Imitation Legionaries

[General David]

I remember in Rome I, a few factions were able to field imitation legionaries which were pretty useful if you wanted to support your phalanxes. I do not know to what extent this was historically accurate or not, but I am hoping for their inclusion in Rome II. Do you think that they will be included? Which factions do you think will have access to these units?

[Geuvesa]

If memory serves me correctly, Pontus has troops that fought in the manner of the Legionaries. Macedon, and Carthage fielded heavier, better equipped soldiers because of wars with Rome (Carthaginian Liby-Phoenician troops looting Lorica Hamata from dead Romans was very popular) and Egypt developed a better equipped spear infantry who fought in loose formations like the Romans (loose compared to a Phalanx that is)

Any more learned history buffs feel free to correct me.

[CDR Hurricane]

Heavy Peltasts? Thureos Swordsmen?

We have already seen the Athenian thureos hoplites wearing chain mail and looking pretty Roman. I bet you can field a Romanesque army as one of the Hellenistic factions even if there are not true imitation legionnaires in the game.

[vietanh797]

The funny point is the Thorakitai was borned about the same time as the Roman hastati/ Principes/ Triarii system. Roman called them Imitation Legionaries actually because they don't know what that unit's name was. The truth is some of those units were there long before the Reform in Roman army

[JaM]

The funny point is the Thorakitai was borned about the same time as the Roman hastati/ Principes/ Triarii system. Roman called them Imitation Legionaries actually because they don't know what that unit's name was. The truth is some of those units were there long before the Reform in Roman army

ROman Hastati/Principes were sooner. They were classical Italian infantry used by tribes in Italy. Samnites uses same infantry types.


Anyway, i find quite strange new naming system.. units like Thorakitai, THeurophoroi, were well know, i dont see the reason why they needs to be renamed.. Its like if they decided Hastati called as Roman light swordsmen, while Principes would be heavy swordsmen... Makes no sense, because everybody knows who Hastati and Principes are... But because CA didnt used proper naming for Greek Infantry in first Rome, Many people dont really know about names of Greek infantry which is a shame...

[vietanh797]

ROman Hastati/Principes were sooner. They were classical Italian infantry used by tribes in Italy. Samnites uses same infantry types.


Anyway, i find quite strange new naming system.. units like Thorakitai, THeurophoroi, were well know, i dont see the reason why they needs to be renamed.. Its like if they decided Hastati called as Roman light swordsmen, while Principes would be heavy swordsmen... Makes no sense, because everybody knows who Hastati and Principes are... But because CA didnt used proper naming for Greek Infantry in first Rome, Many people dont really know about names of Greek infantry which is a shame...

no the Roman use Hoplite at first then switch to Hastati/Principes later on while the unit similar to Thureophoroi was first use by Alexander army in late Persia Campaign
And I was talking about the Roman Legion system was borned later than Thureophoroi or Thorakitai. Not about the Hastati
And if you consider the role of such unit Ekdromoi can also be consider the first kind of such unit but they fight in a light inf manner more than a assault inf

[Sandraker]

no the Roman use Hoplite at first then switch to Hastati/Principes later on while the unit similar to Thureophoroi was first use by Alexander army in late Persia Campaign
And I was talking about the Roman Legion system was borned later than Thureophoroi or Thorakitai. Not about the Hastati

I don't think that's right, isn't Thureos shield is a Celtic design that was first adopted by the Greeks when the Galatians migrated to Anatolia? In that case, its adoption happened long after Alexander's death.
The Romans got their fighting style primarily from other Italic factions (notably the Samnites) as well as a tiny bit of Gaulish influence. The Thureophoroi were sort of mix between Hoplites and Peltasts with the new Celtic-like shield.

[vietanh797]

I don't think that's right, isn't Thureos shield is a Celtic design that was first adopted by the Greeks when the Galatians migrated to Anatolia? In that case, its adoption happened long after Alexander's death.
The Romans got their fighting style primarily from other Italic factions (notably the Samnites) as well as a tiny bit of Gaulish influence. The Thureophoroi were sort of mix between Hoplites and Peltasts with the new Celtic-like shield.

pls read again
"the unit similar to Thureophoroi"
Similar here is about function and role not about the equipment. Equipment can change with time and new technology but the function the role of a unit isn't.

Basically Thureophoroi is heavy peltast while Thorakitai is a even heavier version thus the heavier unit having more new role since they start to drift away from the original peltast.

[torongill]

no the Roman use Hoplite at first then switch to Hastati/Principes later on while the unit similar to Thureophoroi was first use by Alexander army in late Persia Campaign
And I was talking about the Roman Legion system was borned later than Thureophoroi or Thorakitai. Not about the Hastati
And if you consider the role of such unit Ekdromoi can also be consider the first kind of such unit but they fight in a light inf manner more than a assault inf

If we're to believe Livius, then the Romans started using manipular formation after the Camillan reforms, which is earlier than Alexandros.
Second, it would be difficult for the thureophoroi to use shield (thureos) that was introduced by the Celts during the invasion of the Balkans.

[Inhuman One]

Considering how phalanxes are less mobile now, I sure hope that all greek factions will get descent support troops for the flanks. Macedon and greek cities had none at all in rome 1.

[biohazardcake]

greek city states had heavy peltasts wich i used extensivly to protect my flanks .

[CDR Hurricane]

greek city states had heavy peltasts wich i used extensivly to protect my flanks .

That was actually a really bad unit in Rome 1. It cost a lot more than peltasts, couldn't stand up to any regular infantry unit, and did minimal damage to armored targets with javelins. (They did look cool though) You would have been better off spending the money on a cheap hoplite unit and making them fight with swords out of phalanx formation.

Based on the latest video, the light peltasts in Rome 2 look similar to the heavy peltasts of Rome 1 (minus the greaves), so I expect heavy peltasts in Rome 2 to be more competent.

[Lavrentivs]

A unit of Libyans in Hannibal's reserve at Cannae are recorded to have been donned in captured Roman armour (Polybios.III.114). Though it is merely conjecture on my part, I would perhaps also venture to say that this particular unit may have imitated the italic/Roman manipular fighting style.

[Mary The Quene]

The seleucid empire heavily relied on those romanised infantry a good example is the battle of Beth Zechariah

[torongill]

The original RTW had these for Numidia and Armenia as well.

Anyway don't expect to see "immitation legionaries" in Rome 2. Expect to see Thorax Spearmen, Thureos Spears, Heavy Galatian infantry etc. The closest equivalent would be Carthaginian heavy assault infantry, equipped with Roman mail shirts and Roman scutum shields, but we don't know whether we'll see their implementaiton - and one condition to enable their recruitment might be a heroic victory against the Romans, who knows.

@JaM I personally didn't know about the Thorakitai or the Thureophoroi until I started playing EB - so no, not everybody would know what they are. The same does not hold true for the hastati and principes, triarii and velites, because these were often mentioned in the Roman texts, which are the main source of info for the period. The Roman Legion is also a popular theme and it has been studied in and out so it's not the same kind of apples.

[Rhomphaiaphoros]

I personally didn't know about the Thorakitai or the Thureophoroi until I started playing EB - so no, not everybody would know what they are. The same does not hold true for the hastati and principes, triarii and velites, because these were often mentioned in the Roman texts, which are the main source of info for the period. The Roman Legion is also a popular theme and it has been studied in and out so it's not the same kind of apples.

In my opinion, this exactly is the problem. Now that Rome II is almost guaranteed to become a big hit, probably selling more copies than any TW game so far, CA could have made unit names like Thureophoroi and Thorakitai known to the larger audience, via this new almost-certainly-successful game of theirs. What's even more saddening in my opinion is that the same applies to factions as well - let's do be honest, shall we, factions such as the Seleucids, Dacians, Celtiberians etc. were dropped from the list of playable factions only because they are not "well-known" or "trendy" enough for the common player, unlike the titular Romans, the Carthaginians, the traditional choices for "barbarian" factions or the Classical Greeks with their hoplites, who all are exactly that.

What I'm trying to say is, CA would have had the power to affect the common player's view of history if they wanted to, by including less known unit names and (playable!) factions in Rome II and making them better known, even iconic. But instead, they seem to have taken a more traditional approach in some ways, including in the game what is already well known thanks to films, most popular documentaries or other video games. Yet, I'm not saying that they went "full Hollywood" either, because there's already some less known stuff included in the game as well. For example, judging by what we've heard so far, it sounds like they're getting the Hellenistic unit rosters correct this time, despite not using the original names - but I admit that "Thorax Swordsmen" still is much, much better than something generic like "Hellenistic Swordsmen (and even that would be sufficient as a name, as long as the unit itself functions the way it should on the battlefield). Furthermore, I was also pleasantly surprised by the inclusion of Pontus and Epirus as playable factions - perhaps there's still hope for some others like them added later in the game via DLC (which I'm personally not very fond of, but which also is infinitely better than letting them to eternally remain as mere unplayable factions).

[Sandraker]

In my opinion, this exactly is the problem. Now that Rome II is almost guaranteed to become a big hit, probably selling more copies than any TW game so far, CA could have made unit names like Thureophoroi and Thorakitai known to the larger audience, via this new almost-certainly-successful game of theirs. What's even more saddening in my opinion is that the same applies to factions as well - let's do be honest, shall we, factions such as the Seleucids, Dacians, Celtiberians etc. were dropped from the list of playable factions only because they are not "well-known" or "trendy" enough for the common player, unlike the titular Romans, the Carthaginians, the traditional choices for "barbarian" factions or the Classical Greeks with their hoplites, who all are exactly that.

What I'm trying to say is, CA would have had the power to affect the common player's view of history if they wanted to, by including less known unit names and (playable!) factions in Rome II and making them better known, even iconic. But instead, they seem to have taken a more traditional approach in some ways, including in the game what is already well known thanks to films, most popular documentaries or other video games. Yet, I'm not saying that they went "full Hollywood" either, because there's already some less known stuff included in the game as well. For example, judging by what we've heard so far, it sounds like they're getting the Hellenistic unit rosters correct this time, despite not using the original names - but I admit that "Thorax Swordsmen" still is much, much better than something generic like "Hellenistic Swordsmen (and even that would be sufficient as a name, as long as the unit itself functions the way it should on the battlefield). Furthermore, I was also pleasantly surprised by the inclusion of Pontus and Epirus as playable factions - perhaps there's still hope for some others like them added later in the game via DLC (which I'm personally not very fond of, but which also is infinitely better than letting them to eternally remain as mere unplayable factions).

I always found the name "Shield Bearers/(Brothers?)" a bit odd, as it doesn't at all describe the nature of the unit. Uh-huh. They carry shields. Great.
"Hypaspists" on the other hand means absolutely nothing in English, and ironically this is better because it immediately makes you notice that there's something noteworthy about this unit, and you're more inclined to read its full description to figure out what they historically represent and what they can do in combat. (if there even is such thing as a full description in R2)

[DogSoldierSPQR]

I always found the name "Shield Bearers/(Brothers?)" a bit odd, as it doesn't at all describe the nature of the unit. Uh-huh. They carry shields. Great.
"Hypaspists" on the other hand means absolutely nothing in English, and ironically this is better because it immediately makes you notice that there's something noteworthy about this unit, and you're more inclined to read its full description to figure out what they historically represent and what they can do in combat. (if there even is such thing as a full description in R2)

I believe CA were trying to play it safe here when they really should've just put down the realistic names for the units. For example, when I play RS2.5 for the first time, I never knew what a Thorakitai was. Never even heard of them before. I never complained though. I just read the description, recruited them and used them and understood what they were all about. CA wants Rome 2 to be a comfortable experience for people and thought that realistic names would put people off. Quite the opposite really. A lot of people enjoyed having units with the proper names to them.

[Kraxis]

I always found the name "Shield Bearers/(Brothers?)" a bit odd, as it doesn't at all describe the nature of the unit. Uh-huh. They carry shields. Great.
"Hypaspists" on the other hand means absolutely nothing in English, and ironically this is better because it immediately makes you notice that there's something noteworthy about this unit, and you're more inclined to read its full description to figure out what they historically represent and what they can do in combat. (if there even is such thing as a full description in R2)

The main problem is that many of these names can be alluded to be... well, names, and not descriptions. They have somewhat cultural connections to their names, that have since been lost to the general population. Most people would, like you point to, be somewhat puzzled by the translatory names (I might just have made up a word hah). Shield Bearers? Like half of the entire roster of the game? But back then it would have made sense, people would understand why they had such a name, and yet the name had probably by the time of the game, moved on somewhat. People would probably treat Hypaspistai much like we treat 'tank' today.

It would make absolutely no sense for someone in the future to decide that 'tank' is too hard to understand, and instead translate it to 'water container' (in whatever language they use then). Any reader of that would be just as puzzled as people will by many of these names. Heck the word 'tank' is in fact a name given how it is the official word on many languages that aren't even English, notable among them is Russian.

And I agree that the translatory names are worse at getting people's imagination and interest going. Nothing there to make me go "hmm, I wonder what this means?", instead it will make me think more along the lines of "wow, bad imagination there."

[The Juggernaut]

First mod should be removal of the huge green arrows (just make them smaller!!!!!!) and a renaming mod. That would be the best ever.