weak hoplites and ugly spartans

[Prince of Judah]

I've noticed that spearmen tend to be fairly weak. Spartan hoplites cannot use phalanx or shield wall. the Spartan Hoplites cannot best roman legionaries and they come in smaller numbers, further reducing their usefulness. And they use modfified vanilla skins which is ugly imo. Sacred Band cannot either :/. Is this because I selected the unified skeletons animation pack or because i'm running it with BI?

[JrvUnleashed]

The people on this forum will tell you that the legionaries were superior to spearmen, so they use that to justify completely unbalanced gameplay. Spearmen are usually 200-300 denarii more than legionaires, have less men in them, are less flexible, don't have missle weapons, etc. They are pretty much inferior to legionaires in EVERY SINGLE PLOSSIBLE WAY, which, when talking balance, is amazingly ridiculous.

The decreased unit size for elite units is pretty ridiculous in this game. The balance of denarii=effectiveness was great in RTW, but it was completely overlooked in RTR. For instance, ALL elite phalanxes in RTR are completely useless, as you can upgrade their 120 men counterparts to the same price and have them be completely equal, with 40 extra men in them. The decrease in unit size of elite units is pretty much the most fatal flaw of this entire mod.

So yes, you're going to have to live with Rome being completely superior to Greece in every major category, making Greece a useless faction for anyone with logic.

[boofhead]

Greece a useless faction for anyone with logic.

I love playing as Greece!

As far as the Spartan models and textures, I'm not a huge fan of them and would probably prefer something akin to Halie's movie Spartans in his 300 mod, but that wouldn't make it ''Rome Total Realism" anymore. I'm sure the creators must have sourced the model from a factual representation, although I can't seem to find any that look like the in game Spartans.

[Prince of Judah]

The people on this forum will tell you that the legionaries were superior to spearmen, so they use that to justify completely unbalanced gameplay. Spearmen are usually 200-300 denarii more than legionaires, have less men in them, are less flexible, don't have missle weapons, etc. They are pretty much inferior to legionaires in EVERY SINGLE PLOSSIBLE WAY, which, when talking balance, is amazingly ridiculous.

The decreased unit size for elite units is pretty ridiculous in this game. The balance of denarii=effectiveness was great in RTW, but it was completely overlooked in RTR. For instance, ALL elite phalanxes in RTR are completely useless, as you can upgrade their 120 men counterparts to the same price and have them be completely equal, with 40 extra men in them. The decrease in unit size of elite units is pretty much the most fatal flaw of this entire mod.

So yes, you're going to have to live with Rome being completely superior to Greece in every major category, making Greece a useless faction for anyone with logic.

wow. this mod is a complete waste of time then.

[florin80]

For you an people who think like you only. Not that everything in rtr is very well put(many things are wrong or questionable in certain regards indeed), but all those things you`ve mentioned are all justifiable. Someone who has a problem with the small number of spartiates in the hellenistic age, their high price in game and who expects them to do better during the hellenistic age than roman legionaries is obviously someone who has watched more artistic movies than he had read academic books on this subject. The aspect of the spartans is also justifiable in terms of their equipment. If you wanted corinthian helmets for them you should have tried a mod that started a couple centuries before this timeframe. Now go change your title please, because nobody had licensed you as an rtw art critic and calling someone else`s work "ugly" out of the blue sounds more like trolling than anything else. There are far better ways to express yourself publicly and nobody is actually stopping you from changing those units in your game with others you prefer.

wow. this mod is a complete waste of time then.

Then invest your time in doing a mod for this timeframe and of this magnitude that will be better than rtrpe. It`s far easier to insult someone else` work than to earn praise for your own, isn`t it?

They are pretty much inferior to legionaires in EVERY SINGLE PLOSSIBLE WAY, which, when talking balance, is amazingly ridiculous.

Except the fact that the spartans have 2hp while the legionaries have only one. Which really matters in autoresolve battles for instance(which is to say also when one ai faction battles another ai faction). So stop making absolute statements for the sake of hearing yourself speaking. You`ve already started a thread on this here and people have already explained that to you from all possible angles I think. The balance you`re talking about is probably not what the people who spent weeks on the rtrpe unit stats had in mind. Their work was more in the lines of reflecting the real(as much as it can be deduced an interpreted) situation which was not balanced to that degree. The idea was not to put everyone on an equal footing and giving each faction an equivalent for another faction`s unit.
And prices in RTR do not reflect the EDU stats alone. They also reflect how hard it was for a said faction to equip and maintain those soldiers with the intended result that certain factions should train less of a certain unit type that wasn`t actually known to be frequently encountered in their armies. Rome starts small in RTR because of the starting date. If their units would have been weak too, you`d probably have had a much more passive Rome(when controlled by the ai) when you`d actually have expected it to be your nemesis. I doubt that would have been much popular.

[florin80]

I appreciate the fact that you want to be right, but no, the hitpoints are indeed important in more than one way. It affects how the result of battles is being calculated in autoresolve for ones. Having that bonus is indeed an advantage which the legionaries for example lack.

and have 10 men die to every 1 legionnaire.

That`s not a true rule unless you poorly manage your units in combat, and yes, you`ve been told why that battle went like that in those conditions.
In the end, there is such a thing as knowing how to use your units. Just sending them head one and unsupported with no tactical idea is really bellow the point of tw games.

If they're weaker, they should be less expensive.

Yeah, too bad they didn't put balance in mind when making this mod, because dozens of units in this game are useless and Greece is a useless faction for anyone in their right mind if playing competitively.

Go above and read the rationale for that. Certain people like you like the vanilla system which was closer to conventional games like warcraft or whatever. For x unit of the enemy you have the counter unit y. The point of having a unit is to use it exactly for x task and there`s no point in having another one that does the same job. That wasn`t the route taken here. It was more a reflection of what was known to the developers as having happened in history. People like having both the numidian archers and the cretan archers when playing the romans for example, merely because it corresponds with some texts regarding the composition of one of Caesar`s forces. As dvk told me once(I`m paraphrasing) why do people think having factions having a harder time than others is lack of balance or unfair to the weaker ones. It wasn`t balanced and fair in the real history. Units exist in rtr not because they serve x or y purpose but because the developers thought they existed in reality and they didn`t go the route of questioning the ancient`s reasons for organizing themselves thus(like you do). Just because you don`t understand this it doesn`t mean yours is the only way to take. In fact so many people have enjoyed this mod for years now and there have been so many praises made to rtrpe and particularly its unit balance that it clearly proves you`re not representing the majority here or at least not the only taste. At the rtr forums there was a whole thread for that, but it`s lost now. Anyway, there`s always more than one taste when it comes to reflecting historical factors in a game and to what constitutes a good gameplay. So what I don`t like in your posts is that you`re trying to put a "wrong" label on the current system. I have np with your preferences, no matter how twisted they might seem to me, but who are you to define right for others? Eh?

Well then, that's all fine in theory, but when put into practice, it makes them useless. Having a fun, balanced game seems like it should be taken into account when making a game, and this game would be completely unbalanced in multiplayer.

I don`t think the game was designed for mp battles. Iirc at the rtr forums there was an EDU made especially for that by the numerous rtr mp community. But I think that was made for rtr 6 gold. Iirc from their posts(not being an mp myself) it wasn`t updated for rtrpe exactly because the stats in rtrpe have been revised and are better balanced than they were in gold. That may be a subjective opinion, but what I can say is that the balancing of units in rtrpe was done publicly at the rtr forums and many tests made along a number of weeks until it reached the current form. Don`t know if everything, but a good deal of what`s in there today is made that way on purpose.
Certainly the OP does not mention mp in his first post. Go read it again.

[AqD]

The people on this forum will tell you that the legionaries were superior to spearmen, so they use that to justify completely unbalanced gameplay. Spearmen are usually 200-300 denarii more than legionaires, have less men in them, are less flexible, don't have missle weapons, etc. They are pretty much inferior to legionaires in EVERY SINGLE PLOSSIBLE WAY, which, when talking balance, is amazingly ridiculous.

The decreased unit size for elite units is pretty ridiculous in this game. The balance of denarii=effectiveness was great in RTW, but it was completely overlooked in RTR. For instance, ALL elite phalanxes in RTR are completely useless, as you can upgrade their 120 men counterparts to the same price and have them be completely equal, with 40 extra men in them. The decrease in unit size of elite units is pretty much the most fatal flaw of this entire mod.

So yes, you're going to have to live with Rome being completely superior to Greece in every major category, making Greece a useless faction for anyone with logic.

The greece was in a very pathetic state in 280BC, worse than what you have seen in RTR. The traditions of citizen soldiers had been falling, and many greeks were drawn away to settle in the east. Hoplites remain effective but they were no longer the backbone of greek armies but rather a small core of professionals, while the rest are mercenaries, usually equipped like Thureophoroi.

If you want a more balanced battle system, just try my submod The hoplites are slightly overpowered though and I'll fix them in next version.....



PS: the denarii=effectiveness is completely wrong in RTW. Just look at the upkeep figures; The cost of initial recruitment doesn't matter and its only use is to deceive AI.

[TOLAROscipii]

everyone but the prince of Macedon

[killapanda001]

The roman's style of fighting didn't exist in Medieval times. BUt! The Hoplite style of fighting did. Also, all of the Army in Medieval times used Spear and Shield. Which therefore i believe that the Hoplites are better than the Romans.

[{GrailKnight}]

The roman's style of fighting didn't exist in Medieval times. BUt! The Hoplite style of fighting did. Also, all of the Army in Medieval times used Spear and Shield. Which therefore i believe that the Hoplites are better than the Romans.

No the hoplite style of fighting never existed in medieval times lmao! The hoplite phalanx was obsolete by many centuries as was the macedonian sarrisa phalanx. If the sarissa phalanx was proven to be inferior to the roman legions, how in the hell can the hoplite phalanx be superior????
Dude what you said makes no sense at all so plz edit your post

[JrvUnleashed]

No the hoplite style of fighting never existed in medieval times lmao! The hoplite phalanx was obsolete by many centuries as was the macedonian sarrisa phalanx. If the sarissa phalanx was proven to be inferior to the roman legions, how in the hell can the hoplite phalanx be superior????
Dude what you said makes no sense at all so plz edit your post

Actually, it's called the shield wall, and it was employed by the Nordic invaders during the medieval times. It was nearly identical to the shield phalanx of the greeks, only it was able to disperse and was therefore more flexible and more fit for medieval warfare. A similar formation to sarrisa phalanx called a pikemen formation, also used from the Post-Classical to Early-Modern Era, where units held out incredibly long spears to stop heavily armored cavalry charges. So yeah, both of you are wrong, as both of the formations survived long past the Classical Era of the Greeks and Macedonians, the only difference being that they altered them slightly to fit the tactical needs of the day.

[{GrailKnight}]

I dont give a crap about the shield wall, i'm talking about a greek phalanx, which was obsolete during the medieval era as was the sarissa phalanx. The pike formation was used for a short period of time in the post-classical and early-modern era, like you stated, so i cannot be wrong for saying that neither of those formations were used in the MEDIEVAL times.

[JrvUnleashed]

Shield Wall=slightly modified hoplite phalanx.

Pike Wall=Slightly modified version of a sarrisa phalanx.

Same formations, just altered slightly to adapt to newer technology and tactics. So the formations did survive long past the classical era and into medieval times. Your statements only show your ignorance of historical events. The Post-Classical era is the correct term for "Medieval Times". The only difference being that the Medieval Era only speaks about European society, while "Post-Classical" is an international term, describing the entire world during Europe's "Medieval" era, meaning they are the SAME TIME PERIOD.You have no clue what you're talking about. Take a history class. The pike wall was used by many cultures during the Post-Classical/Medieval Era, one prime example being in a movie you've probably seen called "Braveheart", where they hold up rows of long spears to stop English cavalry. That is a descendant of the sarissa phalanx, only modified for the time period. And even past that, have you ever even played Medieval total war II? They have pike units! Medieval times had pike phalanxes, so your whole argument is ridiculous.

[{GrailKnight}]

He was talking about THE HOPLITE PHALANX that's what i was referring to, the ACTUAL hoplite fighting style which he believed was used in the medieval times, and that gives you absolutely no right to call me ignorant or insult the hell out of me by telling me to take a history class, i take two in fact,i just don't learn about medieval history, for ancient history i learn about pompeii and herculaneum and the eurption of mount vesuvius, ancient greece (greco-persian wars), Xerxes (ancient personality) and minoan crete (ancient society), we learn some of the battles such as thermopylae and we learnt the tactics, but we never extensively studied the introduction of the phalanx formation so excuse me for not knowing so much about it, and my other history class is modern and that's self explanatory. One more thing i do play medieval 2 i think it's quite obvious from my signature (you see the byzantine empire faction?? that's what that it just in case you didn't know), i actually play it online and have defeated some of the best players on there and i have OBVIOUSLY seen pikemen, so don't think that i haven't played it, actually why dont you verse me? then we'll see who knows about the game or not, i bet you wouldn't last very long against a human player, since you'd probably be used to playing the dumb A.I.....So don't call me ignorant, i was just stating what the other guy said and i corrected him, HE WAS REFERRING TO THE ACTUAL HOPLITE PHALANX. next time read before you post. I know that the shield wall and pike formation were modified versions of the hoplite and sarissa phalanxes, respectively but i was talking about the ACTUAL formations which he was referring to, and i cannot stress that enough. jesus christ i hate people like you, pathetic trollers. Actually you know it is quite STUPID that you asked if i ever played Medieval 2, if you actually see my username, you can tell that i am a part of a clan, {GrailKnights}, one of the most respected and well reputated clans in medieval, so it was quite idiotic to ask if i play medieval 2, have you ever played medival 2???? i doubt YOU have you probably only know about the game from trailers.

[JrvUnleashed]

There is so much wrong with your post I don't even know where to start. I'll try to push through the bullcrap and inadequate debate skills and muster up a response however. At first I thought you just needed to take a History Class, but it's clear now you need to take English as well. I have Firefox, and your post is just completely red with misspellings. Try using a period more often. Please. Read the Bold if you will:

He was talking about THE HOPLITE PHALANX that's what i was referring to, the ACTUAL hoplite fighting style which he believed was used in the medieval times, and that gives you absolutely no right to call me ignorant or insult the hell out of me by telling me to take a history class,
Does anything in it's pure form ever last more than a few decades? It's called Technological Evolution, and it occurs with every bit of technology that has ever been used. Swords have been used for quite a while, they've just been altered for different fighting styles. You can say, "That's a gladius, not a claymore!", but it's still a sword. There is Tactical Evolution as well, and it follows the same concept. Tactics evolve constantly, but they are still the same basic tactics. The hammer and anvil has been around for thousands of years, and it's still used today. Sure its completely different, because now you use tanks and infantry armed with guns instead of horses and spearmen/swordsmen, etc., but it's still the same tactic. The Siege tactic has been used for thousands of years, and it's still called a siege, even if it's employed differently. The same exact thing can be applied to the "Phalanx". It lasted basically until gunpowder and firearms came along. It just evolved, just like any other tactic, weapon, etc. The fact is, the hoplite fighting style, while changed to fit new tactics, DID last until Medieval Times, it just evolved, just like every other tactic, weapon, etc. It was a very effective tactic for Nordic invaders as well, and it beat pretty much anything that came straight against it.
i take two in fact,i just don't learn about medieval history, for ancient history i learn about pompeii and herculaneum and the eurption of mount vesuvius, ancient greece (greco-persian wars), Xerxes (ancient personality) and minoan crete (ancient society), we learn some of the battles such as thermopylae and we learnt the tactics, but we never extensively studied the introduction of the phalanx formation so excuse me for not knowing so much about it,
OK first of all, you're a complete joke. Everything you mention can be learned in an afternoon of watching history channel and reading a few online study pages. Really now, that's pretty pathetic. Honestly, don't even mention the Greco-Persian Wars to me, because they're a disgustingly over-popularized disgrace of Classical History, and I'm sick of everything thinking they're friggn classical greece expert because they read a few online documents on Marathon and *ugh*Thermopylae.... Second, don't pull the "I'm not sure on the subject crap", because that's a sh-ty argument. Don't tell other people they are wrong about something if you don't know the subject yourself! Telling me you don't know about the subject is basically saying, "I don't know about this time in History, or even the correct names of historical time periods, but I'm going to correct someone else anyway." Please, take your douchy attitude and try out for the football team. You'll find a lot of douches just like you there. And it's CLASSICAL, not ANCIENT. Ancient was before 500 BC, Greek history from 500BC onwards is CLASSICAL, not ANCIENT.
and my other history class is modern and that's self explanatory. One more thing i do play medieval 2 i think it's quite obvious from my signature (you see the byzantine empire faction?? that's what that it just in case you didn't know), i actually play it online and have defeated some of the best players on there and i have OBVIOUSLY seen pikemen, so don't think that i haven't played it, actually why dont you verse me? then we'll see who knows about the game or not, i bet you wouldn't last very long against a human player, since you'd probably be used to playing the dumb A.I.....So don't call me ignorant, i was just stating what the other guy said and i corrected him,
Well, that's a cute little autobiography of your gaming life, but honestly, I don't give a rats ass. I said that sarcastically you F-ing moron, because obviously you've played the game! I was telling you that the pike phalanx lasted into medieval times and you should know that BECAUSE you play Medieval II. What kind of idiot are you? And no, I don't take challenges from immature morons, and I only play Rome: Total War and it's modifications. I'll let you know I win 90% of my battles online in that game, not that it has ANYTHING to do with this conversation.
HE WAS REFERRING TO THE ACTUAL HOPLITE PHALANX. next time read before you post. I know that the shield wall and pike formation were modified versions of the hoplite and sarissa phalanxes, respectively but i was talking about the ACTUAL formations which he was referring to, and i cannot stress that enough.
I've covered this above, and they ARE the actual formations. Nothing survives to long without evolution, so suddenly saying it's not the actual formation just because it evolved is ridiculous.
jesus christ i hate people like you, pathetic trollers.
And I don't have the capacity to hate people on the internet. I have more of a life than that. I will say that I'm intolerant of idiots, of which you fall into the category of.
Actually you know it is quite STUPID that you asked if i ever played Medieval 2, if you actually see my username, you can tell that i am a part of a clan, {GrailKnights}, one of the most respected and well reputated clans in medieval, so it was quite idiotic to ask if i play medieval 2, have you ever played medival 2???? i doubt YOU have you probably only know about the game from trailers.
I was obviously being sarcastic, because the fact that you've played it and didn't know about the pike phalanx was pretty pathetic. I've covered this before though. Right now you've just proved to me that you're a completely ignorant, immature, and lifeless piece of crap, as are most clan members. Did I mention clans are just pathetic attempts at losers trying to feel popular and accepted? It's an incredibly sad psychological issue most nerds have nowadays. That's besides the point though. I thought if you spent half your post and stupid off-topic crap and insults, I'd counter with some insults and off-topic posting of my own. What comes around, goes around, as they say.

[{GrailKnight}]

You just proved that you are the immature moron who insults people on the internet, and i think you are the loser with no life, so stop insulting people on the internet. I never insulted you, you just butted in and started this crap, you are a low life loser (which you have proved) and i don't want to argue with you anymore, mainly because you are just an idiot. So i won't be coming back to this thread anymore, enjoy your pathetic trolling activities (god knows that's the only thing you have to look forward to in your pathetic life you loser). I can tell you are one of those geeks who gets bullied at school, so you come on the internet to try and act atll high and mighty and insult people, that is just pathetic beyond words, enjoy your ed up life loser try and get a gf, maybe then you won't act like you have PMS all the time lol, see ya loser

[pannonian]

Might I remind everyone to calm down, or at least try to, before I call the moderators in?

[Tony83]

There is so much wrong with your post I don't even know where to start. I'll try to push through the bullcrap and inadequate debate skills and muster up a response however. At first I thought you just needed to take a History Class, but it's clear now you need to take English as well. I have Firefox, and your post is just completely red with misspellings. Try using a period more often. Please. Read the Bold if you will:

This sort of post is completely unwarranted, not only is it offensive but totally against the TOS of TWC! Unless you are able to conduct a debate in a more civilised manner I shall have to ask you to move on.

You just proved that you are the immature moron who insults people on the internet, and i think you are the loser with no life, so stop insulting people on the internet. I never insulted you, you just butted in and started this crap, you are a low life loser (which you have proved) and i don't want to argue with you anymore, mainly because you are just an idiot. So i won't be coming back to this thread anymore, enjoy your pathetic trolling activities (god knows that's the only thing you have to look forward to in your pathetic life you loser). I can tell you are one of those geeks who gets bullied at school, so you come on the internet to try and act atll high and mighty and insult people, that is just pathetic beyond words, enjoy your ed up life loser try and get a gf, maybe then you won't act like you have PMS all the time lol, see ya loser

I know that you felt provoked into this response but it is only making matters worse. If you feel that you have been unfairly treated by someone's post then the better option is to report that post and the individual, using the "Report" button. Otherwise, as you see below, the argument perpetuates itself.

So, when I run that through a Retard-to-English Translator, I get, "I lost the argument, I don't want to admit it, so I'm going to be a hypocrite by calling someone a nerd for arguing over the internet, even though I'm doing it myself." I can live with that. A simple, "Sorry, I was wrong" would have sufficed, but it's clear some people are too stubborn for that.

Well, See ya, and have a great day!

JrvUnleashed. Make this the last such post you make, otherwise you will be observing the progress of RTR at a distance. You will not receive another warning.

[TheFirstONeill]

Polite request to all, please refrain from trolling and flaming.

[JrvUnleashed]

...Wow.

The most biased moderating I have ever witnessed. I have lost all respect for you and your ability to fairly moderate. This is outrageous. It's unbelievable that I was singled out and not him. Especially since his post was worse than mine. He was the one that started the argument, and he threw way more insults, but it's clear that he's a senior member of the community, and is therefore given a break. You know what though? I'm fine with that, because I've dealt with biased moderating before, and I'm completely used to it right now. Yeah I was out of line, but if you dare to call yourself a justified moderator you better make darn sure you give him the same little "talk" you gave me, or I wont take your words seriously, at all.

Let me tell you this kid, don't think that just because you are a moderator of your little forum here means that you are in any way superior to me, and I'm sure as hell not going to look to you as any more intelligent or take anything you say more deeply than anything else anyone else says. As far as I'm concerned you're just a wannabe game developer with a superiority complex. You can ban me, and I could really care less. From what I've seen, I certainly don't want to be a part of such a biased community, and if you think that banning me will block me from visiting anything that I want on your site, you've seriously got another thing coming.

Do as you will, but with every bit of dignity I have I REFUSE to step down from this...