Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 38

Thread: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

  1. #1
    Libertus
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Murica
    Posts
    73

    Default The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    I have always played Roma in my campaigns. I've genuinely tried to get into other campaigns, but I've found I'm hopelessly set in my ways with this one. 1,400 hours in, and Roma is still my go-to. I know, I know: there's tons of fantastic, fascinating factions to choose from in DeI that I really should play. They are carefully crafted works of art, history, and game-design that ought to be appreciated. And I really do appreciate them.

    As they receive a gladius face-first from my battle-hardened legions. I know other factions rather intimately because I routinely face and DEFEAT them! Muhahahahahaha!

    Lord knows I'm not helping the friendly rivalries around these forums. How many times have Macedonian and Epirote players threatened my men with their mighty pikemen?

    But I digress: I am a resident expert on Roma. Now, I'm not an expert on Roman History, mind you; I'm merely an intensely fascinated hobbyist, and I have no accreditation in anthropology, history, and so forth (I'm a Comm major for goodness sake). What I mean is that I've accrued enough wisdom in playing as the faction that I'm highly sensitive to what makes it strong, what makes it weak (yes, Roma actually has weaknesses, believe it or not), how the troops perform against any variety of foes, how the economy reacts to changes in unit organization...I could go on. Essentially, all aspects of Roma from a game-design/players' perspective are deeply familiar to me. Am I the best player? Probably not. I don't really enjoy raising battle difficulty since CA just boosts stats instead of doing something interesting with the AI, and VH for campaigns mostly makes everyone hate you and makes economics a chore. I still challenge myself, but some of you guys and gals are unreal with the challenges you take on. So I could probably do what you do (humble brag), but I'm much too satisfied with how the game plays on H/N to really budge.

    So, when the Beta rolled around with adjustments to KAM's new experimental pack, something I was always enthusiastic about, I had to give it a roll after completing my latest Grand Campaign with 1.2.3e's balancing. Cue my favorite DLC campaign in the game: Caesar in Gaul. A great way to test the mettle of Roma's bread-and-butter troops is having them face the onslaught of angry Celts, and it's always satisfying to triumph over them despite the odds. With over a dozen hours clocked into this campaign, how has the combat system fared?

    My goodness I'm blown away. KAM has always striven for Stats mattering, and in 1.2.3e, while it certainly felt that way, it was flawed in my eyes (and CA did everything they could to make it that way, given their balancing in patches had disrupted the mod's, ironically). It was hard to tell when one unit was clearly superior by the numbers unless there was a substantial disparity, plus units would interact in bizarre ways that severely diminished the performance of some units despite their superiority (hoplites and cavalry were primary offenders). 1.2.3e was very good, don't get me wrong, but it still had places to go.

    And then KAM took it to those places. First off, no passive buff for "Disciplined/Professional" units: either fight in loose order, or get into disciplined formation and fight it out that way. Out the door, nuance has been added to the style of Roman (and other factions') combat. This is likely my most controversial point: I find Disciplined Formation to be fantastic and very, very useful. Others, as I have read and respected, find its benefits negligible and its behavior unreliable. Perhaps it needs further buffing. Perhaps my experience is not the norm, or I need to spend more time with using it to see its flaws, but to me, Disciplined Formation has HELD THE LINE despite ridiculous odds, and SLAUGHTERED THE BARBARIANS in impressive numbers. Now it's not like a machine gun nest racking up kills rapidly, but over time, I lose very few men for what is a huge return on investment...precisely how Romans (and other professional units) ought to play when they engage the enemy on their terms. While the troops do spin around weirdly at times because of CA's nonsense, and yes it's not always the best choice in battles, I find it an invaluable tool in tough fights and a cool option for commanders when trying new strategies. I would highly encourage discussion on this topic though: it takes a village to balance this game, as we all know. My one experience is insufficient in providing the fullest picture of this phenomenon.

    Next is the consequences of the stats themselves, and a shift toward armor's import. As a Roman player, I must say there's a lot to love about this. Armor is never in short supply with Roman units (an understatement for the ages), so I like it when I get something in return for the damn expensive armies I field. Legionaries have good base stats, but it's their armor, their morale, and their abundance (any proletarii in the audience?) that sets them apart. In previous combat iterations, I've only felt the staunch effect of the latter two, while armor always seemed questionably useful (save against missiles, where it's always been helpful). Not to say it wasn't useful, but I always focused on stat boosts and positioning to minimize casualties, while differences in armor only contributed some modest amount to preserving my men's lives. Yet now, with stats really, REALLY mattering, I'm seeing the difference. Celtic units with equal stats but low armor struggle against my legionaries. Yes, my men suffer, but not nearly as much as they do. Their armor penetration does not equal a nullification of armor, and it shows. Ill-disciplined and poorly-equipped troops engage legions at their own peril without substantially outnumbering and outpositioning Roman battalions, for one of them is often worth many of your own.

    And even then, there's another thing up Roma's sleeve...yes, I'm not done praising Disciplined Formation. The boost to armor, the bonus versus infantry, the reduced effectiveness of enemy numbers (they can no longer engage one roman with tons of other men), the raised defense and higher morale all make my men a real nasty tick to have to confront. My men, though not invincible, present a hard fact about war: the individual prowess of troops is always trumped by the unity and coordination of men working as one. I think Disciplined Formation is a damn fine way of representing the less tangible elements of Rome's martial excellence: constant training as a unit with drills day in and out; a set standard for troop quality that is sustained by the legion's leadership; a decentralized command structure that relied on individual battalions being more combat effective on their own to achieve local victories...yes, I think Disciplined Formation helps paint that picture. Is this unique to Rome in history? If my memory serves me well, I'd say no. Other societies had achieved such things, and even without them they were able to rival Rome's dominance. So other units having this formation makes sense to me, and it's important that the formation isn't overpowered. Besides, Rome still has things like testudo, Repel Cavalry, and other formations embedded into their legionaries that sets them apart even further. Still, with all that KAM has done, I find Roma's balance fitting for her lofty place in history as a titan on the field that must be engaged with care and cunning (and there's a myriad of other advantages Roma has that makes it so damn scary that need not be mentioned).

    There are many, many other things to discuss: army balance for other factions is astoundingly spot on and immersive from what I can tell. Cavalry behaves much better, now being more vulnerable in melee versus infantry without seeming weak. Missiles play a diminished role, but still pack a punch when used right (and it is currently a forefront of the Beta's balancing, so my position on it is hardly final). Yet I'd like to keep things narrow here, and move onto curiosities/comments about Roma that could be helpful.

    For instance: Veteran Legionaries. What are they good for? Absolutely: something, I think.

    Allow me to clarify: Vet's are equivalent in cost to their normal kin, but draw from the Pleb population rather than Proletarii. Fair enough, given they're veterans. Their stats are equivalent to regular Legionaries save in morale. Okay, makes sense: just because you've seen combat doesn't mean you should get super big buffs, and more morale is useful! But, is it useful enough to justify taking plebs away from cavalry? And furthermore, is it useful enough to strain your logistics as you try to reinforce from a more selective pool of troops? It's hard for me to justify, personally. Base legionaries are so good already that I don't really need to take on some more morale. I buff my units accordingly via generals and agents, and that's that. Now, I still include Vets because they're cool and having nothing but legionaries is kinda boring, but I'd likely be better served if I just neglected them entirely. Now I'm talking about Marian Veterans specifically, and I can't recall if Imperial Veterans had more stat differences to make them special. That said, the problem remains: Veteran Legionaries just don't have much to set them apart. I'm not advocating for crazy buffs, but perhaps an increase to melee attack alone would be enough, making them 8 att/8 def over the regular legionaries 7 att/8 def. That coupled with the morale would be enough to motivate me to prioritize them. I'd like to hear suggestions about that though. I'm apprehensive when it comes to making Roma stronger in any way, given their power is already staggering.

    Finally, Peregrini populations. They are more than useful, they're sometimes vital to Roman army composition given Auxiliary usage. Sadly, they dwindle rapidly after I consolidate my presence over a region. Usually all this means is I need to shift my auxiliary recruitment to a new frontier, but there are troops that I lose access to over time in this endeavor. I always keep auxiliary buildings in Iberia, Gaul, the Alps, Octoduron, et cetera, so I can have auxiliary contingents with my 40 stack armies. Over time though, I have a mountain of Proletarii everywhere, and only a small foreigner class still lingering. Would it be reasonable to buff the 4th pop growth rate on the auxiliary chain, or is the solution simple in maximizing other building chain buffs to 4th pop? This is perhaps the least related comment, all things considered.

    In summation, the DeI team has delivered another fantastic product, and we're all spoiled rotten by their efforts here. While I focused almost solely on KAM's combat work, as combat will always be my true love in RTS's, the other elements of 1.2.3f and the mod overall are praiseworthy in their own right. I'm just trying to keep things manageably short in this post. No need to write a dissertation on the mod...yet. I have rarely been more satisfied with a game than I am right now. I say that routinely due to DeI, and think the product can't get much better, but you guys just keep one-upping yourselves, and it's admirable and inspirational. This kind of focus and strive for excellence is rubbing off on me. I can only dream of running or contributing to a team as successful as this one.

    Thanks for all your work guys! And by the way, it's about time I support you guys financially with how much entertainment and education you've granted me through this project, so consider me your newest patron as of this post. Cheers!

  2. #2

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Tbh with ya, I just want them to finish this one beta mod soon to give them a long break since most of the stat and battle machanic now is pretty much in sweet spot

  3. #3

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    It`s really quite good now. ATM Rome 2 with DeI beats most Paradox games for me. And that`s saying something...

  4. #4

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    As a nearly exclusively roman player for 2500 hours, I am not as enthusiastic. But, we are getting there.

  5. #5

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Yeah, I believe it's possible that some things were someway twisted or confused during some of the different updates, overhauls and such.
    As it is now, Imperial veterans DO have superior stats to Imperial Legionaries. They're better in everything but armor, and such stats are shared identically with Imperial Eagle Cohort and Imperial Praetorians.

    If I sorted "legionary" units by strenght (counting armor as the least important even though it isn't) from lowest to highest they would be:


    Marian Legionaries - standard stats, 60 Morale, 70 Armor
    Imperial Legionaries - standard stats, 60 Morale, 80 Armor
    Marian Veterans = Marian Eagle Cohort - standard stats, 65 Morale, 70 Armor
    Imperial Armored Legionaries - standard stats, 65 Morale and 100 Armor

    Marian Praetorians = Evocata Germanica (Imperial Unit) - Superior stats, 70 Armor
    Imperial Praetorians = Imperial Veterans = Imperial Eagle Cohort - Same stats as above, 80 Armor

    In conclusion, imperial units' combat stats (bar armor) are pretty much streamlined in 2 main tiers. Standard Tier with Legionaries and Armored Legionaries, and Elite Tier with Praetorians, Veterans, Evocata Germanica and Eagle Cohort.
    Marian units don't share this trait. Marian Legionaries are on par with Imperial Legionaries, just with less armor. Marian Elites, save for Praetorians, are NOT on par with their Imperial Counterparts but are barely superior to their contemporary standard units, boasting just +5 Morale.

    So I'd suggest keeping imperial units as they are, while conforming the Marian ones to them.
    To be specific: Buff Marian Veterans and Marian Eagle Cohort to have the same stats as Marian Praetorians, just like Imperial Veterans and Imperial Eagle Cohort are equals to Imperial Praetorians.




    Side note: What about Evocata Germanica? They're listed as an Imperial Unit, they have elite stats but Marian-level armor. This makes them pretty borderline, as they're just inferior Imperial Veterans. I'm assuming they don't have campaign advantages like getting recruited from a different class, correct me if I'm wrong.
    So giving them something to distinguish themselves might be a good idea? Maybe give them THE BEST combat stats bar none amongst the legionary units, while keeping the marian-era 70 armor and/or grant them a unique ability?

  6. #6
    Libertus
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Murica
    Posts
    73

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan_Moscavich View Post
    As a nearly exclusively roman player for 2500 hours, I am not as enthusiastic. But, we are getting there.
    I'd love to hear your thoughts. It was a comment you made in one of the threads about Rome underperforming that piqued my interest and made me wonder. As I'm not intimately aware of the history, I'm not totally sure as to the standard we should hold their balance to.

  7. #7

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta-Mark View Post
    Side note: What about Evocata Germanica? They're listed as an Imperial Unit, they have elite stats but Marian-level armor. This makes them pretty borderline, as they're just inferior Imperial Veterans. I'm assuming they don't have campaign advantages like getting recruited from a different class, correct me if I'm wrong.
    So giving them something to distinguish themselves might be a good idea? Maybe give them THE BEST combat stats bar none amongst the legionary units, while keeping the marian-era 70 armor and/or grant them a unique ability?
    That has been brought up by myself a few times, the thought behind them originally was that they'd have less armor but were more mobile, they also used to have frost immunity, maybe there ought to be more specific evocata units from different theaters (personally I gave them the highest armor rank in my own files :p).
    Last edited by Dardo21; October 19, 2018 at 08:00 PM.

  8. #8
    ♔Greek Strategos♔'s Avatar THE BEARDED MACE
    Artifex Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    It's nice to see you're enjoying the mod. From user reports we're getting that Rome is much more interesting to play with with the latest updates.

  9. #9

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    And just as I get into my next trial (with all the updates) for Roma.....

    Veterans

    I too am not happy with Veterans and it's something I'd love to see changed.

    Firstly - there should be no differences whatsoever as to Armour, AP effect and anything to do with equipment - they should be exactly the same. Then we can concentrate on the differences...

    These guys are (generally) older - and in modern terms, seriously old. They've survived 25-26 years with the legions and are now in their mid-forties at least - in a society when most of them are unlikely to live past 50. Therefore, by simple logic, if nothing else - their overall combat power will be less. Their 'Health' should be lower; their 'Melee Attack' will be lower. To counter this, however, their 'Defence' will be at least equal, if not higher, and their 'Morale' of the highest.

    To achieve that, it might also be sensible to have them recruited at Experience 6 and the stats appportioned appropriately.

    Whilst in the post-Marian period and all the successes they had, let alone the personal loyalty to individual generals, there were many returnees to the 'Eagles' (not that Eagle standards per se existed then); let us not also forget that after the Varus disaster of the Early Empire and soldiers that should have retired were kept on you had the examples of these 'Veterens' having to point out to the Emperor their bleeding and toothless gums.....

    'Veterans' - Yes - but not super-troops. Just for flavour.
    "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'.

  10. #10

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by ur-Lord Tedric View Post
    And just as I get into my next trial (with all the updates) for Roma.....

    Veterans

    I too am not happy with Veterans and it's something I'd love to see changed.

    Firstly - there should be no differences whatsoever as to Armour, AP effect and anything to do with equipment - they should be exactly the same. Then we can concentrate on the differences...

    These guys are (generally) older - and in modern terms, seriously old. They've survived 25-26 years with the legions and are now in their mid-forties at least - in a society when most of them are unlikely to live past 50. Therefore, by simple logic, if nothing else - their overall combat power will be less. Their 'Health' should be lower; their 'Melee Attack' will be lower. To counter this, however, their 'Defence' will be at least equal, if not higher, and their 'Morale' of the highest.

    To achieve that, it might also be sensible to have them recruited at Experience 6 and the stats appportioned appropriately.

    Whilst in the post-Marian period and all the successes they had, let alone the personal loyalty to individual generals, there were many returnees to the 'Eagles' (not that Eagle standards per se existed then); let us not also forget that after the Varus disaster of the Early Empire and soldiers that should have retired were kept on you had the examples of these 'Veterens' having to point out to the Emperor their bleeding and toothless gums.....

    'Veterans' - Yes - but not super-troops. Just for flavour.
    I don't think we should consider middle-aged ancient men as contemporary very old men, the proportion is not like that.
    The low average life expectation is mostly due to the very high infant mortality rate, plagues and violent death, and of course once approaching the actual old age (60+) it was much more difficult to overcome the increasing vulnerability to illness compared to now. But while life expectancy was lower, the maximum human lifespan has been roughly unchanged in the last thousands of years. Even in early 1900s life expectancy was about 46 years.

    As far as adult warriors go, I think their pure physical capabilities would be on par with today's standards or more, because of the kind of life they lived. Those who held the Praefectum Castrorum title came from the rank of "Primus Pilus", which was the first centurion of the First Cohort, and they could have an age of 50-60. If we keep in mind that the First Cohort was in the first-line and that Centurions were in the first rank of their centuries, that means that these 50+ years-old men were fighting on the forefront.

    About veterans, I think they would probably have somewhat less endurance than the youth, but I also think that MUCH of a warrior's pure combat skill came from experience, let alone discipline, teamwork and such. This makes them for all intents and purposes superior soldiers to me, and from what I read and can remember about them, they were very highly regarded and feared. It almost looks like the difference in effectiveness between veterans and standard legionaries was higher than between legionaries and average enemies at times.

    I don't know much about other factions, but I would guess that the best warriors from some cultures, likeveterans and high-status men for the Celts, would also be around that kind of age.


    How to translate that in-game? Maybe lowering their stamina (so you might prefer leaving them in reserve), increasing some of their combat stats and morale even beyond Praetorian/Aquilae level, add a scare-enemies malus and make them VERY expensive, especially in upkeep (I mean, they're basically a unit of officers afterall).

  11. #11

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta-Mark View Post
    I don't think we should consider middle-aged ancient men as contemporary very old men, the proportion is not like that.
    The low average life expectation is mostly due to the very high infant mortality rate, plagues and violent death, and of course once approaching the actual old age (60+) it was much more difficult to overcome the increasing vulnerability to illness compared to now. But while life expectancy was lower, the maximum human lifespan has been roughly unchanged in the last thousands of years. Even in early 1900s life expectancy was about 46 years.
    Firstly - 'Infant Mortality' (less than 10 years old) is not counted in life expectancy calculations (it is the same for Maintenance & Reliability even now where 'Early Life Failures' are not counted) and the records from the time even attest that. You then, but accurately, contradict yourself - for indeed it has not changed much up until the last century - and therefore 46 is reasonable and accurate. In stats terms it means that half the total population has died by then.

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta-Mark View Post
    As far as adult warriors go, I think their pure physical capabilities would be on par with today's standards or more, because of the kind of life they lived. Those who held the Praefectum Castrorum title came from the rank of "Primus Pilus", which was the first centurion of the First Cohort, and they could have an age of 50-60. If we keep in mind that the First Cohort was in the first-line and that Centurions were in the first rank of their centuries, that means that these 50+ years-old men were fighting on the forefront.
    I believe your age information is therefore from the gravestones - which is then their age at death. You would normally be promoted at the end of your total service - ie aged about 43 to 46. Centurions were expected to fight 'in the first rank' when it was necessary. If they fought there all the time, then doing so wouldn't be as valuable as it undoubtably was. Don't forget that we normally retire our line soldiers at 42 (British Army) - and that's only for the remaining senior ranks; juniors having been let go earlier - you have to make Corporal by 12 years and not everyone makes it.

    Also note that the 'Praefectus Castrorum' is a post-Imperial reform when Octavian/Augustus played with the 'Sergeants Mess' (the numbers of Centurions).

    ...................

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta-Mark View Post
    How to translate that in-game? Maybe lowering their stamina (so you might prefer leaving them in reserve), increasing some of their combat stats and morale even beyond Praetorian/Aquilae level, add a scare-enemies malus and make them VERY expensive, especially in upkeep (I mean, they're basically a unit of officers afterall).
    Okay - if treated as 'super-troops' and costed and, hopefully restricted in number, then perhaps.

    But, finally, no, no, NO! No retired legionary equates to 'Officers' (find me a RL soldier who would even agree to such a comparison!). The only 'officers' in a legion would be the Tribunes and upwards - and the Praefectus Castrorum eventually - so Equites and Patricii. The best equivalent term for Centurion I can think of is 'Command Sergeant' (sic).

    And - seriousness aside - if you did find a group of retired officers and thought of raising them once more to service.....you'd be a whole lot better off leaving them in their armchairs! Cohesive action - not a chance!

    {I write as a retired officer!}
    "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'.

  12. #12

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Yes, limiting their number should also be a factor in-game.


    Quote Originally Posted by ur-Lord Tedric View Post

    But, finally, no, no, NO! No retired legionary equates to 'Officers' (find me a RL soldier who would even agree to such a comparison!). The only 'officers' in a legion would be the Tribunes and upwards - and the Praefectus Castrorum eventually - so Equites and Patricii. The best equivalent term for Centurion I can think of is 'Command Sergeant' (sic).

    And - seriousness aside - if you did find a group of retired officers and thought of raising them once more to service.....you'd be a whole lot better off leaving them in their armchairs! Cohesive action - not a chance!

    {I write as a retired officer!}
    Yeah sorry about the "officer" thing, I'm too used to the equivalent term in italian which is formally used much more broadly.
    NCOs is probably more fitting for Centurions whom I was comparing Evocati to, experience-wise (older, higher-ranking centurions to be more specific).

    My main point anyway was that ancient warriors in their 40s wouldn't be "very old" like a contemporary 70+ years-old is just because they were close to the life expectancy of their time (I think with infant mortality as a factor then it would be as low as 20-25 rather than 40-50, so you did well to correct me), but more or less similar to current men in their 40s.

    Still, as a sidenote, I keep my belief that Centurion DID actually fight "regularly" on the front lines. As far as I remember, their mortality rate was pretty high, which makes sense and would someway support this idea.
    Furthemore it's not like soldiers had to fight THAT many actual battles. The vast majority of the time of a soldier wouldn't be on the battlefield anyway.
    Plus as we know most battles weren't really bloodbaths, so there's that.

    It was certainly risky, but probably the benefits of having them on the front line were enough for the Romans to accept that.

  13. #13

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by Meta-Mark View Post
    ..........................
    Furthemore it's not like soldiers had to fight THAT many actual battles. The vast majority of the time of a soldier wouldn't be on the battlefield anyway.
    Plus as we know most battles weren't really bloodbaths, so there's that. ..............
    No worries - but to be fair, at the time of the real use of Evocati - the post-Marian 1st Century BC(E) period - then actually those pesky power-hungry aristocrats really did use the soldiers for regular conquest. It's not until the Imperial period that regular times of peace appeared.

    Overall I would like to see the opportunity for a couple of Veteran Legionary units per army - and they would serve as a replacement for the 'expanded first cohort', which shouldn't appear until the Imperial Age (and then carying the Eagle, which it didn't before, the legions having their own standards. Then they'd go away/be replaced with the Imperial Reform. Perhaps even serving as a 'unti upgrade'.
    "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'.

  14. #14

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by Tiny View Post
    I'd love to hear your thoughts. It was a comment you made in one of the threads about Rome underperforming that piqued my interest and made me wonder. As I'm not intimately aware of the history, I'm not totally sure as to the standard we should hold their balance to.
    Oh man, I don't even know what post that might have been.

    Rome has generally been pretty consistent in the mod over the years, there has been a couple times where things have been unbalanced but that's not very typical. So I can't remember mentioning them underperforming off the top of my head, although I'm sure it happened at some point.

    I think with the new Shield wall formation we are getting a lot closer to both a visual and stat-wise representation of how the Roman troops should fight after the Marian reforms. The formation in itself could probably still use some tweaking since the reduced Frontage reach them being pointed taking penalties more than they should be when fighting in formation.

    Performance-wise I don't have any issue with Roman troops. Early on you have three sets of flexible troops to deal with Battlefield situations and decent cavalry. Rome has always lacked good missile units early on, but that's what mercenary cretan archers and mercenary rhodian Slingers are for.

    Once you hit the Marian reforms you had strong versatile Main Line Infantry and auxiliaries s can take care of all of your shortcomings.


    Economically it is fairly easy to set up a strong economy early on. So there aren't really any problems there.

    I think probably my biggest issue is campaigns falling, but this is more of an issue with Total War as a game than anything to do with our mod. You simply expand much quicker than is historically possible.

    There are some other minor political related things I would like to see cleaned up or enhance the pain, but that's all stuff I can type out later when I'm not hungover and drunk drive a 80000 pound truck through a cornfield.

    I certainly appreciate your enthusiasm for how Rome is in the mod, and it is probably almost as best as it ever has been. I think like cam is chasing Perfection for the battlefield I am trying to chase campaign perfection.

  15. #15
    KAM 2150's Avatar Artifex
    Patrician

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Gdańsk, Poland
    Posts
    11,132

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    What I think would be the best way to mod Veteran Legionnaires is to give them -1 or 2 attack and few points less of charge but +5 or 10 to morale and +2 to melee defence. They would be better at holding ground but worse on offence.
    Official DeI Instagram Account! https://www.instagram.com/divideetimperamod/
    Official DeI Facebook Page! https://www.facebook.com/divideetimperamod

  16. #16

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by KAM 2150 View Post
    What I think would be the best way to mod Veteran Legionnaires is to give them -1 or 2 attack and few points less of charge but +5 or 10 to morale and +2 to melee defence. They would be better at holding ground but worse on offence.
    As a Greek-focused player, that would be a good incentive for me to purchase vets. Above all else, I value infantry that can hold the line. The longer they hold, the more time I have for my auxiliary infantry and cavalry to flank. The fewer casualties the center takes in that process, the happier I am!

  17. #17
    Libertus
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Murica
    Posts
    73

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivan_Moscavich View Post
    Oh man, I don't even know what post that might have been.

    Rome has generally been pretty consistent in the mod over the years, there has been a couple times where things have been unbalanced but that's not very typical. So I can't remember mentioning them underperforming off the top of my head, although I'm sure it happened at some point.

    I think with the new Shield wall formation we are getting a lot closer to both a visual and stat-wise representation of how the Roman troops should fight after the Marian reforms. The formation in itself could probably still use some tweaking since the reduced Frontage reach them being pointed taking penalties more than they should be when fighting in formation.

    Performance-wise I don't have any issue with Roman troops. Early on you have three sets of flexible troops to deal with Battlefield situations and decent cavalry. Rome has always lacked good missile units early on, but that's what mercenary cretan archers and mercenary rhodian Slingers are for.

    Once you hit the Marian reforms you had strong versatile Main Line Infantry and auxiliaries s can take care of all of your shortcomings.


    Economically it is fairly easy to set up a strong economy early on. So there aren't really any problems there.

    I think probably my biggest issue is campaigns falling, but this is more of an issue with Total War as a game than anything to do with our mod. You simply expand much quicker than is historically possible.

    There are some other minor political related things I would like to see cleaned up or enhance the pain, but that's all stuff I can type out later when I'm not hungover and drunk drive a 80000 pound truck through a cornfield.

    I certainly appreciate your enthusiasm for how Rome is in the mod, and it is probably almost as best as it ever has been. I think like cam is chasing Perfection for the battlefield I am trying to chase campaign perfection.
    The more I play, the more I see the weaknesses of Disciplined Formation, I must say. The enemy has an easy time racking up kills when I give an attack order and they dive straight into enemy formations to get outflanked. Pushing other units at the flanks help, but there's still a big flank bonus occurring that grants the enemy too much IMO. Still, I won't retract my previous statements on it: when it's used right, the enemy ought to beware.

    Secondly: yes, the campaign perspective is incredibly important, as successful players invest a lot of time and energy into building a robust economy to enable our military campaigns, all while avoiding diplomatic catastrophes that might give us an unwinnable situation. In other words: you cannot have one without the other. Duh.

    I'm establishing this truism because it reveals the duality of the problem. Rome isn't just its troops. It's the buildings, bonuses, costs, and innate logistical capabilities of a faction that shape one's perception of it. Factions like Rome had, for a very long time, unrivaled force-projection (once Rome's Mediterranean hegemony was consolidated around the Marian period anyhow). No one could put an army anywhere at any time quite like they could. Rome also had the most robust internal economy of the ancient world focused on regional specialization (history experts, interject if I'm wrong. An archaeology professor at my university did not refute that claim of mine, so I feel somewhat confident in it). Tools are in place to realize such things, we just have to scrutinize how well they represent history. The politics of Rome are painfully complex. I have a history book of my own that delves into the matter, yet so many names escape me; I have to sit down someday and studiously catalog the references for my reading comprehension. Needless to say, representing it abstractly is quite the challenge. I wish you all the best in getting it right, because I have no patience for the AI's behavior.

    I have some campaign woes of my own, yet they pertain more to how Caesar in Gaul is handled. While the aforementioned campaign is beloved by me, it's the setting that sells it, NOT CA's execution. Should I ever become a competent sub-modder, I will start tinkering with it to satisfy myself, and relate my experiences. That's a topic for another thread.
    Last edited by Tiny; October 21, 2018 at 09:21 PM.

  18. #18

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    How are you guys using disciplined formation? I'm having a difficult time wrapping my head around this since it's quite different from Hoplite Phalanx.

  19. #19

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    When you guys play Rome do you use the appropriate Historical Family submod or do you prefer not to use it since the family tree update?

  20. #20
    Libertus
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Murica
    Posts
    73

    Default Re: The State of Roma in 1.2.3f: Approaching Perfection

    Quote Originally Posted by CadetNewb View Post
    How are you guys using disciplined formation? I'm having a difficult time wrapping my head around this since it's quite different from Hoplite Phalanx.
    Using it in choke-points, defensively or offensively, is a good application. My advice is to have a line of legionaries behind a unit of crappy spearmen or something. Let the spearmen take the charge, let the legionaries use their pila when it's most effective, then lock into the formation with as many battalions as necessary and push forward into the enemy, withdrawing the likely battering spears. Charging legionaries into a blob of enemies at a choke, then turning on the formation can lead to the enemy surrounding the battalion and getting a harsh flanking bonus on the unit.

    Also with battles in the open it can be helpful. You need reserve units to keep enemies off their flanks because the enemy will wrap around them if they get the chance. Use it if they're in a point of the line that won't get support for a while that needs to be held. Just use it wisely; that enemy flanking bonus can overcome a lot of the bonuses you get on your unit, so you might end up doing more harm than good, or at least making things bad in a different way.

    It's hard to give you a very clear guide to utilizing it, since so much of strategy is reactive, but hopefully that'll get your noggin joggin'.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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