Rome should start with Polybian reforms!

[historian1789]

Epirus starts with thureos reforms and has a much better starting infanfry selection than Rome.
Ironically polybian era roman army is one on the main influences on thureos reform.
The problem is that most barbarian factions have either equal or even better starting infanfry selection than Rome,
Ilirya for example.
Camilan units, except cavarly, are likely obsolete by the time of the phyric war
Rome should start with some camilan era units, but should also have acess to polybian era infanfry immediatly like Epirus.
I Apologize for if I'm being rude!

[Hoplitus]

First of all, does Epirus really start with thureos reform? I'm not sure but I don't think so, however I might be wrong.

Whatever, I disagree on the topic. I like to see the evolution of Roman troops like it is now although it might not be 100% historically accurate. Rome already has a strong starting position with a wealthy province and mostly weak enemies surrounding her.

I think she could have this slight disadvantage in troop quality if it really is a disadvantage which I doubt too. Principes and Triarii are superior to most of Rome's enemies. Also it would mean cutting out a whole reform with lots of units which I think would be a pity.
Also you can easily change that by editing reforms which is the easiest thing to do. Just get PFM and set turn requirement and imperium level for Polybian reform to one and you'll have those units on the second turn of your campaign. So it can be seen as a matter of diversity.

All these agruments support the way it is now so we should keep it the way it is.

Last but not least I won't accept your apology, cause there is nothing to apologize for You brought up the topic in a sensible way unlike others. There is nothing wrong with that. We can always have a discussison this way just expect some people to disagree.

[historian1789]

thank you
P.S. I forgot to proof read the last sentence

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

thank you
P.S. I forgot to proof read the last sentence

Ι think you'll need 50 posts or something to be able to edit.

Cheers

[Ygraine]

You can edit the reforms-script and add Polybian reforms to turn 2 for the player/AI in your own game if you want.

Reforms.lua then you can test it by changing the first line on the screenshot where it says "roman" to {1, 1, x, x, x, x} (x being the other values for the other reforms).

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Rome is already one of the easiest factions and shouldn't be made even easier in the main mod

[Sonny WiFiHr]

And here we go again.
My last argument about this kind of topic is:
I like Early Hastati icon/card.
My true answer will be - I wan't to see early Romans. If date is wrong - so what.

[Kolaris8472]

It's not very accurate but I love seeing all the stages of Rome's military development in a single campaign.

[Dresden]

We fudge history a bit for gameplay reasons sometimes in the mod. We weigh both historical authenticity and gameplay (notice I didn't say historical accuracy, which I think is a different focus). This discussion was brought up in the other thread about Rome here http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...in-the-new-DeI (somewhere in there, not on the first page).

Epirus doesn't start with thureos yet, but they will when the hellenic overhaul hits. The idea there was to make them a bit more unique since there are so many hellenic factions sharing those reforms. Since Rome doesn't share reforms with anyone and has one of the more robust systems in the game with reforms, auxiliaries, etc, I tend toward enjoying a short Camillan time period at the start. My personal reasons for liking this are:
1.) It gives each campaign one of Rome's reform periods - GC Camillan, HatG/MW Polybian, CiG Marian, IA Imperial. Technically IA should start at Marian but we fudge that a bit too, so people can play with Imperial era units when they normally wouldn't be able to (and you can make the argument that many of the reforms of Caesar were already changing things a bit, but I digress)
2.) Its good for gameplay and fun to see the Roman army start at their roots and develop. It doesn't line up perfectly with the time period but the changes were still happening around that time and there is no proof specifically that it was all-or-nothing.
3.) Following that point, reforms represent a shift in tactics, gear, etc over a period of time. Due to technical reasons and the game mechanics itself, the reforms happen at a specific turn. But, the idea is that things have been changing toward that reform over the course of the campaign. So, the changes are happening while Rome is at the Camillan start but Polybian represents the finalization of those changes. The idea is that reforms represent a period of change that aren't an exact date, even if you look at the historical records.
4.) This is a terrible reason and I hate saying it, but its been this way forever in the mod. That is not a reason to keep anything I acknowledge. But, people are used to it this way, its setup already and works properly, and there are a whole tier of units tied to it. You can have Polybian activate earlier by changing the reforms yourself if you prefer that.

[rbt]

Something about Rome, are you going to little nerf that faction?

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

Something about Rome, are you going to little nerf that faction?

Ιn what area ??? It's the most complete faction of the game for a reason. They should be OP

[KAM 2150]

How and why would they be nerfed?

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

How and why would they be nerfed?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

[rbt]

I played few campaigns in 1.2 and Rome was powerful - that is good (finally), but sometimes I feel that faction is overpowered and it's almost unstoppable by another AI factions.

Second thing is diplomacy at all, even on normal difficulty is really hard to do trade partners, where peaces and alliances are even harder (imo just now to hard). Same for Rome, diplomacy with Rome is something that almost not exist.

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

I played few campaigns in 1.2 and Rome was powerful - that is good (finally), but sometimes I feel that faction is overpowered and it's almost unstoppable by another AI factions.

Second thing is diplomacy at all, even on normal difficulty is really hard to do trade partners, where peaces and alliances are even harder (imo just now to hard). Same for Rome, diplomacy with Rome is something that almost not exist.

For me Diplomacy works without issues. It's harder yes but logical most of the time...I'm quite experienced with diplomacy and 1.2 already though, so if you take your time you could get use to it as well.
Ι'll advise you to use the Softcore mod (maybe just for the first 50 turns) so you could expand a little and then remove it if you feel stronger.

[Sonny WiFiHr]

You send spy/diplomat/ship to make diplomacy. You encounter faction - go to diplomacy no matter how much they hate you you will have high chance to make trade.
Join war/Create war - spend money to make other faction join your course. Im in green with most factions playing as patricii. There is world war against Epirus and I gain for 600 gold 60 green points.

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

You send spy/diplomat/ship to make diplomacy. You encounter faction - go to diplomacy no matter how much they hate you you will have high chance to make trade.
Join war/Create war - spend money to make other faction join your course. Im in green with most factions playing as patricii. There is world war against Epirus and I gain for 600 gold 60 green points.

That's actually a glitch never fixed by C.A.

[Sonny WiFiHr]

Then join war - result is same 1800 gold for trade agreement

[Tenerife_Boy]

This is getting off topic...

[♔Greek Strategos♔]

This is getting off topic...

Only slightly

[Hoplitus]

This is getting off topic...

But the topic itself is kind of dealt with, isn't it?