Rome II Total Realism : Previews

[LestaT]

We are currently on a newer build, just waiting for few 2d arts to be completed before uploading the updates.

New version contains:

- certain stats rebalance for Celtic and Germanic infantry
- added first strike to spears simulating momentum for the first strike
- cavalry abilities changed
- small tweaks to campaign AI
- small adjustments to difficulty levels
- some correction on startpos
- few more undocumented .loc changes

* the update will be save game compatible, though obviously any changes to startpos will only be effective with new started campaign.

[radioheads]

Great work guys!

I've got a couple of questions though:

- What happened with phalanx formation for hoplites? It seems to be gone, if so -- why?

- I can't see combat animations, were they removed completely? That makes sense, if true, because they animations were preventing other soldiers from killing soldiers from behind, but they're looking nice though

- for some reason hoplites' shields give less melee defense than scutum, which seems strange to me. I might be wrong though.

So far I've been through some test custom battles and I'm liking the direction of this mod.

Keep it up guys!

[JaM]

- Hoplites are in "Phalanx" by default. no need to enable it. This way, Hoplites can charge while in formation, and actually be effective with it, which was not possible with any of additional formations in R2.

- Matched combat animation probability was reduced down, and disabled for any disciplined unit. THis results in combat more resembling fight of two units than individual duel in arena

- Aspis is used differently than Scutum. It is strapped on arm, therefore it is more like additional layer of armor that is fixed from one direction, especially with shields locked. Having it strapped to arm means it cannot be used in active way. Yet, if you look more closely, Aspis adds +20 to unit armor, while Scutum doesnt. Scutum thanks to central grip was supposed to be used actively during combat, it was not supposed to be locked in solid wall (it was not possible to lock it due to its shape)

long story short, Scutum has more shield defense, but no shield armor. Aspis has reduced shield defense, but adds armor to the picture.

Whole system was created to properly differentiate between different combat tactics used. For example, Cavalry shields are all made passive, (even those with central grip) due to the way how they were used on horseback, there was just no space trying to bash enemy with it etc..

[JaM]

in last few versions we are using a bit different javelin use. As you all know, Roman legionaries were told to use 2 javelins, one heavy and one light. Anyway, most of the time, they carried only one into combat, as there would be no time to use both. Due to the way how CA made the animations for heavy infantry, and the fact its not possible to use javelins from defending positions by default, we gave them ability to do so. Anyway, instead of giving them 2 javelins, which would make them quite hard to charge the enemy automatically as they only do this once all javelins are thrown, they only carry one javelin..

But, because of that single javelin, we actually gave player ability to chose which javelin he wants to use - Heavy Pilum for extended penetration and damage, but shorter range, OR Light Pilum, with longer range, but lower damage and penetration. If we kept 2 javelins, it would be a bit strange because you would be able to throw 2 heavy or 2 light, but this way, it is much closer to reality, where soldiers really used just one javelin. (besides, we plan to use special defensive ability for them, where they would use second one as melee weapon, but that is still WIP/being planned).

All Pila are set to be capable of defensive throws, yet to at least slightly simulate the Roman charge, actual throw rate is greatly increased, so unit will expend all javelin very shortly, which practically means,in attack, you can release all javelins at enemy, and then charge them with swords. Having light Pilum might come in handy in situation you need to counter some skirmishers at slightly longer range, after all, light pilum is still overkill against light troops. But if you face heavy infantry, choice is clear. Heavy pilum can deal a lot of damage and soften up the enemy before contact (all javelins at hit, reduce shield defense, decrease morale, rate of fire and speed of enemy unit)


Next big change happened to Skirmishers. Right now, we have 2 different groups of them. Light skirmishers are fast,capable of ranged combat, but very weak in close combat. Then we have Heavier skirmishers like Peltasts, who are a bit slower, but can actually hold ground if needed.
In last update, we have reworked heavy skirmishers a bit, and created a class within a class. All heavy skirmishers are now a little bit better at melee, but also a bit worse at ranged work. Plus, to this category we have also included Greek Thureophoroi, who were practically hybrid unit capable both skirmishing and melee combat. Thureophoroi are armed with spear, and carry limited amount of javelins (3), yet they are still melee infantry and therefore wont retreat. They got option to use loose order, in case you want to use them as skirmishers..
Similarly, certain changes were done to Celtic Skirmishers and Germanic Youths. Both units instead of swords/daggers (spear was most common weapon of Germans and Celts) received 4 heavy javelins, out of which one is never thrown but used as melee weapon, which practically makes them another hybrid skirmisher/melee unit. Overall, both Germans and Celts thanks to this received unit that can be quite dangerous in broken terrain where their spears would give them advantage over cavalry... sending cavalry unit into scrub or forest where these units are, would be practically a suicide..

Another unit in this class is Iberian Caetrati. These were considered probably the best skirmishers in the ancient world, and they are made like that. They received falcata's and caetra shield, are decent in melee but very good with ranged attack. Caetrati were mentioned as very dangerous, and in Iberian peninsula represented quite a big problem for Roman Velites. They are lightly armored and therefore very fast, which might be quite effective in broken terrain placing ambushes.

Last unit i would like to mention is Auxilia Infantry. Roman Velites practically disappeared with Marian Reforms, yet Roman army had increased need for light infantry units who could provide skirmishing duties. To keep Marian reforms intact, and actually replace all units, we have decided to rework Auxilia into hybrid skirmisher/spearmen unit, similar to Thureophoroi. as in vanilla, they will carry thureos, spear, but also 3 light javelins. They will keep the heavy mail, which means they will be heavily armored, but due to armor they will also be the slowest of all skirmisher units. Yet, same as Thureophoroi, they will be able to use open order, to skirmish with enemy, or provide support against enemy cavalry in case its needed. Best part is, Velites will be upgradeable into Auxilia infantry with Marian Reforms. (technically Velites were disbanded, and joined Legionaries, but due to game mechanics we decided to go with this upgrade to give Late Roman army some skirmishing unit (even though not clean class skirmishers)

[Timhawk]

Best part is, Velites will be upgradeable into Auxilia infantry with Marian Reforms. (technically Velites were disbanded, and joined Legionaries, but due to game mechanics we decided to go with this upgrade to give Late Roman army some skirmishing unit (even though not clean class skirmishers)

damn sorry to focus on that one bit, but it doesn't make sense to me. Velites were still very much citizens. So the idea that I as a player would strip them of their citizens rights and enroll them in some non citizen auxilia regiment just doesn't seem right. If anything, I'd say it'd make more sense to allow the players to convert/upgrade his velites units into regular legionary units. That's afterall one of the pillar of the various reforms around Marious' time.

However, I do like the idea of a thureophoroi-style unit. In most roman army of that time, they were legionaries fighting in that style. Their actual name or organisation is quite the debate but I think you have the idea of it just right !

Anyway, best of luck to get your mod all the way to 1.0 !

[JaM]

I know technically all men would end up being Legionaries, not Auxilia.. problem is, if I do that, your pre-Marian Legion of hastati, principes, Triarii and velites, would be composed of way too many units of Legionaries.. My intention was to keep the Cohort organization structure, which means, if you had 10 cohorts of hastati,principes and triarii (4,4,2) and 2 units of velites, you would end up with legion of 12 cohorts...

Other option was to replace Auxilia infantry unit with Antesignani, problem is that Antesignani were usually ad-hoc unit formed out of most nimble men of legion, who took over skirmish duty if such was required.. they were temporary battlefield improvisation.. so not really a replacement for Velites... (anyway, it is quite probable we will go this way in the future)


Whole reason for having Auxilia Infantry to replace Velites was more of an attempt to make Velites obsolete and removed, than to actually upgrade them into Auxilia...

[AnthoniusII]

There are two articles about ancient Greek archery (including archery of Greeks of Olvia/Bosporian Greeks) by Koryvantes.
Make a search and you will find new infos about this matter.

[wrcromartie]

Loving this preview

[Summary]

Remember to equip Spartan hoplites with their custom sword, the Spartan Lakonian Short Sword. Like the Roman Gladius this is also a thrusting sword. Spartans did not use the Kopis like traditional Greek hoplites, as always they are trying to be braver than their competitors so opted for a shorter sword that guaranteed they had to fight up closer!

But I like the classification of the weapon types. This mod certainly looks very promising!

[JaM]

at some point in time, we will add more models, yet right now we are limiting ourselves on things that are already in game (weapon models). Rome 2 is still in full development by CA, therefore we don't want to be in situation, that we will have to rework whole mod after every patch they release..

once patching is done, true Rome 2 modding will start

[AnthoniusII]

True the game must come to a patch end before any overhuals will have any chanches of success!

[JaM]

Small heads-up - weapon system will be slightly overhauled in next version, there are few things that got changed with some patches, that are no longer work they were before,so i will need to adjust these bonuses directly via unit stats. Also, im working hard on new unit costs and upkeep, based on wider range of variables, which will have quite a impact even on campaign play. These changes will take some time, plus we will face another wave of CA DLCs and patches in nearest future which will slow things down a bit..

[Fudoshin]

Slashing swords as you all know required a lot of strength to deliver lethal damage, typical sword slash produced a lot of kinetic energy, which means that even if armor managed to deflect/stop such hit, there will be still noticeable blunt force trauma dealt with every hit. As noticed thorough our history by many, slashing and cutting was not considered as the most lethal type of attack, and it was definitely not the most effective one considering amount of energy soldier hadto spend to kill his enemy. This reflects into only moderate normal damage dealt by all slashing weapons. From tactical perspective, longswords due to its length would provide soldiers with a bit more standoff against their opponents using the shorter swords, therefore these swords would also guarantee small defense bonus.

Swords like Kopis/Falcata are also treated as slashing, yet they deal a bit more normal damage due to their shape, they also deal less trauma damage due to less weight. Also, their length (65cm) means they get minimal defense bonus.

Thrusting swords are completely different. Thrusting attack is the most lethal type of attack you can do to human body, and you don't even need too much strength to stab deep enough to be very lethal. Thrusting attacks are very efficient, no surprise Romans preferred them over slashing attacks. Yet, because these swords were usually thrusted underarm, their kinetic energy was relatively low (approximately half what is seen with slashing swords), therefore they don't produce significant blunt force trauma. (you need about 100 joules to fracture bones). Anyway because of their speed and energy effectivity, they are able to land several attacks in time soldier with longsword would score one hit. yet, they have to rely on their shields for defense, as shortswords don't provide that much of a defense bonus (even though difference is not big, as Gladius used by Republican Legions was not that much shorter from Celtic Longsword (75cm vs 85cm). Yet, there is another advantage shorter thrusting gladius have. It was much easier to manipulate with it even in confined space, where legionaries could use it to thrust into unprotected areas like armpit, femoral artery, groins etc. because of this, all thrusting shortswords get special melee defense bypass (enemy melee defense is reduced against them) which gives Romans advantage when fighting unarmored enemies.

Some feedback from a martial arts practitioner with actual test-cutting and experience in Katori Shito Ryu (Kenjutsu), Kendo (Japanese Fencing), HEMA (Historical European Martial Arts), Iaido (Draw-Cutting Kata) and Battojutsu (Art of Cutting).

You seem to overestimate by those words the power needed to cut. Edge alignment and speed are more important factors than sheer power ; indeed increasing the strenght is linear, meaning that if you put twice as much strength, you'll get twice as much power. However, speed is exponential, therefore 2x as much speed increases the power four times.

Cutting might not be considered the most lethal of attacks, yet it has a great use, covering a full arc in one swing, ; swinging can be used defensively (kiriotoshi/uchiotoshi) or offensively. Furthermore, it is safer for the attacker. Trusts are more likely to get one's blade struck, and cause more mutual hits, and after-blows (thought afterblows are not that important since I assume someone who took a sword trough his body would have a hard time keeping proper edge alignment).

You seem to over-favor trusts over trusts. Yet, if they were that much better than cuts, no one would use cutting weapons. Both need to have at least similar proficiency if they were used one alongside the other for so long in most sidearms.

Pikes are a bit different from this. They do share certain characteristics, anyway due to the way how pikes are implemented (sharing stats with swords) we had to improvise. Pikes only get their real bonuses with Pike Wall ability activated, if it is not activated, soldiers are supposed to use swords and their stats reflect that. Pike as it is, gives great standoff from enemy, and medium damage from thrusting (while both hands are used, thrusting speed is much slower, which results in only medium damage dealt by pike) Yet its strong point is not in killing everything in front of them, but by ability to fix the enemy so others could flank it and destroy it (more about this later)

Actually, I would argue from my combats against Naginata that spears are faster than swords. Let it be a trust, or a cut, the weapon does not truly affect the speed to a considerable degree. You naturally tend to compensate heavier weapons using more strength.

In fact, what matters the most for speed is range. Hitting is a spear is easy, and it's speed is as fast as you can move both your arms forward minus a tiny amour, basically the same as the trust of a sword. However, let's present a scenario.

Dude 1 : Armed with a spear fights
Dude 2 : Armed with a dagger

They start at an arbitrary distance of 3 units. The spear is 2 units long, the dagger only 1 unit (just as an example).

In most video-games the dude with the dagger would have a much faster weapon.
In fact, Dude 1 is faster for a good reason ;

Since they are 3 units away, but he has a reach of 2 units, he will only need to move 1 unit ; and then strike.
So the speed of the attack will be : 1 movement time & Trust

Dude 2 who always has a sad face is slower, for he will need to move two units then strike :
So the speed of the attack will be : 2 movement time & Trust

And since one of those dude's arm doesn't move faster than the others we can consider that trusts take a similar time. Therefore range is the important factor.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Don't forget that the spear-man can keep his point threateningly toward the dagger user ; keeping him at bay and preventing advance if he is skilled enough. He can also very easily faint, and strike to the upper body as easily as to the lower.

The person with the dagger will have a free arm that he can use to grab the shaft, or in grappling. This is much harder however, if dude 2 gets to grappling he'd have a major advantage thanks to his dagger ; thought it's highly unlikely.

Anyway, I hope this feedback was of some use. Keep up the good job !

[Fudoshin]

Apparently I can't edit, so let's correct some spelling mistakes that could cause misunderstandings :
"it's speed is as fast as you can move both your arms forward minus a tiny amount (not armor, amount caused by the weapon's inertia compensated by the strength used to strike)"

Also, you use a spear with two arms, giving you more leverage and more strength. Similarly, a two handed sword is faster than a one handed thanks to the leverage and extra strength. This does not matter as much in trusts.

I apologize in advance for the double-post .

[Draewn]

I think the thing they were going for is that the ability to cut through armored targets is very, very limited. Flesh is easy, but a couple layers of linen, let alone a bit of bronze, and you'll have a really rough time. That's true of thrusts also, of course, but especially cutting. Still, I think this project is very much frozen in carbonite, so I wouldn't expect a response from the team.

[JaM]

personally, i think whole armor/weapon situation is way too overestimated. Different things completely actually mattered, and while armor and weapons were giving some edge, it was tactical skill and discipline that made huge difference... passive protection was just that - PASIVE... it gave you chance to survive if you got hit, but more important was to not get hit in the first place...

[Eamonn]

Can I just say a thing about routing in this game. I understand town watch type units with no experience routing relatively quick. But if you have an good/elite unit with no experience, they are still going to fight just as hard as the same unit type with more experience, maybe even harder. History has shown us this time and time again. The airborne troops on D-Day, were given the best training but had no combat experience yet but fought like lions. (Didn't want to show themselves up). Fresh Waffen SS units took the most casualties just because they didn't want to fail and dishonor the unit. I''m sure good troops have always been like this and it just didn't start with World War 2.

[JaM]

in R2TR, there is no Elite unit with no experience... its contradictory - Elite unit that has no combat experience is just a bunch of overpriced showoffs in shiny armor, that know nothing about war... I'd rather not compare it to modern days, as warfare evolved over 2000 years, and we are no longer killing each other with swords, which is much more stressful than shooting at each other from distance.. yes, well trained units behave better, but 0 experience in R2TW simulates no training at all... usually, trained units get some experience when recruited.. also, you have ability for your general to give some experience to units (simulating drills such general could employ to the troops)..

[JaM]

To clarify further - it is not about cutting or thrusting vs body per say. But about ability to overcome armor. Slashing was least effective way how to penetrate armor, as was proven by scientific tests performed by historians investigating the subject (Dr Williams). All logic behind weapons is not made from duel perspective, but from actual "combat tactics of small units" perspective.. Of course for slashing speed has much more benefits, thing is, that no human is able to swing his sword for extended period of time in contact with enemy... after few minutes he would be tired down and his speed would be much slower.. while at the other side, thrusts with short sword were not that tiresome, while instead of using sword for defense to keep enemy away, Roman Legionaries used large Scutas for the same effect - they could keep enemy away just by their shield, while they could attack from cover anybody who got himself exposed.. for that thrusting was very effective, while at such distance those legionaries could simply drive the sword into any opening in enemy armor effectively bypassing it... plus, Gladius was ideal thrusting sword.. it was not some medieval blade, optimized for long strikes and slashes with very narrow tip, but actually opposite - gladius was relatively robust sword, with heavy tip, therefore any thrust into enemy body would create a huge blood cannal that would lead to immediate shock and possible death.. technically, gladius was extremely lethal weapon, which was superior to other swords ENERGICALLY - it didnt require a lot of stamina to deal lethal wounds... so even in prolonged fight, legionary could still deal deadly wounds to enemy, while enemy armed with long slashing sword would get more and more tired and less effective.

Regarding pikes - these cannot be compared to naginatas or spears... spear is relatively light, usually 1-1.5kg heavy, while pike was 4-6kg heavy... there is no way anybody would achieve comparable speed with a pike, as with a spear... of course using spear with both hands would be very effective, this is exactly how musket with a bayonet was used... but long pike was just too long and too heavy to be used as a fast thrusting weapon... instead, it was practically a mobile barrier that allowed Phalangites to keep enemy at bay... so cavalry could charge home and decide battle... Pike Phalanx was not capable defeating enemy on its own... there is not a single example in history, where Pike Phalanx would won on its own without cavalry dealing the decisive attack.


Anyway, whole weapon setup in R2TR was not really about weapons per say.. it was created to simulate unit tactics. Huge issue with R2TW was in the fact how it was made, as CA made the combat as if battles were just duels of men on a large field... which is typical Hollywood view, but that is far from reality... this is why R2TR unit design is much more about unit morale and experience than about hitpoints or attack/defense values... Goal was to give player tactical options lacking in vanilla game..

[bobbyr]

And boy you did!
It's the best combat system programmed to this very day imo.
Huge fan miss your combat system in every other mod I play, not to mention Vanilla