Total War Forums

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: The Roman Camp

  1. #1
    Member Lance Corporal CrimswordKnight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    77

    Default The Roman Camp

    Since R2 has been announced I've been reading up ancient Rome and obviously it military. It seems wherever the Romans went the legion would always hunker down at the end of the day and build a camp/fort to protect themselves. The next day they would set out and destroy the camp if they weren't coming back. Does anyone think this will be in R2? In RTW you always had the option to build a fort if you had a general in your army and paid 500 denari for it but it seemed kinda just thrown in.
    Also, a legion had about 6000 soldiers plus officers but was usually under that. I found many mentions of how there was nearly as many non-combatants that went with the legion like supply personal, smiths, the expendable red shirt, etc. In all the layouts of Roman camps I see there is never a section that shows where these non-combatants stayed. They wouldn't stay outside the camp because whose gonna risk losing all your support personal? If anyone knows anything about that I'd like to know.
    This is left blank for an unknown reason.

  2. #2
    Moderator Master and Commander daelin4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    11,010

    Default

    That's because the emphasis of siege battles in RTW was between the attacking and defending armies. Non-combatants had no role in a battle, hence the term non-combatants. Hence there were no visible non-combatants in RTW battles.

    Camp followers were not "expendable red-shirts", especially if they were slaves, blacksmiths, and priests, and for non-Roman factions, women and children.
    Total War Terms and Conditions
    How to install Steam games without downloading
    Total War: ROME II Political Guide
    How to post DXDiag: Windows+R key, type "dxdiag" in the input box. Select Save All Information, and attach as [/code][code] in your post.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Lieutenant Cicimuholovac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CrimswordKnight View Post
    I found many mentions of how there was nearly as many non-combatants that went with the legion like supply personal, smiths, the expendable red shirt, etc.
    You got it wrong. Roman legion was never acompanied by supply personel when on war marches, forced marches ect (if there were auxiliary troops with the legion, as ussualy they were, than it is posible to have suply troops, but they would suply auxiliaries, not the legion). They might accompany them when a legion moved from one garrnison to another without the risk of engaging combat.

    As for the smiths, lumberjacks, builders, masons, ect. all these duties were done by the legionares themselves. Every legionaire had a skill and legion used those skill to make equipment, roads, aqueducts, ect. In essence, aside from food, legions were almost selfsuficient.
    Last edited by Cicimuholovac; 10-26-2012 at 02:22 PM.

  4. #4
    Moderator Master and Commander daelin4's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    11,010

    Default

    I think the OP was referring to Roman forts, which were more permanent fortifications intended to be house a garrison indefinitely, essentially operating much like medieval castles. Their permanent nature allowed civilian settlements to grow adjacent or nearby, employing locals for jobs or trade. Merchants, prostitutes and slaves would have been found in forts that have stood for a long time and relatively safe from conflict.

    Camps were just camps that troops pitched for the night. In that case an army on the move would likely not have a terribly large following of non-combatants, especially if the civilians had homes.

    The Romans used the word "Castra", and there seems to be no distinction between temporary camps and permanent forts- only in size.

    I have come across the term immunes being used to describe "specialist legionaries" exempt from more general tedious chores due to special skills like artisans and the like, however the references in the wikipedia article themselves give no citations. It is thus likely a modernist interpretation of how the Roman miltiary was organized. So there are about three possible sources of specialist labour: actual immunes , hired civilians (impossible nor likely for a temporary camp) or slaves. Since slaves could range from menial to skilled and educated, the possibility of slave labour for various tasks in a Roman fort or camp is not outrageous.
    Total War Terms and Conditions
    How to install Steam games without downloading
    Total War: ROME II Political Guide
    How to post DXDiag: Windows+R key, type "dxdiag" in the input box. Select Save All Information, and attach as [/code][code] in your post.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Lieutenant Cicimuholovac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    486

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by daelin4 View Post
    I have come across the term immunes being used to describe "specialist legionaries" exempt from more general tedious chores due to special skills like artisans and the like, however the references in the wikipedia article themselves give no citations. It is thus likely a modernist interpretation of how the Roman miltiary was organized. So there are about three possible sources of specialist labour: actual immunes , hired civilians (impossible nor likely for a temporary camp) or slaves. Since slaves could range from menial to skilled and educated, the possibility of slave labour for various tasks in a Roman fort or camp is not outrageous.
    It is correct that some legionares had special skills in contrast to most legionares having "normal" skills (like working in the kitchen, cooking, choping wood, cleaning armour, standards, ect.) and because of those special skill they were imune to guarding and camp duties. Thus the term immunes - those who are imune (the root and the meaning is the same in both English and Latin).

    As for the slaves, it is not likely that a legion would be accompanied by them. They simply present too much of a risk. So do the hired civilians. You don't see civilians looming around military camps today, you wouldn't see them 2000 years ago either.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Sergeant
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    254

    Default

    Back on topic though.

    The camp you're describing wouldn't come about very often in-game.

    Perhaps if a Roman army is hit by a night attack, the Romans can have the choice of fighting inside the camp, and thus having the help of their ditches and fences, or fighting outside, because there might be a risk of destroying their belongings and tents. Obviously this choice also applies to other factions where applicable.

    The forts that you payed 500 denarii for in the original should be expanded upon to make them more useful. I would like it if they were upgrade-able into stone forts for example, and if they had a better zone of control to make them a better tool for protecting your cities.

  7. #7
    Senior Member General wilo1066's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    portsmouth uk
    Posts
    1,945

    Default

    i liked the ones in rome you could build them between settlements as you moved forward you take them down and get some money back.And move you army from cities to camp to cities.And build where you like between two mountains in the pass to stop any enemy armys passing through
    wilo1066

  8. #8
    Member Lance Corporal Tristan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Sugar Land, Tx
    Posts
    64

    Default

    Cicimuholovac Your right craftsmen were done by legionaries who each had a job other than war, but many soldiers brought slaves
    with them especially Greek soldiers and barbarians did bring wives and children with them, that's why the Screaming Women unit exists in Rome Total War as it states in the biography of the unit. That's what I think.

  9. #9
    Junior Member Private Macro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    28

    Default

    If this does get added; it should be added with the concept that

    When you take a turn, where you move your army to a location on the map and at the end of the turn, your army has seen no action, only travelled, it will automatically make some kind of camp. By camp I mean tents, The odd defensive poles sticking in the ground, and then if you get attacked on the next turn without moving, you can fight amongst the camp, otherwise if you move on, it automatically packs up the camp.
    If you think of me, think of one thing. Rome.
    Rome is the thing I'm interested most in. The roman era, war tactics and history of Rome is all so fascinating and interesting. I'm all for it, films & books.

    BRING ON ROME TOTAL WAR 2!!!!

  10. #10
    Senior Member General wilo1066's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    portsmouth uk
    Posts
    1,945

    Default

    Ive just finished watching the EAGLE. Not very accurate but its about romans,The roman camp in the film was good the ditches infront of the walls were full of pitch one flaming torch thrown in surounded the fort in fire that would be a cool defence for camps
    wilo1066

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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