Legionnaires by 260 BC

[jonnysulami]

All it takes is four military technologies in a row to unlock post-Marian reform legionnaires and this can be done by 260 BC. Why would CA do this? Of course I could "hold off" on researching that technology, but I would be severely limiting myself. This is simply poor design. I suspect CA chose to ignore ~160 years of Roman military organization under the manipular system in order to rush out the "cooler" and more iconic legionnaires. I am usually forgiving and try to mentally justify other immersion breaking design choices but this is absurd.

Additionally, the assault trireme general that you have at the start of the campaign has the model of a legionnaire that you can use in battle. Why would CA not even bother to give the trireme general a Polybian model? I am clueless.

Ideally I would like to have the technology structured so that half of the game would be under the manipular model and the other half under the Marian model but I suppose that is what mods are for.

[SinerAthin]

Bear in mind though that by only pursuing military techs you will be sacrificing cultural and economical benefits.


It is fair that someone who is willing to sacrifice the economic or cultural buildings/agents to get earlier military units should be able to do so, and vica versa. It is balanced in that regard.

It's a game about making your own history.
If you want to be the Emperor who puts all his resources into developing the military, it makes sense that you'd develop stuff faster. There are tradeoffs to such choices.

[Tazgrent]

There's actually two reforms for the Romans. Marian, which represents the reforms of Marius, and the later "Imperial" legionaries. That said, it seems strange to me that you would rush that tech. If it's so immersion breaking, then don't rush it. I don't complain about a lack of immersion when I rush techs in Civ IV and end up with the Printing Press in 100 BC. I understand that I made a choice to get a tech earlier than I normally would, rather than proceeding at a more historical pace.

[lampuiho]

You are meant to change history by advancing techs differently to accomplish your goal

We would have done a lot of things differently if we knew the result earlier you know

[nomercysniper]

I noticed this as well, and have purposefully held off on researching it as I've only just started to build triarii. Would have preffered the tech to be beginning of the third research box not the 2nd.

[jonnysulami]

Bear in mind though that by only pursuing military techs you will be sacrificing cultural and economical benefits.


It is fair that someone who is willing to sacrifice the economic or cultural buildings/agents to get earlier military units should be able to do so, and vica versa. It is balanced in that regard.

It's a game about making your own history.
If you want to be the Emperor who puts all his resources into developing the military, it makes sense that you'd develop stuff faster. There are tradeoffs to such choices.

You would be correct if there was any significant tradeoff for the massive boost you get from having legionnaires whose stats are significantly better than hastati/principes. Just glancing at the tech tree, all I am giving up is marginal industrial/commerce that would be too expensive to build for so early in the game, an early dignitary or some ship technology. Rushing legionnaires gives the most bang for your buck compared to the other technologies.

[Tazgrent]

But training those units requires the establishment of more military infrastructure, and they also cost more. If you attempt to do this without any sort of economic development, you'll find yourself bankrupt very quickly.

[jonnysulami]

There's actually two reforms for the Romans. Marian, which represents the reforms of Marius, and the later "Imperial" legionaries. That said, it seems strange to me that you would rush that tech. If it's so immersion breaking, then don't rush it. I don't complain about a lack of immersion when I rush techs in Civ IV and end up with the Printing Press in 100 BC. I understand that I made a choice to get a tech earlier than I normally would, rather than proceeding at a more historical pace.

Your comparison between Civ and the Total War series is inappropriate. You can do that without sweating in Civ IV because Civ is not a period piece. It does not attempt, nor does it market an attempt, to invoke a forceful sense of place and time. The mere fact that it is possible to get legionnaires in 260 BC bothers me because it simply does. not. make. sense.

[Tazgrent]

With some clever use of population mechanics, you can easily trigger the reforms within a very short period in the original Rome. By intentionally using gamey tactics, you rush a tech and complain about it being immersion breaking. Forgive me if I see a break in logic here.

[jonnysulami]

But training those units requires the establishment of more military infrastructure, and they also cost more. If you attempt to do this without any sort of economic development, you'll find yourself bankrupt very quickly.

All it takes is the ~1500 for the Principe/triarii barracks and then you can upgrade your units for about 100 each. Actually I am not even sure you need the principe/triarii barracks as you can just upgrade the hastati directly to legionnaires. So lets say that at most it takes 3000 to build the barracks and upgrade a half sized army, which will then steamroll full stacks of the militia/levies that you are faced against. Not much of a financial set back.

[Mephalamos]

But training those units requires the establishment of more military infrastructure, and they also cost more. If you attempt to do this without any sort of economic development, you'll find yourself bankrupt very quickly.

I get that you are trying to justify holding off on legionaries, but it just isn't working.

It would be like my holding off on Pikemen when playing as Athens and instead building Militia Hoplites as a cheaper alternatives. In certain situations, yes, in most, no. There is just no justification 'not' to rush the better units.

[♠ Thomas Cochrane ♠]

Legionnaires by 260BCE?? Wow, those French must have got out of bed early! I wonder how the Roman LEGIONARIES would fare against them?

[jonnysulami]

With some clever use of population mechanics, you can easily trigger the reforms within a very short period in the original Rome. By intentionally using gamey tactics, you rush a tech and complain about it being immersion breaking. Forgive me if I see a break in logic here.

Perhaps I also believe that it was a problem with the original Rome as well? And even more so with Rome 2? The problem was alleviated by mods however. I can hardly see how you can consider it gamey if 1) I am not using any clever mechanic or borderline exploit and 2) simply progressing in a natural fashion. Spending 12 turns in one tech tree is not "rushing."

[jonnysulami]

Legionnaires by 260BCE?? Wow, those French must have got out of bed early! I wonder how the Roman LEGIONARIES would fare against them?

Do you have anything worth contributing? Or are you just trolling? Its late, mistakes happen.

[jonnysulami]

Legionnaires by 260BCE?? Wow, those French must have got out of bed early! I wonder how the Roman LEGIONARIES would fare against them?

Also

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/legionnaire

"a member of a legion"

[Razor]

Well, miraculously "inventing" "Marian legionaries" and "Imperial legionaries" (by themselves modern popular fabrications) is as a whole 'gamey'.

I agree it's weird to see older units standing next to modern units. But not only is it your choice to do so, CA also thought it would be a great idea.

[Shaggy1973]

I just found this and have to say this is one aspect of R2 that is bitterly disappointing. I pursued the military tech to get triarii, but it seems triarii availability is also linked to legionaries. I really don't think pre and post marian reform units should be in the same army. They should be retrained with a reform. I also really think that the marius reforms should perhaps be moved to the civic tech tree somewhere to help prolong the polybian era somehow. This really really jolts me out of the game immersion and I'm so disappointed I'm contemplating putting Rome 2 down until someone mods this stuff into the game. Shame cos I was enjoying myself until this little bomb shell.

GGRRRR!

[SinerAthin]

I think the main complaints about the game with units such as Hastati not getting enough time to shine would be solved if there was 2 or 4 turns per year, as then you'd get to spend a lot more time playing around with them.

With 1 year per turn, things WILL move fast

[Duncan III]

One turn per year was just about the worst design choice made by CA, it leads to so many other problems.

[priam11]

That is irrelevant as there is already a mod that makes it either 2 or 4 turns per year.