikemen but even more Swiss ones were reputed for their quality and were excellent anti-cavalry units. Yet, Machiavelli retold a fight in which Spanish heavy infantry(armor, shield and short sword probably) went under the row of pikes pointed at them using their shield to protect them and then they started slaughtering the pikemen. Only the timed arrival of some allied cavalry drove the Spanish infantry back and save the pikemen. So spear should be anti-cavalry weapon and the sword an anti-spear weapon. As for sword vs cavalry, I think swords already have a penalty![]()
As for the debate concerning roman soldiers. Roman soldiers were, as warriors, very competent, well trained and in good physical condition nonetheless, but it was their tactical flexibility as an army that allowed groups of armed roman soldiers to excel against others well trained and well equipped armies.
Here a good link to a website that I find extremely interesting:
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/...z/gabr000c.htm
It is mainly a study of the evolution of the military theory of the ancient armies.
But the real problem being, as a player, we have SO MUCH control over our troops, thousandfold times the amount of control generals had in ancient and medieval times as we fly over the battlefield as a all-seeing god (especially those playing without the general camera view) able to redirect every unit in a single click and all armies working as well oiled machines with the same efficiency.
But it is impossible to modify this aspect, especially for the AI. If in E:TW, units has to be grouped in formation before the start of the battle and then giving orders, orders that can only be modified with the use of runners then romans could be given an advantage to represent their tactical flexible. Until then, I guess the easiest way to represent this roman "superiority" would be give roman units a somewhat better stats as this would represent this so-called superiority.
BTW, if roman units were to be "power up" I would play them in this way to ad a little more realism to the game. As my battle lines and wings would advance to meet the enemy, instead of ordering them what to do exactly, I would simply delegate them to the AI. Sure they might (and will!) do stupid things but let just call it "battlefield confusion"![]()
Bookmarks