Two suggestions

[CatoTheYounger]

Magnificent detailed historical mod. If i may however a couple of minor suggestions.

1.At least with the Romans a touchup of some of the starting Roman leaders could be used. For instance Varo is listed as a patrician when he was actualy a plebe. A spot check of the starting leaders and there traits might not hurt. Overall they are constucted with their known personalties in mind but it wouldn't hurt to invetigate if anything obvious was missed.

2. Cut down dramaticly on the Roman starting position cavalry availability. They start with enough cav to amass 6 cav in their starting army to face Hannibal. In my consular armies i never have more then 2 cav and usualy have little recruited. But with Hannibal being difficult to single out and kill without cav and the overwhelming starting availability its too tempting to mass 5-6 cav for the opening battle with Hannibal. Start them with 1 or no cav in Italy and make them recruit the following turn. This would give the Romans a proper Infantry army to start but force them to scramble to get the cav up to speed to face Hannibal. As it stands now they start with a wealth of cav in Italy. Could change the starting challenge dramaticly if it is altered.

Minor changes but this mod is so detailed i thought it deserved some consideration.

[Aismov]

I too was surprised by the number of cavalry the Romans get at the start of the game as well as the weakness of Hannibal's army. I rarely have any problems with defeating Hannibal the first turn. I would maybe decrease the cavalry to 3-4 units total, but otherwise I think its pretty reasonable when you consider the 1st rebellion which can be challenging to deal with. If Hannibal was as strong as say Pyrrhus is in RTR it would be nigh impossible for Rome to survive the beginning of the game.

[CatoTheYounger]

If Rome started with only one cav in Italy they could start recruiting in Rome Aretium and Armium. By the time the Socii Rebellion starts they would have enough but they would be in a bit of a jam on turn one against Hannibal and just enough for a basic Cav force on tun 2. Could make it hard to kill Hannibal in a battle if you only had the standard two Roman cav. And if you have to go to turn three to deal with him anything can happen. Uusaly Hannibl is winning the battle until he gets killed and thats when the battle breaks down. If he is alive? Good luck winning,

[ur-Lord Tedric]

I'd certainly vote (have done before!) for removing the Latin Medium Cavalry/Equites Extraordinarii entirely - and the starting Campanian's from the Romans (at least they're gone afterwards).

But, just like I put in the other thread, the proportion of cavalry in a Roman Consular Army (4 units in a proportional stack) is indeed correct.

If the intent would be to make the Hannibal vs Flamminus at Trasimene a more likely loss (if you fight the battle) is perhaps to give the Carthaginian troops a similar Experience boost to that the Socii Allies and general AI factions get (ie 2/3 higher). I don't think the Carthaginian starting position has been changed recently.

@ Cato - whilst Varro is indeed 'known' to have come from humble background, he seems to have bought himself to higher estates. Given the social structure was based upon money and land, however, it might well be more correct to refer to him as a Patrician. Given the way 'history' is written, however, it is also likely that referring to his origins is more of a political slur - exactly along the lines of a member of the English aristocracy referring to 'New Money' or having a parent 'in Trade'.

[CatoTheYounger]

Interesting. Well one thing for sure is i did not care for Varo or Marcellus(Good leader however) Longus or Nero. All of them were my image of the Arogant hypocritical head strong Roman commander/politician. The Scipios amd especialy Fabius Maximus had my respect for the way they considered things before they acted and they seemed to be able to operate without the typical Roman arogance.

Varo definately rose through the ranks and was credited with originaly being a Plebe. But his popularity at the time he won a consulship might have had alot to do with him being oportunistic and pushing for direct confrontation that was oposite of Fabius less popular tactics. I kind of feel he was being topical and feeding the people what he knew they wanted to hear to get elected. Problem is he knew not how to deliver what he spoke of. Politician that had his bluff called and then got his men massacred because he was probably a lesser general then those who fell to Hannibal before him.

As for Paullus i was more sympathetic to him as Livy most likely intended however i can't put all the blame on Varo. Im wager there was a discussion in the tent and he went along with it. Who knows though. I doubt Paullus acted against his will. Either way it is Varo damned for all time.

Varo give me back my Cohorts! lmao.