Smaratia need to be refix kinda

[Talbaz]

sorry for anyspelling errors in a advance

ok am sorry but the state of smaratia in 6.0 was better then in 6.3 has anyone of the tester play them here how a game go unless you surivie some how

take a few rebel province try and get a good army to take care of all the rebel get attack by two other factions and then lose cause you can affroded to fight a two front war with such carppie lands plz can you lower the cost of upkeep i mean i give you that they where kinda of low at 6.0. and why did the whole roster change cause right now the roster with AOR uints is 1 uint of archers 1 aor uint of ok inf 1 uint of horse archers and then everything else take two turns to build
and the two of hrose archer the general uint and the one with the mace wtf up with them they basic the same uint cost close to the same such slightly different weapons can you kinda of make them different or something. am sorry but the roster for uints in 6.0 was a very good roster uints looked better too.

[PyrrhusKillsCaesar]

yo. um the sarmatians are like that because in 6.0 they were uber powerful. that is the only thing that i can understand out of what you said.

[seVVVen]

Sort of reminds me of this:



I'm playing Sarmatia right now with 6.3 and I'm kicking ass just fine. No changes needed.

(J/K about the reading test bud, just couldn't resist)

[Marcus Scaurus]

yo. um the sarmatians are like that because in 6.0 they were uber powerful. that is the only thing that i can understand out of what you said.

In 6.0, I had huge armies invading Thraca and Anatolia. I had about eight provinces but I could afford two or three stacks, mainly horse archers: they costed only about 30 or 50 denarii upkeep per turn, they changed this to 200 in 6.3.

[Cheexsta]

Sarmatia is fine as it is. I started a Sarmatian campaign when 6.3 came out, they can steamroll the nearby rebels (don't bother with Scythia though) and then stomp on the Dacian region. They have a bit more trouble with Germania (so many javelins) but it's usually not too hard when you have lots of horse archers.

As to why they needed their upkeeps changed, they were absolutely annihilating everything in 6.0. Give 'em 20 years and they would have conquered half the world. While the low upkeeps quite accurately represented their low cost to their leaders, the effects of those upkeeps (50 Sarmatian stacks in a single region) was woefully unrealistic. As they are now, they rarely move outside of their borders too far, which is true to history.

[PyrrhusKillsCaesar]

yeah i know what they changed. i helped convince them to change cause i was playing as romans one day and just Sarmatians kept coming and coming at an impossible rate. there would be like 5 full armies attacking in waves at some points

[Talbaz]

ok play back to where i was with my 6.0 campagien there ok still one problem the thrd horse acrher uint why they have same stats and the general's.


oh and found something else the general cav type don't have a skirsmh(spelled that wrong) mode at all.

can you fix the raods plz

[LordSaradain]

The sarmatians do need to be reworked. Not because they are underpowered, trust me they arn't if you play them right. They need to be reworked because currenly they only have four different kinds of units including the generals bodyguard, which is way too little. They need some kind of cheap basic lightcav(not HA's) noble HA's, a few more types of cavalry and a new bodyguard unit(should at least be more powerful than normal Basiliskon hippies).
I think the archers can be dropped, they should be a AoR unit instead. If sarmatia needs infantry you will have to rely on mercenaries and AoR which is as it should be.
Most Important: Give them lots of varied different cavalry units, some female riders would be much appreciated also.

[Nobunuga oda]

They seriously need to be reworked, put some melee infantry in there! The reason why they were so powerful is that they were good in combat and in archery so that they cood take them out at a distance rather than melee.

And seriously the 6.0 units looked extremely good compare to the dull 6.3.

[Scippio Hollandia]

I'm playing sarmatia now.
I have no problems with finance. Simply because i don't have expensive cavalry, just the horse archers. I also take the settlements with ports. They give you a lot of money. Don't go into the Steppe or Germania. There is no money there. You should look instead to Armenia and Pontus. Most notably their blacksea ports.
Although the campaign of the sarmatians mabye difficult. They have great advantage on the battlefield.
I think it is cool that the factions are divers. It would be boring and unrealistic if every faction got as rich as Rome.
Just quickly my battletactics:
take 16 HAS and divide them into 4 groups of 4 HAS
let 1 group go into single line. They will be a holding force.
2 other groups in double line will go to flanks
while the 4th group will go around the enemy and attack them from the rear.
The enemy is surrounded and will be shot to pieces.

[.Seal]

They seriously need to be reworked, put some melee infantry in there! The reason why they were so powerful is that they were good in combat and in archery so that they cood take them out at a distance rather than melee.

And seriously the 6.0 units looked extremely good compare to the dull 6.3.

realism.. historical accuracy.. Only thing I have to say.

[Talbaz]

realism.. historical accuracy.. Only thing I have to say.

um can i ask you a question why are you playing the game then if you want perfect realism why not such program the ai to to specfic moves lose where they historcal lost and all that and sit there and watch. oh yeah cause that would be boring. there has to be a balance of realism and gameplay realism doesn't equal = good gameplay if it did we wouldn't have games cause we all be in the cool fun world doing real things.

yes smartia does need to be rework i would be happy will new uints and if the roads were fix
or such fix the roads for the love of god fixs the roads

[Cheexsta]

um can i ask you a question why are you playing the game then if you want perfect realism why not such program the ai to to specfic moves lose where they historcal lost and all that and sit there and watch. oh yeah cause that would be boring.

I think you're missing the point of "realism" and "historical accuracy." The RTR team is not disallowing things from going against history, they are simply trying to introduce the same factors that affected history. For example, it was historically accurate that Sarmatia did not use much in the way of infantry, basically as they had no need for it. However, we can assume that if Sarmatia expanded into Germania (and hell, why not Gaul as well?) then they would have found some need to use infantry - which is where the AoR troops come in. They would have preferred to use locals who were more used to unmounted combat than they.

there has to be a balance of realism and gameplay realism doesn't equal = good gameplay if it did we wouldn't have games cause we all be in the cool fun world doing real things.

I disagree. How many opportunities do we have in real life to go out and lead an army of Roman Legionairres? That is the point of this game, after all; to do things in history that we could not possibly do in real life.

[Balbor]

When i was playing as Macadon i defeated the Dacians and made them my protectorate, then about 50years later the Sarmatian turned up and started making things difficult, taking all but 1 of dacias cities. To defeate them in open battles i would place all my pikemen is a line cross one of the corners of the battle field, with 3 Balistas/scorpions lined up just in front of them (with the crew standing withing the extended pikes), behind then i had 4 units of archers.

I was never really able to defeate the Sarmatian armies, but my artillary would soon wear down there nobles to the point were they would start to leave the field. As soon as there cavalry were about 2/3 of the way i would send my cavalry units to run down there foot units.

While doing this for about 10 years i build up an invasion force of 4 armies and took 4 of there cities one turn, raised them to the ground and then pushed for them to become a protectorate.

[Wolfcp11]

Parle Anglais, si vous plais!

Their horse archers have little upkeep right now anyway, as stated many times. Go change the upkeep values yourself if you REALLY want to... on second thought, i bet you can't

[{nF}remix]

my only gripe is how the sarmatian general does not have skirmish mode, yet is classified as amissile cav.

same thing with the other elite horse archer unit ;(

[Cheexsta]

Sarmatian Generals, as well as their other elite cavalrymen, have "precursor" missile weapons - this means they fire their weapons before charging. That is why they have no Skirmish mode.