Slitherine

actually, mail would make you quite resistant to any melee weapon unless its a hammer or club.. so guy in mail shirt would have advantage against guy with just a small shield... people are taking TV way too seriously, not realizing what armor was... Mail was the top protection in those time, it was practically a life insurance as it prevented any cuts, stabs or slashes.. it is not humanly possible to cut through or pierce through solid riveted mail with one handed weapon...

So, they're going to aim for other vulnarable spots. How are you going to ward off the blow?

rbodleyscott wrote: You really need to see how the whole combat system works to see how it gives the correct interaction between different troop-types.

Actually, I would indeed be quite interrested to see that.

Latro wrote:So, they're going to aim for other vulnarable spots. How are you going to ward off the blow?

If you have to aim for it, you are at disadvantage. opponent is not restricted that way and will kill you first..

anyway, one common mistake is that mail is seen as armor used by auxiliaries.. it was not the case, mail was always costly. only Auxilia using it, were Gallic Nobles serving for Romans.. Eastern archers usually used lamelar/scale or leather scale armors.. mail was just too costly for them.. Romans for example considered Segmented armor to be "low grade munition armor" that can be provided to all troops.. Mail was too costly, so Roman state was looking for easier method how to provide armor to troops.. Segmentata was one of them, but was not even in use for long as it disappeared completely after about 100 years. instead, Romans continued to use Mail, and used scale armor as cheaper variant.. yet there were actually even hybrid armors which combined both Mail and scale and sometimes banded plates.

JaM2013 wrote:

Latro wrote:So, they're going to aim for other vulnarable spots. How are you going to ward off the blow?

If you have to aim for it, you are at disadvantage. opponent is not restricted that way and will kill you first..

Yes the opponent is restricted....by the shield.
You have not answered how he is going to ward off the blow.
Seriously, a shield is the.single.most.important piece of equipment in close combat. Even before a helmet.

there were actually even hybrid armors which combined both Mail and scale and sometimes banded plates.

Yes I've seen a piece with scale the size of a quarter of a pinky nail, on even smaller mail rings. Riveted rings.

we are talking about small shields... not large shields like scutum.. small shields were mostly made of wicker, not something that would be able to sustain repeated hits. in mail, you are practically resistant to any one handed hit opponent can do to you.. i would take mail shirt over wicker shield every time... but thats beside the point... light skirmishers would not run around in 15kg heavy mail shirt...

I still don't know how my whicker shield is going to sustain multiple hits, when you cannot ward off any of my blows.

you do realize weapons can parry, right?

Yeah, in Hollywood they can hack and parry with a gladius, easily. For several minutes even.
A real sword fight is over in seconds, if no shields are involved. Have you ever watched a fencing match?

yes, and no shields are used in those.. lol if both sides use same length sword, then it is no different... and with mail shirt, that gladius wont kill you... while you can kill opponent with every strike that lands.


mail shirt has higher level of protection than light shield.. with mail shirt, your back, and side is protected the same, while if you have just the light shield, you are protected only from direction where you hold the shield.. so you are easily killed from other directions.. so in real combat,with skirmishers fighting each other, you would be killed by somebody you didnt see. yes, guys in mail would be hit more often without shields, but those hits would be ineffective in huge majority of cases.. so in game terms, any unit that uses mail or similar body protection, should have big advantage in combat, due to its all around distribution.. shield is great thing, but only from the front and left... right side and rear... not so much.

Back to Javelin and slings - I think there is one thing wrong with Javelins - these weapons are most effective when thrown from short run. Therefore Javelinmen should be most effective while moving, while not as effective when stationary.

JaM2013 wrote:Back to Javelin and slings - I think there is one thing wrong with Javelins - these weapons are most effective when thrown from short run. Therefore Javelinmen should be most effective while moving, while not as effective when stationary.

The tiles are 60 paces/metres in size. There is room for a short run within the tile.

of course there is, my point is that the "stationary" bonus kinda makes no sense with Javelins, as it does the opposite. and same is true for javelin light horse - faster they ride, more effective their javelins are, because their kinetic energy is increased by the speed of horse adding to the speed of release. and even small increase in speed can do quite a lot in kinetic energy (speed quadruples the Kinetic energy, while weight doubles it) Its main reason why Numidian light horse was so feared.

JaM2013 wrote:of course there is, my point is that the "stationary" bonus kinda makes no sense with Javelins

There is a big difference between a run up directly towards your target, and doing this after moving into position from a different direction.

True, yet have to wait a turn for javelin horse to get best accuracy is kinda against the logic how these weapons were used. I think they would deserve a bit different approach. And same with javelins thrown by infantry. I've noticed in my battles javelinmen are the least effective skirmishers you can have... slingers or archers always outperform them. Their only advantage is that you can have a lot of them.. Also i kinda miss some specialist javelinmen units for Iberian/Spanish and Numidians.. these were a lot better than average joe javelinmen others used.. Iberian Caetrati gave quite a beating to Roman Velites during wars in Iberia, to the point Romans rather used local skirmishers than their youngsters...



Also, is there any mechanics for flanking or rear shots? If not, there definitely should be.. hitting enemy in back with ranged weapon should be extra effective. no shields from that direction

I like slingshots in the game but javelins are hard to use cause when you move close enough to fire, then you are close enough to be assaulted by the enemy which will inevitably be devastating. I'm not complaining though cause javelins do have short range.

Rome Total War 2 does a good job with javelins and slingshots. The javelins run out of ammo very fast but are quite deadly against any enemy group and have fairly short range. Slingshots have fairly long range but do no damage to armored units with shields up, and slingshots are further made much weaker by having to shoot over a friendly unit or downhill which is odd. But slingshots are very deadly against unarmored units and against armored units when hitting from flank or better yet rear to avoid the shield protection and against routed units. Even the powerful legionnaires get hewed down if slingshot units can fire at them from behind. I really like the slingshots cause I move them around behind enemies that are engaged in melee combat and then pour slingshot rocks into them from the side or rear and it mows down the enemy as well as a few friendlies too but not many. Slingshots work good on ships too cause there is nothing blocking their shots on the ocean so they can reduce enemy crews fairly well.

Most people think slingshots are weak but you have to imagine rocks the size of eggs, sometimes made of lead, flying well over 100mph or so in a hail. It must be scary. A stout tower shield like the Romans used can block the fire though.

yes, i did mentioned it at the start of this thread, that Javelins had a lot more penetrative power than any other ranged weapon used in that time period.. it was no contest there at all, and javelins were the only weapons that could effectively deal with heavily armored units even frontally.
Personally, i think as it is now, javelinmen are not worth their cost, because they need to get very close to deal damage, while they are only useful at the initial stage while forces are approaching each other (which is done usually in 3 turns max)
if you use archers or slingers instead of javelins, you usually get at least 1 more turn of shooting because of their range, while they tend to do more damage (in FoG2) than javelins. So, i think there should be some added bonus to javelins due to their greatly superior power. Something like armor piercing ability, that javelins would ignore part of whatever armor rating unit has, or something similar. or at least give them smaller penalty for throws while moving so they can be used in more dynamic way.. anything.. just make them a bit more useful than ordinary cannon fodder nuisance they are right now.

Lots of discussion about penetrative power of javelins (why do I feel I should be reading this in a tank sim forum ), but it is really irrelevant for slings. The main effect of a sling stone is going to be concussive, which can be bad even with a helmet given a head hit.

I think though as RBS mentioned you need to look at the overall interaction of the troop types before making adjustments. This is not a skirmish game with detailed interactions between individuals, where one would be concerned with a gladius stab at a vulnerable spot, etc. The tabletop game, which is where I am coming from, is all about unit match ups and interaction.

So light infantry javelins have a benefit in melee whereas slingers have a range benefit. Also keep in mind that these are skirmishers so you don't have a concentrated barrage of missile weapons anyway. Frankly all the light troops are nuisance troops where one may hope to get a disorder on a heavy unit or maybe hold difficult terrain, or use light cavalry to go arounf the flank or after the camp (table top game).

light javelinmen are not better in close combat than slingers or archers actually.. only unit that is somewhat better, are Velites, yet even then you dont always have an advantage.. (in my recent campaign against Spanish, my velites got wiped out by spanish light infantry in melee combat... probably an unlucky dice, but in one case 3 of my Velites were unable to overcome single slinger unit in the open for 2 turns, so they got wiped out by incoming scutarii.. - Velites carried gladius and parma shield, while slingers usually had just a dagger.. )

Anyway my main complain is to the fact javelinmen got their ranged effect greatly reduced (not all are throwing at once) while slingers and archers do, which puts them at big disadvantage... My point is, that in situation like this, you need to counterbalance weapons, otherwise that particular weapon system will be not properly useful, which is problematic in the game about ancient combat, where javelins were considered the prime ranged weapons...

So if javelins are not being thrown by all men, while slingers and archers are, then give javelins penetrative power so they are more effective for that throw.. it would be just fair considering their actual power vs arrrows or slingshot, as they had usually 4x higher hitting power, while being a lot more lethal (you could survive arrow hit if it didnt hit any vital organ, but you would definitely not survive a javelin hit...)

- two things are missing here - bonus for heavy unit from the front, due to shield protection - any ranged weapon should have its effect greatly reduced for hits hitting enemy in the frontal arc. and of course, higher penetrative power for javelins, which had usually 2-3x more kinetic energy, than any slingshot or arrow had in that time period... even medieval English War-Arrows (which were 125g heavy vs 40-60g arrows used in antiquity) could only barely reach kinetic energy potential of light javelins used in Ancient times.. (it had range advantage though)

JaM2013 wrote: Also, is there any mechanics for flanking or rear shots? If not, there definitely should be.. hitting enemy in back with ranged weapon should be extra effective. no shields from that direction

Agreed, plus, being shot in the back with arrows, etc. must not be great for morale.