Why do slingers have AP missiles?

[Magnum_Opus]

I was wondering why all slingers have AP missiles? I know this game is trying to be historically accurate and realistic, and it just seems to me that stones and pebbles hitting metal plates and padded armour from long range wouldn't do a whole lot of damage. IMHO, a unit like the early roman slingers should be used as a harassing force to tempt the enemy army into attacking, and if they didn't, to inflict casualties among the lighter armed soldiers that don't have a large shield and heavy armour to protect them. Especially since slingers are so cheap, (a quarter the cost of a levy javelin thrower unit), the role of inflicting heavy casualties among the heavily armoured enemy soldiers doesn't seem fitting.

[Boriak]

In frontal fire, slingers won't cause many casualties. Slingers usually have a very low Attack rating and shields have double the defense against projectiles if I recall correctly.

If you manage to get your slingers at an enemy's back, however, things change. Momentum transfer means the stone's impact carries through armor, causing damage in a similar way as a hammer or mace. Granted the mass of a stone or a lead bullet is much smaller than a hammer's but it also has far more speed. Momentum = mass * speed. Also: Kinetic energy = 0.5* mass * speed^2. Twice the speed, four times the energy.

[Entropy Judge]

it just seems to me that stones and pebbles hitting metal plates and padded armour from long range wouldn't do a whole lot of damage.

It should be noted that most (if not all) professional slingers didn't use stones, they used lead bullets. Also, "long range" doesn't mean a whole lot - four hundred meters or so with a lobbed shot, probably half that with a flat trajectory.
There's also the fact that Slingers have exceptionally low Attack - only 1 or 2 for most of them - so they probably aren't going to be inflicting significant proportions of casualties unless you feed them kills.

[Magnum_Opus]

I suppose that make sense, but it sort of annoys me that my slingers always get more kills than any archers I field. Since archers only have 2-3 more attack, once they both get a bit of experience the ap slinger missiles do more damage.

[Titus Marcellus Scato]

I suppose that make sense, but it sort of annoys me that my slingers always get more kills than any archers I field. Since archers only have 2-3 more attack, once they both get a bit of experience the ap slinger missiles do more damage.

My solution to the problem of overpowered slingers in EB was to mod the number of soldiers in the slinger units from 30 men down to 20 (normal size). That's a reduction from 120 men to 80 on Huge unit size. I didn't reduce their upkeep, because I wanted them to be less attractive to the AI recruitment script.

This makes slingers less of a dominant force on the battlefield, their reduced numbers tone down their killing power by 1/3rd.

[Trax]

I use archers only against unarmoured or shieldless targets unless I can shoot them in the back. Enemy army contains usually both armoured and unarmoured targets so there's work for both archers and slingers.

[Cyclops]

I was wondering why all slingers have AP missiles? I know this game is trying to be historically accurate and realistic, and it just seems to me that stones and pebbles hitting metal plates and padded armour from long range wouldn't do a whole lot of damage. IMHO, a unit like the early roman slingers should be used as a harassing force to tempt the enemy army into attacking, and if they didn't, to inflict casualties among the lighter armed soldiers that don't have a large shield and heavy armour to protect them. Especially since slingers are so cheap, (a quarter the cost of a levy javelin thrower unit), the role of inflicting heavy casualties among the heavily armoured enemy soldiers doesn't seem fitting.

IIRC there's a source (Polybius? Just guessing) that describes Balearic slingers using their missiles to wreck opposing heavy infantry armour.

Certainly some professional slingers would've used lead shot (and by professional I suppose we mean mercenaries that had access to a regular supply of lead-that's most of them as bronze was still a popular metal in the EB era). Not sure how that translates to some of the "barbarian" slinger types though, some of them are described as shepherds?

[Petite Wolf]

IIRC there's a source (Polybius? Just guessing) that describes Balearic slingers using their missiles to wreck opposing heavy infantry armour.

Certainly some professional slingers would've used lead shot (and by professional I suppose we mean mercenaries that had access to a regular supply of lead-that's most of them as bronze was still a popular metal in the EB era). Not sure how that translates to some of the "barbarian" slinger types though, some of them are described as shepherds?

And what would a shepherd use to fend off wild animals? I imagine shepherds would be quite good with a sling, as they'd probably use it regularly while going about their daily business. I could of course be completely wrong, though.

[Trax]

Often, against soldiers armed with helmets, cataphracts and cuirasses, smooth stones shot from a sling or staff sling are more dangerous than any arrows, since while leaving the limbs intact they inflict a wound that is still lethal, and the enemy dies from the blow of the stone without the loss of any blood'

Vegetius

[Stath's]

Thanks Scato for posting your idea.

I think I'll do the same coz usually i find myself overrecruiting them.