Original research on armor upgrade effectiveness?

[Maklodes]

I've heard various statements about what armor upgrades do. The unit cards claim that bronze is +1, silver is +2, and gold is +3. There's also a "visual/narrative armor type"-based view that says that, say, padded is 4, light mail is 5, heavy mail is 6-7, partial plate is 8, plate is 9, and advanced is 10-11. Basically, Byzantine lancers are 5 by default, 7 with bronze, 8 with silver, and 9 with gold. This view is effectively that the commented-out claims of ";stat_armour_ex" actually are effective, but are just hidden in the hard code rather than being comments. Finally, I've heard the view that each armor upgrade is worth about +2-2.5 armor or so. So Byzantine lancer default armor is 5, bronze is 7-7.5, silver is 9-10, and gold is 11-12.5

The source for this view is allegedly extensive testing. However, I just hear it mentioned without links whenever I see it. Does anyone know where the original research is posted?

[Nzg]

Hmm... As far as I've seen, armour upgrade(no matter what base "armour" the unit is wearing) gives you the armor bonus of a specific armour(plate, chain mail etc.), In some cases you upgrade padded to chain mail, so it gives you more than just +1.

I didn't read the research tho, and just made a quick test. I'll try looking into it.

[Dude with the Food]

They also make your units look prettier. So do the weapons upgrades but they are much harder to notice. Things like wooden lances getting painted and such.

[UndrState]

Not sure anyone is going to know better than you Maklodes. You guide on defense values is still the best around.

[Maklodes]

Not sure anyone is going to know better than you Maklodes. You guide on defense values is still the best around.

I... don't think I wrote anything about defense values? I did once make a post about the most advanced armourer building that is possibly useful by faction, but I don't think I wrote anything about defense values in general. Might you be confusing me with someone else? Or am I just forgetting some guide I wrote?

[UndrState]

Maklodes - I'm sorry, I am not certain what I was thinking about.

But I've decided the best way to make it up to you is to do the best research that I can. Here's what I've found:

1) Defense values breakdown - the most often referenced guide for the breakdown of how defence works is the follow, so called "FAUST" Faction And Unit Stat Tables, written by TWC user Brandybarrel. The breakdown for defense itself is at the bottom of the PDF that can be found through the following link:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...W-and-Kingdoms

2) A discussion with original research on Armour upgrades. The original poster, TW.org user SMZ makes a good case, however there are dissenting view as well:

http://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showth...-Work-Properly

3) However the above thread does have further doubters, among them Darth Vader of the DarthMods' fame, as discussed in the link below:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...grades-in-M2TW

And a further discussion in the Darthmod forum, where Time Commander Bob also argues as SMZ did:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...rmour-Upgrades

***

I'm convinced by the assertions, and the tests, of Time Commander Bob and SMZ, but I could understand if someone else did not.

[Aeratus]

One thing that is certain is that the unit card is not to be trusted. As you probably know, the weapon upgrade is shown as +1 in the unit card, but in actuality, it is known to be +6 or something around that.

[Aeratus]

Here's another thread: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...eapon-Upgrades

It seems like the +2/2.5 theory comes from Lusted's testing. I've never seen any detailed test data, but it looks like most people believe him.

I did some quick tests, pitting Eastern Chivalric Knight with +1 armor against regular Chivalric Knight (which has +1 shield more than the Eastern one). The Eastern ones seems to be consistently slightly better, and the difference between +1 armor upgrade and +1 shield feels to be greater than just the mere advantage of armor over shield in melee combat. +2 to 2.5 armor per upgrade feels correct to me, but I haven't done enough tests to confirm.

Also, I think it is highly unlikely that the visual/narrative explanation is correct, simply on the basis that the armor values of each unit is arbitrarily set in the desr file.

The armor upgrade difference is definitely not as noticeable as the weapon upgrade difference. With the weapon upgrade, you can see that a swordsman militia with +1 weapon consistently dominates sword and buckler men, despite having an in-game-display deficiency of 2 in overall attack/defense.

[UndrState]

Good find Aeratus!

[Maklodes]

Maklodes - I'm sorry, I am not certain what I was thinking about.

But I've decided the best way to make it up to you is to do the best research that I can. Here's what I've found:

Thanks! I'd rep you, but apparently need to spread it around before doing it again. Looks like most of these are in favor of the "narrative/visual" explanation, but the actual tests employed (e.g., comparing sergeant spearmen with silver upgrade to armored sergeants) aren't really fine tuned to tell the difference between the "always add +2-2.5 or so" and the padded/light mail/etc sequence).

Here's another thread: http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...eapon-Upgrades

It seems like the +2/2.5 theory comes from Lusted's testing. I've never seen any detailed test data, but it looks like most people believe him.

I did some quick tests, pitting Eastern Chivalric Knight with +1 armor against regular Chivalric Knight (which has +1 shield more than the Eastern one). The Eastern ones seems to be consistently slightly better, and the difference between +1 armor upgrade and +1 shield feels to be greater than just the mere advantage of armor over shield in melee combat. +2 to 2.5 armor per upgrade feels correct to me, but I haven't done enough tests to confirm.

Also, I think it is highly unlikely that the visual/narrative explanation is correct, simply on the basis that the armor values of each unit is arbitrarily set in the desr file.

The armor upgrade difference is definitely not as noticeable as the weapon upgrade difference. With the weapon upgrade, you can see that a swordsman militia with +1 weapon consistently dominates sword and buckler men, despite having an in-game-display deficiency of 2 in overall attack/defense.

Thanks! Glad to have the mystery somewhat solved.