Slitherine

A very reasonable post. Although I do wish proven systems such as Roman maniples folding through each other, the partisan shot, and other known tactics were better employed in the game. I really liked your suggestion about units like pike pinning other units in place. But totally agree much of this game is all subjective takes.

Archaeologist1970 wrote: ↑Sun Aug 05, 2018 1:30 am A very reasonable post. Although I do wish proven systems such as Roman maniples folding through each other, the partisan shot, and other known tactics were better employed in the game. I really liked your suggestion about units like pike pinning other units in place. But totally agree much of this game is all subjective takes.

heh,thanks bro)

@rbodleyscott New problems what I found in game today:Greek and Successor Kingdoms not have peltasts in game,and Roman triarii wears black clothes,use black sheilds in games,I think these really....are unhistorical and serious problems.

Dux Limitis wrote: ↑Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:54 pm @rbodleyscott New problems what I found in game today:Greek and Successor Kingdoms not have peltasts in game,and Roman triarii wears black clothes,use black sheilds in games,I think these really....are unhistorical and serious problems.

1) Some rules systems treat peltasts as some sort of medium infantry, but in fact their role was skirmishing with javelins. They are currently represented in the game by Light Foot Javelinmen. It would be nice if we had a specific shielded Greek peltast model for Greek peltasts, it is on the wish list. Likewise a Euzonoi model for thureophoroi acting as skirmishers. And even a model for pikemen re-armed with javelins and acting as skirmishers.

The troops named "Peltasts" in Successor Armies were in fact pikemen (named peltasts either because of their small shields, or because they were capable, when required, of fighting as light infantry skirmishers).

I refer you to the learned work of Luke Ueda-Sarson:

http://lukeuedasarson.com/Iphikrates1.html

http://lukeuedasarson.com/Iphikrates2.html

2) With regard to the triarii, contrary to popular depictions, it isn't in fact known with any certainty what colour tunics Roman infantry wore, nor what colour shields the "Polybian" legion of the middle Republican period carried. The artist has used the licence granted by this uncertainty to make it easier for the player to distinguish the different parts of the legion in the game, and to make it easier to distinguish one side's units from the other in civil war situations.

The latter consideration means that for some armies the alternative version of the clothing colours used by the second side in civil wars isn't always the most historically likely colour. However, it does enhance playability.

@rbodleyscott Got a new question,why roman army don't have praetorian guard(before 312ad) in game?

Dux Limitis wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:29 am @rbodleyscott Got a new question,why roman army don't have praetorian guard(before 312ad) in game?

Mainly because they infrequently took part in field battles, and because of this, it is questionable whether they were usually of higher quality than the fighting legions. However, they did sometimes do so (e.g. Trajan's Dacian and Parthian campaigns, and the Battle of the Milvian Bridge) so we could add them in the future.

Paul59's TT Mod, which is highly recommended, has them. He has a specific army list for Maxentius's army.

viewtopic.php?f=477&t=87260

rbodleyscott wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 9:37 am

Dux Limitis wrote: ↑Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:29 am @rbodleyscott Got a new question,why roman army don't have praetorian guard(before 312ad) in game?

Mainly because they infrequently took part in field battles, and because of this, it is questionable whether they were usually of higher quality than the fighting legions. However, they did sometimes do so (e.g. Trajan's Dacian and Parthian campaigns, and the Battle of the Milvian Bridge) so we could add them in the future.

Paul59's TT Mod, which is highly recommended, has them. He has a specific army list for Maxentius's army.

viewtopic.php?f=477&t=87260

Thanks.

How about testudo formation? Seems weird pike can change to square but Roman's cannot. Both well documented as well.

Archaeologist1970 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 3:33 am How about testudo formation? Seems weird pike can change to square but Roman's cannot. Both well documented as well.

Testudo was mainly a siege assault formation. In any case, legionaries are already well protected from missile fire in the game.

But you have siege equipment and terrain on the game. Very clearly documented function of the Roman Army but not in the game. I can see not using wedge formations as there is not a hard cut case except for it being used against Bodica. Why also cannot units change to column formations to cover ground quicker? Or eschelons to refuse flanks. Maybe some of these omissions were excusable in the ancient period, but as we move closer to medieval times, tactics did change. Otherwise all of your dlc is the same game with different skins. How are you going to address shield walls?

There are a lot of units that could arguably have formations like wedge or some defensive formations but don't. The pikes now seem like the anomaly in the lot.

In general formations like testudo or phalanx/shield-wall are counted into the overall performance of the units. I personally wouldn't mind if pike square ability was dropped for the sake of consistency and the pike units were re-balanced a bit in some other way.

rbodleyscott wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 7:30 am

Archaeologist1970 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 14, 2018 3:33 am How about testudo formation? Seems weird pike can change to square but Roman's cannot. Both well documented as well.

Testudo was mainly a siege assault formation. In any case, legionaries are already well protected from missile fire in the game.

I think roman will not only use testudo formation in siege battle,if they're facing fierce enemy fire in field battle like 53bc in Carrhae,they will use the testudo too.

So why didn't they use it later when bow armies and mounted bow armies were often the main enemy? I would say it is because whilst testudo increases defence against missiles, it limits visibility and mobility, whilst making it impossible to defend against lancers.

One thing that is possible do is add the nation units in diferent quality levels or/and the ability to turn or not, of course this could be represented in the unit cost.

I think are interesting units in armies but or are to expensive or have to low combat value, for example limatei could be avaliable with medium quality as complement to low quality, of course if are avaliable... 4 of low quality medium quality only can offer 2.

I agree that Limitanei should be available in better quality as well as the raw units the lists contain. They were on the border fighting raids all the time so there must have been some better units.

julianbarker wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 4:05 pm I agree that Limitanei should be available in better quality as well as the raw units the lists contain. They were on the border fighting raids all the time so there must have been some better units.

There are Pseudocomitatenses units to represent such units. Limitanei get promoted to Pseudocomitatenses when they gain sufficient experience in campaigns.

rbodleyscott wrote: ↑Mon Aug 20, 2018 7:08 am

julianbarker wrote: ↑Sun Aug 19, 2018 4:05 pm I agree that Limitanei should be available in better quality as well as the raw units the lists contain. They were on the border fighting raids all the time so there must have been some better units.

There are Pseudocomitatenses units to represent such units. Limitanei get promoted to Pseudocomitatenses when they gain sufficient experience in campaigns.

Honestly to say,their modles're no difference when the limitanei promoted to the psedocomitatenses,just changed unit name and training degree.I hope the psedocomitatenses will have different unit modle from the limitanei in the future.

From what I read, psedocomitatenses is just name for the limitanei who joins the field army. Otherwise, they remain the name "limitanei" on the border. I think there shall be no model difference.

melm wrote: ↑Tue Aug 21, 2018 6:56 am From what I read, psedocomitatenses is just name for the limitanei who joins the field army. Otherwise, they remain the name "limitanei" on the border. I think there shall be no model difference.

That is correct. they would retain the same shield pattern as usual. They are just on secondment to the field army and have gained some experience thereby.

In fact all of the Limitanei shield patterns in the game are genuine Pseudocomitatenses shield patterns from the eastern part of the Notitia Dignitatum. The Notitia does not show shield patterns for Limitanei. However, as the Pseudocomitartenses units represent detachments from the original border legions, it is reasonable to suppose that the part of that legion left on the border might have the same (or similar) shield pattern.

Dux Limitis wrote:No tarentine light horseman

Although Tarentine Light Horse had shields, their classification under the FOG system would be the same as the present light horse. FOG concentrates on getting the interactions between different contemporary troop types right, rather than on relatively unimportant equipment differences - especially when these tended to roll out to most nations within a few years of the initial innovation.

We are a small studio, and if we had to have different models for every variation in appearance from Spain to India, the game simply could not get made at all. Each new model takes at least 1 full day of the artist's time to create, plus some hours of the animator's time.

See viewtopic.php?f=492&t=79817 (5th post)

So we had to make compromises in limiting the number of different models.

In the TT Mod, Paul has done wonders with texture conversions (there are no new models), but the official game units have to be done to an even higher standard, hence we cannot simply roll out all these variant units by texture conversions.