FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Field of Glory II is a turn-based tactical game set during the Rise of Rome from 280 BC to 25 BC.
Post Reply
lapdog666
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 1:25 pm

FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by lapdog666 » Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:17 pm

As time passes, lack of units and generally generic factions are becoming bigger issue for me

i'd completely Remove following factions
1.Arabs (non existant roster)
2.Armenians (non existant roster)
3.Slave Revolt
4.Atropatene (another generic faction without any role)
5.Bythnian (roleless)
6.Bruttian or Lucian
7.Campanian
8.Brutian
9.Ligurian
10.caucasian
11.Iberian "or" colchian (not spain)
12.Illyrian
13.indo Greek
14. Indo Parthian
15.Indo Scythian
16.kapadokian
17. Kushan
18.lybian
19.Mountain indian
20. Indian
21.Numidan Or moorish
22. Roxholani
23.scots irish
24.scythian
25.Spanish
26.Gauls
27.germans
28.Umbrian
29.britons
30. anything that says 'scots-irish'
31. Greeks
(might have forgotten some other factions)

i'd Keep and slightly to considerably Increase (and refine names) number of unique Units for:
1.Antigonids
2.Seleukids
3.Ptolemaics
all need better representation of phalanx

4.Attalids (need different roster)


5.Carthaginians (lacking some units)
6.Parthians (need considerably larger roster)
7.Saka (same)
8.Pontic (slightly more units)
9.Phyrric (slightly more units,better phalanx representation,not in the same way as other legit diadochi kingdoms)
10.Rome (they are fine)

11.Syracusan
12.Thracian (need complete rework)
13.Dacian (slight to considerable increase)

and ofcourse

The Jews
(sources are scarce, but i doubt they used phalanx anyway)

Factions to Create:

One indian tribe

Baktria


Arverni
Helveti
Boii
casse
belgae
Lusitani
edetani
cantabri

(at least 1 gaulish ,1 iberian 1 germanic 1 briton tribe of your choosing)

Massalia
Sparta
Athens

eventually some of the factions from "removed' List, as long as they feel like real factions





i really love fog II, but currently there are couple playable (not great) factions:
1.Romans
2.Diadochi (each of them is fine, since their significance and territorial coverage is large)
3.(either gauls,germans,spanish or britons, only 1 of those, cos they are same)
4.Nomads (only 1 faction cos they are all the same)
5.Carthage
6.Greeks (even tho they 'd be separated into distinct factions in my mind)


Units to be removed:
Armoured Cavalry

each faction should have specific cavalry
i cant really believe that arabs have "armoured cavalry" which look exactly the same as roman armoured cavalry and use same equipement.
thats really a placeholder , not an unit worth using and unacceptable. sorry for sounding like i am attacking you, but i dont know how to say this in a different way

Pikes: too generic. there are materials from which to draw a more realistic picture

Warband: Each faction (previously mentioned) should have its warband (it doesnt even matter if they are same , at least name should be different,if you really cant find any difference between them)


Light horsemen


Others things:
Xystophoroi should only be one of the units in diadochi armies (no need for 30 different cavs, but few more are lacking,ofc in appropirate time periods)

Add: elite macedonian peltasts
Add: Various regional units from bythnia to baktria


in general: far less universal units like armoured cavalry, even changing the names and (if possible skins) would be great

i cannot understand what anyone sees in 30 same factions who use same generic units like rabble and lancers. i 'd rather have 10-20 factions than Various loosely named culture groups

76mm
Major - Jagdpanther
Major - Jagdpanther
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:08 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by 76mm » Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:29 pm

AFAIK you can mod the names, skins, and stats of all the units, so you’d better get busy!

While i agree that some of the factions might seem a bit generic, I think it is a bit much to expect the game to depict each tribe’s (which is basically what you’re asking) dress and weapons with great accuracy, and many of the differences in weapons/armor would be pretty much indistinguishable at the scale of the game.

But luckily for people who really care—presumably including you!—the modding capabilities in the game will allow you to tinker to your heart’s content. In a year i bet there will be lots of excellent modded content...

lapdog666
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 1:25 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by lapdog666 » Tue Oct 17, 2017 3:33 pm

76mm wrote:AFAIK you can mod the names, skins, and stats of all the units, so you’d better get busy!

While i agree that some of the factions might seem a bit generic, I think it is a bit much to expect the game to depict each tribe’s (which is basically what you’re asking) dress and weapons with great accuracy, and many of the differences in weapons/armor would be pretty much indistinguishable at the scale of the game.

But luckily for people who really care—presumably including you!—the modding capabilities in the game will allow you to tinker to your heart’s content. In a year i bet there will be lots of excellent modded content...
i see, but at most i can manage to change the names. i dont dare touch models or skins, or godforbid stats

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by JaM2013 » Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:25 pm

Personally, i'd like to see more faction-specific units.. like Extraordinarii with Romans (elite Socii infantry typically serving as shock troops, which were commonly detached for "special missions"), Campanian cavalry, Iberian Caetrati, Celtiberian infantry, Peltasts ("reformed" Helenic troops trained as phalangites and as heavy javelinmen using Macedonic Pelta shield), Celtic Gaesatae - naked warriors (got wiped out at Tellamon) etc etc
Image

Cumandante
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 5:53 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by Cumandante » Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:27 pm

JaM2013 wrote:Personally, i'd like to see more faction-specific units.. like Extraordinarii with Romans (elite Socii infantry typically serving as shock troops, which were commonly detached for "special missions"), Campanian cavalry, Iberian Caetrati, Celtiberian infantry, Peltasts ("reformed" Helenic troops trained as phalangites and as heavy javelinmen using Macedonic Pelta shield), Celtic Gaesatae - naked warriors (got wiped out at Tellamon) etc etc
Me too. They might be planning to add those as DLC though.

Adraeth
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:19 am

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by Adraeth » Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:30 pm

I really like this big amount of armies, it reminds me of DBA and DBM; indeed you might have "sea people" army full of psiloi, but for a narrative feeling (and thanks to the sandbox campaign there is such feeling) they are really charming.
And the generic army lists here in FOG2 are an excellent way to have many different armies (indeed you might mod them)
Last edited by Adraeth on Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

IainMcNeil
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 13515
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:19 am

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by IainMcNeil » Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:30 pm

This was a design decision. We did not want to have multiple copies of a unit that had the same abilities because of differing nationalities. E.g. If there were 1-2 Bosporan Slingers and 1-2 hill slingers, we combined them to 2-4 slingers. It makes it easier for new players to understand and easier for everyone to manage their army. These could easily be modded back in for flavour.

Cheers

Iain

lapdog666
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Dec 08, 2016 1:25 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by lapdog666 » Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:34 pm

IainMcNeil wrote:This was a design decision. We did not want to have multiple copies of a unit that had the same abilities because of differing nationalities. E.g. If there were 1-2 Bosporan Slingers and 1-2 hill slingers, we combined them to 2-4 slingers. It makes it easier for new players to understand and easier for everyone to manage their army. These could easily be modded back in for flavour.

Cheers

Iain
in that case i cant understand why do we have 20 same factions :D. too many confusing names for new players

anyway i tortured you guys enough. i ll try to mod it myself

76mm
Major - Jagdpanther
Major - Jagdpanther
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:08 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by 76mm » Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:35 pm

lapdog666 wrote: i see, but at most i can manage to change the names. i dont dare touch models or skins, or godforbid stats
But don’t despair—from what Ive seen of modding communities there are some people who love tweaking the skins or stats but find the necesssary research boring, and some people who are vice versa. If you hang out in the modding forum and present some quality research I’d be surprised if you wouldnt find someone ready to domthe technical stuff...

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by JaM2013 » Tue Oct 17, 2017 4:37 pm

i would say we can live without bosporan slingers, but certain specialist units are really missed.. Caetrati are quite commonly mentioned by ancient historians to be quite formidable skirmishers, with both Romans and Carthaginians were using them in their armies. Similarly, there was Tarentine cavalry (light javelin horse) and Numidian light horse. while Tarentines were usually of very average quality, Numidians were exceptional horsemen.. its kinda shame both these are represented by average quality light javelin horse unit...

anyway my biggest complain so far is with historical campaigns.. these feel way too generic, i would expect to fight historical battles in them, not battles fought on randomly generated maps.. They are not that different from sandbox campaign, except for named generals..
Image

GiveWarAchance
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 698
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2016 4:05 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by GiveWarAchance » Tue Oct 17, 2017 5:02 pm

I quite like how the armies and units are in the game. I hope nothing gets removed.
I'm always happy to have more though if they add in more stuff.
Last edited by GiveWarAchance on Tue Oct 17, 2017 7:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

stefankollers
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 56
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2015 8:41 am

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by stefankollers » Tue Oct 17, 2017 6:33 pm

I couldn't mod to save my life, the camera zoom is about it. However it is always great to see new content added, so long as it's historical. Please no "fantasy units" which are so prevalent in a the Rome total war workshop. But like most folk I would love to see more content for some of the factions lacking units. I do think we have done very well to have what we have so praise must go to the Dev team for going to so much trouble providing us the massive amount of content for the base game.

There are lots of talented modders who will no doubt provide us with even more in the future, also probably a DLC or two. The game has after all not been out a week, and already we are seeing user content being added. I would say the future looks very good for this game, and the players.

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by JaM2013 » Tue Oct 17, 2017 6:57 pm

btw, what is the reason behind unit called "javelinmen" to be a medium infantry instead of protected skirmishers? Unit look suggest these should be Iberian or Numidian javelinmen, they carry light shields and javelins, i think they would be better of in their primary skirmishing role than as low quality medium infantry... Besides, if I can chose between them and Scutarii, i always take Scutarii...
Image

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22416
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by rbodleyscott » Tue Oct 17, 2017 7:04 pm

JaM2013 wrote:btw, what is the reason behind unit called "javelinmen" to be a medium infantry instead of protected skirmishers? Unit look suggest these should be Iberian or Numidian javelinmen, they carry light shields and javelins, i think they would be better of in their primary skirmishing role than as low quality medium infantry...
Because they don't represent skirmishers, they represent "hillmen" type tribesmen, Numidian (failed) attempts at developing close-fighting foot and other similar ineffective cannon-fodder.

However, if you want to make them light foot in your mod, you can of course do so.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

jomni
Sengoku Jidai
Sengoku Jidai
Posts: 1385
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:20 am

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by jomni » Fri Oct 20, 2017 7:31 am

The more factions the merrier. Despite repeating units.
Within these factions are subtle differences in unit proportions. Evolving technology through time. Geographic location plays a role on who fights who (I like to restrict matches by timeframe and geography). And there will be people will want to play obscure factions and see if they are able to bring them glory in a campaign.

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 544
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: FOG II Cons (subjective to a degree)

Post by JaM2013 » Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:00 pm

Another thing thats starting to bugging me is how some factions have quite unbalanced and unhistorical armies.. like for example pre-Marian Romans when player by AI, always end up having like 95% heavy infantry and just 1-2 units of Velites or slingers.. Velites should be a lot more numerous, they were as numerous as Hastati and Principes... and same thing with Italian factions.. they are way too one sided, too many infantry with very limited light infantry or cavalry. i would be fine with Celtic faction being like that, because they were well known to be focusing on infantry and didnt usually bring any specialized skirmishers, but with Italic armies its quite unrealistic.

but worst of all is to see Roman AI deployed in 6 ranks at the start... WHY?
Image

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II”