History: Historians Post your work here

[Magneto]

Well siege equipment came after Roman encounters with Greek cities, so the first part is correct.

As for using them effectively, that statement came from “The Roman Army of the Punic Wars 264-146 BC" by Nic fields.

There is evidence though, that siege engineering was a step up from the Polybian times. The fortifications at Alesia, are an example of that (That may be due to the Caesar's ingenuity though).

Also, during the second Punic War, a Roman army had repeatedly failed to take Syracuse. While Archimedes may have delayed their efforts, I don't believe there were ballistas firing at the walls as a form of "covering fire". This allowed Syracuse to mount a defence. At the Siege of Masada, the ballista technique was used to ward of the defenders

Wow, you really know much about history.
Why I asked?
It is possible to make Siege Equipment fire more accurat after a certain number of turns. For Forts changes aren´t possible, at least not in a campaign. Editing the files would of course work.
It is also quite hard to implent the Roman Forts - it is no problem to make every legion always camping in 1, but that would heaviest change gameplay in favor of the romans.

[Lord President of Gallifrey]

Wow, you really know much about history.
Why I asked?
It is possible to make Siege Equipment fire more accurat after a certain number of turns. For Forts changes aren´t possible, at least not in a campaign. Editing the files would of course work.
It is also quite hard to implent the Roman Forts - it is no problem to make every legion always camping in 1, but that would heaviest change gameplay in favor of the romans.

Well the idea of making shots more accurate-that's good and realistic since Roman ballisatas repeatedly took out gauls at the siege of Avaricum

Maybe we can make ambushes more profitable for the barbarian/celtic factions

When they ambush, the map could change into a Teutobeger style map (like normal)
Or it could change to a half finished camp, with the army spread out all over the place. This might level the playing field out.

[Magneto]

Well the idea of making shots more accurate-that's good and realistic since Roman ballisatas repeatedly took out gauls at the siege of Avaricum

Maybe we can make ambushes more profitable for the barbarian/celtic factions

When they ambush, the map could change into a Teutobeger style map (like normal)
Or it could change to a half finished camp, with the army spread out all over the place. This might level the playing field out.

I don´t know what you mean with Teutoburger style map. I´d be happy if any1 would correct me, But I´m very certain it isn´t possible to have a half finished camp ambush - sadly, that would be nice. Also, check your private messages.

[Lord President of Gallifrey]

I don´t know what you mean with Teutoburger style map. I´d be happy if any1 would correct me, But I´m very certain it isn´t possible to have a half finished camp ambush - sadly, that would be nice. Also, check your private messages.

By Teutoberg style map I mean dense forests and things like that

[Magneto]

By Teutoberg style map I mean dense forests and things like that

Ambushes can just be placed in forests, so it would be doable - but dense forests would definitly annoy the player, regardless which faction he plays - he can´t see his troops. Also, I fail to see a great advantage, apart from the +2 forest fighting ability.
But if we would generaly make the winter bonus of the barbarians higher, slow movement rate of the more "civiliced" Factions, and make the game last 4 turns a year - That would strengthen the barbarians, while making it more historically correct that most factions didn´t fight in the winter.

[ahowl11]

that should work since barbarians are very weak

[Lord President of Gallifrey]

Ambushes can just be placed in forests, so it would be doable - but dense forests would definitly annoy the player, regardless which faction he plays - he can´t see his troops. Also, I fail to see a great advantage, apart from the +2 forest fighting ability.

That's true.

But if we would generaly make the winter bonus of the barbarians higher, slow movement rate of the more "civiliced" Factions, and make the game last 4 turns a year - That would strengthen the barbarians, while making it more historically correct that most factions didn´t fight in the winter.

That is also true, but would it change the gameplay too much?

Anyway, I'm not sure if we should put the Romans in forts when they're out of movement point because of the Roman advantages.

Also, it would be better for the player to decide whether they want to build a fort (using up 25% movement, could we implement that?) or use that extra distance to attack the enemy

[Magneto]

using up 25% movement, could we implement that?)

Might. Going to check it.

I agree with your second sentence, and for the first - well, trying. Wouldn´t be too much work, I think.