Hollywood Legionaries better than Real Legionaries?

[SD_Man]

I know that this mod is more towards gameplay than realism but this shouldn't be. One on One with Hamata vs Segmentata and the segmented legions win? Theres a reason why the civil wars were won by the chainmail, it was more flexible, better protection against arrows (RTW engine limitations?), and had wider allround protection on the body. Although the segmented armour was lighter and gave better chest protection against blunt objects, it was not as protective on the other sides of the body which left easy "fleshy points" to stab at, especially those meaty underarms. It was also not as flexible as the hamata (more rigid i guess) which led to its downfall as combat became quicker and more ambush based throughout the later years of the empire. Why is the stereotype kept alive like this, chainmail is the real way to go!

Also, segmented armour was known to be cheaper to make (probably why the government adopted it) but in the mod it costs a Tone!!!

EDIT: I would like to add, why are there no squamata cohorts?

[ur-Lord Tedric]

I did root for a change that pretty much had all the legionaries with similar stats - for just this sort of reason - but I couldn't get traction with the Team for 2 reasons: firstly that there is a long held belief that segmentata was 'better'; and secondly that 'gamers' have an expectation that advances are supposed to bring upgrades.

Personally I would much rather that the legionaries from all periods were much the same so that the Reforms are more of a choice than a 'need'.

That said, I do not think your detail to be 100% correct - segmentata is, per area, heavier, which is why it covers less area in total. The main benefit to retaining hamata is it's greater coverage and equal efficacy vs arrows - which is why it seems to have remained more prevalent in the East (where the segmentata may not have gone at all). Segmentata, however, is much better at coping with the blows of heavy bladed weapons, such as the falx/rhomphaia and clubs/axes that were seen in the West (Germans & Dacians).

Segmentata is 'easier' to make when you have access to state fabrica and a production line. However, hamata/mail is, in general, much easier to maintain and, if kept clean and oiled, will last a great deal of time (hence why many barbarian types, once they acquired it, managed to keep it going and pass it down).

If the engine would allow it in some way, which I do not think is currently possible, unless we could find the right stats to tweak, we would have different stats for different armours vs their attacking mode.

[SD_Man]

Well the falx and the axe were both slashing weapons which had no problem piercing that segmented armour, i quote:

"I think those arguing the superiority of plate armor may be a little too accustomed to modern metal-working which routinely turns out large slabs of high quality steel. In the past forges were smaller, with limited heat, quality control, and capacity of volume. It may be that scale and chain were what the smiths of a particular culture were able to produce reliably and in sufficient quantity and thus that is what the armor was made of."

To make metal armour to this quality would take resources that would be extremely inefficient in relation to its cost, essentially it would cost more than a hamata. So because the segmentata was made out of "cheaper" metal it was also lighter than chainmail. Of course other than this, I really dont know what to believe in anymore. Its effectiveness is questionable other than protection against blunt trauma (cav charge?) and pointy sticks (arrows and spears?), both which i doubt can be accurately depicted due to obvious limitations. All i really know is that chainmail v. cheapo jigsaw armour ends in a win for the chainmail. The only way that this can be represented in the game is by changing the defense stats of the different troops so that the hamata has the advantage in an open-field battle. Im going to do what you recommended and will give all legionaries the same attack values.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

The quote is definitely of interest - but I would much prefer (and it's a long time ago that I last reviewed the great Russel Robinson's armour opus from the library) a scientific analysis of the actual metallurgy of the discovered pieces of segmentata that remain, before I simply dismissed the poor standards of ancient forges.

I will do that for two main reasons:

- firstly that segmentata was definitely introduced and for a reason; it covered less area and I am fairly sure (having not weighed one myself) was heavier per area covered (so my original statement was made without wishing to dissemble); and that it appeared at arguably around the high-point of the Roman military machine and when the steel production was possibly of the best.

- secondly that the simple physical properties of (as it appears) rolled and possibly hardened plate steel (and I am comparing to the rather good quality gladius of the same period) simply makes it better at coping with dissipating blunt force trauma (I make that comment having been able to discuss and study armour effects as part of military Masters degree - including modern composites and all others).

Now, a well swung axe or a well positioned point of a Dacian falx can still be a major problem however and penetration can occur. Taking a simple, heavy, but very effective two-handed club - I assure you that you would 'notice' whatever you were wearing. The long and the short of the choice is that mail/hamata is more flexible and will give, but is just as good against less intense attacks, such as arrows, however it will allow a degree of the blow from a heavier weapon to get through. Unless pierced, though, plate will do a better job of spreading the energy. Scale/squamata interestingly has some of the properties of both; and, having seen your 'edit' I think there is a unit or two in squamata iirc.

The last thing to mention is that whilst mail is relatively easy to produce in simpler forges, it does take many hours/days to actually put together a full 'shirt' - but once done can have repairs done more easily. Segmentata, however, would require regular access to standard and well produced spares.

The reasons for the appearance, how it was produced and why it then dissappeared (really until the appearance of the armoured knight of the late middle ages) may never be known, but some reasonable guessing is not inappropriate. Me, I'd like to see some metallurgical analysis and then testing - but meanwhile I'll go with some engineering sound thoughts!

[Sertorio]

The last thing to mention is that whilst mail is relatively easy to produce in simpler forges, it does take many hours/days to actually put together a full 'shirt' - but once done can have repairs done more easily. Segmentata, however, would require regular access to standard and well produced spares.

And this is i believe were we hit the reasons for their disappearance, Segmentata might have been to difficult to maintain in the end. Or the shifting in the infantry battle tactics towards 3ºrd Century rendered it inadequate. Also their existence might not have been as widespread as Trajan Column suggests.
@SD_Man, as probably there were not large numbers of Segmenta , and the priority would be equipping new legions or reequiping legions for new campaigns, Auxiliary Cohorts would be last in importance to reequip.
And giving spears to your legions is not realistic until the third Century, although having legionares using their pilum as a spear is.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

........ .... If all else fails than i'll just give my segmented legions some spears, which I think seems to be the more realistic choice......

..................And giving spears to your legions is not realistic until the third Century, although having legionares using their pilum as a spear is.

To be fair, I suspect that there is reasonable evidence that you would not be 'wrong'. As an adjunct to the Organisational research I've been doing for a personal thesis I've been doing over the last couple of years, I have become fairly confident that the Velite/Triarii of the Polybian era did not actually go away, but were (somewhat as in RSII with the Antesignanii) morphed into a 'lighter infantry' as part of the legion and eventually became referred to as the lanciarii that Sertorio recalls.

As the other thread notices, actual skirmishers (Greek psiloi) seem mainly to have gone out of favour, but the use of elements of the legion termed 'lighter infantry' appear in several places in Caesar's accounts and others of the later Republic; Josephus hints at one-quarter (the velite ratio of old) of the legion armed differently with spears/hasta; and Arrian's OOB against the Alans where he arms half the legionaries with spears makes a whole deal more sense if a quarter had them normally and they were handy anyway!

In short, if the 'Antesignanii' were closer-order infantry with Spears and javelins/lancea secondary then it might just be more accurate indeed! We all know how useful spears can be - I rather suspect the Romans did too......

[Darth Bane1]

There are two auxilia units that wear squamata, the Cohors I Batavorum und the Cohors III Alpinorum.

[SD_Man]

There are two auxilia units that wear squamata, the Cohors I Batavorum und the Cohors III Alpinorum.

Well yes but I meant the "legionary" cohorts . I know that scale armour didn't become as popular as segmented or chainmail but surely there must be at least one "specialized cohort" unit. Also, how come the auxilia don't receive the segmentata armour? I guess this applies to the same "specialized unit" scenario.


And @Tedric, I'm attempting to overhaul the legions so that they can be more accurately represented but its beginning to be more work than I thought. So many units, so many EDUs, so many decisions. I'm also not too familiar on how to increase running speeds for certain units, and then theres still the issue of Catacav .... If all else fails than i'll just give my segmented legions some spears, which I think seems to be the more realistic choice (e.g. Invasio Barbarorum).

[SD_Man]

Well I do suppose that it's true that the Romans became increasingly inadequate on properly maintaining their armies but I disagree on not giving the new legionaries some spears.

The pilum was actually still in use during the third century, but in a new form. These new forms of pila were heavier, stronger, and more effective against the growing use of armoured cav, essentially becoming a heavy spear of sorts. And with the combined use of a secondary spatha, it was a force to be reckoned with. As for why I think it would be a "realistic" choice to add these fantasy units:

1) To represent the growing concern as Rome expanded eastward and to simulate a reform that could have occurred to maintain Roman dominance in the area.

2) I always felt that Roma Surrectum was a mod about choices and about forging your own history. This means that situations that never arose in our time can occur in this one. To be a what-if situation similar to the "Gallic Heavy Spearmen" of the Arverni, a faction that I believe deserved more attention than was given.

3) Well this one I quote from Tedric, "'gamers' have a [common] expectation that advances are supposed to bring upgrades." And I agree that if resources are going to be taken away to create a new military unit than shouldn't this unit be "better" in some regards, other than just simple stat changes of course. So even though they would lose in a straight fight against their heavier chainmail-wielding brethren, these guys would be all-round better in other situations

This is why I believe that it would be a realistic choice to have "legionary spear" units. My only problem now is: what do I do with the extra pila? (the weighted ones)
Maybe I should just give it to the praetorians.

[High Fist]

3) Well this one I quote from Tedric, "'gamers' have a [common] expectation that advances are supposed to bring upgrades." And I agree that if resources are going to be taken away to create a new military unit than shouldn't this unit be "better" in some regards, other than just simple stat changes of course. So even though they would lose in a straight fight against their heavier chainmail-wielding brethren, these guys would be all-round better in other situations

I don't understand the underlined bit here. Did you mean against legionnaires with swords?

[SD_Man]

I don't understand the underlined bit here. Did you mean against legionnaires with swords?

Segmentata vs hamata/chainmail, as the Romans were not the only ones to use this type of armour. As for "all-round better" I mean that the 3rd century legionaries were pretty much like heavy auxilia units, heavy specialists.

@Sert, yes I understand where your going at but unfortunately I'm not a professional modder like others. To make new units would be impossible at the moment as I'm not a modeler nor do I have 3ds. All I can work with are the " mandotary" files on adding new units to the game. If you do know some models for the lanciarii unit, preferably one that fits with the art style, than that would be greatly appreciated.

As for the use of pila, this is debatable. Because of limitations to the game, if pila goes in than "spatha" has to go out, something that I really dont want to sacrifice.

[Sertorio]

As for the use of pila, this is debatable. Because of limitations to the game, if pila goes in than "spatha" has to go out, something that I really dont want to sacrifice.

Maybe not though i have not tried it myself. if Pila is primary weapon, them maybe, just maybe, by changing skeleton in DMB, and weapon type in EDU, it might be used as a lancea. You will sacrafice the javelin hability off course. Don't know if it works, i have not tried it myself.

[SD_Man]

Maybe not though i have not tried it myself. if Pila is primary weapon, them maybe, just maybe, by changing skeleton in DMB, and weapon type in EDU, it might be used as a lancea. You will sacrafice the javelin hability off course. Don't know if it works, i have not tried it myself.

Well this is kind of what I've been hinting at since the beginning but now comes the odd part: Underarm or Overarm? I'm vouching for under.

[Sertorio]

Yes from 3ºrd Century onwards and possibly since late 2º Century we read more and more of Lancea, a name that seems to apply to several types of spear weapon, either for throwing or melee or both. But the Legions from RS aren't clearly from that period. To be "realistic " we would be talking about totally new units.
The closest thing you have for legionary spear units are the lanciarii and they are first attested in the Parthica of Severus. However as i posted Legionares are reported to retain their Pila for melee combat specially in Caesar and Arrian.

[SD_Man]

Interesting, giving the Antesignanii some spears and javelins would truly make them the "light auxilia" they were meant to be. It might also just make the Marian Reforms less brutal with less reliance on mercs. By the way, missiles cant be in the secondary.

[High Fist]

Under, I would say.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klOc9C-aPr4

Skip to about 2:30. Or watch the whole thing. He's makes very interesting videos.

[SD_Man]

Under, I would say.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klOc9C-aPr4

Skip to about 2:30. Or watch the whole thing. He's makes very interesting videos.

*Opens link* ... *Closes tab immediately* ... No, just no.

[High Fist]

Eh, why? He makes solid points. Can't judge him unless you watch him.

Are you afraid to learn?

[bobbyr]

Eh, why? He makes solid points. Can't judge him unless you watch him.

Are you afraid to learn?

I like his videos too!

Regarding the OP: Blame the Rome 1 engine, when talking about realism one has to bring it up: No legion was EVER fully equipped with segmentata. Even during Hadrian's and Trajan's reign, the hamata was still very much in use and there were many soldiers in each cohort using it.

We need a Medieval II port to add full realism to the legions.

The clone armies of Rome 1 were never realistic, they were clone armies, so from that standpoint it makes sense, that the full segmentata legions are a bit better than the hamata legions, because the kind of represent and upgrade and an evolution.

I don't have a problem with it. I'm using Polybian Cohorts and the so called 'generic legionaries' for 70% of the campaign anyway. Marian Reforms happened approx. in 107 BC, that's when I switch to the 'generic' legionaries, right up to 27 BC (start of Augustus' reign). That's 200 years ingame or 400 turns.In other words, the bulk of the campaign.

The hamata legions in RS2 are from the period of Augustus reign, shape of the shield etc.
The segmentata legions are from Caligula/Claudius onwards.

But like I said, the straight seperation is not historically correct anyway. Rome 1 engine limitations.

[SD_Man]

Eh, IMHO I would actually prefer if the segmented units were removed completely and more attention be given to the other factions, but Im trying to appeal to both parties. I dont ask that the hamatas be given uber AP cataphract charge attacks on the segmentas, I only ask for better historical depiction (higer defense) and for them to win in a straight one-on-one fight. Of course pila fire adds another element on who wins the fight but I speak for swords only. Yes I can do my own stat changes but it still wont be fair for the young uns who will still believe in the myth that the Segmentatas were the "ideal" Romans.

As for whether separating the two units is historically correct: "History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon."
We make our own history.