Light Infantry

[Dude with the Food]

This time can we please get light infantry with a use. Making them slightly faster and cheaper than heavier infantry isn't normally enough to make recruiting them woth it. Currently, they are only good as cheap garrisons and fodder unless I'm missing something badly. In M2TW, I avoided using them unless they were militia for cities or right at the beginning of the campaign when it's tight on money.

Make Heavier infantry slower and tire quicker or something visible that makes light infantry more viable for anything other than riot control. Especially since less units will be wearing heavy armour in this game. Something that distinguishes them from medium infantry which there will be more of.

[HusKatten]

It would be cool if a light infantry unit could actually defeat a heavy infantry unit that is exhausted - if of course, the light infantry is relatively fresh or warmed up. Currently they are good to use as flanking units, but as soon as you could afford it you're very likely to just replace the light flanking units with heavy infantry.

[flippingdesks]

Yeah they were useless in Rome 1, maybe alright at stopping a charge, but once you've got Heavy, there's no need for them.

[Anna_Gein]

It would be nice if the game takes into account the environment when a fight happen and maybe link it to formation. So for example heavy Infantry won't be able to maintain its formation in woods and are forced to use a mildly loosed formation there. On the other hand light infantry would be forced to use the mildly loose formation too but would be more effective in this case than heavy infantry.

Basically how King Arthur worked on this part.

[Dude with the Food]

Exactly, after you get heavy, I only see them good for tying up phalanxes so you can flank them with something less disposable.

[Dan113112]

Am I the only one that finds Hastati useless in vanilla RTW and even in realism mods? Why recruit them when you can have Principes instead? Hastati were lightly armored but too heavy still to move as fast as light infantry. Now, when playing Hellenistic factions in realism mods like RTR VII I have a use for Thureophoroi and Thorakitai. I would love to create a Hellenistic army completely composed of Thorakitai but, for balance reasons, CA and modders will limit their effectiveness and/or stats. Even if they were armed nearly the same as Roman legionaries.

[Maleventum]

I hope this time the velites, peltasts etc will be useful on the battlefield , remember that a bunch of peltast smashed a spartan moira at Lechaeum

[|Sith|Galvanized Iron]

Well skirmishers was really pitiful in RTW, same price level as archers, about same missile damage, but with hopelessly short range and low ammunition. Something needs to be done about them.

[Ichon]

Well skirmishers was really pitiful in RTW, same price level as archers, about same missile damage, but with hopelessly short range and low ammunition. Something needs to be done about them.

I don't remember it like that- they were great counter for elephants and I distinctly remember using entire armies of velites to crush Gauls on the cheap while using legionaries to fight Macedon. That was as much a comment on how weak Gaul roster was but still... they were certainly more useful than archers unless the battle was on a hill. Flat plains they were fast and javelins had better kill rate than archers so running them to flanks could kill 30% of enemy in a few volleys. That is pretty strong.

For R2 speed and stamina should be the main differentiators but also better hide, LoS, and terrain bonuses. Not sure what else to add... perhaps a better use of cover to having skirmishers in forest, heavy scrub or on walls they can crouch behind stuff easier so arrows hit them when in cover even less than heavy infantry in armor.

[DJPenguin]

I'd assume that the new Fog of War mechanic they're implementing could bring usefulness to light infantry if done correctly. Light cavalry would be better at scouting when the terrain is relatively open, but light infantry could be better at scouting dense woods/grass with a faster movement speed and the ability to stay hidden.

[Dan113112]

I'd assume that the new Fog of War mechanic they're implementing could bring usefulness to light infantry if done correctly. Light cavalry would be better at scouting when the terrain is relatively open, but light infantry could be better at scouting dense woods/grass with a faster movement speed and the ability to stay hidden.

I was thinking the same thing. The new fog of war mechanic would put light cavalry and light infantry to good use.

[torongill]

For me the real problem with skirmishers in previous titles was their lack of mobility. What we need(and supposedly have, judging from description of Rome 2 features) is the ability to throw javelins on the move, something that infantry skirmisher units in RTW didn't have. Add friendly fire and losses from getting trampled by friendly cavalry and suddently the skirmishers don't look that useless.

[Dude with the Food]

A lower morale penalty for broken formations? Maybe none.

[torongill]

I should've elaborated more - with "friendly fire" from collisions between cavalry and infantry, it won't be possible for cavalry to charge through its own lines to attack the skirmisher line. That means the player will have to put his cavalry where it won't trample his heavy infantry. In this way defense against skirmishers will be another skirmish line, a premature advance, which might make the enemy skirmish line retreat, or other missile troops to bombard the enemy skirmishers and make them get out of range.

Why use light infantry or skirmishers? Because most often that was what you had. Some warriors is better than none. Second, and this is impossibe to replicate in TW, heavy infantry couldn't move just everywhere. Light infantry and skirmishers could move practically unhindered through all kinds of terrain, precisely because they don't operate in rigid formations and the formation itself is flimsy.

[IGdood]

EB at least did skirmishers correctly:

Better missile attack
Have a small shield so they're slightly more resistant to missiles than archers were and also performed slightly better in the melee
Could work to support cavalry since they ran quickly and tired slowly
Could flank if required



And then there were the THRAIKIOI PELTASTAI

[Kraxis]

One solution is make Heavy Infantry actually move slowly. They haven't so far. I mean look at them when they run. It isn't a jog, it is similar to Marathon runners, and they run at full force. Heavy Infantry wouldn't be able to do that for more than 50 meters or so. When people talk about elite Heavy Infantry and their great stamina it is usually related to marches or longevity in actual fights. That's more down to technique and plain old grits, but running while encumbered, that drains even the hardiest man a lot.

Heavy Infantry shouldn't be able to run at all unless for the last bit for the charge. And then for a while after the enemy breaks. This would make Light Infantry a thorough pain to catch, and it would ensure they also had a function once the battle was decided (to run down routers). This might be extreme as I'm sure a light jog wouldn't be impossible for most well trained Heavies, but functionally they would march in pretty much all situations but the charge and chase.

[Argon Viper]

On way to fix the situation is to put in place formation bonuses/penalties. Heavy infantry is very powerful, but only in groups. And only with their flanks covered. One of the big fixtures of historical battles is heavy infantry being destroyed when they get hit in the flank and their formation collapses.

Heavy infantry should be incredible powerful from a forward direction and when in proper formation but becomes much weaker when that formation is broken or it's attacked from the flanks. Light infantry on the other hand, would be much weaker than heavy infantry in a head to head or formation battle, but would be superior to them if the formations were broken up or they attacked from the flanks.

Why invent complicated gameplay mechanics when history provides the reasoning

[Ichon]

On way to fix the situation is to put in place formation bonuses/penalties. Heavy infantry is very powerful, but only in groups. And only with their flanks covered. One of the big fixtures of historical battles is heavy infantry being destroyed when they get hit in the flank and their formation collapses.

Heavy infantry should be incredible powerful from a forward direction and when in proper formation but becomes much weaker when that formation is broken or it's attacked from the flanks. Light infantry on the other hand, would be much weaker than heavy infantry in a head to head or formation battle, but would be superior to them if the formations were broken up or they attacked from the flanks.

I've wanted that for awhile but it seems obvious from gameplay footage that isn't happening. Maybe they'll add it at a late stage but I doubt it.

[Argon Viper]

I've wanted that for awhile but it seems obvious from gameplay footage that isn't happening. Maybe they'll add it at a late stage but I doubt it.

Yeah, I'll bet that as well. And because of that probably none of us will use anything but heavy infantry

[Argon Viper]

Stupid Double Post...