too much casualties

[Atticus]

i play roma surrection every now and then and i know it's still in developpement but it bugs me a bit the casualties are much too high.

i haven't played as rome yet (i'm waiting till 2.0 comes out), but i played with the bosporians, the greeks and now as syracuse. and although heavy armed hoplites are supposed to be tough, they are getting killed by the dozens. i usually win my battles (settings h/vh) but my casualties are 30% and more, which is way to high to my likings.

will that be changed?

[Brusilov]

If you play on those settings (VH) the AI won't usually rout in battle. The consequence of this is your casualties will be higher (as you have to fight for longer).

If you don't like the casualties play at an easier setting. However, your battles will be easier. SO, you need to decide what you want - casualties or difficulty.

[Spartan 666]

and if you play with rome,don t wonder if you take high losses against barbarians...rome took decades to conquer gaul,spain and a part of germany,and lost a certain number of armies...expecially trying to defend the Danube and the Rhine border in the imperial era

[rory o'kane]

true, but most of them were lost because of tactical or strategic ineptitude on the part of their generals - not necessarily because the legions couldn't fight (we all know they could! ). I'm not happy with the casualty rates either - I do think the Romans' "casualties healed" percentage should be upped to reflect the field hospitals and doctors available to the troops...

[Brusilov]

true, but most of them were lost because of tactical or strategic ineptitude on the part of their generals - not necessarily because the legions couldn't fight (we all know they could! ). I'm not happy with the casualty rates either - I do think the Romans' "casualties healed" percentage should be upped to reflect the field hospitals and doctors available to the troops...

Well, if you have the correct buildings / temples in settlements you will be able to produce generals with doctor, chirugeon and leech retinues.

I suppose you could always attempt to mod the game to get the effect you want.

[El Crumb]

Atticus,

A couple of points to consider:

Unexperienced troops will suffer casulaties faster then veterans. Once your troops have fought a few battles and earned their stripes you will find they survive longer.

Armour bonuses apply, attacked from the front your men stand a better chance of survivng then being attacked from the flank or rear.

30% casualties ain't so bad, just wait till you have an epic battle with 70-100% fatalities on each side!

[Arnspac]

Thirty per cent is acceptable for any battle. Consider what your enemy lost. Are you analysing the after battle report as to where you suffered? Was it your tactics, ie weak unit against strong? That's the fun of the game...improving strategy.

[The10thLegion]

i do agree with the casulty thing, and it probably be corrected with doctors healing 10% of all casulties IMO

[Dark_horse_spirit]

Doctors? If that was me I'd ask for poison before I'd let one of those guys lop my leg off.

DHS

[Forsworn]

You would be surprised how well romans fight with only one leg and no arms.

Though I agree, the casualties are abit high. Even if you're a genius the enemy still inflicts alot of damage on H and VH settings. It's crazy, but it does teach you stuff. Like I learned no matter how great my cavalry are I should never, unless they're elephants, charge anything, that isnt routing, that has a spear. Even if it's Light Infantry or Light Spearmen.

[Oli]

You would be surprised how well romans fight with only one leg and no arms.

Its just a flesh wound afterall...

on topic, 30% doesnt seem like an unrealistic number to me, certainly a lot more accurate that the 5% u get in other mods when the armies are pretty much equal

[Spartan 666]

30% casualties ain't so bad, just wait till you have an epic battle with 70-100% fatalities on each side!

30%? i get furious when i take losses of 15%!

[Forsworn]

Well, realistically the losses would be much higher than they are in RTW. The AI's fualt, though RS has made great strides on making them smarter.

Though there are the rare victories in history with low loss rates.

Such as when Rome owned Macedon by 8,000 kills, 5,000 captures and only lossing 700 roman lives. That's epic!

[Nellup]

They must have cheated, maybe they put God mode on

[Caesar_1991]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Watling_Street now that is a battle with huge casualties on one side and next to nothing on the other one

[century x]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Watling_Street now that is a battle with huge casualties on one side and next to nothing on the other one

And that just shows how well trained Roman soldiers were. Can hold a thin line against 250,000 screaming barbarians.

[Jingles]

And that just shows how well trained Roman soldiers were. Can hold a thin line against 250,000 screaming barbarians.

I remember when they did that battle on Time Commanders...man those poor noobs didn't stand a chance...

[Nellup]

I remember when they did that battle on Time Commanders...man those poor noobs didn't stand a chance...

Yeah, I remember that, it was a good show, except it was frustrating watching people not have a clue. Like I remember one guy ordered his legionaries to form Testudo for a melee fight...

[century x]

Yeah, I remember that, it was a good show, except it was frustrating watching people not have a clue. Like I remember one guy ordered his legionaries to form Testudo for a melee fight...

I would pulled him out of his chair and thrown him a roman Infantry tactic book and tell him to read it 8 times.

And of course take command of his dis organized army.

[rory o'kane]

precisely - Caesar's legions in Gaul fought battle after battle, and they were near half-strength by the time of his civil war against Pompey (22,00 Legionaries on Caesar's side at Pharsalus - with 7 legions on his side, that's on average a little over 3,000 men per legion) - that's just under 50% casualties in 10 years (58 BC to 48 BC) and they STILL saw off Pompey's inexperienced troops! so how 30% casualties in a single engagement is historically accurate, i have no idea! - I challenge any Roman player to conquer Gaul in 14 turns,(7 years), then fight against some Free People (or whoever's got the heaviest non-phalangite infantry nearby) for another 6 turn, and come out with legions that are at 50% strength!