Official Unit Gameplay Balance Thread

[Krez2445]

1. Feb 2017 - updated version ------ Suggestion to improve Mod

2. All Units

3. Increase Upkeep for certain units (affects Campaign the most)

4. One suggestion that I have noticed that has made some of the best mods that I have seen : DEI (rome 2) , Stainless Steel (MTW 2) - is that they increased upkeep to high numbers (almost exaggerated) for certain units that historically were very expensive. Because they were so expensive to train and upkeep was the reason not every country was able to utilize them in large numbers (a modern day example would be Air Craft Carriers - very few countries have this capability). So by applying this to our time frame - just a suggestion:

Low upkeep - spears ect.. pikes ..
moderate upkeep - Longbow Archers / Archers ;

LARGE GAP HERE

Expensive Upkeep: All cavalry
extremely expensive = All mounted knights
Highest expense= highest upkeep and cost to build = siege engines (catapults/mongels/trebechets) + Navy units = should also have extremely high levels of upkeep.



5. obviously I don't know how you guys are planning todo the campaign portion cuz it is not out. This is just a suggestion. THanks for your guys awesome mod so far . very excited for the next release. I check the forums everyday now!

[Påsan]

Just reduce the melee defence on all the pavise crossbowmen. A pavise is not a melee shield.

They really should not be beating meadium infantry in melee

[Ltd.]

I believe pavise crossbowmen should not even use their pavises when in melee. We could have their armour be higher than that of non-pavise crossbowmen to indicate their usage.
Generally pavise units or units carrying shields similar in size to pavises should be really slow and generally act as a mobile and heavy wall instead, being mainly defensive in their purpose, other polearms / MAA / 1h and cavalry units being the striking force .

[You_Guess_Who]

We could have their armour be higher than that of non-pavise crossbowmen to indicate their usage.

No. A Pavise Crossbowmen should have the same armour as any non-pavise crossbowmen. Just having a pavise should not add armour value, but it should greatly add missile block chance.

Its their pavise that's matter - not as a melee defense shield, but as a missile defense shield. The reason is that since crossbows have slow reload and relatively shorter effective range, they need something to cover them when they're advancing and reloading.

In this case, I've introduced a new system so shield only does melee defense and missile block chance, not increasing armour value (akin to AoC system compared to GC). This has been implemented for all units in our test pack, but not yet in the public pack.

A pavise is not a melee shield.
They really should not be beating meadium infantry in melee

I believe pavise crossbowmen should not even use their pavises when in melee.
Generally pavise units or units carrying shields similar in size to pavises should be really slow and generally act as a mobile and heavy wall instead,

How about splitting Defensive Infantry Pavise and Archer Pavise so Archer Pavise do not add melee defence bonus? I can do it for all units in 10 minutes.
For Pavise Spears, that's why I add static defensive testudo to them, instead of the mobile shieldwall of the other shielded units.

[xalvissx]

1. March 12, 2017

2. Terteroban Cavalry and Heavy Macemen, Axemen and Kipchak Swordsmen (Cuman), Tier 3 mercenary units of Western European factions (Ecocheur Footmen, Free Company Longbowmen)

3. Add Parthian Shot and Shoot While Moving to the Terteroban Cavalry, and increase their armor, melee defence, charge bonus, mass, ROF and Accuracy; reduce the Armor, Melee Defence and Missile Block Chance of the Heavy Macemen, and rebalance their cost, and add javelins to the Kipchaks Swordsmen and rebalance the stats with the Axemen; increase the cost of the mercenary units and/or put a unit limit on them.

4. The Terteroban Cavalry of the Cuman serve absolutely no purpose at the moment. Their stats are outclassed by the generic Heavy Horse Archers, while costing a lot more. They should have superior armor, melee defence, melee damage and missle block chance and mass than the generic HHA (the HHA use the new stats confirmed in the last page), and the two abilities that keep horse archers competitive: Parthian Shot and Shoot While Moving. The trade-offs are, that they have inferior ROF and accuracy compare to the HHA, cost more and have less charge bonus. That way both units can be competitive and one does no replace the other completely.

The Heavy Macemen are one of the few units keeping the Cuman competitive at the moment, so I am quite hesitant to suggest this, but they cost too little for such powerful stats. They have comparable damage output to the normal tier 3 swordsmen of other faction, but have a lot more armor and Missile Block Change, comparable to the Pavise Spearman units and only cost 650 a piece, completely make other melee infantry units of the Cuman redundant. That does not make sense, both gameplay and balance wise, so I suggest nerfing their stats a little bit, chiefly Armor and Missile Block Chance, while increasing the cost (or keep the cost, but make them 120 men per units, so that the lower tier melee infantry of the Cuman can get a chance to be pick).

Also, I suggest adding up to two precursor javelins to the Kipchak swordsmen, and increase the Melee Attack, Damage and Bonus of the Cuman Axemen compared to the Kipchak Swordsmen, but lower Melee Defence, Armor and Missile Block Chance (The Axemen are more attack oriented than the Swordsmen, dealing more damage in melee combat, but more vulnerable to missile and lack the general survivability of the Kipchaks) so that, again, all units have something unique about them that make them more suitable to different playstyle, so that they can have a chance to be picked.

The tier 3 mercenary units of Western European factions (Ecocheur Footmen, Free Company Longbowmen), should not cost so little compared to native units of their respective factions: In case of the Ecocheur, they cost less, and have comparable stats to tier 3 Sergeant or Sergeant-equivalent units, while the FCL have more range and deal more damage. They should cost more, being mercenaries and all. I suggest increasing their cost, and/or put a unit limit on them so that Western European factions do not look like carbon copy of each other with horde of mercenaries when match against each other.

[xalvissx]

1. March 12, 2017

2. Teutonic Sergeants (both Early and High), Schwertbrüder, Livonian Auxiliaries, Pikemen, Spear Sergeants (High) (Teutonic Order), Hanseatic Crossbowmen and Mounted Ecocheur (Western European factions)

3. Add Wedge Formation and Disciplined abilities to Early Teutonic Sergeants, and increase their armor and missile block chance and bonus against cavalry a bit, and if possible, add some war dogs and/or throwing axes; Add Square Formations and Pike Wall to High Teutonic Sergeants, increase their melee defence, armor, missile block chance and attack against cavalry; Increase the armor, melee defence and missile block chance of Schwertbrüder to the same level as Bohemia and Poland early Sergeant Equivalents, and add Disciplined abilities as well as increase the cost a little (maybe 50); Add Resistant to Fatigue to Livonian Auxiliary; Increase Pikemen attack a bit (to 25); Increase Spear Sergeants (High) armor and melee defence a bit, or add some throwing axes.

Increase the cost of Hanseatic Crossbowmen and Mounted Ecocheur, and/or put a limit on them.

4. The aforementioned Teutonic units are somewhat overcosted compared to similar units from other factions, and these suggestions also attempt to slightly remedy the deficiencies of the Order until the next big update, as the patch will come long before it. The Schwertbrüder have similar stats to HRE and Lithuania Early Sergeant Equivalents, but they lack precursor throwing axes, and compared to similar units from Poland and Bohemia they are outclassed. Also, the Teutonic infantry IIRC were good compared to their neighbours, and the Teutonic Order currently lacks solid swordsmen so it makes sense both gameplay-wise and history-wise to increase their stats.

The Early Teutonic Sergeants have slightly higher stats compared to Ducal Axemen and Marscher, as well as Chod Frontiersmen, but they cost much more, and lack any abilities that make the other units useful. They have two-handed axes, not halberd, so it makes no sense for them to have Pike Wall and Square Formation, but Wedge Formation and some support elements like dogs would make them not similar to the High Teutonic Sergeants, and still fill some niche in the army. Also, they have armor, so a slight increase in missile block chance would make sense (not too much tho, maybe 5-8)

The High Teutonic Sergeants the same cost as Bohemian High Halberdiers and HRE High Landwehr, but have inferior stats (no missile block chance, inferior damage to Bohemians, and much inferior melee defence to the HRE, and no bonus against cav). And the Order lacks a halberd unit with holding abilities to counter infantry and cavalry, and in their current state the High Teutonic Sergeants are quite lackluster compared to other similar units, despite having the same weapon.

The slight melee damage increase for Pikemen is mainly to make them comparable to similar pike units from other factions like HRE.

The Spear Sergeants (High), again, cost the same as other units but are slightly worse, for example, in comparison with HRE High Burgmannen.

The arguments for the Hanseatic Infantry and Mounted Ecocheur are similar to my post above about the other merc units. In the cast of the Hanseatic Infantry, they invalidate Early and High Native Crossbow units of their factions (Crossbow Huskarle for Denmark, Crossbow Vaepnere for Norway, Armbrustschützer for HRE etc.) as they cost the same as those units, and are better, either in stats or having some other abilities. The Mounted Ecocheurs cost too little for a unit of their caliber, they are similar to High Imperial Ritters, while costing much less, and in MP, you usually see only Mounted Ecocheurs, unless there are enough funds for the much costlier Late Imperial Ritters.

[AlexiosThe1st]

Is a possible solution to the melee/shock cavalry distinction to give the melee cav a bonus against cavalry? As it stands, the only advantage to bringing melee cav that's apparent to me is the faster run speed on the lighter melee cavs. At which point what's the point of heavy melee cav? Has anyone done any testing on melee cav vs shock cab in the current build? From my experience shock prevails even in prolonged melee.

A bonus against cav would give the heavier melee can actual role. They would serve as a decent counter to heavy shock spam.

[Filips Augustus]

I dont think the words "shock" and "melee" cav are right for this mod imo. The shock cavarly in this mod are generally knights (or their counterparts from other factions), who are always better trained in prolonged melee than the general melee sergeant on horseback. The advantage of melee cav is probably that they wont be limited in the campaign, and are generally faster as well. This comes pretty handy for running down (horse)archers. That said, I think the names of these roles should be changed, but I have no idea into what.

[AlexiosThe1st]

I dont think the words "shock" and "melee" cav are right for this mod imo. The shock cavarly in this mod are generally knights (or their counterparts from other factions), who are always better trained in prolonged melee than the general melee sergeant on horseback. The advantage of melee cav is probably that they wont be limited in the campaign, and are generally faster as well. This comes pretty handy for running down (horse)archers. That said, I think the names of these roles should be changed, but I have no idea into what.

I agree, but there's been debate on the shock vs melee distinction since the mod's beginnings so I'm assuming we're sticking with it.

I bring this up mostly because there are a couple high tier elite units for the Mongolian faction of the heavy melee cav stock, and if they're outclassed in melee by shock cav why bring them over their lancer counterparts?

Ultimately i agree, the shock/melee distinction is misleading.

[Degnan]

I Saw lot of Battle videos of this mod. Why heavy cavalry annihilated very fast by infantery in close combat? Heavy knights died for 1 minute or faster. Perhaps they need improve some defense functions?

[Blak]

Just please dont make units that cost less be better than such that cost 2times that amount... examples Jerusaleem, some byzantine units,spanish,burgundian units...
In my opinion all major facitons sohuld have equally good units(statswise+upkeep and cost wise) so that it is more fair as we cant rly know how good each factions soldiers used to fight vs one another.

Well we do kinda know , it was mostly up to terrain , good commanders , morale(will to fight) and strategy. It wasnt all based on paper stats like amrour or weapons...

I just cant stand it when some like mediocre infantry (heavy infantry just for the sake of it) costs 900+(probably high upkeep) whereas some op unit(spadacini high-better than spadacini late) cost 700(probs low upkeep) and are 2x times better statswise...

[achilles-91]

Do you think you would be able to balance pikemen and polearm units?

[busa27]

Really nice mod!!! Thanks for doing this amazing job .

Talking about the mod balancing, I haven't played much but looks like Polearm infantry units are too good and there is no reason to don't pick them over other infantry. They are too good against everything in melee.

As a side note: why England Knights (late) are better than other European factions Knights (late)?. I'm maybe missing something but it looks weird to see England having better Knights (late) than France/Holy Roman Empire.

[You_Guess_Who]

Really nice mod!!! Thanks for doing this amazing job .

Talking about the mod balancing, I haven't played much but looks like Polearm infantry units are too good and there is no reason to don't pick them over other infantry. They are too good against everything in melee.

As a side note: why England Knights (late) are better than other European factions Knights (late)?. I'm maybe missing something but it looks weird to see England having better Knights (late) than France/Holy Roman Empire.

Noted.

Oh, the English Knight stats is an entry mistake. It'll be fixed.

[cloud700]

I don't know if it's just me but after playing numerous custom battles I find alot of soldiers are idle when they should be engaging in the fight haven't played the original Attila game only purchased it because of this mod so I don't know it is the same in that also but I would love to see more action in the fighting. Awesome mod

[Cometopuli]

dunno what you mean maybe cause most soldiers are in formation

[cloud700]

What I mean is when opposing forces engage one soldier will attack the other but then pause for a while before the next strike.

[Cometopuli]

That's Attila for you.

[Cometopuli]

That's Attila for you.

[The Great Khan of Rome]

Generally, for me, I mod my factions with several things in mind. This is mostly for Unreal Total War, an overhaul balancing mod series for total war.

First, I balance cultures. Culture bonuses stack the buffs of the niche and type of faction they have. Next, I create plans on what niche a faction should fill. Niches are basically what a faction is. Next, I assign what kind of faction is it is. The types are Mono, Poly, Tri, and Bi factions. Mono factions are gimmick factions; they only have one unit type or class that they are really good at, everything else receives a debuff. Poly factions receive buffs to multiple units. Tri and Bi are the same as Mono but have more unit classes that receive massive buffs. These are called focus units. For the most part, the ratio between Poly factions and the rest are 3:1. Tri, Bi and Mono factions can't repeat, either; they all need to be exhausted first before one can be used after the other.