Real Battle, Buildings, Recruitment (RBBR) for BC 2.3

[Phosphoricus]

Suppose the top tier elephant units run amok too. This would be realistic (after all, as with men, even well-trained elephants are not entirely immune to fear). Of course, this would place the Indian generals and bodyguards into an even more precarious position. I believe a remedy for such a problem would be to change to the Indian factions to have horse-mounted generals and bodyguards. This would not only improve the mobility and general ease-of-use for these generals, but it might also be more realistic; Rajput warlords, after all, valued horsemanship and would likely proudly demonstrate their prowess as horsemen in battle instead of risking their lives atop a much less reliable animal.

[rusnmat]

to Wareg: Regarding HA, I am talking about the best HA ( mostly Mongols and Turks). Lower tier HA have much lower attack values and accuracies. I watched on the History chanel a program where they compared historically athentic English longbows and much shorter Turkish combosite bow. With the same amount of energy applied, composite bow released the same arrows with higher velocity. Those tests determined that high quality composite bow is superior to the best European longbow. Also, from historical records we know that best composite bows had higher range than even best English bowmen. Accuracies for composite bows are slightly higher due to higher release speed and better release technique. Mongols used a thumb release comparing to 2 fingers European style release ( which could lead to faults if both fingers not release simultaneously). Yes, mongols had problems fighting good armoured heavy Italian crossbowmen ( who had long range weapons). They didn't have any problems with levies/militias type FA since they can outshot them easily.
Even though their bows were not big, they did produce a lots of power and range. That is how they defeated Rus armies or many Middle Eastern kingdoms who have tons and tons of militia archers, hunters and such. Most of the time they just stayed out of range. That is why I had a big problem with some of the original SS stats, since my Rus' peasant/hunters or even javelinmen would just slaughter elite mongol HA ( some of javelinmen in SS had 70m range- catapult arms
That is why I call them "kamikaze" HA
Back to BC, since we can't make HA use different arrows in MTW game then the best scenario will be the best compromise.
At the long distance accuracy is a bigger factor than attack value. For instance with better accuracy missile attack of "2" is better than worse accuracy but attack value of "5". At the close distance attack value is more a factor than an accuracy.
I could lower best HA attack value and improve their accuracies ( then they will suck at close range). Total damage is combination of both attack value and accuracy. Personally, I don't think that elite HA bows were much inferior to FA in the first place. Horse armour counted as part of the unit armour in EDU. descr_mount deals mostly with other things as movement speed, spacing and such. I 'll check the longbowmen shortly.. Thanks for good discussion

[rusnmat]

After the siege thing is done, thx by the way, I played some custom battles with Varangian Axemen and Heavy Janis.
The main problem I think is the shield value. Maybe it would be better balanced by reducing it to 1, I am still wondering how you can use a helberd and a shield properly, it should be at least more difficult than using a sword and a shield; right now both methods have the same values (4) which can't be right.

Attacks without any shield should be higher, I also know the stats from RC/RR, 8 attack for elite 1H axemen and 10 for elite 2H.

Nice observations. + rep Yes, I had a little bit a problem with that too. But since I wanted to follow trueness to unit animation as much as possible, I did kept or lowered just a bit the original shield values- Varangian Axemen at 4 and Heavy Janis at 3.
At least those shield will provide some protection from arrows when walking to melee. Many elite units have 5-6 shield value. For melee they could've gotten a slightly higher defence skill value It is a compromise ( between animation and some common sence ). RC/RR even though is a prety good system, is still a pretty good aprocimation it's could be 7 AT for 1 Elite 1H and 11 for 2 H as well

[rusnmat]

Good suggestion about Indian BG. I thought about it as well... Well, making them horsemen will reduce divercity for BG units, since everybody else have horses. Top level elephats still rout, but they just don't kill their own troops when they to that. That what run amok does and also makes them get out of countrol a little bit earlier. Yes, giving BG elephants run amok attribute could lead to Indian generals leaving armies prematurely. Also handliers would kill animals with stakes to their skulls when they got out of control and rush it to their own troops.

[Phosphoricus]

I think factions generally have horsemen for bodyguards because these were the elite soldiers back in the day. In a way, we could not make this situation more diverse without departing from realism. I don't know what research the original modders used when deciding to have Indian generals and princes ride elephants into combat, but I suspect that it wouldn't be found unrealistic to have the generals ride horses. One of the quotes featured during loading screens in this mod even states, "There are three things you must not ask of a Rajput, his horse, his mistress, or his sword."

If a bodyguard replacement were done, perhaps the Chauhan bodyguard could be based upon Kshatriya Nobles, while the Solanki bodyguard could be based upon Paramara Raja Asvaka.

BTW, why have you given javelins +5 versus elephants? I had thought they already had a great advantage, although elimination of the armor-piercing attribute probably decreased this somewhat.

[Moritol]

BTW, why have you given javelins +5 versus elephants? I had thought they already had a great advantage, although elimination of the armor-piercing attribute probably decreased this somewhat.

As far as I know the ridiculous effectiveness of any javelin unit against elephants is a relict of the RTW engine which still "sleeps" in MTW . That +5 should be not necessary, but the range is too short: the gameplay demands that it should be longer. Against cavalry there is only time for the aiming animation.

[Wareg]

With the same amount of energy applied, composite bow released the same arrows with higher velocity. Those tests determined that high quality composite bow is superior to the best European longbow

I agree that best Janissary or Mongolian FA bows were more powerful than bests longbows. But not HA bows. Longbows had 130-180 (even 200) pounds of weight,
HA bows no more than 70-80 pounds. If you have got informations about more powerful HA bows, please send It. Thanks for discussion too

Menaulatoi Anticav Infantry have got 14 attack value so I conclude that they've got haevier javelins than most of other javelinmen. 48 m of range isn't too much for haevy javelin? It still seems that they've got "catapult arms" (pilum range was about 20-30m max.)

Menaulatoi have got only 2 javelins per man. As compared with Royal kataphractoi (6) It is surprisingly small amount. Why have kataphractoi got 3 times more javelines than Menaulatoi?

[Dago Red]

The problem with shortening jav range too much is that, skirmishers fire SO slowly, they usually only get 1 salvo off before a charging enemy is upon them. Sometimes, they don't even get 1 off, especially if someone's stuck on a rock and the unit is still trying to stop moving.

[rusnmat]

Yes, you got it right - taking AP bonus from javelins has more effect than assigning javelins +5 elephant bonus. Other mods have similar bonuses for javelins ( SS has +6 ). Javelins are the best cost effective way to kill elephants, they can kill armored riders and guys in wooden box on the top of elephants easier than any other infantry can. Also they can throw javelins to more vulnerable elephant spots. Engaging elephant army without javelinmen is pretty much the same as fighting heavy cavalry without spearmen. Yes, it is possible, but will lead to very heavy casualties.
Yes, unfortunately the game mechanics for javelins doesn't work with the realistic 25-30 meters. The minimum distance they can be deployed effectively is about 40 m, that is why javelin units in this minimod have 45-50 meter range. At least it is much closer to the reality than 70 m range javelins that just slaughter elite HA with 80m maximum range

About too short of the javelins range for the game purposes, I have a question - how many salvos is realistic for running towards you men and cavalry?
In my opinion, against running towards you men it would be 1 or 2 if you very lucky and super fast, against a cavalry charge - javelinmen will be just running for their lifes to hide behind spearmen or some natural obsticals. Javelinmen do good job when they behind thin line of infantry, and really good job defending gates and killing elephants.
Regarding ammo, mounted soldiers able to carry around more ammo. Horsemen also were able to replenish ammo esier, since they can just ride out and get more ammo from servants. That's why horsemen in this minimod have more ammo than FA or javelinsman. Elephant units have the most ammo per person.

[Wareg]

If rusnmat changed (How??) speed of melee attack maybe Is is possible also for shooting (throwing) units? That will generate new options for ex. slowlier reloading will be good for late crossbowmen (with more poweful composte crossbows) or ultra-fast shooting for some HA.

[rusnmat]

Back to HA, current attack values are , in my opinion, at the best compromise between game limitation mechanics. This the current settings allowing best HA do a decent job from a long distance and from close distance. If I increase their attack value and lower accuracies, then they will be more potent at close distance but weaker at long distance. If attack values decreased, then they will suck at close distance which also will not be realistic.
There is just an article from Wiki that have good refferences:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_...d_organization
It's basically confirms that we were saying:
"
Six of every ten Mongol troopers were light cavalry horse archers, the remaining four were more heavily armored and armed lancers. Mongol light cavalry were extremely light troops compared to contemporary standards, allowing them to execute tactics and maneuvers that would have been impractical for a heavier enemy (such as European knights). Most of the remaining troops were heavier cavalry with lances for close combat after the archers had brought the enemy into disarray. All soldiers usually carried scimitars or axes as well.
The primary weapon of the Mongol forces was the Mongol bow. It was a recurve bow made from composite materials (wood, horn, and sinew), and at the time unmatched for accuracy, force, and reach. The bow's geometry allowed it to be made relatively small so it could be used and fired in any direction from horseback.[7] Quivers containing sixty arrows were strapped to the backs of the cavalrymen. The Mongols were extremely skilled with the bow and were said to be able to hit a bird on the wing.
The key to the strength of the Mongolian bow was its laminate construction, with layers of boiled horn and sinew to augment the wood. The layer of horn was in the inner face as it resists compression, while the layer of sinew was at the outer face as it resists expansion. All of this gave the bow great power which made it very good against armour. The Mongol bow could shoot an arrow over half a kilometer. Targeted shots were possible at a range of 200 or 230 m, which determined the optimal tactical approach distance for light cavalry units. Ballistic shots could hit enemy units (without targeting individual soldiers) at distances of up to 400 m, useful for surprising and scaring troops and horses before beginning the actual attack.
Mongol archers used a wide variety of arrows, depending on the target and distance. Chainmail and metal armour could be penetrated at close range by using special heavy arrows."

[rusnmat]

If rusnmat changed (How??) speed of melee attack maybe Is is possible also for shooting (throwing) units? That will generate new options for ex. slowlier reloading will be good for late crossbowmen (with more poweful composte crossbows) or ultra-fast shooting for some HA.

Unfortunately, that is much more difficult thing, since you would 'd have to make a new annimation for each missile speed. With melee attack you can just change a speed delay value in EDU

[David93]

Historicly elephants took 5 years to train, i dont want to wait 10 turns on the most basic elephants but i think that basic should be 3, medium 5 and elite 6 (turns) there extroadinary powerfull and it would stop any sort of spam.
IMO your complelety right about the HAs at high levels FA should have just one more attack than their mounted counterparts (because of the difficulty shooting from horseback.)

[rusnmat]

Yes, it is a good idea +rep. I am thinking to inrease it to 3, 4,and 5, comparing to 1,2,3 currenty.
I just did it..
I started working on the buildings file, for better recruitment times, to reduces those later period dousens stacks of troops (especially from Romans, Georgians and KOJ). Also I want to remove a melee upgrade from blacksmith (to end all those "magic" spears and maxes ), just to supstitute it with some small income (from produsing armour and arms). Ideally, it could be nice to do have an armour upgrade instead. But that will require more adjustmens to EDU and prefferably new armoured models for each unit. And add a few other nice things

[David93]

Thanks man.
Personally i was wondering if you could go back to the way of rome? were they upgrade light weapons, heavy weapons and armor? With the massive stats of bc, armorer would actually make a difference. I was wondering if you could give the armor upgrade in anyway? I would prefer to have it and no diffrent models than not at all, But new models would be awesome, im guessing you cant skin however and i cant either or id offer to help
With up grading "light" weapons could only get one upgrade for maces and spears etc heavy could get more. They would also get armor upgardes, this would actually make blacksmiths and stuff valuble in BC. I

[rusnmat]

I am an electrical engineer by education, so good with numbers and variables Not so much with graphics.
OK, since I already invested some time into this mod, it's better to make it proper. I 'll do armour upgrades for units, but just one armour upgrade per unit. Some units don't get any upgrades at all as nubian spearmen and other semi-naked militias. Leather tanner will upgrade cloth/leather wearing units only, higher smith and armourers will upgrade higher level units as well.
Also, armour making buildings will produce a small cash bonus and small settlement health penalty

[Dago Red]

Also, armour making buildings will produce a small cash bonus and small settlement health penalty

That's a great idea! Choices, choices....

[Cochus1]

how do the dismounted knights works on these sub mod?? have they some use or are they like in vanilla BC??

[rusnmat]

Everything has a specific purpose, all combat system was redone

[rusnmat]

In addition to dealing with spamming stack of troops in later game and upgrading armour in armourers, I am working on :
-giving missing bonuses for guilds and other building;
- many buildings will have upkeep costs and many will have cash inflows;
- For religious buildings their effect will depend on local religion levels, higher the curtain religion - higher the bonuses as happiness, trade or health.
- Same for religious troops, they can be recruited only after religion reaches certain levels
- Many buildings will have penailties in addtion to bonuses. For instance, ports and silk road in addition to income and happiness will produces law dissoder and small health penalty ( from overseas infections)

Since it is a much larger project that I originally planned, it will take me a week or so to finish it