I honestly need some serious research done before I start blabbering away in this thread, so if you'll all excuse me for some time... Tribal confederacy, you say? Hmmm this could the basis for a brand-new revolutionary system...

In the mid-6th century, the Byzantine historian Agathias of Myrina records, in the context of the wars of the Goths and Franks against Byzantium, that the Alamanni fighting among the troops of Frankish king Theudebald were like the Franks in all respects except religion, since they

"they worship certain trees, the waters of rivers, hills and mountain valleys, in whose honour they sacrifice horses, cattle and countless other animals by beheading them, and imagine that they are performing an act of piety thereby."[14]

He also spoke of the particular ruthlessness of the Alamani in destroying Christian sanctuaries and plundering churches while the genuine Franks were respectful towards those sanctuaries. Agathias expresses his hope that the Alamanni would assume better manners through prolongued contact with the Franks, which is by all appearances what eventually happened

Might certain Generals be empowered with a bonus when fighting Christians?

Lab

Let's see here...
Going off of Titus and Wiki, they should have a mix of frankish and germanic units. They should have the choice to change religions, maybe give them an incentive. I also hope that we get to keep some beserkers too.

I forsee the Alemanni having a healthy mix of Frankish and Norse troops.


These people have the ability to horde no?

Yes, they are hordable. We should probably try to incorporate some sort of strength of numbers bonus into this faction.

like larger units, or like larger hordes?
what do you mean by strength in numbers bonus?

The Alemanni were further south than the Saxons, more around Alsace-Lorraine. They were a heavy infantry faction like the Franks and Saxons, but never developed the cavalry like the Franks did, which was their undoing in the end.

Therefore I think the Alemanni should follow similar lines as the Saxons, but with the more typical Germanic units. I need to brush up on my Alemanni history, but I do recall them being a pain in the ass to both Romans and Franks before they were crushed.

[This message has been edited by Terikel Grayhair (edited 10-18-2010 @ 02:30 AM).]

The kingdom of Alamannia between Strasbourg and Augsburg lasted until 496, when the Alamanni were conquered by Clovis I at the Battle of Tolbiac. The war of Clovis with the Alamanni forms the setting for the conversion of Clovis, briefly treated by Gregory of Tours (Book II.31) Subsequently the Alamanni formed part of the Frankish dominions and were governed by a Frankish duke.

So i think the Alemanni should start as protectorate of the Franks. That means their mission would be to break free from the Franks.

Although several tribes put their military forces under the joint command of two leaders for the duration of a campaign, the different peoples generally found it difficult to combine, and they had nothing that could be called a central government.

There can be little doubt, however, that the ancient Hermunduri formed the bulk of the nation. Other groups included the Brisgavi, Juthungi, Bucinobantes, Lentienses, and perhaps the Armalausi. From the 4th century onwards we hear also of the Suebi, Suevi or Suabi. The Hermunduri had apparently belonged to the Suebi, but it is likely enough that reinforcements from new Suebic tribes had now moved westward. In later times the names Alamanni and Suebi seem to be synonymous, although some of the Suebi later migrated to Hispania and established an independent kingdom there that endured well into the sixth century.

Maybe we can give famely members and generals a trait that shows from what tribe they are. For example: Faction leader is part of the Hermunduri gives +1 command and -1 management. Candidates for his daughter can be of the Brisgavi +1management -1 influence. Etc.

Just played as the Alemanni today as part of my research

I found that their infantry, esp. their early infantry, sucks in terms of versatility and "well-rounded-ness".

Infantry
Tier 2 - Spear Warband
Tier 3 - Spear Warband (1 EXP)
Tier 3/4 - Night Raiders (from Tavern)
Tier 4 - Spear Warband (2 EXP)
Tier 4 - Chosen Axemen (2-handed)
Tier 5 - Golden Band (super shock infantry like Basternae)
Tier 5 - Spear Warband (3 EXP)
Tier 4/5 - Lombard Berserkers (Donar's Circle, Donar's actually Thor)

This is absolutely not adequate for any heavy-infantry-centered Germanic faction.

Their Cavalry is in comparison pretty cool though:
Tier 3 - Warhounds
Tier 3 - Barbarian Cavalry
Tier 4 - Burgundian Lancers (light shock cav better than the Macedonian Light Lancers)
Tier 5 - Barbarian Noble Cavalry
Tier 5 - Warlord

Missile
Tier 3 - Lombard Archers
Tier 4 - Chosen Arcehrs (who don't actually have as-good range or missile attack stats as Lombard Archers, only better armor)
Tier 5 - Onagers

Though the Cav and Missile depts make up for much of the infantry dept's flaws, both seem to include rip-offs from other factions' units (Lombards and Burgundians). The Alemanni were a confederation of Germanic tribes, but I don't think that the 2 above-mentioned tribes were members at all...

Another thing is that, if according to Terikel, they didn't develop good cavalry like the Franks did, then the cavalry roster will need revisions.

Quoted from Wiki:
This mutually antagonistic relationship [between Rome and the Alemanni] is perhaps the reason why the Roman writers persisted in calling the Alamanni barbari, "savages". The archaeology, however, shows that they were largely Romanized, lived in Roman-style houses and used Roman artifacts, the Alemannic women having adopted the Roman fashion of the tunic even earlier than the men.

Relax - I'm not trying to propose Romanized units for the roster, just trying to prove that they were more civilized than as was represented in vanilla BI. While they were probably not as civilized as the Franks, they probably should have more medium-to-advanced buildings.

Least but not last, a very interesting paragraph here on their political organization and titles for various classes of leaders.

[This message has been edited by GeneralKickAss (edited 10-21-2010 @ 11:40 PM).]

Sorry to repeat-post, didn't wanna make my post look too long.

Mythic, are you sure they're hordable? I couldn't find the horde button in the "settlement details" scroll...

Quoted from Seneca:
the Alemanni should start as protectorate of the Franks. That means their mission would be to break free from the Franks.

Sounds like a good challenge. Normally an attractive usable faction would be well away from any of this, but I think it adds some variety to the game. They had attractive and exciting factions in vanilla (like the Romans, Carthaginians, Franks etc), frustruating or boring factions (like Numidia) and challenging factions (like WRE and Thrace).

We should be looking for factions to make into these categories, just for variety and fun, right?

There's a way to make them hordable. In Amazon Total War, Subrosa made the Germans hordable.

Lab

Alemanni/Lombardi/Burgundii were clone factions in BI.

If I remember correctly, the Alemanni tend to get steamrolled by just about everything with a horse or a sword (certainly Gothic swords cut through the Lombards, who share the roster!). Some sort of heavy backbone spears and germanic sword herbann are definitely in order. Fear units are always fun, so lots of them. Roman influences could be demonstrated in all barbarian factions as some form of barbarian veteranii, either as a merc or roster unit.
And Golden Band are rubbish.

And General, you missed the Night Raiders (or whatever they're called) from the Tavern.

Hording... that's no issue, it's very easy to code. We could make the ERE and WRE capable of hording very easily, if we wanted (wouldn't it be fun?)

Otherwise, take out the Burgundians, so the Burgundii get a unique unit, but keep the Lombards since they aren't a faction in their own right. Alternatively, make the Lombardi AoR/mercs along the upper Danube.

The question here is whether we should make them hordable.

I see little reason to do that actually, since they're a group of Germanic tribes who had always lived and operated there for the longest time... They may be numerous but are numbers alone enough justification to "horde" them? Franks were numerous but already settled, Romans were numerous too. They had to be mobile, on-the-move and adaptable to different environments to have the horde ability. Like the Steppes' nomadic peoples back in vanilla BI.

[This message has been edited by GeneralKickAss (edited 10-22-2010 @ 06:38 AM).]

Hordable should be only for those factions that actually migrate during this time period, or whom we want to be able to migrate without having to bother with cities and the like.

The Franks were settled. The Norse were expanding, the Saxons as well. The Alemanni were in fact declining if not already absorbed. This makes them an excellent candidate for hording- time for them to up-stakes and get the hell out of the way of the Franks and Romans...

Thus I feel the Alemanni should be able to horde.

Make them into a running-away faction like the Goths in vanilla? Sounds...ok

But then there would have to be some sort of trigger/pressure for them to move. Huns/Vandals/other hordes were the pressure for the Goths in BI. Perhaps they'll be gradually worn down by the growing power of the Franks and Romans and other neighbours, and forced to relocate...

_{EDIT: Hello, anyone?}

[This message has been edited by GeneralKickAss (edited 10-23-2010 @ 10:00 PM).]

The Franks would probably be the pressure here.

Either that or some power hungry saxon players.

Just reiterating and developing what I've already mentioned:

I suggest we add a tier three 'Spear Comitatus' as a heavy spear line infantry, and a 'Sword Comitatus' as an able bodied group of swordsmen.

I'd quite like to see their fear/ambush style of play continued as well, so perhaps some form of axe-wielding skirmirsher unit which can hide anywhere, and maybe even a similar archer unit, which has limited range but high attack and can hide anywhere, perhaps with a spear as a secondary weapon? These could compensate for the lack of Burgundian cavalry as flankers (I think they should be with the Burgundii, where they belong!) and increase the infantry focus.

I also think we should keep the lombardi units, although perhaps as an AoR to which the Alemanni have extended access in the regions along the Danube to the west of their starting position, including the beserkers.

Finally, some form of 'Alemanni Veteranii' available in post-Roman regions, which is essentially Roman Veteranii. Perhaps half unit size and double HP or something. Just some form of shock unit, acknowledging the Barbarian presence in late Roman armies.

Them hording sounds like a workable idea too, to prevent them being squashed by the Franks.

Just random guessing: so the Comitatus units would reflect prolonged close-range exposure to Roman strategies and tactics, and the resultant Roman-influenced warriors?

Finally, some form of 'Alemanni Veteranii' available in post-Roman regions, which is essentially Roman Veteranii. Perhaps half unit size and double HP or something. Just some form of shock unit, acknowledging the Barbarian presence in late Roman armies.

I like this, but would like to limit it to an AoR/Merc unit, if they are dropouts from the once-mighty legions (about to go mighty again).

Actually, I just thought it sounded better than warband - 'Comitatus' is the term used by historians to describe them. We all have our jargon.

And yeah, the Veteranii would be AoR/merc. We could easily extend it to all factions which participated in the Roman military, perhaps limiting the AoR regions to the most important ex-Roman provinical capitals. Tarraco and Corduba in Spain, say and maybe Lyons and Treveri in Gaul, and making it a merc with fairly low respawn rates. Just a potential take on the idea.

The Lombardi units would best be limited to an AoR/ local Merc presence.

Any thoughts on the Alemanni cavalry? While their armies didn't historically develop towards a cavalry focus as the Franks did, I certainly don't think their cav was as weak as the Saxons. And as we are kind of reshaping the Alemanni's destiny here by allowing them to horde and get out of the Franks' and Romans' way, would their army balance and tactcis change when they settle in new lands, like the eastern Balkans, northern Spain or even Italy?

I personally would like to see some form of Alemanni-exclusive AoR units in different areas of the map, sort of like the Saxon Lazzi troops, except much more advanced - units intended to reflect shifts of tactics and war-making habits, not just local units like Lombard Archers (which I'd like to see again), but entirely different units like Alemannic... horse archers ...(please don't take the name too seriously, just a rough idea).

Any thoughts on the Alemanni cavalry? While their armies didn't historically develop towards a cavalry focus as the Franks did, I certainly don't think their cav was as weak as the Saxons. And as we are kind of reshaping the Alemanni's destiny here by allowing them to horde and get out of the Franks' and Romans' way, would their army balance and tactcis change when they settle in new lands, like the eastern Balkans, northern Spain or even Italy?

I kinda assumed that AoR units would cover this gap... my preference very much lies with a small unit roster for each nation, with extensive global AoRs to flesh it out.

As for a special AoR... I'd rather only one of two factions had the 'unique' mercenary/AoR focus, one of which I think should be the Sassanid Persians, and if we're giving it to the Saxons, then we lose the unique gameplay of the factions.

If for no other reason, the model limit is really quite tight.

Ave,
I can tell things slowed down(more like stopped)here. Let's keep things up, anyway, I think we should keep the Alemanni's faction symbol(3rd fav symbol), but change the color scheme if you will it.

I think we've lost the people who were full of excitement in the beginning. I think all of the Germanic/Northern Barbarian factions have worn us down too along with the fact that most of us know very little about these people lol.

Great to see you guys coming in and making some much-needed noise around here

Anyway, I have no particular objection to keeping the vanilla symbol, since I can't think up ideas for a new one anyway. Color scheme switch is a basic though.

On Alemannic exclusive AORs, yes it does sound like too much work, let them make use of general AORs to reflect army balance changes.

Noise is good. Today everyone has an excuse, getting their names changed. Previous days, not so much.

What are we doing for the Alemanni bodyguard? Just a revamped version of the current one (a slightly nicer model, same principle though) or do we have some idea to make it unique?

Hell, this is when we need the project directors the most!!

I guess the Alemanni're not that infantry heavy to warrant infantry bodyguards. But I don't think there is much specialty associated with their cavalry either, according to previous contributions which stated they never quite developed great cavalry as the Franks did. Overall they do seem more infantry-focused than cavalry, so perhaps another infantry bodyguard after all?

Do note that they were a confederacy - lots of important warlords and petty local chiefs alike in their armies. I suggest we make at least 2 General's Bodyguard units to reflect that, and a household warriors unit for minor tribes' leaders.

Here's the Wiki page for the "Alamanni". Seriously, read up if you still haven't done so - it's "basic education"

Quoted from Lab:

He [Byzantine historian Agathias of Myrina] also spoke of the particular ruthlessness of the Alamani in destroying Christian sanctuaries and plundering churches while the genuine Franks were respectful towards those sanctuaries. Agathias expresses his hope that the Alamanni would assume better manners through prolongued contact with the Franks, which is by all appearances what eventually happened

Might certain Generals be empowered with a bonus when fighting Christians?

If memory serves they eventually converted to Christianity. Perhaps something we can reflect in-game?

Here's my proposal for the Alemanni: we represent them as a confederation of six tribes - the Harudes, Marcomanni, Triboci, Vangiones, Nemetes, and Sedusii. Each tribe has a specialty - the Harudes are light infantry, the Marcomanni are heavy cavalrymen, the Triboci are spearmen, the Vangiones are heavy infantry, the Nemetes are ranged warriors, and the Sedusii are light cavalrymen. Here's the catch - each province can only have one tribe settled in it. The Alemanni player gets to decide which tribe settles in each province (this will replace temples for the Alemanni), but two tribes cannot coexist in a province. Here's what I'm thinking for the tribe lineup:

Harudes
Peasantry
Levy Spearmen
Foresters (with axes)
Warband

Marcomanni
Noble Cavalry
Warlord's Sons (well-equipped, but poor morale)
General's Bodyguard

Triboci
Spear Warband
Spear Comitatus
King's Guard

Vangiones
Axemen
Priests of Ziu (the Norse called him Tyr)
Sword Comitatus
Berserkers

Nemetes
Slingers
Archers
Skirmishers
Onagers (in certain provinces)

Sedusii
Mounted Warband
Minor Nobles
Horse Archers (in certain provinces)


Obviously this is just a draft, and suggestions are quite welcome.

Ah yes, the brand new revolutionary system, love it!

So we kill the barracks system altogether for the Alemanni?
It sounds good, although I'm worried that we can't have the tribe buildings coexistent with the normal religion ones - the Alemanni will have to stay pagan.

Perhaps to compensate for the lack of temple benefits, we can throw down some basic 'sparring ring' buildings or such, to give some exp bonuses.

*EDIT* Also, God forbid the Alemanni find themselves on the back foot, facing an empire with few provinces. And what do we do about the AI, which is likely to fail horribly with this system?

[This message has been edited by Drakontos (edited 11-01-2010 @ 06:24 PM).]

And losing paganisim is bad how? all that special stuff for a risk of changing religion for a threat that already hates you isn't that bad.

Changing religion is fun. I was just pointing that out - General had just proposed we give them both Christianity and Paganism.

The Alemanni player gets to decide which tribe settles in each province (this will replace temples for the Alemanni), but two tribes cannot coexist in a province.

First off, I love the system.

Second, how exactly does one choose - by building that member tribe's representative building?

Third, Christianity is historically attested, and kind of gives more flexibility in-game. I'll have to think harder...

How abou the different tribes are each a fcation, and the player controls one of these factions. The tribes would all be allied to each other.
Now, before you start thinking that these factions would be horribly outnumbered and the like, how about, if this is possible, the factions have a war, or fight a large battle, say half against half, make it an event or something like that. If the player won the battle, the tribes were united into one alemanni faction. UI'm not sure how this would work though.
Maybe one of the tribes is stronger than the others and has armies in the other factions lands so they could take over quickly, something like that? It could be that if the player unifies the tribes then they will be strong enough to fed off the Franks.
I know that the alemanni were a single political entity, kind of, but this would mean stronger bonds.

@Feudal - I'm afraid we lack the faction slots to do that, not so mention that its not possible in RTW, although the Reconquista team are working on something similarish in Spain, using the Med2:Kingdoms scripting. Something which I am awaiting eagerly.

Sorry Feudal, but that does sound quite impossible. This kind of thing needs new engines, like the R2TW one CA will develop in the distant future.

Further elaborating on Mythic's tribal buildings - tribe-specific tech tree proposal:

As everyone can see, each tribe provides a unique roster of warriors into the greater Alemannic war-host, with varying levels of advancement and consequently, building costs and turns required. I don't know if Mythic had intended to put the units in tiers or not, but I think it's only the natural thing to do, so here goes.

Harudes
Tier 1 - Peasantry -> Pagi Levies (Pagi means "canton", a small township/ village the Alemanni organized themselves into.)
Tier 2 - Levy Spearmen
Tier 3 - Warband - discuss!
Tier 4 - Foresters (with axes) (Fear/Ambush Archers, capable of hiding anywhere?)

Marcomanni
Tier 3 - Noble Cavalry (the Romans call them Optimates, you guys like the name?)
Tier 4 - Warlord's Sons Regales (well-equipped, but poor morale)
Tier 5 - General's Bodyguard

Triboci
Tier 3 - Spear Warband
Tier 4 - Spear Comitatus
Tier 5 - King's Guard

Vangiones
Tier 2 - Axemen
Tier 3 - Priests of Ziu (War god. What're these for? )
Tier 4 - Sword Comitatus
Tier 4/5 - Berserkers (Discuss!)

Nemetes
Tier 1 - Slingers
Tier 2 - Skirmishers
Tier 3 - Archers
Tier 4/5 - Onagers (in certain provinces)

Sedusii
Tier 3 - Mounted Warband
Tier 4 - Minor Nobles (Infantry, since we have so much cavalry already)
Tier 3/4 - Horse Archers (in certain provinces) Good idea, Mythic. Pointy death coming from the Alemanni too!

Some tribes provide more advanced troops, some procide ones less so. Tribal buildings like the Marcomanni's will certainly cost more, imposing cost barriers on the player (and the AI) in early-game, forcing them to stick to the cheaper and lower-tech tribes like the Harudes. Revolutionary enough?

Quoted from Wiki:

Ammianus describes Alamanni rulers with various terms: reges excelsiores ante alios ("paramount kings"), reges proximi ("neighbouring kings"), reguli ("petty kings") and regales ("princes").

Reges Excelsiores Ante Alios, as the Alemannic title for Faction Leader.
Reges Proximi/ Regales as Faction Heir. I prefer Reges Proximi as it obviously ranks higher in the Alemannic hierarchy, but it's up for discussion.

[This message has been edited by GeneralKickAss (edited 11-03-2010 @ 11:01 AM).]

How is the six-tribe thing going to work?

Pick one of six barracks to build, which then exclude the other five the same way temples do?

That could work.

Ah, thought not.
I guess I am just ahead of my time. Be back in a few years.

I'm still worried about what the AI can do with this system.

Also, we do need at least one unit recruitable from the Govt buildings to avoid the revolt CTD. I imagine that would just be the pagi levies?

Yes, that could be how it works. Or we could allow all six to be built in each region/ province. The tribes will still cost differently and take diff. times to build.

the revolt CTD

Sorry, but what's that? I have no problem with moving Pagi Levies to the Gov't building.

Waiting, Feudal, do come back soon

The revolt CTD is a bug which results in a crash when a settlement which cannot train any units revolts, I believe.

I was thinking that we'd have a roster more like this:

Town Government
Tier 1 - Pagi Infantry

Harudes
Tier 2 - Levy Spearmen
Tier 3 - Warband
Tier 4 - Foresters (light 2-handed axe unit)

Marcomanni
Tier 2 - Noble Cavalry (cheap, weak heavy cavalry)
Tier 3 - Regales (well-equipped, but poor morale)
Tier 5 - General's Bodyguard

Triboci
Tier 2 - Spear Warband
Tier 3 - Spear Comitatus
Tier 4 - King's Guard

Vangiones
Tier 2 - Axemen
Tier 3 - Priests of Ziu (War god. Morale-boosting heavy inf)
Tier 4 - Sword Comitatus
Tier 5 - Berserkers

Nemetes
Tier 2 - Slingers
Tier 3 - Skirmishers
Tier 4 - Archers
Tier 5 - Onagers (in certain provinces)

Sedusii
Tier 2 - Mounted Warband (generic light cavalry)
Tier 3 - Minor Nobles (javelin+sword, mix between heavy and light cavalry)
Tier 4 - Horse Archers (in certain provinces)

_{Hey, just trying to help.}

From the look of things here it seems the Marcomanni and the Sedusii are the horselords, the Nemete specialize in ranged warfare, while the Triboci and Vangiones contribute the heavy infantry backbone of Alemannic armies. The Harudes shall pretty much garrison troops with a small punch... I like the way I analyzed it!

The roster looks pretty strong overall, methinks. While berserkers are a worthy addition to any Germanic army it does bring their arsenal that much closer to overpowering status. Anyone else thinking the same thing?

You might want to mix up the infantry a bit more. Many would suffer through weak low-tier units to grab the big high-powered one at the top tier, but nobody would choose one that has low-power units throughout all tiers. Might as well not even have that one.

It's true, but I don't see it as that big a problem. As analyzed, the Harudes provide garrison troops - kind of like the limitanei. I'm assuming we are gonna make the Harudes building dirt cheap - and perhaps their units dirt cheap - because they are obviously troops designed for light duties. In fact I kinda like this tribal specialization.

About the AI misuse of the 6-tribe system:

How about we integrate the 6 into 4 instead? Like thus -

Town Government (As it was)
Tier 1 - Pagi Infantry

Harudes
Tier 2 - Levy Spearmen
Tier 3 - Warband
Tier 4 - Foresters (light 2-handed axe unit)

Marcomanni/ Sedusii
Tier 2 - Noble Cavalry (cheap, weak heavy cavalry)
Tier 2 - Mounted Warband (generic light cavalry)
Tier 3 - Regales (well-equipped, but poor morale)
Tier 3 - Minor Nobles (javelin+sword, mix between heavy and light cavalry)
Tier 4 - Horse Archers (in certain provinces)
Tier 5 - General's Bodyguard

Triboci/ Vangiones
Tier 2 - Axemen
Tier 2 - Spear Warband
Tier 3 - Spear Comitatus
Tier 3 - Priests of Ziu (War god. Morale-boosting heavy inf)
Tier 4 - Sword Comitatus
Tier 4 - King's Guard
Tier 5 - Berserkers

Nemetes
Tier 2 - Slingers
Tier 3 - Skirmishers
Tier 4 - Archers
Tier 5 - Onagers (in certain provinces)

Note: I'm assuming we switch to the all-4-available system, instead of the original "temple-like" 1-in-each-settlement.

My concern with that is that there's really nothing special about the Alemanni if we allow them to get all 4 (or 6) training buildings in each settlement. If we make them specialize a bit, then it makes playing as the Alemanni an interesting and unique challenge.

this might be too complicated, but what if they had one major barracks with access to all the troops, and then the other three they could build minor barracks and only access some troops

Well, you can still force the player/AI to build one out of the four buildings. And I see your point, and I saw Drakontos' point. The AI might fail so terribly at this that all we'll see in an AI army are one-sided spam armies...

Rinster, could you elaborate a bit more on that?

[This message has been edited by GeneralKickAss (edited 11-08-2010 @ 06:33 PM).]

well this idea came from the temple system in rome total realism, so if you have ever played that you might get it

the general idea is that at the first level barracks, they have a choice of building one of the 4 or 5 different barracks trees. At the second level, they can build the second level of that barracks tree, but they can also build the first level of a minor barracks for each of the other major barracks trees that they didn't start, and these would offer recruitment of only 1 or maybe 2 units out of the tree, not all of them. At the 3rd level, they could build the 3rd level of their major barracks, and then the 2nd level of their minor barracks, and the minor barracks only goes up to 2 levels. At the 4th and 5th level they could upgrade their major barracks to recruit all of the troops from that barracks, but the other 3 or 4 minor barracks they could each build up to level 2, allowing access to maybe 1 of the units from each other barracks

does that make sense? or more sense?