New units add suggestion

[sdw1000]

Actually no.. Rome didn't use crossbows. In fact, they hardly used archers until late empire...

[Dux Limitis]

Actually no.. Rome didn't use crossbows. In fact, they hardly used archers until late empire...

search the arcuballista,please

[Dux Limitis]

@rbodleyscott New suggestion,I've bought the Rise of Persia dlc last evening,then I saw the new units with front rank melee infantry and back rank archers,like the assyrian series infantry,elamite infantry.When last time I played the late roman army,I found the legio comitatensis,legio palatina and auxilia palatina's introductions said,they have a proportion of archers,but,they're not obviously reflect in the game,almost absolutely(can't see them and can't control them to shoot).So I think,can you make these roman units like front rank melee infantry,back rank archers' units like what the Rise of Persia has been added?

[rbodleyscott]

@rbodleyscott New suggestion,I've bought the Rise of Persia dlc last evening,then I saw the new units with front rank melee infantry and back rank archers,like the assyrian series infantry,elamite infantry.When last time I played the late roman army,I found the legio comitatensis,legio palatina and auxilia palatina's introductions said,they have a proportion of archers,but,they're not obviously reflect in the game,almost absolutely(can't see them and can't control them to shoot).So I think,can you make these roman units like front rank melee infantry,back rank archers' units like what the Rise of Persia has been added?

The Assyrian units are 50% archers. Late Roman units are not thought to have contained anything like so high a proportion of archers, so representing them in this way would be inappropriate.

[Dux Limitis]

@rbodleyscott New suggestion,I've bought the Rise of Persia dlc last evening,then I saw the new units with front rank melee infantry and back rank archers,like the assyrian series infantry,elamite infantry.When last time I played the late roman army,I found the legio comitatensis,legio palatina and auxilia palatina's introductions said,they have a proportion of archers,but,they're not obviously reflect in the game,almost absolutely(can't see them and can't control them to shoot).So I think,can you make these roman units like front rank melee infantry,back rank archers' units like what the Rise of Persia has been added?

The Assyrian units are 50% archers. Late Roman units are not thought to have contained anything like so high a proportion of archers, so representing them in this way would be inappropriate.

So how to let them better reflect in game?Add few roman back rank archers modles(a little proportion,as you say) with lower ammo and lower damages in the future upgrade?Now I can't let them help for the offensive and defence fire support（controllable）,only can see the introductions says they have "a proportion of archers".

[rbodleyscott]

@rbodleyscott New suggestion,I've bought the Rise of Persia dlc last evening,then I saw the new units with front rank melee infantry and back rank archers,like the assyrian series infantry,elamite infantry.When last time I played the late roman army,I found the legio comitatensis,legio palatina and auxilia palatina's introductions said,they have a proportion of archers,but,they're not obviously reflect in the game,almost absolutely(can't see them and can't control them to shoot).So I think,can you make these roman units like front rank melee infantry,back rank archers' units like what the Rise of Persia has been added?

The Assyrian units are 50% archers. Late Roman units are not thought to have contained anything like so high a proportion of archers, so representing them in this way would be inappropriate.

So how to let them better reflect in game?Add a little proportions of back rank archers with lower ammo and lower damages in the future upgrade?Now I can't let them help for the offensive and defence fire support（controllable）,only can see the introductions says they have "a proportion of archers".

The archers contribute to the defensive Impact POA. We made a design decision not to include desultory long-distance shooting by small numbers of archers, which would just use up their ammo with no significant effect on the enemy. The assumption is that they save their ammo for repelling enemy charges.

We think this does reflect their historical effect.

[Dux Limitis]

The Assyrian units are 50% archers. Late Roman units are not thought to have contained anything like so high a proportion of archers, so representing them in this way would be inappropriate.

So how to let them better reflect in game?Add a little proportions of back rank archers with lower ammo and lower damages in the future upgrade?Now I can't let them help for the offensive and defence fire support（controllable）,only can see the introductions says they have "a proportion of archers".

The archers contribute to the defensive Impact POA. We made a design decision not to include desultory long-distance shooting by small numbers of archers, which would just use up their ammo with no significant effect on the enemy. The assumption is that they save their ammo for repelling enemy charges.

We think this does reflect their historical effect.

Historical effect must have the offensive support I think,and it's really not good reflect in game,to try and think, your army said have a proportion of archers,but you can't order them to shoot before the offensive or charge,or let them shoot the enemy who's engaging now.

[MVP7]

The Assyrian units are 50% archers. Late Roman units are not thought to have contained anything like so high a proportion of archers, so representing them in this way would be inappropriate.

So how to let them better reflect in game?Add a little proportions of back rank archers with lower ammo and lower damages in the future upgrade?Now I can't let them help for the offensive and defence fire support（controllable）,only can see the introductions says they have "a proportion of archers".

The archers contribute to the defensive Impact POA. We made a design decision not to include desultory long-distance shooting by small numbers of archers, which would just use up their ammo with no significant effect on the enemy. The assumption is that they save their ammo for repelling enemy charges.

We think this does reflect their historical effect.

Is it known of what level the archers were integrated into infantry units? Were they a part of squad sized elements or were they organized more like heavy weapons platoon/company? Would it make any sense to have comitatenses without bows and with 40-50% bows?

[rbodleyscott]

So how to let them better reflect in game?Add a little proportions of back rank archers with lower ammo and lower damages in the future upgrade?Now I can't let them help for the offensive and defence fire support（controllable）,only can see the introductions says they have "a proportion of archers".

The archers contribute to the defensive Impact POA. We made a design decision not to include desultory long-distance shooting by small numbers of archers, which would just use up their ammo with no significant effect on the enemy. The assumption is that they save their ammo for repelling enemy charges.

We think this does reflect their historical effect.

Is it known of what level the archers were integrated into infantry units?

No.

Were they a part of squad sized elements or were they organized more like heavy weapons platoon/company?

This isn't known.

Would it make any sense to have comitatenses without bows and with 40-50% bows?

Not really. The archers are believed to have been permanent parts of the units in Late Roman times, not shifted around from unit to unit. There were also separate Sagittarii units, who were presumably all archers.

[Dux Limitis]

The archers contribute to the defensive Impact POA. We made a design decision not to include desultory long-distance shooting by small numbers of archers, which would just use up their ammo with no significant effect on the enemy. The assumption is that they save their ammo for repelling enemy charges.

We think this does reflect their historical effect.

Is it known of what level the archers were integrated into infantry units?

No.

Were they a part of squad sized elements or were they organized more like heavy weapons platoon/company?

This isn't known.

Would it make any sense to have comitatenses without bows and with 40-50% bows?

Not really. The archers are believed to have been permanent parts of the units in Late Roman times, not shifted around from unit to unit. There were also separate Sagittarii units, who were presumably all archers.

@rbodleyscott So,in summary,you really should add a rank of archers to the legio comitatensis,auxilia,and platina units in the furture upgrade ,to better reflect this in game.

[MVP7]

Is it known of what level the archers were integrated into infantry units?

No.

Were they a part of squad sized elements or were they organized more like heavy weapons platoon/company?

This isn't known.

Would it make any sense to have comitatenses without bows and with 40-50% bows?

Not really. The archers are believed to have been permanent parts of the units in Late Roman times, not shifted around from unit to unit. There were also separate Sagittarii units, who were presumably all archers.

@rbodleyscott So,in summary,you really should add a rank of archers to the legio comitatensis,auxilia,and platina units in the furture upgrade ,to better reflect this in game.

It would't reflect their capabilities better in the game since there's only a small amount of archers in the formation that can't be used for active shooting. Having a visible line of archers would be confusing if anything.

[Dux Limitis]

No.



This isn't known.



Not really. The archers are believed to have been permanent parts of the units in Late Roman times, not shifted around from unit to unit. There were also separate Sagittarii units, who were presumably all archers.

@rbodleyscott So,in summary,you really should add a rank of archers to the legio comitatensis,auxilia,and platina units in the furture upgrade ,to better reflect this in game.

It would't reflect their capabilities better in the game since there's only a small amount of archers in the formation that can't be used for active shooting. Having a visible line of archers would be confusing if anything.

If their numbers are 20% or more of the army then they're not small amounts ,and can be used for active shooting.20% or more of army's archers can't active to shoot the enemy,that would be really confusing if let I say.

[MVP7]

@rbodleyscott So,in summary,you really should add a rank of archers to the legio comitatensis,auxilia,and platina units in the furture upgrade ,to better reflect this in game.

It would't reflect their capabilities better in the game since there's only a small amount of archers in the formation that can't be used for active shooting. Having a visible line of archers would be confusing if anything.

If their numbers are 20% or more of the army then they're not small amounts ,and can be used for active shooting.20% or more of army's archers can't active to shoot the enemy,that would be really confusing if let I say.

In the game, a unit with 20% bows can't shoot, the bows only act as a POA modifier.

[Dux Limitis]

It would't reflect their capabilities better in the game since there's only a small amount of archers in the formation that can't be used for active shooting. Having a visible line of archers would be confusing if anything.

If their numbers are 20% or more of the army then they're not small amounts ,and can be used for active shooting.20% or more of army's archers can't active to shoot the enemy,that would be really confusing if let I say.

In the game, a unit with 20% bows can't shoot, the bows only act as a POA modifier.

Board(table top) game's rigid rules should not be bring to the computer game,really ruined this.

[rbodleyscott]

If their numbers are 20% or more of the army then they're not small amounts ,and can be used for active shooting.20% or more of army's archers can't active to shoot the enemy,that would be really confusing if let I say.

In the game, a unit with 20% bows can't shoot, the bows only act as a POA modifier.

Board(table top) game's rigid rules should not be bring to the computer game,really ruined this.

It isn't because of the tabletop rules, it is because we made a design decision, for playability reasons, not to effectively force the player to waste time each turn shooting ineffectively with small numbers of archers.

We were aware that some players would not like this more abstract approach, but decided on balance it was better for the game, as other players would be annoyed by all the extra minimally-effective shooting.

It is impossible to please everyone all of the time.

With regard to showing the archers on the map, at the normal representational scale each figure represents 60 men in four ranks of 15 files. As there aren't 4 ranks of archers in the unit, it would not be appropriate to model them as archers.

[Dux Limitis]

In the game, a unit with 20% bows can't shoot, the bows only act as a POA modifier.

Board(table top) game's rigid rules should not be bring to the computer game,really ruined this.

It isn't because of the tabletop rules, it is because we made a design decision, for playability reasons, not to effectively force the player to waste time each turn shooting ineffectively with small numbers of archers.

We were aware that some players would not like this more abstract approach, but decided on balance it was better for the game, as other players would be annoyed by all the extra minimally-effective shooting.

It is impossible to please everyone all of the time.

With regard to showing the archers on the map, at the normal representational scale each figure represents 60 men in four ranks of 15 files. As there aren't 4 ranks of archers in the unit, it would not be appropriate to model them as archers.

@rbodleyscott I think,add a (other,add them to the third(new)rank,and add two archers' (modle) to the unit)rank of archers who can active shoot is better for the game,beacuse it can be better to simulate late Roman's tactic at that time,no one will be annoyed of this,if they see the introduction said they have a proportion of archers but they can't do active shooting,that will really make people annoying.I hope you can reconsider it,and I still hope you can add them in the future upgrade.

[melm]

If another ranked added, I am afraid it will affect the impact result. I'd rather let archers shoot overhead with less damage effect. But I don't want the animation vision ruined by arrows flying across the front ranks.

[MVP7]

Earlier I made a small mod that let late Romans shoot their bows with range of 2 like horse archers and I think it worked quite nicely.

With limited range the damage remains similar to that of the horse archer units and it definitely better shows the reasons behind the otherwise quite harmful change in the Roman equipment by giving them a bit more initiative against mounted units without making them overpowered or primarily ranged unit.

Still hoping that this might be re-visited at some point.

[Dux Limitis]

If another ranked added, I am afraid it will affect the impact result. I'd rather let archers shoot overhead with less damage effect. But I don't want the animation vision ruined by arrows flying across the front ranks.

Buy Rise of Persia dlc,then play the assyrian infantry,and you'll see how will it runs.(means how will the infantry units with back rank archers runs)

[melm]

If another ranked added, I am afraid it will affect the impact result. I'd rather let archers shoot overhead with less damage effect. But I don't want the animation vision ruined by arrows flying across the front ranks.

Buy Rise of Persia dlc,then play the assyrian infantry,and you'll see how will it runs.(means how will the infantry units with back rank archers runs)

I already won the dlc and played it. Assyrian mixed is set as 50% bows and 50% spear. Thus we have 4 models of spear infantry and 4 models of archer. And because of this the melee capability is compromised. If you want to keep one unit as 8 models, you will change perhaps two models into archer, which will compromise the melee capability of comitatensis. I doubt you want to make comitatensis weaker in melee for the archer capability. If you want to add a third rank, I am afraid it will affect the impact capability as the rank is deeper. It makes comitatensis stronger but I doubt it reflect its historical role.