Andalus
Legionary
posted 26 July 2008 18:22
EDT (US)
19 / 390
I did, yes, and I replied in the affirmative. Did you not get my reply?
Nogert
Legionary
posted 26 July 2008 21:28
EDT (US)
20 / 390
Hmmm... another problem (its minor though).
When in the army selection window, scrolling over desert axeman results in the description having the separators used in the files to help differentiate units. Its really unimportant.
Andalus
Legionary
posted 27 July 2008 04:59
EDT (US)
21 / 390
I did some fiddling with Egypt a while ago, it's probably a descendant of that. I'll have a look and put it right.
I'm away from home this week, though, so nothing will be updated until after.
Oolon Colluphid
Legionary
posted 28 July 2008 22:01
EDT (US)
28 / 390
I don't really know frankly. I've never faced much elephant units. I've used them and war and especially armoured elephants seem to trample everything. Maybe they're not that strong. I would recommend making them only avalaible in regions that have elephants. Not only for realism and consistency, but also not to give the allready very strong Romans not too much power, and omly more after working for it.
Just my thoughts of course.
Cheers.
Medal hearth
Legionary
posted 29 July 2008 04:42
EDT (US)
30 / 390
Well gallig cavalry dont work...
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 29 July 2008 15:25
EDT (US)
32 / 390
i like - a lot - that this mod keeps to the spirit of the RTW vanilla game, which focuses more on interest than anything else.
many people try to put more realistic units in to muted success (spanish javelin cavalry), or boldly fantastic units in (uber hoplites riding dragons)that take the fun out. This seems to consider very nicely the effects that the units will have in battle.
one concern of mine is the equites unit. firstly, there was no such thing as a peasant horseman in italy, nor was there such a thing as good cavalry - the original equites already represented the whole of republican horsemen. that however is irrelevant for my above point, what's bothersome is that i can't see them filling a gap in the game. republican rome doesn't need better cavalry - equites are already too common and frankly too effective!
Medal hearth
Legionary
posted 30 July 2008 04:43
EDT (US)
35 / 390
Gallic cavalry ctd when is going in battle whit them...
yiyangchen
Legionary
posted 05 August 2008 05:01
EDT (US)
48 / 390
Roman spearman are called Lancearii, they are familiar with Greek hoplites.
What about Greek fire raisers(fire blowing golden lion headed siege weapons)
And Roman Rorarii.
Rorarii were soldiers which formed the final lines, or else provided a reserve thereby, in the ancient pre-Marian Roman army. They may have been used with the triarii in battle near the final stages of fighting, since they are recorded as being located at the rear of the main battle formation. (Note that the saying "Going to the Triarii" means that something has gone to the bitter end - as in reached the final line.)
They may have been similar in role to the accensi, acting as supernumeraries and filling the places of fallen soldiers as a battle or campaign wore on, or they may have been skirmishers akin to velites. Unfortunately, the evidence is so limited that it is difficult to understand what direct role the rorarii may have had, if any, in fighting. It seems most likely that they were not part of the line in the same way as triarii, principes and hastati were.
Dromedarii, Roman camel riders.They were developed to take the place of horses where horses were not common. They were also very successful against enemy horses, as the smell of the camel is absolutely repulsive to a horse and will quickly make them reluctant to enter battle or even stay in the immediate area. So you can put a "horse being afraid of camel" trigger, some what like elephants are afraid of pigs and dogs.