Page 35 of 41 FirstFirst ... 102526272829303132333435363738394041 LastLast
Results 681 to 700 of 811

Thread: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

  1. #681

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Hate to be this guy, but do you guys have an ETA for Celts? Im trying to wait patiently, but ya know, warhammer is taking that up as well.

  2. #682

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Not anytime soon I think, Ahiga is taking a well deserved break But enjoy Warhammer for a bit and then come on back!

    ----> Website -- Patreon -- Steam -- Forums -- Youtube -- Facebook <----

  3. #683

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Could you made real name for late roman troops from Notitia Dignitatum...is this possible?

  4. #684
    MajorTom's Avatar Libertus
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    56

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Quote Originally Posted by zig&sharko View Post
    Could you made real name for late roman troops from Notitia Dignitatum...is this possible?
    That would require a separate unit for each legion, meaning the WRE and ERE would need about 150 new units.

  5. #685

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Quote Originally Posted by MajorTom View Post
    That would require a separate unit for each legion, meaning the WRE and ERE would need about 150 new units.
    I had on my mind various troops and most important with area rcruiting system.For example Tertio Iulia Alpina were in northern Italy, Auxilia Palatina troops were in the Italy recruiting beetwen italian seetlers.

  6. #686
    Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Tulifurdum
    Posts
    1,317

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    But with some exceptions a recruitable unit never resembled a real world regiment in all TW games. Mods doing it partly differently are highly appreciated (f.e. an ETW Darthmod submod creating several Prussian regiments with different uniforms and names). It wouldn't be such a problem if you could rename units ingame in ATW (if it is possible please tell me how to do). In ATW the mod itself would have to create a huge bunch of units, an insane task for no real avail. All units then would have the same stats and appearance, just different shield symbols and names. A waste of time in my opinion.

    Area recruitment would be great but has nothing to do with the Roman army. There were several Roman regiments with regional names but also several without. The Palatina regiments you mentioned are not connected with recruitment in Italy for example. I think it was just a name referring to being under imperial command at a certain time, nothing what made them special or elite.
    Last edited by geala; May 08, 2016 at 07:07 AM.

  7. #687

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Geala, Palatine unit are elite ones : in roman law, milites of palatine unit are
    - more prestigious
    - have better wages
    - their recruitment is more qualitative

    the question is different with comitatenses units versus the limitanei/ripenses. A the beginning, it is now pretty clear that "comitatenses rank" was a purely formal recognition of a right choice, Constantine against Licinius. Over time, the system is fossilized and comitatenses units were detached from their limitanei counterparts, which have slowly degraded.

  8. #688
    Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Tulifurdum
    Posts
    1,317

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    I don't see Palatini units as elites in the sense they are resembled in ATW, with "better stats" and so. They were units at some time or often used close to an emperor, so they were glorified from the splendor of the court. I don't think the better prestige and wages would result in even the slighest better performance in battle. Reminds us perhaps a bit of the praetorian cohorts of the early principate.

    There are some sources that suggest a similar prestigious difference between Comitatenses and Limitanei. As far as I remember there is at least one source which points out that a transfer from a Comitatenses unit to one of the Limitanei was seen as a degradation.

    And again I don't think that this, at least in the beginning, showed a difference in combat Performance on unit level. Comitatenses were units in armies used to make the life of an emperor more save. Because Limitanei units were spread and not able to deal with bigger threats (while a "bigger threat" for the late empire would have been judged as rather small in the early principate, where provincial governors had big armies at their disposal) the Comitatenses armies often led in person by the emperor(s) were used to intervene. Because they were often far away from the threat and slow to move the later empire suffered more than the principate.

  9. #689

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Actually planning on revamping the Roman recruitment later, possibly in that next release. For some reason I done goofed and thought that everyone else had a more diffused recruitment among multiple buildings when in fact they (even before I reformed them) usually just have 2 tracks + 1 for minor cities for easterners, 2 tracks for nomads, and for barbars it's a little confusing. So the Romans are not advantaged but disadvantaged with the needless bureaucracy of their building trees.

    I"m not sure what form it will take just yet. I'm curious if we can't replicate the easterner 2 building trees (foot vs cav) and 1 minor hybrid of the two. So it could be for Romans:

    Minor Building Tree (provincal settlements that are not the capital) limits you to foederati, limitanei, pseudocomitatenses and -maybe- Comitatenses at the highest level.
    Major Building Tree A (capital of province/region) could be a duplicate of Minor and designed around fast and cheap building.
    Major Buidling Tree B (capital of province/region) could start off Comitatenses and go Palatina and be more expensive and slower to build.

    Could do Major-A being infantry and Major-B Being cavalry with no distinction to Limitanei, Comitatenses, Palatina - that would just come about from tier.

  10. #690
    Senator
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Tulifurdum
    Posts
    1,317

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    I think a very complicated and bureaucratic approach is maybe actually a very good way to simulate the Roman way. The extension of the bureaucracy and the total separation of the civil and military administration in the late empire was a big hindrance for effective warfare anyhow.

    Ok, to the game and seriously, in my opinion your thought to make it just a two-lines building tree is a good one. I don't think that recruitment needed totally separate buildings to decide wether soldiers would go to a Comitatenses or Limitanei unit. Equipment and training were quite surely the same or very similar, units more or less indistinguishable.

  11. #691

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Hi!

    Who understand, it fundamental differences ?



    Because at Steam writes "An excellent campaign mod that is compatible with this mod is Europa Perdita." (link)


    And is there a differenсе witch one prioritize launch?

  12. #692

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    You want to load FotE first. It should do it automatically in steam.

    ----> Website -- Patreon -- Steam -- Forums -- Youtube -- Facebook <----

  13. #693

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Quote Originally Posted by Ahiga View Post
    Actually planning on revamping the Roman recruitment later, possibly in that next release. For some reason I done goofed and thought that everyone else had a more diffused recruitment among multiple buildings when in fact they (even before I reformed them) usually just have 2 tracks + 1 for minor cities for easterners, 2 tracks for nomads, and for barbars it's a little confusing. So the Romans are not advantaged but disadvantaged with the needless bureaucracy of their building trees.

    I"m not sure what form it will take just yet. I'm curious if we can't replicate the easterner 2 building trees (foot vs cav) and 1 minor hybrid of the two. So it could be for Romans:

    Minor Building Tree (provincal settlements that are not the capital) limits you to foederati, limitanei, pseudocomitatenses and -maybe- Comitatenses at the highest level.
    Major Building Tree A (capital of province/region) could be a duplicate of Minor and designed around fast and cheap building.
    Major Buidling Tree B (capital of province/region) could start off Comitatenses and go Palatina and be more expensive and slower to build.

    Could do Major-A being infantry and Major-B Being cavalry with no distinction to Limitanei, Comitatenses, Palatina - that would just come about from tier.
    An infantry-cavalry tracks combination would be OK though as far as I am concerned the existing system is fine too. As long as assembling a combined arms comitatense formation does not require three buildings...

  14. #694

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Quick Question. Which Mercs are you actually using? There is 2 different (One is a copy the other says Edit) DB tables. I have edited both but it doesn't change the Mercs that appear in Campaign. Is it reading it from the Default DB in Vanilla?

  15. #695

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    You might want to look at the 5.3 fix DB if you re using that


  16. #696

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    I think it was discussed before but forgotten, but I got this idea again - after seeing the vanilla saxon leader model in the campaign selection screen - he holds a big axe there with both hands - 2H. Is it possible to give generals the variety of weapons as such? So that for example saxon or nordic barbarian leaders/generals would wield two handers in battle, even though their bodyguards will be normal shield bearers? I think it'd look nice - as 2H weapons weren't used widely and by everyone. Not only would it look realistic for one man to fight with a big axe and from the cover of his shieldmen, but it would also distinguish the generals greatly on the field.

  17. #697

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Hey guys just realized ive never played the last roman campaign [emoji28] and i didnt want to create a thread just for that. So is FotE compatible with the expansion or am i missing something?

    Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk


  18. #698

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Hi,

    I know there is no focus on the Northmen/vikings, but I would really like to play a campaign with them.
    However this is difficult as I feel they are very underpowered.
    Their huscarls loose to just about any other melee enemy of the same tier.

    Is there any way/submod that increases the viking factions stats a bit?

    Thanks!

    Oooh pictures! Faber est quisque fortunae suae

  19. #699

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Nevermind, figured out how to mod it myself in Attila.
    However if someone else has already done some work changing viking unit stats I would still love to see it.

    Oooh pictures! Faber est quisque fortunae suae

  20. #700

    Default Re: Fall of the Eagles Features and Overview

    Will work on this mod continue? I realy like this mod.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •