Getai secondary weapon issue

[NoHelmet]

I noticed that some of the getai troops (tarabostes, komatai, e.g.) do not have the AP attribute to their secondary weapons, even though the same weapons on other troops have that attribute, like the traikian peltasts. Is it due to balance reasons, or something else, and will i experience any bugs if i alter that attribute during my campain?

[WinsingtonIII]

Komatai and Tarabostes do not carry a rhomphaia like the Thracian Peltasts do. They carry a sica, which may look quite similar, but it is a smaller blade than the rhomphaia, and thus, you get less force behind it when you swing it and it is less able to pierce armor. I know that historically the sica did force the Romans to make some armor modifications, but the EB team has come to the conclusion that it was not enough of an armor piercing weapon to receive the AP trait, whereas they have determined that rhomphaia's were. So, I believe it is for historical reasons that sica-armed troops do not have the AP attribute.

However, if you wish to add the AP trait, I do not think it will cause any bugs, changing unit stats isn't the sort of thing that causes crashes and the like. But, please, wait until someone more qualified than myself agrees with me on this before changing anything.

Welcome to the forums, by the way!

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

You can change any sort of unit stat except number of men in a unit without effecting current games.

[Kival]

But you should backup your files before altering them. If you mess up the files it's always good to have a backup.

[Ludens]

Komatai and Tarabostes do not carry a rhomphaia like the Thracian Peltasts do. They carry a sica, which may look quite similar, but it is a smaller blade than the rhomphaia, and thus, you get less force behind it when you swing it and it is less able to pierce armor. I know that historically the sica did force the Romans to make some armor modifications, but the EB team has come to the conclusion that it was not enough of an armor piercing weapon to receive the AP trait, whereas they have determined that rhomphaia's were. So, I believe it is for historical reasons that sica-armed troops do not have the AP attribute.

I think the modification you mention was made because the sica could reach behind a legionary's shield, rather than because it was particularly effective against armour.

[WinsingtonIII]

I think the modification you mention was made because the sica could reach behind a legionary's shield, rather than because it was particularly effective against armour.

Yeah I think it had to do with the curvature of the blade and how the point could come down on relatively unprotected areas from above.