effective phalanx with pike and sword

**alexgold** · January 29, 2012, 02:16 PM

first of all have a look at this picture to see what i'm talking about:

http://postimage.org/image/j96yas3wz/ .

as you all know phalanx formation is kinda crappy the way it is because of 2 factors:1) troops swich to their swords too quickly and 2) troops only use the soldiers from the first 2 rows to kill the enemy with their pikes. with this trick in this tutorial youll be able to get as much of a working phalanx as possible with both sword and pike.

RULES:
anything after ";*" is a comment by me about the changes to be made
anything after *** = not mandatory for implementing the pike configuration in the photo but still useful for overal balancing

step1) go to edu and start moding your pikemen as in this example

soldier Highland_Pikemen, 100, 0, 1.5;Highland_Pikemen ; *1 no space
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_withdraw
;move_speed_mod 0.7
formation 0, 1.8, 2.8, 2.8, 4, square, phalanx ;*2 cant give negative values
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 8, 5, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, spear, 25, 1.85 ;* this makes the unit stick
to its pike more than usual
;stat_pri_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_pri_attr , spear, long_pike
stat_sec 7, 2, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, sword, 25, 0.15 ;*3
;stat_sec_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_sec_attr no

explanations: *1 the thing is that by adding the second time the skeleton after the ";" you make the units i mean individual units loose their own radius(haven't tryrd it for horses or other stuff ). my hunch was that the 0.8 iner unit spacing was made not by a hardcode but insted by the units individual radius that's why i could then pile the pikes up. it's really important NOT TO SPACE here: 1.5;Highland_Pikemen
*2 then set the formation to 0, 1.8, 2.8, 2.8, 4, the final "4" is the second breakthrough. as youll see adding the unit spacing to 0 will mean that instead of one unit in one place therell be 2 units in that exact same place(this why you said that there are 4 lines of pikes in the photo; i couldnt find a way to mode the number of rows of pikes lowered to anything but 2, so there are 2 lines of pikes over there but with the number of men that would have been otherwise into 4 rows ) anyway the drawback is that not pike units are less wide that's why i recomend to use them in another configuration: put 100 number of troops and lower the number of rows to 3 that should solve it.
* 3 the values 1.85 and 0.15 should not be changed to any othet value for example 100000 and -10000 because i THINK the game doesn't consider these values it there are lower than 0 and biger than 1

step 2) go to your descr_formations_ai.txt and delete inside the blocks that have pikemen the following 2 lines (you may have them or not its not mandatory to have them but in my case as i had the descr_formations_ai.txt from a mode so the respective lines were in it)

begin_block 5
max_units 6
unit_type spearmen infantry 1.0
unit_type heavy infantry 0.9
unit_type light infantry 0.8
unit_density close
min_unit_width 20
max_unit_width 20
block_formation line
block_relative_pos 4 0.0 -5.0
inter_unit_spacing 0.0
priority 1.0
end_block

explenation : ok, so now the pike(as well as all the other troop types present in this block) will have the number of rows set by default, meaning the one set in the edu above

(4 or 3) for pikemen. THIS MAKES THE PIKEMEN FORMATION ABOVE HAVE THE DEFAULT NR OF ROWS WHICH I SET IN THE EXAMPLE ABOVE TO 4 . I SUGGEST TRYING IT TO 3.
*** in my opinion, its best to delete those 2 lines in all blocks in the descr_formations_ai.txt so that all troops switch to the number of rows set by default in the edu and then go to edu and set the default nr of rows to this configuration:
4 for cavalry with 24 nr of soldiers
6 for troops with 48 nr of soldiers
7 to troops with 60 nr of soldiers
4 or 3 to phalanx troops as long as they have 100 nr of soldiers

step3) now go to descr_projectile.txt and modify all the radius of all projectiles from 0 to 0.1 or greater, because the skeleton trick i've done at step 1 made the highland_pikemen's skeleton have no individual radius which makes all projectiled that haven't got a radius of their own to go right through them as if they were gosts

).

projectile hand_gun_bullet

effect bullet_model_set
end_effect bullet_impact_ground_set
end_man_effect man_impact_tiny_set
end_package_effect bullet_impact_wall_set
end_shatter_effect bullet_impact_ground_set
end_shatter_man_effect man_impact_tiny_set
end_shatter_package_effect bullet_impact_wall_set

damage 0
radius 0 ; change this from 0 to 0.1
mass 0.05
accuracy_vs_units 0.04
min_angle -60
max_angle 70
velocity 40 65
display aimed
effect_only

great that's all there is to it. the crucial step of this turorial is adding the soldier's skeleton after the semicolons at step 1 just as it is shown there. this trick can be used for any other units in game (infantry, haven't tryed it for cavalry) this makes them pile up at the front rows and poke the enemy with their weapons it's really cool to watch and it would be good for some mod that uses a shield wall, besides it's use here for phalanx. i also think that adding the same trick to another melee unit (ex:dismounted_feudal_knights) will make them fight with all rows rather than just use its front row this combined with some formation moding may make for a more chaotic melee battle.

for halberd phalanx formatios: it's simple just add the janissary_heavy_inf skeleton to both the soldier and after the semicolon and the delete both the secondary weapon and the phalanx capability. the halberdiers will pile up in the first row and kick the enemy with all they've got it's really cool.

i hope this helps and i hope that this will be implemented in mods from now on although piling units in a small area needs a lot of computing power...

you may also try this configuration, courtoasy of Valiant Champion who has done the testing for it:

soldier Aventuros, 60, 0, 4;Aventuros ; the semicolon here has to be sticked to the last letter
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, very_hardy, can_withdraw
formation 0.5, 1.2, 2.4, 2.4, 3, square, phalanx

**Valiant Champion** · January 31, 2012, 02:24 AM

try these two lines in edu

in soldier line add a comma and than a .25 after the mass value.

than on formation line these values and formation depth

0.5, 1.8, 2.4, 2.4, 3

soldier Highland_Pikemen, 60, 0, 4, 0.25<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<,,
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_withdraw , pike
formation 0.5, 1.8, 2.4, 2.4, 3, square, phalanx<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 8, 5, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, spear, 25, 1
;stat_pri_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_pri_attr , spear, long_pike
stat_sec 7, 2, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, sword, 25, 1
;stat_sec_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_sec_attr no

this should eliminate need to modify projectile text

**alexgold** · January 31, 2012, 05:49 AM

or another config for people who like to stick to the phalanxes without swords.

type Highland Pikemen
dictionary Highland_Pikemen ; Highland Pikemen
category infantry
class spearmen
voice_type Light
banner faction main_spear
banner holy crusade
soldier Highland_Pikemen, 60, 0, 1;Highland_Pikemen
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, can_withdraw, pike
;move_speed_mod 0.7
formation 1.2, 1.2, 2.8, 2.8, 4, square, phalanx
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 8, 5, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, spear, 100, 1

turns out that by adding this to your phalanx without secondary weapon you make it immune to the turning backwards bug. try it for yourselves

**XSamatan** · January 31, 2012, 07:56 AM

Hello alexgold,

I modified a unit of Phalangitai according to your settings, this is what happened:

I modified my local build and made some screenies:

The men are stacked, so more men can participate in combat. It looks fearsome from front.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

Ready for combat:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

Lines clash:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

And this happens short after:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

The last picture is the interesting one, does it look the same in your testings? (The battle is two units of Phalangitai (both with your modification))

Regards,
XSamatan

**Taiji** · January 31, 2012, 08:16 AM

'Nobody turned on their secondary weapons, ...'

That's because you've set them up with no secondary weapons.

**Valiant Champion** · January 31, 2012, 04:37 PM

sorry for a few clerical mistakes on my previous post. I think I corrected them but was in a hurry and got some of the figures wrong. It is corrected now. I believe the current configuration I posted is good for me anyways and possibly for others. I am nervous about lowering the radius too low as it creates an ever increasing ability of the unit to fight and makes it harder to be hit by missiles.

In a way adjusting the radius can be used as a gas pedal to regulate a units melee abilities.

**Valiant Champion** · February 01, 2012, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by XSamatan

Hello alexgold,

I modified a unit of Phalangitai according to your settings, this is what happened:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

The last picture is the interesting one, does it look the same in your testings? (The battle is two units of Phalangitai (both with your modification))

Regards,
XSamatan

try this configuration

Spoiler Alert, click show to read:

**alexgold** · February 05, 2012, 01:38 AM

hello XSamatan,
sorry for the delay of response. yes those phalangists should look exactly like that. there is another post related to this topic made by valiant champion
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=520732 , but so as to make it all clear i'll explain what's supposed to happen and then you can take alook at the numbers for yourself because if i were to throw numbers now i'll only create chaos because a "best" number config has yet to be discovered but tests are still made by valiant champion. first have a look at this thread at RADIUS and HEIGHT those are the 2 things that have made the stacking of pikes possible, here
http://mjollnir.twcenter.net/forums/...1344#Breakdown

so the idea is that after the line soldier from EDU soldier Highland_Pikemen, 60, 0, 1,0.4,1.7 , there are these 2 numbers the first is radius and the second is height. the radius reduces the radius of infantry units and makes stacking possible. however this makes the respective units overpowered so another value has been added which is height this is to balance the owepowering from radius.

the point is that if u lower the radius value (lower than 0.4 which is normal) you have to increase the height(above 1.7) in order to MAINTAIN the units initial performance. this balancing is the purpose of further testing as i didn't find any value that would strike the perfect balance.

ok now what about soldier Highland_Pikemen, 60, 0, 1;Highland_Pikemen? it seems that if u put a 0 in both of radius and height it doesn't have the same effect as the ;skeleton trick, i don't know how but it happenes.

if u put the ;skeleton as shown in the picture then the internam mechanics of the battle will consider THAT ALL ROWS OF PIKEMEN ARE FIGHTING ROWS. without this only the first 2 would use their attack animations with the pikes(assuming the unit has both sword and pike) . so now you'll get a phalanx that uses all its rows, and most importantly TURNS EXTREMLY RARELY AND IF SO IT THEN TURNS IMMEDIATELY BACK FACING THE ENEMY. however this unit is overpowered now and here comes in the height values which balance this value.

i'm allmost sure that i haven't made my point because of the fact that i can't really explain the whole idea in a manner that would be clearly understood.

) but just keep in mind RADIUS/HEIGHT AND ;SKELETON are the only 2 options for balancing a phalanx. have a look at those threads i posted theyr really good.

**alexgold** · February 05, 2012, 01:52 AM

try this config
soldier ......0, x ;;;; these are the values of radius and height
formation 0,1.8,...,4 ;;;; you need 4 rows of pikes

and then you have to put 100 men in the unit this is the unstopable phalanx, unstopable yet not overpowered if u can find a value of x that would do this.
x should be a value that works against the ovrpowering made by radius 0
these are the knowledge that i and valiant champion have come up to now, you should keep in touch to him because i won't be very active from now on. still if u have any problems post them here and i'll solve them.

i think i've got it: use this formula to get the right height for a given radius : 0.4*1.7=radius *height

**Valiant Champion** · February 09, 2012, 05:09 AM

this is the best EDU modification so far

type Tercio Pikemen
dictionary Tercio_Pikemen ; Tercio Pikemen
category infantry
class spearmen
voice_type Heavy
banner faction main_spear
banner holy crusade
soldier Tercio_Pikemen, 60, 0, 4, 0.2, 2.59
attributes sea_faring, hide_forest, hardy, can_withdraw, pike
formation 0.4, 1.8, 1.2, 2.4, 4, square, phalanx
stat_health 1, 0
stat_pri 10, 6, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, spear, 25, 1
;stat_pri_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_pri_attr spear, long_pike, spear_bonus_12
stat_sec 7, 3, no, 0, 0, melee, melee_blade, piercing, sword, 25, 1
;stat_sec_ex 0, 0, 0
stat_sec_attr no
stat_pri_armour 0, 7, 0, flesh
;stat_armour_ex 0, 3, 5, 0, 7, 0, 0, flesh
stat_sec_armour 0, 0, flesh
stat_heat 0
stat_ground 1, 0, 2, -2
stat_mental 9, normal, trained
stat_charge_dist 40
stat_fire_delay 0
stat_food 60, 300
stat_cost 1, 500, 155, 80, 185, 500, 4, 150
armour_ug_levels 0, 1, 2, 3
armour_ug_models Tercio_Pikemen,Tercio_Pikemen, Tercio_Pikemen_ug1, Tercio_Pikemen_ug2
ownership spain
era 2 spain
;unit_info 10, 0, 7
recruit_priority_offset 20

**Germanicu5** · February 15, 2012, 04:06 AM

soldier Tercio_Pikemen, 60, 0, 4, 0.2, 2.59

Nice attempts overall, but I can't help the feeling that people here don't consider consequences of some settings.

0.2 - most plausibly, default value applied to any unit is 0.4, with 0.2 they're much harder to hit and can nearly run through an enemy unit without being caught in melee. I use this setting for some "infiltrator" units in TATW (I just saw this "novelty" didn't make it to 3.0 though).

2.59 - this is unit's height, default is estimated at 1.7... I wouldn't expect positive affects here either.

Regards

**Valiant Champion** · February 16, 2012, 12:19 AM

Originally Posted by Germanicu5

[/COLOR] Nice attempts overall, but I can't help the feeling that people here don't consider consequences of some settings.

0.2 - most plausibly, default value applied to any unit is 0.4, with 0.2 they're much harder to hit and can nearly run through an enemy unit without being caught in melee. I use this setting for some "infiltrator" units in TATW (I just saw this "novelty" didn't make it to 3.0 though).

2.59 - this is unit's height, default is estimated at 1.7... I wouldn't expect positive affects here either.

Regards

you should try it first before you dismiss it. Changing height can increase or decrease a units melee ability. Just a very small adjustment can dramatically affect the unit but once you hit the right spot it perfectly balances against the changed radius.

Your just dismissing something you won't take the time to look into nor have a thorough enough knowledge to understand its significance. The height alone without changing radius can be used to bring balance to some units that seemingly wont fight properly even when given high attack or defense bonuses.

Take for instance "fountain guard" from your comrades tatw. the seemless halberd animation looks nice but it is a weak animation statistically wise. they had to really bump up the defence (most notably the armor which is as good as 2 defense skill any day) to make the unit work better. It could be balanced using a decrease in height of only a mere .01s to make it more effective than you could give a more realistic defense to a unit.

Just like a member from COW subforum mentioned. He can now use tabletop game stats on his units while balancing them through the height adjustment.

larger than man units could be given a "physical" radius so they actually take up the space their "apparent" model occupies. Than adjusting the height by lowering it will balance it out so it fight the same in melee yet now they wont pile up on each other due to small (default) radius

**Germanicu5** · February 16, 2012, 04:18 AM

Originally Posted by Valiant Champion

you should try it first before you dismiss it. Changing height can increase or decrease a units melee ability. Just a very small adjustment can dramatically affect the unit but once you hit the right spot it perfectly balances against the changed radius.

Your just dismissing something you won't take the time to look into nor have a thorough enough knowledge to understand its significance. The height alone without changing radius can be used to bring balance to some units that seemingly wont fight properly even when given high attack or defense bonuses.

Take for instance "fountain guard" from your comrades tatw. the seemless halberd animation looks nice but it is a weak animation statistically wise. they had to really bump up the defence (most notably the armor which is as good as 2 defense skill any day) to make the unit work better. It could be balanced using a decrease in height of only a mere .01s to make it more effective than you could give a more realistic defense to a unit.

Just like a member from COW subforum mentioned. He can now use tabletop game stats on his units while balancing them through the height adjustment.

larger than man units could be given a "physical" radius so they actually take up the space their "apparent" model occupies. Than adjusting the height by lowering it will balance it out so it fight the same in melee yet now they wont pile up on each other due to small (default) radius

You're saying that I dismissed your finds without testing by referring only to the part of my post where I made a conservative statement about not expecting positive results from height adjustment made to one unit only.

Does stating that I did tests for TATW 3.0 prove I didn't do tests?

What about the first part, did I also not take enough time? Did you test with low radius settings in settlements? Even in open battles it's apparent the game engine rams too many units in one spot, did you not notice performance drop or increased CTD possibility with low radius? [In other words I tested it ages ago]

Throughout the thread people suggest to change one unit's settings only, which was the base for all my remarks. This will unbalance the game, you'd need a whole new system of height\radius assignment to make it work, but you never mentioned it.
Changing height of one unit, as suggested, may unbalance the game because it can affect combat abilities indirectly, so only with a well-researched system one can really say that such concept works (some tests in isolated environment, all EDU units recalculated etc).

Your just dismissing something you won't take the time to look into nor have a thorough enough knowledge to understand its significance

Was this not offensive? I explicitly stated I tested these settings before during TATW development and that's exactly why I posted.

And about proper testing, let me quote yourself...

sorry for a few clerical mistakes on my previous post. I think I corrected them but was in a hurry and got some of the figures wrong. It is corrected now. I believe the current configuration I posted is good for me anyways and possibly for others. I am nervous about lowering the radius too low as it creates an ever increasing ability of the unit to fight and makes it harder to be hit by missiles.

Regards

P.S. I didn't post here to argue, I found the thread interesting, but wanted to point out that people should be careful not to rush into some statements.

**Valiant Champion** · February 16, 2012, 10:23 AM

balancing units for a radius change does require testing. with pikes it requires a baseline to test repeatedly over and over (10 times in my case) out of spearwall with sword to create a baseline using 0.4 radius and 1.2, 1.2 spacing. the same pike unit and same enemy unit used for all test. I still have the results recorded on paper. I am also planning on eventually creating a few videos showing how the pikes can now fight without micromanagment on flat terrain, and with only limited micromanagmen twhen attacking in cities (same problem with rtw phalanxes) and on steep inclines (uphill downhill bug, not limited to just pikemen). Also showing that the AI can now use the pikes more reliably and effective to the point that a single enemy pike unit can destroy several player units sent to engage it piecemeal one at a time.

In fact you can tweak the pike unit and experiment with its radius until it is perfectly invincable if you consider that is how a pike unit should be or more balanced so it gets slaughtered if the spearwall is not effective. It can be very tough yet would not have to be left without a secondary weapon animation. which in the case of secondary weapons if the secondary animation is stronger than it will contribute to the endurance of the spearwall by killing enemy flankers quicker before they whittle away at the flanks of the spearwall.

Once a baseline is created than change the radius and keep tweaking the height until you can duplicate the results repeatedly. Than the unit and in fact theoretically (tested) the radius will be balanced for all units that use the new radius vs units who use default.

no crashes at all, no lags at all.If you experienced those I would be very surprised as I have run hundreds of battles to date using changed radius and height with not a single crash.

also to suggest that it causes unrealistic bunching up(havent experienced that with a radius of .2) as if that doesnt happen in the game already? shield wall? large humanoids such as trolls in tatw or ogres in cow? stacking of units? wide swinging animations in impossibly close spaces?

If I use 0.2 radius and a spacing of 0.4 than the formation I see with units staying shoulder to shoulder with very little if any overlap should prove that generally they wont bunch up in melee. not as much as units in shield wall and definitely not as much as units with apparent radius of as much as 0.8 or .1 but whose physical radius is only 0.4. the 0.4 being in contrast to the animation skeletons dimensions. however we know that a difference between skeleton and the apparent size will not catastrophically conflict with the physical size of the unit.

**Valiant Champion** · February 17, 2012, 07:01 PM

less talk and more action I suppose. Without some evidence we are simply chatting claims and numbers right?

the important part here is that after I steer past the trees and give the attack command I am not doing anything at all in micromanagment.

These are using a 0.2 radius and 2.59 height to counterbalance. by the time the spearwall is 80 percent down the halberds decide to retreat and regroup than with my pikes stationary there is no chance for them. unit still had soldiers using pikes when the chaos halberds decided to pull back and regroup.

**Taiji** · February 18, 2012, 05:42 AM

If you make them taller they get hit by arrows more often.

Why are you making them taller?

**Valiant Champion** · February 18, 2012, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by Taiji

If you make them taller they get hit by arrows more often.

Why are you making them taller?

because it counterbalances the tendency of small radius to make unit harder to be hit in melee and by missiles.

It tweaks the square meter area (target size).

Also to help explain another subject. Understand that the physical radius is the target size and not the skeleton size. physical volume (radius and height) and skeleton size and animations (i. e.skeleton radius and height) are independant of one another.

**Taiji** · February 18, 2012, 01:46 PM

Does it cause arrows to impact above their heads as if hitting an invisible force field?

**Valiant Champion** · February 18, 2012, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by Taiji

Does it cause arrows to impact above their heads as if hitting an invisible force field?

I don't know

I suppose that goblin and dwarf skeletons are smaller than their physics size and the same effect may be observed with them as well if it does.

Or that a troll or ogre can only be hit if the shot hits low at its legs and not high.

I will be keeping an eye out for the effect.

Another video showing that the pike unit works as it should versus inferior infantry. It holds the spearwall all the way to the end.

**Taiji** · February 19, 2012, 04:07 AM

I see 2 problems there.

That the enemy inf cannot penetrate the spearwall.

And that at least 6 pikemen changed to sword when 1 enemy fit the flank.

The first problem is very important to solve for pike only units.

The second problem makes dual melee weapon units totally unusable in my opinion.

So in the first place you have a pike unit that is unkillable via melee from the front.

And in the second place you have a bunch of pikemen switching to sword when cav hits.

To some degree it's about personal taste, but clearly it's about gameplay principles too - The unit does stupid stuff, and the unit is clearly OP.

Thread: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Re: effective phalanx with pike and sword

Posting Permissions