Paeninsula Italic Suggestions and Comments

[mcantu]

What Athena says ... he recently got my full faith for re-modding the ChivTW combat model (what i did always alone all the years), means a lot adjustments are in work by him to carry out the last possible AI improvements via the edu file).

It needs a lot of testing ... a strict combat coding along realism stats and a math model can't be the only goal, it is a first approach as basement, then go ahead and test test test and this from the view of the AI.

i strongly agree with this and its the main problem i see in the Real Combat system. the approach i take is to base the armor and shield stats off of what is shown on the skin. then i use the unit description (along with discussion with our history dept) to do the fine tuning of how a unit should perform. i also give all weapons of the same type the same lethality values...

[Hister]

This is getting complicated guys!

[Aper]

This is getting complicated guys!

For now, I will be happy if I succed in persuading the hoplitai in charging head on their enemies! Without make them supermen of course

[DaVinci]

This is getting complicated guys!

Coding is or can be complicate, yes. Rather i would say: Balancing is a long road to take.

For a first approach for setting up a mod, the usual coding ways are completely okay ... the long-therm balancing is another thing anyway.

You can leave a model as is or you just work on it over years, what i did since 2005, and this always dependent of the kind of mod (era, period, culture, traditions, factionmod, ... etc.).

And what mcantu says above is then circa the same what i mean in a few posts above.

I call it historical-realism with gameplay-orientation (in gameplay-orientation sticks as well the AI support). All this isn't done in a day, and is a red line through every file/code that owns a relevance.

[mcantu]

For now, I will be happy if I succed in persuading the hoplitai in charging head on their enemies! Without make them supermen of course

try a few battles in the campaign and not in custom battles

[DaVinci]

Seconded. The campaign outcome is anyway the main instance to judge on the balance ... also very valid for the edu coding.

But, i wouldn't go overboard with changes atm. ... just take a few years from your freetime to balance the campaign globally and entirely.

[DaVinci]

I just did a few edu changes on aper's last edu, according to our discussions.

- pila: 25 range, removed ap
- javelins: 30 range

- shield_wall removed entirely

Hastati, Principes and Triarii slight changes:
- cost, upkeep slightly reduced
- attack, def skill and shield slightly changed/improved
- got hardy and Hastati very_hardy
...this is to give a Roman AI a certain support, as i saw that ie. all usual Hoplites and also other warriors have quite superior stats compared to the Roman line infantry (as global-historical balance point done mainly).

@ Hister and aper: You might take these little edu file changes into consideration or just trash it, ie. remove the attachment or pm me, then i'll remove it asap if needed (for me equal), i'll just test this now in campaign

[Hister]

No no DaVinci, it's okey! Am interested to see how the campaign plays out.

I agree on the javelins - will have to try it though after I return from job.

I really wouldn't remove the shieldwall though! Isn't there a better way to bypass the problem with our hoplites retaining the shieldwall? Aper, hope you come out with something.

Erm, aren't Principes the ones who should get very_hardy attribute?

To be fair to other units having the same shield as those 3 Roman units you definitely need to give higher shield value also to them - but this will again disbalance the whole thing. Maybe give a point less for less trained and less closely packed units having the same shield. Dunno. Have in mind that hoplites should have better shield protection when in hoplite formation! But if we are to raise some values for the romans simply to give them advantage campaign gameplay wise we should atleast have a realistic approach and raise only those values that can be affected by training and discipline.

Edit: Aper, just apply the javelin change to all the javeliners and a bit higher defensive skill and hardy, very_hardy attribute for Romans. I personally wouldn't make other changes.

[Aper]

Thanks a lot DaVinci, but dancing hoplites are still here : it's a problem of the BI engine, it always flank even when is useless or stupid (I remember from vanilla), and attack frontally only against largely inferior enemies.

Well know I understand a purely mathematical/historical approach is not enough, I'll study the EDU of DaVinci and mcantu and ask for clarification.
However, thanks a lot to both!

EDIT : to give PI a new playable EDU as soon as possible, I'll try some empirical modifications to Luciano's EDU, based on the suggestions you guys made in this thread, then, in the future, I'll refine the system learning from more experienced modders like DaVinci and mcantu.
@ Hister : what is your opinion about this ?

[Hister]

You have a green light on the matter Aper!

[Lord Willy]

:hmmm:a few days a go i saw an eagle standard article about paenisula italica total war., and i saw some awsome images about ancient rome.it is done this amazing project or it is abandonaded?
thanks
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=109082

ok thanks for the answer hister

[DaVinci]

I'll study the EDU of DaVinci

Aper, the ChivTW edu is actually designed to fit to the medieval world between 1072 and 1222 AD. So it isnot a template for the PI ancient world. But, i guess mcantu's is far better as template, because of the similar timeperiod. Also, our ChivTW edu is still in the works, the now published isn't the final product.

Shield wall: i playtested without, and Hoplites are still very superior! Hard nut to crack for every other unit. And the behavior is as well 100 % okay, they mainly hold a line, and rather not try to flank, also they charge frontal.

As for the shield value for Hastati, Principes and Triarii:
I don't see a big problem to have 1 point more for them, because the Romans started to have a military maschine at this stage, and you could understand it as a slight forced improvement of the shield construction (reinforced with metal streams at the edges etc.), just vs. Celtic and Italic, Samnite and Etruskan etc. older shield designs. The metal "industry" was in fact in the Toskanian regions (formerly Etruskan realms), which were just conquered at the time of PI by the Romans (or at the start still Etruskan), but the Romans did everything a tag better than the Etruskans by learning from them, of course.

Other thing:
Pila range for the Hastati and Principes: i would increase it to 30, only for them. This will help to reflect their forced skill with the pila and the animation of the faster throwing.

[Aper]

Shield wall: i playtested without, and Hoplites are still very superior! Hard nut to crack for every other unit. And the behavior is as well 100 % okay, they mainly hold a line, and rather not try to flank, also they charge frontal.

Yes the stat balancing is very similar with or without shield-wall ; the difference is that WITH shield-wall the hoplites suffer casualties between 1/4 and 1/3 of their total force, WITHOUT between 1/3 and 1/2 ; tests made in custom battles, on flat terrain, against ensiferi messapii, 240 hoplites against 160 ensiferi, after some hours spent on balancing stats to be sure hoplites don't outflank without make them too strong.

Hister, it's to you and the PI team to decide : IMO both versions are good, but the cost of hoplites should be raised a bit to balance economically their great numbers and strenght.

EDIT : here the units for testing : attack, global defence, size and lethality of the hoplites must remain the same, or they'll start flanking enemies (unfortunately sec HPs have no effect on this) ; to refine balance the best stat to change is attack delay, that has an enourmous effect on melee skill

[Hister]

Uhh, it's hard to decide.
I'm for the shield wall if units with it don't try to flank as much as before and charge frontal. Aper, will you raise hoplites units cost and upkeep to?

DaVinci - good points on Romani!

[Hister]

Ah yes aper - I propose you make the upkeep cost of mercenary units higher a bit to simulate they costed more then regular soldiers.

[Aper]

no problem mate

[DaVinci]

I personally, as you guess already, will remove the shield wall anyway in the end for my personal play. The reason stays, that there are other issues besides the flanking thing.
You could even offer 2 versions, just one with and one without, is ofcourse a thing that players have to change the edu file name to apply.
As Hister loves the shield wall (and most players too), i would anyway publish officially the shield wall version

[Aper]

I personally, as you guess already, will remove the shield wall anyway in the end for my personal play. The reason stays, that there are other issues besides the flanking thing.
You could even offer 2 versions, just one with and one without, is ofcourse a thing that players have to change the edu file name to apply.
As Hister loves the shield wall (and most players too), i would anyway publish officially the shield wall version

As you can see, the changes are minimal, so I'll probably release both version
But anyway, can you be more specific about the undesired issues of shield-wall? thanx

[DaVinci]

The main issue is that they are quite immobile, just slow. You actually should playtest in campaign to see how armies perform in camp with Hoplites and othrer units. The other main thing is, they can't, also cause of the quite static formation, react properly in the chaos of a battle. Only, what filters this, is the extra def bonus.

Other thing on Hoplites:
Now that you increased the number by 50%, they should cost also 50% more for training and upkeep, imo. ... this also would reflect their superior position in the society, and anyway their superior stats.

[Hister]

2 EDU versions sounds superb guys - more variety the better!