I personally believe the troop system currently used is somewhat underwhelming to represent antique wars. Methods of recruitment, battling, tactics, strategy... These all differed between the many cultures of Europe. Then again, doing one system for each nation is a lot of work.
The Carthaginians, for example, used a small amount of phoenician citizens in their armies, preferring instead to use mercenaries from their allies. This is somewhat represented by the military traditions, but I'm sure you'll still be seeing Carthaginians fielding standing armies of tens of thousands of 'nameless' soldiers loyal to either the state or a specific general.
The biggest issue here is that troops have no 'origin'. Traditions dictate the strengths of your whole national army, such as Romans having a powerful heavy infantry buff, it doesn't matter if the cohort was recruited from a Gallic tribe or from Rome itself, it will have that buff. The entertaining way to do it would be to have buffs depend on the origin of those troops. If, for example, you recruit from a city with a majority Gallic population, you should go for Light Infantry, as the Gauls specialize in that aspect of warfare. If you recruit Macedonians, you should have access to powerful Heavy Infantry, if you recruit Thessalians, you'll have powerful Heavy Cavalry.
I've thought up of a way to translate this into actual gameplay:
The best way to do it with the current system might be to make a separate 'Auxiliary Unit' which would draw from their city's culture's hypothetical martial bonus, but not from the traditions' bonus since these troops are auxiliaries and not fully fledged 'state troops'. Your own units will be able to draw from both the traditions' bonus and their cultural bonus. This way, a country's mainstay units, such as the Roman's Heavy Infantry, will never be substituted by a foreign Heavy Infantry, but their Light Infantry and Heavy Cavalry might just be substituted by Gauls and Thessalians, respectively, since neither their traditions nor their cultural martial bonus are centered around such units.
You could also tie units to pops, so one freeman/tribal pop can support X number of cohorts instead of just influencing an arbitrary nationwide maximum cap. Thus, Carthage would have its national Heavy Infantry quite capped, and would have to rely on conquering/vassalizing regions which would provide excellent quality Auxiliary Units to support their regular army, as they did with the Iberian and Balearic tribes. This also provides a further incentive to spread your culture as you want more sources for your beefy beefy National Unit.
This could lead to some more incentive to use diplomacy. Usually, you didn't call an allied country to war unless they had a distinct interest in the war you were fighting. Might be that you still want that beefy Numidian cavalry to reinforce your army without having to drag Numidia herself into war. All you'd have to do is get their permission to use some of their cohorts of National Units in exchange of an alliance, marriage, or a lump sum plus wage payment. These cohorts would behave like an allied army and follow the armies you assign them to. These units would also both enjoy the bonuses from both Traditions and Culture of their homeland. This would, thus, also incentivize having big vassal states from which you can get strong National Units in exchange of a lack of direct control over their provinces.
You'd then be confronted by a choice. Should I just annex everything outright in order to gain a higher tax base and have more direct control over the lands I exert influence upon? Or should I make client states and alliances which will provide me with beefy beefy National Units to fight in my wars? The first choice will weaken my army's overall performance and increase revolt risk due to subjugated peoples, while the second choice will weaken my economy and power projection since I don't have direct control over their territories.
I've spent way too much time making this up and elongated my study break way too much. I hope you guys enjoy my idea, and Paradox gives it a read and has their own ideas on how to better the current system that they have.
Thanks for reading
EDIT: I realized that I forgot to explain one of the types of unit you can recruit. If you recruit a National Unit from a foreign pop, it'll have your tradition bonuses, but not their cultural bonuses. An example of this would be Alexander recruiting thousands of Persians in the Macedonian way after the defeat of the Persians. It's a less efficient unit, but it's a way to round up your army if you must do it.
EDIT2: Damn me and my penchant for correction. I'd like to mention that, though pops influence a cap for their own type of units, this has no bearing to the Manpower pool present in the nation itself. Recruitment is still completely reliant on the global manpower pool.
The Carthaginians, for example, used a small amount of phoenician citizens in their armies, preferring instead to use mercenaries from their allies. This is somewhat represented by the military traditions, but I'm sure you'll still be seeing Carthaginians fielding standing armies of tens of thousands of 'nameless' soldiers loyal to either the state or a specific general.
The biggest issue here is that troops have no 'origin'. Traditions dictate the strengths of your whole national army, such as Romans having a powerful heavy infantry buff, it doesn't matter if the cohort was recruited from a Gallic tribe or from Rome itself, it will have that buff. The entertaining way to do it would be to have buffs depend on the origin of those troops. If, for example, you recruit from a city with a majority Gallic population, you should go for Light Infantry, as the Gauls specialize in that aspect of warfare. If you recruit Macedonians, you should have access to powerful Heavy Infantry, if you recruit Thessalians, you'll have powerful Heavy Cavalry.
I've thought up of a way to translate this into actual gameplay:
The best way to do it with the current system might be to make a separate 'Auxiliary Unit' which would draw from their city's culture's hypothetical martial bonus, but not from the traditions' bonus since these troops are auxiliaries and not fully fledged 'state troops'. Your own units will be able to draw from both the traditions' bonus and their cultural bonus. This way, a country's mainstay units, such as the Roman's Heavy Infantry, will never be substituted by a foreign Heavy Infantry, but their Light Infantry and Heavy Cavalry might just be substituted by Gauls and Thessalians, respectively, since neither their traditions nor their cultural martial bonus are centered around such units.
You could also tie units to pops, so one freeman/tribal pop can support X number of cohorts instead of just influencing an arbitrary nationwide maximum cap. Thus, Carthage would have its national Heavy Infantry quite capped, and would have to rely on conquering/vassalizing regions which would provide excellent quality Auxiliary Units to support their regular army, as they did with the Iberian and Balearic tribes. This also provides a further incentive to spread your culture as you want more sources for your beefy beefy National Unit.
This could lead to some more incentive to use diplomacy. Usually, you didn't call an allied country to war unless they had a distinct interest in the war you were fighting. Might be that you still want that beefy Numidian cavalry to reinforce your army without having to drag Numidia herself into war. All you'd have to do is get their permission to use some of their cohorts of National Units in exchange of an alliance, marriage, or a lump sum plus wage payment. These cohorts would behave like an allied army and follow the armies you assign them to. These units would also both enjoy the bonuses from both Traditions and Culture of their homeland. This would, thus, also incentivize having big vassal states from which you can get strong National Units in exchange of a lack of direct control over their provinces.
You'd then be confronted by a choice. Should I just annex everything outright in order to gain a higher tax base and have more direct control over the lands I exert influence upon? Or should I make client states and alliances which will provide me with beefy beefy National Units to fight in my wars? The first choice will weaken my army's overall performance and increase revolt risk due to subjugated peoples, while the second choice will weaken my economy and power projection since I don't have direct control over their territories.
I've spent way too much time making this up and elongated my study break way too much. I hope you guys enjoy my idea, and Paradox gives it a read and has their own ideas on how to better the current system that they have.
Thanks for reading
EDIT: I realized that I forgot to explain one of the types of unit you can recruit. If you recruit a National Unit from a foreign pop, it'll have your tradition bonuses, but not their cultural bonuses. An example of this would be Alexander recruiting thousands of Persians in the Macedonian way after the defeat of the Persians. It's a less efficient unit, but it's a way to round up your army if you must do it.
EDIT2: Damn me and my penchant for correction. I'd like to mention that, though pops influence a cap for their own type of units, this has no bearing to the Manpower pool present in the nation itself. Recruitment is still completely reliant on the global manpower pool.
Last edited:
