Arcani ..... and spies

[PROMETHEUS ts]

I don't mind that arcani is in game somehow- I just find idea of ninja battlefield unit for Rome completely stupid. Most likely if arcani were Roman and they were on battlefields they would fight like normal Romans. If we want to talk about going behind enemy lines it makes more sense on campaign map. Otherwise the sources are pretty much incomplete and the point is CA could if they wanted use the very brief sources to make some unit, I don't see anyone dispute this. Just that making such a unit like a ninja does not seem cool or fun, it seems stupid as long as we are sticking to opinions and not trying to use sources to back up the opinion that arcani were battlefield super ninja.

You see ... I think CA created the Ninja features to be deployed behind the enemy lines , to simulate somehow the sabotage and the disruptive operations done at tha back of an army ...

And that is the same simulation that could be done using the Arcani ...

that's all a sort of simulation , we all know that probably in reality such operations woudl have been more stuff like poisoning the whells , give fire to the carriages , free the horses or the like , but since this can't be done ingame , I think is a good way to represent a behind the shoulders danger ...

and is also a cool factor in multiplayer ... severall times I got surpised how the enemy used the ninjas to get behind my general back ...

you can imagine a unit of arcani sneacking inside the camp of your general trying to assasinate ... its a way to simulate a back operation ...

[Lord Baal]

The "black ops" are already simulated on the game as agent actions.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

The "black ops" are already simulated on the game as agent actions.

Ok some of them but I like to play and do my guerrilla fight style in field ..

[Lord Baal]

Ok some of them but I like to play and do my guerrilla fight style in field ..

It would be interesting, yes, that instead of just flip the coin and get result missions you where able to play a bit more like the game Commandos (the one about WW2). That would be awesome, but get tiresome after a while.

On the battlefield as units, I would not like them, as it would be a huge leap on logic and all, but meh, I bet we will get something like that anyway. I will mod it out at once if possible.

[DarthRuanek]

Leaps do have to be taken for the sake of gameplay. You're right about that. We don't know necessarily how different ancient army units looked. But deciding how to make the Sacred Band look is purely cosmetic, while adding a battlefield ninja is not. If this was a faction like the Gauls, where we don't have as much historical information, I wouldn't mind as much. But with Rome we can easily have at least 20 or 30 units with good historical backing without resorting to things like your idea of the Arcani.

They sound like they'd be an interesting agent type (though I don't know if they'd be much different from a spy or assassin), but they don't belong on the battlefield. The fact is, we do have tons of information about Roman legions, army compositions, formations, etc. And Arcani aren't ever mentioned there. Sometimes not mentioning something can mean as much as mentioning it.

A single stone that says soldier and spy doesn't mean that there was a person that was both a soldier and a spy simultaneously, and fought in some special independent military unit in battle based on that idea.

BUT YOU DON'T
YOU'VE DONE NOTHING BUT SAY IT CAN'T BE SO BECAUSE REASONS.

NOT ONLY ARE YOU NOT ARGUING PROPERLY, YOU'RE ACTING SMUG ABOUT IT.

Shouting (as typing in all caps is often related to) doesn't ever make people take your argument more seriously. Quite the opposite, in fact.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

They sound like they'd be an interesting agent type (though I don't know if they'd be much different from a spy or assassin), but they don't belong on the battlefield. The fact is, we do have tons of information about Roman legions, army compositions, formations, etc. And Arcani aren't ever mentioned there. Sometimes not mentioning something can mean as much as mentioning it.

Actually having found proves of them as Milites and in a military fortress then makes me believe that they are pertinent to the army , and this is not a leap of faith actually ... as for the rest of lack of inormation , well I woudl be surpirised if you got more if they where supposed to be agentes in rebus or secret behind enemy line operatives ... also in the roman army there where many other subcorps dedicated to different things , from manuballistarii to other kind of units as well , just because they where not mentioned often and were not part of the "standard" army doesnt mean they didn't exhist or been used on field ... infact actually is probably the opposite ... ut anyway we understood your point and I bet you understood ours , lets other people speack perhaps?

[Anna_Gein]

Every spy can call himself a soldier of his country. His country could as well call him a soldier.
Does that make the murdering he has committed for his country a military act ?
Maybe at a few but more would be call criminal or terrorist.
There is no real line to call someone fighting outside the battlefield except the rule of the victorious.
Most of the resistants who fought during the second world war would today been call terrorist if they were Taliban fighting in Afghanistan.
The very meaning of soldier is arguable in itself beyond any hypothesis madded 2000 years later.
Members of the Waffen SS weren't treat as soldier though they just fight as any soldier of the Wechmacht.

Saying the arcani were around since earlier times can mean absolutely everything we want
Prometheus you have already make clear that their role as well as detail concerning them should be taken with cautious so there is no need to justify more their existence.
(Though I will gladly welcome more information about them)
I understand you are both with Marcus Aemilius Lepidus waging personal war across the forum but nearly all have been said
So each of you should show themselves worthy enough to cast aside personal different from a subject about you don't have that much difference in your opinions.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

I agree , but I am making no personal war ... I post usually proves and facts, if those then are judged biased or not good because someone doesn't like then is not my fault ...

as for the spy thing I was just referencing to the tabled found in vindolanda with the Miles arcani writing ... tha'ts all for me it is a good base to speculate and study over .. unfortunately I am not an archeologist and is not my job to further deepen that argument , I can humbly report what I know and what I have had the pleasure to learn over years of study , altough amateur as some people like to point out , I consider myself pretty well informed in general and I do not pretend to know everything infact when I do not know something or I do not know much about a subject I just avoid making claims that I can't eventually backup.

[daelin4]

The closest Arcani should be in Rome2 would be global event bonuses (Arcani: discount and bonus to agent training and actions) and a building called Arcani headquarters, giving similar bonuses to using and training spies.

But in the unit roster? Naw. Maybe as a reward unit for completing missions, but they'd just be Roman Kisho Ninja, and just as useless.

[Lord Baal]

I reached at this point the same conclusion as Lepidus, well I reached a long time ago. I however do think they could have existed in Republic times, but that's moot. I think that the arcani returning, but as the spy/assassins/saboteurs agents of Rome it's a must. I don't think there's a need of having a cool, very shady and unverifiable unit at best, totally ahistorical and fantasy unit at worst, in the battlefield, seeing how much variety the game have already without them.

[Marcus Aemilius Lepidus]

I reached at this point the same conclusion as Lepidus, well I reached a long time ago. I however do think they could have existed in Republic times, but that's moot. I think that the arcani returning, but as the spy/assassins/saboteurs agents of Rome it's a must. I don't think there's a need of having a cool, very shady and unverifiable unit at best, totally ahistorical and fantasy unit at worst, in the battlefield, seeing how much variety the game have already without them.

Saying the arcani were around since earlier times can mean absolutely everything we want
Prometheus you have already make clear that their role as well as detail concerning them should be taken with cautious so there is no need to justify more their existence.

Do not bring now Lord baal that is a smart person and perfectly understood the point of the tread ....

the brought up proves for the specific game i plementations are more than a valid backup .... live with it or not .... Arcani have been proved , and not only by me , as a true exhisting reality of the time....
Wich I repeat since you ignore all time the posts or you do not read on purpouse :

It is not republican time it is imperial time and disbanded by the 4rth ad...

Compare the statements and you have my problem. Fine that you finally notice that they are imperial time, late Imperial time, even it reaches to constans as an authour mentioned. The gameplay time is the republic time and the early principat which disqualifiy the Arcani. They would be better in a Barbarian Invasion Expansion or Diocletian Total War which would cover their existens corectly. If we have Arcani just as agents i could live with that like i and the others wrote before, simple out of the reason that Arcani could be a description of an agent, not of the reason that there was a nearly unknown group in late roman britanny.

And please notice in your latest posts when you change or add sources on your first post, because no one can claim to read all after that. The picture your special soldier downstairs look really amazing, but i don't want units like that. Besides there is still a discussion if masks like the one found in Kalkriese are really more than part of parade acessoir, because it exist well arguet doubts about the ability to fight with them.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

Compare the statements and you have my problem. Fine that you finally notice that they are imperial time, late Imperial time, even it reaches to constans as an authour mentioned. The gameplay time is the republic time and the early principat which disqualifiy the Arcani. They would be better in a Barbarian Invasion Expansion or Diocletian Total War which would cover their existens corectly. If we have Arcani just as agents i could live with that like i and the others wrote before, simple out of the reason that Arcani could be a description of an agent, not of the reason that there was a nearly unknown group in late roman britanny.

And please notice in your latest posts when you change or add sources on your first post, because no one can claim to read all after that. The picture your special soldier downstairs look really amazing, but i don't want units like that. Besides there is still a discussion if masks like the one found in Kalkriese are really more than part of parade acessoir, because it exist well arguet doubts about the ability to fight with them.

It is not me finally noticing ,lol I had to write in bold letters to make you able to "notice" ....
And the game time is from republic to principate and so imperial time , we do not know how much more goes beyond that and since neither you neither I work for CA you cant say anything lol...

As for your problem with arcani yes is your problem with wrong nitpicking...
Also you fail to read my words as usual , read whats been written befoure and you will have a better knowledge of why I am proposing it ,as is clearly stating about a possible fantasy mix up of the look because looks cool , there is. No historical involvement behind that.... you have To spend more time to read the topics and understand them so we woulnt have dozens of posts always saying the same .

And I didnt edit my post , you can clearly see it by the timeframe of its last edition... Why you accuse people of things untrue?
Also the kalkriese , if u knew archeology , you would know that is not the only facemak... Infact there are many others found around and very varied in shapes and look... Beside that no one made claims about its practical use or not , it was a gamelook sugestion for cool factor ....

As for a possible fantasy reconstruction ... could be cool to have for that special unit the former hoods mixed twith this lower armor mask
http://i53.tinypic.com/mhzsrr.jpg

There is no need to bring always and always up stupid historical nitpicking..... Its not pertinent to the topic . Your post is just about stuff thats not even discussed about .

Stop writing and acting like if you are an archeologist on field with all the answers because when false claims are done they get usually discovered.

[bushranger]

I am all for a covert battlefield unit.There would have been plenty of times where a small detachment of men would have been used to cause mischief on the battlefield,especially during sieges,might as well give them a name and acarni keeps popping up why not that.

I would like to see them used differently then in past TW games though,more of a deception unit that can trick a opponent or AI or can imitate a enemy unit to open gates and the like rather then ninjas with bombs.

[PROMETHEUS ts]

I am all for a covert battlefield unit.There would have been plenty of times where a small detachment of men would have been used to cause mischief on the battlefield,especially during sieges,might as well give them a name and acarni keeps popping up why not that.

I would like to see them used differently then in past TW games though,more of a deception unit that can trick a opponent or AI or can imitate a enemy unit to open gates and the like rather then ninjas with bombs.

Exactly what I am saying , and since we have real proves of them beeing agentes in rebus operatives .... We have a valid historic backup for the purpouse of the game ...we aren't writing a zaelotic integralistic book of the historical perfect game .... Otherwise as I said befoure we would have 10% of the units possible .... And the so cared germans of mr Marcus would get just. One Warband at the best for historical evidences of course ....

[Lifthrasir]

Ok, here is something. The Arcani appeared in a text from Ammien Marcellin, Story of Rome, XXVIII, 3, 8:

« haec etiam praecipua. Arcanos genus hominum a ueteribus institutum, super quibus aliqua in actibus Constantis rettulimus, paulatim prolapsos in uitia a stationibus suis remouit: aperte conuictos, acceptarum promissarumque magnitudine praedarum allectos, quae apud nos agebantur, aliquotiens barbaris prodidisse. id enim illis erat officium, ut ultro citroque {per longa spatia} discurrentes, uicinarum gentium strepitus nostris ducibus intimarent. »

« Theodose expelled Arcani, the institution of which goes back up to our ancestors. We said some words about it in the history of emperor Constant. The corruption had skipped imperceptibly among them. They were convinced to have, by the bait of the promises, and to share the booty, betrayed often the secret of our measures; whereas their role, the purpose of their distant excursions, was unlike us to warn movements of the foreigners. »

I hope the translation is correct. But according to that, Arcani existed more as spies than as battlefield unit.