Shield sizes and compound bows

[Quinn Inuit]

Currently, thureophoroi have shield value 5 and hoplites have 6. This doesn't seem to work, since the record is replete with examples of the aspis being better than the thureos in melee. Therefore, I'm seriously considering dropping the thureos value to 4 and upping the aspis to 8, on a par with the Roman scutum.

I'm also seriously considering lowering that upper value to 7, just because it doesn't seem like those shields are fully twice as good as a thureos.

How's this for a value system?

1. Bucklers
2. Caetra, phalangite shields, and other small round shields, esp. those carried by cavalry
3. Larger round shields and small ones of other shapes
4. Large cavalry shields, the thureos, most German and Gallic shields
5. Large shields of other shapes
6. Large wicker shields, e.g. sparabara
7. Aspis and scutum

Also, what should I do about compound bows? I'm hesitant to give any archers AP, but compound bows seem to deserve it. Should I lower archery attack values to compensate?

[FriendlyFire]

I have no background in the area, but wicker doesn't *sound* like a very substantial shield material . Are you using these points values solely to reflect the size of the shield (and hence its ability to block missiles - presumably even wicker does that), while accounting for the melee properties of the shield separately, in unit defense values?

[Irenaeus]

I'd be a bit worried that horse archers would be able to flatten anything in their path if they were given armour-piercing arrows. But I gather phalanxes are weighted highly in auto-resolve (which is what the computer uses when determining battle outcomes and it's between 2 AI factions), so it might work. I would ask that tests in Custom Battles be done to to make sure they wouldn't become super-units.

[FriendlyFire]

Quinn - while you're fixing shields, the text description for mercenary Thessalian Cavalry says they don't have any, but their stats list a shield value of 3

[Quinn Inuit]

I have no background in the area, but wicker doesn't *sound* like a very substantial shield material . Are you using these points values solely to reflect the size of the shield (and hence its ability to block missiles - presumably even wicker does that), while accounting for the melee properties of the shield separately, in unit defense values?

I wish I'd thought of that. That's an excellent way to reflect the arrow protection capacity of wicker while keeping it from being as good as a more solid shield.

I'd be a bit worried that horse archers would be able to flatten anything in their path if they were given armour-piercing arrows. But I gather phalanxes are weighted highly in auto-resolve (which is what the computer uses when determining battle outcomes and it's between 2 AI factions), so it might work. I would ask that tests in Custom Battles be done to to make sure they wouldn't become super-units.

Well, I've already rebalanced the phalanxes, so hopefully that's not as big of a problem now. (Secondary hp balancing was also my main contribution to FOE--I'm very proud of myself.) I'm worried about giving them AP, too. I wonder if lowering their attack would help?

Quinn - while you're fixing shields, the text description for mercenary Thessalian Cavalry says they don't have any, but their stats list a shield value of 3

Darn it. I was hoping I'd already confronted the Thessalian issue. The problem is that they were in a transition phase around the time of the game's start and I don't know precisely how they were armed. I'd better do some research. On the plus side, the old Thessalian cavalry from RTRPE was really quite good (I think it was taken directly from some artwork I saw), so we're covered no matter which way we go.

[slayer8908]

Darn it. I was hoping I'd already confronted the Thessalian issue. The problem is that they were in a transition phase around the time of the game's start and I don't know precisely how they were armed. I'd better do some research. On the plus side, the old Thessalian cavalry from RTRPE was really quite good (I think it was taken directly from some artwork I saw), so we're covered no matter which way we go.

from what i know i think thessalian calavary didnt carry shields.

give compound bows to cretans maybe?

[Carados]

Are compound bows actually affected by weather in the game? If the arrows they fire are strong enough to, allegedly, punch through the armour of the legionaries at Carrhae then I'm sure they should be given AP regardless of whether they are overpowered or not. It would be prudent to seriously reduce their effectiveness in certain weather conditions however. Therefore, in the Middle East etc. they should be fair powerful, but if they were to advance westwards where the climate is wetter, they'll begin to seriously struggle because suddenly the bows don't work!

[Wien1938]

I'd simply up the stats and ranges for compound bows, rather than give them AP. That would be too unbalancing - we're not talking longbow levels of kinetic energy here.

The Thessalians in my opinion would have switched in the mid 3rd Century BC to using shields with javelins, since this seems to be a near universal Hellenistic trend. Even the Macedonians (who effectively ruled Thessaly until 197 BC) switched over to using large round shields and fighting with javelins.

+2 Bucklers (surprising useful in a melee)
+3 Caetra, phalangite shields, and other small round shields (of sound construction), esp. those carried by cavalry
inc Larger round shields and small ones of other shapes (constructed of weaker materials, such as wicker)
inc Large wicker shields, e.g. sparabara (weak against melee attacks)
+4 the thureos, most German and Gallic shields
+5 Large cavalry shields, other strongly constructed large round shields.
+6 Aspis (strongly constructed and reinforced, good alround coverage) and early scutum (lacks reinforcing though well constucted and excellent coverage).
+7 later Scutum (excellent coverage and strongly reinforced)

[Quinn Inuit]

from what i know i think thessalian calavary didnt carry shields.

give compound bows to cretans maybe?

Well, the Cretans already have the current stats that reflect compound bows (i.e., more range and an additional attack point).

Are compound bows actually affected by weather in the game? If the arrows they fire are strong enough to, allegedly, punch through the armour of the legionaries at Carrhae then I'm sure they should be given AP regardless of whether they are overpowered or not. It would be prudent to seriously reduce their effectiveness in certain weather conditions however. Therefore, in the Middle East etc. they should be fair powerful, but if they were to advance westwards where the climate is wetter, they'll begin to seriously struggle because suddenly the bows don't work!

You see, that's what I was thinking of--that the legionnaires at Carrhae just couldn't stop those arrows except.

Unfortunately, I can't mess with how much bad weather affects compound bows. That's hard-coded. I wish I could.

I'd simply up the stats and ranges for compound bows, rather than give them AP. That would be too unbalancing - we're not talking longbow levels of kinetic energy here.

Fair enough. What about Carrhae, though? FWIW, I've already given all compound bowmen an extra attack point relative to the standard for archers and extra range.

The Thessalians in my opinion would have switched in the mid 3rd Century BC to using shields with javelins, since this seems to be a near universal Hellenistic trend. Even the Macedonians (who effectively ruled Thessaly until 197 BC) switched over to using large round shields and fighting with javelins.

Would the Thessalians have stopped being shock cavalry, though? I can see adopting shields, but why would they give up their tradition of being shock cavalry? They (and the Macs) were certainly heavy enough at Cynocephalae to beat back the Roman cavalry.

Also, I thought the Successors kept their xyston cavalry, too, even as they adopted more Tarentine-type cavalry as light horse.

+2 Bucklers (surprising useful in a melee)
+3 Caetra, phalangite shields, and other small round shields (of sound construction), esp. those carried by cavalry
inc Larger round shields and small ones of other shapes (constructed of weaker materials, such as wicker)
inc Large wicker shields, e.g. sparabara (weak against melee attacks)
+4 the thureos, most German and Gallic shields
+5 Large cavalry shields, other strongly constructed large round shields.
+6 Aspis (strongly constructed and reinforced, good alround coverage) and early scutum (lacks reinforcing though well constucted and excellent coverage).
+7 later Scutum (excellent coverage and strongly reinforced)

That looks like a good list. I didn't know about the difference between the early and late scutum. That's good to know. Two things:
1) The thureos only gets 2pts less than the aspis? I thought the general consensus of commentators was that it provided substantially less protection. It has to be more than the caetra, though. Darn. This is a tough one.

2) You're right about wicker being weak in melee, but I think I'm going to go with FF's suggestion and reduce the defense skill of sparabara to reflect its use in arrow blocking. ... Hey, wait a second! If the Persians were using compound bows that could pierce the scutum, then why on Earth would they equip their troops with wicker shields?

btw, I think you're going to like what I do with the phalangites in the next version. I'll finally be able to expunge all of the old large-shield ones and have properly armed and armoured phalangites.

[Caligula Caesar]

2) You're right about wicker being weak in melee, but I think I'm going to go with FF's suggestion and reduce the defense skill of sparabara to reflect its use in arrow blocking. ... Hey, wait a second! If the Persians were using compound bows that could pierce the scutum, then why on Earth would they equip their troops with wicker shields?

Because a) these weren't their elite forces and it is much cheaper, b) the compound bows can't really go through the scutum on a regular basis from long range (there was a thread about that somewhere), and c) they didn't have scutums anyway

[Carados]

+2 Bucklers (surprising useful in a melee)
+3 Caetra, phalangite shields, and other small round shields (of sound construction), esp. those carried by cavalry
inc Larger round shields and small ones of other shapes (constructed of weaker materials, such as wicker)
inc Large wicker shields, e.g. sparabara (weak against melee attacks)
+4 the thureos, most German and Gallic shields
+5 Large cavalry shields, other strongly constructed large round shields.
+6 Aspis (strongly constructed and reinforced, good alround coverage) and early scutum (lacks reinforcing though well constucted and excellent coverage).
+7 later Scutum (excellent coverage and strongly reinforced)

I like this list. The Apsis is designed primarily for use in the phalanx. When isolated, is such a large cumbersome shield a good thing? especially when against a more mobile foe?

Is there any such thing as long and short range damage?
Would certainly solve a few problems if there is...

[Quinn Inuit]

Oh, I remember, that was probably the horse archer thread from a few months ago. I see. So the sparabaras' shields protected them at range from heavy bows, and if the HA got in range to do more damage the archers behind the thin sparabara line would pincushion them.

And let's not rag too much on sparabara. As I understand it, they were the first "regular infantry" troops Persia had ever seen and acquitted themselves quite well on campaigns until the Greeks showed up.

[Wien1938]

Carrhae: If the Parthian arrows had been able to completely pierce the scutum at close range, then the battle casualties would have been high enough to have broken the legions. As it was, the Parthian arrows (at close range) could penetrate the body armour but not the scutum. So the majority of wounds were to exposed limbs and probably non-fatal - witness the amount of wounded abandoned in the panicked retreat.

Sparabara: The large wickershield could block a medium to long-range shot but not always a close range shot. The reason the Persians used this was that it was used in a pavaise-like manner, to cover the archer while he shot. Persian infantry were traditionally a mixture of archers and spearmen - the decisive arm in the Persian army was the cavalry. In plains warfare, infantry hold off cavalry with shot and spear.
Either the Successors recruited Sparabara as a sort of make-shift spearline or retained the cooperative manner of the bow-spear foot. We don't know a great deal about this auxillary infantry. Also they were not meant to engage in hoplite-style combat.

Thureos: The thureos provided better coverage than the traditional pelte and was constructed of wood and leather with a spined boss. It could be used in melee and could be used for limited shelter against slings or arrows. It is a compromise between the pelte and the aspis.

[Quinn Inuit]

I see. So that setup works until you have cavalry and infantry that are heavily-armoured enough to just march through the arrow storm and hack down the lighter units. And your interpretation of Carrhae rings true.

Ok, that makes sense. I'm guessing it was a lot cheaper than the aspis, too, since it seems to have caught on widely very fast.

[Quinn Inuit]

I think it worked pretty well. As I understand it, hypaspistai often fought out of the phalanx, and they were armed with an aspis or something similar in size.

Nope, no difference between short and long range damage except that defense skill doesn't apply to ranged attacks.

[Carados]

Ahhhh this is true.
Fair enough, I was wondering whether a decrease in defence skill for the large shields was in order (to show that they are more cumbersome) but, well, who knows. I've never fought with sword (spear?) and shield before so i wouldn't know how useful they are

[Quinn Inuit]

Hmmm...I hate to penalize like that, since it'll lower the overall rating of the unit. Instead, I recommend just giving them a worse stat_heat.

[Carados]

This is also a fair point.

Although I've never fought with sword and shield before, I must confess I did dress up as a Greek hoplite for halloween this year
Nothing too fancy, I made a plumed corinthian helmet out of a plastic WW1 helmet and cardboard (and some red fluffy thing) and just used some white fabric for a makeshift linothorax and cardboard for the Apsis (which was flat and small, for pratical purposes - nevertheless, it was invaluble in pushing people out of the way in a crowded environment).

Now, granted I had proper Greek curly hair and beard at the time but I got extremely hot with that helmet on, even when I was outside in the cold (except for my feet, they did get cold). Most uncomfortable.

[Quinn Inuit]

Here's another idea: what about giving all of the hoplites (except Spartans, to represent their training) a slower skeleton to represent how hard it was to move about and maneuver in a full panoply?

That's awesome. I'm surprised the helmet was so hot, though. I had no idea. Was it hot around your face, the top of your head, or both?

[Carados]

I'm not sure. It might be better to leave everything as is at the moment. If we were to give them a slower skeleton then we would have to do that with some other units who wore heavier armour and that might be a little too much hassle with deciding who should be slower or not etc. At least for the time being, would be nice to give some units a bit more/less manuvourability(sp?).

Erm, I'm struggling to remember now *thinks* I think it was mostly the top of my head but that's because heat rises, I was definitely hot all round except for the face actually. The face was cool in comparison but it was an absolute nightmare seeing people, especially because I'm short shorted too.

I'll see if I can get a picture up of what my hair was like back then (I've shaved it all off since).
I'm also undecided on what to dress up as next halloween, any ideas?
(and before anyone suggests it - NO!! I will not dress up (down?) as a gaesatae!!)

Here we go: