how about a india provincal campaign?
i can do that, but what faction can we use to represent india? A barbarian faction wouldn't be very apprrpriate, and eastern factions are needed elsewhere, I guess...
Of course...before adding new campaigns it is better to make the existing ones fully playable!
The britons campaign I added today on Caesar Vincens' suggestion required only a couple of minutes of descr_strat editing, nothing more...I guess an Indian campaign would be a bit longer to make!
PS, what's EK?
THx for the explaination but you mnisinterpreted the praetorian part.
What i meant was;
Remove the CAVALRYandINFANTRY UNITS not the Generals. But the infantry parit as you said is still debateable which is fine. THis is just my 2 cents.
Gj yet again.
Last edited by Wegen7 die Große; September 30, 2010 at 07:23 PM.
Deutschland Gloria
Deutschland Gloria (zwei)
Glory to Britannia
DeutschenVaterland's Channel, here are some good videos, for people who enjoy the none liberal Deutschlands/Germanys.
Hail to the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, rulers of the Commonwealth
and Belgium!
Look further down for the rest of my sig
"People can take whatever they want from a sentence and display it in any fashion they want to" That alone can prove democracy is a failure!
Welthauptstadt Germania eins
Welthauptstadt Germania zwei
What is a joke without pissing someone else off?
A bad joke!
THe roman general's premarian cavalry bodyguards are WAY too postmarian.
I mean they got a gallic type E helmet, their lorica hamata and they have a look which makes you feel that unit should got as a default roman cavalry in the marian legions.
roman bodyguard in this era should be wearing a more greek style (more or less what the roman general is wearing) as they represent a group of men that are socially bond to the general (as they share the same background) or
you depict the bodyguard as lictores, which historically were the consules' bodyguard
Carthaginian bodyguard should be also changed, to represent that they are the most fearsme mercenaries, using the iberian assault infantry to this purpose, giving them a mount (like Hannibal, who used the gaesatae as bodyguards) or making them sacred band cavalry
Last edited by Metaluis90; January 17, 2011 at 05:42 PM.
"Rules without exceptions last eternally; Roman Law is the only law"
"The mighty sword in mighty Roman hands"
We'll try to find a more accurate model for the roman bodyguard.
As for Carthage, traditionally the bodyguards were picked from the Sacred Band (which you get post reform) or in any case the local phoenician nobility.
Hannibal didn't use a gaesatae bodyguard in battle but rather he kept them in a "position of honor" for easterners, which is in front of his bodyguard where they would be useful in case things went sour (as in Zama, where they screened the escape of him and his bodyguard).
Basically you can emulate this by having a general "picking" his favourite corps (be it a citizen unit for Hannonids or mercenary for Barcid as example) and always place them in front of him on the battlefield.
Note that not all punic generals (just like the romans) were keen to risk a direct fight so for example Hamilcar and Hannibal would always stay behind, while Mago or Hasdrubal were known to engage in close combat more frequently.
You should move Keleia more to the North-East, or rename it to Aemona. I would suggest changing the location of Keleia, because Aemona was founded by the Romans much later.
Also, Illyrian native culture is fine, but you should add at least Celtic settlements. Most important cities in the region of South-Eastern Alps were Celtic, not Illyrian.
I have done some more research on Eastern Alps region. Histria region (the one with Keleia for main settlement) should stretch more to the north, and it should have Celtic and Illyrian native culture (currently, it has Illyrian natives and Celtic colony). The region of Pannonia Superior should also have both Celtic and Illyrian native cultures (currently, it has only Celtic natives). Regarding the province of Norikon (Noricum), you should change its main settlement from Iuvavum to Noreia, which was situated more to the east.
A provincial campaign with Kingdom of Noricum would also be nice, since Celts in that area were pretty strong at that time.. But that is just a suggestion.
Last edited by Wild Rover; January 30, 2011 at 04:25 AM.
I was doing some research myself over the past few weeks (was looking to tweak a few units from my old XC3), So at least a few points can come in useful on here: mostly archer stuff.
Germans:
The area typically had little in the way of iron, and as such used more clubs and maces, instead of swords or, more prominent in the RTW engine; axes. Of course they were around, but not too common, so maybe the sheer number of axe units might be toned down a little. This wasn't by chance: A culture lacking in iron had little in the way of iron armour, and so focused on armour piercing weapons to try and even the score against armoured opposition. I believe the closest large resource of iron was sweden, hence the big axemen (feorldmenn, eorldmenn, huskarls) of saxons ,danes, and norse from around 4th Century AD onwards. Maybe putting the 2handed axemen as some kind of AOR unit from skandza or jutland might work out better, or possible switching the "2 handed axemen" and "berserker" roles in game, with zerkers being toned down a little and made standard in unit numbers.
Found no evidence of germanic tribes using or even knowing of composite bows (not least until Ostrogoths meeting huns circa late 4th C AD), so the increased range of "chosen archers" seems a little ahistorical, yet a "variety of arrowheads" or so i've read, does suggest they had specialist arrows which i'm guessing is likely for impact against armoured targets (increased attack compared to other barbs or even same attack but the AP suffix).
Romans:
Had little in the way of effective heavy cavalry (im seeing the "preatorian cavalry" here). Most of the early republic used spain to aquire cavalry, so as mentioned in another post, maybe more spanish AOR cavalry.
Archer auxiiaries were almost solely AOR (numidians, cretians, syrians), not recruitable everywhere. Though roamans did know of the composite bow, i cant recall from what time frame this was.
Carthage:
They did actually have native archers (with composite bows), but they were quite crap. Much of their archery was from recruited numidian bowmen (Who were introduced to composite bows from their phoenician neighbours, and did a better job of shooting them: Enough to get Romes attention in the early punic times)
The latter post marian times are hard to interpret as they got wiped out IRL, but i would imagine had they lived, neccessity would see them copying both roman and greeks ideas, probably using both 6 metre sarrisa's and spanish swords in a balanced army.
Egypt:
A little under-represnted archer wise. Archery was bigger in the eastern diadochi's than the homeland. Reports mention compostie bows from way before RTW's timeframe (as well as a vague refernce to a bow "of composite design" actually found in Tutankhamens tomb). Along with the scyian/cimmerian rampages across syrai and the levant of around 6th C BC means they would most certainly of had composites.
Nubians also had a longbow, similar to the indian, as well as the Ethoipians, the latter of the two is backed by Herodotus; mentioning 4 cubits long at least, making something near 6 foot??? (no 69):
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/hh/hh7060.htm
As far as elephants are concerned, egypt used to import african forest elephants from ethiopia and the horn (the same species carthage used from the great plains). This was recorded in some battle or other between them and the seluecids (mentioning the difference in elephant size and assuming thats the reason the egyptian elephants got routed). While im not 100% certain, it seems funny that they would import from the horn of africa if elephants were widespread inside egyptian territory (Thebias).
Archers in genral:
While a composite bow is fairly widspread across most cultures, save for greeks (which should, in general, have known about them from scythain interaction, but i'm unsure whether they used them) and the barbs, Development contiued, especialy in the east. India, the far eastern steppes, bactria, parthia, and maybe even scythia should have a third (and, elite) archery range for many units, given improvements in construction, design, recurve designs, the siyah (which late era roman auxilliaries adopted), etc,etc. Such bows would easily out range even the best horse archers, as HA bows were composite, but of smaller design; to aid in carrying and riding. Parthia should have long range foot archers as well as their mounted's, much documented evidence supports this.
As for the range, im not sure whether the casts in RTW are for gameplay or realism, but i suggest they are a bit short of what archers could do back then. Given that modern day clout archery sport (long range shooting at a large bullseye on grass 180M away: for males according to the British archery standards, tho different countries have different distance standards). Compound bows are not legit, so modern carbon fibre recurve compo's are used, and 180 M can be easily achieved from adult males.
The point being i fully believe even with the original horn/wood/sinew design: 150 yards is a realistic maximum! Given archery in warfare wasn't specifically accurate: Shooting into air the was the norm, meaning a specific "area" of ground was aimed at, not a specific "unit" of men. This shooting up at an angle would not only make sure range was increased, but also cause arrows to fall down onto opponents, hence increasing the chance of vital organs being hit and fatalites.
English longbows have been unofficaily recorded (estimated at the time, not measured) at over 200 yards, at Crecy and Agincourt; giving weight to the increased longbow range of the indians (and hopefully nubians).
My no.1 bugbear with XC is how well hoplites do agaisnt phalangites, i suppose this can come under historically inaccurate! Good quality hoplites in shieldwall can quite easily beat a mid level and above phalanx unit from the front, in a one on one fight. Maybe it should be harder to get past 4 or 5 rows of speartips, but it may just be hardcoded limits: The hoplites always seem to "get inside" and make the phalangites use their swords. The longer pikes hit the hoplite shields, but dont "push back" the hoplites, so the unit continues to advance forwards, getting into melee range eventually.
Increased defence all round makes the hoplite stronger gainst the phalangites, reduced defense all round makes the hoplites die before getting into range. I cant really win from my tweakings, unless theres other ideas.
We're working on an accurized german roster although it's going to take a while before being operative
Legionary and Praetorian cavalry have been removed in XC4 Delta, further accurization of auxiliaries is in progress.Romans:
Had little in the way of effective heavy cavalry (im seeing the "preatorian cavalry" here). Most of the early republic used spain to aquire cavalry, so as mentioned in another post, maybe more spanish AOR cavalry.
Archer auxiiaries were almost solely AOR (numidians, cretians, syrians), not recruitable everywhere. Though roamans did know of the composite bow, i cant recall from what time frame this was.
Native phoenician archers served mostly in the navy, on land they used numidians with composite bows (that are already statted this way) and are available in africa for all factions.Carthage:
They did actually have native archers (with composite bows), but they were quite crap. Much of their archery was from recruited numidian bowmen (Who were introduced to composite bows from their phoenician neighbours, and did a better job of shooting them: Enough to get Romes attention in the early punic times)
The latter post marian times are hard to interpret as they got wiped out IRL, but i would imagine had they lived, neccessity would see them copying both roman and greeks ideas, probably using both 6 metre sarrisa's and spanish swords in a balanced army.
Post marius I implemented my interpretation of a developmental army from the Barcid experience: multi-role troops similar to the iphicratean hoplites backed up by a decently equipped but poorly trained native phalanx on the macedonian style like it was used in the 3rd punic war which is coming in the next version.
Egypt gets nubian archers in africa as well eastern archer-spearmen in asia, both of which use a composite bow.Egypt:
A little under-represnted archer wise. Archery was bigger in the eastern diadochi's than the homeland. Reports mention compostie bows from way before RTW's timeframe (as well as a vague refernce to a bow "of composite design" actually found in Tutankhamens tomb). Along with the scyian/cimmerian rampages across syrai and the levant of around 6th C BC means they would most certainly of had composites.
Nubians also had a longbow, similar to the indian, as well as the Ethoipians, the latter of the two is backed by Herodotus; mentioning 4 cubits long at least, making something near 6 foot??? (no 69):
http://www.sacred-texts.com/cla/hh/hh7060.htm
As far as elephants are concerned, egypt used to import african forest elephants from ethiopia and the horn (the same species carthage used from the great plains). This was recorded in some battle or other between them and the seluecids (mentioning the difference in elephant size and assuming thats the reason the egyptian elephants got routed). While im not 100% certain, it seems funny that they would import from the horn of africa if elephants were widespread inside egyptian territory (Thebias).
In Delta they also recruit elephants from their lower african grounds, although we might restrict them a bit further.
On archery:Archers in genral:
While a composite bow is fairly widspread across most cultures, save for greeks (which should, in general, have known about them from scythain interaction, but i'm unsure whether they used them) and the barbs, Development contiued, especialy in the east. India, the far eastern steppes, bactria, parthia, and maybe even scythia should have a third (and, elite) archery range for many units, given improvements in construction, design, recurve designs, the siyah (which late era roman auxilliaries adopted), etc,etc. Such bows would easily out range even the best horse archers, as HA bows were composite, but of smaller design; to aid in carrying and riding. Parthia should have long range foot archers as well as their mounted's, much documented evidence supports this.
As for the range, im not sure whether the casts in RTW are for gameplay or realism, but i suggest they are a bit short of what archers could do back then. Given that modern day clout archery sport (long range shooting at a large bullseye on grass 180M away: for males according to the British archery standards, tho different countries have different distance standards). Compound bows are not legit, so modern carbon fibre recurve compo's are used, and 180 M can be easily achieved from adult males.
The point being i fully believe even with the original horn/wood/sinew design: 150 yards is a realistic maximum! Given archery in warfare wasn't specifically accurate: Shooting into air the was the norm, meaning a specific "area" of ground was aimed at, not a specific "unit" of men. This shooting up at an angle would not only make sure range was increased, but also cause arrows to fall down onto opponents, hence increasing the chance of vital organs being hit and fatalites.
English longbows have been unofficaily recorded (estimated at the time, not measured) at over 200 yards, at Crecy and Agincourt; giving weight to the increased longbow range of the indians (and hopefully nubians).
If you open export descr_units you will see this has been taken care of.
XC uses ranges that are a lower than historical maximum for two reasons:
1) The battlefield is scaled down, 200m would be half map away
2) Since missile damage doesn't scale down with distance, we tried to depict ranges in which they were effective at causing wounds and kills rather than a mere annoyance
Range-wise it works in this scale: western bows<basic sling/basic composite bow<professional sling<elite composite/longbow
Battle balance reports is something we almost never have, is this from M/M?My no.1 bugbear with XC is how well hoplites do agaisnt phalangites, i suppose this can come under historically inaccurate! Good quality hoplites in shieldwall can quite easily beat a mid level and above phalanx unit from the front, in a one on one fight. Maybe it should be harder to get past 4 or 5 rows of speartips, but it may just be hardcoded limits: The hoplites always seem to "get inside" and make the phalangites use their swords. The longer pikes hit the hoplite shields, but dont "push back" the hoplites, so the unit continues to advance forwards, getting into melee range eventually.
Increased defence all round makes the hoplite stronger gainst the phalangites, reduced defense all round makes the hoplites die before getting into range. I cant really win from my tweakings, unless theres other ideas.
Take into account that an hoplite versus phalanx battle should be mostly a slugging match without a clear winner, in all recorded battles flank action always was the decisive factor.
The macedonian phalanx advantage was in cost per man rather than quality and neither was designed to crush enemy heavy infantry.
EDIT: All of above is written assuming you've been testing on recent version.
XC3 or 4 Gamma are very old by now and not a reliable depiction of the game.
Maybe you should add some Chinese AOR troops(no dont do this!!!)
Oh maybe you can try to make an Alexander provincial campaing!!
Serial Spammer