Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Everything wrong with the Odrysian Kingdom & possible solutions

2»

Comments

  • Xirius The GreatXirius The Great Senior Member Posts: 414Registered Users
    edited July 2014
    Great OP. I agree with everything you said and many of your solutions seem to be perfectly doable, such as adding existing units to OK's roster. Finally not some kid who demands from CA that they totally revamp their game and act like that's feasible.

    Adding existing units to the Odryssian roster is a good idea, i kind of hate it when they make a "unique" unit which in fact is just a copy of another unit with 1% variation and a with a new name slapped onto it. It works but it makes the game less.. cohesive(?) and this way it's also easier and quicker to do. I also strongly agree with your points about the traits, those also need a change.

    They could've made the Odrysian Kingdom that much better by giving them just a bit more love but for some reason they thought that to be too much of a trouble. If there were only mods that change these kinda things while staying true to the vanilla feel, instead of adding weird overhistoric units with bad unit cards of complete overhauls which make the faction feel out of place.

    Thracians in both Rome 1&2 have a special place in my heart. The were the underdogs with a unique roster (Though there situation was different in Rome1). I feel slightly sad when i see this faction being so rushed out for a DLC, i'd hoped they would spend more time with them. And from what i hear the Ardiaei also have this problem (though maybe in a lesser degree).

    Have a nice day,

    Xirius
    "The unholy offspring of lightning and death itself."
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited August 2014
    Great OP. I agree with everything you said and many of your solutions seem to be perfectly doable, such as adding existing units to OK's roster. Finally not some kid who demands from CA that they totally revamp their game and act like that's feasible.

    I don't know if there is a relation between cultural group and buildings though, which might make it impossible to combine the Balkan culture, an initially Barbarian culture in this game, with the Hellenistic buildings, but I highly doubt that and even if it were the case, they could just add exactly the same or very similar buildings, since it is definitely possible to create and implement "unique" buildings for each faction, for example the Bactrian Satrap's Great Palace, which is basically just a Hellenistic version of the Parthian Eastern Royal Palace.
    Adding existing units to the Odryssian roster is a good idea, i kind of hate it when they make a "unique" unit which in fact is just a copy of another unit with 1% variation and a with a new name slapped onto it. It works but it makes the game less.. cohesive(?) and this way it's also easier and quicker to do. I also strongly agree with your points about the traits, those also need a change.

    While I would prefer Thracian Hoplites for example to look similar to Thracian Warriors with Dory and Hoplon/Aspis, I wouldn't really mind them simply adding Light Hoplites, since the Thracians apparently made use of Greek equipment anyway, although their adoption of it was delayed. I don't think that Thracians are that different from other people that the names of each of their units need to point out that they are Thracian. I might even prefer the implementation of already existing units over the creation of new units, which might be historically inaccurate or wrong in some kind of way, as many of them already are. The Thorax Hoplites for example are carrying a Thureos instead of an Aspis or Hoplon, for no reason. Their defining characteristic is the use of a Thorax made of metal, instead of a Linothorax. The Thureos was probably adopted by Greeks from Illyrians and Thracians, which adopted it from the Celts, which settled down in Galatia and possibly Tylis eventually. There are already separate units of Thureos Spears and Thureos Hoplites in the Athenian unit roster though and this shield obviously makes the use of a traditional "Hoplite Phalanx" kind of difficult, which sadly does not exist in the game anyway, because it can't be represented properly and has therefor been renamed to "Hoplite Wall", but that can hardly be considered as a justification.

    The Sica on the other hand is a weapon, which should be represented in the game in some kind of way for sure, but in terms of game-play and balancing their unit roster, Gallo-Thracian-Infantry could also do the job. This unit suits the Odrysian Kingdom probably better than the newly founded Celtic kingdom of Tylis in this game anyway.
    They could've made the Odrysian Kingdom that much better by giving them just a bit more love but for some reason they thought that to be too much of a trouble. If there were only mods that change these kinda things while staying true to the vanilla feel, instead of adding weird overhistoric units with bad unit cards of complete overhauls which make the faction feel out of place.

    Yes, I also dislike most mods, because they are bloated with too much "content", which you might not want in your game or they are badly balanced, by implementing too powerful units for example etc.. What kind of bothers me are the discrepancies between descriptions, unit cards etc. and their actual units. Someone at CA felt the need to write down in their description that they adopted the Phalanx formation of the Greeks, in addition to other military traditions, and that they were supposed to be excellent bowmen, while in the game they don't have any kind of spear-infantry and a single unit of comparably bad archers and no horse archers etc. at all. That seems to be a problem with the game in general though, considered that the description of Thorax Hoplites, which I used as an example earlier, at Steam mentions them as "marked by their bronze breastplate armour, a sign of wealth and status" and that they "are armed with spears and hoplon shields, and use the phalanx formation to batter enemies into submission", which is obviously false in this game. Their actual description in the game is just the generic text about Hoplites by the way, which includes that they were named after their shields.
    Thracians in both Rome 1&2 have a special place in my heart. The were the underdogs with a unique roster (Though there situation was different in Rome1). I feel slightly sad when i see this faction being so rushed out for a DLC, i'd hoped they would spend more time with them. And from what i hear the Ardiaei also have this problem (though maybe in a lesser degree).

    I like the Thracians and the Odrysian Kingdom in specific as well. The Thracians on the one hand had great potential and the Greeks were afraid of the day all of them would unit in a common cause, possibly against them, since they outnumbered them greatly and were considered as powerful and warlike people in general, although that never happened, but on the other hand the Odrysians strived to become more than mere Barbarians in comparison to their Greek neighbors and adopted a lot of their customs and traditions, including their language, into their own culture. They weren't just the ferocious savages many Thracian tribes are portrayed as, but aspired to be better. This makes them interesting and is a great scenario to alter the cause of history. What if the Odrysian Kingdom actually succeeded in uniting the Thracian tribes, possibly by force, and continued their development and delayed adoption of the Greek one? They were considered as wealthy nation anyway and could have risen to one of the most powerful factions in the Mediterranean, whose opposition could have forced Rome to change more than their equipment in order to deal with them. In this game they are doomed to stay a generic Barbarian faction though and instead of their Hellinization, you have to deal with unreasonable hate from all Hellenistic factions, while they are admiring the Iceni for their cultural aspiration.
  • Alexander the great 1602Alexander the great 1602 Senior Member Posts: 126Registered Users
    edited August 2014
    i mostly want to see the client state thing done and balkan to become a type of civilization with stone walls or at least them be made hellenistic.
    i dont thing more melee defense is necessary for thracian nobles because they are allready the best infantry in the game, and that would enable them to shred through two praetorian guard units which would be insane
    Team MACEDON
    Team Odrysia
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited August 2014
    i mostly want to see the client state thing done and balkan to become a type of civilization with stone walls or at least them be made hellenistic.
    i dont thing more melee defense is necessary for thracian nobles because they are allready the best infantry in the game, and that would enable them to shred through two praetorian guard units which would be insane

    They currently would need to be a "Hellenistic" (in terms of their cultural group, in opposition to "Barbarian", they can still be "Balkan") faction to be able to create client states, which they should be anyway in my opinion, because of their buildings and their advanced Hellenization. If they would allow every faction to create client states/satraps or liberate people, which would make sense and probably be appreciated by many players, you could separate the ability to create client states from their cultural group.

    I know that the Thracian Nobles are already really powerful in this game, but that doesn't change anything about their kind of nonsensical amount of melee defense. That an elite unit of well trained and equipped melee infantry with armors and shields has not only less than, but only a fraction of the melee defense of some of the most basic skirmishers, is kind of stupid, especially since their shield provides 0 melee defense, although it was designed for melee combat with a two-handed weapon. If an increase of their melee defense makes them imbalanced, their currently ridiculously high offensive capabilities and stats should be reduced to balance it. The Rhomphaia is a powerful and dangerous weapon, but that their "charge"-stat (63) is higher than that of some elite Shock Cavalry, like the Athenian Hippeus Lancers or the Noble Cavalry of Carthage (both 57) is kind of ridiculous, especially if you consider that their "Melee Attack"-stat is almost twice as high and their "Weapon Damage" is considerably higher as well, while it is armor-piercing and has more than twice as high bonuses against Infantry, Elephants and "Large". They should be a strong unit offensively, but not that powerful, especially not if their defensive capabilities are laughable in exchange for that.
  • Rochaid29Rochaid29 Senior Member Posts: 1,208Registered Users
    edited August 2014
    Gotta say I'm very surprised, this an excellent and well thought post
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited August 2014
    Rochaid29 wrote: »
    Gotta say I'm very surprised, this an excellent and well thought post

    Well, thank you, did you expect something else though? Did you actually read it or just the tl;dr-paragraphs? Do you disagree with any of my suggestions or my point of view on a specific matter?

    * Added an alternative suggestion to enabling the Odrysian Kingdom to create client states by adding them to the Hellenistic faction group (while maintaining the Balkan culture), since I don't see that happening any time soon. It was inspired by a post of Billy Ruffian and would enable Barbarian confederations to recruit all units of the factions that are part of it, possibly excluding elite units. Other Barbarian factions, including the Getae, would benefit from this change as well.
  • MalZen333MalZen333 Senior Member Posts: 225Registered Users
    edited September 2014
    Props @OP. Thoroughly enjoyed the thorough read. Stucture, articulation, intrigue logic. I have so many 'tumults with this game; and have made attempts to vocalize them, but only because I so badly want to enjoy this game and its potential.

    The absolute only thing hindering me from playing Odrysia is the much everywhere color blue, by which I have a dreadfully lame subliminal aversion towards. Blue icon, blue unit cards; which I've not yet modded over, or won't. Silly yes.

    Thanks for all the info and historical refreshers, I don't have much to add aside from a thumbs up.

    However; I'm curious if you perhaps have an opinion on the Draco ability given to Rome? Not directly tied to the topic, but still originating in the Balks /Bosporos vicinity?
  • glenbrutonglenbruton Senior Member Posts: 246Registered Users
    edited September 2014
    Holey moley. Now that's a post! Epic work.
    Warhammer: Total War. I would buy the heck out of it.
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited September 2014
    MalZen333 wrote: »
    Props @OP. Thoroughly enjoyed the thorough read. Stucture, articulation, intrigue logic. I have so many 'tumults with this game; and have made attempts to vocalize them, but only because I so badly want to enjoy this game and its potential.

    The absolute only thing hindering me from playing Odrysia is the much everywhere color blue, by which I have a dreadfully lame subliminal aversion towards. Blue icon, blue unit cards; which I've not yet modded over, or won't. Silly yes.

    Thanks for all the info and historical refreshers, I don't have much to add aside from a thumbs up.

    Thank you. I wish their coloring would be the only thing preventing me from enjoying the Odrysian Kingdom, but after playing it for a couple of turns, many of the issues mentioned above become quiet obvious and annoying, primarily that you are stuck with the same melee infantry unit, the Thracian Warriors, for a majority of your campaign and the only alternative is a more expensive version of them, you will be able to recruit eventually. Artificially crippling this faction by denying them access to spear infantry etc. has the exact opposite effect of making them more interesting to play for me. While might create more "variety" and "diversity" between factions by doing that, it makes playing the affected faction itself monotonous and unvarying, but we will see if anything changes about that with the release of Patch 15 and the Emperor Edition. I didn't read about any changes for the Odrysian Kingdom in specific in the patch notes, but they will benefit from the general improvements for sure. I just hope that at least their unit roster is improved or expanded as well and not just their already available units "rebalanced".
    However; I'm curious if you perhaps have an opinion on the Draco ability given to Rome? Not directly tied to the topic, but still originating in the Balks /Bosporos vicinity?

    I do, I dislike basically everything about it. On the one hand it shouldn't be available to the Roman cavalry, since their adoption of the Draco is out of the period of time covered by the game and it is especially ridiculous that it is exclusive to the Romans and the factions they adopted it from don't have access to it, and on the other hand the implementation of the ability, as magic ability with cooldown, is just bad, because the Draco is a standard - you either have one of these with you, or you don't, and it wouldn't be used only temporarily. There is absolutely no reason why this "ability" or standard would need to be "recharged" to be used again, although they shouldn't stop using it if they have one to begin with. The penalty it applies is also completely nonsensical and bad in terms of balance. The Draco should be a passive ability, which applies a morale penalty to horses, which aren't used to it (maybe even to allies, if they aren't used to it, which would make it necessary to be able to toggle the "ability" on and off), and available only to those factions the Romans adopted it from. We will see if such changes are included in the "balancing changes" of patch 15.
  • DetailedEyesDetailedEyes Senior Member AustraliaPosts: 4,715Registered Users
    edited September 2014
    Marijan wrote: »
    I do, I dislike basically everything about it. On the one hand it shouldn't be available to the Roman cavalry, since their adoption of the Draco is out of the period of time covered by the game and it is especially ridiculous that it is exclusive to the Romans and the factions they adopted it from don't have access to it, and on the other hand the implementation of the ability, as magic ability with cooldown, is just bad, because the Draco is a standard - you either have one of these with you, or you don't, and it wouldn't be used only temporarily. There is absolutely no reason why this "ability" or standard would need to be "recharged" to be used again, although they shouldn't stop using it if they have one to begin with. The penalty it applies is also completely nonsensical and bad in terms of balance. The Draco should be a passive ability, which either applies a morale penalty to horses, which aren't used to it, and available only to those factions the Romans adopted it from. We will see if such changes are included in the "balancing changes" of patch 15.
    Well some did happen, Rome got it removed, all steppe melee cavalry (all 3 units and no Getae units :D ) got it instead but it's effects remain the same as ever, it's still magical.
    "We shall have peace. We shall have peace when you answer for the burning of the Westfold, and the children that lie dead there. When the lives of the soldiers, whose bodies were hewn even as they lay dead against the Gates of the Hornburg are avenged! When you hang from a gibbet, for the sport of your own crows, we shall have peace."

    Theoden to Saruman at Orthanc, also my total war philosophy.
  • MalZen333MalZen333 Senior Member Posts: 225Registered Users
    edited September 2014
    I had anticipated as much regarding Draco, just didn't see it listed anywhere throughout the posts and thought you'd convey my thoughts more amicably than I would have. I interpreted correct.

    And what I meant to say was blue was preventing me from playing them particularly over other factions for about 3 turns before I rage quit due to all those "Tumults' I mentioned. They really stack up.
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited October 2014
    Well, while Patch 15 brought some great improvements, the Odrysian Kingdom is not only mostly unaffected by these changes, but severely weakened in comparison to other factions.

    In terms of military and units, nothing really changed in case of the Odrysian Kingdom, except for the removal of the bonus vs. infantry from its melee infantry units, as from most melee infantry, which indirectly improved spear infantry and made it more viable. It is too bad that the Odrysian Kingdom is the only faction, as far as I know, which does not benefit from this change at all, since it simply has no access to any spear infantry to balance the removal of the bonus vs. infantry from their melee infantry. While I generally think that this bonus was out of place in most cases and appreciate the change, the Rhomphaia is one of the few weapons that actually deserve such a bonus in my opinion, because of its devastating effects in melee combat (although I think a "bonus vs. everything" can hardly be considered as a "bonus" anymore and basically equals a general stat increase), especially since they still have no spear infantry to benefit from this change at all, which is bad by itself.

    In addition to that "fire-at-will" has been implemented for melee- or spear-infantry, which is armed with 2 javelins, which is generally a great improvement and makes much more sense than holding on to your 2 javelins, which are awkward to carry around in melee combat. It is too bad though that the Odrysian Kingdom still has no regular melee infantry, for example using a one-handed sword, preferably the Sica, and 2 javelins, that could benefit from this change, but only two units of melee infantry, which are using two-handed weapons and can therefor not carry or use additional missile weapons, effectively just increasing the disadvantage of the Odrysian Kingdom in comparison to other factions.

    Minor changes like the already mentioned Draco, which is now available to nomad melee cavalry, instead of the Romans, are weakening the Odrysian Kingdom as well, since their neighbors now have access to this ability, whose bonuses still make little sense though and therefor further increase the vulnerability of the Odrysian Kingdom against cavalry and horse archers, by removing the bonus vs. cavalry from their units with this ability, although it should actually primarily affect horses and Thracian, but especially Dacian horses should be used to it, especially since the Dacians made use of the Draco themselves.

    In terms of traits and diplomatic relations sadly nothing I mentioned really changed, as far as I can tell, with the exception of the Eastern "Great Marksmen"-trait and the the Scythian "Archery Masters"-trait now providing a +25% ammunition bonus, instead of an experience bonus, which was inferior to the Thracian one. How being a good archer or marksmen makes you not more experienced and thereby more accurate, but instead enables you to carry 1/4 more projectiles of any kind is beyond my comprehension though. It is less useless for Pontus than experience for archers, but giving them a proper experience bonus for missile infantry and balancing the Thracian one would have been a better solution to these issues in my opinion, than enabling units to carry more javelins, because they are supposedly Archery Masters, which is obviously nonsense.

    In case of buildings, there were some considerable improvements, but mostly minor changes that aren't really important. Barbarian factions now have access to Sanitation-buildings, called "Water", for example, which barely matters, since they are only useful for really minor bonuses to growth and become basically pointless afterwards. I don't want to complain about this, since it is better than before and definitely an improvement, but I don't really care either.

    In addition to that not only the Odrysian Kingdom, but all Barbarian factions can build the Tier 5 Highking's Hold now, which I consider as an improvement, at the very least in case of the Odrysian Kingdom, although the building thereby lost all of its uniqueness (which is by the way the case for many of these newly introduced changes, especially in case of the Tier 5 temples of Hellenistic factions, which barely differ from each other now).

    Resources are supposedly more important now as well, but they are far from the re-introduction of Shogun 2's great regional resources, which were mostly important and useful in one way or another other besides trading purposes, whether it was for military recruitment or agents (reintroducing building requirements for agents would by the way solve a lot of problems, including reducing the infamous "agent spam", which is caused by multiple 1-region-factions being able to recruit way more agents than a single faction holding the same amount of regions, but that is an entirely different topic), and shown as separate settlements on the campaign map, which had strategic value since they could be raided separately.

    Instead most resources just got a differently colored icon and different bonuses, in many cases even making them less important by decreasing these bonuses in general, with the exception of the newly introduced horse trainers and iron, which are now useful for military specialization, since they provide upgrades (I don't know why they wouldn't introduce something like the arrow maker from Shogun 2 for missile infantry as well, which could easily be an alternate building-chain in regions with "wood" as natural resource.). They mostly ignored the iron and gold deposits in Dacia by the way, which should be present, even though the Dacians barely made use of them, especially in the Augustus Campaign. The province of Pannonia is sadly only an inferior 3-regions-province (which prevents you from stacking as many bonuses as in a 4-regions-province and is therefor inferior in terms of military specialization), making Galatia Et Cappodocia the closest province which can be used for optimal military specialization. Speaking of which, the Barbarian military recruitment building chains are supposedly less decentralized and messed up now, which generally sounds like a great improvement, although I would like the Odrysian Kingdom in specific to have Hellenistic buildings.

    They changed some of the bonuses of the religious buildings of the Odrysian Kingdom, but only the Sanctuary of Bendis seems to be actually improved now, which now provides a bonus to the morale of missile infantry, minor unit recruitment cost reduction and a increases the wealth generated by livestock, which suits the goddess of the hunt perfectly in my opinion and also makes sense in terms of balancing, and the Sanctuary of Zibelthiurdos, which now provides the bonuses I suggested.

    They didn't change much about the Sanctuary of the Cabeiri, which is fine, since they decreased the bonuses the Temple of Hephaistos provides, which was previously clearly superior with its Tier 4 building being comparable to the unique Tier 5 building of the Cabeiri.

    They ruined the Sanctuary of Kotys though, instead of replacing it with another temple for a god of war, preferably Ares/Thrax, which provides bonuses to infantry in general or other than missile infantry, by making it provide a research bonus, increasing the wealth from culture and providing cultural conversion and public order. Doesn't sound bad at first, although it doesn't make much sense to relate these bonuses to a goddess, which name supposedly translates to something like "war" and was worshiped through orgies at night to speed up your technological advancement, but the bonuses of the Sanctuary of Sabazios were also changed and make the ones of this temple completely pointless, with the exception of the nonsensical minor research bonus, since it provides more public order, more cultural conversion and a 16% bonus to all sources of income, which is superior a 20% bonus to income from culture for obvious reasons (No, cultural province specialization does not change anything about that). Instead of the research bonus and an irrelevant bonus to wealth from agriculture, the Sanctuary of Sabazios also increases the tax rate in the whole province by 6%. I would definitely like to see this temple replaced by one of Ares/Thrax and instead Kotys being mentioned in the "Water"-building-chain, referring to the washing rituals performed before the orgies.

    While I appreciate the improvements of Patch 15 in general, although they were kind of disappointing in comparison to what I expected and hoped for, they are partly making the already bad situation for the Odrysian Kingdom even worse. I was also severely disappointed, that Thrace and many other factions, are not playable on the new and improved Imperator Augustus campaign map for basically no reason, since they still existed and would have required only minor changes at best, which basically forces you to play on the old, "inferior" campaign map if you want to play one of these factions.

    What I positively noticed though is the Thracian unit roster in the Imperator Augustus campaign, which basically is the Dacian one, with the exception of the general's or admiral's bodyguards, which are still Thracian. While I dislike that their regular Thracian units were replaced for no reason, I think that making "Royal" elite units exclusive to bodyguards would be a great change for a majority of factions (the Praetorian Guard being the prime example) and that they seemed to prefer giving Thrace an inaccurate but balanced and versatile unit roster instead of the one of the Odrysian Kingdom, which I appreciate and kind of equals acknowledging that the Odrysian unit roster is comparably bad and imbalanced, assuming that this wasn't just an incredibly lazy oversight.

    I don't know whether any of these issues are ever going to be addressed though, now that they announced Total War: Attila and with the exception of the "content team", which is probably in charge of releasing already pre-planned content for this game, are moving on to the next title.
  • CSiva13CSiva13 Senior Member Posts: 809Registered Users
    edited October 2014
    i realy hope they add some units to O.K. i have said it from the start O.K. suck on campagn its to boring to use only tracian warriors as melee inf almost for the hole campagn
    Rome 2 finished campaigns .
    GC---Odrysian Kingdom, Lusitani , Cimmeria , Iceni , Baktria , Massagetae , Sparta ,Pergamon , Getae , Athens .
    HATG---Lusitani , Syracuse , Rome .
    IA----Lepidus .
    CIG---Nervii .
    WOS---Boiotian League
  • daelin4daelin4 Senior Member Posts: 16,176Registered Users
    edited October 2014
    Several posts deleted for being off topic and getting personal. I will close thread and start banning the instant someone decides s/he is above the rules.

    Corrected action is the most sincere form of apology.
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited October 2014
    csilva wrote: »
    i realy hope they add some units to O.K. i have said it from the start O.K. suck on campagn its to boring to use only tracian warriors as melee inf almost for the hole campagn

    My response to your post sadly got deleted as well, but I agree with you that their lack of unit variety and diversity makes them very dull and boring to play as, although that doesn't equal being "bad" in general, since you can easily win a campaign with nothing but Eastern Spearmen and Slingers, they certainly are inferior in direct comparison to the unit rosters of other factions.
    daelin4 wrote: »
    Several posts deleted for being off topic and getting personal. I will close thread and start banning the instant someone decides s/he is above the rules.

    Thank you for taking care of it, although I would have preferred it if the parts of posts that weren't off-topic wouldn't have been deleted as well.

    The issues some people had with these suggestions - or any suggestions to improve this faction in general, since it was supposedly perfectly fine from their point of view, are being discussed in this newly created thread by the way, which also includes a decent source for historical information about the Thracians, which I am not going to link to directly, because that might be a copyright-infringement. Unlike this one, the OP seems to be focused more on multiplayer-balance though.
  • CSiva13CSiva13 Senior Member Posts: 809Registered Users
    edited October 2014
    yea i just cant use OK on camp due to they only have 1 melee unit for almost the hole camp its to boring maybe CA will fix this and add mid tier unit with a sica or a mid rhompia unit
    Rome 2 finished campaigns .
    GC---Odrysian Kingdom, Lusitani , Cimmeria , Iceni , Baktria , Massagetae , Sparta ,Pergamon , Getae , Athens .
    HATG---Lusitani , Syracuse , Rome .
    IA----Lepidus .
    CIG---Nervii .
    WOS---Boiotian League
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Posts: 8,217Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    Hoping CA notices that Odrysia needs more units and buff to their current melee units...
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Posts: 6,234Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    Given the release of another culture pack, I feel the need to post here to remind everyone that the Odrysian Kingdom is considered by most players to be still in need of some attention. CA, please do not simply "move on" from the Odrysian Kingdom without giving them another look.

    Thank you.
  • AlJabberwockAlJabberwock Moderator USAPosts: 7,729Moderators, Tech Moderators, Knights
    edited November 2014
    Posts discussing MP vagaries are removed to the extent that they make use of argument based on individual player's capabilities or strategies where the intent of the OP is primarily to only include aspects -not- related to player-skill.



    ~Al
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    “Every so often things happen that can’t be rationalized in a conventional way. People wanna know their government has a response. I am that response.”
    ― Kent Mansley (in "Iron Giant")

    For most general problems, for which you have no idea of the culprit, your first port of call should be:
    https://support.sega.co.uk/hc/en-us/categories/200307381-Total-War-Support

    If you are aware of a bug or a specific issue for which you know the cause, post in the support section for the specific title on our forums. ~Al

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest
  • AlJabberwockAlJabberwock Moderator USAPosts: 7,729Moderators, Tech Moderators, Knights
    edited November 2014
    Note the title is re-edited, and the edits in the above Moderator note are themselves edited... (lol).

    This is a deliberate double post as a small gesture to the OP, and anyone misconstruing this as a general amnesty on double posting may repair to the quote in my thread. :)

    PLAY ON! ~Al
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    “Every so often things happen that can’t be rationalized in a conventional way. People wanna know their government has a response. I am that response.”
    ― Kent Mansley (in "Iron Giant")

    For most general problems, for which you have no idea of the culprit, your first port of call should be:
    https://support.sega.co.uk/hc/en-us/categories/200307381-Total-War-Support

    If you are aware of a bug or a specific issue for which you know the cause, post in the support section for the specific title on our forums. ~Al

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest
  • CosmosisCosmosis Senior Member Posts: 354Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    Too long, didn't read.
    Cosmosis' single top wish for Rome 2: Total War
    • War Goals
    Every war doesn't have to be a capitulation war - regional wars gives depth and variation to both warfare and diplomacy
  • jonathanridings@gmail.com[email protected] Senior Member Posts: 1,054Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    I've probably said this before, but if I were to add anything to Odryssia I think all they need are the Spears / Heavy Spears unit from Getae
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    EvilNed wrote: »
    I've probably said this before, but if I were to add anything to Odryssia I think all they need are the Spears / Heavy Spears unit from Getae

    Well, I wouldn't consider it as "all they need", but spear infantry or alternatives to hold a line are definitely among the most important issues. If the implementation of actually new units is to too much ask for, just adding already existing one to their unit roster would be still preferable over nothing - and it isn't only not far fetched that some Dacians could have been ruled by the Odrysian Kingdom as well, but historically accurate.
    Cosmosis wrote: »
    Too long, didn't read.

    Yes, it is definitely too long and I would be the first one that would have wanted a thread about issues of this faction to be shorter.
  • jamreal18jamreal18 Senior Member Posts: 8,217Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    Odrysia needs MID-TIER sica unit...
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    Patch 16 seems to change little about the game in general, but tweaks the stats of some units, including many of the Odrysian Kingdom.
    Increased melee attack of Thracian Slingers, Bowmen, Skirmishers.
    Increased the armour of Thracian Peltasts.
    Increased the morale of Thracian Warriors.
    Mercenary Veteran Hoplites added to custom/multiplayer battle roster for the Odrysian Kingdom.

    Looks like an improvement in general, but it is far from what I had hoped for. The melee attack value of dedicated missile and skirmishers units is basically irrelevant, since these aren't even Peltasts. They are still inferior to actual melee infantry in terms of stats and numbers, so it doesn't change anything about the fact that you want to keep them at distance as long as possible and that they are barely capable of being meat shields after they ran out of ammunition.

    The armour increase of Thracian Peltasts will make them obviously more resistant to missile fire, but "more armour" is probably one of the least historically accurate improvements for this faction, especially when they add to their base armour instead of increasing the currently ridiculously small bonus provided by their shield.

    Mercenary Veteran Hoplites are a decent addition to their custom/multiplayer battle roster, considering that it is a both historically accurate and very tough unit, which is able to hold a line more reliably than regular hoplites. It is beyond my comprehension though why they keep adding mercenaries to these rosters, while changing nothing about their exceptionally poor factional mercenaries and traits that make using them as permanent parts of your army even less affordable than for other factions, with the only negative cultural trait in the entire game.

    Generally it seems like multiplayer players will benefit from this patch much more than singleplayer players, since they receive an additional unit, are much more likely to "waste" their skirmishers and missile infantry in melee combat as meat shields, because they don't have to worry about the aftermath, and they don't have to worry as much about the improvements to units of factions close to the Odrysian Kingdom on the campaign map, although the Odrysian Kingdom on the campaign map has much more issues than in multiplayer, where traits, the aftermath of battles or a lack of unit variety are much less significant.
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Posts: 6,234Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    Honestly I was thinking that if they had intended to give Thracian Peltasts more armor, they would have adjusted their shield, not their normal armor value. I mean what the heck... it's a pelte, not a buckler. It's better armor for most every other pelte carrying unit out there. But for Thracians? Nope! Little 5 value useless buckler of the sort javelinmen use. There seems to be almost no consistency with the armor values provided by shields in this game. Iberian Swordsmen, for instance, also use a decently sized shield and it's more or less useless too. Celts use the same thing and get double the value out of it. Go figure.

    The additional mercenary units for Custom/MP is honestly just a slap in the face. Their normal single-player roster should be getting additional NON mercenary units added to it.

    I'm starting to think that the OK threads are largely just ignored :(
  • SjirikiSjiriki Senior Member Posts: 1,370Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    Marijan wrote: »
    Patch 16 seems to change little about the game in general, but tweaks the stats of some units, including many of the Odrysian Kingdom.

    The armour increase of Thracian Peltasts will make them obviously more resistant to missile fire, but "more armour" is probably one of the least historically accurate improvements for this faction, especially when they add to their base armour instead of increasing the currently ridiculously small bonus provided by their shield.

    Their armor is changed from cloth to padded cloth, providing an additional 15 armor. I don't think it's that far-fetched to give them such an armor type, although I do agree a better shield would have been much better. They end up with a whopping 30 armor. It's weird that Thracian warriors got no such buff. I agree with the rest of your points though.
  • MarijanMarijan Senior Member Posts: 2,001Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    Sjiriki wrote: »
    Their armor is changed from cloth to padded cloth, providing an additional 15 armor. I don't think it's that far-fetched to give them such an armor type, although I do agree a better shield would have been much better. They end up with a whopping 30 armor. It's weird that Thracian warriors got no such buff. I agree with the rest of your points though.

    It's not far-fetched by itself, although their only difference to other units are boots instead of shoes and a completely meaningless cloak, but ridiculously inconsistent. The Thracian Warriors wear shin-guards and helmets in addition to that and have less than half of their base armor, as every other infantry unit besides the Thracian Nobles. The Thracian Peltast historically adopted more armor eventually, but if you want to represent that, they should actually give them shin-guards etc. or add a heavier Thracian Peltast as separate unit, preferably Sica-wielding melee infantry instead of just another plain improvement, which serves otherwise no different purpose. If change was purely done for the sake of balance, they could and should have increased their shield value, which currently provides only 1/4 of the armor of the shield of the Thracian Warriors, which is attached to their arms and comparably tiny, and only 1/6 of their total armor, implying that the cloth they are wearing are 5 times more protective than an actual shield.

    In general though the Thracians were kind of known for very lightly armored units, with the exception of the nobility, which is why I consider just "more (body) armor" in general as a comparably bad approach to improve and balance this faction.
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Posts: 6,234Registered Users
    edited November 2014
    I sometimes wonder if the balance team just sifts data from MP when making their decisions.
Sign In or Register to comment.