I don't see how using the bows that they have in the very situations the bows were meant for would be ahistorical. They don't need bows to chase down lancers, they need bows so they don't have to chase down lancers. I'd think that the very reason bowmen were integrated into the legion formations was to give them more tools to deal with light infantry and cavalry, the unit types pure heavy infantry have historically had most trouble (actively) dealing with.TheGrayMouser wrote:They have the same POA versus attacking shock cavalry ( lancers) as do earlier impact foot legions which is ZERO... And they are better defending versus lancers... I dont think they need ahistorical fire power to go chasing down lancers..MVP7 wrote:There are certainly ways to work around it but my main issue is that the Legio units in the game end up being a easily ignorable toothless defensive units, the very thing that the bows should be preventing it from becoming. They suffer from the very weakness that the bows are specifically supposed to mitigate.
They wouldn't need to be killers with the bows or even do enough damage to consistently cause cohesion loss with concentrated fire. They just really need to be able to do a little bit of damage so that enemies can't just stand right in front of them for several turns with complete impunity and force the player to throw away even the defensive bonus that the now otherwise pointless bows provide.
As for the AI getting stuck in front of them, thats a differnt problem. Havnt run into that yet ( I usually enjoy playing the nomands vs the AI)
I have played six battles (out of seven) in a campaign between the Rome and Bosporans. So far not even once (not counting two flank charges) has a Legio unit been charged by any enemy and it's not a matter of them having better targets to charge at. Every battle so far has consisted of enemy lancers standing right in front of the Legios doing nothing, forcing me to slowly surround the cavalry and other units with my infantry which is completely upside-down dynamic. This means that while the new Romans are in theory good at defense, especially against cavalry, in practice they are just an expensive but lackluster offensive heavy foot unit. Their defensive capabilities are irrelevant when the AI has no need or reason to attack them under any circumstances and having some ranged capability would create that need and reason.
There's both historical and gameplay reasons to give the units with 20% bows ranged attacks even if it's not their forte. The bows were there for a reason but since they are essentially a non-factor as it is, the units suffer from all the tactical pitfalls of defensive heavy infantry that the bows were there to mitigate. Giving the units some weak ranged attack would not make them overpowered in the game, it would just give them little something to compensate for the overall loss of offensive capabilities compared to the older doctrine and make their dynamic more historical.