Author Topic: Discussion: New Faction Units  (Read 58471 times)

ahowl11

  • Moderator
  • Posts: 1214
  • Karma: 16
  • RTR Project
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #60 on: February 19, 2014, 04:59:04 AM »
Wow, thank you so much for that Mausalos!

In regards to Katoikoi/Kleruchoi, I found this from an RS2 Preview:
Quote
The terms for landowner (kleruchoi) and settler (katoikoi) would change with the times. Before the 3rd century B.C., the Greek and Macedonian land holders were referred to as kleruchoi. Starting with successes at Raphia and the demands for greater say in the running of their homelands, the natives were being granted land ownership too. In 197 B.C. during the reign of Ptolemy V Ephiphanes the natives were used in more substantial roles within the empire and were increasingly granted land allotments themselves; attaining kleruchoi status themselves. In response to this the Greek and Macedonian land holders, and perhaps other European settlers like the Celts and Thracians, increasingly chose to be called katoikoi, not kleruchoi, to distinguish themselves from native kleruchoi.

In the same preview (For the Ptolemies) it addressed that Pezhetairoi was a universal term, just as you explained.
Quote
Pezoi, by definition, basically means "foot soldier," and was the term generally applied to all Ptolemaic phalangites. The Makedonikoi Phalangitai of the Seleucids, Pezoi of the Ptolemies, and the Pezhetairoi of Macedonia are all from the same background.

Okay so let's see if I can get these right!


Antigonids
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Seleucids
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Ptolemies
Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Alright that's it. Took me a few hours to compile everything! Everything should look good for the Seleucids and Ptolemies. There are still a few units in question for the Antigonids. Mausalos, if you could read what I put about them and check your sources I think we can come up with a final roster.

I'll restate that I think that Greek (Antigonid), Asian (Seleucid), and Machimoi (Ptolemaic) troops should be available for all Diadochi factions based on regions owned. The Antigonids and Seleucids should have access to Machimoi troop types if they ever conquer Egypt.

Also, I believe each faction needs a Levy Militia unit for garrisoning/public order. It would replace the peasant unit and it stops the revolt CTD that will occur if Peasants are removed. Thoughts?

Once we finalize these three rosters we will do the Hellenic States roster, which will be fun because it will feature units from Epirus, Pergamum, Cyrene, and Bactria :)

« Last Edit: February 19, 2014, 06:52:01 AM by ahowl11 »
God, Family, Baseball, Friends, Rome Total War, and Exilian. What more could I possibly need?

Bercor

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 573
  • Karma: 10
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #61 on: February 19, 2014, 11:44:25 AM »
In the hellenistic period the hypaspist was an elite unit, so giving the Seleucids an unit called Elite Hypaspists it's redundant. Also, I don't think there should be a Sword Hypaspist unit, the engine allows to give two weapons to any unit, as such, we can have an hoplite with a sword as secondary weapon, and it's an unnecessary unit that takes a spot that we may need in the future. If the player wants more assault units then he can buy mercenaries.

Mausolos of Caria

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 358
  • Karma: 7
  • RTR Project Historian
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #62 on: February 19, 2014, 03:35:34 PM »
Bercor, don't be silly, there isn't any snow in Caria.

And ahowl, it's MausOlos, not Mausalos, just by the way  :P

But back onto the topic:



Katoikoi: Maybe that's right, what I found was that Katoikoi were the socially higher standing part of the Kleruchoi later on. I forgot to add to the roster above that the Ptolemaic Empire should have the Katoikoi Hippeis as I pointed out above. Katoikoi cavalry would also be a good solution and shows that they are the richer cleruchs since they can afford their own horses. > Add Katoikoi cavalry to Ptolemaic Empire

MACEDON

Thureophoroi were invented as a reaction to Celtic raids, and since Macedon was the first of the hellenistic state to encounter Celtic enemies it would seem logic that they were the ones wo even invented the Thureos shield troops. Should definitely get them.

Sword Hypaspists Okay this is complicated now. The Royal Peltasts seem to be the so called ''Agema of the Hypaspists'', the elite of the elite, formed from the original corps of Alexander's hypaspists, counting 2000 men. They are described as peltasts, but in pitched battles they are described as a Macedonian phalanx. Bercor makes a good point about the two weapons one can have, but it seems that the Agema Hypaspists could actually fight as phalangites and swordsmen. So if you don't form them into a phalanx they would be elite sword hypaspists. But I don't think that's possible in the game mechanics, or is it?

Amphipolitan and Bottian Phalangites If you want them, put them in, but I'm sure they were part of the Chalkaspides & Leukaspides ;)

Lonchophoroi They seem to be extremely similar to Xystophoroi then. If we find enough differences we could put both in, or alternatively Ptolemies and Seleucids get Xystophoroi while Macedon has Lonchophoroi as medium cavalry.

Aspidophoroi: Well the different mods don't seem to agree on their role and equipment  :P I found mounted Thureophoroi being mentioned and from the descriptions they could be the Aspidophoroi, although they carry a Thureos shield and not a Aspis shield, while both have javelins and the machaira sword for melee. So we could put them in I guess.

+ Illyrian cavalry was even stationed by Alexander in Bactria so they were probably part of later Macedonian armies, too. Making them available as mercenaries seems sound.

+ Gallic cavalry was also deployed as mercenaries after the Gallic invasion of Greece and still served in the Macedonian army by the 190s. Perhaps some of them also fought by foot like the Galatian mercenaries deployed by the Ptolemies. The element of ,,barbarian'' troops in the Macedonian army, be it Celts, Thracians, Illyrians or others was constantly on the rise during the 3rd and early 2nd century BC

Thorakitai: I read another book (Hans van Wees) on the topic and he attests this ''cuirassed infantry'' only to the Seleucid and Achaian armies.


SELEUCIDS

Elite Hypaspists- sorry for not being clear enough there, the Seleucids had a unit called Agema of the Hypaspists, but they were never described in any of the recorded battles and thus it is very likely that it this was rather meant as the Agema of the Argyraspides, being the Hypaspists. So in difference to Macedon, there wasn't a special core of the Hypaspists, just Hypaspists

Everything else is fine, but we can add another unit:

+ The Dromedary corps - I think that's self explaining ;) Obviously they are slower, but spread fear among horses. Dromedar cataphracts are only attested some 400 years later in the Parthian army, so these would have been medium spear cavalry I think (since camels/dromedars don't have a lot of use against infantry they wouldn't have carried swords)

PTOLEMIES

Add Katoikoi Hippeis (see above)

Everything else is fine, but don't forget about the Cretans, Galatians, Rhodians and Carians  ;)


P.S: The Achaian League also fielded the Epilektoi as Elite infantry, as they did have Thorakitai (just putting this here for later)
''I found a city of bricks and left a city of marble''

Augustus

Bercor

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 573
  • Karma: 10
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #63 on: February 19, 2014, 04:21:43 PM »
Sword Hypaspists Okay this is complicated now. The Royal Peltasts seem to be the so called ''Agema of the Hypaspists'', the elite of the elite, formed from the original corps of Alexander's hypaspists, counting 2000 men. They are described as peltasts, but in pitched battles they are described as a Macedonian phalanx. Bercor makes a good point about the two weapons one can have, but it seems that the Agema Hypaspists could actually fight as phalangites and swordsmen. So if you don't form them into a phalanx they would be elite sword hypaspists. But I don't think that's possible in the game mechanics, or is it?

So we have three possibilities to represent the hypaspists:
- as an elite phalangite, with sword as secondary weapon;
- as an traditional hoplite, with sword as secondary weapon;
- as an royal peltast, with sword as secondary weapon.

In my opinion, we should discard representing them as an elite phalangite because, while it's true what Mausolos said, we already have an elite phalangite unit for both Macedon and the Seleucids. So, this gives us the last two options. If we want to make them an assault troop, probably more adequated to the hellenistic period, then we should make them royal peltasts. On the other hand, if we want them as an defensive sturdy unit, more antiquated, then we should represent them as tradiotional hoplites.

Personally, I would make the basic Hypaspist unit as an traditional hoplite and give Macedon an Hypaspist peltast unit "Agema Hypaspistai" or something similar. This way I believe we can represent the "elite" macedonian hypaspists.

Mausolos of Caria

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 358
  • Karma: 7
  • RTR Project Historian
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #64 on: February 19, 2014, 05:03:49 PM »
Yeah I think that would be the best way to handle it. We should be aware of the fact that the description ''peltast'' only refers to the pelte shield, apart from that they will have been rather swordsmen than light troops. So they would be elite assault troops then, while the ''normal'' hypaspists are elite hoplites, more flexible than the phalanx- guard hoplites, if you want.
''I found a city of bricks and left a city of marble''

Augustus

Bercor

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 573
  • Karma: 10
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #65 on: February 19, 2014, 07:45:01 PM »
This is the Europa Barbarorum profile for the Carian Warriors:

Is this historically accurate?

Mausolos of Caria

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 358
  • Karma: 7
  • RTR Project Historian
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #66 on: February 19, 2014, 10:03:16 PM »
See, that's exactly how I tried to describe them before ;D Yes that's legit.

As for the militia to defend towns, I forgot to adress that, I guess we can just put them in as ''militia'' or ''citizen militia'' or so.
''I found a city of bricks and left a city of marble''

Augustus

Bercor

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 573
  • Karma: 10
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #67 on: February 19, 2014, 10:45:59 PM »
But did they use mainly swords or axes?

Mausolos of Caria

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 358
  • Karma: 7
  • RTR Project Historian
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #68 on: February 19, 2014, 11:21:20 PM »
Well as the name says they are a warband, for most of the time Caria had neither a state nor any common rules or organisation. EB gives them the kopis sword, Rome II gives them axes, a quick google search shows that they could also be equipped with a falx. Whatever fits the game mechanics best, but I'd like to see them with axes since there are very few other unites with axes (thus making them more unique and not just another swordsmen unit).
An interesting thing I read is that a Carian at the Pharao's court is credited to say that ''the Carians were the first to use feathers on their helmets''. However, that quote is from about 600 BC so they would probably (and sadly!) have looked different by the Hellenistic age :p

By the way I think it is important, that they belong to the normal troops. While they initially came to Egypt as mercenaries in the 7th and 6th centuries BC, they settled down there over the generations and had their own communities, for example in Memphis (Hrdt. 1,1,3), like the Jews in Alexandria or later the Italians in Constantinople. So they should be recruitable there.
The other foreign troops, Thracians, Rhodians, Cretans and Galatians also formed part of the main body of the Ptolemaic Army. Quoting one historian ''During peace time, these troops formed the majority of the army''. Many Galatians emmigrated to Egypt after their expedition into Asia Minor came to a halt thanks to the rising power of Pergamon (late 3rd century BC) while Eastern Crete was occupied by the Ptolemies at the same time and the Nesiotic League (of which Rhodos was a member for a while) came under heavy Ptolemaic influence, while the independent Rhodos also always enjoyed good relations with Ptolemaic Egypt.
This means, that especially the Carians, and to a slightly lesser extent the Cretans and Rhodians, and to again a lesser extent the Galatians were always available and thus different to mercenaries who would be hired ad hoc.
''I found a city of bricks and left a city of marble''

Augustus

Bercor

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 573
  • Karma: 10
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #69 on: February 19, 2014, 11:37:43 PM »
I agree.

ahowl11

  • Moderator
  • Posts: 1214
  • Karma: 16
  • RTR Project
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #70 on: February 20, 2014, 12:46:13 AM »
Sorry MausOlos :)

Okay so for Macedon:
Keep Thureophoroi
Add Agema Hypaspists
No Thorakitai

Seleucids:
Camel Corps

Ptolemies:
Katoikoi Cavalry
Carian Warband *AOR Caria/Egypt

I'll keep the Lonchophoroi but I don't know about Aspidophoroi. Are there any written records on either of them?

Also, with all of these units for the Diadochi, how are we going to recruit them?

I think that a 'Doryphoroi' unit will serve well as a garrison unit.

And what are your thoughts about Asian, Greek, and Egyptian troops being available to all Diadochi factions?
God, Family, Baseball, Friends, Rome Total War, and Exilian. What more could I possibly need?

Jubal

  • Megadux
    Executive Officer
  • Posts: 35495
  • Karma: 140
  • Awards Awarded for oustanding services to Exilian!
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #71 on: February 20, 2014, 04:06:24 PM »
I'm generally of the opinion that local troops should be available to all the Diadochi as AOR types, given they were all operating pretty similar governance models it makes quite a lot of sense.
The duke, the wanderer, the philosopher, the mariner, the warrior, the strategist, the storyteller, the wizard, the wayfarer...

Mausolos of Caria

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 358
  • Karma: 7
  • RTR Project Historian
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #72 on: February 20, 2014, 04:23:13 PM »
Seeing they serve in the Ptolemaic army it might be better to call them ''Carian Light Infantry'' or something like that (Warriors, Infantry, Axemen, whatever), since ''warband'' implies they are free of any command structures ;)

I have really no idea where I should even look to find Aspidophoroi or Lonchophoroi being mentioned. Even those mods that used them admits that they are only obscurely mentioned in a few passages and the internet doesn't know about them at all (like a wikipedia article where there are notes like ''Polybios, I''). Furthermore, translations of the ancient sources will call them different, while Greek originals would put them in Greek letters so it's nigh impossible to find those obscure passages.

What exactly do you mean? I guess there should be buildings for them?  ;D

I'm not sure if Doryphoroi is a good name for a militia unit, since it is usually connected with Peisistratos' mercenary bodyguard (while not really an elite, they were also called Doryphoroi) or sometimes statues of spear bearers are called Doryphoroi. In Greek versions of Roman sources the Praetorians are called Doryphoroi.

Well we have already included the Egyptian troops for the Ptolemies, do you mean the other Diadochi should have the possibilty to recruit them if they are to conquer Egypt?
As for the other two factions, Macedon should definitely have access to Greek hoplites, peltasts and hippeis in Thessalia, Euboia & Corinth (all the territories they control outside of Macedon). The Seleucids should also have access to Sparabara and other local troops in the East, fitting to the different region. But I would like us to make the cheaper troops of their main roster easily available and not primarily local troops, since on many mods you see the Seleucids fielding armies made up of much more local troops than Phalangites and other Hellenistic units and while the latter's number was obviously restricted, they were also careful in recruiting not too many locals (not as cautious as the Ptolemies, but still).
''I found a city of bricks and left a city of marble''

Augustus

ahowl11

  • Moderator
  • Posts: 1214
  • Karma: 16
  • RTR Project
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #73 on: February 20, 2014, 04:50:48 PM »
Hmmm I say we don't include Lonchophoroi or Aspidophoroi then, just because of the murkiness of their existence.

So what do you suggest as a militia/garrison unit?

Also, yes that is what I am saying. If Macedon conquered Egypt they should have access to the local troops. If Macedon conquered the east they should have access to the asian troops.
God, Family, Baseball, Friends, Rome Total War, and Exilian. What more could I possibly need?

Mausolos of Caria

  • Citizens
    Voting Member
  • Posts: 358
  • Karma: 7
  • RTR Project Historian
    • View Profile
    • Awards
Re: Discussion: New Faction Units
« Reply #74 on: February 20, 2014, 05:05:46 PM »
1. Well maybe they did exist, I mean there are many famous battles or persons we only know from 1 or 2 lines in an obscure author's text who lived 500 years after the things happened. I just don't know where to look since I've never heard or read about these cavalry units outside of EB & RSII. Do you know the historians of EB or RS, for chance? We could ask them after their sources for those units then.

2. For all Diadochoi? We don't have to dig too deep there if you ask me, just give them a citizen militia based on vanilla's militia hoplites and it should be fine. Call them citizen militia or militia spearmen or so, I don't think we need to find a proper Greek name for a garrison unit.

3. Yeah I'm okay with that.
« Last Edit: February 20, 2014, 05:51:06 PM by Mausolos of Caria »
''I found a city of bricks and left a city of marble''

Augustus