Does this mean you need a volunteer?3. (The Coveted Spot #3 )
Does this mean you need a volunteer?3. (The Coveted Spot #3 )
Does this mean you need a volunteer?
OK, so here are my ideas for provinces with recoverable legions.
Recoverable Legions:
Pannonia
Dalmatia
Cyrene
Africa
Noricum
Raetia
Italia
Sicilia
Corsica?
Sardinia?
Tarraconesis
Alpes?
Lusitiana
Baetica
Mauretania Tingitana
Mauretania Caesariensis
Dacia
Armenia
Mesopotamia
Narbonensis
Aquitania
Lugdunensis
Belgica
Germania Superior
Germania Inferior
Britannia
Are there any of those you aren't making, because if not there won't be any point making them.
OK, so here are my ideas for provinces with recoverable legions.
So what are these legions? I mean, are they supposed to be some mercenary force that's supposed to represent Roman legions?Alternatively, shouldn't legions be represented as retinues? If so, I think it would be best if retinues are set as 1,000 units. That should represent the legions of the late empire.OK, so here are my ideas for provinces with recoverable legions.
Recoverable Legions:
Pannonia
Dalmatia
Cyrene
Africa
Noricum
Raetia
Italia
Sicilia
Corsica?
Sardinia?
Tarraconesis
Alpes?
Lusitiana
Baetica
Mauretania Tingitana
Mauretania Caesariensis
Dacia
Armenia
Mesopotamia
Narbonensis
Aquitania
Lugdunensis
Belgica
Germania Superior
Germania Inferior
Britannia
Are there any of those you aren't making, because if not there won't be any point making them.
I agree, the Legions were nearly dead and buried at this time frame yet they seem to be a rather large focus. The fall of the Western Roman Empire saw the end of professional standing armies for nearly a thousand years and the switch to the feudal model.So what are these legions? I mean, are they supposed to be some mercenary force that's supposed to represent Roman legions?Alternatively, shouldn't legions be represented as retinues? If so, I think it would be best if retinues are set as 1,000 units. That should represent the legions of the late empire.
Would there be anyone alive who've seen western legions? There weren't any in Cataluanian plains, 30 years earlier.I agree, the Legions were nearly dead and buried at this time frame yet they seem to be a rather large focus. The fall of the Western Roman Empire saw the end of professional standing armies for nearly a thousand years and the switch to the feudal model.
Weren't there? I thought there were, although many of these 'legions' were staffed by barbarian foederates.Seeing how legions at this time number around 1,000 men each, I would assume it is reasonable that there would have been some 'purely Roman' legions at this time.Would there be anyone alive who've seen western legions? There weren't any in Cataluanian plains, 30 years earlier.
From Wiki: According to Sidonius Apollinaris, he was leading forth a force consisting of few and sparse auxiliaries without one regular soldier.[14]Weren't there? I thought there were, although many of these 'legions' were staffed by barbarian foederates.Seeing how legions at this time number around 1,000 men each, I would assume it is reasonable that there would have been some 'purely Roman' legions at this time.
So what are these legions? I mean, are they supposed to be some mercenary force that's supposed to represent Roman legions?Alternatively, shouldn't legions be represented as retinues? If so, I think it would be best if retinues are set as 1,000 units. That should represent the legions of the late empire.
Well, that's post Tetrarchy legion for you. They call it decline and fall for a reason.Only 1000? That´s way too few! What is wrong with having 4500? 1000 men is just too small of a force to be called legion. Between 3000-5000, that is the perfect number
Only 1000? That´s way too few! What is wrong with having 4500? 1000 men is just too small of a force to be called legion. Between 3000-5000, that is the perfect number
Plus by the end, even the relatively wealthy East could no longer afford large standing armies. After the failures in Syria and Egypt you see some attempts to reform: the themes.Well, that's post Tetrarchy legion for you. They call it decline and fall for a reason.
Actually, there's a good reason why the later legions were 1,000 men units. 1,000 men legions are more flexible than 5,000 men legions. During the 3rd century, legions often had to be split into temporary 1000 men vexillatio formations in response to crisis or emergencies. Most of the time, these 1000 men formations were permanently separated from their parental units and mixed up with the vexillatio of other legions, which led to the decline in esprit de corps of the legions. By making these 1,000 men units their own legions, each of these 1,000 men unit would maintain their own esprit de corps that wouldn't be diluted.I would also assume there would be less confusion in the chain of command as well.Well, that's post Tetrarchy legion for you. They call it decline and fall for a reason.
I think here's the number of factors involved. Mobility's one. Financial catastrophe's the other, political concern, that commander of large unified force would just proclaim himself an Emperor, is the third. And there's many more, probably.Actually, there's a good reason why the later legions were 1,000 men units. 1,000 men legions are more flexible than 5,000 men legions. During the 3rd century, legions often had to be split into temporary 1000 men vexillatio formations in response to crisis or emergencies. Most of the time, these 1000 men formations were permanently separated from their parental units and mixed up with the vexillatio of other legions, which led to the decline in esprit de corps of the legions. By making these 1,000 men units their own legions, each of these 1,000 men unit would maintain their own esprit de corps that wouldn't be diluted.
I don't think that's an important reason though. Commanders of 5,000 men legions have too few troops to rebel with. The commanders that proclaim themselves Emperor usually had command over several five-thousand men legions.After the transformation of legions to 1,000 men unit, many commanders still retained the command of large unified formations, it's just that these formations now consists of many of 1,000 men legions as opposed to several 5,000 men legions, and the number of troops they command also remained the same depending on which frontier force they command. The only major attempt to stop usurpation was to separate provincial governorship from military command, which to some extent deprived commanders of some resources.I think here's the number of factors involved. Mobility's one. Financial catastrophe's the other, political concern, that commander of large unified force would just proclaim himself an Emperor, is the third. And there's many more, probably.
Plus by the end, even the relatively wealthy East could no longer afford large standing armies. After the failures in Syria and Egypt you see some attempts to reform: the themes.
Actually, there's a good reason why the later legions were 1,000 men units. 1,000 men legions are more flexible than 5,000 men legions. During the 3rd century, legions often had to be split into temporary 1000 men vexillatio formations in response to crisis or emergencies. Most of the time, these 1000 men formations were permanently separated from their parental units and mixed up with the vexillatio of other legions, which led to the decline in esprit de corps of the legions. By making these 1,000 men units their own legions, each of these 1,000 men unit would maintain their own esprit de corps that wouldn't be diluted.I would also assume there would be less confusion in the chain of command as well.
I think here's the number of factors involved. Mobility's one. Financial catastrophe's the other, political concern, that commander of large unified force would just proclaim himself an Emperor, is the third. And there's many more, probably.
Not that I disagree with you, but I would point that if earlier to rebel would usually mean to go seize Rome, subjugate the Empire and rule in all its entirety, near the end of Empire rebels usually just tried to carve out a nice little empire for themselves. Which makes sense, considering that this military leaders weren't just Roman officers, but also a kings of their tribe. And that tribe constituted the majority, if not entirety, of their force.I don't think that's an important reason though. Commanders of 5,000 men legions have too few troops to rebel with. In addition, the commanders that usually proclaim themselves Emperor usually had command of several five-thousand men legions.After the transformation of legions to 1,000 men unit, many commanders still retained the command of large unified formations, it's just that these formations now consists of many of 1,000 men legions as opposed to a several 5,000 men legions, and then number of troops they command also remained the same depending on which frontier force they command. The only major attempt to stop usurpation was to separate provincial governorship from military command, which to some extent deprived commanders of some resources.
Emperor Justinian blazes across the western Mediterranean, beating ass wherever he goes. He restores Italy, Pannonia,Africa and Hispania and declares the return of the Roman Empire.
Option 1: He goes after the Franks
Option 2: He now spends his energy on consolidating his conquests, fortifying his borders and reorganizing the Empire. Hordes of recruits pour into the army in the glory of the new Empire. Properly trained and diciplined, the legions swell in size, as do the population.
What I mean to say is, if you restore the Grand Empire, the legions should grow as your power increases.