What factions/titles do you want me to cover next with this series? : )

@Gogglesboy

4 жыл бұрын

I think you should do how to make an accurate Crusading army in Med2

@lorenzosilvio4054

4 жыл бұрын

How to create an accurate Byzantine army in Med2

@pug1062

4 жыл бұрын

Rome 2

@pieter2433

4 жыл бұрын

English and French armies during the Hundred Years’ War in medieval 2 total war

@kadinlong7333

4 жыл бұрын

How about an army composition for Macedon, one during Alexander The Great's time and one during the time of the Macedonian Wars (214-148 BC)

this is literally the only reason why i picked ancient history for uni

Interestingly enough gallienus’s original comitatenses were an all cavalry force so that they can respond to threats in different parts of the empire quickly

@MelkorGG

4 жыл бұрын

XD Yeah I read about that in my research. He's been playing too much total war.

@JLrapel492

3 жыл бұрын

Oh.

@Belisarius1967

Ай бұрын

But the latest research suggests it was the Limitanei that were more Cavalry focussed, The Comitatensei were more Infantry based.

Do 'an accurate new world army' for kingdoms americas spain

I know a lot of Roman army fans don’t like the later Roman military but I think they look pretty badass tbh. Comitatenses and auxilia palatina have a sort of medieval look about them which I think makes them look unique. Not to mention the use of catafracts and clibinarii

I love to role play with accurate unit composition. Wold love to see your depiction in the other Total War games.

@ryanpatterson5278

4 жыл бұрын

Doing one for M2TW would give a lot of content for the future

How about the Romans having more expensive units compared to barbarian factions (represent corruption and just how expensive it was). Also balanced the economy between Romans and Barbarians at the same time.

You should take a look at the invasio barbarorum mod for BI. Great mods covering that era

Good video ! I know this kind of video needs a lot of research, as the Roman army is a complex machine that evolved throughout time, and you could litteraly make hours long documentaries on them (just for 3rd century army). It was also something that could adapt depending on the front, and therefore recruitment of specialized units could change. Plus, when it comes to ancient history, you always need different sources, because nobody agrees (as you said).

I love your channel man. I love the way you have to play in the BI, a defensive yet offensive war. WRE is on the the hardest and no doubt you can see so many reasons why they have failed.

The 3rd century makes me cry everyime ;( If only Rome had conquered the world.

Love the historical accuracy videos

I’ve recently got back to playin total war after my playing for abt 3 or 4 months and came back to your channel because of it

Really enjoying the videos :)

In barbarian invasion the romans roster is okey, attila total war has the lack of the division of limitanei and comitatenses after the units upgrates.

@rorschach1985ify

3 жыл бұрын

I hated how the Limitanei were just one unit of weak tier 1 spearmen that get almost instantly replaced when they were the 2nd essential half of the Late Roman Army. Yeah they were one unit in BI but at least the more limited unit roster meant they were more noticeable and you could still recruit them as garrison troops like they were meant to be used historically which was helped by the fact Peasants no longer had an advantage when it comes to public order so it subtly pushed you into recruiting them.

It would be great if you continue whit this kind of tutorial/documentaries on how ancient armys where structured and showing how we can recreate them on our campaings

Show us how to build an accurate bronze-age Egyptian army...

good work keep it up

I've seen lots of sources that indicate that over time, the limit' would be forgotten and not paid on time, which caused a reduction in how much time they spent training and how well equipped they were.

very nice man

As depressing as it would be, it would be interesting to see the Pars Occidentalis when it was intact in 395 vs post empire in 487

That is a very prohibitive army. In the time span of the campaign I would be very short on cash every turn and my strong armies would have at most 5 or so Comitatenses, plus foederati auxilia and cavalry, assorted mercs and any close limitanei units; to give you an idea I would have 1 small army in Britain about 3 comitatenses, and the rest would be mostly limitanei, another in Central Europe with 4 or 5 comitat. Cav and any nearby limitanei. One in Africa and Turkey/Romania that would be conquering provinces from ERE and thus very strong in cav, mercs and comitatenses and 0 limitanei plus one in italy to fend off the Hordes that dared to go that far: my most regal army with plumbatari, auxilia palatina and sarmatian auxilia all with silver attack and shields. By the way, I think the unit naming convention as 'comitatenses' and 'limitanei' is wrong since as I have read those were like 'tiers' of soldiers not a specific unit. For example a comitatenses unit might have been equiped with lances and a sword but because they were used in the field army, they received a classification as 'Comitatenses' while a limitanei unit might have been equipped as the local tribe near by with swords, spears or axes etc but their job description and pay were classified as 'Limitanei' or border troops. So to correct this, I think roman units should be named as the primary weapon they carry (like the barbarian units) and 'comitatenses' or 'limitanei' should not be part of the unit name, as it is just how they are used. Obviously, units intended for field use would have better morale and be more heavily armored and equiped. Further, the 'Legio' name attribute should be changed to 'Cohort' if infantry so a unit could be called 'Cohort I, II, III' etc. And 'Ala' + a name if allied cav. Or Equites + numeral + name if Roman.

Pls more like this I beg.

You should do napoleon total war. Or medieval 2

Fodirate werent allies they were just recruited from roman provinces that where still highly barberian and as the years passed they were replacing more and more of the ather units with them also because of the series of civil wars the upkeep had been raised so much to keep them loyal that in result destroyed westen roman economy .

@MelkorGG

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the extra information. Although I don't think I called them allies in the video. All I said was they were at times recuited from barbarian lands as part of a deal. To be honest, I did not know what that meant, but I don't beleive my wording was wrong.

@MELKOR Would you be open to discuss this roster (and its translation to TW Attila)? I kind of have some issues based on some things that I've read on the Roman Army from late antiquity. This roster feels more like a recreation of what you made with the Roman legion after the Marian reforms, but even then it conflicts with an element you said in that video (specifically about praetorians). Allow me to explain... 1) the Scholae Palatinae were part of the Comitatenses Praesentalis, or "palatini" meaning "palace troops. These were the successors of the Praetorian Guard after their abolishment by Constantine I. From all the mentions I've found, the praetorians and palatini could be attached to a legion, but only to protect the emperor or a VIP general. If you are open to a follow-up to these, I might counter-propose 1 unit of praetorians or palatini in a legion, but only if the general is a member of your family. 2) Comitatenses and sagitarii...so this one is a bit tricky to explain. At the time of Rome 1, the Roman Army had a clear distinction between legionnaires (Roman citizens) and auxiliaries (non-citizens). Over time, the auxiliary units became more Romanized (something you mentioned here) and looked increasingly similar to the normal Roman legionnaires. When we get to the reforms of Emperor Diocletian, he does a two step move. First is to officially give auxiliaries status as full fledged legionnaires. He then took all of the legionnaires and split them in half (regardless of who they were part of initially) to make the limitanei and comitatenses. It's also worth mentioning that the legions of late antiquity were MUCH smaller normally than those of earlier times (general estimates from what I've read online and from some Osprey books on the subject list a legion around 1000 men, about 1/6 of the size from the time of Caesar). I think it would make more sense to reduce the number of Comitatenses by at least 3 (probably 4), but also add some more sagitarii and count these in the number of "cohort" units in the army. 3) Cavalry is repeatedly cited as being much more common and prominent in the Roman Army from the 3rd century CE onwards, yet the number of units in this roster looks the same as in your Rome 1 list. There is also a much wider range of cavalry of the Roman cavalry at this time than during the early imperial era. I would think that an army would have around 6-8 units of cavalry in the army...2 heavy (cataphracts), 2 medium, 2 light/foederati, and 1-2 units of equites sagitarii (which may be used in lieu of the medium or light cavalry units, depending on needs and availability) In all, though, I really love your video. So much so that I'm attempting to recreate your built in a TW Attila campaign to see how it does in that game. I love your assessment that it feels like this roster is about minimizing casualties and your mention of the use of ambush tactics as well as the incorporation of Germanic barbarians into the Roman legions. I think the suggested changes further all 3 points by relying on firepower (from the sagitarii and ballistae) and the hammer and anvil tactics inherited by the Romans from the Greeks in the face of the threats they faced from the Germanic tribes, Persians, and Huns. If you have any feedback on this, I'd really appreciate seeing what you have to say. Thanks for everything you do MELKOR, and keep at it!

@jeff_underscore9244

4 ай бұрын

Bro typed all that and got ghosted 😂

What about chariot ballistas, are they accurate?

I love your voice.

Everything seems very accurate. According to the KZreadr: Maiorianus

Accurate Hellenistic army for Macedon, the seleucids, and the ptolemies

so what how did they lose so much troops to the point of foederati leading to rome's ostrogothic take over

@AAX11111

3 жыл бұрын

Plagues, civil wars, the Romans themselves being utterly unmotivated to actually fight for their country. Hell by the time of Valentinian the Wrathful, Italians (ie the actual Romans) were mostly exempt from military service due to how worthless as soldiers they were. Also self mutilations were common to avoid military service. This was due to the fact that military service by the late 300s was an AWFUL choice due to the fact that money was worthless due to hyperinflatuon/devaluation, citizenship was a given at birth as opposed to being granted after military service (not like being a Roman "Citizen" was worth anything at that point due to the government being a parasitic, corrupt kleptocracy), and looting foreign enemies was a thing of the past due to the defensive nature of the army by that point. In all Rome was doomed after the Crisis of the Third Century. Interita was the only thing keeping it going.

Say what you will about late Roman Legions (myth or fact) these are my favourites from an aesthetic point of view.

I might have missed it in your other videos, but have you tried Attila Total War? I loved Barbarian Invasion in its day, but Attila supercedes it and is arguably the best historical total war game. The Roman units are frustrating from a historical perspective - it's like historically named units are randomly thrown in to a tier/tech tree for flavour, with little logic or system. But there's more variety than in BI and you can make reasonable approximations to historical army composition, especially after including mercs and levies from hordes.

@MelkorGG

4 жыл бұрын

I love Attila and will certainly be covering it : )

You deleted the roleplay series... why?

@MelkorGG

4 жыл бұрын

That was done over a month ago. That +600 older videos got unlisted that no longer reflect the channel and where I am taking it. No let's plays here. Any let's play will take place on the 2nd channel as a stream. Reason for the Rome 2 ending is because I was struggling to enjoy the following episodes due to a variety of reasons. Also, youtube algorithm does not like it when youtubers do let's plays and I could not have continued on those views. I hate to make it about the views, but when they were as low as that, I had no choice.

@brandon97652

4 жыл бұрын

@@MelkorGG its such a shame it didn't get many views, it deserved alot more.

It's funny how english speakers always fuck up the pronounciation of words. The way you said foederati and praeventores was funny :D

What is your accent? Scottish?

@MelkorGG

4 жыл бұрын

Yorkshire, Northern England. So near enough. : )

The late Roman army was not any more "defensive" than earlier periods, and not any less "offensive." The late Roman army campaigned beyond Roman territory almost annually.

whats up with the red "hat" on ur head in every video xd

@MelkorGG

4 жыл бұрын

Fez, and old channel meme ; )

E