Page 3 of 48 FirstFirst 1234567891011121328 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 943

Thread: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

  1. #41

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    dvk:
    The way to simulate this may be to make it hard for the Romans to grow population-wise until one of the reform buildings is built, and then apply a faction wide population growth bonus as well in that building.
    I think I like that. Do you mean just the city of Rome itself having population growth issues? It couldn't, for example, reach a huge city until the "reform building" is built. Is that sort of the idea? Presumably, the reform building itself requires a long list of other things like higher-level barracks and army rations, the buildings representing citizenship and/or other political institutions, mid-tier blacksmiths, perhaps also mid-tier aqueducts and/or grain facilities (if those could be moved or a precursor put into a large city slot), etc., all to prevent it from being available too soon. Or perhaps none of the Italian cities could reach a huge level (and the needed improvements which would go with it) until this happens. But I figure the solution to it could be a very involved process in Rome only, so there's not such a huge amount of construction to do all over the place simply to trigger the reforms: other cities would still need proper barracks and other infrastructure to make use of it and recruit the new units, but it could be "centralized" in Rome by making sure it has the most to do (although Rome will need to be fairly well-developed to start with, so I'm not sure what sort of requirements would be a good choice).

    I'm also thinking I have enough problems with very small towns getting their population up to a reasonable level, especially when the AI has previously mismanaged them all way down to their 400 lower-limits by constantly recruiting from those locations. I hope it wouldn't affect them (at least not too much).

    And after that point, I would hope it would be a small faction-wide growth bonus, maybe just half a percent (since that's the smallest possible) or not much more.

    But basically, I would like that, assuming it's nothing too crazy.

    And I'd also like the AI factions to evolve. If you can make cultural evolution happen in this game, I believe I would literally cry with joy.

    Kenny Works:

    Try recruiting a Roman legion with in 609 AUC and sending them against a equally large unit of Gauls or Boii with three or four "champion" units with silver armor and weapon/experience bonuses. Your units can have none. Watch what happens.
    Why would anyone do that?

    My point exactly. I think the game is balanced enough as it is.

    I really don't think RSII needs to be made any "harder." At some point it will end up being like playing KoJ in Broken Crescent - a mod I love but that creates a terribly frustrating game experience. And there are similar mods out there that just make game unbearably hard or, equally bad, incredibly time consuming. A single game turn lasting four hours??!! Who has time for that?
    Well, I think any such changes should be fairly minor. And I'm not claiming you should take inexperienced, unarmored units (or "poorly supplied" ones as I think of it) and fight them against stacks of experienced/armored elites.

    However, we could (and I think should) adjust AI stats in accordance with the better Roman stats after the reforms. We cannot make new types of units, since we've hit the limit. Hence, an additional point of experience, or another point or two in attack/armor/whatever, is possible, could be a minor change, and it satisfies the need for having a legitimate reason to go through with the reforms. There is not currently much of a point. There ought to be a point to doing it, besides a (perfectly understandable) desire to see fancy names and numbers on the things we're calling "legions" -- that is a superficial reason, and does not in any way reflect why the Romans historically went through the reforms. (They also didn't go through with it because some obscure town in Sicily became very big.) So there is good reason to change the mechanism by which the reforms happen, whatever that change may be. The slightly increased stats for the Romans is hardly justified by their increased costs. And it can't be explained that it is so unreasonably hard prior to this, for any player who managed to get at least many decades into the game in order to trigger the reforms. Anyway, a fairly small increase in AI stats was all I was proposing: it would make the end-game (as judged by unit stats) approximately as hard as the beginning currently is, not make the beginning harder. Nor would it be done just on a whim, to make things harder for the sake of making them harder: the reforms actually happened, and the attempt is to simulate something about them.

  2. #42

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    A note on the reforms.....

    The 'Marian Reforms' happened because the Roman 'Empire' had grown large enough so that not only were standing armies now needed, but also the need to have garrisoned places further afield. Neither of these things would have been popular, not even practicable, with the need to release the 'plebeian' farmers back their fields. In the game we never do that anyway. The only way it could be replicated would be in a game perhaps with a 2 week turn (like Napoleon), where the troops would begin to rebel if they were used outside the normal campaign/crop seasons.

    The Marian Reforms in game, therefore, more represent the transition from the standard Consular Army triple-acies Hastati/Principes/Triarii scenario to the Cohort being the operational and tactical unit and the rise of the 'more permanent' legions.

    The Augustan Reforms, however, are more positive and represent the need to re-organise the Empire in its Imperial guise; establishing the long-term professional legions and instituting the regular auxilia for the first time.

    The historical reasons for the different reforms are very difficult to represent 'accurately' for lots of 'play' reasons. A player doesn't disband his armies at the end of the campaign season - and indeed it is not really possible to replicate the manipular system either (even if we knew exactly what it was in the first place!). Neither really is there any reason that a Principes is any different to a Caesarian legionnaire or one of the Imperial age. They were pretty much armed, armoured and trained the same throughout.
    "RTW/RS VH campaign difficulty is bugged out (CA bug that never got fixed) and thus easier than Hard so play on that instead" - apple

    RSII 2.5/2.6 Tester and pesky irritant to the Team. Mucho praise for long suffering dvk'.

  3. #43
    bobbyr's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    418

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by ur-Lord Tedric View Post
    A note on the reforms.....

    The 'Marian Reforms' happened because the Roman 'Empire' had grown large enough so that not only were standing armies now needed, but also the need to have garrisoned places further afield. Neither of these things would have been popular, not even practicable, with the need to release the 'plebeian' farmers back their fields. In the game we never do that anyway. The only way it could be replicated would be in a game perhaps with a 2 week turn (like Napoleon), where the troops would begin to rebel if they were used outside the normal campaign/crop seasons.

    The Marian Reforms in game, therefore, more represent the transition from the standard Consular Army triple-acies Hastati/Principes/Triarii scenario to the Cohort being the operational and tactical unit and the rise of the 'more permanent' legions.

    The Augustan Reforms, however, are more positive and represent the need to re-organise the Empire in its Imperial guise; establishing the long-term professional legions and instituting the regular auxilia for the first time.

    The historical reasons for the different reforms are very difficult to represent 'accurately' for lots of 'play' reasons. A player doesn't disband his armies at the end of the campaign season - and indeed it is not really possible to replicate the manipular system either (even if we knew exactly what it was in the first place!). Neither really is there any reason that a Principes is any different to a Caesarian legionnaire or one of the Imperial age. They were pretty much armed, armoured and trained the same throughout.

    I agree on the difficulty to represent the reforms in-game.

    I do however disband non-named Legions after campaigning, especially in the 'Camillan' and 'Polybian' eras. It just adds realism to the game and the armour- and weapon upgrades pretty much kind of simulate the experience factor. So when I disband my Polybian legion which gained like 2-3 chevrons of experience during a campaign in Illyria for example, I don't start off worse for the next campaign (after disbanding the legions to simulate the Plebs going back to their 'normal' life), because I get Hastati, Principes etc with arnour and shield upgrades for the next campaign, which all but compensates the zero chevrons in experience for the newly 'recruited' Legions.

    During the Imperial age (Augustus and further) I obviously don't disband the Legions (they were in fact standing and professional armies). I just replace diminished cohorts with new recruits (like it happened in reality).

    I don't agree with your statement on Principes, Caesarian and Imperial legionarries though.
    It is true, that Polybian Principes and Caesarian Legionarries looked kind of similar, but the Post-Marian Milites were professional soldiers and better trained and slightly better equipped. The Imperial legionarries were even better equipped and trained.



    vs



    vs




    There are visible differences and the difference in training was even bigger




  4. #44

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by bobbyr View Post
    ...............

    I don't agree with your statement on Principes, Caesarian and Imperial legionarries though.
    It is true, that Polybian Principes and Caesarian Legionarries looked kind of similar, but the Post-Marian Milites were professional soldiers and better trained and slightly better equipped. The Imperial legionarries were even better equipped and trained............

    There are visible differences and the difference in training was even bigger
    That's fine - many people are wedded to the idea that progress and change 'have' to be better.

    The 'Principes' was a trained and experienced soldier where martial training was ingrained from an early age, practiced and then used a lot over many campaign seasons. More, the farmer milite was fighting for his own lands and 'country'.

    The post-Marian legions were recruited from people for whom the army and, more perhaps, the General they fought for, became the centre of their being. Fully professional troops they became very experienced, although legions seemed to get smaller over time as losses mounted and were often not kept up to strength. Very experienced they were the equal of what went before.

    The Imperial legions were fully professional standing armies and both trained constantly and occasionally, but for some less so, indulged in campaigns. All in all I would rate them all pretty much the same. Where are the training and experience differences?

    And then - nice pictures - what are these great visual differences? Each legionnaire has: a body-covering set of armour (less, in fact for the segmentata, which was aimed at combating heavier close-combat weapons, but was heavier per area of coverage; as opposed to the greater coverage of the hamata mail-coat, which remained the armour of preference in the Eastern empire long after segmentata came in, probably because of the greater coverage and therefore the efficacy against arrows (and other ranged weapons); a good helmet; a shield of roughly similar proportions throughout (4ft x 2.5ft); a stabbing sword; and heavy javelin (and also spears) as well as access to lighter ones.

    Where exactly are the gross differences?

    The Roman army solder of the 3rd Century BC was so good, that he pretty much remained unchanged for probably the next 600-700 years and lots of others copied him (until they themselves were subsumed). Please argue differently, but I'll happily defend the great similarities over the tiny variations.

    For us? Recruit a soldier, give him weapons and gain experience. Be 'realistic' - never take 'cohorts' back to be retrained, only ever recruit new units and send them forward and merge them to bring the existing ones to full strength. What would be wonderful is if units left in quiet garrisons actually lost experience, but hey, it's a game and there's lots of experience available.......
    "RTW/RS VH campaign difficulty is bugged out (CA bug that never got fixed) and thus easier than Hard so play on that instead" - apple

    RSII 2.5/2.6 Tester and pesky irritant to the Team. Mucho praise for long suffering dvk'.

  5. #45

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Now loosing experience if the army is just sitting around and not doing much would be great!

    For the Greeks/Hellens esp the Seleucid's a rebellion depending on (1) how far you expanded your empire, (2) whether you allowed your cities to become a Satrapy's and what traits the local governor gets (3) at the death of the faction leader and if the sons don't have the same qualities as their father. If its possible that would trigger a situation similar to what Antinochus III faced when he was made king.

  6. #46
    dvk901's Avatar Consummatum est
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,984

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by ur-Lord Tedric View Post
    That's fine - many people are wedded to the idea that progress and change 'have' to be better.

    The 'Principes' was a trained and experienced soldier where martial training was ingrained from an early age, practiced and then used a lot over many campaign seasons. More, the farmer milite was fighting for his own lands and 'country'.

    The post-Marian legions were recruited from people for whom the army and, more perhaps, the General they fought for, became the centre of their being. Fully professional troops they became very experienced, although legions seemed to get smaller over time as losses mounted and were often not kept up to strength. Very experienced they were the equal of what went before.

    The Imperial legions were fully professional standing armies and both trained constantly and occasionally, but for some less so, indulged in campaigns. All in all I would rate them all pretty much the same. Where are the training and experience differences?

    And then - nice pictures - what are these great visual differences? Each legionnaire has: a body-covering set of armour (less, in fact for the segmentata, which was aimed at combating heavier close-combat weapons, but was heavier per area of coverage; as opposed to the greater coverage of the hamata mail-coat, which remained the armour of preference in the Eastern empire long after segmentata came in, probably because of the greater coverage and therefore the efficacy against arrows (and other ranged weapons); a good helmet; a shield of roughly similar proportions throughout (4ft x 2.5ft); a stabbing sword; and heavy javelin (and also spears) as well as access to lighter ones.

    Where exactly are the gross differences?

    The Roman army solder of the 3rd Century BC was so good, that he pretty much remained unchanged for probably the next 600-700 years and lots of others copied him (until they themselves were subsumed). Please argue differently, but I'll happily defend the great similarities over the tiny variations.

    For us? Recruit a soldier, give him weapons and gain experience. Be 'realistic' - never take 'cohorts' back to be retrained, only ever recruit new units and send them forward and merge them to bring the existing ones to full strength. What would be wonderful is if units left in quiet garrisons actually lost experience, but hey, it's a game and there's lots of experience available.......
    I would have to agree here, simply because of the times we are talking about, and the people we are discussing. The Romans, as well as other cultures of this time, were a very militaristic people. Boys in the Republican era were trained from a very young age to use weapons proficiently, and to fight well in order to survive. Survival of your own carcass, and of the state being rather important issues. But after the Marian Reforms, when any Roman citizen could be a Legionary, the men who joined the Legions were trained and tutored in basically the same skills as their earlier counterparts. There may have well been a difference in WHEN they were trained, and by whom, but nevertheless, each expression of a 'legionary' was trained in one way or another. Did that make a Republican legionary better than an Imperial one? I don't think so. But.....

    The differences between units ranging from the so-called 'Polybian Legions' to the later 'Imperial Legions' was not just a matter of training, nor weapons, nor armor. They were also a matter of tactical progression and hardened military doctrine. Legion Generals became 'Legion Generals', not civilian Senators and Consuls who were gifted with command because of reputation, wealth, or a vote. Military tactics and the ways to handle an army were written down and taught, and the experiences of other Generals added to the 'database' of information that constantly allowed the Roman military to learn, adapt and borrow weapons or tactics. This, IMHO, is why the Legions should in some small way be better as they progress.

    In RTW, there is no way to give expression to this learning curve that takes one Republican man and one Imperial man and makes the latter 'better'. He simply IS better because he is commanded better (for the most part), and schooled better in a professional military atmosphere. So to portray this, the only way to do it is with a small increase in stats.....a bit more defense, a little more attack, etc. Not because he is a genetically superior man to his forefathers, but because he's fighting in a superior atmosphere.

    Creator of: "Ecce, Roma Surrectum....Behold, Rome Arises!"
    R.I.P. My Beloved Father

  7. #47

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by dvk901 View Post
    .................... He simply IS better because he is commanded better (for the most part), and schooled better in a professional military atmosphere. So to portray this, the only way to do it is with a small increase in stats.....a bit more defense, a little more attack, etc. Not because he is a genetically superior man to his forefathers, but because he's fighting in a superior atmosphere.
    An interesting argument - I'm not sure I entirely agree with it, but it's a good one. You know me, I'd much rather the player represented the 'Legion General' and learned the best strategy, operational and tactical approaches, than strove to change-up to 'better' troops. I would point out that we already have the ability to get initial experience (which affects those base stats) from buildings.

    If there were more 'variation' in stats to make choices, then that would be even better.... The Early are worse for armour, but better for morale - the post-Marian are the middle ground - the Imperial get the perfected pila, but less range - the manica-equipped get increased armour, lower range on pila (or none) and are much quicker to tire/slower.....

    Now, if only there were a way to have different armour effects dependent on the weapon......well, if only.....
    "RTW/RS VH campaign difficulty is bugged out (CA bug that never got fixed) and thus easier than Hard so play on that instead" - apple

    RSII 2.5/2.6 Tester and pesky irritant to the Team. Mucho praise for long suffering dvk'.

  8. #48

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Back in 2.5 the Weapons Metal Import was needed to upgrade/build the blacksmith tree for regions that did not have them as natural resource; in 2.6. its not a requirement, nor does it give another chevron experience, it just provides a small trade bonus. Perhaps the whole building tree could be freed for another use?
    Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana...

  9. #49
    High Fist's Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    2,967

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by Iskandar View Post
    Back in 2.5 the Weapons Metal Import was needed to upgrade/build the blacksmith tree for regions that did not have them as natural resource; in 2.6. its not a requirement, nor does it give another chevron experience, it just provides a small trade bonus. Perhaps the whole building tree could be freed for another use?
    It's still needed. I still need it anyways.
    The only self-discipline you need is to finish your sandwiches

  10. #50
    dvk901's Avatar Consummatum est
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    20,984

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by Iskandar View Post
    Back in 2.5 the Weapons Metal Import was needed to upgrade/build the blacksmith tree for regions that did not have them as natural resource; in 2.6. its not a requirement, nor does it give another chevron experience, it just provides a small trade bonus. Perhaps the whole building tree could be freed for another use?
    It is likely that that building, as well as the functionality of the blacksmith tree will be changed. I have been working on ways to split some buildings into a 'commercial use' vs a 'military use' in order to prevent the AI from building all your stuff for you.

    Creator of: "Ecce, Roma Surrectum....Behold, Rome Arises!"
    R.I.P. My Beloved Father

  11. #51

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by ur-Lord Tedric View Post

    Now, if only there were a way to have different armour effects dependent on the weapon......well, if only.....
    Not quite sure what you mean here.


    Under patronage of Spirit of Rob; Patron of Century X, Pacco, Cherryfunk, Leif Erikson.

  12. #52

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by tone View Post
    Not quite sure what you mean here.
    In it's simplest guise....

    - the hamata mail coat covered a larger area than the segmentata cuirass. Whilst the segmentata was introduced in the West, so it seems, it also appears that the hamata remained the armour of choice in the East. The likely reason is that the stiffer and more impact-protective segmentata was introduced to counter the heavy slashing weapons (axes, falcata, early rhomphaia and the like, let alone serious clubs) of the mostly Germanic tribes by that time, where mail still allowed the force of the blow to get through; whilst in the East the major prevalent threat was from arrows, which not only was the mail just as good at countering, but covered a greater area

    - in RTW, et al, all we have is a single armour stat - whereas to replicate the above we could probably better have '2': one that was used for close-quarter melée weapons and the other vs ranged weapons.

    - now, it might be possible to play with some of the other stats in combination, but given that melée defence is impacted by experience, it's not as suitable.

    It's just a simple limitation. If you want a more modern analogy - spaced armour on tanks, anti-HEAT skirts and even recent bar-armour and netting are all great against their threats (cf mail vs arrows); but they're bugger all use against kinetic rounds (cf slashing & bludgeoning weapons vs nice thick armour!).
    "RTW/RS VH campaign difficulty is bugged out (CA bug that never got fixed) and thus easier than Hard so play on that instead" - apple

    RSII 2.5/2.6 Tester and pesky irritant to the Team. Mucho praise for long suffering dvk'.

  13. #53
    SD_Man's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    416

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by ur-Lord Tedric View Post
    In it's simplest guise....

    - the hamata mail coat covered a larger area than the segmentata cuirass. Whilst the segmentata was introduced in the West, so it seems, it also appears that the hamata remained the armour of choice in the East. The likely reason is that the stiffer and more impact-protective segmentata was introduced to counter the heavy slashing weapons (axes, falcata, early rhomphaia and the like, let alone serious clubs) of the mostly Germanic tribes by that time, where mail still allowed the force of the blow to get through; whilst in the East the major prevalent threat was from arrows, which not only was the mail just as good at countering, but covered a greater area

    - in RTW, et al, all we have is a single armour stat - whereas to replicate the above we could probably better have '2': one that was used for close-quarter melée weapons and the other vs ranged weapons.

    - now, it might be possible to play with some of the other stats in combination, but given that melée defence is impacted by experience, it's not as suitable.

    It's just a simple limitation. If you want a more modern analogy - spaced armour on tanks, anti-HEAT skirts and even recent bar-armour and netting are all great against their threats (cf mail vs arrows); but they're bugger all use against kinetic rounds (cf slashing & bludgeoning weapons vs nice thick armour!).
    Segmenta vs falx? No methinks you are mistaken, its the other way around . IIRC the heavy segmenta was ditched in favor for the lighter hamata (and squamata) during the Dacia wars, the stacked segmenta most definitely had better protection against arrows though.
    Last edited by SD_Man; November 02, 2013 at 07:25 PM.

  14. #54

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    With all the hub-bub and controversy over Rome2...some loving it, and some not so much, I think it's necessary (at least for me) to do some thinking about the future of RS2. A lot of people have praised it and shown support for it....so here's an opportunity to voice ideas, likes, dislikes....and in short, provide some ideas for me to make it even better. I can't offer sea battles, or anything that RTW just can't do, but there are things that can be done to some extent, and are at least worth a try.
    Hi, I hate Rome 2 , the battlefield could be something out of 'Star Wars' or 'Startrek' with the laser beam trajectory effects, so any ideas you have for the future of RS I am sure would be sound. If I could stick my 'two pennies' worth in', I like some of the ideas from EB and RTR, from EB I like the idea of the senate awarding a successful general a 'triumph', where he has to return to Rome to celebrate the 'triumph'. Then from RTR, I like the emphasis on the 'cursus honorus', which I believe gives the game a 'depth', I found myself paying more attention to the various families and their progress up the political ladder, personally I think it needs tinkering with, but I love the concept, I'd like to know your take on it. Apart from that, I love the mod, and think it is the best one going. Thanks for all your great work thus far and look forward to your future ideas.

  15. #55

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Quote Originally Posted by SD_Man View Post
    Segmenta vs falx? No methinks you are mistaken, its the other way around . IIRC the heavy segmenta was ditched in favor for the lighter hamata (and squamata) during the Dacia wars, the stacked segmenta most definitely had better protection against arrows though.
    Methinks I am not.....

    Here is a reasonable picture of a manica-armoured legionary from the Trajanic Dacian wars (actually just after our period) - no hamata in sight:


    Segmentata is just as good against arrows as hamata is - but it covers less area and is thus less 'effective' overall.
    "RTW/RS VH campaign difficulty is bugged out (CA bug that never got fixed) and thus easier than Hard so play on that instead" - apple

    RSII 2.5/2.6 Tester and pesky irritant to the Team. Mucho praise for long suffering dvk'.

  16. #56
    SD_Man's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    416

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Never knew Trajan had a Nikon 2005 to take those pics

    Joking aside, Ive come to learn that the hamata was indeed more effective against arrows but heres a source that reinforces my argument about the adaptations made during the Trajan-Dacian Wars:

    "Marcus Cornelius Fronto described the large gaping wounds that a falx inflicted, and experiments have shown that a blow from a falx easily penetrated the Romans' lorica segmentata, incapacitating the majority of victims. These experiments also show that the falx was most efficient when targeting the head, shoulder, leg and especially the right (sword) arm, which was generally exposed. A legionary who had lost the use of his right arm became a serious liability to his unit in battle.The time of the conquest of Dacia by Trajan is the only known instance of the Roman army adapting personal equipment while on campaign, and it seems likely that this was a response to this deadly weapon. Roman legionaries had transverse reinforcing iron straps applied to their helmets - it is clear that these are late modifications because they are roughly applied across existing embossed decoration. The legions also reintroduced the wearing of lorica hamata and lorica squamata for the Dacia campaign as both were more flexible than the newer segmentata armour and were able to distribute damage more widely. In addition, both these older armour styles had unique modifications, a row of pteruges was added to the sleeves, a double row of pteruges was added to the skirt and a heavily padded vestment was worn underneath them. Roman armour of the time left limbs unprotected; Trajan introduced the use of greaves and an arm protector (manica) for the right arm, which had previously been used only by gladiators, and which was never used again by soldiers once the Dacia campaign concluded."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falx

    The more flexible and lighter hamata meant that the Romans could better adapt themselves against the armour-piercing falx, the hamata's extra coverage also aided in their fight whereas the heavier segmenta only made the fighting more brutal.
    Last edited by SD_Man; November 05, 2013 at 01:24 PM.

  17. #57

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    There were indeed a whole number of things tried to 'up-armour' the legionaires for the Dacian wars - and in fact we really have no idea on exactly what, how much, or how many. There are a number of different references and even some illustrations.

    Hamata and squamata, both being lighter per area covered were tried. All to see if the skilfully wielded falx could be countered. I would always refer to primary sources and never rely on dear old wiki......
    "RTW/RS VH campaign difficulty is bugged out (CA bug that never got fixed) and thus easier than Hard so play on that instead" - apple

    RSII 2.5/2.6 Tester and pesky irritant to the Team. Mucho praise for long suffering dvk'.

  18. #58
    SD_Man's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    416

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Well Trajan's column is enough primary source (if that's what it can be called) as no segmenta armour appears in any of the illustrations, hinting that it was abandoned during his later campaigns. And dont hate on wikipedia, it has been proven time and again to be a reliable source, it really irks me when people do this.

    Plus lets just agree that the main (obvious) factor in winning the war was increased troop morale caused by Roman propaganda, otherwise they would have just scurried back across the bridge.

    EDIT: This also got me thinking, maybe there can be a special Roman "Yellow Journalism" building that can be added to the game. You know to add the effects of propaganda that must have been rampant for all those senseless wars to gain any weight.
    Last edited by SD_Man; November 06, 2013 at 04:02 PM.

  19. #59
    craziii's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    4,247

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    I am also seeking and hoping for someone who can help or figure out either WHY all the buildings in a settlement can't be seen in the normal Strat UI...OR....find a way that the 'destroy buildings' button in the building browser could be activated so that they could be destroyed there. You can see the buildings there, but you can't get rid of them if you wanted. The button is just always disabled. Frustrating, and I'd love to fix this.
    this is very annoying bug that has always been there. I always assumed it was hardcoded? with culture penalties, I wish the game allow us to completely change or destroy those buildings. one of the things that rome 2 did right was allowing buildings to be converted.
    fear is helluva drug
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    “The only rule that ever made sense to me I learned from a history, not an economics, professor at Wharton. "Fear," he used to say, "fear is the most valuable commodity in the universe." That blew me away. "Turn on the TV," he'd say. "What are you seeing? People selling their products? No. People selling the fear of you having to live without their products." freakin' A, was he right. Fear of aging, fear of loneliness, fear of poverty, fear of failure. Fear is the most basic emotion we have. Fear is primal. Fear sells.” WWZ

    Have you had your daily dose of fear yet? craziii
    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  20. #60
    tungri_centurio's Avatar Senator
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    belgium/flanders/tungria
    Posts
    1,177

    Default Re: RS2's Future and Mod Ideas:

    Is IT possible in the future to change the cultural and economic building,to the one of your culture.i find it oddto have a barbaric culture building in a roman large city,maybe link it to the annex,client state or citizenship buildings. Maybe only change when you Grant citizenship to that city?
    Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth. -Marcus Aurelius

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •