Update

[napoleonic]

noob question what actually the real life / historical background difference between skirmishers and non skirmishers missiles units?

and btw from current stats, kiev's dismount junior druzhina is superior in stats than luchniki? how come since luchniki appear later? I mean shouldn't they have superior tech?

[Erunion Telcontar]

Two really big things to keep in mind:
A; Later does not equal Better (yes, arms/quality/etc has a distinct upward trend, but there are many, many outliers).
B; Stats Are Not Everything.

I don't know the specific case with the Luchniki and the Druzhina, but it is likely that the Druzhina are 'Feudal' type units, whereas the Luchniki are either late or early professionals. Professionals have better discipline, better upkeep, and are far more readily available. Feudal's tend to be less disciplined, expensive to keep, slow to regenerate, but individually very skilled and well equipped.

[Point Blank]

Yes Junior Druzhina are retinue units. They are Superior quality and well-equipped, but not available in large numbers.

Luchniki are Late Pro, average quality, appearing later but can be trained in larger numbers.

[Ichon]

Good idea. The question is which skirmishers should have stakes?

I've set missile archers who are placed behind the main battle line to not skirmish.

Missile archers that have stakes could be placed in front I guess by being designated skirmishers - they would still shoot as missile archers.

Hmm... how many did you leave with stakes anyway? I thought one of the changes already was to reduce many of the unit able to plant stakes? I'd say only professionals can plant stakes. But then I'm not sure if longbowmen are professionals and they should be able to. Or maybe make longbows unable but retinue able to... since there were different qualities of units. The retinues could be more skirmisher like anyway- the front line best archers that could fire aimed shots or range shots with better equipment and experience.

It's really too bad there isn't a way to make stakes less deadly. Then they could be an obstacle but not automatic kill. I saw that war wagon submod and wondered if something similar could be done but I'm not exactly sure how he is getting that effect. If siege equipment could be scripted into non-siege battles then maybe something cool could be done.

How did you designate which missile units are placed behind the line? There is an AI switch for that? Really then every AI missile unit should have it because half the battles with missiles are total waste as AI puts them way out in front of the line. The few times I've had to attack AI on a hill or with protected missile units the battles just from that become much more difficult and probably realistic.

That reminds me- any way to give some of the crossbow units stakes? I'd guess that they deployed obstacles more often than archers did even if it was just a line of Pavise planted in the ground or firing stands.

[Point Blank]

I haven't finally decided who gets stakes yet. Perhaps elite professionals? That would include Yeoman archers, Janissaries etc.

Which units are placed behind the line is defined in the descr_ai_formations file. At the moment most skirmishers are in front of the main battle line with skirmish enabled, and missile behind with it disabled. Easy enough to alter that. That was part of the reason I decided to use the skirmish class originally because its recognised in the formations file.

From what I've see of G5's latest BAI the skirmish archers don't seem to move ahead so much on the attack, and the AI is also more likely to find a nice hill to sit on and defend, in which case they don't move.

I'd say Crossbows could use stakes.

[k/t]

Are AI archers finally able to deploy stakes at the beginning of a battle and not only when your cavalry is charging them? I am planning to remove stakes from all units if the AI cannot use them properly, as they give me too much of an advantage and I end up stocking my armies with inferior archers just because they can protect my infantry with their stakes.

[Point Blank]

I don't know I'll ask Germanicu5. If they can't be deployed by AI at battle start I agree that it may be best just to remove them entirely.

[Lord Ragnar]

Hi,Master PB. Is the up and comming update of RR/RC have a point system as in DLV. I'm asking as to also see if there is an add-on mod at present that has this option, to SS6.4. Production of buildings is one thing,having to gather points to open other options is another.Quite fun and at least it wont offend the Historian side of the modder world. just a thought, respect as always.

[napoleonic]

Point Blank, will you make this update stand alone download?

[RollingWave]

noob question what actually the real life / historical background difference between skirmishers and non skirmishers missiles units?

and btw from current stats, kiev's dismount junior druzhina is superior in stats than luchniki? how come since luchniki appear later? I mean shouldn't they have superior tech?

On a general level, using archers as the primary example (since that's kinda the only type that have both), the difference between skrimishing archer and missile archer in theory is....


Skrimish : it means that they fight more as a loose group of individuals, aiming their shots individually and usually fairly up close. most early archers are kinda like that , especially those levied into a group on notice and had little to no time to train as a unit.

Missile: typically the more common perception of what a archer unit is ... aka volley fire as a group. they just all fire into a general direction which obviously help extend their range since they're just going for general arc shots and not aimed shots.



So in theory skrimishers = better accuarcy, probably better movement rate, less overall training (though that depends. skrmishing horse archers might be exceptionally well trained and organized). somewhat slower fireing rate, lower range. maybe a bit more defense in melee too since they'll just dodge around as a loose group.

While missiles = longer range, less individual accuracy, lesser movement rate, generally have at least some training so they can work in a group. somewhat faster firing rate. probably will be in deeper trouble if actually caught in melee.


IMHO, aside from PB's great work on different animations, we probably should give skrimishers a bit more defense skill rating and +1 damage to their missile to account for accuracy. (it only matters for bows though.) I usually set my range unit's melee ability much closer to what their melee unit's counter part should be anyway. (for my next version I plan to lower their unit # though, historically until the English in the hundred years war most Catholic archer groups were SMALL , they should be more like 60-80 men on huge instead of the 120-150 it usually is now, obviously related price adjustments will apply)

[napoleonic]

On a general level, using archers as the primary example (since that's kinda the only type that have both), the difference between skrimishing archer and missile archer in theory is....


Skrimish : it means that they fight more as a loose group of individuals, aiming their shots individually and usually fairly up close. most early archers are kinda like that , especially those levied into a group on notice and had little to no time to train as a unit.

Missile: typically the more common perception of what a archer unit is ... aka volley fire as a group. they just all fire into a general direction which obviously help extend their range since they're just going for general arc shots and not aimed shots.



So in theory skrimishers = better accuarcy, probably better movement rate, less overall training (though that depends. skrmishing horse archers might be exceptionally well trained and organized). somewhat slower fireing rate, lower range. maybe a bit more defense in melee too since they'll just dodge around as a loose group.

While missiles = longer range, less individual accuracy, lesser movement rate, generally have at least some training so they can work in a group. somewhat faster firing rate. probably will be in deeper trouble if actually caught in melee.

I see... but are these difference exist in the game or is it only refers for the auto retreat when enemy closing? if it the later then why bother separate them into 2 classes?

and one thing I ask, I heard Broken Crescent has units that are not using square formations? what shape do they have and can SS get them too?

[RollingWave]

I see... but are these difference exist in the game or is it only refers for the auto retreat when enemy closing? if it the later then why bother separate them into 2 classes?

and one thing I ask, I heard Broken Crescent has units that are not using square formations? what shape do they have and can SS get them too?

It's has been more or less adopted into RC as there are clear different definition for skrimish and missile version bow range. though obviously how balanced it is in practice is open to debate. wether they can skrimish mode or not is really not the biggest problem ever since skrimish mode don't work particularly well in M2TW anyway. in reality what a skrimisher group imply is that they can work as individuals, for example even on foot they'll do some run and shoot (and a part of them can shoot while a part runs etc..) but in M2TW engine that's not possible. which is why I suggest a. movement bonus so they're hard to catch and b. general melee bonus so they're not that helpless when caught.

As for formation, there is basically 2 usable starting formation type, square or horde, horde being a circle loose formation. it makes sense for most untrained / lesser trained unit to be horde but in practice there is often some problems.


BTW PB, you talked about how your new animation will make some range units ready faster.... does that work for archers? if it does it would make sense to have the skrimisher version animations ready fast while the missile version ready slower (since one is firing individually while the other is trying to cordinate a volley shot)

[Gorrrrrn]

Horde - not practical for foot units, makes them a pain to deploy in settlements - need to be able to deploy in rectangle for walls etc.
--
English Longbowmen don't really fit neat classifications - individually they were trained to shoot 200m at a stationary target.
There was no training for collective shooting.
In practice, if an army was attacking they would be deployed out front as skirmishers, from as close as was comfortable, with infantry and cavalry in close support.
They wouldn't use stakes then.
However if the army was on the defensive then they'd deploy stakes (and any other preparation of the battlefield possible) and stay behind them.
Most were not professional but some were individually contracted, some retinue, some county levies /town militia. All had the same general capabilities, archery equipment etc.
(The crown supplied bows, arrows, strings etc to all serving as longbowmen without distinction.)
All English longbowmen should have stakes ability, but that does mean no skirmishing - my suggestion was based on testing G5's latest BAI.

[Polycarpe]

Speaking of horde, this formation should be applied to more "wild" people, highlanders are good example of horde formation.

[Point Blank]

On a general level, using archers as the primary example (since that's kinda the only type that have both), the difference between skrimishing archer and missile archer in theory is....


Skrimish : it means that they fight more as a loose group of individuals, aiming their shots individually and usually fairly up close. most early archers are kinda like that , especially those levied into a group on notice and had little to no time to train as a unit.

Missile: typically the more common perception of what a archer unit is ... aka volley fire as a group. they just all fire into a general direction which obviously help extend their range since they're just going for general arc shots and not aimed shots.



So in theory skrimishers = better accuarcy, probably better movement rate, less overall training (though that depends. skrmishing horse archers might be exceptionally well trained and organized). somewhat slower fireing rate, lower range. maybe a bit more defense in melee too since they'll just dodge around as a loose group.

While missiles = longer range, less individual accuracy, lesser movement rate, generally have at least some training so they can work in a group. somewhat faster firing rate. probably will be in deeper trouble if actually caught in melee.


IMHO, aside from PB's great work on different animations, we probably should give skrimishers a bit more defense skill rating and +1 damage to their missile to account for accuracy. (it only matters for bows though.) I usually set my range unit's melee ability much closer to what their melee unit's counter part should be anyway. (for my next version I plan to lower their unit # though, historically until the English in the hundred years war most Catholic archer groups were SMALL , they should be more like 60-80 men on huge instead of the 120-150 it usually is now, obviously related price adjustments will apply)

RW pretty much covered it all:

RC 2.0
Skirmishers
-------------
Shorter range, shoot directly over open sights
Most accurate of all projectile units
HA Skirmishers close to very close range, ideally just out of javelin range but that is difficult to always control
Melee at one quality level less than they shoot at
Have less morale than melee unit of equivalent quality
Foot Skirmishers have reduced mass because they are less conditioned by training and temperament for any kind of collision situation
Tend to have more open formations
Foot Skirmishers are usually deployed in front of the main battle line
Have 'Skirmish' function switched on
HA are usually deployed on the wings
Skirmish HA employ relatively heavy arrows at short range so have +1 damage compared to Missile HA
Skirmish HA typically ride new 'HA' mount type category which give +0.1 move_speed_mod, -2 heat, -0.5 mount mass (depicts mares, more responsive and agile but smaller and not trained for melee)
Via animation, tend to back out once engaged in melee
Are more likely to be 'Local' and less likely to be Professionals. As such, they will not only usually have lighter equipment, but equipment of lesser quality as well
Tend to have more 'fragile' mental stats eg Low Discipline, but this is also dependent on their type eg Local, Pro, Feudal or whatever

Missileers
------------
Longer range, arc arrows onto targets to create an 'arrow shower' over a wider area
Maximum shooting rate possible
Less accurate
Melee at two quality levels less than they shoot at
Have less morale than melee and skirmish units of equivalent quality
Foot Missile have further reduced mass because they are less conditioned by training and temperament for any kind of collision situation
Tighter formations than Skirmishers
Foot Missile are usually deployed behind the main battle line
Foot Missile usually have 'Skirmish' function switched off
Missile HA are usually deployed on the wings but closer in than Skirmish HA
Missile HA cannot use as heavy a draw-poundage bow as a foot archer so to reach a similar range must use lighter arrows, and hence have -1 damage compared to Skirmish HA
Missile HA can ride new 'HA' mount but in practice its pretty variable - some use heavier mounts if they might engage in melee afterwards (eg Mamluk Archers, Khorchi)
Via animation, tend to back out once engaged in melee
Are more likely to be Professionals and less likely to be Locals etc. Usually have heavier and better quality equipment

It's has been more or less adopted into RC as there are clear different definition for skrimish and missile version bow range. though obviously how balanced it is in practice is open to debate.

Yes its quite an abstraction.

wether they can skrimish mode or not is really not the biggest problem ever since skrimish mode don't work particularly well in M2TW anyway. in reality what a skrimisher group imply is that they can work as individuals, for example even on foot they'll do some run and shoot (and a part of them can shoot while a part runs etc..) but in M2TW engine that's not possible. which is why I suggest a. movement bonus so they're hard to catch and b. general melee bonus so they're not that helpless when caught.

I'm pretty sure that I've got the skirmish distances at a point now where you can fairly safely leave Skirmishers unsupervised, except if chased by fast light cav. Mount speed differences have been emphasised.

As for formation, there is basically 2 usable starting formation type, square or horde, horde being a circle loose formation. it makes sense for most untrained / lesser trained unit to be horde but in practice there is often some problems.


BTW PB, you talked about how your new animation will make some range units ready faster.... does that work for archers? if it does it would make sense to have the skrimisher version animations ready fast while the missile version ready slower (since one is firing individually while the other is trying to cordinate a volley shot)

Yes it works for archers. I think its OK for either type - for Missile archers the first volley is always a bit ragged regardless, but after that they synchronize.

Horde - not practical for foot units, makes them a pain to deploy in settlements - need to be able to deploy in rectangle for walls etc.
--
English Longbowmen don't really fit neat classifications - individually they were trained to shoot 200m at a stationary target.
There was no training for collective shooting.

We could create a special animation class for them so they shoot similarly to Missile Archers but more raggedly, with Retinue shooting as normal Missile.

In practice, if an army was attacking they would be deployed out front as skirmishers, from as close as was comfortable, with infantry and cavalry in close support.

However if the army was on the defensive then they'd deploy stakes (and any other preparation of the battlefield possible) and stay behind them.
Most were not professional but some were individually contracted, some retinue, some county levies /town militia. All had the same general capabilities, archery equipment etc.
(The crown supplied bows, arrows, strings etc to all serving as longbowmen without distinction.)
All English longbowmen should have stakes ability, but that does mean no skirmishing - my suggestion was based on testing G5's latest BAI.

What we could do with units that can deploy stakes is classify all such as Skirmishers (but leave their attributes unchanged, they would just be Skirmishers for purposes of positioning by the Formations file) so they would deploy in front and give them 'cannot_skirmish' attribute so they would hold in place, though this would depend if G5's BAI can do this so its still fair for the AI.

[napoleonic]

PB hasn't answered whether he is going to give us stand alone download or not

[Point Blank]

Well, the uncompressed size of the version that goes on top of 6.4 is 5.5GB, and a standalone would be 9.5GB.

The compressed versions would be a lot smaller of course.

[Polycarpe]

An estimated size for a modding resource, how much it will be?

[Point Blank]

Only about 10MB compressed.

EDIT: Oops forgot about animations. So maybe 100MB.

[napoleonic]

Well, the uncompressed size of the version that goes on top of 6.4 is 5.5GB, and a standalone would be 9.5GB.

The compressed versions would be a lot smaller of course.

sooo are you going to upload the standalone version or not? because at least for me, downloading 6.4 alone is quite a troublesome already...

*update with question and suggestion

I've seen some unit that have sword as primary weapons and axe as secondary, does that mean it will need to use ALT left click to make them attack using axe?

I've read that you will incorporate multiple weapons on single unit for the next update, will there still exist units that have sword and axe as primary and secondary weapons?

and now for the suggestion, as with above problem, can we get a more detailed unit descriptions for the next update? I mean IMO units descriptions should have these info :

1. weapons they use (primary and secondary)
2. ammo for missiles
3. armor upgrade path
4. type of shield they use
5. morale attribute like impetuous and such

IMO these information should be incorporated into units descriptions