Roman Infantry Armour (Rome II)

[Sir. Cunningham]

Now as we know the equipment of the Roman infantry changed a lot from 231 BC (start of the game) up until and throughout the Imperial era.

Around 100 BC the Marian Reforms brought forth the standardization of training & equipment within the Roman army, making sure each soldier was equally trained & equipped. The result was a highly skilled professional army the likes of which the world had never before seen.

Not long after, at around 50 BC (exact year is debatable), the Lorica Segmentata was introduced, a highly advanced type of segmented armour that provided the wearer with both superior protection & flexibility compared to all earlier types of armour. Now it is generally accepted that this type of armour had become standard equipment by around 100 AD, during the conflict with Dacia, however when should we be able research it in Rome II ? Should we be able to obtain it earlier or should advances in technology like these be restricted to certain time periods ?

Marian Imperial Roman Legionnaires ca. 100 AD:

[♔The Black Knight♔]

There will be various tech trees to choose from so it will prabably depend on your research rate.

Then again, we don't even know if they will have different period armors but we can hope.

[Gods999]

I bet Lorica Segmata will be in Rome 2 just like it was in Rome 1 because its a signature piece of equipment today when talking about the Roman military.

[Shneckie]

Of course it will be in the game.

[bobbin]

As far as we know it was never the standard armour at any point, chain mail was the most common armour for the period.

[weirdoascensor]

The Question is: when we advance in technology, e.g. The Marian Reforms, would the effect instantly transform the existing Legions? or do we need to pay an "upgrade this Legion" button? No...dont say we have to disband and retrain...one of the most important new Legion stack system purpose should be averting this very issue....

[Wodeson]

I'd be tempted to tie it's use to the reforms of Augustus, so it becomes available once you win the civil war.

[Manco]

Now it is generally accepted

No, it isn't.
Mail/lorica hamata was still widely used, likely even remaining more common at all times, in the lorica segmentata's heyday.

[Celsius]

I want the Roman armor to glisten so it can blind the ish out of those damn wannabe Carthaginians.

[Ahiga]

It's not something that can be solved in a single topic or post, but I have real doubts about the presentation of the legionary as an absolutely uniform clad "Stormtrooper like" force of almost automatronic soldiers. Secondary sources abound about how they were or weren't uniformly clad, and we'd run around in circles relying on that (not to mention you can find secondary sources that used to claim the segmenta was used in the republic, or even a turn of the century book by an esteemed military author I picked up that said the legionaries all used squamata - Scale armor!). I can cite two sources (re-enactor in the Legio XX I met, and my professor and author of "Soldiers & Ghosts" discussing Greco-Roman Warfare) arguing on behalf of a lack of absolute uniformality (at least in armor/helmet) and I am sure others can cite sources to the contrary.

So simply put - What is the primary, period evidence pointing towards a uniformality of legionary equipment. That every single legionary in a maniple/cohort or legion had the same armor, the same helmet, the same tunic color, or the same shield design. What are the literary, archeaological or visual depictions to support the idea of uniformly armed legions during the pre-Marian, post-Marian, and Imperial Legions. Also, How did the legionary get his equipment - both who paid for it and how he acquired it. Trajan's Column is not valid, as it uses an artistic license to distinguish legionary (Segmenta, Rectangular scutum) from auxilia (Mail, oval scutum). We get the century or so later Aurelian column completely dissolving that artistic license, too.

I know CA will go with color-coordinated troops given that's their gameplay choice. Perfectly fine with that, but I'd like to have the educated insight of those who know more than me help to clarify this issue. I am a firm believer against the fantasy of "Stormtrooper Legions" and would think uniform shields are likely, uniform tunics less likely, uniform armor is bollocks. I think people have an unnatural hard-on for the segmenta because of the love of "armor porn" and the idea that because it's pieces of solid plate it's somehow lightyears superior to mail or scale. It's also how we identify the legionary much like plate armor does for a knight. Subsequently you get people pushing the date of the armor back far beyond its actual usage because of that association.

I find the idea of fielding an army as well uniformed as a Napoleonic army in antiquity to be absolutely insane and from what I've seen the only proponents of that idea are either outdated perspectives from valid historical sources (who were just not privy to more recent revelations and archaeological research, given its an ongoing process especially for the abundant material on the Romans) or uneducated laypersons beholden to the "rule of cool" and nothing more.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

The Lorica Segmentata was not introduced until the 1st century AD, and even then Lorica Hamata remained the primary armor type. Mail shouldn't be much weaker, either, because the only area where the LS is superior is shock absorption - which means less padding is necessary. Mail is superior in that it doesn't need maintenance and is much more flexible. Roman technology wouldn't allow for the production of high quality steel in large single pieces as in the LS.

[Manco]

Lusted's in charge of unit design I heard, so good chance he'll be able to answer that.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

Lusted's in charge of unit design I heard, so good chance he'll be able to answer that.

I really hope the LS isn't overused as it was in the original game. In fact, if the game ends in like 14AD, the LS can be scrapped altogether.

[MathiasOfAthens]

If you notice in the picture some men have the plate armour and other have chain-mail or scales.

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

Yes, yes, but the OP doesn't notice that. Anyway, the Roman army was never uniform, and they weren't robotic supersoldiers fighting in tidy blocks. The Roman formation was a combination of "barbarian" swordfighting techniques and the phalanx, leading to a fighting style that basically amounts to individual swordsmen roughly contained in a line by harsh superiors.

[Sir. Cunningham]

As far as we know it was never the standard armour at any point, chain mail was the most common armour for the period.

According to historian and specialist in roman equipment Peter Connolly it was standard alongside chain mail for about 300 years. The only reason it came out of use starting around 300 AD was due to the fact that it took longer and was more expensive to make than chain mail, not to mention that each piece was made to perfectly fit the individual, which was harder to achieve than with chain mail which was almost "one size fits all".

On the plus side the Lorica Segmentata provided the wearer with the same flexibility as chain mail, whilst offering far better protection and weighing only half that of the chain mail suit.

By 300 AD however the Roman Empire was finding it too difficult to train & equip every soldier to the standards of earlier periods, thanks to pressing financial problems and issues recruiting enough troops in occupied areas. As a result the Roman army slowly began to deteriorate in both training & equipment.

That having been said chain mail had always been a standard piece of kit, even during Rome's high point, where it was used én masse alongside the Lorica Segmentata from ~50 BC to ~250 AD (time period is again a subject of debate).

But who wore what ? The general concensus is that the auxilliary troops wore chain mail exclusively, whilst only the Legionnaires wore the Lorica Segmentata, albeit not all Legions were exclusively equipped with this and still made more use of chain mail. However some have suggested that the Lorica Segmentata was in exclusive use by a number of elite Legions only, esp. those fighting the Dacians & Britons, where the extra protection is thought to have been of greater value. (The "Manica" arm protection, shin plates & Lorica Squamata was also in great use during the conflict with the Dacians at ~ 100 AD)

Dacian Wars 100 AD:

[Blatta Optima Maxima]

The only reason it came out of use starting around 300 AD was due to the fact that it took longer and was more expensive to make than chain mail

Wrong. Firstly, the LS had disappeared by 300AD, and second, mail was the more expensive of the two. Get your facts straight.

[weirdoascensor]

Pfft, What is it all about? NTW and S2TW already HAS variantmodels, differing variant of models for each man in a unit...not clones...each man have different head, helmets, armors and such... Armor irregularities were already possible!

The Question is, would Tech Research or Retrainings increases the appearance frequency of more advanced armor variantmodels in a unit.

(Well, the appropriate frequency of the armor in question is still debated in this thread anyway...)

[Ahiga]

I like and respect the late Peter Connolly a lot, but again, we can go around in circles by referencing secondary literature authors who produce more composite and nebulous works. He was one of us, very enthusiastic about history but I don't think he's a strong authoritative source - more an educated figure in the field but not a master. I've heard plenty of critiques about his conceptions and presentations - such as apparently arguing the carthaginians fought in a sarissa phalanx when most recognize that is not the case, or in my experience some presumptions with the Mycenaeans in his book about them and the Iliad. Furthermore his book is at least 20 years old and perhaps even 30 - a lot of research has gone on since then.

If you're going to argue from his position then you still have to tell us what primary resources are the foundation of those claims.

[Barristan Selmy]

It's not something that can be solved in a single topic or post, but I have real doubts about the presentation of the legionary as an absolutely uniform clad "Stormtrooper like" force of almost automatronic soldiers. Secondary sources abound about how they were or weren't uniformly clad, and we'd run around in circles relying on that (not to mention you can find secondary sources that used to claim the segmenta was used in the republic, or even a turn of the century book by an esteemed military author I picked up that said the legionaries all used squamata - Scale armor!). I can cite two sources (re-enactor in the Legio XX I met, and my professor and author of "Soldiers & Ghosts" discussing Greco-Roman Warfare) arguing on behalf of a lack of absolute uniformality (at least in armor/helmet) and I am sure others can cite sources to the contrary.

So simply put - What is the primary, period evidence pointing towards a uniformality of legionary equipment. That every single legionary in a maniple/cohort or legion had the same armor, the same helmet, the same tunic color, or the same shield design. What are the literary, archeaological or visual depictions to support the idea of uniformly armed legions during the pre-Marian, post-Marian, and Imperial Legions. Also, How did the legionary get his equipment - both who paid for it and how he acquired it. Trajan's Column is not valid, as it uses an artistic license to distinguish legionary (Segmenta, Rectangular scutum) from auxilia (Mail, oval scutum). We get the century or so later Aurelian column completely dissolving that artistic license, too.

I know CA will go with color-coordinated troops given that's their gameplay choice. Perfectly fine with that, but I'd like to have the educated insight of those who know more than me help to clarify this issue. I am a firm believer against the fantasy of "Stormtrooper Legions" and would think uniform shields are likely, uniform tunics less likely, uniform armor is bollocks. I think people have an unnatural hard-on for the segmenta because of the love of "armor porn" and the idea that because it's pieces of solid plate it's somehow lightyears superior to mail or scale. It's also how we identify the legionary much like plate armor does for a knight. Subsequently you get people pushing the date of the armor back far beyond its actual usage because of that association.

I find the idea of fielding an army as well uniformed as a Napoleonic army in antiquity to be absolutely insane and from what I've seen the only proponents of that idea are either outdated perspectives from valid historical sources (who were just not privy to more recent revelations and archaeological research, given its an ongoing process especially for the abundant material on the Romans) or uneducated laypersons beholden to the "rule of cool" and nothing more.

Ill grab the armor porn bit for my sig