EB 101 (long post)

[Fulminatrix]

there is no one to play when i get online on EB so i just go play vanilla.

[Burebista]

What about roman boxes? they have no flanks and cata charges usually cost u more mnai than them. Not to add that few factions have the luxury of fielding 1 elite ranged units compared to the roman 3 ( balearic , cretan , saggitarius) and win the ranged duel.

All i am saying is that roman cohorts should cost more. It doesnt make sanse that most elites cost more than roman regulars and do less . As far as i remember romans were a disciplined highly trained , heavy armed army . That must cost more than a bunch of naked gauls with shields and swords (Milnaht for ex)

[vartan]

there is no one to play when i get online on EB so i just go play vanilla.

Follow the red arrows.

What about roman boxes? they have no flanks and cata charges usually cost u more mnai than them. Not to add that few factions have the luxury of fielding 1 elite ranged units compared to the roman 3 ( balearic , cretan , saggitarius) and win the ranged duel.

All i am saying is that roman cohorts should cost more. It doesnt make sanse that most elites cost more than roman regulars and do less . As far as i remember romans were a disciplined highly trained , heavy armed army . That must cost more than a bunch of naked gauls with shields and swords (Milnaht for ex)

I'm all for revisiting the costs of the 500-something units in EB, even though it would take a while. I'm also eager to hear if anyone has yet figured out how to remove the guard-mode feature and to reprogram the engagement and pathfinding AI.

As for the OP, players shouldn't be busy working around the flawed and broken game. They should be busy playing the game. The way it was meant to be played. If A > B, then A should defeat B. Unfortunately, the system doesn't realize this and allows for 2 + 2 = 5.

[Geticus]

Follow the red arrows.

I'm all for revisiting the costs of the 500-something units in EB, even though it would take a while. I'm also eager to hear if anyone has yet figured out how to remove the guard-mode feature and to reprogram the engagement and pathfinding AI.

As for the OP, players shouldn't be busy working around the flawed and broken game. They should be busy playing the game. The way it was meant to be played. If A > B, then A should defeat B. Unfortunately, the system doesn't realize this and allows for 2 + 2 = 5.

Yeah I don't see it that way, weaker infantry can withstand superior infantry if they hold formation in guard mode and gas their opponent. That is a principle of warfare, in classical history it was an often repeated phrase that the Gauls were more than men in the initial charge, and less than men at the end of a battle, this shows how the Romans fought defensively and wore the Gauls down against their shieldwall and killed them after they were exhausted. Same principle as EB, without guard mode the game becomes simpler, some want a straightforward slugfest in line with the better troop winning, but the higher level of play is reached through micromanagement on the flank, and better troops can fall to inferior troops depending on superior coordination, more well placed javelin volleys, more proficient skirmishing, combined arms etc.

[Geticus]

What about roman boxes? they have no flanks and cata charges usually cost u more mnai than them. Not to add that few factions have the luxury of fielding 1 elite ranged units compared to the roman 3 ( balearic , cretan , saggitarius) and win the ranged duel.

All i am saying is that roman cohorts should cost more. It doesnt make sanse that most elites cost more than roman regulars and do less . As far as i remember romans were a disciplined highly trained , heavy armed army . That must cost more than a bunch of naked gauls with shields and swords (Milnaht for ex)

I agree Roman cohorts are underpriced, but so are Thrakian peltasts, bosphoran archers, Sarmatian nobles, Aorsi riders, Cretan mercenary archers, and Rhaetian axemen to name a few. I might also argue that phalanxes are broken because of their insane missile immunity. But its all about abusing advantages. The key to it is not straightforward slugfest but rather tactical micromanagement on the flanks. Against Romans I think there are various ways to beat a cohort box. Shoot down their cavalry and sagitarii with armored horse archers, then charge the right flank and exposed cohorts on the corners with lancers to break up the box.

I also remember Neospartan played in the tourney as Aedui (one of my factions incidentally) last year and was destroying infantry lines real fast with Brihentin/gaesatae/druids/axemen/swordsmen swarming the flank. I recall a game where Neospartan fought a guy that played Koinon Hellenon, mostly Thorakitai in a box in guard mode with Cretan archers at the center, like 16 heavy infantry, he just sat there and waited for you to come to him just letting the Cretans draw you in. Neospartan swarmed one flank with extreme pressure and brihentin charges and the whole box chainrouted in like 2 minutes. The KH player was so upset that he quit the tournament. But the same strat would probably work against the Romans, its just a bit harder I think, but the same principle applies, that armies that just sit still will win if you fight on their own terms but lose if you break them up piecemeal.

[MisterFred]

Remember that in the tourney, you can't change faction. Probably the reason that most people are complaining about guard mode right now over cataphracts are that a number of people (especially ones with time to play all day) are playing factions conducive to such tactics (Rome and others) where as few are playing successor states who can really put the hammer down. That said, if its REAAALY frustrating and you'd prefer to figure out how to break the box in practice rather than a tourney game there are two tactics that work well:

1) Sitting back yourself, or holding to the forest. Leads to draws as the Romans are too scared to engage you. Boring, I know. But sometimes you have to fight fire with fire. Or, in this case, don't fight with fire with someone else who refuses to fight with fire. Bring a good book. Sounds insane? You're using the same tactics they are.... Their main advantage in using guard mode is that they're willing to twiddle their thumbs and you aren't.

2) Don't face someone who's used a strategy you don't want to fight again. If its not fun, fight someone else.

[vartan]

2) Don't face someone who's used a strategy you don't want to fight again. If its not fun, fight someone else.

Among the best lines all day.

I don't think you got it, geticus. The issue regarding the guard mode, say, to represent the line relief used by the Romans, is as follows. In the RTW system, there are three ways to fight enemy units in melee.

In the first method, you have guard mode off. It does not matter whether you order an attack or not order an attack: the attack happens upon collision detection.

In the second method, you have guard mode on, and order an attack. Your men won't break formation, will face a general direction determined by their initial positioning, and will not chase after the enemy.

In the third method, you have guard mode on, and do not order an attack. Your men will, in the eyes of the engine, be idling. No more, and no less. Yet you will observe fighting and killing of the enemy troops.

In method 1 and 2, your men will tire over time because the engine determines them to be in fighting mode, and you can observe this by hovering the mouse over the unit. In method 3, your men will be idling, according to the engine, as you can again see by hovering your mouse over the unit.

Methods 1 and 2 are fair, method 3 is unfair. And that is where the problem lies. The feature itself (i.e. guard mode) that tells your men not to chase routing units is fine, but the use of it to have idling-yet-fighting units is not fine/justified/fair/etc.

Do you get that, geticus?

[Geticus]

Vartan if there was a programming glitch it is news to me. What proof do you have, from the programmers or game developers themselves, that it is an actual glitch, and not a game feature that you simply disagree with?

For my part I have seen my troops many times lose stamina in guard mode if they are strongly pressed and pushed off of their original station. They also never conserve stamina if they are set in guard mode and ordered to move to another station, and get attacked before reaching it.

[vartan]

Vartan if there was a programming glitch it is news to me. What proof do you have, from the programmers or game developers themselves, that it is an actual glitch, and not a game feature that you simply disagree with?

For my part I have seen my troops many times lose stamina in guard mode if they are strongly pressed and pushed off of their original station. They also never conserve stamina if they are set in guard mode and ordered to move to another station, and get attacked before reaching it.

You watch yet you do not see. Idle guard units rarely fight unless they are ordered to or they are run through. The combination of both glitch and bad programming of engagement and pathfinding AI is beyond understanding.